The late Mark Pittman was a journalist for Bloomberg when, once upon a time, there were still a few actual investigative reporters. Mark did a piece on my operation in Japan. He knew what we were doing, that the accounts were mine, not clients, and that I was buying distressed portfolios. Not one client ever signed a complaint, and there was NO DEFAULT. When they charged me. I met Mark at the Hyatt in NYC across from the Train Station. He knew it was a setup and said: “Marty, we are not going to allow them to do this to you.”
The law says that if you commit fraud, you MUST help the victims get their money back. Further proof of how New York City is a cesspool of corruption: when they realized I was helping my clients go after the bankers, they put a gag order on me to stop me from helping my clients against HSBC/Republic. They have been doing the same to Trump. The Special Prosecutor went as far as to demand a gag order on Trump so that he could not even criticize Biden while campaigning. You cannot make up this stuff. If you wrote a fiction novel with these maneuvers, they would say it is too far-fetched.
I think it is absolutely critical as Trump is put on trial in New York City. I was granted bail in New Jersey. Not a single NY journalist ever reported the Truth no less the courts. I was interviewed by a journalist who asked about the bank illegally trading in my accounts. She asked if they were using my accounts to “launder money for the Russian Mafia as they were doing in Madof?” The banks claimed in Madoff’s case not to have known. That is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE, for you have to know your client rules. They verified every account and the corporate documents behind each one. Madoff pled guilty to an information quickly. He was not indicted and could have defended for a few years. The only reason he did so was clearly to protect his family. Just as in my case, the bank claimed it had no idea where the money was. It is impossible to get $1 billion out of a bank, and nobody knows where it went. There is NO SUCH thing as a fair trial in New York City. Trump is doomed there, and this is all about interfering in the 2024 election.
Mark understood the bankers very well. Bloomberg removed Mark from covering my case and replaced him with David Glovin, who could never praise the government more. It was Mark at Bloomberg who battled in court for years to get the details of those bailouts released to the public. Mark was probably the most professional journalist I ever met. I was told after my case began that Bloomberg purged all the reports Mark had previously written about our firm from their terminals and certainly Japan. It was as if Bloomberg was in on the whole scam.
Mark’s wife, Laura, wrote to me about Mark’s death. It was a sad day, for there was NEVER anyone at Bloomberg I ever met who had the integrity of Mark Pittman.
QUESTION: I am writing to you today to seek your expert advice on a much-discussed topic in France: the Lagleize Law. As you probably know, this law, if passed, could radically change the way property ownership is structured in France.
The Lagleize law proposes to separate the ownership of the building from the land on which it is built. This means that a buyer could become the owner of his home without owning the land on which the property is built. In exchange for occupying the land, the owner of the building would pay rent to a freehold land agency (FLO).
I am particularly interested in the potential impact of this law on the French property market. Do you think that the Lagleize law could lead to a decrease in property prices, as some suggest? Or do you think it could have other effects, such as creating new investment opportunities or solving some of the problems in the current property market?
In addition, I would also like to know your views on how this law compares with similar legislation in other countries. For example, the UK has a long tradition of “leasehold” where land and buildings are often held separately. Do you think that the Lagleize law could have similar effects to those observed in the UK or in other countries with similar legislation?
I would be very grateful if you could share your thoughts on these issues. Your expertise would be invaluable in informing my understanding of this law and its potential implications. I thank you in advance for your time and look forward to reading your response. Yours sincerely
ANSWER: Europe is a Marxist paradise. The left has dominated Europe and when you just look at our Real Estate Index for each country, there is just no comparison. Of course, the left will always interpret the way to stop inflation they cause is to always confiscate property.
The entire “Commune” project began in France. They convinced Marx that Communism is the answer to stop the business cycle. We can see how that devastated human society in Russia, Eastern Europe, and China. Nevertheless, this Lagleize Law is in line with this same thinking but they are trying to do it just for landownership. As Socrates has written: “Keep in mind that given the dramatic decline of 70% from the last high established during 2015, that if we continue to move in the same direction after one target, then the move will not subside until the next target in time is reached. We have elected 2 Bearish Reversals from the last high thus far to date.”
