Reports are circling that the Biden Administration has begged Germany to hold off on banning Russian oil until after the midterm elections. The Democrats are so desperate to win amid their record-low popularity that they are openly asking other nations to alter major policies at the expense of the people. Biden has banned Russian energy imports, but the EU, which is more reliant on Russian energy, must wait.
Banning Russian energy will backfire on Europe and send aftershocks throughout the market. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock initially announced that Germany would cease purchases from Russia but quickly changed her stance. Finance Minister Christian Lindner said that Germany would support Ukraine but not at the expense of the German people. “It was a mistake that Germany became so heavily dependent on energy imports from Russia,” she admitted after avoiding warnings years ago.
Germany is the #1 importer of Russian energy, with 34% of its total petroleum coming from Russia. Nearly half of Germany’s coal is tied to Russia, and one-third of homes are heated with Russian imported oil. Germany purchased 27 billion tons of crude from Russia in 2021 alone.
Zelensky has cried that the EU is spending “blood money” on Russian energy without understanding there is no immediate alternative. Zelensky accused nations who purchase Russian oil of being guilty of genocide and war crimes. “If Russians are committing war crimes, even genocide, whoever is supplying Russia with this bloody money is guilty of the same war crime.” If he had his way, he would punish each nation accordingly.
Germany recently stated they will ban Russian oil by the end of the year, regardless of the repercussions, and will ban gas imports by next year. While it is unconfirmed whether Biden begged Scholz to hold off on additional sanctions, the prospect is highly likely. In the end, Biden, Scholz, and Zelensky are subservient to the Build Back Better agenda, and policies will be aimed at that socialistic goal rather than what is best for the people.
QUESTION: Marty; I just wanted to comment that I am amazed that Socrates forecast the ruble through this mess showing a directional change in April leaving the March low intact. The ruble turned with your ECM target of March 14. Congrats. Your accomplishment is worth a Noble Prize for it actually works. Nobody had correctly forecasted these events. It is not hard to see how the government tortured you and your family for your accomplishment.
Do you think Putin took your advice on backing the ruble with gold?
PN
REPLY: Thank you. People fail to understand that events like these are just beyond human capability to reason and rationalize what will unfold. Nobody has lived through such events before so there is no possibility to rely upon personal experience. There are analysts who hate me and see this as competition. There are some things that just go far beyond human forecasting. Just compare the two Monthly Arrays from December and now. March was showing as a knee-jerk reaction and then there was a Directional Change in April. I do not think anyone in December could have foreseen the events of war and how the world economy would have been destroyed by Biden and his unimaginable sanctions. Even SWIFT refused in 2014 to remove Russia when asked by Obama. So how could anyone foresee such events?
Every government central bank and intelligence entity tunes into Socrates. Yes, my recommendation to Russia I published on March 23rd was to back the currency with gold in a reverse manner of FDR restricting the gold convertibility to domestic use rather than international. I did not speak with the Russian central bank, but I’m sure they understood the implication of what I suggested. The Russian Central Bank announced on April 5th that the ruble would be backed by gold making one gram of gold equal to 5,000 rubles.
Those pulling the strings connected to the mouths of Western world leaders are simply braindead. One day after Russia halted natural gas supplies to Poland and Bulgaria due to “nonpayment in rubles“, Putin confirmed that he was willing to go ahead and shut down supplies to “unfriendly” nations. He has sent European natural gas prices soaring. It is clear that Europe’s united front is cracking. Already four European gas buyers have paid for supplies in rubles. Europe is DOOMED without Russia and they better wake up and stop following whatever dribble comes from Biden’s mouth for they are words he himself does not even comprehend.
The European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was put in that position by Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum. Like Biden, she is selling war and the destruction of the world economy to achieve Schwab’s dream of his Great Reset to conquer the world with his vision of how it should operate.
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Andrei Kozyrev served under Putin’s predecessor Boris Yeltsin in the 1990s. From his former position within the Russian Federation, Kozyrev believes Putin would only use nuclear weapons in “very specific situations.” Namely, if NATO became involved and Russia was backed into a corner from which there was no escape. “If Russia or one of those countries really threatened in their hearts – existentially, that is … if NATO troops come to Moscow, then probably they will resort to nuclear weapons,” Kozyrev told reporters.
Ukraine’s Zelensky has been touting that Russia is close to using chemical and nuclear weapons against Ukraine. “Not only me — all of the world, all of the countries have to be worried because it can be not real information, but it can be truth,” Zelensky said to CNN reporters, strategically in English. Zelensky stated that all nations should be concerned about Russia’s nuclear capabilities, but Putin is not that ignorant. The goal is to secure land that is believed to belong to the Russian people, not to create a nuclear world war. Putin believes he is winning the global battle financially by saying Russian sanctions have led to a “deterioration of the economy in the West.”
