Tag Archives: Russia

Dec 7 2019

Is Carbon Dioxide Endangering the Planet? Craig Idso vs. Jeffrey Bennett. A Debate


3.01K subscribers

Resolution: There is little or no rigorous evidence that rising concentrations of carbon dioxide are causing dangerous global warming and threatening life on the planet. For the affirmative: Craig Idso is the founder, former president, and currently chairman of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. The Center was founded in 1998 as a non-profit public charity dedicated to discovering and disseminating scientific information pertaining to the effects of atmospheric carbon dioxide enrichment on climate and the biosphere. Dr. Idso’s research has appeared many times in peer-reviewed journals, and is the author or coauthor of several books, including The Many Benefits of Atmospheric CO2Enrichment (Vales Lake Publishing, LLC, 2011), CO2, Global Warming and Coral Reefs (Vales Lake Publishing, LLC, 2009). Dr. Idso also serves as an adjunct scholar for the Cato Institute and as a policy advisor for the CO2Coalition, the Heartland Institute and the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow. For the negative: Jeffrey Bennett is an astrophysicist and educator. He has focused his career on math and science literacy. He is the lead author of bestselling college textbooks in astronomy, astrobiology, mathematics, and statistics, and of critically acclaimed books for the general public on topics including Einstein’s theory of relativity, the search for extraterrestrial life, and the importance of math to our everyday lives. Other career highlights include serving two years as a Visiting Senior Scientist at NASA Headquarters, proposing and helping to develop the Voyage Scale Model Solar System that resides on the National Mall in Washington, DC, and creating the freeTotality app that has helped tens of thousands of people learn how to view a total solar eclipse. His book A Global Warming Primeris posted freely online at http://www.globalwarmingprimer.com
Dec 7 2019

BREXIT & Pound Rally


Armstrong Economics Blog/BRITAIN

Re-Posted Dec 7, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

One of the major distinction is how politics has degenerated into who knows what, all we need to do is look at BREXIT and the chaos of the British elections come the 13th. We have never seen an election where former prime ministers have intervened to disrupt an election as they have this time around. Instead of coming out to support their successors, the former Prime Minister John Major, who staged the coup against Margaret Thatcher in an attempt to abolish the pound and join the Euro along with former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair have both been condemning the leaders and questioning whether voters should back them over their positions on BREXIT. Both men support the full surrender of all sovereignty of Britain no matter what they claim. They both believe in trying to create the United States of Europe.

Meanwhile, Senior Diplomat Alexandra Hall Hall has left the UK diplomatic service over BREXIT claiming she is not taking a position. Her resignation letter read:

“I have been increasingly dismayed by the way in which our political leaders have tried to deliver Brexit, with reluctance to address honestly, even with our own citizens, the challenges and trade-offs which Brexit involves; the use of misleading or disingenuous arguments about the implications of the various options before us; and some behaviour towards our institutions, which, were it happening in another country, we would almost certainly as diplomats have received instructions to register our concern.” 

Hall is really against BREXIT and her resignation one week before the election demonstrates that she is trying to “influence” the election rather than truly expressing her patriotic frustration. You would expect her to wait for the election to see if anything changes. Resigning ahead of the election and blaming the politicians is absolutely a staged ploy.

The British Pound has pushed above the key 1.18 level against the Euro and 1.31 against the U.S. Dollar over the last week among the rise in expectations for Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Conservative Party to win a majority at the polls next week. This would mean no coalition and it would be a rejection of Labour which has become extremely left wing. Despite the resignation of Hall and both Major and Blair coming out against BREXIT, the markets are showing relief that Labour will lose.

Cat
Dec 7 2019

Stunning News in Canada – Economy Loses 71,200 Jobs, Unemployment Jumps to 5.9%…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on December 6, 2019 by 

Elections have consequences.  On the same day the U.S. economy reports astoundingly successful jobs growth of 226,000 jobs and a drop in the unemployment rate to 3.5 percent; the Canadian state economic minister reports surprisingly terrible jobs losses of 72,200 jobs and a jump in unemployment from 5.5 to 5.9 percent.