We have not elected any Yearly Bearish Reversals in US property. It is highly questionable that the government could even try that since the 5th Amendment states plainly in what is known as the Takings Clause:
“nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
Whenever we analyze the law, we MUST look at the historical reason for its creation. The genesis of the Takings Clause can be found in Section 38 of the Magna Charta, which declared that land would not be taken without some form of due process. King John (1166–1216), who signed that document, almost immediately denounced this undertaking to his barons. However, that promise eventually made its way into the coronation oaths taken by kings, and, in England, it became a protection against the confiscation of lands without some form of a hearing.
I had to study international law in order to even be in a position to advise clients on global investment. On this subject, I found Sir Edward Coke (1552-1634), who was the Lord Chief Justice of England, really defined the English Common Law. He wrote the “Petition of Right,” which established specific rights, of alleged ancient provenance, against the powers of the King to prevent tyranny. He eventually compiled everything in the law and prepared a full-volume series called the “Institutes of the Laws of England,” which set out his views on the role of the common law in protecting ancient rights against royal power.
Sir William Blackstone (1723-1780) wrote a four-volume series entitled the “Commentaries on the Laws of England,” which was used as a foundation for legal education in England. However, the founding of the United States relied upon his Commentaries to establish the American foundation of law. I would refer to his Commentaries to seek an understanding of the intent behind the Constitutional provisions as do US Supreme Court Justices from time to time.
You must understand the basic differences in law between nations before you dare step foot into that jurisdiction. The #1 mistake is to assume your legal tradition will apply in a foreign jurisdiction. For example, under common law, a wife or clergy cannot testify against a defendant. However, children can be forced to testify against a parent. Under French Civil/Canon Law, no family member can be forced to testify against another even a brother-in-law. The Canon Law recognized the sanctity of the family unit whereas the English King did not.
There is no constitutional prohibition against confiscating all the land in France and handing it to the State. In Fact, during the 1789 French Revolution, they confiscated all the land of the Catholic Church. On November 2nd, 1789, in the midst of the early enthusiasm for the Revolution and to solve the fiscal crisis of the Monarchy, the French Constituent Assembly passed a law to confiscate all Church property and to redistribute it by auction. The Assignat notes of the French Revolution were issued from 1790 – 1796. To buy the land, you had to exchange coins for these notes.
So as you can see, history repeats. They confiscated land before, so the same idea resurfaces once again.
In 2010, Barron’s wrote a piece on me effectively laughing at my forecast that the share market would rally to new highs. What seems to inevitably unfold is this notion that whatever the event might be in motion, the mere thought of a reversal in trend appears impossible. When the press disagrees with Socrates, I know it will be the press who is wrong. And because they end up being wrong, of course, they cannot print a retraction so they will just pretend you do not exist rather than admit – Sorry, we were wrong. The Dow made that new high above 2007 by February 2013. That was 64 months from the October 2007 high.
I have been in the game for many years. With each event, it appears to be like Groundhog Day. They pop their heads out and declare they do not see their shadow, so the entire world will disintegrate and that is always based upon opinion. It is never backed by real analysis. Just the standard human trait of assuming whatever trend is in motion, will remain in motion.
Being an institutional adviser, I have never had that luxury. We have had to deal with some of the biggest portfolios in the world. They want accurate forecasting, and it has to be long-term – not day trading. They are not interested in the typical headlines of doom and gloom that the press love to print with every financial event simply to get readership. That is all they care about. It has been the financial version of the fake news.
When we step back and look at this favorite fundamental that people beat to death to predict the end of the world, the national debt, and the collapse of the dollar. Little did they know that the increase in National Debt during the 2007-2009 Financial Crisis was supposed to bring down the sky and end the existence of the dollar. We can see the sharp rise in debt simply made a double top with the Financial Crisis of 1985.
It was that previous 1985 Financial Crisis that set in motion the Plaza Accord which brought together the central banks creating what was then the G5 – now G20. Of course, like every government intervention, the side effect was the 1987 Crash and their attempt to reverse their directive at the Plaza Accord became the Louve Accord. When the traders saw that failed, the collapse in confidence led to the 1987 Crash.
