Tag Archives: New Monetary Theory
Interview: The World According to Martin Armstrong Part 3, The Rise of the Neocons
Armstrong Economics Blog/Armstrong in the Media Re-Posted Mar 18, 2023 by Martin Armstrong
Summary:
Martin Armstrong joins us in this episode to give his perspective on what’s happening in the world—addressing topics like the war in Ukraine, gold, central bank currencies, cryptocurrency, and more. We discuss what’s in store for the war and whether there is an end in sight, noting the US’ tendency to get involved in endless wars with no strategic defense. Furthermore, Russell emphasizes that the market will eventually break to the upside, and that capital will move from the bond markets and into the private sector. Tune in to this episode for more expert insight.
Press play on the audio player above or click here for my latest interview with Kerry Lutz: “The World According to Martin Armstrong Part 3, The Rise of the Neocons.”
The International Criminal Court (ICC) Issues Warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin for Human Trafficking, Child Abduction and Other Heinous Misdeeds
Posted originally on the CTH on March 17, 2023 | Sundance
Before looking at the absurdity of the International Criminal Court (ICC) position, it is worth noting that Russia, Ukraine, Saudi Arabia, India, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, the United States and China do not recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC and are not member states in the organization {LINK}.
Additionally, I doubt the countries of Kiribati and Malawi are going to launch a military offensive against Russia; so, one has to ask, exactly what is this latest production about – amid the theater of World War Reddit.
The essential accusation is that Vladimir Putin took orphans out of orphanages in the Ukraine war zone and moved the children to safety in Russia. Ergo, Putin is guilty of human trafficking and abducting children.
THE HAGUE (AP) — The International Criminal Court said Friday that it has issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin for war crimes, accusing him of personal responsibility for the abductions of children from Ukraine.
It was the first time the global court has issued a warrant against a leader of one of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.
The ICC said in a statement that Putin “is allegedly responsible for the war crime of unlawful deportation of (children) and that of unlawful transfer of (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation.”
The move was immediately dismissed by Moscow. […] Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia doesn’t recognize the ICC and considers its decisions “legally void.” He called the court’s move “outrageous and unacceptable.” Peskov refused to comment when asked if Putin would avoid making trips to countries where he could be arrested on the ICC’s warrant.
[…]Lvova-Belova, who was also implicated in the warrants, reacted with dripping sarcasm. “It is great that the international community has appreciated the work to help the children of our country, that we do not leave them in war zones, that we take them out, we create good conditions for them, that we surround them with loving, caring people,” she said. (read more)
Chairman Xi Heading to Russia Next Week For State Visit with President Putin – NATO, Ukraine and U.S. Going Bananas
Posted originally on the CTH on March 17, 2023 | Sundance
U.S. government officials are not happy as China confirms Chairman Xi Jinping visit to Russia next week to meet with President Putin.
In the background of the Ukraine conflict, smiling Panda has been happy to see distracted western nations bleeding their resources and treasury in support of Ukraine. Meanwhile, happy Panda negotiates and brokers increased relationships between Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, India and China.
There is no downside to Chairman Xi visiting Russia and advancing a position that ‘peaceful negotiations’ should begin between Russia and Ukraine, unless a resolution to the conflict is against the geopolitical usefulness of the war – which appears to be the unfortunate current status.
“The U.S. on Friday said it would oppose any effort by China at the meeting to propose a ceasefire in Ukraine“…
Think about that. Remember, Ukraine is to Washington DC as North Korea is to Beijing.
KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Chinese President Xi Jinping plans to visit Moscow next week, offering a major diplomatic boost to Russian President Vladimir Putin on the same day the International Criminal Court announced it wants to put the Russian leader on trial for alleged war crimes.
Xi’s visit was the latest sign of Beijing’s emboldened diplomatic ambitions, and came amid sharpening East-West tensions over the war in Ukraine, now in its 13th month. The U.S. on Friday said it would oppose any effort by China at the meeting to propose a ceasefire in Ukraine as the “ratification of Russian conquest.”
White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby encouraged Xi to reach out to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to get his country’s perspective on the war and avoid any “one-sided” proposals.
China has sought to project itself as neutral in the conflict, even while it has refused to condemn Moscow’s aggression and declared last year that it had a “no-limits” friendship with Russia. Beijing has denounced Western sanctions against Moscow, and accused NATO and the United States of provoking Putin’s military action.
Throughout the conflict, China has said the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be respected. It remains unclear, however, whether it sympathizes with Moscow’s claims to seized Ukrainian territory.
[…] Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Friday that Putin and Xi would have a one-on-one meeting over an informal dinner Monday. Broader talks involving officials from both countries on a range of subjects are scheduled for Tuesday.
