OPEC, Non-OPEC Oil Producers Recommend Extending Production Cuts By Six Months


Tyler Durden's picture

Having failed to “rebalance” the oil market in the first six months following the implementation of the Vienna production cut agreement, with crude inventories in the US hitting all time highs in the interim…

… OPEC and non-OPEC oil producers found themselves in the unpleasant position of scrambling for solutions at this weekend’s Kuwait meeting – in which Saudi Arabia was conspicuously missing – where just two things were discussed: deal compliance, which OPEC paradoxically claims is more than satisfactory despite the relentless climb in inventories, and whether to extend the production cuts by another six month.

And as the Kuwait meeting in which OPEC and rival N-OPEC producing countries met to review progress with their pact to cut supplies drew to a close, a joint committee of ministers from OPEC and non-OPEC oil producers recommended extending by six months the global deal to reduce oil output by 1.8 million barrels, a draft press release from their meeting on Sunday showed.

ClearBridge Dividend Strategy Portfolios target total return, risk management and dividend potential. Discover the strength of Legg Mason – A Leader In Separately Managed Accounts.

The oil ministerial committee “expressed its satisfaction with the progress made toward full conformity with the voluntary production adjustments and encouraged all participating countries to press on toward 100 percent conformity,” said the draft, seen by Reuters.

The December accord, aimed at supporting the oil market, has lifted crude LCOc1 to more than $50 a barrel. But the price gain has encouraged U.S. shale oil producers, which are not part of the pact, to boost output.

In its statement, the committee said that “certain factors, such as low seasonal demand, refinery maintenance, and rising non-OPEC supply, have led to a further increase in crude oil stocks. At the same time, the liquidation of positions by financial players in the market was also observed.”  In other words, the committee blamed everything, including “evil selling speculators” except non-compliance with the deal, of course as that would crush what little credibility OPEC had.

Oil inventories are high because of low U.S. demand and higher supply, and the market should re-balance in the second half of the year, OPEC Secretary-General Mohammad Barkindo told reporters in Kuwait. Inventories in countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development are currently 282 million barrels higher than their five-year average, he said at the meeting on Sunday.

It also left on a positive note: “However, the end of the refinery maintenance season and noticeable slowdown in U.S. stock build as well as the reduction in floating storage will support the positive efforts undertaken to achieve stability in the market,” it said.

“Oddly”, there was no mention of US shale production, which has soared in recent months, happy to grab market share from OPEC which has allegedly cut production by nearly 2 million barrels daily, and whose output continues to ramp higher in line with the resurgence in US oil rigs.

Before the meeting, Iraqi Oil Minister Jabar Ali al-Luaibi told reporters there were some encouraging elements that suggested the oil market was improving, and that if all OPEC members agreed measures to help price stability, Iraq would support such steps. “Any decisions taken unanimously by members of OPEC … Iraq will be part of the decision and will not be deviating from this,” Luaibi said quoted by Reuters.

Iraq’s oil production is running at 4.312 million bpd this month, Luaibi said, adding that his country had cut its oil exports by 187,000 bpd so far and would reach 210,000 bpd in a few days. Compliance with the supply-cut deal was 94 percent in February among OPEC and non-OPEC oil producers combined, Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak said.

Russia is committed to cuts of 300,000 bpd by the end of April, Novak said, adding that a deal extension could be discussed on Sunday. “For today, obviously, this is within the sphere of our questions,” Novak said and added that he expects global oil stockpiles to decrease in the second quarter of this year. “The dynamics are positive here, I believe,” Novak said, adding that inventories in the United States and other industrialized countries had risen by less than in the past.

OPEC’s compliance rate was 106% in February, and non-OPEC nations, including Russia, have reached compliance of 64 percent, Kuwait’s Almarzooq said Sunday. The combined compliance rate of both was 94 percent, he said.

Kuwaiti Oil Minister Essam al-Marzouq said the oil market may return to balance by the third quarter of this year if producers comply fully with their production targets.

“More has to be done. We need to see conformity across the board. We assured ourselves and the world that we would reach our adjustment to 100 percent conformity,” Marzouq said.

The biggest question, however, how OPEC plans to deal with the rising shale threat, which as Goldman noted last week has become the global oil price setter, was unanswered.

