The Left Becoming Violent in France As they Did Against Trump


Corsica Riots 4-9-2017

In Corsica, the left has stormed into an appearance of Marine Le Pen to disrupt her campaign. The leftist group Ghjuventu Indipendentista claims to be Corsican nationalists who want to separate from France. The group called for everyone to join using Twitter. The goal was to prevent Le Pen from making an election campaign speech in Corsica. About 20 to 30 people managed to gain access to the Hall of the Party Front National (FN) and forced the room to be cleared after a handful used of tear gas. As usual, it is the left which is always violent for they are often the source political revolutions that suppress anyone who disagrees with them and that is pretty standard around the world.

The rioters were arrested. This is becoming a much more frequent trend internationally.

Farage Tells the EU They are Acting like Mafia


 

Tax Authorities Still Hunting for More


Credit Swiss

Credit Suisse was raided in the hunt for tax money all throughout Europe. They took out ads last Sunday in the Sunday Times, Sunday Telegraph and Observer in London, all saying that they were a “response to recent reports about tax probes in various European countries”. The hunt for taxes has continued to target Switzerland which the other governments blame for their own fiscal mismanagement. The prevailing view has embedded that the Swiss banks for years has helped wealthy individuals around the world to hide money. Previously, Credit Suisse, Switzerland’s second-biggest bank, in 2014 pleaded guilty and was fined $2.6 billion by U.S. authorities over charges it helped wealthy Americans evade taxes. It has also settled tax, dodging cases in Italy and Germany. The tax authorities of various government tasted first blood and now they are back for more.

The entire issue with Switzerland secrecy laws began in 1933 because Hitler was doing the very same thing. He declared it to be illegal for any German to have money outside of the country. To protect the Jews, Switzerland introduced its secrecy laws. Now the rest of the world is going the very same thing that Hitler did. Interesting how history repeats.

KIM JONG-UN PLACES NORTH KOREA ON “BRINK OF WAR” STATUS


Tomahawks

IMF Issue Working Paper on Eliminating Cash


IMF De-Cashing

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) in Washington has published a Working Paper on “de-cashing” the economies and the implications. This paper clearly demonstrates that this is the direction we are headed into. It provides advice to governments who want to join in the latest thing – abolishing cash. IMF-Analyst Alexei Kireyev recommends in his conclusions:

Although some countries most likely will de-cash in a few years, going completely cashless should be phased in steps. The de-cashing process could build on the initial and largely uncontested steps, such as the phasing out of large denomination bills, the placement of ceilings on cash transactions, and the reporting of cash moves across the borders. Further steps could include creating economic incentives to reduce the use of cash in transactions, simplifying the opening and use of transferrable deposits, and further computerizing the financial system. 

 

The paper does not advocate eliminating cash. It merely goes through the plus and minus to such a policy. While governments are pressing this using terrorism as the excuse, you do not eliminate the entire monetary system of the world to even catch 100 terrorists and their camels. This is all about the collapse in socialism and the desperate need to raise money.

IMF De-Cashing Paper

Syria – Pipeline – How The Press Will Not Tell the Truth about Syria


Pipeline

With all the attacks upon Trump as having some covert connection with Putin to defeat Hillary when nothing hacked from the DNC was ever said to have been faked or altered, just released, one must wonder has this suddenly influenced Trump to attack Syria to prove he is not in league with Putin? If the military advisors are telling him it is Syria who has launched a chemical attack, he really should tread very lightly. This 180 degree turn for Trump may indeed be a trap.

Back in December 2015, I explained what Syria was all about and why the Obama Administration wanted to invade to help Qatar get a pipeline through Syria to compete with Russia selling gas to Europe. I explained there were two pipelines one approved by Russia from Iran through Syria and the other Obama agreed to with Qatar also through Syria. The American press supported Obama by trying to make everyone believe Obama cared about innocent civilians being gassed. Nothing was further from the truth and the US was supplying the weapons to rebels who were slaughtering people and throwing them in mass graves. Obama turned a blind eye because the pipeline was more important than people in Syria.

Finally, after more than one year from when I reported the real truth behind Syria, the Australian Press has now broke the story. The question is why now? It seems the media will now switch the focus and claim Trump is the one doing this for the pipeline now that their favorite son, Obama, is out of the picture. Mainstream media is out to defeat Trump. That is what they are directed to do from their big corporate owners who Dan Rather exposed in 2008, but now defends the press as being honest and real and the devil is Trump claiming they are fake.

