Tag Archives: Gold Standard

Mar 14 2018

Is it St Mark or Alexander the Great Buried in Venice?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Ancient History

Re-Posted Mar 14, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: I just returned from Venice and I was told that they stole the bones of St Mark from Egypt and built a church there for them. The four horses on the Church they stole from Constantinople. It seems a bit strange that they would go take relics from somewhere else. Do you have any comments on the Venetian Empire and their kleptomania?

JE

FourHorses

ANSWER: Venice had extensive trading connections with the eastern Mediterranean regions as well as an off/on relationship with the Ottoman Empire. Venice was the medieval center for the trade in antiquities as well as ancient coins. They loved history and it was a serious business in Venice. The Venetian gold ducat even rose to be an internationally accepted coin. This pictures St Mark standing giving a gonfalone to the kneeling doge (head of Venice). So indeed, St Mark was the center of Venetian culture. The four horses were from a chariot full size driven by Constantine which once stood in Constantinople before the Venetians conquered the city. They took just the horses back to Venice.

This interest in antiquities and relics first began in the Middle Ages and initially was focused on holy relics, which included removal of the bones of St. Mark from Alexandria in 828AD and moving them to what became known as St Mark’s Square. Most of the important early coin collections were actually formed through Venice. Andrea Loredan was a patrician of an old family of Venice dating back to the 12th century that occupied hereditary seats on the Great Council from 1297 onward. The family still exists today with the Palazzo Loredan Cini at Campo San Vio. Andrea Loredan was a serious coin collector who ordered an illustrated list of all his coins to be made in 1560 in order to help with their sale. A reproduction of that list has been produced by the American Numismatic Society – Irritamenta: Numismatic Treasures of a Renaissance.

With respect to the mummified body of St Mark, there is still a controversy that the remains are not that of St Mark, but Alexander the Great. Three early Christian sources stated that St Mark’s body was burnt after his death. As the story goes, the pagans seized Saint Mark in Alexandria, Egypt, when he was serving the Liturgy and beat him, dragging him through the streets and threw him in prison. On the following day, the crowd again dragged him through the streets to the courtroom, but along the way, Saint Mark died. The pagans were so angry and the Egyptian tradition was to preserve the body, so they wanted to burn the body in disrespect. It is said that when they lit the fire, everything grew dark, thunder crashed, and there was an earthquake. The pagans then fled in terror. Some Christians then took up the body of Saint Mark and buried it in a stone crypt on April 4th, 63AD.

During the year 310AD after Constantine, I the Great becomes Emperor in 307AD and two years before the Battle at Milvian Bridge on October  28th, 312AD, a church was constructed over the relics of Saint Mark. The Pope prayed a prayer on the grave of Saint Mark when the church was then a little chapel on the eastern coast containing bodies said to be of Saint Mark and some of his holy successors. The church was later enlarged in the days of Pope Achillas, who was the 18th Pope.

After the Siege of Alexandria in 641AD, the tomb of Saint Mark was no longer in Christian hands. The church was greatly ruined in 641AD when the Arabs invaded Egypt. Then in 680AD, Pope John III rebuilt the church. In 828AD a group of Venetian Christian merchants traveled to Alexandria and obtained the body of Saint Mark. As the story goes, these merchants used pork to prevent the Islamic authorities from inspecting what they were transporting. The Venetians and the body of Saint Mark managed successfully to make its way to Venice.  The church was destroyed again in 1219, during the time of the crusades, and was rebuilt once more. However, during the 16th century, the French explorer Pierre Belon mentions the founding of the church in 1547.

The other tomb of a mummified person in Alexandria was that of Alexander the Great. The location of Alexander the Great’s tomb has remained a great mystery. After the death of  Alexander in Babylon, the possession of his body became a subject of negotiations between his generals. Where to bury Alexander became a controversy. Aegae was one of the two originally proposed resting places. The body, however, was stolen en route by Ptolemy I Soter, the general who took Egypt. According to contemporary records for the years 321–320 BC, Ptolemy initially buried Alexander in Memphis. Sometime during the early 3rd century BC, Alexander’s body was transferred from Memphis to Alexandria, where it was reburied in a new tomb. It was this tomb that became a major tourist destination for hundreds of years.