This is how Goldman explained the dramatic change in the global oil cost curve over the past three years:

Shale’s short time to market and ongoing productivity improvements have provided an efficient answer to the industry’s decade-long search for incremental hydrocarbon resources in technically challenging, high cost areas and has kicked off a competition amongst oil producing countries to offer attractive enough contracts and tax terms to attract incremental capital. This is instigating a structural deflationary change in the oil cost curve, as shown in Exhibit 2. This shift has driven low cost OPEC producers to respond by focusing on market share, ramping up production where possible, using their own domestic resources or incentivizing higher activity from the international oil companies through more attractive contract structures and tax regimes. In the rest of the world, projects and countries have to compete for capital, trying to drive costs down to become competitive through deflation, FX and potentially lower tax rates.

The implications of this curve shift are major, all of which are very adverse to the Saudis, who have been relegated from the post of long-term price setter to inventory manager, and thus the loss of leverage. Here are some further thoughts from Goldman:

  • OPEC role: from price setter to inventory manager In the New Oil Order, we believe OPEC’s role has structurally changed from long-term price setter to inventory manager. In the past, large-scale developments required seven years+ from FID to peak production, giving OPEC long-term control over oil prices. US shale oil currently offers large-scale development opportunities with 6-9 months to peak production. This short-cycle opportunity has structurally changed the cost dynamics, eliminating the need for high cost frontier developments and instigating a competition for capital amongst oil producing countries that is lowering and flattening the cost curve through improved contract terms and taxes.
  • OPEC’s November decision had unintended consequences: OPEC’s decision to cut production was rational and fit into the inventory management role. Inventory builds led to an extreme contango in the Brent forward curve, with 2-year fwd Brent trading at a US$5.5/bl (11%) premium to spot. As OPEC countries sell spot, but US E&Ps sell 30%+ of their production forward, this was giving the E&Ps a competitive advantage. Within one month of the OPEC announcement, the contango declined to US$1.1/bl (2%), achieving the cartel’s purpose. However, the unintended consequence was to underwrite shale activity through the credit market.
  • Stability and credit fuel overconfidence and strong activity: A period of stability (1% Brent Coefficient of Variation ytd vs. 6% 3-year average) has allowed E&Ps to hedge (35% of 2017 oil production vs. 21% in November) and access the credit market, with high yield reopen after a 10- month closure (largest issuance in 4Q16 since 3Q14). Successful cost repositioning and abundant funding are boosting a short-cycle revival, with c.85% of oil companies under our coverage increasing capex in 2017.

Finally, with Saudi Arabia absent, the Kuwait meeting was largely moot. Khalid Al-Falih, the Saudi energy minister said in a Bloomberg Television interview on March 17 that the deal will be maintained if oil stockpiles are still above their five-year average.

In summary: It’s too early to decide on an extension of the output cuts, and OPEC will take up the issue in May, Barkindo said at Sunday’s meeting, during which ministers will monitor compliance with the targeted reductions.

* * *

For those curious, here is the full blast of Bloomberg overnight headlines covering the Kuwait meeting

KUWAIT OIL MINISTER OPEC COMPLIANCE IN FEB BETTER THAN JAN
KUWAIT: WE ARE ASKING COUNTRIES TO INCREASE COMPLIANCE
KUWAIT: WE SHOULD SEE MARKET REBALANCE END OF YEAR
KUWAIT: WE SHOULD SEE OIL STOCKS DRAWDOWN IN 3Q
KUWAIT OIL MINISTER: INDUSTRY NEEDS TO ADDRESS CHALLENGES
KUWAIT: SAUDI ARABIA, ANGOLA EXCEEDED COMMITMENTS TO CUT OUTPUT
KUWAIT: OIL MARKET WILL BE IN BALANCE IN 3Q IF COMPLIANCE 100%
KUWAIT: OIL COMMITEE REPORTS HIGH LEVEL OF CONFORMITY
KUWAIT: OPEC IS STUDYING EXTENSION OF CUTS DEAL FOR SIX MONTHS
KUWAIT MINISTER: OPEC, NON-OPEC COMPLIANCE WITH CUTS IS AT 94%
KUWAIT: COMMITTEE CALLS FOR OPEC TO MAKE RECOMMENDATION ON CUTS

