Published on Nov 12, 2018
ICE needs funding for 10,000 more illegal immigrants. But who should be allowed to enter, and who should be turned away?
Tag Archives: Political Correctness
Caravan Rejects Mexican President’s Refuge Offer
Published on Nov 9, 2018
The caravan of Honduran migrants headed through Mexico toward the U.S. border received an offer they could not refuse…but they did. Bill Whittle Now grapples with some of the thornier issues for conservatives when it comes to immigration
Contrast in Competence – Miami Dade is Halfway Finished With Recount, Broward County Hasn’t Even Started…
November 12, 2018
Well, this certainly adds context to the charges of purposeful incompetence applied toward notoriously corrupt Broward County Supervisor of Elections, Brenda Snipes.
According to a recent report from the Miami Herald, Miami-Dade County is halfway through the constitutionally required recount of votes. Meanwhile, Broward County has not started; and there’s almost no-way for them to meet the court-ordered deadline of Thursday afternoon.
(Miami Herald) By noon on Monday, Miami-Dade managed to recount about half of the more than 800,000 votes cast in the 2018 election. Broward County had not yet started its state-mandated recount.
The stark contrast in pace from Florida’s two largest sources of ballots highlights the pressure facing Broward as it tries to meet a Thursday afternoon deadline to recount the more than 700,000 votes cast in the largely Democratic county.
As of noon Monday, Broward still had to calibrate its ballot-scanning machines and sort out the ballots needed to be counted, suggesting the actual recount may not start until later in the day or even Tuesday morning. (read more)
Mark Levin Interviews Jim Jordan and Newly Elected Chip Roy on Midterm Outcome…
November 12, 2018
Mark Levin discusses the midterm election result with Ohio Representative Jim Jordan, and Texas Representative-elect Chip Roy. Both discuss why the party failed to hold onto the House while gains were made in the Senate on ‘Life, Liberty and Levin.’
Hillary to Run Again in 2020
Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics
Re-Posted Nov 13, 2018 by Martin Armstrong
Yes, the rumors are True. Hillary is indeed planning on running again in 2020. She will throw her Pants-Suit into the ring. I have been hearing that for months now from several sources. It has now even appeared in the Hill publication. Hillary is a diehard ’60s women’s libber and she actually believes it is her divine right to be the first woman president. The Clinton’s were masters at controlling the Democratic Party. Let’s see how she will get them to “plead” with her to run – that is what the rumor is behind the curtain. She will pretend there is nobody else and the Democrats will lay flowers at her feet and beg her to run.
Sunday Talks: Democrat Representative David Cicilline Discusses Marxist Economic Priorities – Siege Agenda to Eliminate Trump…
November 11, 2018
Success in the midterm election secured power for House Democrats. The discussion then moves to how are the democrats going to use that power? Representative David Cicilline, co-chair of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee, indicates their intended set of priorities in a series of Sunday talking points.
Democrats in the House intend to raise taxes on individuals and corporations; roll back the MAGAnomic policy for corporate tax incentives (investment, jobs, and manufacturing) and create a bigger gap between low and top income earners through their spending controls. In essence, Democrats take control over income earnings (via tax policy) and distribute it to their constituents based on need. [Historic Fabian approach]
Simultaneously, the House committees (Oversight, Judiciary, Intel, Finance) will begin immediate investigations of the Trump administration, writ large, and -using those investigations- secure the pathway to the 2020 election cycle.
.
Cecilline admits OUR CTH PROJECTION is entirely accurate.
Unfortunately, we have solid references to base these predictions on – because there’s a solid frame of reference from the 2006 midterm and the subsequent consequences we saw in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010.
If we take the empirical 2006 example as the starting point and overlay the 2018 landscape to modernize the predictive model, what results is a most likely scenario.
First, any intellectually honest review must overlay the current political environment. In 2018 the scale of unchecked lawless behavior is a significant influence toward the differences we can expect from the last time Democrat/Marxists held congressional power. The term “Democrat-socialism”, in essence a Marxist approach, is now the dominant fuel within the professional DNC political operations.
