Tag Archives: ECB

Jan 21 2019

Panic Cycles v Waterfall Events


Armstrong Economics Blog/Training Tools

Re-Posted Jan 21, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: Hi There,
I suggest you do an article on the terminology you use.For example I noted that on your commentary on centamin Egypt you use the term waterfall pattern. You also you use the term panic cycle.An article on these words and their meaning would be helpful.
Thanks

S

REPLY: We do have terminology is the Glossary on this site. The Waterfall Event is a term I coined to describe what I discovered in the study of the rise and fall of empires, nations, and city-states. This differs from a Panic Cycle which reflects just a short-term increase in volatility, which can exceed the previous session high and penetrate the previous session low or make a big move in one direction.  They do not imply the destruction of the system being observed or an individual market.

I have encountered the Waterfall Events such as the collapse of Venice to the 1931 Sovereign DebtCrisis where the foreign government bonds listed on the New York Stock Exchange simple defaulted and went to zero. Thus, the Waterfall is a sharp collapse that will unfold in a market with a decline of generally greater than 50%.

 

Jan 21 2019

Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi to Run for EU Seat


Armstrong Economics Blog/European Union

Re-Posted Jan 21, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

Silvio Berlusconi announced his candidacy for European elections in May due to a “sense of responsibility.” Indeed, this may be the best thing that ever happened. The EU pulled off a coup secretly behind the scenes to drive him from office because he wanted to take Italy out of the euro to save his country. Our deep sources all confirmed the EU intervened in the Italian elections to remove Berlusconi, which was effectively a coup back in 2013.

Southern Europe has been seriously disrupted from joining the euro. They were forced to convert their past debts to euros and then the euro doubled in value, causing their real world national debts to double in terms of international value. Is it any wonder their economies have been in a death spiral? Unemployment among the youth has reached 60% in some regions, and they are now known as “The Lost Generation.”

The May elections for the EU are looking like a lot more anti-EU and people will be taking up seats in Brussels.

Categor
Jan 20 2019

The Difference between 2020 and 2032


Armstrong Economics Blog/ECM

Re-Posted Jan 20, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Hi Martin,

My girlfriend brought up a point about your work during coffee this morning. Basically, she’s confused about the two dates you often mention, 2020 and 2032. She wants to know which date (2020, 2032) you expect the markets move into crises mode due to the lack of confidence in government. I tried to explain but my insight wasn’t good enough.

Could you explain in a future blog the difference between these dates and what you (Socrates) expect to happen during these points in time?

Thanks,
J

ANSWER: The 2032 date is the conclusion of this Private Wave. That is when the power of the West will begin to shift to China for the next cycle that begins thereafter. The 2020 date is when the confidence begins to noticeably begin to turn down for the AVERAGE person.  You can “feel” it in the air already. What the Democrats have done is simply unbelievable. Sure the people who hate Trump cheer. But they fail to understand the system. Whatever they do to the Republicans sets the stage for what will be considered “normal” for the Republicans to do to the Democrats if power shifts.

I have explained that the Democratic victory in the House was really a disaster for this has allowed nothing but the next two years to be confrontation as we are witnessing on the funding of the wall which is only $5.7 billion. In Fiscal Year 2019, the federal budget will be $4.407 trillion. The U.S. government estimates it will receive $3.422 trillion in revenue. That creates a $985 billion deficit for October 1st, 2018 through September 30, 2019. Not only is this less than a single week’s interest payment of $6.7 billion, it is .001% of the annual budget. It is so meaningless it illustrates my point. The Democrats think all they have to do is demonize Trump and OPPOSE absolutely everything he proposes to win the White House in 2020.

We will be running the computer models on the 2020 election. But preliminary indications show that we will see a sharp rise in violence. Neither side will accept the results.

Categories: ECM
Jan 17 2019

May Survives No-Confidence Vote but has until Monday 21st to present New Proposal


Armstrong Economics Blog/Pound

Re-Posted Jan 17, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

The British pound moved higher following the British Prime Minister Theresa May’s government narrowly surviving a no confidence vote brought by the opposition over the handling of BREXIT. The vote was narrow with May winning by just 19 votes. Our sources were correct that she would survive. However, while the 21st seems to be a target date of our models, the prime minister  has just three days to propose an alternative deal – that is January 21st. I find it curious how the computer picks weeks in advance of political events the targets for market movements that are driven by politics. There is clearly something beyond the headlines that the computer picks up.

Categories: Pound
Jan 17 2019

Despite Losing Vote for Brexit Plan, Prime Minister Theresa May Wins Confidence Vote…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on January 16, 2019 by 

After losing a key vote to advance her Brexit plan, the U.K. Parliament held a confidence vote.  Despite the lost vote 24 hours earlier, British MPs voted 325 to 306 affirming their confidence in May’s government.

Prime Minister May delivered remarks on the past two days from 10 Downing Street.

