Respected economists (real economists) give the EU at most 2 or 3 years before it goes under. Smart money is coming to the US as the only save haven let in the world.
Aug 21, 2016
By
Clive Crook

Mervyn King, former governor of the Bank of England, has written the best article I’ve read on Britain’s exit from the European Union. In an essay for the New York Review of Books he makes many excellent points, but one is of surpassing importance. It’s an obvious point, or ought to be, that nonetheless has been almost entirely ignored by other respectable commentators: Whether Britain should stay in the EU depends on where the EU is heading.
The EU is plainly in deep trouble with or without the U.K., and its condition as a political project is anything but stable. Judging whether Britain is better off as a member therefore requires a judgment not only about what Britain has gained or lost from membership up to now but also an assessment of the future character of the whole EU enterprise. Britain’s Remain campaign, expressing…
View original post 711 more words



In the first six months of the year, the raw data has shown that several central banks have been selling US government bonds in an attempt to support their currencies against the dollar. This has come in part at the request of the United States, exactly as took place back in 1985 at the Plaza Accord. The United States has a strikingly different view as to currency value. You even hear Trump calling China a currency manipulator because they have seen a declining currency. He does not view that this has been a global trend. Nonetheless, European central banks see a weak current as a weakness politically and thus want a high valued currency.