Caracalla-B1Julius Caesar paid his respects to the tomb of Alexander the Great. The first Emperor of the Roman Empire Augustus declined the opportunity to visit any tombs saying that he came to see a King and not a bunch of dead people. Emperor  Caracalla (198-217AD) had seen himself as the reincarnation of Alexander the Great. Caracalla even retraced Alexander’s route to Egypt however and in 215AD, Caracalla was warmly received when he visited Alexander’s tomb. For some unknown reason, he slaughtered many of Alexandria’s inhabitants shortly thereafter. It is known that Caracalla apparently left with a piece of Alexander’s body armor. According to chronicler John of Antioch, Caracalla removed Alexander’s tunic, his ring, his belt with some other precious items and deposited them on the coffin.

When John Chrysostom  (349 – 407AD), the Archbishop of Constantinople visited Alexandria in 400AD, he asked to see Alexander’s tomb and remarked, “his tomb even his own people know not”. Later authors claim to have seen the tomb during the 9th century.  Others claimed to have visited a sepulcher in the center of Alexandria that was still venerated as the resting place of Alexander. This seems to be unlikely given the fact that the Christians sought to destroy anything that was a Pagan worship. Therefore, credible historical references of Alexander’s tomb continued only until about 390AD, and then vanish.

It has been argued that two years after the last historical reference of Alexander’s tomb, another tomb in Alexandria seems to surface after 310AD. But it is not the tomb of Alexander, the tomb belongs to Saint Mark. Saint Mark had been dead for over 300 years. Some have suggested that the mummified body of Saint Mark could, in fact, be Alexander the Great. The missing link is the question that if the Christians did indeed rescue the body of St Mark from the pagans and it was not burned, then was it mummified in Egyptian tradition or simply buried? If in 828AD a group of Venetian Christian merchants took a mummified body, was it really St Mark? Could the pagans have rescued Alexander’s body from the Christians who would have certainly destroyed it in their rage and placed it  in a church pretending it was St Mark to protect it?

The Copts (Greek Orthodox Christians) believe that the head of St. Mark remains in a church named after him in Alexandria, and parts of his relics are in St. Mark’s Cairo’s Cathedral. Some believe that the rest of what are believed to be his relics are in the St Mark’s Basilica in Venice, Italy. However, back in 1063, during the construction of a new basilica in Venice, Saint Mark’s relics could not be found. According to legend, in 1094, the saint himself revealed the location of his remains by extending an arm from a pillar. The newly discovered remains were then placed in a sarcophagus in the basilica pictured here. There remain many questions about the body in the church. In Egypt, every year, on the 30th day of the month of Paopi, the Coptic Orthodox Church celebrates the consecration of the church of St. Mark and the appearance of the head of the saint in the city of Alexandria. This takes place inside St. Mark Coptic Orthodox Cathedral in Alexandria, where the saint’s head is said to be preserved.

The whereabouts of Alexander’s body remains one of the great mysteries yet to be resolved. Some argue it was buried in a remote community outside of Alexandria. A DNA test of the body in St Mark’s of Venice would resolve the issue and settle the question is the person of Greek or Semitic origin? Naturally, such a test would never be allowed for what if it showed it was the body of Alexander the Great? Can you imagine what that would do to Venice?

Mar 13 2018

Direct Democracy – Is it Possible?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Basic Concepts

Re-Posted Mar 13, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

 

The advancement in technology today certainly allows us to scrap the Republican form of government with pretend representation of the people by career politicians. There is no reason we cannot vote from home on every bill and that no bill may be merged with any other subject matter. There should be no sneaking spending for military tucked inside a Clean Water Act. Direct Democracy can work ONLY if it respects a Bill of Rights that precludes SOCIALISM no matter how noble the goals. It must also EXCLUDE all legislation to do with religious morals so no outlawing abortion or even prostitution no matter how much it will offend some. Do not forget that is another religious group get control, they will reverse it and retaliate again their opposition. No law will EVER eliminate either action and the most one can do is to restrict where it is and require a license to ensure it is conducted in a safe environment and leave God to judge.

