Georgism, which is a variety of Marxism whereby the State should own all the resources derived from land

Macron & His Socialist Agenda

Posted May 16, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

Macron’s funding reveals that elite Socialists were really behind him changing the label to sell a centrist agenda, but in reality, to maintain their agenda. Macron was able to raise funds from French abroad with the promises of change, and this targeted particularly the French who fled Hollande living in London and New York. He did a photo-op with Nobel Prize laureate Joseph E. Stiglitz before journalists who is critical of the management of globalization, against  laissez-faire economists who he classifies a “free market fundamentalists”, as well as international institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.  Stiglitz is an American economist and a professor at Columbia University and is a former senior vice president and chief economist of the World Bank. He was also a former member and chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under Bill Clinton and supported Hillary over Obama saying she is more “liberal” (socialist) than Obama. Stiglitz believes in Georgism, which is a variety of Marxism whereby the State should own all the resources derived from land which is an old Physicocrat idea that wealth is derived from land. In this way, all natural resources should belong to government from mining to energy just for starters as if government operated industries ever ran efficient. He also supported a single tax for all an believes that, while people should own the value they produce themselves with everything derived from lkand should belone to government characterized as belonging equally to all members of society.

Joseph Stiglitz criticized Obama publicly saying that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP)  trade deal should not be about “who makes the trade rules—China or the United States?'” Stiglitz said  “I think the big issue is, this is about who makes the rules of trade—the American people, our democratic process, or the corporations? And who they’re made for, which is, for the corporations or for all of us?”

Stiglitz is a core Marxist, which is why he is liked in France where where Communism began and convinced Marx this was the way to go. In 2015, Stiglitz wrote two books, The Great Divide andRewriting the Rules of the American Economy, which are based upon select years for research. Each book highlights a series of problems he maintains have led to the current state of economic inequality with the gap between the rich and the pour. Stiglitz merely maintains that taking from the rich in greater proportion is necessary to even the playing field and this somehow will make everything better ignored the fact that as government crows, its consumes the wealth of a nation rather than raises the standard of living. He thus blames everything on a faulty tax code that rewards the rich and hampers the poor, an increase in behavior that boosts the economic gains of only a few while extracting more capital from the majority, and a misplaced focus on altering the economy in a way that benefits shareholders, executives, and investors, but not the average worker.

Macron publicly wanted to be photographed with Stiglitz who is a popular socialist in France. In total, he collected around 15 million euros, all from private individuals. 1.7% of the donors gave 45% of the funds. He collected €1.9 million when he was still an economic minister illustrating that he saw the collapse in popularity of Hollande, and decides to repage the same old agenda pretending it was now centrist. EVen Stiglitz believes the Euro is a failure and should be split into a “flexible” euro creating separate groups within Europe, whicvh by default would also be the end of the European Central Bank

Bit coin. Longer-term, this technology may be the future after the crash and burn. Not now.

Two-Tier Monetary Systems & Local Alternative Currencies

Posted May 14, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: I very much look forward to reading your blog every day and feel that I am learning much. I don’t know much about BitCoin but I note that it has almost doubled since the beginning of the year. Does your model have any insight into the future of cryptocurrencies like BitCoin.

MR

ANSWER: The problem with BitCoin is precisely that. It is akin to the problem that existed when the bubble burst in 1966 with mutual funds because they were listed back then. The value of BitCoin can change at a volatility rate of 10x that of the dollar, making it a highly dangerous instrument as a store of wealth. It is solely a trading vehicle until they way it is valued is changed.

In 1966, investors bid the mutual funds up beyond net asset value so during the crash, people lost everything when they thought it was a secure investment. The net underlying assets may have dropped 20%, but they paid 20% over net asset value and then sold at 50% of net asset value. Many mutual funds crash 70-90% where the Dow drop was 26.5%. Ever since, mutual funds are no longer allowed to be listed. You go in and out at net asset value. BitCoin must change its structure or it will never become a valid currency with a stable store of value which is supposed to be the whole point. It is just an asset class of high volatility.

For this reason, BitCoin is not ready for prime time. However, that is a separate and distinct problem from the technology. For now, BitCoin represents a threat to governments for it is used to get money out of places, avoid taxes, and is an alternative currency. Throughout history there have been alternative currencies and as long as people accept them, at times, they have become the major currency when government does the crash and burn. (see Two-Tier Monetary Systems & Local Alternative Currencies)

Longer-term, this technology may be the future after the crash and burn.