When the Democrats last held power in 2006, their actionable objective was toward a far-left, Saul Alinsky-type aggressive tone and influence; however, there was a need to couch that intention as they positioned Senator Barack Obama for the 2008 presidential election.
In 2006 the radicals, needed to downplay their radicalism. In 2018 the severity and aggression of the left, as assisted by the dropping of all media pretense, no longer needs to hide the intention. When Democrat-Marxists take control in January of 2019 they no longer need to couch the extremism, the American electorate have been prepped.
Secondly, it cannot be overstated how violent and confrontational the House of Representatives will be as soon as they are sworn in. They will work with an immediate purposeful intention. All political violence will be approved to attain their objectives. The recent behavior of Jim Acosta (CNN media), and ANTIFA toward Tucker Carlson, is now, and will be going forward, the new normal.
There will be extreme political violence.
In 2006 it was the SEIU and AFSCME union foot-soldiers who smashed windows, advanced upon polling places and engaged in the most severe examples of voter fraud and intimidation. In 2018, with the help of uber-Alinsky DNC Chairman Tom Perez, that corrupt sentiment is now institutionalized within democrat-socialist political apparatus. ANTIFA is now the DNC grassroots activist approach.
Failing to accept the severity of this shift in the past decade is intellectually dishonest. As Nancy Pelosi said of the Occupy Wall Street violent anarchists: “God bless these people.” Indeed the OWS precursor to ANTIFA were laying the groundwork for the new severity of power in Democrat leadership. Nothing is out-of-bounds; no level of corrupt behavior will be avoided; everything will happen openly and without any backlash from a compliant media apparatus; the social fabric will be shredded.
The Democrat mantra: “never let a crisis go to waste” is the modern version of the Fabian-Socialist: “remould it nearer to the heart’s desire“.
[Fabian Window –>]
Both approaches rely upon the destruction of acceptable norms in order to advance the political objective.
♦Specifics: When Democrats last took power in January 2007, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer took control in the final two years of George Bush second term. Immediately they set about a process laying the groundwork for the 2008 presidential election of Barack Obama. This was a priority objective.
One of the techniques was the removal of the budget process. By eliminating the federal budget process in 2007 (fiscal year ’08) the Democrats paved the way for the next democrat president to demand massive open-ended spending.
By the time the year of the general election came around (2008), the lengthy budget process was replaced with Omnibus spending bills (fiscal year 2009). Obviously when Obama was successfully installed in November of 2008, the useful crisis was financial. The subsequent TARP bailout, auto bailout, ARRA ($1 trillion stimulus) and QE1 were all accomplished with massive omnibus spending packages.
[NOTE: These are important references because from that moment forward, despite the GOP taking back control in January 2011, the constraining budgetary process was forever destroyed. There was never regular-order budgetary spending again.]
It is also critical to emphasize the difference between Democrats taking control in the last two years of Bush’s second term, and Democrats taking control in the last two years of Trump’s first term. Within this difference you will predictably see a shift in strategic operations from the Marxists.
George W Bush was exiting, and unlimited spending was used to empower the entry of Obama; however, now the Marxists need to knee-cap President Trump by weaponizing the power of the purse – the biggest weapon of the House of Representatives.
After a ten year UniParty hiatus the Marxists will now go back to using budgets in the structural defunding and dismantling of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), the Southern Border Wall, and any program, initiative, policy or institution the Marxists want to see removed. This is a strategy of the Democrat crisis-makers; and they are exceptionally better at achieving their desired results than Republicans.
When it comes to political weaponization and political power constructs the Marxists have exceptional work ethics; they will outwork anyone on the other side who opposes them. They are far, far, better at political strategy and scheme than conservative politicians. Part of the reason for their success is that crooks, cons and swindlers are far more cunning than honorable, virtuous and moral people. It is unfortunate, but true; and the same truth applies beyond politics.