Every tourist who has ventured to Amsterdam visits the famous red light district where girls are in shop windows typically wearing bathing suits (not naked). The street is packed probably with 99% tourists rather than customers, but it is famous, safe for both the people and the girls, and certainly a curiosity. They are not walking down the streets as they still do in LA, New York, Chicago, or Boston. Girls are not abducted and forced into prostitution. There have been movies on that subject like TAKEN, which are very real.

I have often told the story about flying back from London with my girlfriend into JFK and I went to the curb waiting for the car and she went to the bathroom. There was a very famous Supermodel I did not know at the time standing there and she started to chat. I had flown in on the Concord and she knew that but she had stiletto high-heels and a very short leather mini-skirt. I did not notice her on the plane so I assumed she was a hooker looking to pick up passengers when they land in NYC, which is very common. When my girlfriend came out and saw me talking to her she got jealous. She said I can’t leave you alone for 5 minutes you are talking to a supermodel. I said what are you talking about? She was a hooker! I was just being polite! She then said she was on the plane. Based on the provocative dress, it seemed to me like the standard hooker uniform in New York City. I remember staying the Excelsior Hotel on the Via Vittorio Veneto during the 1970s and having to push through prostitutes just trying to walk down the street to go to dinner. NYC 42nd street used to be that way as well.

Direct Democracy will never work once you cross the line into perceived morality. One person’s moral principles will differ from another. When I travel to the office in Abu Dhabi, I am impressed that you see the freedom of religion in play. There are men with their four wives in burqas and women dressed in western style. Neither objects to the other. Women are free to wear two-piece bathing suits on the beach and this photo I took shows. They cannot walk the streets or go to a mall dressed like that, but there are places in the USA that object to that as well.

We cannot judge others by our own moral beliefs. That is God’s role – not man. Yes, there is the famous saying of Arnaud Amalric (died 1225) who said:  “Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.” (“Kill them. For the Lord knows those that are His own.”). I have previously written about the right to Freedom of Religion which means we must remain free from moral laws imposed by a majority upon a minority. That is why the Christians were persecuted and when they became the majority, then the Christians persecuted the pagans. We kill so freely proclaiming we are doing God’s will and yet so many claim to know God’s will. We have terrorists waging Holy Wars in the name of God whose will they have interpreted. This is why I wrote:

“This question is probably the greatest conflict morally that humanity faces, with the likelihood of any solution being impossible. If Mormons want to have more than one wife, that is fine, provided it is a local issue. Others who disagree have no right to say they are wrong and use the federal law to prosecute them. The freedom of movement is essential for if you do not believe in the culture of a local region, you should be free to leave and join a community that you agree with. Without this respect, society cannot function free of conflict, violence, and war. Perhaps this is just our fate. To some extent, we need to stop judging others by what we believe and let God sort that out on Judgement Day.”

The Ten Commandments form the core of fundamental principles that are actually essential to the foundation of society. The prohibition against killing can have no exception that it is OK to kill as long as the head of state says so. Every person has the right to self-defense, but not to invade another’s home or nation. There can be only a single standard for which a person’s liberty may be restricted, which was best articulated by John Stuart Mills:

“That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant … Over himself, over his body and mind, the individual is sovereign.” (On Liberty)

There was the Prohibition period where women demanded alcohol be outlawed because men became drunk and failed to be a proper husband and/or father. This was certainly not the majority of men, but they then imposed this law upon them all. All they did was fund organized crime and that led to countless killings. Many farmers were imprisoned for making their own alcohol.

You simply cannot legislate morality. Only a fool will try. This is what is so deeply wrong with SOCIALISM, for it defies the Ten Commandments, created hatred and divides the nation, has always led to more bloodshed than any other division (Communist Revolutions) and has hopelessly condemned society to a violent cycle of endless war.