RUSSIA’S ENERGY MINISTER: MINISTERS DISCUSS EXTENDING CUTS DEAL
RUSSIA’S NOVAK: OPEC/NON OPEC COMPLIANCE 94% AS OF END OF FEB
RUSSIA’S NOVAK: OPEC, NON-OPEC DISCUSS EXTENDING OIL-CUTS DEAL
RUSSIA: OPEC, NON-OPEC COOPERATING AT `VERY HIGH LEVEL’

IRAQ TO SUPPORT EXTENDING OIL CUTS IF OTHERS IN OPEC AGREE
IRAQ PRODUCED 4.312M B/D OF OIL IN MARCH: MINISTER
IRAQ’S MARCH OIL EXPORTS IN AGREED RANGE: MINISTER
IRAQ CUT OIL OUTPUT BY 187M B/D UNDER OPEC DEAL: LUAIBI
IRAQ TO CUT 210K B/D OF OIL OUTPUT IN FEW DAYS: LUAIBI

OPEC CHIEF SEES MARKET REBALANCE IN SECOND HALF OF 2017
OPEC: PRODUCERS REACHED HIGH LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE WITH CUTS
OPEC HOPES FOR HIGHER LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE WITH OUTPUT CUTS
OPEC CHIEF: TOO EARLY TO DECIDE ON EXTENSION OF OIL CUTS DEAL
OPEC CHIEF: OIL MARKET OPTIMISM IMPROVED ON OUTPUT CUTS
OPEC: OIL STOCKS ARE HIGH ON LOW U.S. DEMAND, RISING SUPPLY
OPEC: OIL STOCKS TO DECREASE IN SECOND HALF OF THIS YEAR

OMAN OIL MINISTER SAYS MAKES SENSE TO EXTEND OUTPUT CUTS 6 MOS
OMAN SUPPORTS OIL OUTPUT CUTS UNTIL END OF YEAR: MINISTER

VENEZUELA OIL MIN: WE ARE READY TO BACK EXTENDING OUPTUT CUTS

OPEC, NON-OPEC COMMITTEE SAID TO RECOMMEND OIL-CUTS EXTENSION
BARKINDO: OPEC TO DECIDE ON EXTENSION OF OIL CUTS DEAL IN MAY

The Media Has Always Been Biased?


Livermore

COMMENT: Marty; I managed to get a copy of your Greatest Bull Market in History at an auction. You do know they bring $3,000+ I presume? But what stunned me in there is that you wrote how the Wall Street Journal falsely accused Jesse Livermore of trying to influence the presidential election by saying the stock market was going to rally. When it did do what he said, the press refused to quote him again because they were wrong.

They will not quote you yet you have been the only one who has called this bull market from the very bottom. It looks like mainstream media is doing to you what they did to Livermore. History does repeat.

REPLY: You may be right. But that is a good thing. It is better to keep the info in real hands rather than just plastered around for hype. Exclusive is better. The majority would never listen anyway.

The Financial Crisis 1992-1993


Major John

QUESTION: Marty, it is well known here in Britain that you advised Thatcher of course, but it was John Major you advised and even wrote what he said during the pound crisis and the Soros attack. Would you ever like to comment on that in public about what really happened during that crisis. The press will never report anything you say. There are those of us who would like to hear from the source.

Thank you for what you do.

PJ

British Pound Sept 1992 Soros

ANSWER: For those who do not know, Sir John Major was the Prime Minister of Britain 1990-1997. One of the biggest BS stories is how they blame or credit such events to one person. Each of these market “manipulations” or attacks, are typically characterized with one member of “the Club” taking the front position. In this case it was George Soros. He was given the personal face of that event that broke the pound. It was by no means just Soros. He did not get that trade correct out of thin air. Everyone in the trading community saw it coming. It was similar to the Greek crisis in 2010. Once one member is in trouble, traders look around ans see who is next.

