Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 36

Thread: The Central Bank System = The Deep State

  1. #16
    Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    4th May 2014
    Posts
    415
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 1,268 Times in 397 Posts
    Biggest Threat => the Federal Reserve...
    NOTE: After the commercial segment, the SGT Report w/ Bill Holter begins @ 1:51

    UPHEAVAL BEYOND ANYTHING YOU
    CAN IMAGINE IS COMING -- Bill Holter

    (Nov 18, 2018)

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKdJUYqDGi8

    Description:

    Bill Holter joins me for an economic update, and despite some good news and sunny musings from our President, Holter says there is upheaval coming that is beyond imagination. Holter notes that the annual payments on the national debt have surpassed $500 Billion and will soon eclipse national defense spending. And with the Fed continuing to raise interest rates, President Trump is quite right when he says his biggest threat is the Federal Reserve.
    ...to the topTop

  2. #17
    Senior Member NotAPretender's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    3,601
    Thanks
    14,201
    Thanked 16,155 Times in 3,603 Posts
    Would you explain how the Federal Reserve functions Turiya, I've never really understood it myself but the following article (with additional sources for reading) might help both of us:


    Monetary Policy Strategies of Major Central Banks
    The Federal Reserve and many other central banks have broadly similar approaches to making monetary policy--approaches that are systematic, transparent, and forward looking.1 These approaches share a number of key features. For example, the goals of monetary policy--what the central bank is trying to achieve--are well defined and clearly stated. Major central banks also tend to be highly transparent, explaining policy decisions and the rationale for those decisions to the public. Such transparency strengthens the effectiveness of monetary policy by helping households and businesses form expectations about future economic and financial conditions--expectations that influence their spending and investment decisions; transparency also helps countries hold their central banks accountable for meeting their goals.2

    Because monetary policy affects the economy with a lag, the Federal Reserve and other major central banks take a forward-looking approach. Central banks consider not only current economic conditions, but also the expected evolution of the economy and the risks around that outlook. Four times each year, as part of the Federal Open Market Committee's (FOMC) forward-looking approach, each member of the Board of Governors and each Federal Reserve Bank president formulates and submits his or her projections of the most likely outlook for growth in real, or inflation-adjusted, gross domestic product; the unemployment rate; and inflation, along with assessments for the path of the federal funds rate deemed most likely to foster outcomes consistent with the FOMC's goals.3 These forecasts are published every quarter in the Summary of Economic Projections (SEP); projections from the most recent SEP are also included in the semiannual Monetary Policy Report transmitted to the Congress.4 During FOMC meetings, policymakers discuss their individual perspectives and forge a consensus on the appropriate policy decision.

    Most other major central banks also publish forecasts of inflation and other macroeconomic variables. A well-known example is the Bank of England's Inflation Report, which provides forecasts for economic growth, the labor market, and inflation together with an assessment of the uncertainty associated with each forecast. The publication of forecasts enhances transparency, in part because central banks' goals are often stated in terms of inflation and employment in the medium or longer run.

    In deliberating about monetary policy and formulating projections for the economy, Fed policymakers routinely consult the prescriptions of policy rules. Such rules propose settings for the policy interest rate based on estimates of the deviation of (1) inflation from the central bank's objective and (2) output from its full resource utilization level. However, such rules do not, on their own, incorporate feedback effects that changes in the policy rate will have on growth, the labor market, and inflation. By embedding a policy rule within a macroeconomic model, it is possible to examine prescriptions for the policy interest rate that take into account these feedback effects. For many years, the FOMC has regularly examined both the prescriptions from simple policy rules and simulations that incorporate feedback effects.5 Other major central banks use policy rules in a similar fashion, but, to date, no major central bank has set its policy rate mechanically based on the prescriptions of such a rule.6 For a discussion of the limitations that argue against setting monetary policy by mechanically following any rule, see Challenges Associated with Using Rules to Make Monetary Policy.

    With regard to the goals of policy, the Federal Reserve and other major central banks state the objectives of monetary policy clearly and publicly and explain how the policy committee pursues those goals. In the Federal Reserve Act, the Congress instructs the Federal Reserve to set monetary policy to promote "maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates."7 In 2012, the FOMC adopted a Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy, which it has reaffirmed every January.8 This statement indicates that the FOMC judges that inflation at the rate of 2 percent (as measured by the annual rate of change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures) is most consistent over the longer run with the Federal Reserve's statutory mandate. The FOMC's inflation objective is symmetric, meaning that persistent deviations of inflation above or below 2 percent would be equally undesirable. The statement also indicates that the FOMC strives to minimize the deviations of employment from the Committee's assessments of its maximum level. At the same time, the statement acknowledges that the maximum level of employment is determined largely by nonmonetary factors and varies over time.9