Similar to North Korea launching missile exercises to remind the world not to invade, Russia is touting its nuclear capabilities as a scare tactic to prevent the NATO alliance from decimating their country.
Once upon a time, I use to respect The Economist. I even took the back cover in July 1985 to announce that the Economic Confidence Model was beginning a new 51.6-year Cycle that was a Private Wave that would ultimately peak in 2032. I boldly announced the bottom in gold and the peak in the dollar taking the back cover every week in July 1985.
The Economist just released its cover article sadly demonstrating that the publication remains in the Dark Age of economics. They began:
“Central Banks are supposed to inspire confidence in the economy by keeping inflation low and stable. America’s Federal Reserve has suffered a hair-raising loss of control. In March consumer prices were 8.5% higher than a year earlier, the fastest annual rise since 1981. … It is the Fed, however, that had the tools to stop inflation and failed to use them in time.”
To say I am shocked at their reporting that is no better than a first-semester student in Economics 101. It reflects a complete lack of comprehension of how the economy even functions and adopts the politician view that they are NEVER responsible for inflation – it is always the central bank.
Clearly, they have not bothered to take notice that something major took place with the fall of Bretton Woods in 1971. Previously, the theory was if you borrowed, that was less inflationary rather than printing more money. Of course, that was a throwback to the days of Gresham’s Law when currencies traded in Amsterdam were based not on political-military power, but on the pure metal content. The debasement of the coinage by Henry VIII led to (1) the higher-based coinage being hoarded and (2) the decline in the value of English coinage trading in Amsterdam.
That theory became the Quantity of Money Theory which today is totally obsolete yet that is what we hear all the time when the Fed increased its balance sheet and therefore it should have been inflationary following 2008 but the Fed and other central banks could not create 2% inflation. That even led to some claiming MMT (Modern Monetary Theory) proves that the creation of money is NOT inflationary.
It was barely two months after we announced the beginning of a Private Wave in the Economist in July 1985 that in September 1985, the central banks were all called together and formed the G5 and then proclaimed that they wanted the dollar lower by 40%. This was James Baker’s brainchild that manipulating the dollar lower would reduce the US trade deficit and create jobs.
I was summoned to be among the global experts who solicit advice but never listen. It is always a dog & pony show so they can pretend they summoned the top experts in the world and then announce what they intended to do anyhow. Of course, it is always pretended to be based on independent advice. However, that is just not how Washington or any government functions. So I wrote to President Reagan and warned that devaluing the dollar to reverse the trade deficit would lead to a crash.
The present ordered Beryl Sprinkel who was the 14th Chariman of the Economic Advisers to the President (1985-1989) to respond. It had been the rise in interest rates to 14% under Paul Volcker to reduce inflation that led to the Deflation. Capital poured into the dollar for the high-interest rates which peaked precisely with the previous ECM wave in March 1981. Thereafter, the dollar soared driving the British pound down to $1.03 in 1985.
Clearly, the entire theory that the Economist is still clinging to currently is unsupported by the historical evidence. The raising of interest rates to stop inflation led to the explosion of the national debt thanks to the servicing costs. In 1980, the national debt stood at $907.7 billion. By 1989, the debt reached $2.857 trillion. The raising of interest rates created deflation near-term but expanded the inflation longer-term.
The Plaza Accord set in motion the 1987 Crash. They failed to understand that lowering the value of the dollar may have made US goods appear cheaper overseas to reduce the trade deficit, but at the same time, it also devalues all the US assets in the eyes of foreign investors. After selling more than one-third of the US national debt to the Japanese, the lowering of the dollar by 40% would mean a 40% loss on their holding of US debt.
As the dollar began a free-fall, the central banks began to realize this was a mistake. The Louvre Accord was an agreement, signed on February 22, 1987, in Paris, that aimed to stabilize the international currency markets and halt the continued decline of the US Dollar caused by the PlazaAccord. The agreement was signed by France, West Germany, Japan, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Italy declined to sign the agreement. The Group of 5 became the Group of 7 – G7 (now G20).
The G7 meeting of central bankers and finance ministers in Paris announced that the dollar was now “consistent with economic fundamentals.” They announced that they would only intervene when required to ensure foreign exchange stability. The objective was then to manage the floating currency system.
Democrats gained control of Congress in 1986 and immediately called for protectionist measures. The dollar depreciation agreed to in 1985 at the Plaza Accord, failed to really improve the trade perspective. In 1986, the trade deficit actually rose to approximately $166 billion with exports at about $370 billion and imports at about $520 billion. The object of manipulating currency to try to create jobs and alter trade flows proved to be completely false.