Interesting how they can hide the story to help Obama and then flip the same story to attack Trump. It looks like Trump is falling prey to being set up to think this is really about chemical weapons and saving people. Sorry – that was all BS. The evidence came out that it was the rebels supported by Obama who were using the chemical weapons. Investigations revealed that back in 2013, they used sarin gas – not the Syrian government.

The proposed gas pipeline from Qatar via Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Turkey to Europe.

Pipeline from Iran via Iraq and Syria to Europe.

Socialism – Family Structure – Gold – Food


3-Hoard

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; you said that socialism is collapsing and the West is most vulnerable because it changed the social structure and the family unit. Spanish families from Mexico seem to be much tighter groups than Americans. Is this what you are talking about? Did the ancient Greeks save money for retirement? Is that why hoards of coins are found?

Thank you for making my brain work again

LY

ANSWER: Yes, socialism’s goal was to replace the family unit and make people dependent upon the state. Even under communism in Russia, you were instructed that the State was your real parents, and if your biological parents spoke against the State you were supposed to turn them in. I went behind the Berlin Wall before it fell. The system was paranoid to the point you trusted no one.

I have friends in Ukraine. They never trusted the State and retained a strong family bond. They provided for each other, and this is what you see among Mexican families as well. When there is no trust in government, we turn back toward almost a tribal heritage, but band together in family structures.

Coin hoards are not found as savings, or else they would be far more common. They tend to reflect savings but from periods of political-economic instability. So, we have far more hoards from the 3rd century AD than any other period.

Amphorae

As for the ancient Greeks, they did not save money. To them, economic security took the form of an amphorae of olive oil. Olive oil was very nutritious and could be stored for relatively long periods of time. To provide for themselves in times of need the Greeks stockpiled olive oil and this was their form of economic security. It provided substance during crop failures and had a value that would always rise against the value of money during economic crisis. So the hoards you find in ancient homes are that of amphorae rather than coin.

I have stated plenty of times, that if you go too far in the economic downturn, not even gold will retain its value. You move all the way back down the evolution of value to food where it all began.

Germany Passes Bill To Fine FaceBook, Twitter Up To $50MM For “Fake News”


Tyler Durden's picture

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has apparently decided she’s not willing to take the chance of becoming the latest politician to fall victim to the same “Russian hacking” and “fake news” campaigns which ‘undoubtedly’ caused the downfall of America’s liberal darling, Hillary Clinton (forget those pay-for-play scandals, federal record retention violations and willful non-compliance with Congressional subpeonas…total non-factors in the 2016 election).

And since they can’t really control the actions of those pesky ‘Russian hackers,” Germany’s cabinet has instead decided to pass legislation that would impose serious fines of up to 50 million Euros on any social networks that fail to swiftly remove content that could be deemed “hateful” or “fake news.”  Per Yahoo News:

Germany’s Cabinet on Wednesday approved a new bill that punishes social networking sites if they fail to swiftly remove illegal content such as hate speech or defamatory fake news

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Cabinet agreed on rules that would impose fines of up to 50 million euros (53.4 million dollars) on Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms.

German Justice Minister Heiko Maas said that the companies offering such online platforms are responsible for removing hateful content. He said the new bill would not restrict the freedom of expression, but intervene only when criminal hatred or intentionally false news are posted.

Of course, all of this begs the question of exactly how German officials define “fake news” as the lines between what is pure ‘fact’ versus ‘opinion’ often grow very blurred in politics.  Moreover, politicians themselves are often the biggest purveyors of “fake news”…so if someone quotes the erroneous comments of a German politician on FaceBook is the social network then liable?  All questions that would have seemed silly just a year ago…

Masas

Nevertheless, German Justice Minister Heiko Maas is convinced that “verbal radicalization” of snowflakes over twitter and Facebook is often a precursor to “physical violence.”

Social networks need to ensure that obviously criminal content — as defined by German law — will be deleted within 24 hours and other illegal content after seven days.

“Just like on the streets, there is also no room for criminal incitement on social networks,” Maas said.

“The internet affects the culture of debate and the atmosphere in our society. Verbal radicalization is often a preliminary stage to physical violence,” he added.

But nevermind the actual ‘radicalization’ occurring in migrant communities throughout Europe at the moment…that is also just “fake news.”