    Other major central banks around the world also have broad mandates set by legislation (or, in the case of the European Central Bank (ECB), by treaty) and have generally agreed-upon numerical goals for inflation, but--like the Fed--they have not set specific numerical goals for other economic objectives. For example, the treaty that established the ECB lists price stability as the primary objective, but it also directs the ECB to contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the European Union, including full employment and balanced economic growth.10 The ECB defines price stability as year-on-year inflation below 2 percent and aims at maintaining inflation "below, but close to, 2% over the medium term."11 In practice, all major central banks--even those whose statutory mandates are worded solely in terms of inflation--seek to deliver price stability while avoiding large deviations of employment and output from levels consistent with sustaining maximum employment.12

    Finally, the Federal Reserve and other major central banks around the world regularly announce their policy decisions to the general public and explain the rationale for those decisions. For example, after its eight regularly scheduled meetings each year, the FOMC releases a statement announcing its policy decision and its assessment of recent economic developments and the economic outlook.13 Following four of these meetings, the Chair holds a press conference to provide additional information and answer questions. Detailed minutes of FOMC meetings are published three weeks later; transcripts and meeting materials from FOMC meetings are released after five years. Twice each year, the Federal Reserve gives its Monetary Policy Report to the Congress, and the Chair testifies before congressional committees about that report. Board members, including the Chair, and Federal Reserve Bank presidents give numerous speeches to a wide variety of audiences and deliver testimony before the Congress as requested.

    Central banks around the world use many of these same communication tools. For example, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, the ECB, the Reserve Bank of Australia, and Sweden's Riksbank provide detailed minutes of each policy meeting, typically within a month of the meeting. Almost all major central banks hold regular press conferences at which a senior policymaker explains policy decisions and answers questions from the media; their policymakers also testify before legislatures and give speeches. The Bank of Japan, like the FOMC, releases full transcripts of its policy meetings after a long lag.14

    Taken together, the Federal Reserve's policy communications provide a wealth of information that members of the Congress and the public can use to understand the FOMC's decisions and assess their implications for the economy. Such communications help ensure that the Fed is accountable to the public. Similarly, other major central banks' policy communications help the public and elected officials understand those central banks' policy decisions. By helping the public understand central banks' goals and their strategies for achieving those goals, central banks' policy communications enhance the effectiveness of monetary policy.

    1. At the Federal Reserve and the other major central banks, monetary policy decisions arise from committee deliberations. The size of the committee and number of voting members varies. For instance, the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank (ECB) have large committees, and only a subset of the policymakers vote at any given meeting. In contrast, the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England has 9 members; all vote at every meeting. In some cases, the committee comprises different types of members. For instance, the Fed's policy committee comprises the members of the Board of Governors, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and 4 of the remaining 11 Reserve Bank presidents, who are voting members for one-year terms on a rotating basis; the ECB's Governing Council consists of 6 executive board members and 19 national central bank governors. At the Bank of England, 5 "internal" members plus 4 "external" members, who bring outside expertise, make up the policy committee.

    2. See Monetary Policy: What Are Its Goals? How Does It Work? for a discussion of the goals for monetary policy and how it affects the macroeconomy.

    3. In addition, the Federal Reserve Board staff's forecast and other staff analyses provided to the FOMC are released to the public with a five-year lag. The forecasts prepared by most central banks are judgmental--that is, they are not produced by any single model, but rather reflect policymaker or staff judgments, typically based on a wide range of models and sources of information.

    4. Of course, economic forecasts are subject to considerable uncertainty. One way in which the FOMC highlights this uncertainty is by providing information in the SEP about the size of historical forecast errors.

    5. These materials are released with the transcripts of FOMC meetings after a lag of five years.

    6. See Pier Francesco Asso, George A. Kahn, and Robert Leeson (2010), "The Taylor Rule and the Practice of Central Banking (PDF)," Research Working Paper 10-05 (Kansas City, Mo.: Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, February).

    7. See Federal Reserve Act, 12 U.S.C. § 225a, available on the Board's website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/about.../section2a.htm.

    8. The statement is available on the Board's website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monet...erRunGoals.pdf.

    9. FOMC participants provide their assessments of the longer-run normal rate of unemployment every quarter in the SEP.

    10. See European Central Bank, "Objective of Monetary Policy," webpage.

    11. See European Central Bank, "The Definition of Price Stability," webpage.

    12. This approach is sometimes referred to as "flexible" inflation targeting. Even the central banks whose mandate is stated solely in terms of inflation are not compelled to bring inflation back to target in the shortest possible time and may take account of other economic objectives (such as employment). In a common macroeconomic model, such an approach substantially reduces the welfare losses associated with inflation without incurring the large welfare losses that result from large deviations from full employment. Central banks with an inflation objective include the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, the ECB, the Swiss National Bank, and many other central banks. According to Svensson (2011), "In practice, inflation targeting is never 'strict' but always 'flexible,' because all inflation-targeting central banks . . . not only aim at stabilizing inflation around the inflation target but also put some weight on stabilizing the real economy; for instance, implicitly or explicitly stabilizing a measure of resource utilization such as the output gap; that is, the gap between actual and potential output." See Lars E.O. Svensson (2010), "Inflation Targeting," in Benjamin M. Friedman and Michael Woodford, eds., Handbook of Monetary Economics, vol. 3B (Amsterdam: North-Holland), pp. 1237-1302 (quoted text on p. 1239). For additional discussion, see, for example, Ben S. Bernanke (2003), "A Perspective on Inflation Targeting," speech delivered at the annual Washington Policy Conference of the National Association of Business Economists, Washington, March 25.

