Revenge of the Right: Why Break Up YouTube, Google and Facebook


Uploaded on Jun 14, 2019

Bill Whittle finds three reasons to break up Google, YouTube, Facebook and other social media companies that use algorithms to suppress free speech. This is not merely the revenge of the Right over demonetization. Bias without consent, practical monopoly status, and the distinction between carriers and publishers all lead to the conclusion that even conservatives should cheer the dissolution of these “private” businesses. The power of social media to suppress our messages has squeezed ad revenues to a trickle, and stopped many thousands of people from even seeing these videos. To survive and to advance the cause of common sense and decency, the Members at BillWhittle.com have taken up the challenge to fund this enterprise, and to share these videos with their networks of friends. Members have created a refuge for free thought, reason, civility and a lot of humor. Join them today at https://BillWhittle.com/register/

 

Why Can’t Progressive Media Make a Profit Trying to Destroy Capitalism?


Published on Jun 15, 2019

Salon, ThinkProgress, Vox and other Progressive media outlets struggle to stay out of bankruptcy despite the growing popularity of socialism in the United States. Is this proof that free enterprise is a failed economic model when a good-hearted Progressive can’t make a profit trying to destroy capitalism? As we say in this video, the Members at BillWhittle.com believe in free market economics, and you can vote with your dollars to support this enterprise at https://BillWhittle.com/register/

 

Dying to Visit The Dominican Republic?….


No-one seems to know why Americans are dying of ‘heart attacks’ during vacations in the Dominican Republic, but many people are beginning to suspect intentional poisoning by hotel workers.   Another mysterious death today:

(Dominican Republic) The son of a New York hospital technician who died suddenly in her room at an all-inclusive resort in Punta Cana says Dominican authorities are resisting doing toxicology tests and pressuring him to have her body cremated or embalmed before its return to the U.S.

Will Cox, 25, told Fox News on Friday that his mother, Leyla, who died Monday evening at the Excellence resort, was on a solo trip to celebrate her 53rd birthday and was in good health.

A Dominican police report, which Cox showed to Fox News, listed the cause of death as a heart attack. (read more)

Suspicious Cat is suspicious…

DNC Club Releases Debate Line-Up, Elizabeth Warren Positioned Over Sanders…


It’s important to remember President Obama’s ideological ally, former DOJ Civil Rights Division head Tom Perez, is the current Chairman of the DNC.  There are still two generally adverse camps within the DNC Club, though the boundary is much softer.

The professionals (former Clinton wing) and the activists (former Obama wing).  Tom Perez hails from the ideological activist wing.  The Democrat debate will take place in Miami and the group has been broken up into two groups over two nights.

Despite the nonsense that might be spun by NBC, the selection was not random draw (they never are) by the club. The DNC selected the candidates for each night and coordinated with NBC.  Interestingly, Elizabeth Warren is the biggest winner and Bernie Sanders is the biggest loser.  That’s a *tell*.  The DNC is shaping the perspectives of the college crowd.

By positioning Elizabeth Warren on the first night (highest rating night); and positioning her with little intellectual or policy challenge; it appears the Perez DNC activist wing wants Warren over Sanders. It’s also obvious Warren can critique Sanders without an rebuttal (smart move).  Additionally Beto will look like the goofball he is.  This helps assemble the college crowd to Warren (again, subtle but smart move).

Conversely, the DNC put Sanders against Biden, Buttigieg, Harris and Bennet.  Sanders has no-one to debate his communist bona-fides with.  Night two will be a swarm of social justice and me-too-isms…. and of course, high dose Orange-Man-Bad.

Data-Delivery Deadline…. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio made the cut while Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, Rep. Seth Moulton (Mass.) and Miramar, FL, Mayor Wayne Messam did not.  This is almost certain to be a measure of value for the first required batch of data-delivery.

Likely de Blasio gave up his New York donor and candidate support file to make the stage. The DNC has all but admitted the data-value is the primary metric in determining support.  But the Club is going to have to be really careful with Bernie Sanders.