IMF: " a tax of about 10 percent is needed for households with a positive asset"

IMF Proposed a Capital Levy – Tax on Money in Bank Accounts & Raise Property Taxes

Posted May 12, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is always the cheerleader to raise taxes to support government they are instructing Germany to raise taxes and also talking about just imposing a 10% tax on all money on deposit in banks throughout Europe. Yes – you read that one correctly.

The IMF has told Germany it should raise its property tax, cut social welfare contributions and invest more to reduce income inequality. The demands are contentious in an election year. Once again the IMF has demanded higher taxes on savings deposits in Germany. Germany must do more for to raise taxes to impose more socialistic ideals to somehow tax the rich to create a broader participation of all citizens in the fruits of economic growth, if somehow raising taxes actually ever creates economic growth. The IMF warns that there is a relatively high tax burden on lower incomes with a comparatively low burden on assets.

The IMF argues for higher taxes on property are in fact necessary and that the government should demand higher wages to also give impetus to the growth in Germany, yet this is magically creating no inflationary impact. Years ago, Italy simply imposed a tax on money in one’s account. This was called a “capital levy”. This was a one-time charge as an exceptional measure to restore the sustainability of the debt. The IMF is also suggesting that measure be invoked to help the coming Sovereign Debt Crisis. The attractiveness of such a measure is that such a one-time tax can be levied before a tax evasion can even occur, especially if cash is eliminated and money can only exist in bank accounts. This requires the belief that this measure is unique and never repeated.

The IMF has already calculated how much the measure would cost every Eurozone citizen:

“The amount of the tax would have to bring the European sovereign debt back to the pre-crisis level. In order to reduce the debt to the level of 2007 (for example in the euro area countries), a tax of about 10 percent is needed for households with a positive asset. “

As you can see, there is NEVER any discussion about reducing taxes or the size of government. The solution is always to raise taxes and to not even look at the old Italian trick of a 10% seizure of all cash in your account. We highly recommend to diversify to assets that are MOVABLE and not subject to taxation merely to possess.

Macron is European nationalist but Germany needs open markets to retain its current account surplus

Brussels & Berlin Reject the Core of Macron’s Political Campaign

posted May 12, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

Emmanuel Macron has shown just how inexperienced he is when it comes to international trade. Both Berlin and Brussels have rejected Macron’s central platform in his election campaign that all government purchases should be made from exclusively European companies. They realize that while Le Pen cheered “France First”, Macron called that nationalist, he proposed European Nationalism. Germany needs open markets to retain its current account surplus. Without that, Germany fears its economic power will collapse. Macron’s proposals are rejected already behind the curtain. Hence, the French people will find he is their Obama – great expectations for change, but no leadership leads to the same old status quo.

Macron’s “Buy European Act” was his a central promise during his campaign. Macron’;s entire plan was to solve unemployment with protectionism but not exclusively for France, but for Europe. Macron’s formula was to be that only companies that have settled at least half of their production in Europe would qualify to sell goods to the government. He call this the plan for that would protect Europe in this new age of globalization.

At the end of the day, the difference between Le Pen and Macron was a sense of power. Le Pen realized the authority of the president ended at the French border. Macron, though he really would have a say in Brussels and Berlin. Ah, what fools we mortals can be

The first opportunity for a major dollar high is 2018 and after that comes 2020/2021.

The Dollar Remains King

Posted May 8, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION:  Hi, I’ve read your blog for a couple of months now and it clearly opened my eyes. But I’m wondering if I’m getting crazy now.. I can see a pattern between rising Chinese yields (despite weaker growth), parked Chinese money in the Canadian & Australian housing bubble, plunging commodities (very bad for Australian and Canadian people who have to pay of their massive mortgages) and why all this will lead to a rising dollar. Am I looking in the right direction? A.S.

ANSWER: Yes. The only way to reach the economic crisis that forces political change is to put on the maximum amount of pressure. It does not even require that what people BELIEVE will happen, happens. Human nature is such that we all act in anticipation of events. Sure the Euro has bounced on belief that BREXIT is a passing phase. But the election of Macron was the worst possible outcome as it should have been for it in the Euro that will crumble as Brussels now tried to federalize everything to secure it own survival against the people of Europe.

