Tag Archives: Illuminati

Mar 6 2018

Putin’s Address to the Nation & the World


Armstrong Economics Blog/Russia

Re-Posted Mar 6, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

 

Putin’s address on March 1st to the Federal Assembly seems to have sparked a lot of crazy emails with people talking nonsense about things they do not even come close to understanding. Yes, the headline grabber was Putin’s statement about a new invincible cruise missile. I will address that in a moment. Overlooked, however, was Putin addressing the real issues of economic concerns that seem to have gone over everyone’s head. The problem with the Oligarchs where he is implying that things need to change for the good of Russia. China moved to Capitalism directly from Communism and we see the difference with China poised to surpass the US economy by 2032 and is already the second largest economy in the world. Russia, on the other hand, simply moved from state-controlled economic system to one where political friends became Oligarchs and prevented a free market economy. Russia economically ranks 12th in the world behind the USA, China, Japan, Germany, France, United Kingdom, India, Brazil, Italy, Canada, and South Korea. This is what Putin was addressing, the need to truly open up the economy to competition. If you try to compete against an Oligarch by opening a restaurant in Moscow, you will be lucky to survive beyond 24 hours. Russia is economically a third world country with a lot of weapons. Putin realizes that for all its military power, it collapsed BECAUSE it did not have the economy to support its military ambitions.

Putin also addressed trying to keep people from leaving Russia. Despite the Global Warming movement that is really trying to reduce the population, in fact, the population is declining among the industrialized nations and Russia is no exception. The population of Russia peaked at 148,689,000 back in 1991, just before the breakup of the Soviet Union. Ever since the collapse of Communism, people realize that the State will not simply take care of them. As a direct result, the birth rates have been steadily dropping and there have been abnormally high death rates in Russia as well among the elderly. Russia’s population has been declining at an annual rate of 0.5%, or about 750,000 to 800,000 people per year since 1991. Add to this figure, the migration of Russian women looking for Western men, and you have a crisis brewing in the decline of population in Russia that threatens its long-term viability.

Nevertheless, the area of Putin’s speech that has sparked the wildest claims were those comments which mentioned the invincible strategic nuclear systems in various stages of development. The boast of a missile that can penetrate the US defense system has been known behind the curtain as the RS-28 “Sarmat” system which is a new land-based heavy intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). This is what is being fitted with advanced technology to assure penetration of any missile defense.

Putin definitely made global headlines with these comments. However, I really did not think it warranted comment since Russia’s ability to defeat U.S. missile defenses is nothing new. I suppose I have known that fact but it seems many did not. Let me explain something that may not be common knowledge. U.S. policy has been not to deploy a defensive system that could neutralize a Russian retaliatory response to a U.S. nuclear attack. The reason this is the basic policy is the concern that such a system which was called Star Wars, would destabilize the world and result in a new arms race where Russia would be driven to re-establish a retaliatory capability. Putin’s response was directed at Trump and his administration’s idea of reversing that policy creating a new Ballistic Missile Defense Review. This was part of the February 2018 U.S. Nuclear Posture Review which states that any improvements in U.S. defensive capabilities will be deployed in such a way as to “preclude an arms race” with China or Russia. Therefore, Putin was addressing this very issue and to make it clear that there MUST remain a balance between powers for all the nukes keep everyone in check.

Putin also addressed a maneuverable hypersonic glide the “Avangard” which is a new missile system with a vehicle of this type. Putin also mentioned a long-range nuclear-powered unmanned underwater vehicle that can be fitted with a nuclear warhead, known commonly as “Status-6.” Both of these systems are designed to evade any U.S. defensive measures — Avangard by presenting an unpredictable flight trajectory, while Status-6 is an entirely new sea-based way to deliver a nuclear weapon. Both are designed to maintain the power balance.

The invincible new cruise missile was really a statement to Trump not to start a new arms race. You simply have to understand what is going on behind the curtain right now.

Mar 6 2018

Italian Elections – Another Nail in the Coffin of Brussels?


Armstrong Economics Blog/European Union

Re-Posted Mar 6, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

EU CrisisThe Italian election results are in and once again it demonstrates that correlating economics with voting, you end up with a far more accurate forecast. Trying to predict based upon samples of calling people appears to be not merely questionable, but also prone to human bias. We have been warning that this trend toward nationalism is growing worldwide and especially within Europe. The Italian vote proves that the refugee issue is a major crisis and the people do not support it. Civil Unrest in Ital has been rising, but nobody listens to the people.