    13. The FOMC released its first postmeeting statement in 1994 and began publishing a statement after every meeting in 1999. Statements, minutes, and press conference transcripts are available on the Board's website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/monet...ccalendars.htm. For a history of FOMC communications practices, see David E. Lindsey (2003), "A Modern History of FOMC Communication: 1975-2002 (PDF)," memo to the Federal Open Market Committee, June 24.

    14. The Bank of England has announced plans to release transcripts of its policy meetings after eight years beginning in 2023.
    "We are one thought away from changing the world!"
    ...to the topTop

  3. #18
    Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    4th May 2014
    Posts
    415
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 1,268 Times in 397 Posts
    ...to the topTop

  4. #19
    Senior Member NotAPretender's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    3,601
    Thanks
    14,201
    Thanked 16,155 Times in 3,603 Posts
    The truth about the Trump economy
    Did Trump unleash an economic miracle, or take credit for Obama’s work?

    “Six months ago, we unleashed an economic miracle by signing the biggest tax cuts and reforms,” President Donald Trump said earlier this summer.

    Politically, a lot rides on perceptions of economic performance. Incumbents are almost always reelected amid strong economies. They are frequently defeated amid weak ones.

    If Trump really has unleashed “an economic miracle,” that’s a powerful argument for his reelection, and for the Republican Congress that supported him. If the good economic news is a mirage, or if Trump is just riding the Obama administration’s economic policy coattails, then his sole claim to success evaporates. So which is it?

    Let’s begin with the data. In July, the economy clocked its 93rd uninterrupted month of job growth — the longest stretch in American history. For the first time on record, there are more open jobs than job seekers. The unemployment rate is 3.9 percent; the last time the unemployment rate was this low was in 2000, the tail end of the Clinton boom.

    According to Gallup, 65 percent of Americans believe this is a good time to find a quality job, among the highest readings the pollster has recorded since they began asking the question in 2002.

    The cheerful economic news is largely absent from worker paychecks, though. Average hourly wage growth has been 2.7 percent over the past year, anemic given the power and length of the economic expansion. Making matters worse, a surge of inflation, driven by higher oil prices, has clawed back almost all those wage gains, as David Leonhardt documents at the New York Times.

    These trends didn’t begin with Trump’s election. This is what the unemployment rate has looked like since 2012. If you can detect a sharp break between the Obama an
    Javier Zarracina/Voxd Trump economies, you’ve got a keener eye than I do:

    Looking at job growth yields a similar picture. Depending on which period you’re talking about, you can argue that job growth since Trump was elected has been a bit slower or a bit faster
    than in the years preceding him, but it’s all clearly within the same trend.

    “If you take a look at President Obama’s second term, he was adding 217,000 jobs,” says Betsey Stevenson, an economist at the University of Michigan who served as chief economist at the Labor Department under Barack Obama. “And since Trump assumed the presidency, he’s been adding 189,000 jobs per month. I’d say those are roughly around the same ballpark. But I don’t think Trump should be bragging that he’s somehow doing something that President Obama wasn’t doing.”


    The same is true for GDP growth. “Not too long ago, progressive economists said strong economic growth couldn’t be done anymore— that a stagnant U.S. economy was the ‘new normal,’” tweeted House Speaker Paul Ryan. “And yet, our economy is growing at its fastest rate since 2014.”

    There is something odd about suggesting you’ve owned the libs and defied the odds by returning to a growth rate last seen during Obama’s second term. At any rate, the Bureau of Economic Analysis offers this chart, which again makes a strong case that we’re basically seeing an economy similar to that of Obama’s second term.


    Spot the boom! Bureau of Economic Analysis
    It’s hard to look at this data and argue that the Trump economy represents a sharp break with the Obama economy.

    But that argument cuts both directions. Trump hasn’t unleashed an economic miracle, but he hasn’t caused a crisis either. Plenty of liberals believed a Trump victory would be devastating for the economy, tanking stock markets amid fears of trade wars, nuclear wars, and political chaos. That Trump has managed to keep growth going might be a less impressive record than he claims, but it’s a more impressive record than many of his critics expected.

    “I’ll give the president credit for not steering the economy into a ditch,” says Aaron Sojourner, a labor economist at the University of Minnesota who closely tracks economic trends. “That’s the main accomplishment. He inherited a strong economy, strong trends, after a campaign of telling us the economy was terrible and awful and we had to make America great again. And now he’s declared victory.”