The Canadian economy is roughly one-tenth the size of the U.S. So in equivalent terms the results from Canada reflect a comparative loss of 720,000 jobs on the same day the U.S. revises all figures upward to over 300,000 gains.  A stunning economic contrast:

OTTAWA (Reuters) – The Canadian job market lost a surprise 71,200 net positions in November while the unemployment rate rose to 5.9%, the highest in more than a year, data showed on Friday, as analysts said a repeat of the weak numbers could force the Bank of Canada to rethink its monetary policy.

Analysts in a Reuters poll had forecast a gain of 10,000 jobs and had predicted the unemployment rate would hold steady at 5.5%. […] November’s numbers followed a weak report in October, when the labor market unexpectedly shed jobs despite a likely boost from hiring related to the federal election.

[…] Canada’s goods-producing industries saw a decline of 26,600 net jobs, largely on manufacturing. The services sector lost 44,400 net jobs.

November’s unemployment rate was the highest seen since the 6.0% reported in August 2018. 38,400 full-time jobs and 32,800 part-time jobs were lost in November. (read more)

It is worth remembering that Canada does not allow competition in their media sector.  The Canadian government considers the news media a protected “cultural industry”; and through a process of subsidizing broadcast all news media is essentially state run media.

Why is this important?  Well, when the expressed priority of the government is controlling broadcast information if you are intellectually honest you should apply that same ideological outlook toward any information from the government in a general sense.

The Canadian election was held on October 21st, 2019.  The central control government of Justin Trudeau would likely hold-back any negative economic information in an effort to support the ideology of the central government and maintain public opinion in advance of the voting.  However, with the election over the economic books need to be reconciled.

I strongly suspect the Canadian November jobs report encompasses some of that state run reconciliation effort.  Meaning the Canadian economy was in much worse shape in the months leading up to the election than state media were broadcasting.  The reality is now catching up….

Secondly, it was obvious in July of this year that Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Justin Trudeau entered into an agreement of mutual benefit.  Trudeau would hold back submission of the USMCA for parliamentary ratification, and left-wing political ideologues in the U.S. would help Trudeau win re-election.

At the time CTH forewarned of what this type of political arrangement really meant.

In essence Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was willing to compromise the health of his own economy for stunningly political reasons.  There was a perfect storm of negative economic dynamics clearly visible on the horizon…. but few were paying attention.

In combination with leftist economic policies on energy development that strangles economic growth through excessive regulation, the leftist government of Trudeau has dismantled the natural underpinnings of a market-based economy.  The manufacturing base of Canada is compromised, perhaps to the point of no return.

For two decades liberal (left-wing) Canadian policy essentially transformed their economic model from manufacturing to “assembly“.   The goods-based production within the Canadian economy was structured to take advantage of the NAFTA loophole.

Goods production in Canada was reduced from full manufacturing to a process of assembling parts brought in from overseas and then selling them into the U.S. market.   This process exploited the NAFTA loophole allowing foreign companies to ship parts to Canada and then assemble for transport into the U.S. without tariffs.

Over time the Canadian economy became more and more dependent on this system of brokering goods, while Canada simultaneously dismantled their heavy industry at the request of extreme environmentalists.

The Canadian assembly system for durable goods was always at risk of the NAFTA loophole being closed.  When President Trump renegotiated the USMCA, primarily with Mexico, the loophole was closed.  The USMCA rules on origination now require the parts to come from inside the North American manufacturing system.

Importing parts from Asia and simply assembling them in Canada is no longer permitted under the USMCA agreement.  The majority of the parts -which require heavy industry to produce- must originate from North America.  Canada has little capacity to take advantage of this economic opportunity because they dismantled their heavy industry.

As a consequence, if any multinational company wanting to invest in a manufacturing system, that avoids tariffs, to bring their end product to the massive U.S. market… well, Canada is no longer a viable option for that investment.

The multinational banks and investment groups who fund corporate manufacturing investment; and who are now no longer willing to underwrite Asian investment due to the impact of Trump tariffs; are focusing on where that investment can support the economic activity.

As with this latest report, when we see: “Canada’s goods-producing industries saw a decline of 26,600 net jobs, largely on manufacturing” leading the headline, this is a direct consequence of the economic dynamic identified above.

Elections have consequences; and those economic consequences are extraordinarily impactful in the era when U.S. President Trump is dismantling global supply chains; focusing on bringing high-wage manufacturing industry back to the U.S; and driving a process of profound consequence through economic nationalism.