The politicians in Europe and even in the United States with respect to Trump, have assumed that this is merely a populist movement that would quickly fade into memory. Career politicians have had it their way for so long, they cannot fathom why after robbing the Treasury for decades and nobody said anything, why are the people suddenly mad now? The Italian vote should be a wake-up call to Brussels, but they will remain in a state of denial. Their attempt to PUNISH Britain they believed would prevent other states from leaving. They are sadly mistaken.

A majority of Italian voters have spoken and they supported the Eurosceptic candidates in the national election. Italy had been a steadfast championed the European project. However, the dreams have fallen to the ground as dusk in the winds of politics. Those in Brussels have been totally dishonest with the European people swearing that a single currency would solve all the ills and that they were not trying to take over Europe making it the United States of Europe with one government. The promise that a single currency would also produce a single interest rate for all proved also a complete lie.

The early results released by the interior ministry pointed to a hung parliament, with the only hope of perhaps a center-right coalition, with about 37% of the vote could perhaps secure a majority once parliamentary seats are allocated ignoring the people as they have done in Germany. Any way we cut this, the Italian vote is a complete repudiation of Brussels following the trend set by BRXIT for Britain to leave the European Union.

The newspapers are reporting that unlike British voters, Italians would NOT support an exit from Europe or a referendum on leaving the Eurozone. Nonetheless, the very populist parties who score big in this vote have previously been open to a referendum on the Euro and will remain as an important barometer of the mood of the country moving forward. The burning question comes down to – are Italians proud to be Italians? Or do they buy into this view that an Italian is nothing without Europe?

The Italian vote on Sunday also marked the rise of two relatively new political parties that had been ignored and laughed at as fringe movements – (1) the anti-establishment Five Star Movement (M5S), which early results showed had 31% of the vote, and (2) the anti-migrant and Eurosceptic League, formerly known as the Northern League. Neither group warrants being laughed at or ignored anymore.

The former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi appears to have lost to a younger rival on the far right, Matteo Salvini, who supports radical immigration policies that even include mass deportations of immigrants who are in Italy illegally. Many have called Salvini a racist, as they are using that label in Britain to disparage anyone who votes for BRIXT. However, this is not really a racist issue. During hard times, during the 1840s, there was a nationalist movement in the United States against the migration of Irish. That even turned into gun battles on the street of Philadelphia and it had nothing to do with RACE!

The RACIST label being used against anyone who opposes the mass immigration from Africa under the pretense of war in Syria is simply a tactic used to defend a policy that is indefensible. Regardless of race, this is a crisis created by conflicting cultures and no politician will address the issue because they must have to admit a mistake. The performance of Salvini’s has been a clear warning sign that this entire Refugee Crisis in Europe is indeed tearing the continent apart. It was implemented unilaterally by Merkel who was concerned that her image was being harmed by her position refusing to compromise or foregive any debt with Greece. Germany tried to cover-up the Refugee Crisis without success.  Only when the elections were coming up did Markel suddenly flip and said she too would deport refugees. This was only after Merkel’s party suffered a historical defeat in Berlin local elections. The statistics show that 70% of the migrants are young men who are economic migrants, not political refugees. Whatever happened to women’s rights in the middle of all this?

Salvini made a “gentleman’s agreement” with Berlusconi that if the center-right were to win a majority, whichever party comes out with the most votes within the coalition would name the next prime minister. I have written previously that removing Berlusconi from office was a coup staged by Brussels all because he was beginning to favor exiting the Euro. Salvini also publicly stated that the Euro as a currency was destined to fail, and he also said he would not rule out a referendum on the issue.

Then we have the former Prime Minister Renzi’s leading lieutenant, Maria Elena Boschi, won a safe parliamentary seat in South Tyrol in northern Italy, two other prominent politicians, the interior minister, Marco Minniti, and the culture minister, Dario Franceschini, were defeated. This is clearly demonstrating that there is an underlying rejection of Europe and the Brussels’ agenda.  Consequently, Renzi has stepped down as head of the Democratic party (PD). Renzi has seen his political career go down in flames all because he would not listen to the people.

The politicians have simply backed Merkel, who never put this entire refugee matter to a vote among politicians no less the people. The Refugee Crisis demonstrates that there is no democratic mechanism within the European Union because politicians have viewed that they are smarter than the people and they are just stupid sheep who do as they are told.