PlazaAccord-1

The 1992/1993 collapse of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) was a system introduced by the European Economic Community on March 13th, 1979, to which Thatcher was against. It was part of the European Monetary System (EMS), intended to reduce exchange rate variability and achieve monetary stability in Europe in the aftermath of the collapse of Bretton Woods in 1971. Only after the Plaza Accord in 1985, did the EMS prepare for Economic and Monetary Union of Europe which gave birth to the introduction of a single currency, the euro, which took place on January 1st, 1999. The collapse of Bretton Woods, the ERM, and the coming Euro all have the same flawed understanding of economics. Governments think they can by law or regulation nullify their own failures. All three systems could never survive under the socialistic/military establishment for the politicians do whatever they want to sustain power, not to manage the economy in any meaningful manner.

china-100-yuan

Clearly, the tension within the ERM began to build up from mid-July 1992, concentrating initially on the Italian lira, then on sterling and then on a variety of other currencies. However, what was also overlooked was the fact that July 1992 was also when the Russian Ruble began trading for the first time. Meanwhile, the Bank of China required foreign visitors to China to conduct transactions with Foreign Exchange Certificates that were issued by the Bank of China between 1979 and 1994. Effectively, this was a two-tier monetary system – domestic v international. Following the ERM Crisis, this two-tier system in China was abolished, and all transactions then took place in Renminbi. The entire global foreign exchange system was changing. The biggest mistake people make looking at the British pound crisis of 1992, has been to look at it through a myopic perspective of isolation.

The pressure on the Finnish Markka was so strong at that time it was forced to abandon its peg with the ECU. Italy raised its interest rates to try to support its currency, but still the lira weakened repeatedly. The Bundesbank did not cut its interest rates enough fearing inflation and speculation would continue, which put pressures on other states. It was on September 13th, 1992 when the Italian decision to devalue Italian Lira by 7% took place (other currencies revalue of 3.5%: Lira devalues 3.5%). The pressures on lira led traders to look around and saw that the British pound was also overvalued all relative to Germany.

Hence, the pound sterling became the next target just as did Portugal after Greece in 2010.  It was Black Wednesday, September 16th, 1992, when the British Conservative government of John Major was forced to withdraw the pound sterling from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) after it was unable to keep the pound above its agreed lower limit in the ERM. Yes, I was being called during this crisis. The first call from Britain asked me what our model was forecasting. I warned that the pound had to be devalued and that the ERM was collapsing exactly as did Bretton Woods. I was told John Major could not devalue the pound for that was his campaign promise. I thought about the crisis and called back. I wrote down the words to say that he would allow the pound to float and seek its own level. This was slightly different from a devaluation which would have still been a fixed exchange rate peg. Allowing the pound to float would let the market make the decision, rather than the politicians. Therefore, Major did not violate his promise and did not officially devalue the pound – he let it float to seek its own level.

The day after the British crisis ended with effectively withdrawing from ERM, it in turn flipped the pressure back upon Italy. Thus, the following day, the 17th of September 1992, Italy also withdrew from ERM. Once again, attempts to politically fix currencies produced a total and utter failure as was the case with Bretton Woods and of course the more recent Swiss Peg collapse. We will see the same end result with the Euro.

Deutsche Mark Sept 1992-MThe Deutsche mark was sent to significant highs even against the dollar in September 1992. The foreign exchange markets remained disturbed for the rest of that year, with a renewed outbreak of speculative pressures leading to the abandonment of Sweden’s peg to the ECU, devaluation of both the Portuguese escudo and the Spanish peseta came in November 1992 and the abandonment of Norway’s ECU-peg in December 1992. By January 1993, Ireland witnessed economic pressure due to the sterling devaluation by the UK, and this then compelled Ireland to devalue by 10%. Germany finally reduced its interest rates in February, March and April of 1993, trying to ease the economic pressure within the currencies that had not yet been realigned. The entire crisis of 1992-1994 was a prelude to the ultimate crisis that would hit the euro for similar reasons and Germany’s fear of inflation that would impose austerity on the rest of Europe. It was Germany’s high interest rates in 1992/1993 that broke the back of the ERM.

Indeed, then France presented a problem for the politicians that made clear of their commitment to the ‘franc fort’ policy, that was keeping the franc at its existing parity. France also wanted lower interest rates to relieve the recession, and it appeared willing to challenge the German economic authorities publicly, who were concerned about inflation, so they kept interest rates high out of austerity. On June 18th, the French money market intervention rate was pushed below the German rates. This was received with skepticism in the markets. Consequently, speculative pressures within the ERM continued to build. This time, those pressures turned against the French franc during July 1993. The Banque de France was forced to raise its interest rate to prevent the franc from falling through its ERM lower band. However, the Bundesbank did not lower its discount rate, and massive sales of the French franc, Belgian franc, Danish krone, Spanish peseta and Portuguese escudo took place in response. Once again, Germany’s obsession with the Hyperinflation of the 1920s dictates their response. Today, we have seen the price of German austerity upon the entire economic condition of Europe. While the ERM broke, today there is a full federalized government in Brussels attempting to maintain austerity and the same philosophies that broke the ERM during the 1992/1993 Crisis.

