US National Debt – A Different Perspective

Armstrong Economics Blog/Uncategorized Re-Posted Mar 24, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

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.

the 1933 Bank Holiday – Can it Happen Again?

Armstrong Economics Blog/Banking Crisis Re-Posted Mar 23, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Marty there are a lot of people who seem to be trying to create a panic. Some are claiming the stock market will plunge by 50%. Others are saying nothing will survive other than gold. It seems like none of these people have any sense of what is really unfolding. They were saying the same thing for different reasons before the banking crisis. Can you offer any historical perspective?

Thank you. You seem to be the only real source these days.


ANSWER: The Bank Holiday took place the first week of March 1933. It began with governors closing down the banks in their states. Once one began, like COVID rules, they quickly jumped on the bandwagon. As reported by March 4th, 1933, some 41 states had already declared a banking holiday. Back then, the president took office in March – not January. Thus, Roosevelt was sworn in on March 4th, 1933. As the new president, FDR delivered what is arguably his best-known speech.

“So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is…fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and of vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. And I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.”

The following day, Roosevelt declared a national banking holiday on March 5th, 1933. Then Congress responded by passing the Emergency Banking Act of 1933 on March 9th, 1933. This action was combined with the Federal Reserve’s commitment to supply unlimited amounts of currency to reopened banks. Back then, they effectively created a de facto 100% deposit insurance and this was before the FDIC was created.

However, what the history books have omitted because it revealed the real reason for the major banking crisis, was the confiscation of gold precisely as Germany did in December 1922 seizing 10% of all assets which unleashed hyperinflation in 1923.

In Herbert Hoover’s memoirs (1951), he documents the fact that Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) played a very dirty game of politics. There were rumors that FDR would confiscate gold in 1932 BEFORE the election. These rumors spread and people ran to banks to withdraw their funds. The night before the election in 1932, FDR denied that he would do such a thing. After FDR won the election, the real bank panic began. FDR would not take office until March 1933.

The run on banks began as the Great Depression started. In 1929 alone, 659 banks closed their doors due to mismanagement and speculation. Ironically, to save money on paper, it was also in 1929 when the currency was reduced in size to save money. This time, they want to move to digital and save 100% on printing money. Here in 2023, the failures are due to the WOKE agenda which has deprived the banks of risk management rather than speculation.

However, as the 1931 Sovereign Debt Crisis hit, the number of bank failures skyrocketed. Goldman Sacks and others were selling foreign bonds to Americans in small denominations., As Europe began to default, US banks holding foreign debt and individuals in need of cash led to a banking panic for external reasons. Here is a chart showing the listing of bonds on the NYSE. We can easily see the collapse in the bond market thanks to the 1931 Sovereign Debt Crisis.

By 1932, an additional 5,102 banks went out of business. Families lost their life savings overnight. Thirty-eight states had adopted restrictions on withdrawals in an effort to forestall the panic. By March 4th, 41 states had declared a bank holiday shutting down banks. Bank failures increased in 1933, and Franklin Roosevelt deemed remedying these failing financial institutions his first priority after being inaugurated.

However, it was actually the election of FDR that started the banking crisis post-1931. Hoover pleaded with FDR to please come out and address the gold confiscation rumors. People had been hoarding their gold coins fearing the rumored confiscation. Despite Hoover’s plea for FDR to come out and deny the rumors after the election, he remained silent. Given FDR’s manipulation of Japan and the attack on Pearl Harbor which he appeared to instigate with sanctions confiscating Japanese assets in the USA, denying the sale of any energy to Japan, and then threatening to use the fleet to block them from buying fuel from anywhere else, They Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. There were Senate investigations afterward about FDR’s role because the US had already broken the Japanese code and knew in advance about the attack on Pearl Harbor. He did that to force the US into World War II.

It was in his character to remain silent and create the worst banking crisis in history before he was sworn in as president. FDR was a radical socialist and many viewed that he admired Lenin. If it were not for Mr. Jones exposing the truth behind Stalin, even the corrupt New York Times journalist promoting Stalinism was meeting with FDR. The run on the banks became massive when FDR won the election on November 8th, 1932. FDR allowed the banking system to implode with people rushing to withdraw the money in gold coins.

At 1:00 a.m. on Monday, March 6th, 1933, President Roosevelt issued Proclamation 2039 ordering the suspension of all banking transactions, effective immediately. Roosevelt had taken the oath of office only thirty-six hours earlier.

The terms of the presidential proclamation specified:

[N]o such banking institution or branch shall pay out, export, earmark, or permit the withdrawal or transfer in any manner or by any device whatsoever, of any gold or silver coin or bullion or currency or take any other action which might facilitate the hoarding thereof; nor shall any such banking institution or branch pay out deposits, make loans or discounts, deal in foreign exchange, transfer credits from the United States to any place abroad, or transact any other banking business whatsoever.

For an entire week, Americans would not have access to banks or banking services. They could not withdraw or transfer their money, nor could they make deposits. The entire economy ran simply on cash in your pocket.

While the first phase of the banking crisis unfolded after 1929 due to speculation losses (hence Glass–Steagall Act), then the second phase was the 1931 Sovereign Debt Crisis, it was the third phase with the election of FDR that led to thousands of banks failing as there was a mad rush to withdraw your gold coin. But a new round of problems that began in early 1933 placed a severe strain on New York banks, many of which held balances for banks in other parts of the country. About 4,000 banks failed during this period alone bringing the total to over 9,000.

Much to everyone’s relief, when the institutions that could reopen for business on March 13th, 1933 saw depositors standing in line to return their stashed cash to neighborhood banks. Within two weeks, Americans had redeposited more than half of the currency that they had withdrawn post-FDR’s election on November 8th, 1932. This would prove to be a sneaky trick of FDR to get people to redeposit all the gold coins they had withdrawn – as we are about to explore.

The stock market was also ordered closed when FDR came to power. With the cleverness of a real con artist operating a Ponzi Scheme to gain the confidence of the people, FDR needed the gold coin to be deposited for Phase 4 of the banking crisis. On March 15th, 1933, (The Ides of March), the stock market was allowed to reopen. On the first day of trading, the New York Stock Exchange recorded the largest one-day percentage price increase ever.

The week before the closure, the Dow Jones Industrials fell to 49.68. The week following the closure, the Dow rallied to 64.56 – a percentage gain of virtually 30% over the banking holiday. The shorts who were better on the collapse of the market once it reopened were devastated. It was a major short-covering rally.

With the benefit of hindsight, the nationwide Bank Holiday and the Emergency Banking Act of March 1933, ended the bank runs that had plagued the Great Depression, but it also set the stage for the confiscation of gold. What you have to understand is that Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s (FDR) actions in 1933 were not directed simply at gold. He was embarking on what he called the New Deal, which was a Marxist Agenda that was very popular at the time. His New Deal would end austerity, whereby they were maintaining a balanced budget in the belief that they needed to inspire confidence in the currency.

It was this balanced budget philosophy that also inspired John Maynard Keynes who argued that in times of economic distress when the demand has collapsed, that is when the state needs to run a deficit and increase the money supply. There was a simultaneous international flight of capital from Europe to the United States in the face of European sovereign debt defaults.  That capital flight lasted for nearly two years until FDR won the election in 1932. There was much concern that Roosevelt would do what Germany did in 1922 in confiscating assets. That was the rumor about the possible confiscation of gold.

Milton Friedman criticized the Fed because the capital flows poured into the US but they refused to monetize it. We can see that as Europe defaulted on its debts in 1931, the capital rushed head-first into the dollar. Then we see that the dollar peaked in November 1932 with the election of FDR fearing that would weaken the dollar and exploit the economy. All this gold came to the USA pushing the dollar higher, but the Fed refused to monetize it, was Milton’s criticism. The backing of gold behind the dollar doubled in supply between 1929 and 1931.

So, you must separate gold and the devaluation of the dollar to comprehend what the issue was all about. FDR could have simply abandoned the gold standard, as did Britain, and not confiscated gold. However, that would have also been sufficient to end austerity. But the bankers would have profited and sold the gold overseas at higher prices. Roosevelt in his confiscation of gold was intended to deprive the private sector of profiting from his devaluation of the dollar which was rising the price of gold from $20 to $35. You must keep in mind that he even degraded Pierre du Pont (1870-1954) and called him the “Merchant of Death” because he produced arms for World War I and made a profit off of that war demand. Many saw Roosevelt as a traitor to his own class.


The confiscation of the gold was for two reasons. First, FDR was changing the monetary system from one where there was no distinction domestically from internationally to a two-tier system. Gold would freely circulate without restriction only internationally. Therefore, the confiscation of gold was altering the monetary system moving to a two-tier monetary system with gold only used in international transactions.

Consequently, FDR confiscated gold to move to a two-tier system and to deprive Americans of any profit from his devaluation. What FDR then did was confiscate gold from all institutions ordering them to turn over whatever they had. Ironically, this move was intended to target bankers rather than the public. FDR did not have people knocking on every door demanding all their gold. That is why there are plenty of US gold coins that have survived. If individuals possessed them rather than an institution, then they kept what they owned

Therefore, Roosevelt was able to seize whatever gold existed in banks. He declared all contracts void that had gold provisions for payment. It was in Perry v. United States – 294 U.S. 330 (1935) that the US Supreme Court ruled that Congress, by virtue of its power to deal with gold coin as a medium of exchange, was authorized to prohibit its export and limit its use in foreign exchange. Hence, the restraint thus imposed upon holders of gold coins was incidental to their ownership of it, and gave them no cause of action. id/P. 294 U. S. 356.

The Supreme Court held that it could not say that the exercise of this power by Congress was arbitrary or capricious. id/P. 294 U. S. 356. They held that even if the Government’s repudiation of the gold clause in the government bonds was unconstitutional, it did not entitle the plaintiff to recover more than the loss he has actually suffered, and of which he may rightfully complain. id/P. 294 U. S. 354. Therefore, the Joint Resolution of June 5, 1933, held:

“insofar as it undertakes to nullify such gold clauses in obligations of the United States and provides that such obligations shall be discharged by payment, dollar for dollar, in any coin or currency which at the time of payment is legal tender for public and private debts, is unconstitutional. id/P. 294 U. S. 349.

Yet, swapping gold for dollars created no loss that was cognizable even though the taking of gold was unconstitutional. Clearly, the Supreme Court did not consider the loss in terms of foreign exchange. The Court reasoned:

“Plaintiff has not attempted to show that, in relation to buying power, he has sustained any loss; on the contrary, in view of the adjustment of the internal economy to the single measure of value as established by the legislation of the Congress, and the universal availability and use throughout the country of the legal tender currency in meeting all engagements, the payment to the plaintiff of the amount which he demands would appear to constitute not a recoupment of loss in any proper sense, but an unjustified enrichment.”

In my understanding of the law, those who argued before the Court made purely a domestic argument. A dollar was still a dollar in domestic terms so there was no cognizable loss and the Court did not reach the constitutional question. Had they argued that their loss was with respect to some debt owed in British pounds, they there was a loss. Purely domestically, the only loss would have been to inflation and the Court would never rule against the government on such an issue.

All of that said, there does not appear to be any historical precedent for the stock market to collapse by 50%, all tangible assets to turn to dust, and only gold will survive given a banking crisis where Biden and Yellen sit on each other’s hands and do nothing. Trust me. Every major Democratic donor will be screaming. And as for those claiming the Fed will reverse its position, say inflation is suddenly no longer a problem, and monetize everything in sight, this is even too big for the Fed. have to create QE and absorb all the debt, there to things have changed. If the Fed does that, it will also lose all credibility. It squarely understands that inflation comes from handing Ukraine a black check to the most corrupt government in the world. The Fed raised rates yesterday for it cannot back down. It is choreographing the best it can but the bankers do not listen.

If they simply stand behind all the deposits, then there will be no panic. That is what they did in 1933 and the market rallied in confidence thereafter.

White House Neocon Spokesman Admits – They Do Not Want Peace in Ukraine

Armstrong Economics Blog/Ukraine Re-Posted Mar 22, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

I have had two employees from Ukraine – Kiev and Donetsk. The one from Kiev just mouths the standard Ukrainian propaganda. If they give up the Donbas, they will then want all of Ukraine. The UK is deeply involved walking hand and hand with Biden into world war III. They have clearly crossed the Rubicon here and for no justification. Had they simply honored the Minsk Agreement and let the Donbas, which is ethnically Russian, separate from a regime that hates their guts the war would be over in 5 minutes.

Instead, Britain appears to have been planning to give Ukraine nuclear weapons with depleted Uranium. Putin has come out and warned the UK that “the delivery and use of depleted uranium missiles by the Ukrainian Armed Forces will be perceived as an attack against Russia with a weapon that has a ‘nuclear component’.” Putin elaborated:

“Today it became known that the United Kingdom, through the Deputy Head of the Ministry of Defense of the country, announced the supply of not only tanks to Ukraine but also shells with depleted uranium. It seems that the West really decided to fight Russia in the last Ukrainian not with words, but with deeds Russia will be forced to react once the collective West starts using weapons with a nuclear component.”

There are some who believe that Ukraine should just be nuked. Give the people 2 weeks to flee to Poland or Germany, and then nuke the region and make it unlivable. That is basically the legion that Rome certainly razed the city entirely, but there are no contemporary sources stating that the Romans salted the land to prevent the city of Carthage from rising a fourth time. The Greek writer from the 1st century BC, Diodorus Siculus, informs us that the city had been razed and Carthaginians destroyed. Horace informs us that after the city was destroyed, the land was symbolically plowed. Polybius in his “The Histories” makes no mention of the land being salted just that the city was completely destroyed. Appian of Alexandria does record that Carthage was reconstructed by the first Emperor Augustus (27BC-14AD) and to avoid the evil spells that were cast on the ground, Carthage was rebuilt in a different location.

Surely, if Russia nuked Ukraine that would kill the European breadbasket and it would guarantee Ukraine’s neutrality. Is that the only way to terminate this Neocon Proxy Way and save the world?

The three Punic Wars (264 BC–146 BC) between Rome and Carthage were a turning point in the history of the Mediterranean world and, more than any other conflict, the Second Punic War (218 BC–201 BC) appears to have been a defining time in Roman history. We also see the debasement in that coinage of Carthage as they waged war to defeat Rome. You can see the early silver coinage debased as the war unfolded.

As Hannibal marched through Spain and invaded Italy from the North, Rome issued its first gold coinage more as a symbol of wealth to the other Italian city-states that they should standby Rome and not join Hannibal.

On the Roman side, we also see the consequence of the war with the debasement of the silver quadrigatus, which was the Greek denomination of the didrachm they complied with for trade with the Greek world. Here too, we can see the cost of war is not just the lives lost, but also the inflation and the monetary debasement.

Hannibal’s war also forced Rome to establish the denarius, which was the weight reduction from the Greek standard of the Didrachm 6.5 grams to 4.0 grams in 211BC. Even though Rome won,  the lesson here is that sometimes wars result in the complete collapse of a monetary standard and the rebirth of a new currency. This is what we face. The Neocons care nothing about the economics, nor about the lives of the people they send to die for their arrogance. They are the worst of humanity and should be driven from governments on a global scale.

Indeed, King Louis XIV (1643-1715) was on his deathbed when he lamented.

“I have been too fond of war.”

Meanwhile, the arrogance of the Neocons trying to dictate to the world and ordering China not to help Russia, Xi’s trip to Russia had no other outcome but to support Russia as he called Putin a ‘dear friend’ as China now pushes back against U.S. power knowing full well the real agenda here is to weaken Russia and then for NATO to invade on any pretense to destroy Russia once and for all. This is the Neocon’s dream and they could care less about the Ukrainian people. I have warned that the Ukrainian people are there to be slaughtered for the glory of the Neocons.

The Decline & Fall of the United States

Armstrong Economics Blog/Corruption re-Posted Mar 20, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: Hi Marty,

Seems to me the Democrats are following the time honored practice South American governments have resorted to in recent years when one party displaces another in a national election. In Brasil, the current president, Lula, spent 3 years in jail for charges of corruption. His successor was later removed from office. Now Bolsonaro has fled the country and is living in South Florida. In Ecuador, a past president, Moreno ,is under indictment and it appears he too will end up being arrested on trumped up corruption charges. In Bolivia, two term ex-president Evo Morales, after trying to run for an unprecedented third term, fled the country in 2019 when it appeared opposition to his run would potentially result in his being jailed. He fled to Argentina, then later got asylum in Mexico. The woman who replaced him was subsequently arrested on trumped up charges of conspiracy. IN Peru, which has gone through more presidents in recent years than most countries have experienced in a half century, has arrested the past 5 presidents. In Chile, the last president who served in office was run out of office for using the military to suppress protests. This was back in 2019.  The revolution that led to the country abandoning their old constitution has put the country in chaos.. The current president is extremely unpopular and one can imagine he won’t last another year in office. In Colombia, the country now is run by a communist/socialist who is now flirting with an ambitious spending program designed to buy time and slow down the opposition building against him. In Argentina, the former president, Christina Fernandez Kirchner, is dodging charges of corruption(and just avoided being assassinated by a lone gunman) after presiding over another series of IMF sponsored funding that has left the country in a perpetual state of default. The socialist in office today, Fernandez, is one of a long line of failed presidents who is destined to be pulled under by the corruption so deeply embedded in this country.

Now the Democrats appear to have imported South America’s tradition of imprisoning opposition leaders.It’s hard to imagine a party as corrupt as that of the Democrats. But nothing happens in a vacuum. With Republican support in Congress during Trump’s term when they opposed him and did everything they could to undermine him, the uni-party now operates without even the slightest effort to disguise their true intentions. An outsider like Trump is anathema to both parties. It reminds me of the PRI in Mexico. which put forth its candidate every year pretending people there actually had a choice, It took AMLO to break this tradition. Only because the drug cartels today are so powerful, the central government is virtually impotent to extend its reach outside of the capital.

We are watching the dying days of this republic. Biden’s “election” has assured that no serious challenger can ever emerge.Locking up your opponent now has become part of their playbook.  This is the tradition of the Sandinistas, the Peronists in Argentina, and now the Biden dictatorship.


REPLY: People do not realize that Zelensky wants to imprison the former president indefinitely pending a rigged trial for corruption. This is the one man who could probably run against Zelensky and beat him with his high heel shoes. Zelinsky is so perverse and a disgrace to Ukraine when in fact it has been clearly established there is NO accountability for any money handed to Zelensky and any American politician who votes for this money for Ukraine should be removed from office for they are probably tainted as well.

It has been established that Zelensky has been stashing money offshore. When the last Ukrainian fall on the battlefield, the US will have him airlifted in style and he will flee to his mansion in Miami after destroying his own country. Zelensky has been caught. Who will prosecute him? Not the Biden Administration which owed him the Midterm elections for being the 2nd largest donor under the money laundering scheme of FTX which will also be swept under the rug to protect the corruption that has consumed governments.

The United States is NO LONGER the beacon of liberty to the world. We have descended to the lowest possible level of absolute duplicity and corruption. People are bearish about the dollar because of the quantity of money? Get real! The collapse in the dollar will not be because of such petty nonsense. it will collapse because these people are destroying the very foundation of confidence and respect the United States once had.

Toxic Currencies – Good for the Yuan

Armstrong Economics Blog/China Re-Posted Mar 14, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

The Chinese yuan has out-traded the US dollar by volume for one of the first times in recent Russian history. The dollar was king in 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed, but that is no longer the case after Moscow branded the dollar a “toxic currency” along with the euro. Toxic currencies accounted for 87% of exports from Russia at the beginning of 2022, but this figure fell to 48% by the start of the new year. The Bank of Russia has reported that the proportion of USD/ruble pair in exchange fell to only 36% in February. The central bank is calling this a “broad structural transformation of the Russian economy.”

As “unfriendly countries” and their “toxic currencies” band together, those on the outskirts are winning. China has become the new go-to country for new trade partnerships as it bypasses Western-imposed sanctions. Toxic currencies represented 46% of imports in December 2022 but were at 65% in January 2022 before the war. In contrast, the yuan’s share rose from 4% to 23% during that time.

Those who were previously shunned from the big table are now pulling up a chair to discuss economic prospects with China. This will make it much easier to phase out toxic currencies because more people are willing to accept the yuan. The confidence in the yuan is growing. Everything occurring may seem odd, but it is precisely on target. As I mentioned in my report “China on the Rise,” China will dethrone the United States to become the world’s leading economic powerhouse by 2032. It’s just time.

The Myth of Fair Value

Armstrong Economics Blog/Understanding Cycles Re-Posted Mar 13, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: If the metals are not trading at a fair value relative to everything else, then does that not prove they are manipulated?


ANSWER: Your problem is the assumption that everything must be trading at some fair value. That is up there with the theory of random walks.  ALL markets trade for periods where they remain well below fair value. That was the entire takeover boom of the 1980s which they also blamed on me because I was advising many of the takeover players. I simply showed these charts back then which show in terms of book value, the Dow Jones bottomed in 1977. The market was grossly undervalued because you could buy a company, sell all its tangible assets, and double or triple your money. Michael Douglas’ famous speech in that movie about “greed” would not even be possible if everything always trade like some mythical robot at fair value. Everything overshoots and undershoots.

The metals are NO DIFFERENT. Every market swings between grossly UNDERVALUED and then grossly OVERVALUED. This is part of the business cycle. If there were no periods of gross undervaluations, there would not be a sudden boom either.

This is what you have to come to grips with. There is such a thing and the business cycle. Our cyclical analysis would not be possible if everything was trading at a flat line of fair value. This nonsense in metals is made up of people who have been wrong, and need to blame someone else. It is like blaming climate cycles on CO2. This notion of fair value is rooted, I hate to tell you, in Marxism, because he too did not understand  the business cycle.

The Hunger Games Begin – Soaring Energy Costs Lead to Rationing of Vegetables in U.K.

Posted originally on the CTH on February 21, 2023 | Sundance 

Follow the bouncing ball of consequence….

(Via Daily Mail) Vegetable rationing could last for ‘weeks’, it was warned today, after Morrisons joined Asda to became the second major supermarket to limit sales of certain items. 

Perishables like tomatoes, potatoes, cucumber and broccoli have been restricted to just two or three per customer in a host of stores up and down the country.

The crisis has developed in recent weeks due to soaring energy costs which have forced British farmers to switch off greenhouses as they desperately try to make ends meet – leaving a dearth of home-grown produce. (read more)

While it is prudent to remind everyone how fortunate we are to have Florida, California and Mexico for North American vegetable supplies, ie. no dramatic supply shortages, the energy price pressure being applied by Biden policy will lead to even higher consumer prices for all row crops.

18 months ago (Oct 2021), CTH first strongly recommended restarting victory gardens at home. The same recommendation only strengthens.