Interview: The Real Rate of Inflation


Armstrong Economics Blog/Armstrong in the Media Re-Posted May 13, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

15-Minute Cities – Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)


Armstrong Economics Blog/Real Estate Re-Posted May 12, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Let’s take a closer look at Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) that have been proposed for 15-minute cities. These small units are typically under 1,000 sq ft and were once considered secondary structures on an existing residential lot. Think of what we once considered “in-law suites” or guest houses. There are numerous designs for ADUs, but 15-minute cities will seek to create connected units to house as many people as possible. The exact plans for ADUs within 15-minute cities are shrouded in mystery, but we can ascertain what they have planned based on other proposed policies.

“You will own nothing,” as these structures will be built upon government and/or privately owned land for the people to rent. The 15-minute city is marketed as a futuristic town where everyone will live within 15 minutes of essential services. Some may say that large cities already meet this criterion, but the difference is that people currently have the ability to own their properties. Excess will not be possible in ADUs due to size. The World Economic Forum is also proposing more “micro-housing units” or “plug-in houses” that will be no larger than 500 sq ft. Cars will be unnecessary in these sustainable cities, as reducing fossil fuels and sustainability is the top priority.

Senseable City Lab analyzed 40 million mobile devices to analyze how and where people travel. The study backed by MIT found that people tend to travel 7 miles for essentials, which is much further than what is being proposed for 15-minute cities. Hence, the ADUs proposed for the 15-minute cities will be connected, one on top of the other, for this to work logistically.

Regulations and zoning restrictions need to be altered or dismantled for these cities to work. Another issue is equity and eliminating our “unfair” capitalistic societies where some have more than others. The C40 Knowledge Hub explains this premise to “build back better” in detail throughout their writings.

“In a successful 15-minute city, everyone would have the opportunity to live in a 15-minute neighbourhood. It is vital that cities prioritise 15-minute city-style investments for lower-income neighbourhoods and those that are most underserved, informed by the baseline mapping of existing amenities in each neighbourhood. Just as critically, take steps to ensure that existing local populations in those neighbourhoods are not displaced through the process of gentrification, or feel excluded due to changes to local identity. Cities should also pursue opportunities to build affordable homes and diversify the mix of homes within neighbourhoods.”

Equality in this manner does not meet the dictionary definition, as equality is intended to “prioritize the most underserved neighbourhoods and disadvantaged groups.” Hence numerous policies are being brought forth that penalize the middle class with taxes, shrinking the group that was once the bulk of modernized societies.

Sustainability, equality, and going green are cited as the main reasons to “build back better” with these 15-minute cities. However, the real motive here is control and power. They are discussing controlling everything, including food productionThey are making it increasingly harder for the average person to obtain housing, whether it be rentals or owning. These AUDs will be brought forth as perhaps the only solution for permanent housing. Yet, they are making it clear that those dwelling in these structures will have landlords who may become overlords as the people relinquish all their freedoms to exist.

British Government has Lost its Mind


Armstrong Economics Blog/Gov’t Incompetence Re-Posted May 12, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: The rumor was that you were considering coming to London to hold a quick update WEC. Is there any chance of that?

WJ

ANSWER: You have good sources. Yes, I was considering that. Since the UK has insanely crossed Putin’s “red line” by sending Ukraine long-range “Storm Shadow” missiles to use in its fighting against Russia, I am not sure London is a viable place anymore.  Ukraine is NOT trustworthy. Why do they need long-range missiles unless they intend to attack Moscow? Germany sunk the Lusitania because the US was secretly sending arms on passenger ships to London. Britain has made that mistake with Ukraine.

Britain has just put its own national security and its citizens at risk all for what? This war would NEVER have taken place if the West did not lie and simply honored the Minsk Agreement and let those people in the Donbas, which are Russian, not Ukrainian, decide their own future. That was OK for Kiev, but not the Russians?

Those in the Donbas had a basic human right to vote on their own future. This is a war against Russia to conquer it. Handing these missiles to Ukraine will provoke Russia and would even justify attacking Britain according to the basic rules of war. They use these to attack Moscow, and Russia would be justified to attack London. This is a BS war that was to destroy Russia from the start.

The British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace told lawmakers in the House of Commons that Storm Shadow missiles “are now going into or are in” Ukraine, but he did not say how many Britain was planning to send.

I love London. I miss it very much. But the British government is out of its mind putting all of Britain at risk for Ukraine? These people making these decisions are just Neocons who love war all the time.