At this point in time, the ERM was in total crisis within Europe. One would think they learned from Bretton Woods, but politicians are blinded by their self-interest, which always comes before that of the people or country. Massive intervention was necessary to keep these currencies just above their ERM floor. On the 2nd of August 1993, the EC monetary officials and finance ministers finally agreed that the ERM bands should be widened from 2.25% to 15% (except for the Dutch-German one). With the wider bands, the system would be less vulnerable to speculation.

At the core of all of this was German’s complete misunderstanding of the Hyperinflation and their attempt to impose austerity upon all of Europe, which is deflationary and anti-economic growth.

Thailand Share-Y 3-22-2017

The ERM Crisis of 1992/1993, made George Soros famous, yes, but it awakened international hedge fund traders to the currencies markets. Traders then turned to the peripheral markets – Russia next and then South East Asia, which saw its share market peak in January 1994 and bottom in September 1998 (56 months).

Russia Ruble-Y 3-22-2017It was on October 11th, 1994, when the ruble tumbled in the Moscow interbank market by over 20% against the U.S. dollar. “Black Tuesday” became the first currency crisis in post-communist Russia also caused by politicians. From July 1992, when the ruble first could be legally exchanged for United States dollars, to October 1995, the rate of exchange between the ruble and the dollar declined from 144 rubles per US$1 to around 5,000 per US$1. It was the float of the Ruble in July 1992 that started the shift in global capital flows and currency markets. Politicians, for pride, artificially set the Ruble’s value too high against the dollar reflecting past glories, which was the exact same mistake of the British entering the ERM. Rapid changes in the nominal rate of the Russian economy reflected the overall macroeconomic instability. After the ERM crisis, traders then turned to emerging markets targeting Russia. This was the Black Tuesday with a 27% collapse in the ruble’s value against the dollar. Eventually, in July 1995, the Russian Central Bank announced its intention to maintain the ruble within a band of 4,300 to 4,900 per US$1 through October 1995. They later extended the period to June 1996. They attempted a “crawling band” exchange rate which they introduced to allow the ruble to depreciate gradually through the end of 1996, This led to a further collapse from 5,000 to 6,100.

ft-1998After the Russian introduction of the “crawling band”, traders turned their attention to the emerging market in Southeast Asia with more concerted force. This eventually manifested in the 1997 Asian Currency Crisis. Then traders turned back to Russia. I have stated many times how I was invited to the IMF dinner put on by Edmond Safra in Washington. I was being pitched then to join “the Club” and buy into Russia for they had the IMF in their pocket. The IMF would continue to guarantee Russian debt so you could buy debt and earn 5 times the amount of interest otherwise. The IMF would eliminate the risk. I said “No way, my computer warned Russia would collapse.”

Ruble 1998 - DOf course, this eventually led to the collapse in 1998, which in turn set in motion the Lehman and Bear Stearns collapse thanks to Long Term Capital Management collapse who lost on the Russian bond market.

It was all set in motion by politicians trying to fix currencies that they cannot fix.

European North v South


european_union_3d_map_1600_clr_17749

Dijsselbloem’s comments regarding the Southern Europe reflect the political bias – not the general public at large within Europe. There are different cultures throughout Europe. In some places people will not cross the street until a light changes even if there are no cars. Other parts are like New York, lights are optional. There are many cultural differences in general between north and south, but even more between members. Even in Germany there is a divide between north and south.

The blame does NOT lie in cultural differences, corruption, or even easier spending in the south and excessive pensions as in Greece. The problem that has pushed Europe to the brink is:

(1) this failed idea that ending European War can be achieved by federalizing Europe. That will not change the cultural differences. Even in the United States, there are cultural differences between the Bible Belt (anti-Abortion & anti-Gay Marriage) compared to California or New York. It is the Federalization of the United States and the attempt to impose one culture upon the whole ever since the Great Depression that is causing tensions within the United States. The same is TRUE within Europe.