My concerns warning the White House that volatility would increase made back in 1985 were materializing. What they did not understand was that lowering the dollar in value also led to a shift in capital flows and the selling of US assets. Foreigners were suffering losses by financing U.S. trade by purchasing United States Treasury bonds in an attempt to ease the trade deficit criticism. We were advising the Japanese to buy gold on the New York COMEX, export it, and then resell which would also make it appear that the US exports were increasing. However, the lower dollar was then resulting in the importation of inflation into their own nations.
The press back then never understood the crash. I was called in by the Brady Commission charged with investigating the causes of the Crash. Of course, they would not blame the government. The best I could do was to prevent a witch-hunt on Wall Street and the final report casually mentioned that they believed foreign exchange had something to do with it.
There is probably nobody else who has dealt with more central banks than me from China to Switzerland and into the Middle East. To read this cover story by the Economist was indeed shocking. They are obviously still under the impression that inflation is the result of the rise and fall of the money supply that dates back to the days of Henry VIII. I dare say, things have changed slightly.
Today, governments have borrowed relentlessly. But the debt is acceptable now as collateral so national debts are simply money that pays interest. That is completely out of the scope of the central bank so it DOES NOT have the tools to prevent or create inflation. The politicians always want to spend whatever it takes to win the next election and then blame the central bank if it resulted in inflation. It is a sad day that the Economist is so out of touch its rambling and that of someone serious out of touch with reality.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 26, 2022
Fox News’ Tucker Carlson previewed a discussion with Glenn Greenwald that will appear in full tomorrow on Fox Nation. In this segment {Direct Rumble Link Here} Greenwald gives his perspective on the motives of Elon Musk purchasing Twitter.
Greenwald does a good job encapsulating the essential support most feel for the Musk effort. There are many people still uncertain about how this will all roll out, and Musk has been favorable to Big Govt in his two most famous endeavors, Tesla and SpaceX. Elon Musk’s phase of pushing back against speech and internet control is more recent, and as a result has left many people wondering about it.
As Greenwald notes, there really isn’t a downside for people who are trying to break the totalitarian and monopoly control systems on the internet. The upside benefits to on-line freedom, debate, discussion and the first real effort to stop internet censorship are well worth supporting. Greenwald eloquently puts an appropriate context to the battle. WATCH:
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 26, 2022 | Sundance
Perhaps no media paragraph more perfectly encapsulates the issues around the Twitter debate than this one from New York Times writer Shira Ovide:
…”The 2016 U.S. presidential election and the Brexit vote that same year gave Silicon Valley executives, U.S. elected officials and the public a peek into what can go wrong when social media companies opt not to wade too deeply into what people say on their sites.”… (link)
In essence, that would be the quiet part said out loud and matter-of-factly. If people are allowed freedom of communication, they end up doing things without our approval.
That paragraph perfectly encapsulates the reason why so many media and leftists are having mental breakdowns.
Elon Musk has the audacity to purchase one, just one, social media platform with the intent to allow Americans the freedom to speak to each other freely, without limit and control. That is the expressed risk the Democrats, media and leftists in every institution are enraged about.
As Fox News highlighted, “several Twitter employees expressed serious concerns and fear over Musk’s $44 billion acquisition of the company including a prominent worry that Musk would undo censorship mechanisms they had worked to implement over the years.” It’s all about control. We are living in a cyber version of Poland circa early 1980’s.
The solidarity movement results in millions of Polish citizens taking to the streets, looking around and suddenly realizing there are more of us than them. That is what the collective left is now desperate to avoid, and they will do anything to stop people from seeing the scope of the control effort they have deployed in order to carry out their agenda. Those are the stakes at play.
During yesterday’s phone call between Twitter executives and employees at the company, the leaders within the company talked about the issues at hand. A leaked copy a short segment of the discussion was made available by Project Veritas today. WATCH:
.
All of this collective apoplexy and anxiety is a reflection of fear. The need for control is a reaction to deep internal fear.
Notice they keep using the words “safety”, as if being exposed to alternate perspectives is something that threatens safety.
Elon Musk is correct, “the extreme antibody reaction from those who fear free speech says it all.”
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 26, 2022 | Sundance
Goya Foods CEO Bob Unanu appeared on Fox Business earlier today in order to give a bigger picture review of the current status of food production. Unanu does a good job outlining how the interconnected systems from field to fork impact consumers. The Goya CEO appropriately outlines what is happening and what the consequences are from Biden energy policy. It’s a good interview.
Unanu does not push food alarmism and accurately states the U.S. food production system will ensure that food is available for U.S. consumers to purchase, albeit at higher prices. The people most at risk from food insecurity are developing countries who rely on exports of food products generated by efficient, productive and exceptional farming operations in North America that feed the world.
