Obama Called the Gas Tax Holiday a Gimmick


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Jun 26, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

President Joe Biden is calling for a three-month gas tax holiday to lower the price at the pump. Interestingly, former President Obama opposed a gas tax holiday when energy prices were much lower. In fact, he called temporarily suspending the tax a “gimmick.” The US government currently charges 18 centers per gallon of gasoline and 24 cents per gallon of diesel.

In his 2020 memoir “A Promised Land,” Obama stated that opposing the temporary suspension was one of the reasons he beat Hillary Clinton in the 2008 US Presidential Election. “I was sure that consumers wouldn’t see much benefit. In fact, gas station owners were just as likely to keep gas prices high and boost their own profits as they were to pass the three-cents-a-gallon savings on to motorists,” Obama stated in his memoir after noting that Clinton and GOP candidate McCain both endorsed the idea.

Numerous politicians from both sides of the spectrum have stated that they cannot guarantee a tax holiday would ease consumer costs. In the face of the current energy crisis, a measly tax break will not help those struggling to afford gasoline in a significant way. Instead, America needs to boost production, reimplement pipeline deals, and begin fracking until a viable alternative option is available.

Biden Spreads Inflation Lies on Twitter. Jeff Bezos’ Response Is Priceless | DM CLIPS | Rubin Report


Posted originally on the The Rubin Report  on Rumble on May 23, 2022

Dave Rubin of “The Rubin Report” talks about Jeff Bezos calling out Joe Biden’s inflation lies. Jeff Bezos attacked Joe Biden’s statement which connected inflation with corporate tax rates. Even Democrats like Bezos are turning on Biden as the US economy continues to tank amid inflation, supply chain problems, and market crashes.

Canadian Multinational Executive Outlines Tech Initiative to Create Consumer Carbon Footprint Tracker


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 24, 2022 | Sundance

It is important to remember the ultimate goal of the ‘climate change’ promotors (World Economic Forum) is not an energy system that changes the global climate. The goal of the ‘climate change’ group is to create a carbon trading system; a new financial mechanism (a global tax program) to control human activity on a world-wide basis.  This system also needs a digital identity in order to work {hint-hint}.

You cannot tax or trade things you cannot track.  As a result, there was always going to be a need for an individual tracking and monitoring system that would connect to the global digital identity and determine the carbon footprint.  The carbon taxing and trading system will be more financially lucrative than any stock exchange or monetary banking system.  It is the ultimate human control mechanism, and the preferred way to redistribute wealth under the guise of global equity.

Of course, the system will beta test as a consumer demand product until the government steps in to take over the allocation and distribution equity part.  In this video segment, Alibaba Group president J. Michael Evans boasts at the 2022 World Economic Forum about the development of an “individual carbon footprint tracker” to monitor what you buy, what you eat, and where/how you travel.  WATCH:

The individual carbon tracker is the baseline for a global carbon trading system that involves everyone; at least, everyone connected to the outlook of western government.

Carbon allocation creates the financial metric that replaces currency.  You buy and sell carbon credits allowing you to engage in specific functions within society, like dining, traveling, home ownership and type, vehicle or transportation type, even the clothes you can purchase. Hence, “carbon trading” is the term most people are familiar with.

In essence, you are a parasite to earth; therefore, you must offset your derogatory footprint on the planet by paying a fee to exist.  If you cannot pay for the carbon credits needed to engage in the transaction (travel, home ownership, cooling, heating, etc.) you cannot engage in the regulated activity.

The carbon exchange process is at the end of the slippery slope created by a digital identity.  The 5G telecommunications network is designed to use geolocation and behavioral tracking that will connect your digital identity to your individual behavior and facilitate the carbon footprint tracing process.   We are already passed the “if” stage.

The Biden Administration Deliberately Destroyed Our Capacity to Produce Energy


Armstrong Economics Blog/Energy Re-Posted May 24, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Everyone who voted for Biden will continue to see their future utterly destroyed. The climate change people are deliberately destroying the capacity to produce energy without any alternative in place. The word from DC is that they “do not give a sh-t” about the people. They want to destroy our ability to produce fossil fuels before they are thrown out of office if that is even possible.