Putin’s foreign policy adviser, Yuri Ushakov, suggested the talks could yield new approaches to the fighting in Ukraine. “I’m sure that our leader and the Chinese leader will exchange their assessments of the situation” there, he said. “We shall see what ideas will emerge after that.” (read more)
.
What Reagan Would NOT Do
Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted Mar 17, 2023 by Martin Armstrong
America should violate international law to begin World War III, or as Senator Lindsey Graham worded it: “We should hold [Russia] accountable and say that if you ever get near another U.S. asset flying in international waters, your airplane would be shot down.” Graham suggested last year that we simply assassinate President Putin, so this was not in response to a Russian jet clipping an unmanned US drone. Graham is so invested in destroying Russia that he has been the only Republican senator to visit Ukraine since the war began.
All the Neocons point to Ronald Reagan. In this same interview, Graham asked, “What would Ronald Reagan do?” Liz Cheney recently criticized DeSantis for saying Ukraine should not be a priority by invoking the Reagan card. Her dad even ran on a platform of wanting to exemplify Reagan’s policies as his own. Reagan was against communism, but the current conflict has absolutely nothing to do with communism or a fallen empire.
Ronald Reagan was the most respected Republican president since Abraham Lincoln. The Neocons, like Graham, effectively stand for everything that Reagan rejected. When I wrote to Reagan warning in 1985 that the formation of what became the G5 would lead to a crash by 1987, he ordered the Chief Economic Adviser Mr. Sprinkle to respond to me directly.
Reagan initiated the arms race to outspend the USSR during the Cold War. This too was a proxy war against the generally democratic Western bloc and the Communist Eastern bloc. He tried to avoid direct battle with the USSR as he was said to be fearful, rightly so, of nuclear war. Senators were not advocating shooting down planes, and causalities remained minimal as far as war is concerned.
Jonathan Clarke and Stefan Halper wrote in “America Alone: The Neoconservatives and the Global Order” that Republicans have “attached a Reagan bumper sticker to their motorcade [but they] ignore much of the substance: the intense arms control commitment, the summitry, the minimal use of direct American military power.” Gene Healy published an article for the CATO Institute: “Reagan Was No Neocon.” Reagan wanted to protect American democracy, but he did not want to act as a missionary spreading democracy to foreign countries.
Margaret Thatcher famously said that Reagan won the Cold War without firing a single bullet. When reading his eulogy, Thatcher did not describe a warmonger.
"Yet his ideas, so clear, were never simplistic. He saw the many sides of truth. Yes, he warned that the Soviet Union had an insatiable drive for military power and territorial expansion, but he also sensed that it was being eaten away by systemic failures impossible to reform. Yes, he did not shrink from denouncing Moscow’s evil empire, but he realized that a man of good will might nonetheless emerge from within its dark corridors. So the president resisted Soviet expansion and pressed down on Soviet weakness at every point until the day came when communism began to collapse beneath the combined weight of those pressures and its own failures. And when a man of good will did emerge from the ruins, President Reagan stepped forward to shake his hand and to offer sincere cooperation. Nothing was more typical of Ronald Reagan than that large-hearted magnanimity, and nothing was more American. Therein lies perhaps the final explanation of his achievements. Ronald Reagan carried the American people with him in his great endeavours because there was perfect sympathy between them. He and they loved America and what it stands for: freedom and opportunity for ordinary people."
Ronald Reagan would be appalled to see how his own party tosses around his name to promote murder. Reagan would not sacrifice domestic policy, send “blank checks” to Ukraine, or push America into a global war with nations that have comparable nuclear capability. So what would Reagan do? He would prioritize his own nation and end this complete nonsense.
Kevin O’Leary Discusses How Small and Regional Banks Will Disappear With New Biden/Yellen Policy…
Posted originally on the CTH on March 16, 2023 | Sundance
Small to medium sized banks along with credit unions are the best vehicle for Main Street USA small businesses. Somehow in all the conversations about banking customers, this little factoid is seemingly, perhaps purposefully, overlooked. WATCH:
Senator Bill Cassidy Confronts Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Biden Tax Proposal, “That’s a Lie”
Posted originally on the CTH on March 16, 2023 | Sundance
During today’s Senate Finance Committee hearing, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) questioned Treasury Sec. Janet Yellen about Social Security and the immediate cuts that take place in nine years if the current plan goes bankrupt. The confrontation was professional, but also very focused. WATCH:
.
Cash Not Accepted
Armstrong Economics Blog/The Hunt for Taxes Re-Posted Mar 16, 2023 by Martin Armstrong
There once was a time when cash was the undisputed king. Merchants preferred cash payments over credit, and there were often incentives for paying with paper. I recall receiving lower gas prices when paying with cash, for example. It is increasingly common to see “no cash accepted” signs at establishments as the world moves toward a cashless society. At the Federal level, there are no laws protecting consumers who wish to pay in cash. The Federal Reserve stated on its website:
There is no federal statute mandating that a private business, a person, or an organization must accept currency or coins as payment for goods or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether to accept cash unless there is a state law that says otherwise.
