Category Important

Jan 27 2017

FULL: President Trump Hannity Interview In The White House 1/26/17


Jan 27 2017

Resistance Creates Strength | Vox Day and Stefan Molyneux


Jan 26 2017

The Horrible Truth About Barack Obama’s Presidency


Jan 26 2017

Are We Getting Dumber?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Civil Unrest

Re-Posted Jan 26, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

Students-1

Recent studies are discovering that each generation is becoming increasingly stupid. A study from Iceland has highlighted a downward spiral in human intelligence. The genetics firm in Reykjavik found that groups of genes that predispose people to spend more years in education became a little rarer in the country from 1910 to 1975. The sample size was more than 100,000 Icelanders. They found a slight decline over the 65-year period.

There may be another explanation for this trend. The more affluent a society becomes, several factors unleash. The birthrate declines sharply, for as people become wealthier, women prefer not to have children. The poorest cultures have the greatest number of births because children take care of their parents. In our new age of socialism, government has replaced the family unit. Ask a girl under thirty in the United States if she wants to have children today and you are likely to get the answer, “No.” According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey, in 2014, 47.6% of women between age 15 and 44 had never had children, up from 46.5% in 2012. The more affluent a society becomes, the lower the birthrate.

The next side effect is intelligence. As a society becomes more affluent, the need to do many tasks vanish. We lose skill sets whereas most people in less affluent countries would starve to death if the food supply suddenly came to a halt. Most people would not know how to fend for themselves, no less hunt. The wealthier a society becomes, the more we are relieved of basic skills. The less we do with our hands, the less coordination we develop, and intelligence diminishes which contributes to the fall of empires, nations, and city-states.

Jan 23 2017

Women Rally but for What?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Civil Unrest

Re-Posted Jan 23, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: In the UK, the organizers of this woman’s march said it was not a protest about Trump. In the United States it is being billed as a Trump protest. What a difference the other side of the pond.

ANSWER: Yes. Here the press is always going to be negative and will do whatever they can to bash Trump for the next 4 years. This will be in fact the very means of dividing the United States that will lead to massive civil unrest if not an uprising from the left. I cannot believe how ignorant these women are yelling that Trump better keep his hands off of their rights. This is the gender confrontation of the 1960s all over again. The real women activists from the Sixties are all dying alone. Their confrontation with men has been so nasty, who would want to be in such a position. There should be no suppression from either side. A couple is a team effort. Yes, there are men extremely possessive. But there are women who have the same mindset.

Trump has said nothing about subjugating women. I really do not get this. If there was anyone who oppressed women it was Hillary. She trashed any women bill had an affair with. Bill will be Bill. That was a political marriage all the time. This protest yelling “We’re Not Going Away” is very befuddling. I understand protesting something he proposes of does. But what was all of this about – just a protest organized by the left with unknowing participants? We can see that moving forward we are tearing the United States apart at the seams. This protest is just part of a larger agenda that is turning everyone against everyone else. The New York Times reported that the women are protesting reproductive rights, which only the Supreme Court could possibly overrule and there is no likelihood of that, immigration and civil rights. Where is these only a women’s issue? Very strange:

The “march is the start of what organizers hope could be a sustained campaign of protest in a polarized America, unifying demonstrators around issues like reproductive rights, immigration and civil rights.”

Slutwalk

There are the Slutwalks, which are protest taking the form of a march, primarily of  young women, wearing revealing clothes often just underwear or sexy attire and scanty tops dressing like “sluts” to protest rape and how men look at them. I am sure Bill Clinton would love to be a judge for the best dress in those events. At least the Slutwalks are a woman’s issue. I fail to see how immigration and civil rights warrants signs such as “Pussy Power” being paraded around.

Jan 23 2017

Kill Infections Using This 7 Ingredient Master Tonic


Just might need something like this!

Jan 18 2017

Entrenched GOPe Show Their Cards – Construct “Border Adjustment Tax” To Oppose Trump’s America-First Agenda…


Anyone who believes Democrats own exclusive opposition to Donald Trump are completely ignoring the deliberate construct of the 2015/2016 republican primary.  There are just as many -if not more- na…

Source: Entrenched GOPe Show Their Cards – Construct “Border Adjustment Tax” To Oppose Trump’s America-First Agenda…

trump-03

Jan 18 2017

Rogoff: An Elitist Who Has No Respect for the People


Armstrong Economics Blog/Interest Rates

Re-Posted Jan 18, 2017 by Martin Armstrong

Rogoff-Kenneth-2

Kenneth Rogoff is a Professor of Public Policy and Economics at Harvard University. Rogoff calls critics of negative interest rates “ignorant” despite the fact that negative interest rates have been used since 2008 without any success. He had the audacity to say that people should not look at their short-term personal losses, but rather look at the long-term vision of the central banks. He is such an elitist. I cannot find words appropriate to describe how this academic, who has zero experience in the real world, is incapable of comprehending that his Marxist style intervention is creating the next crisis.

1933 London Economic Conference

Yes, negative interest rates lower deficits. But who will buy the negative debt besides central banks? Why borrow money at all and compete against the private sector? Interest rates are negative to punish savers for saving. He wants them to spend their money. Fine – stop government borrowing altogether and just print what is needed for the expense of government. Stop this elitist Marxist concept that people like Rogoff can play the role of emperor and manipulate society to do whatever they believe is appropriate.

Just before his death in 1946, John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946) told Henry Clay, a professor of Social Economics and adviser to the Bank of England, that he hoped that Adam Smith’s invisible hand would help Britain out of its economic hole. “I find myself more and more relying for a solution of our problems on the invisible hand which I tried to eject from economic thinking twenty years ago.”

Checkmate

Economists such as Rogoff are still basking in the ideas of Karl Marx that government CAN and SHOULD manipulate society to achieve the public policy dreams of those in power. Rogoff is not willing to even think about what he has done to the pension system and how we are looking at states like Illinois becoming broke.

In California, less than four years have passed since it fought to achieve a balanced budget by raising taxes to the highest level in the nation. Politicians cannot manage the economy and negative interest rates are destroying pensions. There is no long-term gain, for Rogoff cannot imagine the next step. The central banks are trapped and can NEVER resell what they have bought under Quantitative Easing. We are rapidly approaching the point of no return or NO BID. That is when government tries to sell its debt to pay off the last chunk and there is NO BID. Oops! Checkmat