    How Republicans stopped worrying and remembered they love deficits
    To the extent that we’ve seen a modest growth bump over the past year, the driving reason might be one Republicans are loath to admit: After years of refusing the Obama administration’s entreaties to lift sequestration and cut taxes for workers, congressional Republicans have joined Trump to boost government spending by hundreds of billions of dollars and pass $1.5 trillion in unpaid tax cuts.

    There’s been, in other words, a large, deficit-financed demand-side stimulus of the sort Republicans condemned when Obama asked for it but were all too happy to pass as soon as Trump took office. And after years in which Republicans warned that fear of long-term debt was stopping corporations from investing and the economy from growing, they’ve added trillions to the national credit card without any evident harm to the economy.

    “Trump took the Obama economy and added a Keynesian spending boost Republicans never would’ve let Obama do,” says Sojourner.

    The disappointment is that more of this money hasn’t shown up in wages. The good news, to the extent that there is good news, is that recent pay raises have been concentrated at the bottom end of the income distribution. Workers in the bottom 40 percent of the income distribution are seeing faster real wage growth than they have since the late 1990s, but wages overall are growing more slowly than would be expected for an economy that’s grown this much for this long.

    Different economists have different explanations for what’s come to be called “the wage puzzle”; my colleague Matt Yglesias has a great piece on this. But the fact remains that a strong economy hasn’t led to proportionately bigger paychecks. This likely explains why the Trump administration’s tax cuts remain resolutely unpopular: The public heard about trillions of dollars coming down the pike, but they seem to be getting precious little of it.

    “What we did was we gave a bunch of money back to people through tax cuts and we didn’t [pay for it],” says Stevenson. “Of course that’s going to provide some sort of short-term stimulus. Now the question is whether that encourages further investment in the economy that creates long-term growth.”

    So is this a strong economy? Yes, with some big caveats. Does Trump deserve much of the credit? That’s a harder case to make, but it’s clear that he hasn’t derailed what growth we’ve had, which is an accomplishment of a sort.

    The question, now, is whether growth continues. A recession would be devastating, as wage increases haven’t come near to making up for the pain caused by the last recession, and Republicans have taken fiscal firepower that could’ve been held in reserve for a future downturn and spent it on tax cuts and military boosts amid an expansion. It’s a risky strategy for the economy long-term, but it’s one that may boost the GOP’s chances in the next few elections.
    "We are one thought away from changing the world!"
    ...to the topTop

  5. #20
    Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    4th May 2014
    Posts
    415
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 1,268 Times in 397 Posts
    While you sleep, they create your reality...



    ...to the topTop

  6. #21
    Super Moderator United States Dreamtimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    8,852
    Thanks
    49,698
    Thanked 39,638 Times in 8,769 Posts
    The tax cuts helped corporations and the rich. They don't expire. The small part which helped the middle class expires. Trump has been riding the Obama economy wave. Tariffs are hurting the heartland. That's one of the reasons his base is already eroding. The seats up for grabs in 2020 are even more vulnerable. Gerrymandering is now backfiring.

    It used to be corporations had obligations to the communities they operated in. No more. Now their only obligation is to shareholders who don't like to pay taxes and send most of their money out of the country.

    The wage puzzle...how much are workers valued? It seems like they're often considered a burden. Profit over people.
    ...to the topTop

  7. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (25th November 2018), Chris (25th November 2018), Elen (25th November 2018), NotAPretender (25th November 2018)

  8. #22
    Senior Member NotAPretender's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    3,601
    Thanks
    14,201
    Thanked 16,155 Times in 3,603 Posts
    The tax cut was a complete fraud, DT...it is depressingly sad that so many can't see through this blatant manipulation.

    I've got a story exemplifying this sort of financial sleight-of-hand. A company I worked for pulled a 'look over here' on its small town uneducated work force...Some rich thrive on this form of exploitation and feel morally deserving of it.

    The 'genius' owner of this company had a daughter that I went to school with. We both we absent from school one day and somehow a conversation was started by the class about us. I was told that the teacher had stated that this girl couldn't hold an intellectual candle to me. It was a weird experience but then I had quite a few weird experiences in grade school.

    Since I"m going off the rails here, I saw on the news this morning a stated mantra: When a woman is tough she is called a beyotch and when a man is tough he is called effective. Maybe for some but when I see a 'tough' man, I see an assh*le. Ok, I"m done.
    Last edited by NotAPretender, 25th November 2018 at 16:24.
    "We are one thought away from changing the world!"
    ...to the topTop

  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to NotAPretender For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (25th November 2018), Dreamtimer (26th November 2018), Elen (25th November 2018)

  10. #23
    Super Moderator United States Dreamtimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th April 2015
    Location
    Patapsco Valley
    Posts
    8,852
    Thanks
    49,698
    Thanked 39,638 Times in 8,769 Posts
    I recently learned that Ayn Rand's books are as popular as Shakespeare. The Bible is still the number one seller, I believe.