When the economy turns down, class warfare rises and is used as the excuse to punish those who have more. If we are EVER going to end the cycle of violence, we must begin with a Direct Democracy eliminating career politicians, but it must also be confined prohibitin it to impose any morality by law. There will always be women who prefer prostitution. It cannot be outlawed, but we can license it and restrict it to specific areas as you see in Amsterdam. It is God’s role to judge others – not ours. As soon as one person stands up and demands laws to enforce their personal religious belief, they must respect that they will create a violent response from the opposition. When the opposition gains the majority, then the tables will be turned.

Direct Democracy can work ONLY when restrained from trying to create morality by law. ONLY if someone violates another then the law should apply. As Mills said: “the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant … Over himself, over his body and mind, the individual is sovereign.” We cannot legislate morality. The sooner we stop this nonsense, the sooner we will all enjoy true liberty. I must defend someone’s right to disagree and speak their mind, for to deny that person the right to speak will become just a hypocrisy.

Mar 13 2018

US To Become Biggest Producer of Oil in the World?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Energy

Re-Posted Mar 13, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

By next year, the US will become the world’s largest oil producer thanks to the fracking boom. Perhaps the US outdid the current Primus Russia earlier this year, said International Energy Agency (IEA) chief Fatih Birol: “The growth of US shale oil is strong and the pace is very high – the US will soon become the world’s largest oil producer.”

At the end of 2017, US oil production rose to over ten million barrels a day (bpd). As a result, the USA production passed that of Saudi Arabia, which has been the world’s largest exporter of oil. It appears that US oil production will continue to expand going into 2020 before we see a correction thereafter. There is no doubt that the US has significantly changed the global oil market. This has placed tremendous pressure on Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec) to reduce its production in an effort to stabilize the market price of oil. Opec and other leading producers have agreed on a decline in production since the beginning of 2017. Oil prices have since increased.

Mar 12 2018

What is the Difference between Institutional & Speculation?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Training Tools

Re-Posted Mar 12, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; I was talking to a friend who works in one of the banks you probably classify as the club. He knew you right off the bat. He said you have been probably the largest institutional advisor in the world. He said clients question the bank’s research and openly contrast it with yours. My question is simply this. What makes your institutional advice so dominant? Is it different from what you put out on your blog?

Just curious

HD

ANSWER: Interesting question. Institutions CANNOT be flipping their portfolios back and forth. They are not interested in what will the Fed do next week. They cannot react to such short-term swings. Our models are fractal and dynamic. We have the largest database ever assembled and that is what it takes to do accurate long-range forecasting. What you also must understand is how can a guy write a book and describe the feeling it is to give birth. Sure, he can interview women and write down the overview of what they say. But he cannot possibly really know what it feels like.

Look, 99% of all these self-proclaimed analysts have NEVER traded size. The look at the market from a short-term trader perspective and do not even understand how to do strategically position a portfolio. Oh sure, they can advocate the standard 60% equities and 40% bonds. Yet what happens when government bonds default? What happens when 10-year rates are 3% or less and you need to make 8% to cover your liabilities moving forward? They are clueless when it comes to actually the problems in size and how you even place orders.

 

 

The questions from institutions are strikingly different. They need to know when major trends change and how to adjust their portfolio and when. They are not concerned about when is the high Tuesday or Wednesday. Therefore, our institutional services are strategically different. You are either long or short. There is no pension fund that can buy even a 10-year government bond paying 3% for they are locking in a 50% loss. If you have not played in the big leagues, don’t bother. How you hedge is strikingly different from speculative trading.

We are able to differentiate between short-term changes in trend and long-term. That is the key. Plus, even if someone comes up with a new model and tries to get a meeting with a major institution if they can get 15 minutes that will be a miracle. Why? Nobody is going to take an unproven model for if it fails, that person loses their job. We have a track record and reputation going back into the 1980s. There is no risk with us because of that and they already know we have more institutional clients than anyone for decades.