It has always been a CONFIDENCE game as I pointed out with the 1933 Banking Holiday previously. In this case, the failure of the Louvre Accord which came out and said the dollar had fallen enough, once new lows in the dollar unfolded and the central banks could not stop the decline, led to financial panic by 1987 which manifested in the 1987 Crash.
This chart shows the quarterly change in the National Debt since 1966, Here you can see the 1985 and 2008 Financial Crises were on par. Neither one ended the dollar no less the world economy. So when I warned the share market would rally and make new highs and Barron’s laughed in 2010, I said the same thing after the 1987 Crash and people laughed.
In fact, on the very day of the low, I said this was it and that we would rally back to new highs by 1989. That was perfect and the market responded to the Economic Confidence Model (ECM) which has been published back in 1979. This was more than simply forecasting the 1987 Crash and the very day of the low. It clearly established that the ECM had revealed that there was a secret cycle behind the appearance of chaos even in economics.
Larry Edelson was actually a competitor at the time. But Larry respected that the forecast from the model was far beyond what people would ever expect. If we are ever going to advance as a society, we have to stop the bullshit and understand HOW markets trade and WHY. Larry did that. He understood that the model was something larger than just personal opinion.
Even those claiming to be using the K-Wave cannot make real forecasts. The basis of Kondratieff’s argument came from his empirical study of the economic performance of the USA, England, France, and Germany between 1790 and 1920. Kondratieff took the wholesale price levels, interest rates, and production and consumption of coal, pig iron, and lead for each economy. He then sought to smooth the data using an averaging mathematical approach of nine years to eliminate the trend as well as shorter waves. Kondratieff thus arrived at his long-wave theory suggesting that the economic process was a process of continuous waves of boom and bust.
Kondratieff’s work was compelling and contributed greatly to the Austrian School of Economics that first began to develop the concept of a Business Cycle. The general central principle of the Austrian Business Cycle Theory is concerned with a period of sustained low-interest rates and excessive credit creation resulting in a volatile and unstable imbalance between saving and investment. Within this context, the theory supposes that the Business Cycle unfolds whereby low rates of interest tend to stimulate borrowing from the banking sector and thus then result in the expansion of the money supply that causes an unsustainable credit source boom which leads to a diminished opportunity for investment by competition.
Here is a chart of the business cycle that was created by a farmer named Samuel Benner. Benner based his work on Sunspots, which actually incorporated solar maximum and minimum that today’s Climate Change zealots refuse to consider. Nevertheless, someone manipulated Brenner’s work and created a chart to try to influence society handing it in with a wild story to the Wall Street Journal published this cycle on February 2nd, 1932, when the market bottomed in July 1932. Still, nobody knew who had investigated this phenomenon in 1932.
When I was doing my own research reading all the newspapers to understand how events unfolded, I came across this chart. I found it interesting that during the Great Depression people were reaching out and some began to embrace cyclical ideas. The problem with both Kondratiff and Brenner was that the period they used to develop their cycles was the 19th century because the real Industrial Revolution was unfolding and in the 1850s, 70% of the civil workforce were all in agriculture. Consequently, if you constructed a model based entirely upon one sector, it would work only as long as that sector was the top dog.
Being a historian buff, it quickly hit me that NOTHING remains constant and that the economy will ALWAYS evolve, mature, and then crash and burn. Where agriculture was 70% of the workforce in 18590, it fell to 40% by 1900, and then down to 3% by 1980.
Just look at energy. The earliest lamps, dating to the Upper Paleolithic, were stones with depressions in which animal fats were burned as a source of light. In cultures closer to the sea, they began to use shells as lamps which they would burn at first animal fat. Clay lamps began to appear during the Bronze Age around the 16th century BC and the invention quickly spread throughout the Roman Empire. Initially, they took the form of a saucer with a floating wick.