    Her Objectivism is a pretty name for egoism. People who are poor or unfortunate are seen as deserving it. It doesn't seem that examining the causes of that poverty really matters.

    And if a society doesn't truly examine and understand that it will end up with larger and larger gaps between the haves and have-nots.

    I think that around half of our nation's wealth is now in the hands of just a few people.


    Of course, in her later years, Ms. Rand took welfare and social security despite having lambasted those systems in her prime.
    ...to the topTop

  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dreamtimer For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (26th November 2018), Elen (26th November 2018), NotAPretender (26th November 2018)

  12. #24
    Senior Member NotAPretender's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd April 2017
    Posts
    3,601
    Thanks
    14,201
    Thanked 16,155 Times in 3,603 Posts
    Amen to that...she was messed up by her Soviet experience...her aura oozed the dysfunction.
    "We are one thought away from changing the world!"
    ...to the topTop

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to NotAPretender For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (26th November 2018), Dreamtimer (26th November 2018), Elen (26th November 2018)

  14. #25
    Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    4th May 2014
    Posts
    415
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 1,268 Times in 397 Posts
    Catherine Austin Fitts - Government Taking
    Massive Amounts of Money Dark

    (Nov 24, 2018)

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Rv27tbz-7M

    Desription:

    • Financial expert Catherine Austin Fitts says, “I don’t know why the government is shifting massive amounts of money out of the U.S. government and out of the U.S. economy and taking it dark.”
    • Fitts says, “Right now, we are choking on secrecy as a society.
    • If you look at all the people who got it wrong about the collapse, the reason they got it wrong is because all the information they needed to determine whether or not it was going to collapse was being kept secret even though they, as taxpayers, were financing it. . . .
    • If we had transparency and we stopped with the secrecy, we could turn the red button green. . . .
    • The cost of secrecy is enormous . . . .
    • The cost of tyranny, the cost of oppression, the cost of Americans having lousy education and all this control, it destroys so much wealth.”
    • You cannot have a successful civilization with this kind of secrecy.”
    ...to the topTop

  15. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to turiya For This Useful Post:

    Aragorn (27th November 2018), Dreamtimer (27th November 2018), Elen (27th November 2018), Melidae (27th November 2018)

  16. #26
    Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    4th May 2014
    Posts
    415
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 1,268 Times in 397 Posts
    Central Banks Want Cashless Society ==> Cryptocurrencies
    Report begins @ 2:03...

    IMF Calls On Central Bankers To Begin The Transition
    Process Into Their New System - Episode 1725a

    (Nov 26, 2018)

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3o5c_HZIJE

    Description:

    • Black Friday did not go well for the brick and mortar stores, traffic way down. GM is closing plants and laying off many people.
    • The IMF signals the rest of the central banks to push their own cryptocurrencies.
    • This is their electronic currency that they want to control this is why you have seen Bitcoin and other cryptos decline rapidly, this was done on purpose.
    • The EU is proposing new regs for the WTO, they are fighting an uphill battle, the central bankers are trying to keep their system intact but it is slipping through their fingers.
    Economy
    Black Friday Has Brick-and-Mortar Stores Seeing Red

    • Legacy brick-and-mortar retailers have found themselves falling behind this Thanksgiving season, this Black Friday traditional brick-and-mortar retailers like Lowe’s, Walmart, Lululemon and Kohl’s all dealt with glitches and malfunctioning websites.


    • foot traffic at malls and stores seems to be similar to last year’s levels if slightly lower at some locations. For instance, more than 62% of the malls managed by JLL reported the same volume of foot traffic this year as in 2017.

    Source: zerohedge.com
    ______________________________

    Trump “Not Happy” About GM News, Tells Company To Stop Making Cars In China


    [list][*]GM’s mass layoffs affecting over 14,000 workers and widespread plant shutterings in the US and abroad,[*]GM’s announcement has nothing to do with tariffs
    Source: zerohedge.com
    ______________________________

    Central Banks Looking at Creating Their Own Cryptocurrencies


    • The IMF has recommended that all Central banks should issue their own cryptocurrencies. Indeed, they are looking at using Block Chain to keep track of taxes and to enforce negative interest rates with cryptocurrencies which would allow them to impose negative interest rates whenever necessary. With adopting cryptocurrencies that governments would control, we will come one step closer to losing all our freedom. Central banks could enforce negative interest rates with cryptocurrencies and thus people would find their accounts just garnished. You could not hoard cash and withdraw it from banks. They are also looking at this as a way to manage a banking crisis stopping runs on banks.

