Bitcoin v Gold


QUESTION: Do you think that Bitcoin will replace gold as some people claim it is some new reserve asset?

Thank you for being the voice of reason in the middle of all these people p[reaching their own position.

GD

ANSWER: That is really a bizarre question. I do not see how that is possible. As far as it becoming a reserve asset that surpasses everything else, I would have to say that is not plausible. These are proposals propagated clearly by retail people involved in the conspiracy world. Even if we look at the German hyperinflation, the PRIMARY assets to survive was real estate. That became the backing of the replacement currency.

 

Money itself is NEVER a store of wealth. It rises and falls against tangible assets. I have stated plenty of times that Bitcoin is a trading vehicle — nothing more. Just look at the chart. This fluctuates like everything else. That alone proves it will never be some mythical store of value or reserve assets. Our Energy Models have turned negative so it has squeezed out most of the excess which would allow it to make a rally if it exceeds the Weekly Bullish Reversals (see Socrates report for further details — available to subscribers only).

It does not matter what you are talking about. ABSOLUTELY NO instrument will ever be the main “reserve asset” for people will always disagree. There will be people who cling to gold, others to stocks or real estate, and then we have the sublime fools who will hold government debt. You will never convince everyone to create a single reserve asset.

These are usually the rantings of people unfamiliar with how the world economy really functions. Even central banks hold dollars but in bonds to earn interest. They do not hold physical paper dollars. When they were leasing out gold to earn some income, these same people accused them of suppressing the market in a conspiracy.

Institutions need to earn some income. This is why they do not hold gold. Gold shares they can’t hold but bullion must be lent out to earn income. How are they going to hold Bitcoin that pays no interest and fluctuates like any other commodity?

What these people preach sounds great to the retail market who is just looking to make capital gains. But institutions cannot function that way. Pension funds need income to make payments. They can no more hold Bitcoin than gold bullion in a vault without income.

 

Are Bonds Preferable to Stocks in a Crisis?


QUESTION: There are a few people coming out claiming the stock market will crash so buy bonds even though you will lose money. How can people keep calling for a mega-crash so long with constantly being wrong since 2010?

Thank you for your reason

NR

ANSWER: These people are still living in a world that is defined by the event of the Great Depression. Even Germany forces austerity upon Europe because they do not understand the events behind their own hyperinflation and stupidly assume it was merely an increase in the supply of money that caused the event. Nobody seems to be bothered to ask which comes first – the chicken or the egg?

Here is a chart of the stock market with the US Long Bond. Andrew Jackson paid off the national debt in 1835. President Jackson also shut down the Second Bank of the United States on Sept. 10th, 1833. Jackson announced that the government would no longer deposit federal funds in the Second Bank of the United States, which was a quasi-governmental national bank. The stock market peaked in 1835 and began its decline without a central bank. Then during July 1836, Jackson issued the Specie Circular. Under this act, the government would only accept gold or silver in payment for federal land.

Jackson’s Bank War closing down the Bank of the United States was personal because they funded his opposition. By shifting deposits to state banks, Jackson set off a major crisis undermining the entire monetary system. He effectively devalued all the circulating currency in the country with one law – the Specie Circular. Suddenly, there was a run on gold. The Panic of 1837 unfolds as New York banks suspended all withdrawals of gold. Jackson created massive austerity, but he had shut down the national debt as well. This was a very complicated financial crisis with an interesting mix of events combining together.

There were NO federal issues of paper money and the first paper dollar to be issued by the government did not unfold until 1860 to fund the Civil War. Therefore, Jackson effectively canceled all paper money by refusing to accept it and this resulted in a gold panic forcing the banks to suspend all payments. People were rushing to banks to exchange their paper currency for gold and banks could not meet the demand and suspended all demands for gold.

When federal bonds resumed in 1842, they had declined in value as interest rates rose. There was no flight to quality, only to gold given there were no federal bonds. This is when several states moved into default permanently upon their debt. Therefore, the Monetary Crisis Cycle that hit then was felt in the state and local levels – not federal. The Monetary Crisis Cycle that hit in 1931 resulted in widespread sovereign defaults outside the USA.