Mar 11 2018

Reality of Being a Chief Economic Advisor


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics

Re-Posted Mar 11, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: I thank God that your are here in my lifetime. The information you freely impart is priceless and I can’t wait to read your daily Posts. I believe that it would be incredibly wise if President Trump were to invite you to replace Gary Cohen as his Chief Economic Advisor. My question is regarding the end of the Private Cycle that you are forecasting will occur in 2032. Will the change result as a demise of the US economy or the rise of the eastern economies? Do you see President Trump as a facilitator to that end or will his policies server to mitigate the process.

Thank you

Sir.

ANSWER: Well thank you very much. But you should understand what goes on behind the curtain and why I prefer this side. I was offered that job back in 1999 to be Bush Jr’s Chief Economic Advisor. I laughed and turned it down. Why? People like Gary Cohn take these jobs because they get to sell all their stock TAX-FREE. Since this would be a conflict of interest to own Goldman Sachs stock, he must sell it to take that job. Since it is something he MUST do, taxes are exempt. Plus all the politicians do not want to get Goldman Sachs angry since they donate to both sides. Therefore, Cohn gets an easy pass by the Senate.

First, we are private, not public, and I have no interest in selling the company to get a tax-free deal. Second, they would NEVER give me a pass in the Senate. I have advised the major car companies outside the USA in Japan and Germany. The Democrats would paint me as a traitor who helped foreign companies beat General Motors. The list can go on and on. So there is no way I would ever be interested in a such a job. Someone like Cohn now gets all the benefits and all he had to do is work one single day and then resign.

Trump is the counter-trend reaction. Reagan was the same reaction to hard economic times. You can see here that world GDP peaked in 1973. I remember the recession into 1976 very clearly. People were openly talking about another Great Depression. You get these counter-trend reactions which slow the decline down. Even Diocletian (284-305AD) instituted monetary reforms, wage, and price controls, and revised the political system creating the Tetrarchy whereby he was the first Emperor to actually retire and pass on the reigns of power. Trump will not reverse the trend. He will at best mitigate the fall during his term.

Mar 11 2018

The Monetary Reform of 1857 Ends Legal Tender Foreign Coins


Armstrong Economics Blog/America’s Economic History

Re-Posted Mar 11, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, I found in my grandmother’s belongings a penny from 1855 and one from 1857 which was much smaller and silver in appearance. Was there also a monetary reform that changed the coinage during the 1850s?

PK

ANSWER: Oh yes. But it is far more interesting than meets the eye. Foreign coins were actually legal tender in the United States until 1857. You could pay taxes with Spanish or English coins. Everything was legal tender under the Coinage Act of 1857.

The government first proposed the penny in the Coinage Act of 1792. Pennies and half-pennies went into production for the first time in 1793 with a composition of 100% copper which weighed 13.48 grams (0.475 ounces). From 1795 to 1857, the government reduced the copper penny in size with a new weight of 10.89 grams (0.384 ounces). It was the Coinage Act of 1857 (Act of Feb. 21, 1857, Chap. 56, 34th Cong., Sess. III, 11 Stat. 163) that the coinage was radically reduced with the composition of the penny being  88% copper and included 12% nickel, which produced a silver-like appearance. The weight was reduced to 4.67 grams (0.164 ounces). By changing the metal content, they justified that this was intrinsically worth more by adding nickel to pure copper.

In 1864, there was another Monetary Reform following the war as inflation set in and drove the value of metals higher. The silver was really removed from the 3 cent coins were now being produced in nickel starting in 1865 and most silver coins were being melted down given the silver was worth more than the face value. It was 1864 that they introduced the two-cent coinage as well reflecting inflation. The design of the penny was the Indian Head until 1909 when they change to the portrait of Abraham Lincoln. From 1864 to 1942, the penny was redesigned penny and it now weighed 3.11 grams (0.109 ounces) and nickel was removed leaving the composition primarily of bronze (95% copper, 5% zinc and tin). In 1943, due to the war, copper rose in value so then struck pennies composed of steel zinc-coated for just one year. The steel penny weighed 2.72 grams (0.095 ounces). From 1944 to 1981, the penny was composed primarily of copper (95%) and zinc (5%), with a weight of 3.11 grams (0.109 ounces). After 1982, copper was eliminated from the penny. The composition was changed because the value of the copper in the coin was greater than one cent. From 1982, the penny became 97.5% zinc composition, which was copper plated. With the commodity boom into 2011, the cost to mint a penny became 2.41 cents. The crash in commodities reduced the cost to 1.83 cents by 2013.