    Source: armstrongeconomics.com
    ______________________________

    EU Says It Has New Proposal to Reform WTO, Jointly With Australia, Canada, China


    • The European Union has announced it has a new proposal to reform the World Trade Organisation, jointly with Australia, Canada, China, India, Mexico and other countries, the statement said.
    • “Together with a broad coalition of WTO members, we are presenting our most concrete proposals yet for WTO reform. I hope that this will contribute to breaking the current deadlock and that all WTO members will take responsibility equally,” European Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom said in a statement.
    • The package, co-authored by Australia, Canada, China, Iceland, India, New Zealand, Mexico, Norway, Singapore, South Korea and Switzerland, will streamline the appointment of new judges, currently blocked by the United States. This has led to a backlog in the cases heard.

    Source: sputniknews.com

    X22Report.com
    Last edited by turiya, 27th November 2018 at 18:40.
    ...to the topTop

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to turiya For This Useful Post:

    Melidae (3rd December 2018)

  18. #27
    Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    4th May 2014
    Posts
    415
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 1,268 Times in 397 Posts
    'BREXIT is for the Bankers, Not for the People'...
    Trump Calls Out The Central Bankers, BREXIT
    Is In Favor Of The EU - Episode 1726a

    (Nov 27, 2018)

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0SdMNodmSk

    Description:

    • Trump bashes May again and in the process reveals that the BREXIT deals is for the central bankers and not for the people.
    • Consumer confidence dips, savings rates decline, a recipe for a disaster.
    • US home prices are leveling off and beginning to decline in many areas.
    • WTO releases report that the world trade is slowing, but what they really mean is their controlled globalists trade is slowing.
    • In the end the objective is to go after the entire globalist/central bank system.

    Economy
    Trump publicly bashes May AGAIN, says Brexit is only ‘great’ for EU, will hurt UK-US trade deal

    • US President Donald Trump criticized UK Prime Minister Theresa May, saying the divorce deal she has negotiated with the EU jeopardizes Britain’s ability to seal a trade deal with America.

    • Trump said it was a “great deal for the EU,” but not so much for Britain.
    • “Right now as the deal stands… they may not be able to trade with the US and I don’t think they want that at all, that would be a very big negative for the deal,” Trump told
    • Trump argued that May should restart negotiations with Brussels with a view to securing better terms for Britain. Both the British prime minister and European officials said that this will not happen.

    Source: rt.com
    Last edited by turiya, 28th November 2018 at 20:31.
    ...to the topTop

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to turiya For This Useful Post:

    Melidae (3rd December 2018)

  20. #28
    Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    4th May 2014
    Posts
    415
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 1,268 Times in 397 Posts
    Make Mexico Great Again...
    Mexico To Award Nation’s Highest Honor To Jared Kusher for Efforts Around USMCA Trade Negotiations…
    Posted on November 27, 2018
    by sundance

    A small but interesting development in the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico highlights a backstory CTH suspected several months ago {Go Deep}. August 25th:

    As USTR Robert Lighthizer was working with the trade officials representing outgoing Mexican President Peña Nieto, White House adviser/emissary Jared Kushner was quietly working behind the scenes with AMLO trade adviser Jesus Seade and outlining the possibilities if they partnered with strategic economic objectives in mind.

    As a result of Kusher’s dogged efforts to bring an entirely new dual-nationalist ‘focus’ within the trade construct, removing the historic globalist baseline, the outcome of the trade deal is excellent for both the U.S. and Mexico. So today:

    MEXICO […] Kushner will receive the prize “for his contributions to achieve the negotiation of the new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA),” according to a statement by Mexico’s Foreign Relations Secretariat.

    Peña Nieto will present Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law, with the award on Thursday at the Group of 20 summit in Argentina, according to the Reforma newspaper.

    “Mr. Kushner’s participation was a determinant factor to start the process of renegotiation of [the North American Free Trade Agreement], avoiding a unilateral exit by the United States from said treaty, and his constant and effective involvement was key in achieving a successful close of negotiations,” reads the official statement on the award.

    It’s likely to be Peña Nieto’s last major act as president, as he is due to hand over power to President-elect Andrés Manuel López Obrador on Saturday. (read more)

    It will take time for Mexico to withdraw from prior corrupt agreements with multinational corporations who have invested in exploitative enterprise and bribed corrupt Mexican officials. President Trump is EXACTLY the guy AMLO needs to help guide him through a complex business and economic process of extracting his country from the tentacles of economic exploitation.

    BACKSTORY CTH September 2018: […] Previous Mexican Presidents structured economic policy around accepting multinational corporate investment, facilitating the requests of Wall Street investment banks, and the predictable parasitic outcomes that follow. Exfiltration of wealth and exploitation of resources/labor are an outcropping of predatory multinational trade exploitation, ie. “globalism”.

    Retention of the multinational schemes generally leads to massive corruption. In the U.S. this corruption is known as “lobbying”, in Mexico the process is called ‘bribery’; however, the activity is the same.



    The incoming Mexican President, Lopez-Obrador (AMLO), is more of an economic nationalist; and quite remarkably his economic outlook, at least as his team has described the objectives so far, is quite Trumpian.