Each cycle that hits is slightly different characters and reasons. I highly warn against buying any sovereign debt whatsoever. Any federal debt to hold must be short-term no more than 90-day paper. In the case of the Hard Times of 1837-1842, the stock market crashed in terms of gold because all money was effectively canceled. Paper money collapsed as notes lost their legal-tender value. Thus, only gold rose in value as the medium of exchange thanks to Jackson refusing to accept anything but gold.

This time around, bonds are legal tender so that is the money that will decline in value far more than anyone expects. Both the Bank of Japan and the ECB in Europe have wiped out their bonds markets for they have been the primary buyer of government debt which they cannot now resell.

 

The Stock Market – Up & Away or Crash & Burn?


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong,

In your blog you talked about a global recession and hard landing. Does this mean the US stock market will rally because funds will flow from the rest of the world to the US stock market? Or will the US stock market succumb to the global recession and go lower too?

This is very confusing for most of us and a very critical time in the markets. I hope you will guides us with your knowledge and experience.

Thank you for all you do!

KC

ANSWER: The key to pushing capital fleeing into the stock market will be the decline in public confidence within the government. Everything is unfolding on schedule. You see turmoil everywhere from Canada to France and Italy. The level of people distrusting government is climbing. Normally, it will take a 45% level of people turning against the government to set off the spark.

So no, there still does not appear to be a major crash of 50-62% as the majority are calling. The market is testing resistance, but here too we do not see this as breaking out and taking off just yet. We are in a choppy consolidation building a higher base that qualifies as a cycle low. We will be ready to take off soon. Just be patient.

 

The Rally Beyond 2015 in the Dow Has Proven We are in a Cycle Inversion


QUESTION: There are many people who are now saying we are headed into a recession. Your model shows we are coming to the end. Yet you have been the only analyst who has been correct. There are bankers warning the stock market will collapse by 50% because it always goes down in a recession. I watched the market rally to new high as you forecast back in 2010 going into 2015. Then you warned the market would invert and continue the rally after 2015. The market rallied into nearly your Pi Target in 2018. You said at the last WEC there would be a correction back to retest the monthly bearish reversal.

You have been correct at every turn. Back in 2014, you posted: “What will not go down when the cycles shift, inverts and rises even further.” It seems that this has been a cycle inversion where the market has just been rising through the upside and downside of your model. My question is this. You still forecast that this is just the staging ground and we are about to see a different pattern altogether. Is this all part of the cycle inversion you have been stating is underway?

NM

ANSWER: Yes. I also wrote in that post: “This is why I have been warning a cycle inversion is coming. We may be in that process now starting from November 19th/20th.” With all the craziness on the horizon economically, the government was the one in trouble, not the private sector. That meant we had to undergo a cycle inversion. That is what is underway. A normal cycle would have seen the market peak in October 2015 and then decline. The fact that the market has continued to rally past 2015 proves this is a cycle inversion. We will be addressing this at the Rome WEC. We are about to make a major play that will be critical to understanding for the future.

Can European Sovereign Debt Really Crash Without a Free Market?


QUESTION: Hi Marty,

When the stock market crashed in 1929, followed by the bonds into 1933, we saw a minor bump in the stock market. As this occurred during a Public Wave, are u suggesting during our current Private Wave, we will see bonds collapse first 2020+, as capital flees into the stock market for a peak in 2022/2023? How will European bonds collapse when the ECB continues QE? Or will the catalyst be one or two large bank ( DB), or country failures (Italy), or Brexit?

Who ranks in importance?

Thank you?