We even find Roman oil lamps as luxury items crafted out of bronze. There are collectors of terracotta oil lamps for there is a vast variety of motifs. There is everything from dolphins, and various entities, to erotic oil lamps, which may have been used in brothels. The point is, if you constructed a model on oil, you would have surely accomplished similar results to Kondratief and Brenner.
Then of course, just as the energy moved from animal fats to vegetable oils, by the 19th century it returned to whale oil which was extracted from the blubber. Emerging industrial societies used whale oil in oil lamps and to make soap. However, during the 20th century, whale oil was even made into margarine.
Then the discovery of petroleum and the use of whale oils declined considerably from their peak in the 19th century into the 20th century. Ironically, it was fossil fuels that probably saved whales from extinction. Hence, now we are entering a period where they deliberately want to end fossil fuels and move to solar and wind power. Obviously, just a cursory review of energy reveals the problem of basing a model on the current energy source or major economic industry. Things change with time.
COMMENT: Hi, I live in Finland/Helsinki. The Soviet Union attacked Finland in 1939, Stalin was one who arranged a false flag in Manila. A lot of Finnish soldiers and civilians died. But we survived. We Finnish people know Russians extremely well. It is a historical fact that Russians always arrange false flags and try to slave other nations and people. And that is happening just now in Ukraine. Putin attacked Ukraine and he is trying to slave Ukraine. Best Regards from Finland
JT
REPLY: It is important to not judge a country by its leaders. There are always left and right in every country and no country enjoys 100% approval of its people. Just look at the United States. There are ONLY three presidents who won with 60% or more, FDR 1st term, Johnson following Kennedy’s assassination, and Richard Nixon who promised to end Vietnam. All others won with just a few points over 50%. In the 2008 Election of Obama v McCain score his victory with just 52.9%. Even Lenin warned not to put Stalin in charge.
It is wrong to judge Russia by Stalin and today the powers that be just hate the Russian people and attribute everything to Putin. It is essential to also understand that there is a left and a right in Russia that still prevails today and Putin is a moderate that if ignored by the West, will drive Russia into the hands of the extreme right.
We MUST understand history for there has always been a question of where Russia begins and ends and who constitutes the Russian people. These questions have been debated by Russian thinkers themselves for centuries post-Russian Revolution which ended more than 300 years of tsarist rule. Believe it or not, Putin is NOT trying to resurrect the Soviet Union for that was not even the vision of Lenin – but Stalin.
At first, Lenin was revered as the architect of the new Russia. He was the elder statesman of the Bolshevik revolution. Stalin, on the other hand, was what we would call a Neocon. He was the ambitious party leader with visions of absolute authoritarian control. The two clashed not only over their political vision for Russia but also on a very personal level hurling insults steeped in grudges. It was this battle that actually proved to be too much for Lenin resulting in his premature death.
The conflict between these two Russian leaders reached a climax in the last days of December 1922. This is when 2,000 delegates from all over the former Russian empire gathered together in Moscow to create a new state which would become the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The vision of this new state was starkly different between the two men. There were republics of Ukraine, Belarus, and Transcaucasia, which were formally independent of Russia. When Georgy Chicherin, the Soviet Russian commissar for foreign relations, signed the treaty with Germany where each surrendered their claims against the other for war reparations in July 1918, there was a problem of unity. Ukraine and Belarus were independent before 1919 but were then overrun by the Bolsheviks in 1919. They had objected to forgiving Germany.
Ukraine and Belarus took the position that the Russian authorities had no right to speak on behalf of Ukrainian and Belarus. In Georgia, there too they objected insisting that their rights as the members of an independent republic were violated. This is was ultimately set in motion the birth of the final version of the Soviet Union.
It was in August of 1922 when Joseph Stalin created a special commission to recommend a new political model of relations between the communist Party’s Central Committee, Russia and the republics. Stalin’s proposal was called the “autonomization of the republics” whereby the formally independent republics would be incorporated into the Russian Soviet Federation with rights of autonomy. However, the Russian Federation would become the central authority subordinating the formally independent republics. This resulted in a rebellion with the Georgians led the revolt against Stalin’s model. They were joined by the Ukrainians and Belarusians.