Wars should be fought between leaders – not the people. Put them all in a room and let them sort it out and leave the people alone. But the truth is, your children are expendable. They risk NOTHING themselves. You mean less than nothing to these people. By their decisions, they prove we do NOT live in a democracy. For Wallace to unilaterally send those long-range missiles without the people’s approval shows he is not a trustworthy individual who should be in charge of even being a meter-maid for parking tickets.

So it does not look good for a WEC in London. I would have to ask my staff how they would feel.

Neocon’s Endorsement for 2024


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Apr 11, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

The Neocon Endorsement for 2024 – Invade the Entire World

Why should Canada and Mexico escape?

If they could do it in 2020 – they can do it again in 2024.

It Never Ends – Joe Biden Extends 2011 National Security Emergency over Libya Through 2023


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on February 17, 2023 | Sundance

In 2010 and 2011 the Hillary Clinton State Department, working with NATO allies (particularly France), triggered a crisis in Libya during the Obama administration’s intentional effort to remove Muammar Gaddafi from power.  This was a key element to the Arab Spring (Islamist Spring or Color Revolution) that flowed from the Cairo, Egypt, speech of President Obama a year prior.

Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Samanta Power (R2P) were the architects of the destabilization plan.  After the country was destabilized and thrown into severe violent crisis by the U.S. support for radical Islamists in eastern Libya (Benghazi region), President Obama then signed (Feb, 2011) a national emergency declaration in regard to the destabilized Libya his administration created.

Five years later, in April 2016, President Obama expanded the Libya emergency declaration to extend the 2011 declaration and envelop a larger portion of North Africa, under the auspices of expanded threats from AQIM (al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb).  This extension allowed the state dept to frame actions in neighboring Egypt, and block any effort to counteract Obama’s mid-east policy which was established to support the Muslim Brotherhood.   In April 2016 it was presumed Hillary Clinton would win the election and continue the policy.

Today, a full twelve years after Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton destabilized Libya throwing it into a tribal civil war, Joe Biden signs an executive order continuing the extension of the U.S. National Emergency with regard to Libya {White House Link}.

[…] “The situation in Libya continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, and measures are needed to protect against the diversion of assets or other abuses by members of Qadhafi’s family, their associates, and other persons hindering Libyan national reconciliation.

For this reason, the national emergency declared on February 25, 2011, and expanded on April 19, 2016, must continue in effect beyond February 25, 2023.  Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13566.

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress. (read full)

Pro-War Propagandists: How Bloodthirsty Media Push US Toward Every New War | SYSTEM UPDATE #35


Glenn Greenwald posted originally on Rumble on: Feb 6, 7:00 pm EST

War is coming and it isn’t going to be quick and easy a woke military is not capable of fighting.

Did Caesar Issue a Coin When He Crossed the Rubicon?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Ancient Economies Re-Posted Feb 7, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: I found it fascinating that you were able to calculate the funding of the war that Cleopatra provided Mark Antony. Have you done similar work to look at the funding of Julius Caesar to cross the Rubicon?

WT

ANSWER: Yes. Where the Battle of Actium was a proxy war instigated by Cleopatra to try to seize control of Rome following the assassination of Julius Caesar. The best estimate I could make was that Mark Antony struck at least 25 million legionary denarii up to 35 million. Likewise, the coinage of Julius Caesar provides us with evidence of the cost of revolution as well, which is not recorded among contemporary historians. They were more interested in the reasons and biases of the time, not in the economics of the events.

Julius Caesar struck his Rubicon Coinage with the image of an elephant crushing a dragon-snake which represented the corrupt Senate. Some tried to claim that the snake represented Pompey the Great. Caesar had married Pompey to his daughter. He was greatly upset when the Egyptians beheaded Pompey and gave him his head as a gift. It is unlikely that the snake was ever a personal representation of Pompey. It was, in my mind, the Senate where the instigator of the civil war was none other than the vile and corrupt Cato. It was Cato who was the leader of the Opimates who controlled the Senate and tried to strip Caesar of all power which effectively forced him to cross the Rubicon.

It is most likely that this coinage commenced in Gaul, as part of Caesar’s preparations for invasion, in order to pay his troops. The number of dies suggests that this issue was also huge exceeding 25 million denarii. It most certainly was expanded when he acquired the reserves of the Roman Treasury that were left behind by the panic-stricken Senators, Optimates, when they fled Rome because the people never supported the likes of Cato or Cicero for that matter.