The Coinage Act of 1857 was an act of the United States Congress which ended the status of foreign coins as legal tender, repealing all acts “authorizing the currency of foreign gold or silver coins”. Specific coins would be exchanged at the Treasury and re-coined. Up until 1857, foreign coins circulated as legal tender. The Spanish 8 reals were known as a Pillar Dollar. This was the primary money supply during the Colonial period rather than British coins. In fact, the Spanish dollar was officially declared legal tender (accepted for taxes) by the Act of April 10, 1806.

The United States following the Revolutionary War had no gold reserves. Therefore, in 1792 when the establishment of the US mint came into play, the sole medium of exchange in terms of specie was the foreign coin. Alexander Hamilton proposed that foreign coin should be allowed to circulate freely for a period of three years until the new mint in Philadelphia was running at full capacity. This clause allowing the foreign coin to circulate was renewed several times before it was formally authorized by the Act of April 10, 1806. By 1830, about 25% of all circulating coins were of Spanish origin.

President Andrew Jackson supported foreign coin as legal tender in his famous war with the Bank of the United States in the Gold Bill. Jackson set in motion a major financial crisis as every bank began to issue their own currency. Jackson’s support of foreign coin ended up making it difficult for the US to retain its overvalued worn Spanish silver in the 1840s as they vanished from circulation and private issues appeared known as Hard Times Tokens. It was not until the early 1850s that the US mint had finally been able to match demand for the foreign coin with the production of American issues.

The Act of April 10, 1806, was passed because of the fact that there were no silver dollars minted by the United States at all between 1805 and 1840. In 1792, Congress adopted a bimetallic standard and the 15 to 1 ratio of silver to gold. The precious metal content of a US dollar was fixed at 371¼ grains of silver or 24¾ grains of gold. By 1795, the 15:1 ratio was under pressure because of the revolution in Paris as Gold rose against silver pushing the ratio to 15½ ounces of silver to one ounce of gold. By 1799, the ratio continued to expand reaching 15¾ ounces. This presented a huge arbitrage opportunity, so bullion dealers bought United States gold coins using Spanish silver coins and they shipped them to Europe to be melted and re-sold profiting almost 1oz of silver. The net gold capital outflow was huge and American coin was vanishing rapidly. Finally, in 1804, when Napoléon Bonaparte became emperor,  President Thomas Jefferson was forced to order the suspension of minting gold $10 eagles and silver coins. All we see are copper coins being produced at this point in time. This was the backdrop to the Act of 1806 which made all foreign coins legal tender.

In addition to demonetizing foreign coins, the Coinage Act of 1857 also discontinued the half cent. Furthermore, the penny was reduced in size. The large cent was discontinued and regular coinage of the Flying Eagle cent began. The Act fixed the weight and measure of US one-cent pieces at 4.655 grams, which was composed of 88% copper and 12% nickel. It also mandated that this new copper/nickel alloy be received as payment for the worn gold and silver coins turned in at the mint. The effective aim was to limit the domestic money supply by crushing European competition. This was the first major step towards the government essentially having a monopoly over the money supply.

The Coinage Act of 1857 significantly altered the way American business was conducted. Since the beginning of the Colonies, businesses accepted any form of payment as long as it was made of specie. Following this Act of 1857, American business no longer accepted foreign coins and only US coins were accepted. Throughout this period, there was fierce competition among foreign exchange dealers in the United States. The ability of the US Mint to finally produce enough coinage made much of the foreign silver coinage obsolete.