ANSWER: One of the fascinating aspects of what we face is clearly the sovereign bond markets. The ECB and the Bank of Japan fund their government debts without end, and they have both destroyed their bonds markets. I will have to run back to Europe because things are just getting really crazy there. The ECB cannot sell the bonds it has already bought. They have already stated that as bonds mature, they will reinvest that money aside from any new purchases because there is no market. Since they have destroyed their own bond markets, we are UNLIKELY to see a crash if there are no bids and offers. They will simply pretend that sovereign debt is perfectly fine.

What we should expect to see is private sector debt decline as rates rise. The premium of private over government will widen simply because the government debt is not a free market number. I can say that there are a lot of people in various governments who are contacting us these days. This shows there are people who are deeply concerned that this is not going to end very nicely.

As far as which is more serious, BREXIT or an Italian exit, it will be the latter and not the former. Why? Italy was a founding member of the euro and it uses the euro. Therefore, Britain never joined the euro thanks to Maggie Thatcher. Italy leaving the euro will be far more devastating to the euro itself and will complicate matters since the ECB is saturated with Italian debt. There are a lot more ties that have to be cut besides trade, as is the case in Britain.

Is Perpetual Prosperity a Fictional Dream?


QUESTION: Hi Mr. Armstrong…Thanks for trying to settle our confusion re: Griffin’s “Creature” You make a distinction between Gov’t mandated debt & Fed helicopter money. But isn’t debt still just debt?
Also, you seem to be saying the Federal Reserve is a necessary evil (maybe not even evil), & that central banks & fractional reserve banking are a fair & honest system. All very confusing.
I believe you could more easily enlighten our Neanderthal economic brains by simply describing your version of a near perfect monetary system, that’s also immune from political interference. Maybe call it “The Armstrong Guide to Perpetual Prosperity”

We’re NOT mocking you. Would love to see this as would 99% of your readers.

Wishing you a long & healthy life. We need you.

HS

ANSWER: I understand this gets confusing because people have taken one tiny stone and assume the entire mountain is the same. The Fed was created to be funded by the banks themselves to effectively be their bailout institution. As I have written before, the Fed “stimulated” for it was authorized to buy ONLY corporate paper when banks could not lend. Because of WWI, the politicians directed the Fed to only buy government debt and never returned it to its purpose. It is nothing like what it was designed to do.

There is no such thing as Fed Helicopter Money. That is another absolute absurd proposition. The Fed can create elastic money, but it is effectively backed by the debt they purchase. The entire Quantitative Easing was by NO MEANS the creation of money out of thin air. They were buying in government debt which is in itself simply money that pays interest. The Helicopter Money these people argue was supposed to create hyperinflation only revealed that the people who call it that actually have no idea what they are talking about. They pretend that the money was just created with no backing. But it was buying in government debt. The REAL MONEY supply is not simply cash, it includes the entire national debt BECAUSE debt is now collateral and can be used in the economy. The economic reality was simply moving money from your left pocket to your right. The supply remained the same. That is why Quantitative Easing failed to work. The real creation of money is the debt and the difference is significant for it is money that pays interest requiring the creation of ever more debt.

The PERFECT monetary system is one in which there is no debt. Rome lasted for 1,000 years BECAUSE it had no debt. It did use MMT insofar as it created money each year to fund itself. The great debasement took place during the 3rd century when Emperor Valerian I was captured by the Persians in 260 AD and forced to be a slave to the Persian King. That broke confidence in the government; people freaked out and began to hoard everything.

The first criteria are TERM LIMITS and the elimination of any power to borrow. No spending bill may be merged with another. Every bill must stand on its own and the people must vote by a computer on each bill. They cannot be passed without more than 50% of the people voting. Therefore, we restore a DIRECT form of Democratic government. There may be no law that is based upon any religious belief or seeks to impose any restriction upon any race, gender, or sexual orientation. Some people will object. But we must understand that we have to protect even people we disagree with in order to protect ourselves. There can be no exception to basic rights. Arnaud Amalric, prior to the massacre at Béziers, was reported to have said: “Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius,” which is a direct translation of the Latin phrase “Kill them. For the Lord knows those that are His own.” It is not our station to sit in judgment over others pretending to know what God wants. That is his role, not ours. Laws should never be allowed to be written for the purpose of forcing the belief of one group upon another as we have today with the left v right.