For U.S. consumers it is the massive increases in energy and transportation costs that are driving up food prices, putting the issue of food insecurity into the correct context of food affordability. WATCH:
.
Consumers can offset the price impacts by shopping closer to the field, the origin of the food purchases needed. Shopping for fresh food products at farmers markets avoids feeling the impact of shipping and transportation costs, and it helps the local economy. If you are near areas with farm production in the United States consider the financial value of skipping the convenience of the supermarket in favor of shopping closer to the field.
In the field to fork food supply and distribution system, the closer you can get to the field for purchases the less costs you will encounter. Obviously, for many people this may not be possible. However, for others it might be time to evaluate the cost of convenience.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 26, 2022 | Sundance
Another item in the long list of ‘thanks Joe Biden‘ stuff. Shortages in natural gas in windmill chasing Europe have driven up the prices significantly. The conflict between NATO and their targeted villain in Russia is only making matters worse.
As the EU prices jump to $33/$34 per million British thermal units (BTU’s), the U.S. natural gas selling at $6 per million BTU’s is an absolute bargain.
Liquify that stuff and send it across the pond says any smart energy capitalist.
However, that comes with a problem for us. Our supplies of natural gas are depleting quickly, our exports are now almost three times more than our production.
LONDON, April 8 (Reuters) – U.S. gas prices have climbed to their highest level in more than a decade as strong demand from overseas has emptied storage and left inventories well below average for the time of year despite a mild winter.
Front-month futures for gas delivered at Henry Hub in Louisiana have risen to $6.40 per million British thermal units, the highest in real terms since 2010. Wholesale prices in the United States are still far below those prevailing in Northeast Asia ($33 per million British thermal units) and Northwest Europe ($34).
[…] U.S. LNG exports rose 13% in the three months from November to January compared with the same period a year earlier, while gas production was up by less than 5%.
[…] Working stocks in underground storage were 316 billion cubic feet (19%) below the pre-pandemic five-year seasonal average for 2015-2019.
Because of strong exports, inventories depleted more than usual despite high prices and winter heating demand that was 8% below the long-term average.
Reflecting the low level of stocks, futures prices have moved into a strong backwardation, with nearby prices rising to reduce consumption and exports and encourage more production. (read more)
But hey, relax…. Biden is only destroying our food, fuel and energy…. I mean, it could be worse right?
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 26, 2022 | Sundance
Recalls are not uncommon in the modern food industry. As consumers have shifted toward convenience and increasingly done less food processing in their own kitchens, the opportunity for foodborne illness has expanded. One familiar example would be using bagged, previously processed, salad mixes instead of doing the raw chopping, cleaning and rinsing at home. [The risk is listeria (pink mold) or E.Coli]
A few days ago, when talking about the uptick in industrial accidents, CTH noted, “another downstream consequence could be an uptick in food recalls as an outcome of increased bacteria within the food processing equipment, because the break-down-time, sanitation and hygiene might be impacted by excessive operational run times.
There’s a myriad of issues from any industrial operation that goes from ordinary capacity to seriously over-stressed maximum capacity… and then remains in the emergency phase for months.”…
Now today: – “Approximately 120,872 pounds of ground beef products have been recalled due to possible E. coli contamination.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) website, Lakeside Refrigerated Services, of Swedesboro, N.J., announced Monday that it is recalling the beef after the problem was discovered during routine testing of imported products produced from Feb. 1 through April 8. (read more)
E.coli comes from bacteria in feces. Sometimes during cattle processing the blade can rupture the internal organs and feces can contaminate the meat. It’s not uncommon.
E.coli bacteria can also be found in row crops. However that usually comes from inadequate personal hygiene of the field workers (I will not detail, tmi).
Bottom line: clean and sanitize raw food (salads, veg,) before eating, and cook all meat proteins to an internal minimum temperature of 145° to kill any foodborne bacteria before consumption.
Even when/if E.coli bacteria is present in meat (not uncommon), it does not survive cooking temperatures above 145°.
When most people have a bout of foodborne illness, commonly referred to as food poisoning, the focus is usually on the beef, pork or chicken as the culprit. However, most foodborne illnesses are caused by vegetables, not protein, because they are consumed raw. Spouts and leaf items are common bacteria carriers, but the least understood risk is actually from potatoes.
Potatoes should always be washed if cooked with the peel (ie baked), because the external soiled bacteria can transfer into the center when pierced with a fork as frequently done as people prep/test during cooking. Bacteria can transfer from the exterior of a potato into the center where a nice warm moist environment exists, perfect for growth.
Just an fyi, handle/cook potatoes as you would handle/cook meat. [USDA Recall Sheet Here]
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 