♦ Two other thoughts on this issue. First, you might remember when this massive spending, and the government takeover of healthcare, led to the Marxists losing the 2010 midterm election in a massive defeat. But do you remember what the democrats did in the lame-duck congress between November 2010 and January 2011?
Does the term “Porkulous” ring a bell?
While 63 democrat seats were lost in the November 2010 election (and six democrat senate seats), those exiting Marxists, despite just having suffered the worst defeat in almost 100 years, audaciously –and apologetically– voted in the December 2010 lame-duck session, to fully fund President Obama’s next two years in office. This was done by Speaker Nancy Pelosi specifically to block the incoming GOP wave from upending the priorities of the Obama administration in 2011. That was called the “Porkulous” spending bill; and the democrat-marxists didn’t give a snit about how it looked.
Now, do you think Speaker Paul Ryan will do anything as bold to fund and secure the budgetary priorities of President Donald Trump in this lame-duck?
Secondly, about the overall unilateral commitment and cunning historically displayed by the Marxists. They are so committed to the long-term view they are willing to sacrifice anything for the biggest, most consequential, advances toward their objectives. In 2010 the democrats killed their own “blue-dog” coalition to advance their ideological goals.
Within the 63 House seats the Marxists lost in that 2010 midterm election; they killed off the entire 40 member Bart Stupak coalition; the blue-dog caucus. Totally willing to sacrifice 40 seats to attain a generational ideological objective (ObamaCare); and they are about to step back into power a mere eight years later. Stunning when you think about it.
In my opinion few Americans have any idea just how bad these next two years are going to be. It’s not our fault.
The majority of Americans are normal people who work earnestly to take care of their families and watch over the future for their children and grandchildren. Most Americans don’t spend every moment of their day scheming, conniving, and developing plans to dismantle the lives of your freedom loving community and rebuild it as a collective society.
For these Democrat-Marxists who are about to take power that’s all they do. Every moment of their existence they spend thinking about how to gain power and dominate, 24/7/365 ; it really is all they do.
This is their utopian model:
Sunday Talks: Kevin McCarthy Discusses Midterm Election Results….
November 11, 2018
Maria Bartiromo holds the most significant conversations today surrounding the midterm election and the predictable consequences therein. Starting next week, what we see in the lame-duck congressional session will form the cornerstone of the next two years.
Historically, Wall Street Republicans (GOPe) prefer to be in the minority; it is part of their structural Decepticon model. Representative Kevin McCarthy appears with Ms. Bartiromo to discuss his take on what is to come, and his desire to become Minority Leader.
Remarks by President Trump at the American Commemoration – Suresnes, France…
November 11, 2018
Comemorating the 100 year anniversary of the end of World-War-One, President Trump a ttends the American Commemoration Ceremony at Suresnes American Cemetery hosted by the Secretary of the American Battle Monuments Commission:
[Transcript] Suresnes, France – 4:14 P.M. CEST – PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you very much. Please.
Major General Matz, I want to thank you and everyone at the American Battle Monuments Commission for doing just an absolutely fantastic job.
Exactly 100 years ago today, on November 11th, 1918, World War I came to an end. Thank God. It was a brutal war. Millions of American, French, and Allied troops had fought with the extraordinary skill and valor in one of the bloodiest conflicts in human history.
We are gathered together, at this hallowed resting place, to pay tribute to the brave Americans who gave their last breath in that mighty struggle.
Earlier, Melania and I were deeply honored to be the guests of President Macron and Brigitte at the Centennial Commemoration of Armistice Day. It was very beautiful and so well done.
To all of the French military leaders and dignitaries in attendance with us now: Thank you for joining us as we honor the American and French service members who shed their blood together in a horrible, horrible war, but a war known as the Great War.
We are also joined by many distinguished American military leaders. Thank you to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford. Thank you, Joe. Thank you. Army Chief of Staff, General Mark Milley. Thank you, Mark. Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General Curtis Scaparrotti. General, Thank you. And Air Force Commander Europe, General Tod Wolters. Thank you. Thank you, General.