IBEUUS-Y TEK TO 2020 1-22-2016

(2) The structural blame lies with Brussels. The failure to have consolidated all the debts of the members and make that the federal debt created two major errors. First, it meant the Euro would never be able to complete with the dollar for there was no single unified debt and investors would still have to make decisions based upon individual member state credit rating. That defeated the entire purpose of creating a euro and federalization. Secondly, leaving all individual member states with past debt yet converted that to euro, then resulted in their debts doubling in international value as the euro doubled going into 2008.

As I have stated numerous times, the commission designing the Euro attended our WEC in London back in 1998. I warned that the debt MUST BE CONSOLIDATED from all member states. That would have then formed a federal bond market to compete with the dollar. I then advised that thereafter, all new debt would by individual state debt simply issued in euro. That was the successful structure of the United States. I explained in detail why this worked and why it was the ONLY possible way to process or the euro would begin to collapse in 2016 (following 2015.75) on schedule (17.2 years (2 x 8.6) and the risk of its total collapse by 2019 (20 years from 1999).

The fault does NOT lie with the people of Europe – but with the politicians who have zero skill in understanding an economy no less managing one and then they rely upon academics who have never had a real job in the field. You cannot understand how capital flows around the world and why without real world observation. That would be like me trying to manage a hospital with no medical experience and telling someone how a brain surgery should be done simply because I read a book. You cannot learn everything from a book.

I maybe one of the few people to speak out, but that is because those with experience working in the industry must sign confidentiality agreements and cannot speak out for anything they say will be attributed to their employer. To actually design a system that works, one must consult not academics or analysts who have never worked in the industry, but traders on FX desks who see this first hand.

The Dollar – Media – Interest Rates – Politics


Uncle Sam & Media

QUESTION: Hi Marty,

A couple of questions please.  When the Feds raised the rates last week why did the dollar mover lower?  Also, with the trend change coming in May should we be out of the market?  If so how long?
Thank you
S
ANSWER: The Fed raised rates as expected but that same day there was the Netherlands elections and the current prime minister won against the extreme right. This gave a life of hope to Europe that maybe the status quo will prevail. That of course is good for a near-term bounce, but in reality, the false hope boosts politicians to do nothing to reform or alter the trend.
Then in the States, there has been thing constant attack upon Trump orchestrated by the media to stop any reform. They have sold our rights out willingly spreading the propaganda of terrorism as the excuse for everything right down to capturing every single phone call, SMS, and email. So the media has been trying desperately to prevent any reform and this has given a bit a pessimism that will run back and forth.
Still there is no indication of a major crash in equities.

Market Update for the Close of March 24th, 2017


DJIND-W 3-20-2017

 

Today a closing above 20775 will signal that the Dow Jones Industrials is still holding firm. We see this period into May as consolidation.  We have technical support at 20147 level and technical closing support at 20702. ONLY a weekly closing below 20000 would confirm a more sustainable correction into May. Otherwise, expect choppiness. The bulk of analysis still calls for a crash. This has been the biggest rally in history with the biggest amount of bearishness perhaps ever in history.

DJIND-W FOR 3-23-2017

We can see this week in a turning point and we should begin to see more volatility ahead. But you can see a choppy trend over other week for right now. A closing today above 20640 will also signal the market is still withing support.

If gold closes March below 1243, this will warn that a correction into May is possible. This has been merely a 3 month reaction so there is still nothing to write home about just yet. Today, gold MUST close above 1245.50 to hold on to any gains.

IBEUUS-M FOR 3-23-2017

The Euro has a Weekly Bullish Reversal at 10855. Only a closing above that level will signal strength. Otherwise, caution is still advisable. Our monthly timing models called for a bounce here into March. The next important turning point will be May

I live in a Commonwealth. They are trying to make my wealth common!


Pick-pocket

COMMENT: Sir,

Growing up in Kentucky, I remember one of my friend’s fathers always grumbling, “I live in a Commonwealth. They are trying to make my wealth common!”
      Just another phrase for a “sharing economy”.
       Keep up the good work
       DK

Marxist Socialism now relabeled as the Sharing Economy


Canada CRA

In Canada, I was in a discussion with a socialist politician. I was shocked at the response to their view of the economy that everything you earned belonged to the state and they decided how much you were allowed to keep. This same attitude is displayed by the Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA). They have cleaned up the way they say it softening the words and injecting a new term calling this a “sharing economy” and equating it to five key sectors of the sharing economy as being: “accommodation sharing, ride sharing, music and video streaming, online staffing, and peer/crowd funding.” The CRA is now selling socialism by relabeling this as a new “sharing economy” that assert “is becoming bigger part of the general economy, and that it is cooperating with industries, provinces, and territories on how tax systems and compliance is affected by such changes.”