Alaskan Senator Sullivan explains that the Biden Administration is DELIBERATELY creating an energy crisis and then wants to blame oil companies and Putin. Senator Sullivan explains what Biden has done in just the last three weeks.

Then at the same time, they want farmers to grow only green crops and terminate beef production. The Neocons want to wage war against Russian and China. And nobody stands up and asks – “WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?”

A Realist Analysis of Global Temperature


And Carbon Dioxide, CO2 Levels

Way too much effort has been put into a non-issue in regards to extreme climate change; because the planet’s climate has never been constant since the planet was formed. In general, the temperatures have run from 12 degree C to 22 degrees C with the average around 17 degrees C. Since we are now around 15 degrees C, which is on the cold side of the average, it’s hard for me to see where the problem is. Especially, since more people die from the cold weather then the hot weather and current temperatures are below normal and therefore not a threat.

Then we have CO2 which has run from a high of around 7,000 ppm around 500 million years ago to 420 ppm today, again historically very, very low. And there does not seem to be any correlation between the two. In fact, if you look at the last 65 million years the CO2 dropped from around 800 ppm to below 200 ppm and temperature dropped form 22 degrees C to around 12 degree C around 1650.  But then CO2 had been dropping for over 100 million year so where is the correlation?

So now, let’s look at the more current climate. But before we can do that, we must look at where all our information comes from. CO2 started to be actually tracked by NOAA in 1958. Their website is https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/ and the CO2 levels are published monthly. There is an annual cycle to the CO2 levels, as in the summer, in the northern hemisphere the CO2 levels go down as the vegetation uses the CO2 as food. Then in the winter, we burn lots of carbon based fuels for heating and the levels go back up. Local temperatures have been recorded since the time of the U. S. civil war but they have only been turned into a global temperature going back to 1880 recently with modern computers by NASA. The estimated global temperatures can be found at https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/  in their table Land Ocean Temperature Index (LOTI) in text or CSV format. However, they are not published as a temperature but as an anomaly from the average temperature from 1950 to 1980 estimated to be 14 Degrees C. which is odd since it’s in the middle of the range that we are looking at which is not a good practice statistically. The reason I say this is that the calculated global temperatures are re-calculated every month as adjustments are made to the software. The process used in called Homogenization by NASA. 

To get the anomaly, you would take the current temperature, say 14.8 degrees C and subtract 14 degrees C leaving .8 degrees C and then multiple that by 100 to give you an anomaly of 80. The NASA LOTI table shows that value for every month from the current back to January 1880. I don’t understand why this is done like that nor why they don’t use kelvin like everyone else would use doing research on the quantity of heat in a subject material. I guess it’s because the temperature changes are so small that it’s hard to show a change relevant to the subject as 80 looks a lot bigger than .8 but we have to work with what we are given. For example, 14.8 degrees C divided by 14.0 degrees C equals 5.7% and 287.95 degrees K divided by 286.15 degrees K = 1.0%. A Note, Kelvin or K is used when making these kinds of calculation is science and engineering.

I have all these values in an Excel spreadsheet in column format by month from the current year back to September 2012, Sadly I didn’t keep the ones back to when I started in 2007 since I didn’t realize, back then, that the values in the table were not fixed and there were changes in them as NASA modified the process used to calculated all the values. There are presently 1,707 values in the LOTI table.

We use the NOAA Co2 value starting in 1958, as is, then use the NASA anomalies from 1958 with an adjustment to determine if there is a reasonable correlation between the two over time. The method used was to create a monthly percent increase for each since 1958 the NOAA data is useable as published. The NASA anomalies need to be adjusted as they don’t represent the actual heat in the atmosphere. The base has to be absolute zero 273.15 K (Kelvin) so we can determine the actual increase in thermal energy in the atmosphere. That is a straight forward calculation which needs no description. Once we have the monthly temperature in degree kelvin, we then calculate the increase in thermal energy from 1958 to the present.