This conflict between Lenin’s vision of a union more akin to the United States model and Lenin’s vision of absolute central power resulted in the heated conversation with Feliks Dzerzhinsky, who was the head of the secret police and a supporter of Stalin. Stalin and many of his supporters, such as Ordzhonikidze and Dzerzhinsky, were actually non-Russians. Stalin was Georgian and Dzerzhinsky was actiually Polish. Interestingly, Felix Dzerzhinsky was remembered in St Petersburg on a Commemorative plaque dedicated him.
But the stroke prevented him from taking any decisive steps against them. Two days later, a commission of party officials, led by Stalin, placed strict limitations on Lenin’s activities, effectively isolating him. They said the restrictions were designed to prevent the worsening of Lenin’s health. But they also served a political purpose.
Lenin could not attend the congress and he certainly did not trust Stalin. Consequently, the paralyzed Lenin dictated his famous thoughts on the nationality question in a document he sent to the party leadership. It was a letter titled “On the Question of Nationalities or ‘Autonomization.’” On December 31st, 1922, he attacked Stalin’s policies criticizing the rights provided to the republics by the Union treaty, deeming them inadequate to stop the rise of Great Russian nationalism. Lenin called this threat as “great-power chauvinism.” To Lenin saw these people as non-Russians who he did not trust and feared for the future of the Russian people.
In Lenin believed that Stalin, who was not Russia, posed a major threat to Russia. He viewed Stalin’s dream of the USSR as a threat to the unity of state which he was correct. Lenin’s idea of a union of independent states would be sustained by local autonomy taking into account their local customes. Lenin was prepared to replace the Union he had originally proposed with a looser association of states with the centralized powers to be confined to matters of defense and international relations exclusively. Lenin also maintained that the republics should retain the right of secession to prevent Stalin’s central dominance of authority.
I highly recommend watching the movie Mr. Jones. While this will NOT show the battle between Lenin and Stalin, it will show the ruthlessness of Stalin that Lenin feared. But Stalin was NOT a Russian, but he has tarnish the reputation of all Russians ever since. It is ironic that Stalin was a Georgian, which is in the Caucuses bordering Turkey where they hate Russians for the very oppression of Stalin.
So, as you can see, this is a very complex subject. Putin is not a follower of Stalin wheras other behind him are. So we should be very care what we wish for when it comes to Regime Change. Just maybe they know this as well and want Regime Change to ensure war. Very interesting indeed. We should NOT judge Putin by Stalin or all Russians for that matter. That is the propaganda of the Neocons who are still fighting against Stalin.
Our models have confirmed that Biden’s sanctions against all Russians have undeniably destroyed the global economy unfortunately precisely on time from its birth in 1950. Our capital flow models have confirmed that there has been an unprecedented cash outflow from China following Biden’s sanctions. Not only are we witnessing a withdrawal of Western capital from China realizing that the US has no interest in peace and China will be next, but we are also looking at collapsing confidence in globalization continuing from here on out.
Our models have confirmed a highly unusual change in direction of the global capital flows which is even showing up in the emerging markets. China saw investors pull out from its share markets over concerns that we are clearly headed into World War III. Historically, the capital flows to the dollar during world war under the assumption that tanks will not be landing on the beaches of Virginia or California. This will tend to support the dollar, but not long-term. Biden’s sanctions attacking individual Russians have turned into a nightmare. Besides the Czech Republic seizing ALL assets of any Russian based upon their ethnicity as they were doing to the Japanese during World War II in the United States, now even Switzerland is doing the same thing.
These sanctions are not going to cause regime change and the overthrow of Putin with Russians running into the arms of the West. This is outright hatred of Russians as a people and they will have no choice but bond with China in an all-out war against this outrageous tyranny. I seriously doubt that Biden even understands what he is doing at the directions of these Neocons who have infiltrated the White House.
These Neocons are bringing the entire world to destruction which some argue is all part of their plan to enable the world to BUILD BACK BETTER which necessitates the destruction of the current energy system and reduction of population to make Bill Gates sleep easy at night. So the next season of BUILD BACK BETTER may be the climax.