 

The results also demonstrated that Sicily, which had traditionally supported Berlusconi’s Forza Italia, also moved toward M5S, which is a broader movement rather than a party that is variously considered populist, embracing anti-establishment, environmentalist, alter-globalist, and Eurosceptic philosophies.

Mar 5 2018

GDPR – Are You Ready?


Armstrong Economics Blog/European Union

Re-Posted Mar 5, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

The new so-called “General Data Protection Regulation” (GDPR) of the EU goes into full force on May 25, 2018. GDPR is a serious measure which is really designed to stem any criticism of the EU Commission. The claimed purpose is to stop propaganda pretending this will boost consumer confidence, revive the economy and generate billions of dollars in savings. What this is all about is the plain fact that this regulation will lay the foundation establishing a new layer of bureaucracy pretending to protect citizens but will burden the private sector since there are no specific injuries that are defined in advance leaving the enforcement arbitrary in the hands of bureaucrats at their discretion.

Across all of Europe, nobody understands exactly what is allowed and what is forbidden, who has to take what action, but the penalties of up to €20 million or 4% of your annual turnover are shocking. If you violate these uncertain rules when using personal data who can find yourself charged for simply doing normal business. This new EU regulation provides for a major threat to all companies in every field without exception. It appears to be clandestinely intended to be a revenue-raising tool that is just undefined. This regulation could be the straw that breaks the back of public patience and economic development in Europe. So far, such actions were always directed against individual industries such as the banks, which everyone else ignored since it was not their pocket being hit. This submissiveness unfolded more like the famous saying of Martin Niemoller (1892-1984) how the Nazi came for each group one at a time and nobody said anything until it was their turn and there was nobody left to ask for help.

Nobody knows if it is even okay to congratulate a customer on a birthday. If you can only send one e-mail to people who have expressly agreed in advance, can you send any sort of greeting even for Christmas? You are not allowed to send these persons any suitable e-mail or ask them for authorization by phone. A letter with a request for permission to send an e-mail is permitted. Lawyers cannot interpret exceptions in the vague formulations for even that will be just opinions that vary from one lawyer to the next. Everyone wants, everyone needs clarity but it does not exist!

This legislation is akin to the Writs of Assistance entered by King George III, which sparked the American Revolution. The defending lawyer against the King’s Writs of Assistance was James Otis (1725-1783) who pronounced these writs were “the worst instrument of arbitrary power, the most destructive of English liberty, and the fundamental principles of law, that ever was found in an English law book.” Otis warned that the king placed discretion in the hands of every agent to act as he desired. Nothing has changed for the government can do whatever it desires today and it is always the burden of the citizen to prove he has any rights whatsoever.

The EU has created the very same type of act. Allowing penalties to be imposed at the discretion of government agents without any clearly defined law is extremely arbitrary. The only thing truly defined are the penalties which can be up to €20 million Euros or 4% of the gross turnover of any business. Government agencies such as the judiciary, the police, the financial and intelligence services enjoy a special status, naturally.

Lawyers cannot even agree on whether the sending of an email by a company to a person is allowed or not for a birthday or holiday. Does there have to be prior consent to receiving an email? Some lawyers have warned that you may not be able to even send an email to ask for permission to send one. A company who sends unwanted emails commits a punishable violation of the regulation. Simply requiring to have an “unsubscribe” feature fails to comply with the law.

There are the countless emails we all get from Nigeria promising you are now a multi-millionaire just send your personal details so they can clean out your account. Just how is an EU regulation going to be applied overseas? Can a company that bombards people with emails constantly every day just because they look at their site but did not buy anything could be charged in Europe even if they are sending them from the USA. There is such a thing as territorial jurisdiction, but then again there is also extradition agreements. It appears that legitimate businesses will be hunted and fined for just doing commerce. The pretend emails that are criminally intended to grab your money or hold your computer for ransom will never be caught in the process.

The entire basis of Microsoft Windows is to push advertising and to take your surfing the net without any warning they are doing it. The latest Windows version was interesting. We turned off auto-update and two separate computers crashed at the same time and forced a reboot and then took 30 minutes to install updates. This seems that you cannot even opt-out even if you pay for the Pro Version. The vagueness of this law could actually call into question Windows when it is up to the discretion of an agent.