Thank you as well to the members of Congress who have joined us: Ralph Abraham, Anthony Brown, John Carter, Paul Cook, Henry Cuellar, Richard Hudson, Bill Huizenga, Dutch Ruppersberger, John Rutherford, and Steve Stivers. Thank you all very much for being with us. Thank you very much. I know you wanted to be here very badly. We appreciate it.
In the United States, Armistice Day is now enshrined as Veterans Day. We have a number of amazing veterans with us today, including six veterans of World War II:
James Blane. James? Where is James? James, thank you. Thank you, James. Frank Devita. Thank you, Frank. Thank you very much. You look so comfortable up there, under shelter — (laughter) — as we’re getting drenched. You’re very smart people. (Laughter.) Pete DuPre. Pete, thank you very much. Gregory Melikian. Thank you, Gregory. Steven Melnikoff. Thank you. Thank you, Steven. And Jay Trimmer. Thank you. Thank you, Jay. Thank you.
You look like you’re in really good shape, all of you. (Applause.) I hope I look like that someday. You look great. America is forever in debt, and we are forever in your debt. And we really appreciate you being here.
We’re also joined by another very special guest: a 13-year-old boy from the United States named Matthew Haske. Matthew is in the eighth grade, and he worked and saved all of his money for two years to make this trip to France. He wanted to be here in person to honor the American heroes of World War I. Matthew, thank you. You make us very proud. Where is Matthew? Matthew. Matthew. (Applause.) Thank you very much. You’re way ahead of your time, Matthew. Thank you.
On this day, in the year 1918, church bells rang, families embraced, and celebrations, as you know, filled the streets like never before, in towns throughout Europe and the United States.
But victory had come at a terrible cost. Among the Allied Forces, more than one million French soldiers and 116,000 American service members had been killed by the war’s end. Millions more were wounded. Countless would come home bearing the lasting scars of trench warfare and the grisly horrors of chemical weapons.
During the final battle of the war, over 26,000 Americans lost their lives and more than 95,000 were wounded. It was the single deadliest battle in United States history. Thank of that — 26,000 Americans lost their lives in a battle.
Here on the revered grounds of Suresnes American Cemetery lie more than 1,500 U.S. service members who made the ultimate sacrifice in the First World War. Among those buried here are legendary Marines who fought in the Battle of Belleau Wood.
In that treacherous forest and the surrounding fields, American Marines, soldiers, and Allied Forces fought — and they fought through hell — to turn the tide of the war. And that’s what they did — they turned the tide of the war.
It was in that battle that our Marines earned the nickname “Devil Dogs,” arising from the German description of their ferocious fighting spirit. John Kelly knows that name, “Devil Dogs,” very well, John. Right?
Earlier this year, President Macron presented an oak sapling from Belleau Wood as a gift to our nation — an enduring reminder of our friendship sealed in battle. We fought well together. You could not fight better than we fought together. Sergeant Eugene Wear from Hazleton, Pennsylvania was one of the Marines at Belleau Wood. Eugene raced straight into a barrage of enemy fire, like no one has ever seen before, to bandage his friend’s wounds and carry him back to safety.
Months later, Eugene was mortally wounded. He passed away one day after Christmas. His mother would come right here to mourn by the grave of her precious son. She loved him so much. She was one of the thousands of American moms and dads whose beloved children found their final resting place on the hillside of Suresnes.
Each of these marble crosses and Stars of David marks the life of an American warrior — great, great warriors they are — who gave everything for family, country, God, and freedom. Through rain, hail, snow, mud, poisonous gas, bullets and mortar, they held the line, and pushed onward to victory — it was a great, great victory; costly victory but a great victory — never knowing if they would ever again see their families or ever again hold their loved ones.
Here are the words of a young soldier named Sergeant Paul Maynard from a letter he wrote only a few days before the end of the war: “Dear Mother, I think of you all at home, and I know if I am spared to get back, that I shall appreciate home more than ever, [ever] before. It will seem like heaven to me to be once more where there is peace and only peace.”