Our model has ALWAYS picked up the shifts in capital flows that precede war. This time we are witnessing outflows not just from China, but also from ALL emerging markets on a scale that is simply unprecedented. The timing of outflows is clearly linked to Biden’s unprecedented sanctions against the Russian people – not just Russia itself as a political state. This has NEVER taken place in history before with the single exception of the US sanctions imposed on Japan and the freezing of all their assets in the United States which preceded Pearl Harbor.
It pains me to have to even write this today. But clearly, those who understand where this is going is to World War III and make no mistake about it – this is INTENTIONAL! Even the official data has revealed that foreign investors have sold a net $5.5 billion of Chinese government bonds in the last few weeks. Biden stupidly threatened China that if they support Russia, they will suffer the same sanctions. This is just insane and it is DELIBERATELY trying to destroy the entire world economy.
Even from NATO, Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said at a press conference on March 24, “China must not provide economic or military support for the Russian invasion.” The previous day he accused Beijing of spreading “blatant lies and misinformation.” What they are calling “misinformation” is anything that challenges the West’s own propaganda. They want WAR for the demands of Putin are reasonable – Ukraine remains neutral, surrender Donbas and Crimea which are all ethnic Russians when Zelensky passed the language law that Russian is no longer to be an official language in Ukraine. That is the same as telling all Spanish if you do not speak English – get out.
All we can do is write to every political leader and DEMAND accountability for the Biden Administration is out to BUILD BACK BETTER, but that requires total destruction first.
Leading Czech politicians are calling for all property within the Czech Republic of all Russians to be indefinitely ‘frozen’ in violation of international law. The onus would be on the victims to “prove” that they are against the Putin regime. There are about 40,000 Russians living in the Czech Republic, plus others who have property or businesses there.
The EU is increasing being viewed as an evil, lawless, government. However, the Eastern European EU members are now even worse than the Western ones. They seem to go further violating international law trying to prove to the West that they are good little obedient vassals. Fischer is violating every principle of what the EU was supposed to stand for – human rights. The Czech Republic has clearly begun a new cycle which began with the COVID Crash.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on March 24, 2022
When CTH outlined the ‘Destination Handbasket’ framework {Go Deep}, we had no idea Blackrock CEO Larry Fink was essentially going to confirm the premise of our prediction. Keep in mind, any digital currency can only work if there is a digital identity attributed to it – what some have called a digital passport which then creates a crypto wallet.
I have based the framework, of what appears to be over the horizon, on a set of inevitable geopolitical outcomes if the current path is continued. The letter by Blackrock CEO Larry Fink [LINK] seems to affirm the strongest likelihood of a western-inspired digital currency eventually replacing the dollar.
NEW YORK, March 24 (Reuters) – BlackRock Inc’s (BLK.N) chief executive, Larry Fink, said on Thursday that the Russia-Ukraine war could end up accelerating digital currencies as a tool to settle international transactions, as the conflict upends the globalization drive of the last three decades.
In a letter to the shareholders of the world’s largest asset manager, Fink said the war will push countries to reassess currency dependencies, and that BlackRock was studying digital currencies and stablecoins due to increased client interest.
“A global digital payment system, thoughtfully designed, can enhance the settlement of international transactions while reducing the risk of money laundering and corruption”, he said.
[…] In the letter on Thursday, the chairman and CEO of the $10 trillion asset manager said the Russia-Ukraine crisis had put an end to the globalization forces at work over the past 30 years.
[…] “While companies’ and consumers’ balance sheets are strong today, giving them more of a cushion to weather these difficulties, a large-scale reorientation of supply chains will inherently be inflationary,” said Fink.
He said central banks were dealing with a dilemma they had not faced in decades, having to choose between living with high inflation or slowing economic activity to contain price pressures. (read more)
You see that problem, that “dilemma” Fink mentions in the last paragraph above. That is what we have been talking about on these pages for more than two years. It is a dilemma western government created when they all joined together and followed the exact same financial path during the pandemic.