BTW – we do not sell anyone’s names, we do not send endless solicitations every day, anything we send as to notices of posts you must subscribe to for free.

Mar 5 2018

Germany Gets a Grand Coalition


Armstrong Economics Blog/European Union

Re-Posted Mar 5, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

The SPD members voted by a two-thirds majority for their party’s entry into a renewed grand coalition. The acting Social Democrats (SPD) party leader Olaf Scholz came out and said: “We now have clarity: The SPD will enter the next federal government.” The SPD had no choice. The polls showed if they returned and put it to an election, they would lose to the rising right-wing. Germany will move into a grand coalition but it truly lacks the majority support of the German people. This means that political unrest in Germany will continue to rise.

Chancellor Angela Merkel finally reached a deal this past Wednesday to form a new German grand coalition government by handing the powerful finance ministry to the country’s main center-left party SPD in an agreement aimed at ending months of political gridlock. Both the CDU and SPD realized that if they failed, both would lose seats to the rising AfD. Merkel’s conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), its Bavaria-only sister, the Christian Social Union, and the center-left SPD agreed to a 177-page deal that leads off with the promise of “a new awakening for Europe.”

Germany has already broken its post-World War II record for the longest time in its latest election on Sept. 24 to the swearing-in of a new government. That is still at least several weeks away. Merkel has been leading a caretaker government, which has not been in any position to play any significant role in the debate on the fate of the EU going forward. That spotlight has been taken by France’s President Emmanuel Macron who seems to enjoy his newfound power.

Schulz’s has taken a course in recent months that simply undermined his authority. On election night, Schulz vowed to take the party into opposition against the CDU. He reversed course in November after Merkel’s efforts to build a coalition with two smaller parties collapsed. Merkel needed only the approval of a party congress of her CDU which seems to do whatever she tells them to do. The Social Democrats are set to get the foreign, labor and finance ministries to run. The finance ministry is the major prize, for it was held by Merkel’s CDU for the past eight years. This has been a major influential position given Germany’s status as the eurozone’s biggest economy. The interior ministry, also held by the CDU, would go to Bavaria’s CSU, which has pushed hard to curb the number of migrants entering Germany.

Mar 1 2018

Why Not Take More?


A professor at UCLA seems surprised that poor people in America don’t vote for more redistributive policies. Maybe they have more moral fiber than intellectuals give them credit for.

Mar 1 2018

The New German Political Hawk?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Germany

Re-Posted Mar 1, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

The German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen was being touted as a possible successor to Merkel. She has spoken at the Munich Security Conference stating that there must be “the common will to actually use the military weight when circumstances require it.” Leyen has come out saying that Germany should no longer hide behind its history, but must accept that soldiers must fight for the security of the nation and the freedom of the people. Leyen’s French colleague, Florence Parly, has also called for closer European military cooperation.

The NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has warned against risks that confront Europe as a whole. He came out and said: “The truth is: the European Union cannot protect Europe alone.”

France has been stating that Europe must be militarily independent of the USA. Nonetheless, t defense of Europe without the help of Norway, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States, would actually be very hard to imagine.

The scuttlebutt is that Leyen is a hawk who would have little problem going to war against Russia. She was seen as on the short-list of successors to Merkel, but she is going to NATO instead. The Hessian Prime Minister Bouffier is surprisingly distant to Chancellor Merkel as the dissatisfaction with Merkel rises.

Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer is also being talked about as a successor to Merkel. She is the first woman to lead the government of Saarland and only the fourth woman to govern any German state.
Feb 24 2018

Germany Turning to the Right


Armstrong Economics Blog/Germany

Re-Posted Feb 24, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

What is happening in Germany is very critical because it is a reflection of the global trend. Schultz is under attack because the SPD has fallen to such a state that it is barely above the AfD. Party members are deeply concerned as I wrote that Schultz wanted a coalition for personal power. Yet there was another issue at stake. There was also a growing fear that the SPD would lose even more seats in a new election.

Merkel, many remark will have to be dragged out of office by her hair. She wants to remain Chancellor until 2021. Because of that personal desire, she too wants a coalition deal. Therefore, both Schultz and Merkel are seen as a deal for personal political status.

Meanwhile, there is a rising trend of right-wing groups in Germany that the refugee crisis has inspired. Politicians have for far too long regarded the people as fools who will accept whatever the politicians tell them. Those days are passing.