This new “sharing economy” is Marxist socialism warmed over. The CRA says: “The sharing economy is a technologically fuelled way to consume and access property and services.” They added: “In this economy, communities pool, loan, and share their resources through networks of trust.”

You are not capable of being able to manage your own affairs and are way too stupid to understand what is the best way to spend money. Therefore, the CRA explains that the tax obligations for individuals or small businesses involved in the “sharing economy” means they MUST report ALL income earned through “such activities, as well as meet goods and services tax/harmonized sales tax requirements.”

Why Science Fails to Understand Cycles – They Lack the Connections


Ring of fire - 1

QUESTION: Hi Marty,

Interesting attempt at the cycle analysis for a MAJOR earthquake. Why do you think they make these predictions, when they don’t properly understand the cycles?
PF
Last week, research based on a more complete earthquake record revised the return period of a quake to 291 years. The last was in 1717, exactly 300 years ago. Every year that passes pushes us further into the wrong end of that equation.
ANSWER: In every field of science outside of Physics, there has been a brain-freeze when it comes to understanding the cyclical nature of everything around us. I was on one of my Institutional World Tours in the second half of the 1980s. I first flew to Toronto, and there was a small earthquake. I then flew to Vancouver, and then there was another small earthquake. Then, I flew to Tokyo and was hit by yet another small quake. I then flew to Australia and joked about how this quake was following me. They said no worries, quakes don’t happen there. That night we were hit by a big quake and all power went out for a day. After that, I flew to New Zealand and sure enough, I was in the middle of another quake.
I met with the earthquake research center there in Auckland. When I described that this quake was following me around the Ring of Fire, I was told no, that was impossible. They were not connected. I argued if you move the plate on one side, it seemed logical that it must move on the other side eventually. About a year later, the research person I had met with called me. He remarked, you know I think you may be right.
1906-sanfrancisoquake
I ran correlations of all quakes since the 1906 San Francisco quakes that was ultimately responsible for creating the Federal Reserve and the 1923 quake in Japan was just absolutely devastating. Such an event today would be profound to the world economy.
ECM-Dynamic
The entire problem center upon the lack of understanding is that everything is connected and this is the key to comprehending volatility in markets or major quakes in the landscape. It is the combination of force that makes one event more powerful than another. This field of research is just not comprehended in many fields.

How Capital Moves – Outward then Inward


USA Net Cap 1960-1990 Annotated

QUESTION: Hello Martin, In your ‘Why the Crash & Burn is Public not Private’ post of 18 March, you have an image showing World Capital Investment. Is that the sequence money usually follows at this time? And, what exactly is the ‘alignment’ you mention towards the end of the post as well as elsewhere? Best Regards and my condolences on the loss of your friend, Mr. Edelson.

BH

ANSWER: Historically, capital tends to flow first from the financial capital of the world to the outer provinces or state. This was how it functioned in the Roman times as was the case for postwar when US capital flowed outward to rebuild the rest of the world. Then what happens is as an empire begins to die (in this case Western Culture), the capital flow reverses and then moves back toward the core economy which is the financial capital of the world.

UBLST-25 MAHere is a chart of all the bonds listed on the New York Stock Exchange. When the Sovereign Debt Crisis hit in 1931, government simply defaulted. The bonds were then delisted never to come back again.

What transpires at that moment when government moves into a Crash & Burn, is that all tangible assets rise together, albeit at different rates of advance. This is what I call the Great Alignment. Therefore, we will see gold rise WITH the stock market – not counter-trend. Likewise, real estate survives provided you do not enter into a Dark Age when not even gold survives – only food.

German-1925-Rentenmark

If we look at the German Hyperinflation caused by the Communist Revolution in Germany in 1918 inviting the Communists of Russia to take Germany and the formation of the Weimar Republic, all of this political-economic chaos ended with a new currency being issued following the fall of the Weimar Republic. That currency was not backed by gold, but instead real estate.