On November 11th, 1918, Paul died in the final hours of battle, just before the end. No, sadly, he did not make it. He was among the countless young men who never returned home. But through their sacrifice, they ascended to peace in heaven. Rest in peace, Paul.
The American and French patriots of World War I embody the timeless virtues of our two republics: honor and courage; strength and valor; love and loyalty; grace and glory. It is our duty to preserve the civilization they defended and to protect the peace they so nobly gave their lives to secure one century ago.
It is now my great honor to present Major General William Matz with an American flag, as a symbol of our nation’s gratitude to the American Battle Monuments. The Commission has done such an incredible job. And, General, we very much appreciate it. Today, we renew our sacred obligation to memorialize our fallen heroes on the soil where they rest for all of eternity.
Thank you very much. And, General, this is a great honor. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
Thank you all. God bless you. This has been a wonderful two days we spent in France. And this is certainly the highlight of the trip. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. (Applause.)
Media List of Names Under Consideration For Attorney General….
November 10, 2018
With Jeff Sessions now removed, the question becomes who will be the next person selected by President Trump to lead the institutionally corrupt U.S. Department of Justice.
With the loss of the House of Representatives to the arch-enemies of the President; and with the predictable likelihood of resistance investigations starting almost immediately in January; the next AG nominee is perhaps the most important cabinet choice in the second half of President Trump’s first term in office.
The upcoming 2019 siege of the White House will be record-breaking in anger, incivility, rage, activist-driven political violence, Machiavellian schemes, death threats against cabinet officials, increased Antifa activity, and media assaults. The next AG faces the full weaponized deployment of well-planned DC swamp attacks.
That said, the series of names currently being promoted includes:
♦Former NJ Governor Chris Christie
♦Former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani
♦Former Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker
♦Former Kansas SoS Kris Kobach
♦Congressman John Ratcliffe [(R-TX) possible frontrunner]
♦Florida AG Pam Bondi
♦Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-SC)
♦Health and Human Services secretary Alex Azar
♦Former U.S. Attorney SDNY Andrew McCarthy
According to multiple media reports, citing close White House officials, the key advisor to President Trump, on this important decision, is Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC).
[Anyone else picturing a possible set-up here?]
Here’s my review of the current names and situation therein.
♦Trump cannot pick Christie or Giuliani because the Mueller investigation is, by design, not over – and there’s no end in sight. Christie and Giuliani would face the identical recusal issues as Jeff Sessions for exactly the same reason. Both are shrewd enough to withstand the firestorm; but both were also on the 2016 election campaign – just like the elf on the shelf. However, likely for this very reason, they are the two being pushed by the media and democrats.
♦Given the history of Scott Walker and his relationship to big GOPe he would be a Never Trump pick. Predictably, in his off hours, Walker would fly down to the border wall with his staff and personally use pick-axes to tear it down. Walker, might not be Brutus, but he would polish the spear, drive Brutus to the White House and keep watch while the deed is done. His ability to look in both directions simultaneously does have benefits.
♦In a similar vein, Trey Gowdy would be even worse than Walker. Dear God, can you even imagine the chaos?… Democrats wouldn’t need a Trojan Horse, roosterhead would hold the door open while singing Muellers praises and personally ordering every member of the Trump family, and administration, to be on 24/7 mattress tag surveillance. Purple-tied Gowdy would likely hire Peter Strzok as his deputy. Um… no!
♦Next up, Pam Bondi – the BFF of Benjamin Crump and most ineffective politically correct AG in the history of Florida. If you want to know if me-me-me Bondi would bow-down under pressure; you need to look no further than her decision-making in the Zimmerman case. How’s that Broward County election accountability working out? Nuf said.
♦HHS Secretary Alex Azar doesn’t want the job. Thankfully, Mr. Bean takes a pass.
♦If the AG job required writing 3,000 word daily essays to defend the administration from the legions knocking down the gates; and then standing atop a gilded podium talking to them with the intention of boring them into submission with articulate prose… Andrew McCarthy would be ideal. Otherwise, well, not-so-much.