Next, we must eliminate all forms of Direct Taxation (income tax), which requires people to report to the government even to confirm you are not rich. All taxation MUST be indirect as the Founding Fathers intended. The people will pay taxes based upon their consumption. Naturally, raw food and rent should be exempt. Then you cap the government expenditure at a max of 5% of GDP, not to exceed the population growth rate.

Money is simply the medium of exchange. It is NEVER a reservoir or store of wealth. It is merely the unit of account that is no different from a language. If someone says something to you in German, you immediately try to translate it to your native tongue to understand what they said. Money serves the same function. We call Trump a billionaire, not because he has cash in the bank, but because people look at his assets and translate them into money to judge his worth. That is the role of money. We must understand and embrace it. Only then can we comprehend a monetary system.

These are just a few of the necessary elements. The crisis is NEVER the quantity of money. It is those who seek to rule us from above. Direct reform at the powers that be and the monetary system will quickly fall into line. There is no possible “perpetual prosperity” because everything is connected and nature also plays a role in the business cycle. Marx to Keynes have all tried to create the perfect system that will produce endless prosperity. That is an impossible fictional dream.

 

India v Pakistan & the 2019/2020 Turning Point


The last time that Indian and Pakistan were at war was back in 1971. Our War Model turned up in 1964 and indeed it marked the beginning of the US Vietnam War. In reality, the separation or the partition of India took place in 1947 based upon religion. The British created two independent dominions, India and Pakistan. India became the Republic of India in 1950, and in 1957 the Dominion of Pakistan became the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. In 1971, the People’s Republic of Bangladesh came into being. On March 25, 1971, there was also the Bangladesh War of Independence against Pakistan. Bangladesh was a Sunni Muslim state as was the case with Pakistan.  The partition involved the division of three provinces — Assam, Bengal, and Punjab — based on separating Hindus from Muslim majorities.

Ironically, here we are at the 72-year mark from 1947 which equals 2019. This is PRECISELY on target for a confrontation. Back in 1971, neither side possessed nuclear weapons as both do today. Indian warplanes began bombing inside Pakistan’s on February 26, which was really the culmination of the most serious confrontation South Asia has seen in a long time.

The origins of India’s air raid can be traced to a suicide bombing on February 14th in the Pulwama district of the state of Jammu & Kashmir that killed 40 Indian policemen. That was by far the deadliest attack and the worst jihadist assault to date. Prime Minister Narendra Modi faces reelection. The Hindu hardliners argue he has been weak and thus the attacks are clearly because of the upcoming elections. Then there are those who believe his attempt to modernize India to bring jobs to his countrymen has also failed. Modi is in a place where personal power depends upon him appearing strong. Unfortunately, this is precisely on target for 2019 after 72 years.

Even the volatility model of the Economic Confidence Model component is 6 years. Where the 8.6-year wave builds into waves of 51.6 years, due to turn in January 2020, the major volatility wave coincides here as well — 72 years from 1947. It was also 1947 when the International Monetary Fund began. It was also 1947 when the Marshall Plan came into force.

Ironically, 2019-2020 is a very formidable turning point both in conflicts and war/civil unre

When is Forecasting Not Forecasting?


QUESTION: There are a number of people who claim to have called the 2008 crash. What I find absent is that there is no one who brags on calling the rallies and crashes as you have and I have witnessed from going to your WECs since 1985. I still remember you in 1985 standing up and showing us all the projections of so many economic indicators all point to the moon for the next 51.6 years. Your call on the Dow going from 1,000 to 6,000 was an eye-opener back then and to watch it unfold was unbelievable. Then at the bottom in 2009 you called for new record highs. I read Barrons even wrote on that as if it was just a foolish comment. That happened exactly the same way when you stood up at the 1987 WEC and said the same thing.