Elephant walking right, trampling on dragon-snake the head of which rears up before him, CAESAR in exergue. On the reverse, we see the emblems of the pontificate — simpulum, aspergillum, axe, and apex.

The coinage opens an economic window that allows us to understand the real motives and costs behind the events in history. This Rubicon Coinage reveals something far more politically significant than what the contemporary writers revealed. Caesar actually took personal responsibility for the production of this coinage which was obviously unconstitutional at the time. Typically, there was a treasurer also known as a moneyer who issued the coins. There is no moneyer on this coinage so Caesar is taking PERSONAL responsibility absent the possession of a qualifying magistracy appointed by the Senate.

This is why I call this the Rubicon Coinage for Caesar was declaring war on the Senate of Rome in this time of national crisis. The very creation of this coinage without a moneyer sanction by the Senate was a declaration of civil war. The symbolism of the obverse can hardly be anything other than the triumph of good over evil, whilst the reverse alludes to Caesar’s possession of the office of pontifex Maximus and he ended the corruption of bribing the high priests to extend the calendar to avoid elections. Hence, today we have the Julian calendar.

This issue of the Rubicon Coinage clearly funded the crossing of the Rubicon. How long this important type remained in issue after Cato and his corrupt Senators fled and the war with Pompey began is hard to say. It was most likely struck right up to the time of the final campaign leading to the Battle of Pharsalus which took place  August 9th, 48 BC, and the defeat of Pompey. It was on January 10th, 49 BC when Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon.

It took just 19 months to bring down the Republic or 82.3 weeks from Caesar crossing the Rubicon to the defeat of Pompey at the Battle of  Pharsalus in the Greek region of Thessaly. Thereafter, Caesar now consolidated his power He was elected as consul (normally a one-year term) in 48, 46, 45, and 44BC. Because of the political crisis and the corruption of the Senate which did not want to yield any power to the people, the new Senate thus waived the traditional requirement that a consul had to wait 10 years between terms. Caesar was also granted the title and office of  Dictator which was a political position in times of crisis during the years 49, 48-47, and 46-44. Traditionally, the office of the Dictator was confined to just six months and he would be granted special powers to one man for a limited period to escape the bureaucracy to get things done. This was the means to deal with an emergency that threatened the state.

To meet the Republic’s urgent need for cash, Caesar resumed coinage of gold, which had not been struck by Rome since the dictatorship of Sulla (82-81 BCE). Most of Caesar’s aurei (about eight grams) are crude in design and workmanship in 46 BC. The moneyer was Aulus Hirtius who was a key supporter of Caesar. He served as one of Caesar’s legates in Gaul from about 54 BC and was an envoy to Pompey in 50 BC. He served Caesar loyally during the Civil War against Pompey and his successors in 48-45 BC. Hirtius was appointed as Caesar’s mintmaster in Rome in 46 BC, and it was at this time as a moneyer when he struck the first truly large issue of gold aurei from the spoils of Caesar’s campaigns. These aurei were poorly designed and executed with a veiled female head on the obverse, often appearing as a male, with priestly implements on the reverse. They were used to pay Caesar’s soldiers after the great triumphal parade.

Following Caesar’s assassination, Hirtius initially supported Marc Antony, but, after taking over as Consul in 43 BC, he raised an army against Antony at the instigation of Cicero and Octavian. His army defeated Antony at Mutina in April of 43 BC, but Hirtius was killed in the fighting. He left that political stage leaving Octavian and Antony masters of Rome. Hirtius was a loyal supporter of Caesar for he preserved and edited Caesar’s Commentaries on the Gallic and Civil Wars.

It was during the latter part of 45BC when this particular series of Aureii was produced for Caesar’s Spanish triumph in October of that year. Indeed, that the obverse type of the winged goddess Victory clearly refers to Caesar’s victory at Munda against Roman adversaries. Caesar was a Populares, a man of the people, who was not shy to express his increasing disdain for the factions of the aristocracy – the Optimates led by Cato. Caesar even celebrated a triumph in the capital, an unprecedented commemoration of victory over other Romans illustrating he regarded the Optimates as the enemy of the people. The presence within the issue of a gold half-aureus, or quinarius, makes it almost certain that this type was minted specially for the Spanish triumph since the denomination was typically associated with the distribution of largess at public celebrations.