    You might even say: “Make Mexico Great Again”.

    Both U.S. President Trump and Mexican President-elect AMLO have similar outlooks toward predatory multinational corporations and economic exploitation. If you think about how Mexico was used by the multinationals in the past twenty years; and then think about a very real possibility of a U.S President and Mexican President having an economic friendship; well,… holy cats, those multinationals could be remarkably nervous right now.

    AMLO supports labor and has an actual agenda to create a strong working-class or middle-class. The wealth disparity within Mexico has always been a foundational issue that has led to a tremendous amount of corruption.

    Similarly, President Trump supports labor. Likely because of his positive relationships with labor unions as a private sector builder, Trump was the only republican candidate who advanced pragmatic opinion toward organized labor in 2015, 2016 and, as president, in White House meetings where he invited labor officials. President Trump’s economic agenda is laser focused on a strong middle-class.

    AMLO views Wall Street multinationals as predatory by disposition; Mexico has suffered from industrial exploitation, especially in the agriculture sector. President Trump also views those same multinationals as tending toward predatory behavior, and he has targeted many specific corporations for attention due to their participation in the erosion of the American middle-class and the U.S. manufacturing base.

    AMLO is a strong Mexican Nationalist. President Trump is a strong American Nationalist. Within almost all of President Trump’s foreign policy speeches on economics, he openly accepts that all nations should make decisions based on their individual and nationalistic needs. Trump does not see economic nationalism as adversarial; he points out that trade agreements based on both interests are entirely possible, and actually easy to construct.

    As long as AMLO stays away from the authoritarian tendencies of power, ie. government ownership of private industry – and the slippery slope of soft-Marxism, surprisingly he and President Trump are likely to have a great deal more in common than most would think. Both populists; both nationalists; both rebuke the elitist trappings of globalism and intend on executing economic policies for the majority of their citizens.

    Because they have more in common on the economics of policy, this explains why the framework of the U.S-Mexico trade agreement between Robert Lighthizer (representing Trump) and Jesus Seade (representing AMLO) was possible to construct.



    Lighthizer and Seade held long meetings after formal U.S-Mexico daily negotiations, and together this relationship appears to have been very important in how the deal framework was structured. Right now both teams are filling in the details based on common objectives.

    With AMLO and President Trump, Mexico and the U.S. have joint-interests in an economic trade bloc. It is actually quite stunning when you think about the economic power that both nations can hold if their mutual and individual interests remain at the forefront.

    President Trump and President Lopez-Obrador have common objectives; and with the economic approach outlined by AMLO toward using Mexico’s energy resources as leverage for expanded investment, the U.S. is well positioned to help. Mexico needs independent collateral to break the cycle of dependency on overseas money (investment). Mexico needs policies and partners that can make Mexico, and the Mexican people, independently wealthy. Guess who the bestest partner would be? Yup, President Trump.

    President Trump is well positioned to assist Mexico via a united trade bloc with expanded cross-border investment for economic development.

    AMLO wants a higher standard of living for Mexican workers; President Trump wants greater parity between Mexican workers and their U.S. counterparts. Heck, it was U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and USTR Robert Lighthizer who first proposed raising the Mexican minimum wage. Now both countries have agreed to an incremental Mexican minimum wage aspect of $16/hr within the auto sector.

    Combining the wage aspect with the content and origination agreement, this has become a win/win for both AMLO and President Trump. The multinationals within the auto-sector might not like it, but they’ve already put a massive amount of money into plant and manufacturing investment in their existing Mexican footprint. They have no choice.

    In an generally overlooked outcome the nationalist interests of Mexico, specific to AMLO, are very close to alignment with the nationalist MAGA agenda of President Trump.

    The U.S. economy is expanding at an unprecedented rate, and Mexico prepares to surf the MAGAnomic tsunami known as Donald Trump.

    President Trump can see that independent economic future for Mexico based on a partnership that protects the interests of both nations. It certainly appears that AMLO can see the same vision.

    Remarkable times.


    Source
    Last edited by turiya, 28th November 2018 at 20:30.
    ...to the topTop

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to turiya For This Useful Post:

    Melidae (3rd December 2018)

  22. #29
    Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    4th May 2014
    Posts
    415
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 1,268 Times in 397 Posts
    'A Global Systemic Default'...
    Bill Holter – Mad Max World Possible as Unpayable Debt Bubble Pops

    (Nov 27, 2018)

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCgoJAd_Zmw

    Description:

    • There is going to be a reset of this unpayable debt, and financial writer and precious metals expert Bill Holter contends, “It’s going to happen, and I hope for not a very long period of time.
    • I am hoping it’s just a two week or four week event where the system goes down and goes back up.
    • If I am wrong, then you are looking at a Mad Max world. . . .
    • Basically, nothing works.
    • Your electricity doesn’t work.
    • Your car may or may not work.
    • We may have an EMP or it will work until you run out of gas.
    • When credit breaks down, then distribution breaks down.
    • If credit doesn’t come back up, then distribution is gone.
    • That means every Walmart, every grocery store is empty.
    • Basically, you are on your own.”