Jan 17 2019

Central Banks v Clearing


Armstrong Economics Blog/Ancient History

Re-Posted Jan 17, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

Delos, First Central Bank

QUESTION: Dear Martin

Wonder if you have any insights as to the history of the bank clearing process.
Was the clearing process created mainly so banks could play games and earn interest with peoples’ money
with the reasoning that it was to prevent money laundering?

With technological advances today, one can accept an hour or two for automatic name and account number checks to happen
but 3-7 days seems ridiculous.

Any insights to the creation of the clearing process would be enlightening.

Thank you again

KW

ANSWER: The function of bank clearing began with giro-banking, which originated in the Temple of Delos in Greece. The term refers to the circulation of money. It originated where you could write a check to one person and transfer the payment to their account at the same bank. Effectively, in ancient Greece, you would have an account at the Temple in Delos and instruct a transfer to their account in the Temple. The Romans adopted this concept and thus Roman banking was born.

A central bank emerged after the Dark Ages in the early modern history as a government or state-owned banks. The Dutch were pioneers and financial innovators who not only created this state banking concept, but they also invented insurance. The Wisselbank was the first such bank in Amsterdam which was founded in the Dutch Republic during 1609. The Wisselbank became the model of the central banking system and it spread throughout Europe; first in 1668 in Sweden known as the Sveriges Riksbank and then the Bank of England in 1694.

When smaller private banks began to pop up, the state-owned banks emerged as clearing banks where transfers between the accounts at the central bank took place the same as they did between accounts in ancient Delos.

The Wisselbank actually collapsed in 1790 after it was revealed that the deposits have been used secretly to fund the Dutch East India Company. The manipulation was that they represented themselves as just holding money for safe-keeping. They did not lend money out. So when the bank failed and they had been using the money to fund the Dutch East India Company, the city had to bail out the bank and stand behind the losses.

To eliminate cash, the ECB has a secret project to provide instantaneous transfers for each transaction. Therefore, the central bank was simply a state-owned bank whereas a clearing bank was one where all banks must clear transactions

Jan 17 2019

BREXIT Deal of PM Down in Defeat


Armstrong Economics Blog/BRITAIN

Re-Posted Jan 16, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

Prime Minister Theresa May now faces a no-confidence vote after her BREXIT plan was defeated to be submitted by opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn. Nonetheless, our sources there say that she will probably survive as the Conservatives who rejected her plan are not likely to vote for a no-confidence motion realizing that a Corbyn victory would more or less signal it is time to leave Britain on the next flight.  Corbyn’s socialist policies would only put Britain in a heated competition in Europe with France as to who could go bankrupt first. Macron realizes that socialism has destroyed the French economy, but he has no real support to try to change that policy.

This defeat of her plan for BREXIT only increases the chances of a hard-exit come March. The talk both in London and Brussels is all about postponing the inevitable. The idea is gaining ground now that the UK should seek to delay its departure from the EU. The SNP has called for extra time for an extension of article 50 beyond March 2019 so that the government could “go back and negotiate a better deal”. Meanwhile, those who have supported of a second referendum, such as the Conservative former cabinet minister Justine Greening, is joined by others behind the curtain who believe that the exit clause could be extended until the end of July 2019 to allow time for another vote.

Our timing models still show March and May as the key targets this year.

 

Jan 16 2019

Theresa May Brexit Deal Resoundingly Rejected by U.K. Parliament….


RE-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on January 15, 2019 by 

The British Parliament resoundingly rejected the proposed Brexit deal put forth by Prime Minister Theresa May earlier today.  Government officials on both sides of the contentious economic argument, globalists and nationalists, found little to support in May’s insufferable attempt to split the baby.  The vote was 432-Nay, and 202-Yea.

(Via Fox News) British lawmakers on Tuesday rejected Prime Minister Theresa May’s proposed deal to exit the European Union by a resounding 432-202 vote, dealing a major setback to negotiations just 10 weeks before the United Kingdom is set to withdraw from the international body.

The vote leaves the country with no clear plan to implement Brexit and raises questions about May’s future as prime minister. The rejection was widely expected and dealt the British government its biggest defeat in the House of Commons in more than a century.

[…] The deal was doomed by deep opposition from both sides of the divide over U.K.’s place in the bloc. Pro-Brexit lawmakers say the deal will leave Britain bound indefinitely to EU rules, while pro-EU politicians favor an even closer economic relationship with Europe.

The government and opposition parties ordered lawmakers to cancel all other plans to be on hand for the crucial vote. Labour legislator Tulip Siddiq delayed the scheduled cesarean birth of her son so she could attend, arriving in a wheelchair.

As lawmakers debated in the House of Commons chamber, outside there was a cacophony of chants, drums and music from rival bands of pro-EU and pro-Brexit protesters. One group waved blue-and-yellow EU flags, the other brandished “Leave Means Leave” placards. (read more)