The comparison is then very simple. The first plot shown below as the black plot is the monthly CO2 level in the atmosphere as a percentage increase from 1958. The annual cycle is clearly shown in the Chart. The blue plot is the trend line with a excellent fit with a geometric increase that shows there has been no slowdown in the increase. The equation for the trend is shown in red. The second plot shown below in red (hard to see here) is the monthly heat value of the atmosphere in Kelvin and as percentage increase from 1958 just like CO2. The yellow heat content plot is the trend line with a reasonable fit and the equation for it is shown red at the bottom of the chart. The scales on the chart axes are the same for both plots 95%5 to 150%, so the relationships are correct.

Now since it’s kind of hard to see the temperature changes on Chart 8a as they are so small let’s change the scale on the chart and make a new chart. The new Chart is Chart 8 and the scale on the right side is from 95% 105% the scale on the left side is the same at 95% to 150%. With that change, we can see some movement as shown in Chart 8 on the next page. When you compare the two Charts, you can also see how easy it is to make something look like it is something else.

 This chart shows that if nothing changes from what it is now, by 2038 CO2 will have gone up by 145% and the heat in the atmosphere only .5% and that’s both from the base of 1958. Since we are told that the base is 14 degrees C which is actually 387.15 degrees Kelvin, 100.5% will only be 288.6 degrees Kelvin or around 15.5 degrees C. That is still nowhere near the historic average of 17.0 degree s C.

There is however, scientific evidence that this is probably relatively close to what the physics is predicting as what is shown in a paper written by W. A. Wijngaarden and W. Happer and published on June 8 2020 titled Dependence id Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases. It’s a 38 page work with significant ramifications to the validity of the IPCC climate change narrative. The bottom line to this scientific study is that there is NO DANGER to additional CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere. Any warming that might be caused by CO2 has for the most part already been accounted for.  Page 13 from that paper, shown on the next page, clearly shows that the sun’s radiation absorption bands for CO2 are now saturated and there will be no additional effect. The green line is no CO2, the black line is the correct level of CO2, and the red line is double the current level of CO2. As can be clearly seen the black and red lines are virtually identical. In other words, the absorption bands of water in the atmosphere are saturated by the CO2 level around 400 ppm so that even if CO2 goes to 800 ppm it will have little to no effect on global temperature.

In summary, we have shown using two methods that CO2 is not a danger but we will be in great danger if we really try to get rid of Fossil fuels. There are three reasons for this assessment that a realistic engineering assessment of switching from fossil fuels to Solar PV and Wind power is just not realistic.

First, the Green power generation required to replace the existing fossil fuel power generating capacity exceeds the “scarce” raw materials available on the planet to make and maintain them. As shown in the next, three reasons.

Second, the life spans of solar PV and wind power devices are “significantly” less than conventional power plants. So they will need to be replaced constantly.  

Third, Solar PV and Wind are both intermittent sources and are not suitable for base load power at the levels required for an advanced technology based economy. The amount of batteries required to smooth the load are also of a relatively short life and would be to be replaced constantly.

Four, The locations for solar PV and Wind generation are generally not were the needs are and they are all in different time zones the Transmission grid will need to be significantly  increased to allow for the high voltage flows over long distances.

Then there is the fact that CO2 levels are now below optimum for plant life to use photosynthesis efficiently; the chemical process of converting sun light and CO2 into sugars to make the food they need to grow. CO2 levels above 1,000 ppm would be desirable and anything below 300 ppm CO2 is risky as planets need a minimum of 180/200 ppm CO2 or they die. 

Smart Investor Article (English Translation Provided)


Armstrong Economics Blog/Armstrong in the Media Re-Posted Apr 15, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

I recently appeared on the cover of “Smart Investor” after being approached by journalist Ralph Malisch. Click here to read the full interview (German).

The English translation is available below:

Smart Investor talks to legendary cycle analyst Martin Armstrong about Corona, war and reshaping the world

Smart Investor: Mr. Armstrong, in 2015, The Forecaster, a powerful film about your life, was released. We interviewed you extensively in Smart Investor 5/2015. How have you been doing in the meantime and what are your current projects?
Armstrong:  I was involved in a sequel to the film that will be out later this year. Otherwise, we have expanded our services and have now launched our computer system, which is the system that the government wanted for itself. It now produces over 1,000 written reports every day all over the world without human intervention. We now use it in over 40 countries, which means we probably have the largest institutional customer base in the world.

