QUESTION: Marty, do you happen to know what type/kind of shekel coins Jesus was most likely betrayed for?

Thanks,

A

ANSWER: The Biblical account makes no mention of shekels for they were not the coin of currency. Thirty pieces of silver was the payment for Judas Iscariot’s betrayal of Jesus, according to an account in the Gospel of Matthew 26:15 in the New Testament. The Roman Emperor at the time was Tiberius (14-37 AD). The exact date of his crucifixion is not known. Most scholars have provided estimates for the crucifixion to be within the range 30–33 AD, with perhaps April 7, 30 AD to be the majority of consensus. The pieces of silver would have been of the silver denarius. The amount of coinage under Augustus (27 BC-14 AD) was massive. The coinage of Tiberius was very frugal.

The only local coinage was that of tiny bronze coins for small change. To put this in perspective, the wages of a Roman foot soldier in 30 AD was 900 sestertii annually. A silver denarius was worth 4 sestertii. Therefore, 30 pieces of silver was about one and a half month’s pay for a Roman soldier. It was not a huge amount of money, but it was respectable for an average Jew.

The Roman denarius weighed about 3.7 grams in reality when its theoretical weight was supposed to be 4 grams. When the Jews revolted against Rome, that is when they over-struct or melted down other coins and issued their Shekel which was a Sumerian unit of weight. This was the dominant system from Babylon to Carthage throughout Northern Africa. The Shekel was by no means simply a Jewish standard of weight or coin.

COMMENT: Marty; the books you handed out at the WEC are spectacular. One first edition just sold for $2,000 on eBay. The second edition is going for $300 on eBay but there aren’t many of those either. I just wanted to say thank you for your generous gift to the attendees. The book is worth the price of the ticket, lol. I hope you get the time to do the next one.

DF

REPLY: I am trying to have another book for this year’s WEC. I have collected books my whole life. I know the Greatest Bull Market in History from 1986 goes for $2500 to $3000 on eBay. I only have one copy of that myself. One of those was presented to President Reagan back in the day. So First Editions are always worth a lot more. The second edition of Manipulating the World Economy was amazing. It sold out in less than 3 hours. That is the one that some members of the press got their hands on. Not the first edition. We will have a 3rd edition but that will not have the same value as the 1st and 2nd. If that book becomes a major classic when the economy turns down, then its value should rise even more. Keynes first published his work in 1921 despite the fact he wrote it before WWI. His book: The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money was published in 1936. They will bring $3,000+. Even a 1799 edition of Adam Smith still brings over $2,000.

I am finishing up two books I really want to get out this year before all my time evaporates. I am trying for the Geometry of Time and the Economic Confidence Model, which is the proof back to the inception of recorded time. I know a lot of people are waiting for the 3rd edition of Manipulating the World Economy. We are working on that too.

QUESTION: Do you agree with Bridgewater’s Bob Prince that the Boom-Bust Cycle is over? Have they made an offer to buy you out yet?

SH

ANSWER: Absolutely no way. His theory is that the tightening of central banks all around the world “wasn’t intended to cause the downturn, wasn’t intended to cause what it did.” Prince explained, “I think lessons were learned from that and I think it was really a marker that we’ve probably seen the end of the boom-bust cycle.”

That is an interesting take, but it reflects the typical investment manager focus. They tend not to pay attention to history and always assume that the financial world started as far back as maybe 1971 if not 1990. The boom-bust cycle that he refers to has been the classical economic expansion and contraction in economic activity. However, the very book I just published, “Manipulating the World Economy,” deals with this issue of central bank intervention. He seems to think that since the financial crisis and monetary easing has disrupted that cycle, that it has fueled the longest-running bull market in stocks.

This is why Bridgewater has had a terrible year in 2019. They have completely misunderstood the market and do not grasp the capital flows and how they drive markets. Indeed, Bridgewater Associates, the world’s largest hedge fund firm, had a very difficult 2019 because of this view. The firm’s flagship Pure Alpha strategy was essentially flat in 2019, with Pure Alpha 18%, the more leveraged version, falling 0.5% for the year, according to an investor in the funds. It has been this fundamental focus which is why they missed the bull market.