Mar 10 2018

The Economic Confidence Model & Why there are 6 waves


Armstrong Economics Blog/ECM

Re-Posted Mar 10, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Dear Mr. Armstrong,

Firstly – sorry to hear about the passing of your mother.
Secondly – thank you very much for reading and answering questions.
My question – what is the significance of the six repetitions in the ECM? Six 8.6 years make a cycle and six of these make a larger cycle and then six of these make a super-cycle. Why six? Why not five or seven? Can you explain the significance?
Thank you
g
ANSWER: The Economic Confidence Model is actually a three-dimensional wave structure. The volatility is a different frequency and that is what determines the number of 8.6-year waves for this is building in intensity. What you get at the end of these 51.6-year waves is very profound. After the 1774.95 peak, we end up with a revolution against the monarchy. The next wave peak in 1826.55 Russo-Persian War, 1826-1828, Greek War of Independence, Battle of Monte Santiago between Brazil and Argentina, Mexican Constitution is formed, the Maryland Democratic Party begins creating the confrontation between the Democrats and Republicans (South v North), and even Thomas Jefferson and John Adams both died on the 4th of July 1826 (1826.50) whereas the peak of the wave was July 19th. The next wave 1878 saw the Long Depression which was called the “Great Depression” until 1929-1932. Then the next wave was 1981.35 which marked the peak in interest rates even to the day. The next one will be 2032 and this will be followed by the shift from the West to the East in economic power.
Mar 9 2018

The Creature from Jekyll Island – Unprofessional Propaganda Book


Armstrong Economics Blog/Central Banks

Re-Posted Mar 9, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

The_Creature_from_Jekyll_Island-2

QUESTION: Martin. Have you read the book Creature of Jekyll Island by Edward Griffin it is about the Feds and how they control? Many years ago I thought it was fiction but after reading it again it is true. My Question what can we do money will be what they want it to be the control?

ST

ANSWER: The book you refer to is propaganda. There are quotes in there that he simply made up about the Rothschilds. Go ahead and try and find the source. I have written about this before. That book is highly dangerous for it completely misrepresents and fails to understand that elastic money began in the 1850s and was created privately by clearing houses. It worked perfectly fine and it was not economically disastrous but BENEFICIAL!

The ability to create money by the Federal Reserve is essential. However, that design was directly beneficial for it would buy ONLY short-term corporate paper in a crisis when banks could not lend. Buying in corporate paper saved jobs. The key was a simple fact it was corporate and NOT the government. Corporates have to pay back – the government does not.

It was not that the Fed was evil, it was that the Fed was usurped by Congress during World War I and directed to buy only the paper of the government. It was that aspect that has altered the role of the central bank and is demonstrated who the ECB in Europe now own 40% of all government debt and they cannot stop without creating a crisis.

The Creature of Jekyll Island advocates what Jackson did, and that will lead to a massive Sovereign Debt Crisis among the States and undermined the entire economy both domestically as well as internationally. That is by no means the answer. The answer lies in the curtailment of politicians. The banks owned the Fed BECAUSE it was a bailout system that they paid into. It was never intended that taxpayer money would be used to bail out banks. Once the banks became the seller of government debt, they then had a grip on government and with the Fed only buying government debt, the entire system is nothing like the intended design.

Mar 9 2018

Interbank Market Collapsing


Armstrong Economics Blog/Banking Crisis

Re-Posted Mar 9, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; Has interbank lending collapse due to a lack of confidence concerning counter-party risk?

Thank you for being a rare source with experience

ER

ANSWER: Yes that is a correct statement. The failure of Lehman and Bear Sterns was the result of interbank lending when they could not make good on the collateral they posted the day before in the REPO market. Then we had the collapse of MF Global, which was also a loss linked to the overnight markets. Now mix in the LIBOR scandal and banks were scrutinized for manipulating LIBOR rates in the interbank market.

The interbank lending market is a market in which banks extend loans to one another for a specified term, typically 24 hrs. Most interbank loans are for maturities of one week or less, the majority being overnight. Such loans are made at the interbank rate (also called the overnight rate if the term of the loan is overnight).

The collapse of this market is a clear warning that liquidity is extremely vulnerable. When crisis strikes, liquidity will simply vanish entirely. This warns that volatility will rise sharply and it appears to be predominantly focused in on the debt market.