Smart Investor 5/2015

Smart Investor: Would you briefly explain your forecasting approach to our readers again?
Armstrong:  In the 1980s and 1990s, I was one of the top international hedge fund managers, even being named hedge fund manager of the year for predicting the collapse of Russia, which triggered the 1998 hedge fund Long-Term Capital Management crisis. During that time, I’d watched global investment capital refocus on markets and then move on—leaving Japan in 1989, Southeast Asia in 1994, and Russia in 1998, followed by the euro. All of this was fueled by capital flows. One can follow these movements of capital and see how they cause the boom-bust cycles around the globe.

Smart Investor: The topic of Corona has kept us under its spell for more than two years. Was this turning point, or a drastic event like this, visible in your cycle model?
Armstrong: Yes, I warned at our own World Economic Conference that if our model flipped in January 2020 (= year 2020.05) the market would crash. We were even able to pinpoint the exact day for the March 2020 bottom. Had an event like Corona happened during an uptrend, it would have been largely ignored. But if something like this happens while the model is turning down, then sentiment is inherently bearish. We also warned that there would be a scarcity-based commodity cycle from January 2020 to 2024.

Smart Investor: In our perception, major pandemics occur with a certain regularity. Have you thought about some kind of plague cycle and how it might continue?
Armstrong: Such epidemics have always existed – but never in history have governments reacted so madly. The global lockdown has cost jobs and created bottlenecks in supply chains that will persist for several years to come. It was an absurd response that was proven wrong and caused a lot more damage. Most people know someone who got sick from COVID but didn’t die from it. Those who died would likely have died from any form of respiratory disease, such as occurs during the annual cycle of influenza. It was not a dangerous plague that killed 30% to 50% of the population like smallpox or the black plague in the 14th century.

Smart Investor: Now a new dominant event has been triggered with the hot war in Ukraine. How does this war fit into your model, specifically the war cycle?
Armstrong: That too came at exactly the “right” time. Our model showed 1/16/2022. Unfortunately, instead of trying to bring peace to the world, the West has demonized Putin. The claim that Putin wanted to restore the old Soviet Union was pure propaganda. For the past 22 years he has made no attempt to restore communism, only calling Lenin himself a communist. He did not try to expand the borders but warned against NATO encroachment. In war, both sides spread propaganda, and it is always important to be objective about the claims of both sides. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine was consistent with his warnings and came four days after US Vice President Harris recommended Ukraine join NATO. That was totally irresponsible.

Smart Investor: Can you see in your models which regions or countries will suffer the most in this conflict, who will get off lightly and who will be the beneficiaries?
Armstrong: On both sides there are what we call neocons, people who just hate the other side. They cannot sleep at night as long as their enemy exists. Unfortunately, the deteriorating economic outlook is a reminder that war has often served as a diversionary tactic in the past. It looks like China is allying itself with Russia. I believe the confiscation of Russian private property was a serious violation of international law. Others, too, will realize that their assets could be confiscated if their country got into a dispute with the West. This would, of course, lead to a drop in global investment. It is precisely this process that seems to have started and, according to our models, will only get much worse over the next ten years. Disputes between countries are likely to remain at this level. The arrest of individuals simply because they are Russian is reminiscent of the internment camps for Japanese in the US during World War II solely on the basis of their ethnicity. It is very detrimental to the world economy when free investment is hampered.

Image: © Angelov – stock.adobe.com

Smart Investor: If we understand it correctly, the cycles develop largely independently of the specific actions of individuals. It’s hard to imagine, but would an escalation have been inevitable even if the Russian President hadn’t given the order for the invasion?
Armstrong: That’s right. Demonizing Putin is absurd. There have been far worse leaders in history, like Hitler or Stalin, who could kill millions of people without thinking twice. The development of things is primarily determined by the economy. Normally you don’t bite the hand that feeds you. But imposing sanctions on Russia has exactly the opposite effect: they isolate Russia and sever economic ties, leading to casualties and in turn evoking anger and retaliation. Rome survived for 1,000 years because the conquered provinces benefited from selling their products to Rome. The confiscation of Russia’s currency reserves is above all a warning to China to be very careful in its dealings with the West. For China, the exclusion of Russia from the SWIFT system only means that it is working flat out to introduce its variant of CIPS. Saudi Arabia just agreed to sell oil for yuan. These measures only guarantee that conflicts will continue to escalate and the world economy will be split in half.