As we noted last week, Assemblyman Ed Chau (D-Monterey Park) recently introduced a similar piece of legislation in California, the so-called “California Political Cyberfraud Abatement Act” or AB 1104 for short, that would have effectively made it a crime to be wrong on the Internet.  The text of the bill implicated anyone who writes, publishes or even shares news stories that could be false, if those news stories are later found to have had an impact on an election.  From the bill:

This bill would modify the definition of the terms “political cyberfraud” and “political Web site” to include Internet Web sites that urge or appear to urge the support or opposition of candidates for public office. The bill would also make it unlawful for a person to knowingly and willingly make, publish or circulate on a Web site, or cause to be made, published, or circulated in any writing posted on a Web site, a false or deceptive statement designed to influence the vote on any issue submitted to voters at an election or on any candidate for election to public office.

And even though author Ed Chau described AB 1104 as “an important step forward in the fight against ‘fake news’ and deceptive campaign tactics”, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a digital-rights advocacy group, said the bill was “so obviously unconstitutional, we had to double check that it was real.”

Memo to California Assemblymember Ed Chau: you can’t fight fake news with a bad law.

On Tuesday, the California Assembly’s Committee on Privacy and Consumer Affairs, which Chau chairs, will consider A.B. 1104—a censorship bill so obviously unconstitutional, we had to double check that it was real.

This bill will fuel a chaotic free-for-all of mudslinging with candidates and others being accused of crimes at the slightest hint of hyperbole, exaggeration, poetic license, or common error. While those accusations may not ultimately hold up, politically motivated prosecutions—or the threat of such—may harm democracy more than if the issue had just been left alone. Furthermore, A.B. 1104 makes no exception for satire and parody, leaving The Onion and Saturday Night Live open to accusations of illegal content. Nor does it exempt news organizations who quote deceptive statements made by politicians in their online reporting—even if their reporting is meant to debunk those claims. And what of everyday citizens who are duped by misleading materials: if 1,000 Californians retweet an incorrect statement by a presidential candidate, have they all broken the law?

At a time when political leaders are promoting “alternative facts” and branding unflattering reporting as “fake news,” we don’t think it’s a good idea to give the government more power to punish speech.

But, unlike in Germany, California actually realized how idiotic their bill was before passing it into law…

US Population Migrating South to Less Taxed States


USA Map Migration

The US Census report has shown that the net migration from the New York City area has surged during 2016, and that even included myself. Indeed, much more people are leaving the New York region than any other major metropolitan area in the country. Since 2010, the New York area has lost almost 4.5% of its population. This included New Jersey, Connecticut, Long Island, and the lower Hudson Valley. The number of people who left in 2015 was 187,034. Last year, 2016, that number jumped to 223,423. The number of international immigrants settling in the tri-state area declined from 181,551 to 160,324. The international migration has slowed and this trend means that taxes will only rise.

Meanwhile, Cook County, Illinois has lost more population than any other county in the United States from July 2015 to July 2016, according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau report. Clearly, the highest taxed states are losing the most people. Nevertheless, the data clearly shows that the higher the state tax rate, the greater the migration outward.

The State of New York as a whole lost 95,591 people and California came in second losing 93,915 with New Jersey losing 76,175, Illinois lost 52,804, and Michigan losing 47,347.

The three states at the top of the list for destinations are Texas posting a gain of 109,887 people, Florida 61,395, and Colorado 41,501.

Getting the Facts Straight – Are they Just Oblivious to our History?


1863$100GoldCertificate

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, I was reading one analyst who claims we need a new dollar. He said that in 1832 Gold coins were produced at a face value of $20 each, and the one ounce Silver coins retained their $1 valuation and were issued in 1792. He concluded: “In summary. A Silver coin standard in 1792. A Gold coin standard in 1832. Paper Gold/Silver Certificates in 1900. Then Federal Reserve notes in 1933. This is where it stands now. Each century a new US Dollar. So why do we need a new US Dollar?” You have shown pictures of gold backed currency before 1900 and you wrote $20 gold pieces were not minted until the California Gold Rush in 1849. Are any of these statements remotely correct? This is very confusing.

SF

US1794$1-r

1795USGold$10ANSWER: Sorry, but no. They are all wrong. Just pick up a US coin catalog and you will quickly see the first silver dollar was minted in 1794, not 1792. There were no silver dollars minted at all between 1805 and 1840 and the first $20 gold coin was indeed issued during 1849 because of the California Gold Rush. The largest gold coin previously was $10 and it was issued in 1795 and here too there were no $10 gold coins issued after 1804 until 1838. So, I’m not sure where 1832 comes into play. The first gold back paper currency was issued in 1863, not 1900. That’s another strange statement.