The repo market is already proving the idea that the boom-bust cycle is dead. Interest rates are pushing higher and the Fed is desperate to try to prevent that rise. You cannot defeat the business cycle. Even Paul Volcker admitted that much (Rediscovery of the Business Cycle). Many people have thought that governments have killed the business cycle. They have ALL BEEN PROVEN to be wrong!

No, I have never met Ray Dalio that I remember. If I did, it was just in passing perhaps at some cocktail party. Bridgewater is not a client so the idea of some offer is not even plausible. It is one thing to take in a partner, it’s something entirely different to sell everything to some private firm which would then have exclusive use. That is not my goal and I would not live long enough to spend some mythical billion-dollar sell-out. Sorry, that is not my agenda. I would like to see Socrates help to better manage the world economy, not make money for a bank or hedge fund exclusively.

Despite all the yelling and threats on top of forecasts that Britain will fall apart without the EU, the markets do not reflect such a doomsday outlook. We do see 2021 and 2023 as important targets for turning points. The critical level will still remain at the 8250 level. If that is breached, then the political crisis in the EU will begin. The departure of Britain will leave a major hole in the budget of the EU which wants to fund its own army. As pressure rises on other members to chip in more money and raise taxes on their citizens even further, the European Project will remain a serious threat to the entire world economy.

QUESTION: Marty, finally we decided to open a bank account in the USA which is not part of the CRS. But now we do not know which US-bank is safe enough and where to go! You mentioned that Goldmann Sachs, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase have derivative exposure linked back to Deutsche Bank. So those banks are not safe enough. The can fail in a contagion. You said also that Wells Fargo has the least derivative exposure.

In another article you said that the BANK of NEW YORK would be good as a custodian. Would the Bank of New York be safe enough in a contagion? The Bank of New York has a branch in Frankfurt. Could we open an USD-account in Frankfurt and still be outside the CRS? Or would this be a major fault.

Would you please give us a hint how to proceed as this choice is way over our head. Which bank is safe and outside of the CRS at the same time.

Thank you very much for sharing your experience and knowledge with us!
GB

ANSWER: Wells Fargo is a bank that is perhaps more accessible. Bank of New York has a big custodian business. Wells Fargo does not have offices outside of the US that provide services to retail or small business customers. Remember that any branches of US banks outside the United States are not part of the Fed system and are not FDIC insured. If you want a retail type of arrangement then Wells Fargo may be better. Bank of America has probably the best facilities for wiring money internationally online.

If you are dealing with a US branch of any bank, it must be FDIC insured and that is per person, not per account or banks. You do not want any account with a US bank’s branch outside the USA for they would be under the control of the local central bank.

NOTE: I do not receive any referral fees from either Wells Fargo or Bank of New York. We do notaccept any commission from banks or brokers for any referrals whatsoever. We maintain our strict policy of no conflicts or interest.

COMMENT: Martin, as an avid follower, I took your advice to heart to try to fix our interest rate for the loan we have on our house. This was the answer I got from our direct advisor: “Have looked at your file, you can still enjoy your low-interest rate until 01/12/2020, in other words refinancing is only recommended at the earliest in November 2020. Your capital will then fall to 37,000 euros outstanding, the interest may already rise to 3 % (then you still benefit in November compared to refinance now!) ? Repocrisis is in the USA, Europe is supported by the ECB, which keeps interest rates low? Or am i wrong?” Isn’t this the perfect example of how well people are informed, even those working at the banks? Or do we already see some intended lingering of banks, trying not to get caught on the wrong side of the risk? Thanks for answering or using this in your private blog as a perfect example…

BL

ANSWER: They may have been instructed from above to keep loans floating because the Repo Crisis is demonstrating that rates are under pressure to rise, not fall!

If you have a mortgage that is floating, lock it in with a fixed rate.

Those looking to buy have a dilemma. On the one hand, real estate prices are high in many regions and you can wait for prices to come down before buying. On the other hand, when prices start to tumble it will be the result of an inability to get long-term fixed loans so prices will fall to where people will be able to get loans or pay cash. The solution may be to buy when you can get a long-term fixed mortgage and then hedge it with eventually shorting rates where there will be a liquid marke