Smart Investor: As investors, we try to prepare for strong cycles like these. Which asset classes or sectors should one avoid in this situation and where can one expect safety?
Armstrong:  Government bonds in particular are to be avoided. Governments will default and you will get nothing back. The loans from European governments from before the Second World War are now just an attractive wall decoration. When a company goes bust, its assets are sold and at least you get something back. But you can’t just run into the art museum and steal Picassos in the government. In times of war and geopolitical conflict, real assets are the best security.

Smart Investor: Gold is considered the safe haven, and Bitcoin is also perceived as such in some places. However, these two assets are also more of a thorn in the side of our governments. What do you think of the idea that the Russia argument could make life difficult for investors here in the future?
Armstrong: Gold has lost its mobility – so you can’t hop on a plane and fly somewhere with a briefcase full of gold coins or bars. Cryptocurrencies are vulnerable, because without a power grid, credit cards are a thing of the past. The government is trying to switch to digital currencies and they will not allow competition so they will confiscate cryptocurrencies. The best is paper money or small denomination silver coins that are recognizable to the average person. Tin cans will also have an exchange value if there is no electricity grid.

Smart Investor: Gold and cryptocurrencies are also the main alternatives to paper money, which the war is putting additional pressure on. Will the US dollar and euro survive this?
Armstrong:  The US dollar will outlast the euro, but if we get into a real world war, the paper dollars could lose their value too. Europe has historically canceled its fiat money, while the
US dollar has never been cancelled. Even Canada is now nullifying its currency.

Smart Investor: The Great Reset, the World Economic Forum and Prof. Dr. Klaus Schwab are making waves in Europe. During the corona pandemic, the government measures literally dismantled the medium-sized economy. What do you think of the corporations’ “Big Plan” and are the actors’ ideas compatible with the cycles?
Armstrong: The Great Reset is indeed a real goal. It’s not a conspiracy theory. The three stumbling blocks along the way were Trump, Putin and Xi. They got rid of the first one, and now the propaganda has turned to demonizing Putin and Xi. They believe that if they get rid of these two leaders, they can unite the world under the United Nations. Our models have warned that authoritarianism will rise in this final decade. But they will fail. Marx succeeded only because serfdom in Russia did not end until 1861, while in Europe it only lasted until the fourteenth century. So the people owned nothing, and it was easy to confiscate the wealth of the aristocrats. Today people own their own houses, cars and save for the future. The slogan “You will have nothing and be happy” propagated by the WEF is a red herring. Governments can no longer borrow indefinitely and there will be a default. To disguise this fact, the impression is given that all debts are being forgiven and that they are doing it for you. The guaranteed basic income will be there to replace the pension funds that hold government debt today.

Smart Investor: Thank you very much for your very interesting explanations.

In stock market circles, the American Martin Armstrong (born 1949) is considered a legend. As early as the early 1980s, he correctly predicted the stock market crash of 1987 – and in the midst of the panic he predicted new highs for 1989. He also predicted the bursting of the Japanese stock bubble at the end of 1989. He made his forecasts using the “Economic Confidence Model” (ECM) he developed himself, which is based on a database on the history of coins, which Armstrong used to reconstruct the (financial) history. You can find his daily updated assessments on the blog https://armstrongeconomics.com .

Climate Change the Tool of Control


Armstrong Economics Blog/Uncategorized Re-Posted Apr 10, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Dear Martin,
After reading many of your blog posts, there appears to be one question you might not have answered. Do the elitists who are trying to control the world truly believe climate change cycles are not natural, but instead are caused by humans? It would seem that any climate theory that doesn’t explain the coming and going of ice ages which our history books told us happened, is an incomplete theory.

H

ANSWER: I think anyone with 10% of a brain can’t believe this climate change is caused by CO2. The climate has always changed and they use data that starts only in 1850 to argue this is all fossil fuels. CO2 is also generated by burning wood and the pollution from diesel and wood is the type that you feel. I lived in London during the 1980s and the buses were all diesel. You had to hold your breath when walking by.