    • In closing, Holter warns, “The balloon has already been popped. The pin has popped the bubble, and now we are just going to work its way out. The workout, by the way, is going to be a complete and utter financial collapse. It is a house of cards, and it is all going to end up flat.”
    Last edited by turiya, 28th November 2018 at 20:29.
    ...to the topTop

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to turiya For This Useful Post:

    Melidae (3rd December 2018)

  24. #30
    Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    4th May 2014
    Posts
    415
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 1,268 Times in 397 Posts
    Trump: “[Fed] Much Bigger Problem Than China”,
    Blames [Fed] For Everything - Episode 1727a

    (Nov 28, 2018)

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX2gaTSB8iY

    Description:

    • Trump puts the screws to GM, checking on auto tariffs. New home sales decline rapidly, the housing market it falling apart.
    • Powell explains how the economy is doing, says its still strong, only moderate problems will continue with rate hikes, tells the MSM that they might slow next year, market sky rockets.
    • Trump says that the Fed is worse than China and they are to blame for almost everything in the economy, Putin says they are not pulling away from the dollar, the dollar is pulling away from the world.
    Economy


    Donald J. Trump
    @realDonaldTrump


    The reason that the small truck business in the U.S. is such a go to favorite is that, for many years, Tariffs of 25% have been put on small trucks coming into our country. It is called the “chicken tax.” If we did that with cars coming in, many more cars would be built here.....

    6:43 AM - 28 Nov 2018


    Donald J. Trump
    @realDonaldTrump


    .....and G.M. would not be closing their plants in Ohio, Michigan & Maryland. Get smart Congress. Also, the countries that send us cars have taken advantage of the U.S. for decades. The President has great power on this issue - Because of the G.M. event, it is being studied now!

    6:49 AM - 28 Nov 2018
    ____________________________________

    Watch Live: Fed Chair Powell Defend His Rate-Hike Rout Against Trump Tantrum


    Source: zerohedge.com
    ____________________________________

    Dollar Dumps, Gold Jumps As Powell Abandons Hawkish “Long Way” From Neutral Stance

    • Powell says rates “just below” range of estimates for neutral policy, raising the question of whether he’s walking back an earlier view that neutral was a longer way off
    • He says even after eight hikes since December 2015, rates are still low by historical standards
    • Powell explains Fed’s gradualism, saying the approach is meant to balance risks of moving too fast or too slowly
    • Powell says moving too fast would risk shortening U.S. expansion, moving too slow could risk higher inflation and destabilizing financial imbalances
    • Says the effects of Fed’s gradual hikes is uncertain, may take a year to realize
    • “We see no major asset class, however, where valuations appear far in excess of standard benchmarks”
    • Powell sees “great deal to like” about U.S. economic outlook, says he and FOMC are forecasting `continued solid growth’
    • Much of Powell’s speech dealt with financial stability, rating the overall risks “moderate”

    Source: zerohedge.com
    ____________________________________

    Trump blasts Fed chair over stock market slide, GM layoffs


    • President Trump on Tuesday blamed Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell for a string of negative economic developments, including the stock market’s recent slide and General Motors’s plan to shutter U.S. factories and lay off thousands of workers.
    • “I’m doing deals and I’m not being accommodated by the Fed,” Trump said
    • “So far, I’m not even a little bit happy with my selection of Jay,” Trump told the Post. “Not even a little bit. And I’m not blaming anybody, but I’m just telling you I think that the Fed is way off-base with what they’re doing.”

    Source: thehill.com
    ____________________________________

    Trump calls Federal Reserve ‘much bigger problem than China’ -- AP

    • President Donald Trump says he thinks the Federal Reserve’s policies are a greater threat to U.S. economic growth than a burgeoning trade war with China.

    • Trump “I think the Fed is a much bigger problem than China.”

    Source: cleveland19.com
    ____________________________________

    Putin: “We Aren’t Aiming To Ditch The Dollar, The Dollar Is Ditching Us” -- Zerohedge


    • Putin says “We aren’t aiming to ditch the dollar. The dollar is ditching us.”

    • We are not setting the target of moving away from the dollar – the dollar is moving away from us, and those who take respective [sanctions] decisions are shooting themselves not just in the foot, but slightly higher, as such instability in calculations in dollars creates a desire of many global economies to find alternative reserve currencies and create settlement systems independent of the dollar.

    • To underscore that Russia is not alone in moving toward de-dollarization, Putin added, “We’re not the only ones doing it, believe me.”

    Source: zerohedge.com

    x22report.com
    Last edited by turiya, 30th November 2018 at 15:47.
    ...to the topTop

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to turiya For This Useful Post:

    Melidae (3rd December 2018)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •