Nuclear War to Save the Plan


Armstrong Economics Blog/War Re-Posted Jan 25, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: Great article about Nuclear War and saving the planet. You forgot to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The “science” says both cities should have been uninhabitable for a 1000 years after a nuclear war. Yet, their populations doubled in 20 years after being nuked? Hiroshima now has 9 times its 1945 population. In 1945, after the A-bomb, it was 137,000. Now they have 1.2 million people? Doesn’t make sense!

Mike

REPLY: You are correct. I have even visited the area. I did not think to add that. The idea that a nuclear attack will poison the area permanently is also bad science just like Climate Change and the Earth will fry all because of CO2. I somehow think that not just cockroaches will survive a nuclear blast, but I get this strange feeling so will the people at the WEF.

Why do Neocons Want War with Russia?


Armstrong Economics Blog/War Re-Posted Jan 24, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Lindsey Graham is the twin brother of John McCain. I had asked John McCain once why he hated Russia so much. He never responded with any reason. It was always the same nonsense he always spread before Putin and after. It has baffled me as to what the difference is between Germany and Russia. We do not belittle Germany or hate its people solely because of Hitler. When it comes to Russia, it does not matter who is president, nothing ever changes. Graham said:

“If Putin gets away with this, there goes Taiwan. If Putin’s successful in Ukraine and isn’t prosecuted under international law, everything we’ve said since WWII becomes a joke. He will continue beyond Ukraine.” 

Lindsey Graham is an outright neocon who will say anything to achieve his dream – the destruction of Russia even though it is not communist. There is absolutely ZERO evidence since the fall of the USSR that anyone has sought to conquer Europe. Both Hitler and Napoleon were seeking to re-establish the old Roman Empire and rule over all of Europe. Both attempted to take Egypt to relive the glory of Rome. Some say to fulfill the prophecy that the end will come when the Holy Roman Empire Rises for that will be the time when we die. Don’t worry, Putin does not aspire to that dream. I’m not so sure about the American Neocons.

To even say if Putin wins in Ukraine, “there goes Taiwan” is an absolutely delusional statement. If anything, China would be better off taking Taiwan as the US foolishly keeps sending military arms to Ukraine. The US has already transferred thousands of artillery shells from a military weapons stockpile in Israel to Ukraine. They did the same sending weapons from South Korea to Ukraine. It was reported back in March of 2022 that planes take off almost daily from Dover Air Force Base in Delaware filled with Javelins, Stingers, howitzers, and everything else they can fit. Likewise, Germany began the same in February 2022.

Just this past week, the US military warned Biden that Is the U.S. Running Out of Weapons to even send to Ukraine. The EU foreign policy chief  also warned that “the military stocks of most [EU] member states has been, I wouldn’t say exhausted, but depleted in a high proportion, because we have been providing a lot of capacity to the Ukrainians.”

While the US aid to Ukraine came in at $113 billion far greater than Russia’s budget of 65.9 billion, it is double the military budgets of both France and Germany. It is approaching 50% of the annual budget of China. Just looking at the military spending, Russia has not been preparing to invade Europe. This is absolutely an absurd argument.

John McCain has never changed his view of Russia regardless of who is at the helm. Politico called him the “American antagonist of Russia.” It was McCain who kept pushing NATO Eastward up to the border of Russia all on his claims that if the West does not expand NATO, then Russia will. He proclaimed that those in power did not want to restore the “Soviet Union, but the Russian empire.” There was NEVER a single move that Russia ever made to imply that theory was remotely correct post-1991 and the fall of the USSR.

Lindsey Graham is carrying the banner of hatred for all Russians. It does not matter if Russia overthrows Putin, he dies, or retires. He will still hate Russia and want an all-out war to destroy Russia wiping it off the map once and for all.

The Russian people like Europeans and Americans, do not want war. Like everyone else they just want to enjoy life and take care of their families. It is always the leaders who create all the wars. We are just the dirt beneath their feet – the great unwashed who are always expendable because there are too many of us anyway.

This hatred of Russia is a strategic psychological tactic to sell the idea of war to the common people so they are willing to die for something they think is noble. Not much different from the young arab terrorists who are told this is a holy war and God will reward them if they blow themselves up. The leaders there too will never blow themselves up either.

So why do people like Lindsey Graham just hate Russians and wants war at all cost? It is hard to say. We do not hate Germans today because of Hitler. So why do we hate Russians because of Stalin? One thing is for sure, this hatred of Russia is exhausting our own conventional military supplies so while we cheer claiming Ukraine is winning, we will not be in a position to defend even ourselves if China and North Korea, as well as Iran, decide to join the party.

PUTIN LIBERATES Bakhmut STRONGHOLD (Kleshcheevka)


What is going on in the Ukraine?

Kissinger Sells Out on Ukraine?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Geopolitical Re-Posted Jan 20, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Martin, what do you have to say about Kissinger now?
I am sure many want to know.

AP

ANSWER: Well I had hoped that Henry could have made it to the WEC this year. I think it would have been a very interesting discussion between the two of us. I am well aware of Henry’s background even with Schwab. He delivered a speech at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, and he flipped in his position saying: “Before this war, I was opposed to membership of Ukraine in NATO because I feared that it would start exactly the process that we have seen now. The idea of a neutral Ukraine under these conditions is no longer meaningful.”

I have long admired Kissinger’s geopolitical analysis. He was instrumental in moving Richard Nixon to open with China which was really a policy to divide and separate Russia from China. While he said that dialogue must be kept open between Russia and other countries even as the war rages on in Ukraine, for if you do not talk, there cannot be any possible resolution.

I fully disagree with Kissinger saying that Ukraine should recapture territory that has been annexed by Russia while simultaneously holding negotiations to end the war. Some of Ukraine’s neighbors really support Russia and would not be so upset if Ukraine was completely destroyed for many view that as karma for their alliance with Nazi Germany. The Western press does not wish to report on how in that region, Ukraine is not trusted nor respected. Some have even expressed the view that Kyiv should be nuked for that is the only way to restore world peace – exterminate the Nazis and their ethnic cleansing once and for all.

While Kissinger said that a diplomatic process could help Russia “re-evaluate its historic position, which was an amalgam of an attraction to the culture of Europe and a fear of domination by Europe.” He did not elaborate on that “fear of domination by Europe” statement, but the fact is that Russia has NEVER sought to invade Europe, but Europe has tried to conquer Russia many times with the two most prominent being Napoleon and Hitler. After the statements that the whole Minsk Agreement was just to fool Putin to buy time for this latest attempt to conquer Russia with NATO planning for the long-haul to invade Moscow after Ukraine is finished depleting Russia’s conventional ability to defend itself.

Kissinger also made the statement that “[e]ach side needs to consider for itself how the threat to human survival of the destructiveness of weapons, coupled with making them almost conscious in their application, can be dealt with.” This is a proxy war and Zelensky has no respect for his own people. This is all about a land grab and the Donbas has been historically occupied by Russians as has Crimea. Simply because Khruschev drew the border for Ukraine purely for administrative purposes does not suddenly give Ukraine the right to claim those regions when Ukraine was NEVER a country before the USSR.

Kissinger had advocated for a ceasefire that would see Ukraine accept some of the annexed territories as Russian land for those people are Russian and they should not be compelled to surrender their language and their religion. I cannot explain Henry’s flipping this position for it seems to be only one of two possible explanations (1) old age being 99, or (2) he was told to support Ukraine for this is the objective to destroy Russia by the deep state. The same deep state that took down JFK, Nixon, and Trump for all being anti-war.

I support the people in the Donbas against the tyranny of Zelensky and Kyiv for I have not flipped my position which is consistent worldwide for all people. In 2014, I advocated splitting Ukraine according to the ethnic language of the people. Governments have no absolute right to power. Kissinger has forgotten his history. Any government exists only with the support and consent of the people. Zelensky ran and won promising peace and the end of corruption. He has done neither.

Our computer pinpointed Ukraine would be the place where World War III would begin. On December 3rd, 2013 we published: Ukraine Maybe The Most Important Country To Watch! Our computer is unbiased and it looks at the geopolitical consequences of war and where they begin and end.

As Thomas Paine (1737-1809) explained, government becomes drunk with power and presumes that they are the sovereign when that power resides only with the people. The U.S. Supreme Court stated in LEGAL TENDER CASES, 110 U.S. 421 (1884) (also referred to as Julliard v Greenman),

“There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the United States. It is a government of delegated powers, supreme within its prescribed sphere, but powerless outside of it. In this country, sovereignty resides in the people, and congress can exercise no power which they have not, by their constitution, entrusted to it; all else is withheld.”

The Supreme Court held that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land and binds every forum whether it derives its authority from a state or from the United States Cook v Moffat, 46 US 295 (1847). “It may be regarded as settled that the Constitution of the United States is the only source of power authorizing action by any branch of the Federal government.” Dorr v US, 195 US 138, 140 (1904).

This is why I do not support Zelensky or his ruthless proxy war with Russia on behalf of the USA and NATO. The fake Minsk Agreement confirmed that from day one, the West has been planning to wage war with Russia – the third wave to conquer and destroy Russia directed by the Deep State. They are using the Ukrainian people as cannon fodder and could care less how many die to achieve their end goal – the total destruction of Russia.

What is also MISUNDERSTOOD is Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence which expressed the same idea as Thomas Paine. By stating that “all men are created equal” had nothing to do with slavery as some tried to re-interpret. He stated that these are “unalienable rights” that are NOT granted by any government. Governments are created to secure those rights, not to suppress them as so many have done and Zelensky is doing right now to the people of the Donbas which the Minsk Agreement was to be their Declaration of Independence that the west has bluntly pissed all over it. When a government becomes destructive to those rights, as the West and Zelensky have done, then “it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it” in the words of Jefferson.

I am sorry, up to now I have always respected you, Henry. I would not have invited you to our WEC had you flipped your position perhaps you were not sick and were told by the deep state not to attend our WEC. There is no purpose to NATO other than to confront Russia. Let’s get that straight. NATO is no different than ancient Athens demanding tribute from everyone to protect them against another invasion by the Persians which also never came. Russia under Khrushchev was very different. It was pushing Marxism and believed that communists would rule the world. Yeltsin choose Putin because he was NOT a Communist, nor was he an oligarch. Those days are long gone and the Russian people themselves would not support a return to communism. They are free to even go to church and pursue a career they decide on rather than the state.

The West has refused to accept Russia as a member of the world economy. It has been the West that has tried to keep the cold war going. NATO, of course, refused to ever accept Russia was no longer communist and kept the paranoia going that they wanted to conquer and dominate Europe which was a goal that died with communism. Neither Russia nor China wants to occupy the United States or Europe. The days of empire-building also died long ago.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has no incentive to believe anything coming from Ukraine, NATO, or the United States after what they saw with the deliberate fake Minsk Agreement to only buy time for war. The Donbas should be allowed to vote and let that vote be monitored. They are Russians ethnically and they have an inherent unalienable human right to establish their own government, to worship their own religion freely, and to speak their own language. Zelensky is a fake actor playing a role dictated by NATO and the USA. He is putting his own people on the geopolitical altar for sacrifice to seize a region that has always been Russian denying them any Democracy option when he claims he is defending Democracy. When the last Ukrainian standing falls, Zelensky will be given a free ride to the Bahamas to live the rest of his life on a warm tropical beach with the billions he has stolen.

No government has a right to Deny Any Region to Separate

That Applies in the United States for our day will also come

Sorry Henry – You Lost My Respect I hope it was Old Age

Ukraine Weighs BAKHMUT Retreat Due To RUSSIAN Offensive


The Dive With Jackson Hinkle Streamed on: Jan 15, 11:07 pm EST

Posner on NATO v Russia


Armstrong Economics Blog/Russia Re-Posted Jan 16, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Russian Black Fleet Heads to Sea


Armstrong Economics Blog/Russia Re-Posted Jan 12, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Russian Navy ships and submarines have suddenly left their base at Novorossiysk, in the Black Sea, en-masse. This is highly unusual and many fear that this is a change in tactics. The Western Press keeps trying to paint Russia as losing the war so, quite frankly, they can get more people to volunteer to join the military if they think they are on the winning side.  There is no question that the US and Russia are waging the most intense confrontation since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Our model on that confrontation aligned with our major war model showing that 2014 was the end of that period and the beginning of this new period as we head into World War III.

The hardliners are not happy in Russia and President Vladimir Putin is being pushed into a corner. Either he gets more aggressive, or they could be a coup. The hardliners are using nuclear threats and other escalations in what they know is now really a proxy war of the USA and NATO against Russia using Ukraine as the pawn they are willing to sacrifice.

Washington is wielding its own array of pressures to paint Putin as a loser. The good news is that, so far, both strategies have been fairly carefully calibrated. The bad news is that America and Russia are still on a collision course because the end goal is actually to conquer Russia.

Sweden has now instituted a draft. Poland is building its army of up to 250,000 men. All of this is based on the expectation that Ukraine can reduce the Russian army and that will make it a cakewalk to invade and drive tanks from Poland right into Moscow.

Sweden will boost military spending by around 40% over the next five years from 2016 and double the numbers conscripted into the armed forces as it looks to beef up its defence amid growing tensions with Russia post-2014. Meanwhile, France, Italy, Latvia and Lithuania scrapped conscription as they concluded that large-scale defence was no longer necessary before 2014, but now they have all reversed policies.

The Joe Biden administration pledged to defend “every inch” of Nato territory. That has complicated matters for Putin to interfere with Ukraine’s supply lines through Romania and Poland. The Western Press keeps pitching the same propaganda that Putin is spiralling toward defeat in Ukraine and may not survive that outcome politically. Yet I know that the hardliners are there and if Putin does not become more aggressive, they may indeed replace him by May and then holy hell will break loose.

Putin is warning Washington as well as Kyiv that attacks on those territories are tantamount to attacks on Russia itself. The Biden administration has opted not to listen to anything from Putin and only seeks war instructing Zelensky to sacrifice his own people and to reject any peace talks whatsoever. If the US hands Zelensky long-range missiles, he will use them to attack mainland Russia and that will begin World War III.

EVERY President throughout my entire life has always sought peace. The Biden Administration and NATO only talk about pushing war. NEVER have I ever witnessed such irresponsible leadership for this is really about Climate Change.

An Independent Journalist on the Ground in Ukraine


Armstrong Economics Blog/Ukraine Re-Posted Jan 8, 2023 by Martin ArmstrongSpread the love

18th Century Copper Riots & Private Money


Armstrong Economics Blog/Civil Unrest Re-Posted Jan 6, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

During the reign of King George III (1760–1820) the first issue of halfpennies actually was not issued until 10 years after his accession to the throne in 1770. Consequently, the vast number of halfpennies in circulation were actually all counterfeits. Indeed, counterfeiting became rampant at first because there was a coin shortage. In 1771, it was declared that counterfeiting copper coins were to be a serious crime. Nevertheless, this really made no difference. Over the course of the next twenty years, the majority of copper coins in circulation were forgeries. Even in the American Colonies, a favorite pastime was to counterfeit British halfpennies.

Coppers of this type are thought to have been minted from mid-1787 through 1788 and probably into 1789. Interestingly, it appears Thomas Machin first produced halfpence dated to the contemporary year as well as examples backdated to 1778. As the mints in Connecticut, New Jersey, and Vermont failed, their equipment ended up at Machin’s Mills. Along with imitation British halfpence, Machin’s Mills also produced illegal Connecticut coppers and some legal Vermont Coppers, with most of their Vermont coins being struck over counterfeit Irish halfpence. The illegal coining operation continued at Machin’s Mills until around early 1790, which was longer than any of the legal mints in New England.

John Adams wrote to John Jay on April 10. 1787

“There is a vast sum in Circulation here of base Copper: to the amount of Several hundreds of thousands of Pounds. very lately these half Pence are refused every where: I suppose in Consequence of some Concerted Scheme. and it is supposed that they will be all purchased for a trifle and Sent to the United States where they will pass for good metal, and consequently our Simple Country men be cheated of an immense sum.2 The Board of Treasury, may be ordered with out the avowed Interposition of Congress, to give the alarm to our Citizens. and the seperate States would do well to prohibit this false Money from being paid or received.3

There was religious tension in Britain that still lingers to this day against Catholics. The Gordon Riots of 1780 took place over several days instigated by the anti-Catholic sentiment that again erupted with the passage of the Papists Act of 1778. That was an attempt to reduce official discrimination against British Catholics with the first legislation of the Popery Act of 1698. At the time, Lord George Gordon was the head of the Protestant Association. He argued that the law would enable Catholics to join the British Army and once in they would then use the army to plot treason. The protest became the excuse to burn people’s possessions, engaged in widespread rioting and looting, and they even used the opportunity to attack both Newgate Prison and the Bank of England. This was by far the most destructive riot in the history of London.

alexis-i-copper-riot-1662

From the mid-1600s, the world money supply was increased largely with copper coins. Russia, in particular, began to overvalue the copper coins. Money is always fiat for its value is typically dictated by the government. Overvaluing copper as in the 17th and 18th centuries, led to the same trend of overvaluing silver during the 19th century. The result of this monetary manipulation by the Russian government led to what became known as the Copper Riots of 1662.

The Russian government began producing copper coins and monetizing them to be of equal value to silver Kopek currency with an average weight of about half of a gram to meet expenses during the mini-Ice Age. The effort failed and silver vanished from circulation as people began hoarding them causing the entire economy to collapse. The copper money was naturally devalued in purchasing power and then there were widespread counterfeiting operations since the official value of the copper coinage became far in excess of the cost of production. The economy collapsed into a deflationary black hole as businesses shut down and unemployment rose dramatically. This erupted into what has become known as the Copper Riots of 1662.

The German bankers, the Fuggers, emerged as the leading Augsburg merchant-banker, who then provided loans to local rulers secured with the silver produce of their mines. The discovery of vast silver mines eventually led to the development in 1525 of the one-ounce silver coin that was the thaler from which we derive the name “dollar” as the alternative to the British pound after the American Revolution. The Joachimsthaler of the Kingdom of Bohemia was therefore the first thaler ideally with a weight of 31 grams or one troy ounce.

copper-panic-1662

As the silver mines were declining, the decline in the supply of silver led to the rise of copper coinage during the next century. This was not an isolated incident confined to Russia. There was a shortage of precious metals going into 1662. It was most profound in Russia. Nevertheless, the price of gold rose sharply from the low of 1655 in a 7-year bull market. This also reflected the deflationary atmosphere that was emerging thanks also to the mini-Ice Age which was peaking during the 17th century yet would last well into the mid-19th century.

It was Spain’s silver mine known as the great red Cerro Rico or ‘Rich Hill’ that towered over the city of Potosí in Bolivia. It had been mined since 1545 by drafted armies of natives. The great silver boom of c1575-1635 was when Potosí alone produced nearly half the world’s silver. But the mine’s yield was starting to decline. By 1678, native workers became scarce and the output of the mines began to dwindle. This was the royal mint that produced vast amounts of ‘pieces of eight’, which became the precursor of the American dollar. The shortage of labor ended up being augmented by purchasing African slaves from the Dutch who were buying them under the pretense that they were the spoils of war, which had been the justification for slaves from ancient times.

As the quantity of new silver in the world monetary system was declining, we begin to see the rise of copper coinage make its first appearance under James I of England (1603-1625). Due to a shortage of small coins, James I authorized John Harrington to issue tin-coated bronze farthings in 1613, and three main types were minted – the last being a slightly larger copper farthing without the tin coating. The first halfpenny was introduced in 1672 by Charles II (1660-1685). Charles II issued some copper halfpennies and farthings in 1672 for a single year but issued farthings again in 1873. The next issue of a farthing was struck in a tin but during 1684 and 1685.

However, in 1694 the Bank of England was established to raise money for King William III’s war against France. The Bank started to issue notes in return for deposits. Therefore, the money supply for the first time began to include paper currency. By 1695 the first fraud took place. The authorities prosecuted Daniel Perrismore for forging sixty £100 notes. This incident caused the Bank of England to introduce a watermark in the paper to prevent such fraud. This was further enhanced by making counterfeiting subjected to the death penalty as a felony resulting in the confiscation of all your wealth and throwing your family out of the street as well. Pictured here, is a protest imitation note. The law was being prosecuted on the mere possession of a forged note. The complaint here was that these one-pound notes were easily forged and innocent people were duped, thereby committing a felony by mere possession. They were being hanged with no proof that they created the forgery – merely that they possessed one. This was creating an incentive not to even accept the notes in transactions.

George I, II, and III all issued copper halfpennies. George III’s halfpennies were dated 1770 to 1772. The economic hard times no doubt contributed to the riots of 1780. After those events, at Newgate Prison in March 1782 a female alleged counterfeiter of halfpennies was hanged. She was then fixed to a stake and burned before the debtor’s door at Newgate prison in London as a further example of not to counterfeit.

In a letter to Lord Hawkesbury on April 14th, 1789, Matthew Boulton, who is considered the Grandfather of modern coinage,  commented

“In the course of my journeys, I observe that I receive upon average two-thirds counterfeit halfpence for change at toll-gates, etc., and I believe the evil is daily increasing, as the spurious money is carried into circulation by the lowest class of manufacturers, who pay with it the principal part of the wages of the poor people they employ”.

Boulton’s contract in 1797 to produce the Cartwheel pennies and twopences, thwarting the counterfeiters, did not extend to producing the halfpenny, though Boulton had expected that it would, and had prepared patterns of the appropriate size and weight in accordance with his ideas on the intrinsic value of copper coins. The reason the government gave for the omission of the denomination from the contract was that a large number of de facto halfpennies (including tokens and fakes) would be driven out of circulation and Boulton would be unable to produce enough coins to meet the demand that would ensue.

To avoid being hung for counterfeiting and burned at the stake, there was a multitude of halfpenny tokens. Many were of a political nature as this one complaining about the cost of bread. The government yielded to the private halfpenny tokens which became the majority of the small change. The overall public demand for legal halfpennies soon forced the government to change its mind, and in 1798 a contract was issued to Boulton for him to produce halfpennies and farthings dated 1799.

Interestingly, it was also at this time when inflation sent the price of copper rising, and consequently, the weight of the coins was reduced slightly, which resulted in them not being as popular as expected. In 1806 a further 427.5 tons of copper was struck into halfpennies by Boulton, but the price of copper had risen again and the weight was even less than the 1799 issue. This time, however, there was no unfavorable reaction from the public, so perhaps the national obsession with “intrinsic value” had run its course.

This was a very curious period where private money dominated the money supply for halfpennies. There are other periods where this has emerged in history primarily due to the shortage of real official money. One of the earliest such periods was during the reign of the Roman Emperor Tiberius (14-37AD).

Tiberius was legendary to be a frugal emperor. His deliberate contraction in creating new money led to the Financial Panic of 33AD. As far as Quantitative Easing, that too was nothing new. Tiberius offered loans INTEREST-FREE, but they had a limitation of three years. This was to prevent people from being forced to sell their estates further depressing land values.

There was a major earthquake in Asia, modern Turkey, and this was so devastating, he issued coins stating they were for the relief of Asia. He also waived all taxes in the region for 5 years – something our modern-day politicians would never dream of.

The lesson from history reveals that at times there emerges the acceptance of private money. During the 1870s, we also see private tokens circulating as money in the United States. Collectors call them the Hard Times Tokens. The very same thing took place during the American Civil War.

During the Great Depression, the shortage of money led to more than 200 cities issuing their own paper currency. As long as everyone in town accepted it, these Depressions Scrips enable people to work and to be paid locally when there was simply not enough federal money to go around.

During the Hyperinflation in Germany of the 1920s, there again we see private currency being printed known as NOTGELD. Therefore, in the end, when the confidence in government declines, society is compelled to return to a barter-based society and that is when we begin to see private forms of money take hold.

The Coming Revolution – The End of Brazil


Armstrong Economics Blog/Central America Re-Posted Jan 6, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

The leftist press immediately claims that any assertions of a rigged election in Brazil are as baseless as the Hunter Biden laptop. Our model shows that the election was in fact bogus and it was in a series of global elections that are being rigged to create this global leftist agenda. For any newspaper to immediately proclaim Bolanaro left the country amid “baseless” claims shows that they are just propaganda and part of the agenda.

Our model showed a serious Directional Change would take place in 2023, but we are looking at the complete collapse of Brazil and a major revolution unfolding in 2030. Leftist governments have ALWAYS, and without exception, resulted in declining economic growth. NEVER has even just one ever produced any economic benefit to the whole of any nation. Brazil has sealed its fate and it will take the rest of the continent with it. South and Central America have been plagued with Marxism and that is why the continent has been unable to rise from its knees. Even the Pope has been infected with this philosophy which is why he is always commenting on the economy rather than religion. This has led to many Catholics now saying – He Ain’t My Pope.