The first clean air act was passed in 535AD by Emperor Justinian I who proclaimed the importance of clean air as a birthright. “By the law of nature these things are common to mankind—the air, running water, the sea.”

See: https://twitter.com/GooseMumma/status/1512323263011119105

People are easily manipulated and those with a fully functioning brain are horrified by the stupidity of people who were told to hate Trump who now refuses to admit that Biden is a disaster because they would be compelled to acknowledge their own malleability to those who still wear masks even driving alone and rushed out to get every vaccine and booster possible. Now they are all about freedom, democracy, and anti-Russia so just kill them all because that is again what they are told.

I do not think that world leaders are that stupid. They are using this climate change for their own agenda. Even Obama and Bull Gates both bought houses on the beach and Obama has now bought a private island in the Caribbean. Hm. So much for their belief in rising sea levels and civilization.

This is all about control – we, the great unwashed. There is absolutely no way the world will end because of CO2 in 7 years. That is absolute nonsense to create fear and obedience. The climate has always changed – it is NEVER the same. Civilization expands during warming periods and it collapses during cold periods. France has had the coldest April since 1947. Yet Macron vows to “get France out of oil, gas, and coal” while Paris is freezing and needs heat. I woke up this morning to 50 degrees here in Florida. Obviously, we have way too many climate change zealots coming to Florida holding Séances for global cooling to save the planet.

Maybe Gates is correct – we just need to thin the herd of all stupidity before we can get our human rights back.

The Myth of Green Energy


Published originally on Rumple by Energycademy  on January 31, 2022

This video looks at the official definition of green energy and critically examines how well solar and wind energy, two of the most popular form of green energy, match the official definition.

#greenenergy #solarenergy #windenergy #cleanenergy

Sunday Talks, Hillary Creeps Out from the Catacombs to Demand More War and Bloodlust


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 3, 2022  | Sundance

If there’s one political figure who should remain stewing over her toxic cauldron in the dark recesses of political caves, it’s Hillary.  The same creature who purposefully destroyed the nation of Libya by organizing a NATO invasion, has no credibility to discuss foreign invasion by Russia.

Regardless of the outcome in Ukraine, whenever the conflict finishes, there will not be modern human slave markets in the streets, widespread graphic violence using machetes, race-driven and tribal genocide and tens of thousands of people continually shoveled by the dump trucks into mass graves.  That’s the current status of ‘life’ in the north African country of Libya following the aftermath of Hillary’s war.

I would not normally even think about sharing any viewpoint from this evil and maniacal creature if it wasn’t for Clinton recently reopening the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative so she could scrape off some of the $14 billion in aid congress has allocated for Ukraine.  Watch as she starts to frame her attack position and position Saudi Arabia, India, parts of Europe and China as targets for more “diplomatic leverage,” vis-a-vis blackmail sanctions, if they do not adhere to her call for the destruction of Russia.

She’s transparently trying to promote her influence – Tony Blinken was her former protege’ – as a potential influence broker if countries want to avoid being on the wrong side of the Biden-Blinken operation in Ukraine.  Clinton is the Al Sharpton of shakedowns using geopolitical blackmail.

.

German Grocers Warn Consumers of Significant Second Wave Price Increases


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 3, 2022 | Sundance

The inflationary impact to any specific country is directly proportionate to the scale of the government intervention in the COVID lockdown spend.  Almost all of the nations who deployed the WEF program are in the same inflationary position.

The U.S., U.K., New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the EU, within which Germany is the largest economy, all followed the WEF spending instructions.

(Germany) – According to the German Retail Association (HDE), consumers should prepare for another wave of price hikes for everyday goods and groceries.

Even before the outbreak of war in Ukraine, prices had risen by about five per cent “across the product range” as a result of increased energy prices, HDE President Josef Sanktjohanser told the Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung on Friday.

With Russia’s invasion hitting economies and the supply chain harder, yet another series of price increases is on the horizon. “The second wave of price increases is coming, and it will certainly be in double figures,” Sanktjohanser warned. (read more)

Every time the supermarket checkout rings, a yellow vested rebel is created.