♦That leaves John Ratcliffe and Kris Kobach. Ratcliffe is generally unflappable and knows the likely force of the alliance against him. Actually, Kobach and Ratcliffe both know what’s coming. Could Kris Kobach pass confirmation? Likely yes; however, he would be fuel for the resistance horde. That’s probably why John Ratcliffe is the frontrunner.
The success or failure of this person, whoever President Trump picks, will strongly influence: (A) his decision on running for re-election in 2020; and (B) the likelihood of success in the 2020 election.
Given the DOJ history and ‘in-your-face‘ evidence over the past two years, if the next AG can’t or won’t deal with the institutional corruption that has fully metastasized within the Department of Justice, President Trump’s support could erode quickly.
Peter Navarro Warns Wall Street Globalists: “Stand Down” Or Else…
November 10, 2018
The words from Peter Navarro will come as no surprise to any CTH reader who is fully engaged and reviewing the multi-trillion stakes, within the Globalist (Wall St.) -vs- Nationalist (Main Street) confrontation.
For several decades Wall Street, through lobbying arms such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (Tom Donohue), has structurally opposed Main Street economic policy in order to inflate profits and hold power – “The Big Club”. This manipulative intent is really the epicenter of the corruption within the DC swamp.
U.S. National Trade Council Director Peter Navarro discusses how Wall Street bankers and hedge-fund managers are attempting to influence U.S.-China trade talks. He speaks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
https://videopress.com/embed/0kCDXSwK?hd=0&autoPlay=0&permalink=0&loop=0Originally outlined a year ago. At the heart of the professional/political opposition the issue is money; there are trillions at stake.
President Trump’s MAGAnomic trade and foreign policy agenda is jaw-dropping in scale, scope and consequence. There are multiple simultaneous aspects to each policy objective; however, many have been visible for a long time – some even before the election victory in November ’16.
If we get too far in the weeds the larger picture is lost. CTH objective is to continue pointing focus toward the larger horizon, and then at specific inflection points to dive into the topic and explain how each moment is connected to the larger strategy.
If you understand the basic elements behind the new dimension in American economics, you already understand how three decades of DC legislative and regulatory policy was structured to benefit Wall Street and not Main Street. The intentional shift in fiscal policy is what created the distance between two entirely divergent economic engines.
REMEMBER […] there had to be a point where the value of the second economy (Wall Street) surpassed the value of the first economy (Main Street).
Investments, and the bets therein, needed to expand outside of the USA. hence, globalist investing.
However, a second more consequential aspect happened simultaneously. The politicians became more valuable to the Wall Street team than the Main Street team; and Wall Street had deeper pockets because their economy was now larger.
As a consequence Wall Street started funding political candidates and asking for legislation that benefited their interests.
When Main Street was purchasing the legislative influence the outcomes were -generally speaking- beneficial to Main Street, and by direct attachment those outcomes also benefited the average American inside the real economy.
When Wall Street began purchasing the legislative influence, the outcomes therein became beneficial to Wall Street. Those benefits are detached from improving the livelihoods of main street Americans because the benefits are “global”. Global financial interests, multinational investment interests -and corporations therein- became the primary filter through which the DC legislative outcomes were considered.
There is a natural disconnect. (more)
As an outcome of national financial policy blending commercial banking with institutional investment banking something happened on Wall Street that few understand. If we take the time to understand what happened we can understand why the Stock Market grew and what risks exist today as the monetary policy is reversed to benefit Main Street.
President Trump and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin have already begun assembling and delivering a new banking system.
Instead of attempting to put Glass-Stegal regulations back into massive banking systems, the Trump administration is creating a parallel financial system of less-regulated small commercial banks, credit unions and traditional lenders who can operate to the benefit of Main Street without the burdensome regulation of the mega-banks and multinationals. This really is one of the more brilliant solutions to work around a uniquely American economic problem.
♦ When U.S. banks were allowed to merge their investment divisions with their commercial banking operations (the removal of Glass Stegal) something changed on Wall Street.