"Section 31 U.S.C. 5103, entitled "Legal tender," states: "United States coins and currency [including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve Banks and national banks] are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues." This statute means that all U.S. money as identified above is a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor."
Yet, the Federal Reserve also recognizes that as of 2021, 4.5% of US households were “unbanked.” This means that 5.9 million households are unable to pay by card. This is the lowest unbanked rate since the Fed began keeping track in 2009. The most common reason for not having an account, reported by 21.7% of unbanked households, is that they do not meet minimum balance requirements. The second most reported reason (13.2%) is that people simply do not trust banks, while the third most cited reason (8.4%) was the desire for privacy.
If merchants refuse to accept cash, these people cannot participate in consumerism. Their legal tender is simply not accepted. Unbanked households are more likely to contain persons with lower levels of education, lower incomes, disabilities, single mothers, and minorities. As the Fed reported:
“Differences in unbanked rates between Black and White households and between Hispanic and White households in 2021 were present at every income level. For example, among households with income between $30,000 and $50,000, 8.0 percent of Black households and 8.4 percent of Hispanic households were unbanked, compared with 1.7 percent of White households.”
If cash is legal tender, then it should be accepted everywhere. Numerous merchants not only refuse cash but they charge an additional fee for using credit. Tennessee, Arizona, Delaware, District of Columbia, Idaho, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Rhode, Colorado, and Connecticut have laws at the state level protecting cash payments. Some cities such as Washington D.C., Berkley, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, and San Francisco also have laws in place. However, I can assure you that many retailers in these areas still do not accept cash.
Washington wants to move us toward a cashless society to tax everyone, even those with the least to give, on every transaction we make.
My Warning from 2014
Armstrong Economics Blog/ECM Re- Posted Mar 16, 2023 by Martin Armstrong
In an interview on May 11, 2014, I explained on USAWatchdog that confidence always outweighs reality. “It’s basically what you believe. There have been all sorts of studies on fundamentals that say if interest rates go up, stocks go down. It is simply not true. The stock market has never peaked with interest rates twice in history. If you think you are going to make 25% in the market, you’ll pay 10% interest; but if you really think the market is only going to go up 10%, you won’t pay 10%. So, it’s always the difference between what you believe and reality.”
The people have lost all confidence in government. We have heard rumors of a “soft landing” from the Fed for the past year, but the situation continues to worsen. Washington maintains that everything is stable as banks continue to fail and inflation rages on. There can be no price stability when war is at play. Biden just released his latest budget plan that no reasonable person would condone. I explained in 2014 that great empires all come crashing down after piling on massive debt. People believe hyperinflation would cause such a scenario, but debt is the major player. Once the government accumulates enormous debt, it targets its citizens aggressively. That is what we are seeing today.
So where should you put your money? I said in 2014: “One of the number one questions I get all the time is where do I put my money? If the banks can just take whatever they want now, there will be bail-ins rather than bail-outs. People are afraid. What do you do with the cash? So, people are buying things like real estate and stocks, just trying to get money out of the banking system.” That sentiment is continuing and the latest CPI report even showed that shelter costs are rising at the highest rate since June 1982. Smart money has been trying to escape the banks for years. There was no incentive until very recently to park money in the banks due to artificially low rates.
I also explained that the Fed would only bail out deposits and had been asking institutions to change their models. “Everybody knows I advise some of the big institutions around, and I can tell you that they have told me directly that the Fed went to them and told them they will not be bailed out for proprietary trading. It will be only on deposits. That’s it,” I stated. “The Fed has been going around telling them, ‘hey, you better change your models.’ They don’t think it will be a flight to quality as it was before. You buy the long term (Treasuries) and that saves you. They don’t think that’s going to happen. It’s quite interesting. . . . It looks like the long term (Treasury bonds) is going to end up starting to rise.”
Sound familiar to the current situation? People have moved from the public sector into the private sector. We are well into a private wave, and the public will not go back to the public sector for many years to come.
Swiss Central Bank Steps in to Backstop Credit Suisse Amid Financial Collapse – The Larger Geopolitical Dynamic is Clear
Posted originally on the CTH on March 16, 2023
Before getting to the details of the Credit Suisse issue, it is worth taking a bigger geopolitical context to the dynamic. The initial backstop sought by Credit Suisse was from the Saudi National Bank; however, SNB Chairman Ammar Abdul Wahed Al Khudairy refused more lending {LINK}.