Trade Union Confederation (DGB), labor unions are turning much more right-wing. The AfD and other right-extremist groups are preparing to win votes and mandates with trade unions such as IG metal and Verdi von März. They see this trend as never having so good prospects at the polls.

Politics is shifting in Germany and we have the refugee crisis and EU policies to thank. Many members of the SPD party are warning that if they fail to agree to the coalition, a new round of elections will see their party be greatly reduced.

Feb 23 2018

Canada Also Adopted the BAIL-IN moving from Socialism to Tyranny


Armstrong Economics Blog/Banking Crisis

Re-Posted Feb 23, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

Yes – Canada has also adopted the BAIL-IN abandoning the socialist BAILOUT so banks can take depositors money legally. This is how we move from Capitalism to Socialism to Tyranny,

 

Feb 23 2018

Britain’s New Law UNEXPLAINED WEALTH ORDERS Targeting the Rich


Armstrong Economics Blog/BRITAIN

Re-Posted Feb 23, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

From January 31st, 2018, the UK authorities have a new power. They can now use new and expansive investigative authority to require both individuals and corporate bodies to provide information as to how they acquired property. Known as Unexplained Wealth Orders (“UWOs”), which is another step toward tyranny all because governments are totally incapable of managing their own finances. They line their own pockets with promises of pensions for government workers and when they need to be paid their attitude is simply that the people are like an apple orchard – just go pick some more apples when you get hungry.

The new UWO imposes obligations to disclose information with respect to property anywhere in the world and can even be served on persons living outside the UK. Britain is taking a step closer toward imposing worldwide taxation for it is now requiring even non-resident to divulge information that historically was not taxable. The legal framework behind UWOs, and their interaction with other criminal and civil statutes, as well as the implications for individuals, institutions, and trustees are serious issues.

What has taken place is rather stark and we can expect that other countries will file Britain’s lead. This new law has turned the entire legal system on its head. We have always believed that we were supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. That has been completely eradicated from the law. The UWOs now presume guilty and it becomes your burden to prove you are innocent.

The Legal background

Sections 1 to 9 of the Criminal Finances Act 2017 (“CFA”) have now amended section 362 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (“POCA”), This has created a whole new regime of UWOs. As of January 31st, 2018, several of the UK authorities have new powers including the National Crime Agency, Serious Fraud Office, Financial Conduct Authority and HM Revenue & Customs. All of these agencies are now able to require both individuals and corporate bodies to explain how they obtained an interest in a specified property.

The Court may now also engage in a UWO requirement where the following four conditions are satisfied:

Condition 1: There are reasonable grounds to believe that the person holds the asset(s).

Condition 2: There are reasonable grounds to believe that the cumulative value of the asset(s) is greater than £50,000.

Condition 3: There are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the known source of the person’s lawfully obtained income would have been insufficient for the purposes of obtaining the property – for these purposes, the Court will consider any mortgage or other security that it is reasonable to assume was or may have been available and assume that the person obtained the property for market value.

Condition 4: The person falls into one of the following categories –

· The person is a “Politically Exposed Person” (“PEP”) i.e. someone entrusted with prominent public functions by an international organisation or any country other than the United Kingdom or another EEA state;
· The person is a family member, a close associate or a connected person of a PEP;
· There are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the person is, or has been, involved in serious crime (either in the UK or elsewhere) (“a suspected criminal”) – serious crime will include fraud, money laundering, tax evasion, sanctions offences, and bribery and corruption; or
· The person is connected with a suspected criminal.

UWOs must be served in accordance with the usual Civil Procedure Rules. So in other words, we are looking at a whole new type of power. You are now GUILTY and you must prove your INNOCENCE.  I have explained that I was held in prison for “Civil Contempt” not CRIMINAL. The difference is one I was being “coerced” and the other is you are being “punished” so only then are you entitled to a real trial by jury.

Here we have the same pretense. The burden and standard of proof regarding UWOs fall under the civil investigative tools and as such they do not form part of the UK’s criminal law regime. Therefore, as long as it is civil, you can be stripped of all rights and any imprisonment is “coercive” so you are not being punished. Consequently, the UK authorities can engage in full-blown tyranny applying for a UWO they will only need to show “reasonable grounds” for their suspicions. This is a much lighter legal standard than the “realistic prospect of conviction” standard required in order to bring criminal prosecutions what is call in America “probable cause”.