The dollar rose between 1980 and 1985 on the fears that the USA would default creating a two-tier monetary system with red dollars externally and green dollars internally. The US national debt hit $907.7 billion in 1980 and the Eurodollar market was about the same. The Europeans were convinced that the US would default by adopting a two-tier dollar. Consequently, between 1980 and 1985, Eurodollar deposits fell by about 50% and the Europeans moved their accounts to the USA where they thought they would get green dollars. That was the number one question I would get at seminars and conferences in Europe between 1980 and 1985. It never happened. Yet the “belief” it might moved capital to USA and that sent even the British pound to $1.03 in 1985.

Only the dollar moving to all time record highs in 1985 sparked the Plaza Accord. However, that is where the whole idea of the Euro was born. Jim Baker saw THE PROBLEM AS THERE WAS NO CURRENCY TO COMPLETE AGAINST THE DOLLAR. Baker urged Europe to create a single currency to prevent the dollar from rising, which then reduced US exports.

The national debt continued to rise reaching $2.125 trillion by 1986 and $3.2 trillion by 1990 and now we are at $20 trillion by 2017. The Dow Jones Industrial average was 1,000 in 1980. So exactly how is 21,000 on the Dow today out of like from just the expansion in debt?

You can see the correlation below. Our number remains 23,000 on the Dow where things begin to get interesting. So far, it is just keeping pace with international value. The first opportunity for a major dollar high is 2018 and after that comes 2020/2021.

Govt cannot borrow internationally, so it now wants to confiscate people’s gold using a bond scheme

Turkey to Confiscate Gold in New Clever Way – To Help Citizens Earn Money

Posted Apr 12, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

The dwindling credit of Turkey and significant decline in its currency, has led to the new clever idea of confiscating gold with a smile. The Turkish Central Bank has set up two new investment opportunities for physical gold on behalf of the government. Their objective is to make the private gold stocks of the citizens available to the financial system for themselves, but how to sell that to the people?.

The Turkish central bank is launching two new investment opportunities for physical gold, according to reports in the Daily Sabah . They are issuing a gold bond on one hand and on the other an instrument for the loan of gold and gold jewelry.

The scheme is that the Turkish government is really seeking to use the precious metal in the private sector making it available to the financial industry. This is being marketed as broadening the financial system allowing citizens to earn additional income with their gold reserves under their mattresses by turning it in to the government. The are pitching that this will stimulate the economy according to Deputy Prime Minister Mehmet Simsek .

What the government is really doing with issuing a gold bond is they are issuing a bond in return for your gold. They are promising to pay a certain interest rate during the term of the paper in Turkish lira. This interest rate will be oriented towards the development of the gold price. The gold-covered loan certificate also entitles the holder to receive interest after physical gold or gold jewelry has been deposited with the intermediary bank.

This clever scheme means that the government cannot borrow internationally, so it now wants to confiscate people’s gold using a bond scheme that in the end they will be forced to default. This will be a major test of the saying: You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

Changing Cycle Frequencies Produces Different Effects- Discovering the key

Posted May 4, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Marty, I’m glad that you’ve showed a couple of examples in the past few articles, as per how you apply ECM and volatility cycle waves to events. Yet, can you please explain the methodology and criteria which you use in deciding how to apply them?

What is the criteria with which you choose the starting date of any particular event? Why do you sometimes apply ECM 51.6 time-units, or 72 (volatility), or 31.4 (Pi), or at times intervals such as 2×8.6 vs 34.4, and so forth?

I do understand the arithmetic and the individual cycles, yet I want to understand how your mind combines the right frequencies and adopts the correct cyclical pattern for analysis. In few words, what is the methodology.

Thanks in advance for everything you’re doing.

—

SB

ANSWER: Cycles are identical to light, which always moves in frequencies. Everything within the universe is fractal. So discovering the key then applies in all frames of reference. It is way too complex to answer in a brief note. I promise, I am trying very hard to complete the Geometry of Time. It will take a lot of pages to explain this complex and deep subject.

Nevertheless, with a light wave, alter the frequency length and you get a different effect. Major turning points are the convergence of many cycle frequencies. Each will depart from that same event producing different effects and events in the future. It is all about understanding each wave and what it will produce- like radio waves, microwaves, infrared, visible light, ultraviolet, x-rays, and gamma waves. They are all part of the light wave. Change the frequency and you can watch TV or cook dinner