“Economic Security is National Security” ~ President Trump

Dec 6 2019

Drug Trade, Violence, & Capital Flows


Armstrong Economics Blog/Opinion

Re-Posted Dec 6, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION:

Good afternoon Mr. Armstrong,

First of all, thank you for all the information you give us on your blog so that we who are and live in third world countries like me can understand the behavior of the global economy and especially in the rich countries. The way I approach the issue of the sovereign debt crisis has been very helpful, but I think that just as the press does not talk about the issue, you do not address the issue of how the illegal economy, especially that of drug trafficking, It affects the global economy.

Can you tell us what Socrates says about this last topic?

A big and warm greeting

CMGB

ANSWER: The drug trade is cash. It has had a major impact upon keeping the political governments south of the United States in chaos. In all honestly, if drugs were legalized, it would save so many lives and help reduce crime. In America, many are attracted to selling drugs because of the money they can make without education. South of the border, people are killed and subjected to slavery, tyranny, and political corruption all because of the drug trade. The number of people who die from the violence far exceeds the number of people die of an overdose.

Socrates picks up the cash flows. Much of the money is laundered into real estate around the world, but particularly into Miami.

 

Dec 6 2019

The Senate and Impeachment Dynamic…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree house on December 5, 2019 by 

As the House impeachment of President Donald Trump becomes more of a forgone political conclusion it’s worth considering what terms and conditions Senate Leader Mitch McConnell will extract in order to preserve a Trump Presidency.

Most political pundits will not correctly outline the status of the possibilities, because most political pundits are willfully blind to the structure of the McConnell Senate.

First, McConnell doesn’t care about holding a majority position in the Senate.  Whether he is a majority leader or a minority leader doesn’t matter to McConnell. In fact McConnell’s political skill-set does better in the minority than the majority.

The preferred political position for Mitch McConnell is where he has between 45 and 49 republican Senators, and the Democrats hold the Majority with around 55.  Of course with Reid’s retirement, this would now be with Majority leader Chuck Schumer holding office.

Why does McConnell prefer the minority position?

The answer is where you have had to actually follow Mitch McConnell closely to see how he works.   When the Majority has around 52 to 55 seats, they need McConnell to give them 8 to 9 votes to overcome the three-fifths (60 vote) threshold for their legislative needs.  It is in the process of trade and payment for those 8 to 9 votes where McConnell makes more money, and holds more power, than as a sitting Majority Leader.

The 60 vote threshold, and McConnell’s incredible skillset in the minority, is where he shines.  Each of the needed votes to achieve sixty is worth buckets of indulgence to the minority leader.  This is why McConnell never changed the Senate rules for legislative passage.

Except for budget passage (reconciliation); and McConnell being forced by intransigence in the era of Trump resistance to change the judicial vote threshold to 51; McConnell would never consider changing the legislative threshold to a simple majority because it would be removing his favored position.  A simple majority vote is adverse to his interests; that’s why he retained it during his reign as majority leader; as did Harry Reid before him.

The vote selling to the 60 vote threshold in the Senate is where the UniParty operates; and where the status of maximum financial benefit for the minority exists.

Currently, as majority leader, McConnell needs to purchase eight or nine votes for each legislative priority.

Mitch McConnell doesn’t like being the purchaser, he prefers being the vote seller where his skill-set as a broker really shines.  McConnell is much better at extracting terms for his vote sales, than being the purchaser for the votes of an intransigent minority wing. This is why the current Senate doesn’t pass many bills.

If Democrats were in the majority, and McConnell was the minority leader, we would see much more legislation pass because Schumer is a more well financed buyer (K-Street) and McConnell is a much better seller.  Whenever we have this minority dynamic it always leaves people confused because few really watch what McConnell is doing.

McConnell takes his favorite twenty controlled GOP senators and brokers their votes on an ‘as needed’ basis.  The eight to ten senators he selects each time get compensated in the process.  McConnell rotates the financial beneficiaries on a bill-by-bill basis.  As a consequence each of the 20 or so McConnell senators gets quite wealthy over time, and McConnell gains additional power and influence.

If any of the republican Senators attempt to disrupt this UniParty business model McConnell excommunicates them from the legislative process; the best reference for the ‘incommunicado’ approach is former U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC).