Lucius Munatius Plancus, whose name appears on the reverse of this coin, was one of the Urban Prefects appointed by the dictator in 46 BC to administer the capital while he was on campaign. After this prominent issue of aurei was minted under his name, he rose to the position of governor of Transalpine Gaul in 44 BC where he founded the colony of Lugdunum, and later was appointed consul in 42 BC. Although he supported Marc Antony in the tumult which followed Caesar’s assassination, he eventually became an adviser to Octavian and according to Suetonius he dissuaded the princeps from assuming the name of Romulus as a ‘second founder of Rome’ (Suet. Aug. 7) and instead on 16 January 27 BC he formally proposed that the title ‘Augustus’, meaning ‘revered one’ be granted to the young princeps.

It was not until Caesar received the unprecedented title of “Dictator in Perpetuity” (DICT PERPETUO on the coinage) early in 44 BCE, conservative Romans were horrified. To them, this was akin to a monarchy. Here is a coin struck before his assassination with the title DICT PERPETUO issued by the moneyer Macer.

They assassinated Caesar on the Ides of March – the 15th. Therefore, coins with the portrait of Caesar with the legend “DICT PERPETUO”  had to have been struck for only a few weeks. He was granted that title between January 26th, 44BC and February 15th, 44BC. It was on February 15th when Rome celebrated the festival of the Lupercal, which we call today Valentines’s Day.  That was when Mark Antony twice presents Caesar with a royal diadem, urging him to take it and declare himself king. He refuses this offer and orders the crown to be placed in the Temple of Jupiter. It was most likely at this time when Caesar took the title “DICT PERPETUO” as the alternative. Curiously, it was 30/31 days later when he was assassinated – Pi?

The conspirators who again fled Rome, also began to issue coins pretending they are defending the Republic, championed by the fake news of Cicero,. This is even when Brutus issues silver and gold coinage bragging that he killed Caesar on the EID MAR – 15th of March.

When Caesar was assassinated, that is when we see the coinage change. Mark Antony starts to issue denarii with his picture on one side and Caesar’s on the other.

We also see Octavian issuing even gold aurei with his image on one side and Caesar on the other. They even issued coins announcing their Triumvirate against the corrupt Polulares. We even see Augustus, after he defeats Cleopatra and Mark Antony, issuing coinage showing the comet in the sky that people took as the omen that Caesar was now a god.

The coinage documents events written by contemporary writers at the time. This was the basis of Shakespeare’s play – Julius Caesar. The coinage has both confirmed history but also opened the door to establish answers to important economic trends.  One with the coinage was it possible to answer the question of how fast did Rome really fall. By imputing this data, it became possible for the computer to even correctly forecast the fall of communism and the Berlin Wall in 1989. It is fascinating how it takes a finite amount of time to bring down a nation-state. When it starts to fall, it does so in a Waterfall type event. Rome fell in just 8.6 years.

Multinational Advertisers Begin Pulling Out of Twitter


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 3, 2022 | Sundance

In the prediction section of the recent Twitter discussion {Go Deep} CTH mentioned the reason and unspoken motive behind a prediction that multinational corporations would start to pull their advertising money from Elon Musk.

We are simply in an era where there is no distinction between the WEF guidance for multinational corporations and the instructions toward governments’ they support.  Free speech and freedom of expression are against both their interests.

Multinational corporations are political entities.  The former distinctions between the private and public sector have been purposefully erased.  Evidence can be found in the vaccination mandate and within corporate responses to voter outcomes during elections. {Go Deep}

As predicted, it begins….

(Via Wall Street Journal) – Food company General Mills Inc., Oreo maker Mondelez International Inc., Pfizer Inc. and Volkswagen/Audi are among a growing list of brands that have temporarily paused their Twitter advertising in the wake of the takeover of the company by Elon Musk, according to people familiar with the matter.

Some advertisers are concerned that Mr. Musk could scale back content moderation, which they worry would lead to an increase in objectionable content on the platform. Others are temporarily halting their ads because of the uncertainty at the company as top executives exit and Mr. Musk considers a raft of changes, some of the people said.

Kelsey Roemhildt, a spokeswoman for General Mills, whose brands include Cheerios, Bisquick and Häagen-Dazs, confirmed the company has paused Twitter ads. “As always, we will continue to monitor this new direction and evaluate our marketing spend,” she said.

A Twitter representative didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

General Motors Co. paused its spending on the social-media platform last week.

Several ad buyers say they expect the number of brands pausing Twitter ads to rise. They say that the platform isn’t considered a must-buy for many advertisers, with far larger budgets going to tech giants such as Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Meta Platforms Inc., and that pausing makes sense during the bumpy transition under Mr. Musk.