My question is this. I recently read where a value investor from Boston claimed that the stock market would produce 2% to 3% for the next 20 years not 6% to 8%. He claimed to have called the 2000 and 2008 crash. Why do these people only claim to forecast the crash and not the rally?

Your life long subscriber who has grown old with you in this journey for knowledge as you put it.

PG

ANSWER: Good to hear from you. Yes, it has been a long time. I believe your answer lies in the fact that so many analysts are focused on 1929 and constantly view the market in that light. Even Germany and its austerity policy that has devastated Europe is fixed on the hyperinflation of the 1920s. In both cases, they failed to ever do the research to comprehend the real reasons behind the events of the 1920s and 1930s. So you will always find people claiming to predict every crash. There is an absence of those who forecast rallies. This is the result of the very same reason. They are all focused only on the events of 1929. You even have the Goldbugs constantly telling people everything will collapse and only gold will rally based upon their understanding of the 1930s which again is completely wrong.

If you are going to forecast any market, you have to be UNBIASED and willing to forecast the rally and the decline or else it is not forecasting. All the pretend gold analysts who only constantly forecast rising prices are really preaching, not forecasting, and they typically have skin in the game and will never say down when they own gold or mining stakes. When I was called by the Brady Commission for the Crash of 1987, the investigation showed that the theory that computer trading caused the crash was proven wrong because most people did not follow the computers and unplugged them because they did not believe in them.

 

All you have to do is look at our Energy Models. They track the strength and weakness of a market and show you when the energy in a market is declining even though you may not see that in a chart pattern. Likewise, the energy was immediately making new record highs coming out of the major low.

You must also understand that the press needs content. They have their stable of people to put on and they prefer to show a consistent prediction. They do not want to put me on the air as I contradict everything they are putting out there. This immediate rally has been the most hated bull market in history. Every high there was someone forecasting the crash of all time. Even Goldman Sachs told everyone to sell 2019. Granted, at the Orlando WEC I stood up and said the market would make a correction and we should drop to retest the Monthly Bearish. We dropped to 21712 when the target was 21600.

But we have to look at this UNBIASED from every angle. You cannot forecast from a personal opinion perspective. I find it really funny when someone tries to argue against me and offers some logical fundamental, reducing everything to a single cause and effect. They fail to understand I am NOTmaking forecasts on what I “think” or my “opinion” personally I have been wrong and the model proves to always win if I dared to try to compete.

I suppose when you are always forecasting every high as the big one, then you can claim to call the crash. But nobody asks how many highs before then did they say the same thing. Markets are like the two sides to a coin. If you cannot forecast the rally and the decline, then you are not really forecasting

Thomas Sowell on Intellectuals and Society


Published on Dec 16, 2009

SUBSCRIBE 114K
The author of more than a dozen books, Dr. Sowell is now a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. In his newest work, Intellectuals and Society, he will discuss why so many disasters of our time have been committed by experts or intellectuals. You may remember FDRs Brain Trust which according to later studies is a prolonged the depression by several years. The wiz kids at the pentagon under McNamara who managed to mess up the Vietnam War, you can run through an impressive list of things, of disasters brought about by people with very high IQ

 

Trade Deficits & the Confusion Caused by the Methods used to Calculate it


QUESTION: Marty, just reported this past week America’s trade deficit hit a record $891 billion while, in the same week, unemployment report fell to 3.8%. Does this refute the conventional economic belief that trade deficits take away jobs and output?

Cheers, TGM

ANSWER: What is reported as trade is not simply trade. The numbers are all screwed up. It tracks actual goods as well as services and that includes capital flows. The accounting system is set up in such a way that capital investment buying bonds, stocks, and real estate go into the Capital Account. However, all dividends and interest earned by a foreigner on US assets then are accounted for in the Current Account. It is the Current Account that people report as trade which is not correct because it also includes interest and dividends. Thus, the more foreigners invest in a country, the more it will erroneously appear to be expanding the trade deficit as interest and dividends flow back on their capital investment.