Additional references for how McConnell operates this scheme as the Minority Leader can be found in the Corker-Cardin amendment which allowed the Iran nuclear deal/payments under Obama; and/or the “fast track” Trade Promotion Authority deal for TPP passage, again for President Obama’s maximum benefit.   In these examples McConnell worked with Harry Reid to flip the vote threshold from votes to approve, to votes needed to deny.

Within TPP Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was again working on the priorities of U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue.   McConnell and Donohue have been working together on UniParty trade and domestic legislative issues for around twenty years. It is well established that Senate Leader Mitch McConnell has one major career alliance that has been unbroken and unchanged for well over two decades. That alliance is with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and specifically with CoC President Tom Donohue.

CoC President Tom Donohue represents Wall Street interests and supports: all multinational trade deals, open-border immigration policies, amnesty legislative constructs, and all of the issues that have generally irked common-sense GOP voters for the same period of time. [SEE HERE and SEE HERE].

Tom Donohue is the biggest lobbyist spender in DC every year, by a mile.

To remind ourselves how Minority and Majority Senator McConnell took down the threat of the Tea Party revisit these old articles:  CNN Part I and CNN Part II  both showcase how McConnell works.   Then do some research on how McConnell worked with Haley Barbour in Mississippi [SEE HERE].

So the reason for outlining this Senate dynamic is simply to remind everyone that with a Senate impeachment trial coming up, it’s not the 2020 campaign to hold a majority in the senate that matters to Mitch McConnell.  If McConnell can rid himself of Tom Donohue’s nemesis, President Trump, and simultaneously return to his preferred and more lucrative position as minority leader, he would be quite happy.

The first opportunity for leverage over the White House will come in the shape of the Senate “rules of impeachment”.  The senate will have wide latitude in how they set-up the processes and procedures for the trial – and McConnell never misses an opportunity to leverage a “get” from his senate position.

So what will the White House need to give McConnell… or what will McConnell’s ask be, in order to protect the office of the president?  Here’s where you have to remember Tom Donohue and the Wall St priorities.

McConnell (subtext Donohue) would prefer the confrontation with China be eliminated and the tariffs dropped.  Is that too big an “ask”?  Would the White House sell/trade McConnell a China deal for better impeachment terms?

All of these are questions worth pondering now, because there’s no doubt they are being discussed amid those in DC sitting on the comfy Corinthian wing-backs and gleefully rubbing their hands around a well polished mahogany table….

….There are trillions at stake !

 

Dec 6 2019

Chris Heinz’s Dad Endorses Hunter Biden’s Dad – A ‘Protect the Family’ Decision…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on December 5, 2019 by 

Hunter Biden, Chris Heinz and Devon Archer created an international private equity firm. It was anchored by the Heinz family alternative investment fund, Rosemont Capital.

The Rosemont group described themselves as “a $2.4 billion private equity firm co-owned by Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz,” with Devon Archer as “Managing Partner.”

As Vice-President Joe Biden (Hunter’s dad) and Secretary of State John Kerry (Chris’s dad) negotiated sensitive and high-stakes deals with foreign governments, Rosemont secured a series of exclusive financial deals with those same foreign governments. Hunter Biden and Chris Heinz made millions.  Today John Kerry endorses Joe Biden:

In the spring of 2014, Hunter Biden and Devon Archer joined the board of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian gas company that was at the center of a U.K. money laundering probe. Over the next year, Burisma reportedly paid Biden and Archer’s companies over $3 million. Because VP Biden’s job overseeing Ukraine was too obvious a construct for the financial influence operation Chris Heinz reportedly cut ties with Hunter and Devon.

Dec 5 2019

Biden Bit My Finger: Plus, Kids Loved to Rub Joe’s Hairy Legs


You won’t believe a leading candidate for president said this — or did that — but former Veep Joe Biden tells a weird tale about his days as a lifeguard, and he bite’s his wife’s finger…on the campaign stump. Did Biden’s speech writer pen the story about how kids loved to rub Joe’s hairy legs? Does he have anyone on his staff to restrain him from raving? Should we be seriously concerned that something is mentally wrong with the leading Democratic presidential candidate? Right Angle with Stephen Green, Bill Whittle and Scott Ott, comes to you 16 times each month, thanks to our Members, who get to enjoy an additional four Backstage episodes, plus write their own blog, and interact with a comments forum and private messaging on our website at https://BillWhittle.com – Become a Member at https://BillWhittle.com/register/ – Support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/billwhittle – Listen to our shows on the go with your podcast app: http://bit.ly/BWN-Podcasts – Watch us now on Amazon’s Fire TV by downloading the Bill Whittle Network app. http://bit.ly/BWN-FireTV – Ask your Amazon smart device, “Alexa, play Bill Whittle Network on TuneIn radio.” – We’re on Bitchute too: http://bit.ly/BWN-Bitchute