Companies who are evaluated based on their financial results, profits and losses, remained in their traditional role as traded stocks on the U.S. Stock Market and were evaluated accordingly. However, over time investment instruments -which are secondary to actual company results- created a sub-set within Wall Street that detached from actual bottom line company results.
The resulting secondary financial market system was essentially ‘investment markets’. Both ordinary company stocks and the investment market stocks operate on the same stock exchanges. But the underlying valuation is tied to entirely different metrics.
Financial products were developed (as investment instruments) that are essentially wagers or bets on the outcomes of actual companies traded on Wall Street. Those bets/wagers form the hedge markets and are [essentially] people trading on expectations of performance. The “derivatives market” is the ‘betting system’.
♦Ford Motor Company (only chosen as a commonly known entity) has a stock valuation based on their actual company performance in the market of manufacturing and consumer purchasing of their product. However, there can be thousands of financial instruments wagering on the actual outcome of their performance.
There are two initial bets on these outcomes that form the basis for Hedge-fund activity. Bet ‘A’ that Ford hits a profit number, or bet ‘B’ that they don’t. There are financial instruments created to place each wager. [The wagers form the derivatives] But it doesn’t stop there.
Additionally, more financial products are created that bet on the outcomes of the A/B bets. A secondary financial product might find two sides betting on both A outcome and B outcome.
Party C bets the “A” bet is accurate, and party D bets against the A bet. Party E bets the “B” bet is accurate, and party F bets against the B. If it stopped there we would only have six total participants. But it doesn’t stop there, it goes on and on and on…
The outcome of the bets forms the basis for the tenuous investment markets. The important part to understand is that the investment funds are not necessarily attached to the original company stock, they are now attached to the outcome of bet(s). Hence an inherent disconnect is created.
Subsequently, if the actual stock doesn’t meet it’s expected P-n-L outcome (if the company actually doesn’t do well), and if the financial investment was betting against the outcome, the value of the investment actually goes up. The company performance and the investment bets on the outcome of that performance are two entirely different aspects of the stock market. [Hence two metrics.]
♦Understanding the disconnect between an actual company on the stock market, and the bets for and against that company stock, helps to understand what can happen when fiscal policy is geared toward the underlying company (Main Street MAGAnomics), and not toward the bets therein (Investment Class).
The U.S. stock markets’ overall value can increase with Main Street policy, and yet the investment class can simultaneously decrease in value even though the company(ies) in the stock market is/are doing better. This detachment is critical to understand because the ‘real economy’ is based on the company, the ‘paper economy’ is based on the financial investment instruments betting on the company.
Trillions can be lost in investment instruments, and yet the overall stock market -as valued by company operations/profits- can increase.
Conversely, there are now classes of companies on the U.S. stock exchange that never make a dime in profit, yet the value of the company increases. This dynamic is possible because the financial investment bets are not connected to the bottom line profit. (Examples include Tesla Motors, Amazon and a host of internet stocks like Facebook and Twitter.) It is this investment group of companies that stands to lose the most if/when the underlying system of betting on them stops or slows.
Specifically due to most recent U.S. fiscal policy, modern multinational banks, including all of the investment products therein, are more closely attached to this investment system on Wall Street. It stands to reason they are at greater risk of financial losses overall with a shift in fiscal policy.
That financial and economic risk is the basic reason behind Trump and Mnuchin putting a protective, secondary and parallel, banking system in place for Main Street.
Big multinational banks can suffer big losses from their investments, and yet the Main Street economy can continue growing, and have access to capital, uninterrupted.
Bottom Line: U.S. companies who have actual connection to a growing U.S. economy can succeed; based on the advantages of the new economic environment and MAGA policy, specifically in the areas of manufacturing, trade and the ancillary benefactors.
Meanwhile U.S. investment assets (multinational investment portfolios) that are disconnected from the actual results of those benefiting U.S. companies, and as a consequence also disconnected from the U.S. economic expansion, can simultaneously drop in value even though the U.S. economy is thriving.
Centinel2012 