The real danger her is there is no practical limitation on the scope. That means the UK is applying the scope to worldwide turning its citizens and corporations as well as trusts into tax slaves. Laws are normally limited to TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION meaning if you killed someone in Paris, you stand trial in Paris not in Hong Kong or wherever you are a citizen. Hence, here the scope of UWOs can be made in respect of any property, regardless of where in the world it is located converting everyone to a tax slave. This applies to any individual or corporate, whatever their place of residence, business or incorporation (there is no requirement to demonstrate a nexus to the UK). This is really tyranny for the way the code is written, they could bring this to anyone even if not British. UWOs can be made in respect of any property, including property acquired before January 31st, 2018, as well as property held by more than one person meaning partnerships and trusts. Laws have traditionally been regarded as tyranny if they are applied retroactively, known as Ex Post Facto. Here, because this is “civil” in pretense, they are circumventing all the historic safeguards against legal persecutions by writing a law after the fact to make something criminal.

The penalties of a failure to respond to the UWO within the prescribed time without reasonable excuse will give rise to a presumption that the property specified in the UWO is recoverable for the purposes of a civil recovery order (“CRO”) which means the property will be presumed to be ill-gotten gains and seized by the government. You then will have the burden to prove you are innocent and you are presumed to be guilty. If you refuse to answer, they can throw you in prison until you die as they did with me using the contempt of court powers. If you lie in any statement in response to a UWO, now this becomes criminal and punishable by a prison sentence of up to two years and/or a fine.

You will be deemed guilty unless you have “reasonable excuse” to have failed to comply with the terms of the UWO, yet what constitutes a “reasonable excuse” is not actually defined. In the States, a mother was required to pay her son’s student loan even though he had been killed and the court held that was not a “reasonable excuse” so this becomes a pure tyranny.

The UWO also allows in the legislative changes a new Interim Freezing Order (“IFO”). So, the government can freeze your assets until you comply. The High Court may grant a IFO to prohibit a respondent to a UWO (and any other person with an interest in the property) from dealing with the property specified in the UWO. If the court issues an IFO, the agency bringing the action must determine whether or not to instigate proceedings within 60 days. If it fails to do so, the IFO will expire, however, the relevant authority is still free to determine what proceedings it may take against the respondent “at any time” in the future without any statute of limitations – another tyranny under the law.

magna_carta_signing

The DANGER in this legislation is simple. It is pure and unadulterated tyranny for it removes ALL protections of law and shreds the English Bill of Rights no less the Magna Carta.  Then King John also derived income from fines, court fees, and the sale of charters and other privileges. Fines were called “amercements” and at the time, it was said that there was hardly an Englishman of substance who had not been amerced at least once a year. Magna Carta introduced the right to trial by jury, where the people decide if someone is guilty and what the fine should be. This drastically curtailed the king’s abuse of the legal system at that time. King John was very unpopular, for he had intensified his efforts to maximize all possible sources of income to regain Normandy. Contemporary commentators describe him as “Avaricious, miserly, extortionate and money minded.”

The entire right to trial by jury was to stop the king and his corrupt courts from fining people to raise money. This law has shredded the Magna Carta and has restored all the former tyranny of the King once again to raise money. In 2015, that marked the 800th year following the signing of Magna Carta.

Feb 22 2018

The Coming Banking Crisis & The End of Bailouts


Armstrong Economics Blog/Banking Crisis

Re-Posted Feb 21, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

Behind the curtain, there is a growing concern about a serious banking crisis beginning once again in Europe. Many governments are talking about the crisis behind-the-curtain and we are now beginning to see steps that are being taken to end the TO-BIG-TO-FAIL policies that dominated the 2007-2009 Crash.

The United States is looking at a new radical bank rescue policy where the government is proposing to revise a central pillar of the idea of bailing out banks creating new financial regulation with a new Chapter 14 bankruptcy procedure. They are looking at eliminating the risk of taxpayers’ costs to bail out banks. They are investigating the means for an orderly resolution so that the taxpayers do not have to bail out the banks. This development is causing some concern among the high-flying Wall Street banks, for if that is the case, then another crisis as 2007-2009 will result in even Goldman Sachs closing. The proposal looks to shift the burden to the shareholders and creditors of that bank. This means depositors who are thus creditors.

In Australia, we see similar legislation being proposed. This is the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Bill 2017. This also authorizes bail-ins bringing an end to the bailout.