None of these facts are remotely close to being true.

1792-Birch-Disme

cromwell-oliverAs far as 1792, Thomas Birch struck experimental coins the Disme (10 cent), Half Disme, and the One Cent. These were not the coins officially adopted by the US government and are considered to be patterns. The debate was rather profound at that time whether the coins should bare the portrait of the president as was the case of Cromwell during the English Glorious Revolution. Others rejected that concept and said it would appear to be a monarchical practice. George Washington is said to have also rejected the idea of placing himself on the coinage.

1793-Penny-HalfPenny

The Birch coins were therefore patterns struck during the period of debate with the portrait of Liberty. Therefore, the official coinage of the United States did not begin until 1793 with a half-penny and penny, with the silver denominations following in 1794. The first 5 cent coin was not issued until 1866 with the inflation of the Civil War. The first 3 cent coin appeared in 1851 struck in silver and the 2 cent in 1864 in bronze. The half dime was struck in silver in 1794 until 1805. Half dimes were not reissued until 1829.

What these people totally lack in their accounts is the fact that there was a crisis from the very beginning with trying to peg the dollar to European currencies despite the fact it was a silver and gold standard. In 1792, congress adopted a bimetallic standard and the 15 to 1 ratio of silver to gold. The precious metal content of a US dollar was fixed at 371¼ grains of silver or 24¾ grains of gold. Just like trying to fix the British pound in the ERM or the Swiss peg to the Euro, everything went nuts and forced the suspension of silver coinage in the United States.

By 1795, an ounce of gold in the US had a ratio of 15:1 and was under pressure because in Paris it was worth 15½ ounces of silver to one ounce of gold. By 1799, the ratio continued to expand reaching 15¾ ounces. This presented a huge arbitrage opportunity, so bullion dealers bought United States gold coins using Spanish silver coins and they shipped them to Europe to be melted and re-sold. The net capital outflow was huge and American coin was vanishing rapidly. Finally, in 1804, President Thomas Jefferson was forced to order that no more gold $10 eagles and silver coins were to be struck. All we see are copper coins being produced at this point in time.

Then by 1813, the silver/gold ratio continued to expand reaching 16¼ to 1 as gold had become very scarce. At this point in American economic history, 98% of all U.S. gold coinage would have be melted down by the bullion dealers. Gold became rare and none was being imported to the US officially. Any gold that did make it to the States was not for the US mint but only in private transactions. Beginning in the 1820s, some new gold finds were made in Georgia and North Carolina. However, the supply of gold in America was never enough to allow gold coins to circulate widely. The $5 gold half-eagles continued to be struck, but marginally with about 50,000 coins annually. In 1920, the new finds in gold sparked a sharp rise in production reaching 263,806 $5 coins. However, the show of economic power dwindled rapidly falling to under 15,000 coins struck in 1823.

There was no “bullion fund” authorized by a congress to buy bullion to be coined. Congress was strapped for cash. The U.S. dollars were accepted as the equivalent of Spanish dollars in the Caribbean, and since unworn Spanish pieces had a higher silver content than the U.S. coins, it became profitable to export the American dollars, exchanging them for the Spanish pieces which were then melted down. This is why Jefferson suspended production of silver dollars in 1804, which lasted for nearly 40 years. From that point, the half dollar became the dominant U.S. silver coin.

A crisis in the money supply had emerged. Finally, a senate committee reported in 1830 that so few quarters, dimes, and half dimes had been struck from the birth of the nation that there was less than one coin struck for each person in the country. The total face value of silver coins struck from inception was only about $25 million in silver coins minted since 1794 and the gyrations in the ratio left about $14 million still in circulation by 1830, of which $2 million represented bank reserves. Consequently, they seem to be oblivious to this history of our monetary system.

1914FederalReserveNotes

As far as when did Federal Reserve notes begin? Sorry, that was 1914 and the Fed was created in 1913. The $500-$10,000 notes were not issued until 1918. True, gold was confiscated and there was a bank holiday in 1933, but that was not the beginning of the Federal Reserve notes. I am not sure why all these dates are so wrong and how this impacts the objective of a forecast