This is where we need to keep the BRICS -vs- WEF dynamic in mind and consider that ideologically there is a conflict between the current agenda of the ‘western financial system’ (climate change) and the traditional energy developers. This conflict has been playing out not only in the energy sector, but also the dynamic of support for Russia (an OPEC+ member) against the western sanction regime. Ultimately supporting Russia’s battle against NATO encroachments.
Russia, Saudi Arabia and China are geopolitically aligned in interest against the western financial system. As a consequence, when western banks find themselves in need of capital and cash, there is a layered geopolitical dynamic in the background to Saudi refusal that must be considered.
With multiple western banks now in trouble, Credit Suisse is also exposed, and, like U.S. Treasury/Fed intervention in America, the Swiss central bank has stepped in to backstop the looming collapse.
In the big picture we are seeing the ramifications of the ‘Build Back Better‘ agenda impacting the banking and finance sector which spearheaded it. I am not seeing this discussed anywhere, as the western governments of the collapsing banks are being forced to intervene.
(Reuters) – Credit Suisse on Thursday said it was taking “decisive action” to strengthen its liquidity by borrowing up to $54 billion from the Swiss central bank after a slump in its shares intensified fears about a broader bank deposit crisis.
The Swiss bank’s problems have shifted the focus for investors and regulators from the United States to Europe, where Credit Suisse led a selloff in bank shares after its largest investor said it could not provide more financial assistance because of regulatory constraints.
Regulators in the private banking hub on Wednesday had sought to ease investor fears around Credit Suisse, which added to broader worries sparked by last week’s collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, two U.S. mid-size firms.
Asian stocks had extended Wall Street’s tumble on Thursday and investors bought gold, bonds and the dollar, leaving markets on edge ahead of a European Central Bank meeting later in the day. The bank’s announcement in the early European morning helped trim some of those losses though trade was volatile. (read more)
Again, I go back to the geopolitical map. The yellow nations with sanctions against Russia are also the yellow nations driving the ‘Build Back Better’ climate change energy policy. The grey nations are not in alignment with either dynamic. It is not a coincidence the banking issues are all within the yellow nations.
(Via Daily Mail) Wall Street’s main stock indexes opened lower on Wednesday, as turmoil at Credit Suisse renewed fears of a banking crisis and sent shares of major US banks lower.
At the opening bell, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 396 points, or 1.23 percent, while the S&P 500 opened 1.09 percent lower and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 1.20 percent.
Shares of First Republic, one of the regional banks swept up in contagion fears after the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, dropped up to 11 percent after the bank’s bond rating was downgraded to junk status by S&P.
In Europe, shares of Credit Suisse plunged more than 25 percent, hitting a new record low for the second day in a row, after the Swiss bank’s largest investor said it could not provide more financial assistance to the lender.
The Big Four trillion-dollar US banks suffered in early trading after yesterday’s rally. Wells Fargo slid 3.9 percent, Citigroup dropped 4.3 percent, Bank of America was down 2.2 percent and JP Morgan saw a 3.5 percent dip.
After the collapse of SVB Financial and Signature Bank, emergency measures by US authorities had soothed some worries about the health of the other banks, helping regional lenders stage a rebound in Tuesday’s session.
However, regional banks were giving back their gains in early trading Wednesday, with shares of First Republic, PacWest and Western Alliance all down between 2.7 percent and 11 percent.
[…] Driving investor sentiment was turmoil at Credit Suisse, after its biggest shareholder – the Saudi National Bank – said that it would not inject more money into the ailing Swiss bank.
Saudi National Bank chairman Ammar Al Khudairy told Reuters: ‘We cannot [buy more shares] because we would go above 10 percent. It’s a regulatory issue.’
The Saudi bank holds a 9.88 percent stake in Credit Suisse, according to Refinitiv data. (read more)
Yellow Team -vs- Gray Team: Remember, China just brokered a deal to lessen hostilities between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The fulcrum of that agreement was economics.
Meanwhile in North America, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez-Obrador has said he was not willing to join the energy suicide pact pushed by Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau…. A policy break in the trilateral relationship which suddenly, and not coincidentally, aligns with the timing to make Mexico a pariah to the U.S. vis-a-vis a renewed media push on the drug cartel narrative.
BIG PICTURE NOT BEING DISCUSSED – The western politicians followed the climate change instructions of the WEF multinational corporations and banks (Build Back Better) and post-pandemic immediately started reducing energy development. The central bankers then began raising interest rates to shrink the economies of the same western nations to the scale of the now diminished energy production.
The raising of interest rates is now hitting the national and multinational banks impacted by government policy that was following WEF orders. Now the western politicians are stepping in with the government controlled central banks to backstop the national banks and multinationals. Can you see the dynamic?
Team yellow is suffering the consequences of their own ideological policy as enacted. Team grey is not going to help team yellow get out of a crisis team yellow created, which was intended to hurt team grey.
…. And we continue watching.
Centinel2012 