Dec 4 2019

Socrates Project – Best Kept Secret


Armstrong Economics Blog/Socrates

Re-Posted Dec 4, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Marty; A friend of mine is an analyst at one of the major banks in New York. He said they are not allowed to forecast some things as you said. He used to work for a European bank and did say it was much worse.  He said everyone who is anyone reads you. He also said that none of the mainstream media will ever report on Socrates because you will put all analysis out of business. Is this why you intend to go public?

Thanks so much for your insight in creating Socrates.

MH

ANSWER: Mainstream press in the USA has never been interested in really covering our analysis. They are not interested in reporting that a computer can actually write reports and forecast the entire world. You have to understand, we remain the best-kept secret. Even when Nigel Farage was our guest speaker in Rome, he said he had to come after we forecast BREXIT. Now, not a single British newspaper ever reported our forecast before or after. Nonetheless, those in power and in strategic institutions and corporations, all know what our forecasts were. So it is an interesting paradox. We are the best-read, but the most under-reported.

Nobody wants to report there is a computer that forecasts the world for it at the same time exposes the true trend of the economy and all the interconnections, including climate change. In the summer when the Inverted Yield Curve was taking place, all the newspapers were forecasting Trump would lose because the economy was headed into a recession. That was their typical biased war against Trump. Our model showed there would be a moderate decline in the expansion into the ECM for January, but that we did not see a major correction or a major recession.

These types of forecasts are not luck nor are they based upon what “I think” for we are all human and thus we are subject to making mistakes. We need a dispassionate analysis of a computer to provide an objective outlook. People keep trying to compete with me personally which is often quite funny to me.

Socrates will only be recognized when (1) we go public, and (2) after my death. That is just how things work. Even in the Bible, Jesus said that a prophet has no honor or is recognized in his own country’ (John 4:44). That is the way it has ALWAYS been in every field. Not exactly sure why it is that way. It just is! I have always been covered more by the press outside the USA than inside.

Dec 4 2019

Italy & the Euro


Armstrong Economic Blog/Euro €

Re-Posted Dec 4, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Dear Mr Armstrong,
When will the Euro begin the final drop against the USD?
My second question is property in Italy seems to be rising. Is this what you referred to a currency inflation?

CDP

ANSWER: The decline in the euro since 2008 has been steady, but gradual to some extent. The EU government has been warning banks not to accept short positions and they have done their best to try to hold the currency. The final blow comes ONLY when the general public realizes that there is a problem with all central banks. They cannot support the economy while the fiscal side makes no effort at reform. That is more likely in the 2021-2022 time period.

As far as property in Italy is concerned, Italians have a cultural attachment to property. Many have more than one place. They have traditionally sought to park money in property because the Italian lira was in a perpetual decline.

Pension funds on a global scale will become a major crisis. Japan has the worst aging population. However, the same problem exists in Europe and America. This is a long-term issue rather than instantly, right now

Dec 4 2019

German Politics


Armstrong Economics Blog/Germany

Re-Posted Dec 4, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION:

Hi Martin,

It can not be said enough: thank you for everything that you do.

I have a question that has been bothering me for some time now. I haven’t had the time to compose it until now.

You often talk of the fact that Hitler was elected with only 30% of the vote, and was allowed to propagate because of it. This changed the face of Europe and the world.

Was this the same for Merkel? Was she allowed, with only 30% of the vote, to open the borders and so change the face of Europe for decades to come?

If so, then Germany, with all its preoccupation about hyperinflation, has misread history and so should have focused on electoral reform rather than austerity.

Thanks, from a dedicated daily reader,

D

ANSWER: Yes, political reform in Germany is really essential. At the very least, it should adopt the French system where the first round of voting reduces the multi-party factions to two. Then the people have to vote between them. In the case of Germany, they form governments from groups to form coalitions. This means there must be compromises in what the people voted for. It is wrong that those compromises are then decided by politicians rather than the people. The next result, someone with only 30% can change the face of Germany and Europe