When western governments used the justification of the global pandemic to shut down their economies, enforce lockdowns and all of the subsequent rules, restrictions and economic pains as a direct result of those decisions, they put us on a crisis path that was always going to bring us to this “dilemma.” Quite frankly, I do not see that unity of action as accidental, nor do I see it as organic.
All of the western leaders followed the same monetary and financial policy that was being advanced by the World Economic Forum. They all spent like crazy, and provided tens-of-trillions in bailouts, subsidies and cash payments to cover the economic losses created by their COVID lockdowns. They all did exactly the same thing, and that collective action is why we have ‘global inflation.’
Perversely, while inflation crushes the working class, global inflation works to their benefit by lowering the cost of the debt the politicians created, which the central bands and federal reserve facilitated. We the citizens are suffering under inflation, but the governments that created the inflation actually benefit from it.
I will say with great deliberateness, these western governments want inflation. Sure, it provides a political challenge for those who need to get reelected by voters, but in the bigger of big pictures, they need inflation. Think about it in very simple terms. If they did not want inflation, those same central banks and federal reserve policy makers would have raised interest rates six to eight months ago.
None of what is happening in supply chains and inflation is a surprise to them; they might pretend not to know, but these are not stupid people. This is by design. Media covers for them because, well, I’ll accept the PR firms for the regimes are idiots. However, the people who constructed these policies to take advantage of COVID-19 are not dummies. They knew what all that intervention, manipulation and govt spending would lead to.
Where we are going now is a self-fulfilling prophecy, a destination that is a result of specific action the guided policymakers have taken.
Yes, in hindsight, all of it does seem planned to a long-term eventual conclusion. However, I’m not going to make that specific affirmation just yet; there are still strong elements of ‘not letting a crisis go to waste’ as the leading driver. Did these governing bodies create the underlying crisis? We can debate that, but the point is essentially moot. We are where we are.
The vaccination protocol created the Vax-Passport. That has opened the door to the digital identity, “digital id.” Any government created digital currency is going to need a digital id from the outset.
There are a lot of people asking where this is going, and what can be done to stop it. I’m pretty certain we have accurately identified “Where This is Going,” and I’m a lot more confident now about that aspect than I was even just 24 hours ago. However, knowing that, now we need to look closer at what they would do to stop us from disrupting it.
COMMENT #1: Well, at least I got the decline accelerating in the Ruble correct and thanks to your models knew the war and commodity cycles were turning up. Getting the fundamentals correct ahead of time is a work in progress and definitely not easy.
But while watching the Ruble crashing into weakness going into the ECM, one could not reverse position and go long the RUB. Heck, nobody could even open new positions and definitely not buy the RUB. All that was allowed was closing already existing positions. And now the RUB was even removed from the trading platform altogether.
So my original trading strategy of shorting and then going long RUB got cut short and max profits throw out the window. So much for free markets.
EM
COMMENT #2: Marty you have proven your model and computer is the key to running governments for the future living with the cycle. It is easy to see why the CIA wanted your model pinpointing Ukraine almost 10 years in advance as the key spot for war. It is also interesting how others prefer not to ever mention you for your work is not opinion like everyone else. I really hope you succeed in securing Socrates for the world long-term. We all can learn so much.
All the best from Poland
and thanks for the conference that you did here in Warsaw
VA
REPLY: The free markets are not so free. During the Civil War, even President Lincoln went after trading gold and argued those people were making money off of every battle. The EU wanted to take trading the Euro away from London because of BREXIT. The people running these governments will NEVER honor the free markets when they go against them.
Yes, it was very nice to meet everyone in Warsaw. I had not been there before. I am doing my best to make sure Socrates continues beyond my shelf life. The problem is that the world is run by the seat of its pants and it is always based upon bias, prejudice, and power-plays driven by ego. I think some people just need to have an enemy and no matter what changes, they ignore that to keep the hatred ongoing.
There are people who still call China Communist even though there is private ownership which is the opposite of communism. They will continue to hate China no matter what and that in turn only invokes a response to counter that trend. Biases like that prevent us from ever moving forward and society is at times like a scratched record playing the same track over and over again.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 