Many executives on Madison Avenue are uneasy with the rash of sudden executive departures from Twitter’s advertising sales and marketing units. Among those who have exited are Chief Customer Officer Sarah Personette, Chief Marketing Officer Leslie Berland, and Jean-Philippe Maheu, Twitter’s vice president of global client solutions. Those executives helped reassure advertisers that their ad dollars were being spent wisely and appropriately on Twitter. (read more)

Fascism was traditionally defined as an authoritarian government working hand-in-glove with corporations to achieve objectives. A centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, using severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

That system of government didn’t work in the long-term, because the underlying principles of free people reject government authoritarianism.  Fascist governments collapsed, and the corporate beneficiaries were nulled and scorned for participating.  Then, along came a new approach to achieve the same objective.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) was created to use the same fundamental associations of government and corporations.  Only this time, it was the multinational corporations who organized to tell the government(s) what to do.

The WEF was organized for multinational corporations to assemble and tell the various governments how to cooperate with them, in order to be rewarded by them.   Corporatism was/is the outcome.  The government is now doing what the multinationals tell them to do, and in return the multinationals install the compliant politicians.

Fascism, the cooperation between government and corporations, is still the underlying premise; the World Economic Forum simply flipped the internal dynamic putting the corporations in charge of handing out the instructions.

What results is a slightly modified definition of fascism:

A massive multinational corporate conglomerate; telling a centralized autocratic government leader what to do; and using severe economic and social regimentation as a control mechanism; combined with forcible suppression of opposition by both the corporations and government.

Doesn’t that define our current reality, especially visible in the era of COVID?

The instructions from the multinational corporations to government would be called the “Great Reset“, or as commonly transposed by the government officials receiving the instructions, “Build Back Better”.

 ~ Go Deep ~

Retail Sales Growth Drops Below Rate of Inflation, What Does That Tell You?


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 14, 2022 | Sundance 

You often hear me talk about how financial pundits and economic analysts are disconnected from Main Street.  Today we get a prime example of that from the Wall Street Journal.

The topline of the WSJ article is essentially that people are not spending money on anything except essential goods (housing, energy, fuel, food, etc), which is somewhat of a ‘duh tell us something we don’t know‘ type article.   However, the analytical part of the article is where you find the insufferable disconnect.   Here’s one example:

[Data Point 1] Gasoline prices dropped in September for the third month in a row, falling 4.9% from August.”  [Data Point 2] Sales at gasoline stations, a proxy for spending by car owners, declined 1.4% last month.” 

If gasoline dropped 4.9% in price, but sales only declined 1.4% that would indicate more physical gasoline was purchased at a lower price than the month before.   It’s not a hard concept to understand.

This is a retail sales reality even identified in the article itself, “Unlike many government reports, retail sales aren’t adjusted for inflation, so some swings reflect price changes rather than shifts in the amounts purchased.”

However, now look at this:  “Spending at restaurants and bars grew 0.5% in September from the prior month. But prices at restaurants grew 0.9% in the same month, according to a separate Labor Department report released Thursday, meaning that consumers are getting less for their spending.

No, that’s not what this means.

If restaurant prices increase 0.9%, but restaurant sales only increase 0.5% it means you are selling/serving fewer customers.  It doesn’t mean consumers getting less food, it means fewer consumers are eating at restaurants….   Which is caused by consumers having to prioritize their spending.

(WSJ) – […] Spending declined in categories linked to big purchases like cars, televisions, beds and golf clubs. Purchases at electronics and appliance stores declined 0.8% in September while spending at furniture stores fell 0.7%.

[…] Scott Brave, the head of economic analytics for Morning Consult, said consumers have started to pull back on optional purchases while still spending on the essentials.  “They are having to make tough decisions,” he said. (more)

NBC Nibbles Carefully During Report on Fall Harvest Inflation


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 13, 2022 | Sundance

In this brief segment on fall harvest inflation, NBC notes consumer prices for food stuffs continue increasing regardless of the economic action by the Biden administration. The reason is very simple and is outlined within the segment by Jacob Goebbert, the Goebbert’s farm general manager.  WATCH:

.

The current inflation is embedded in the cost of products, because it’s a supply side issue.

Financial “experts” can shout all day long about the fiscal policy (spending) being the origin of inflation (ie. demand side), they’re wrong.  Our current inflation cycle, most notably evident within massive increases in food prices, is a supply side issue created by the increased energy costs.  Full stop.  It’s a Biden policy outcome.