Bernie has the biggest and most valuable data-file within the entire DNC field. The club is going to have to find a way to export that file to Elizabeth Warren without pissing off Bernie too much… though we know from 2016 Bernie and Jane can be purchased, so it might just be an aspect of determining best price (likely is).

The first pair of debates are being hosted by NBC News, MSNBC and Telemundo. NBC News said the positioning of candidate podiums onstage would be based on polling and will be announced at a later date.  Again, more shaping. Warren will be center stage on Night One, and Biden will be center stage on Night Two.

Et tu Tom?

[ps. Don’t forget, just like the republican voters in 2011/2012, most of the Democrat voters still have no idea how controlled this is. Only a small number of voters know how the big club operate and can fathom how Club strategies are executed (splitters etc).  The College Crowd is absolutely clueless – stunningly so.]

Will Basel-III Changing Gold’s Status as a Reserve Asset for Banks Change the Future?


 

The Bank of International Settlements under Basel-III changed the status of gold as a reserve asset effectively on April 1, 2019. Gold used to be viewed by the banks as a risky asset and classified under “Tier-3”, which meant it was considered risky and could only be carried on the books at 50% of the market value for reserve purposes.  Naturally, gold has historically been classified as a Tier 3 asset because its value fluctuated. To the extent that the value was reduced for reserve status by 50% ensured that there was little incentive for banks to retain gold as a reserve asset regardless of their beliefs.

Since the BIS reclassified gold as a “Tier-1” asset, its value is now no longer reduced but is reflected as 100%. Now people assume banks will run out and buy gold. The problem is that it is not a fixed price on the balance sheet but it is regarded only as a 100% of market value.  While some claim that this makes Gold a “riskless” asset in the eyes of world banking authorities, they fail to note it is market value. Cash does not fluctuate $1 is still $1 regardless of what it buys.

Banks are NOT in a mad rush to buy gold and shift their reserve asses when they cannot employ gold in the banking business. True, there was once upon a time when banks cherish gold reserves but that was when gold was fixed on a standard. It will by no means increase confidence in any bank or the system as a whole. Gold remains illiquid insofar as a reserve asset is concerned.

While there is no incentive for banks to load up on gold even if it is a Tier-I asset from a banking and economic standpoint since we are not on a gold standard and its value will fluctuate unlike cash reserves, There is another reason why a small portion would make sense to retain in gold outside of the United States especially in Europe. The reserve status that is Tier-I in Europe would be bonds of all member states of the EU. There is obviously a risk in that respect.

These standards, collectively called Basel III, compare a bank’s assets with its capital to determine if the bank could stand the test of a crisis. Capital is required by banks to absorb unexpected losses that arise during the normal course of the bank’s operations. The Basel III framework tightens the capital requirements by limiting the type of capital that a bank may include in its different capital tiers and structures.

Because not all assets have the same risk, the assets of a bank are weighted based on the credit risk and market risk that each asset presents. For example, take a government bond may be characterized as a “no-risk asset” and given a zero percent risk weighting. On the other hand, a subprime mortgage may be classified as a high-risk asset and weighted 65%. So Basel III considering government debt as “no-risk” is a little foolish when we look into the years ahead.

Gold will offer a neutral bank with respect to government debt holdings, but it will still not provide a stable base of an asset since it will fluctuate rather than the immediate currency base. Gold will offer a hedge against sovereign debt among European banks more so than America.

Interest Rate & Currency Pegs


QUESTION: Martin,

I went over three blogs this morning (both public and private); they are The FED Between a Rock & a Hard Place, Manipulating interest rates & Public vs Private Interest Rates. A common theme of the FED possibly pegging interest rates and inflation. My question is: If the FED is induced to peg rates at artificially low levels and the traditional method of combating inflation is raising rates, something must give, so are metals and commodities getting ready for “prime time?”

CF

ANSWER: Behind the curtain the system of pegging rates, as I have stated, is viewed substantially differently than QE. The rates on the U.S. debt will be pegged, but not the Fed funds rates. They will be able to raise rates to the marketplace, but the bonds will be “pegged” like the Swiss attempted to “peg” the franc/euro.

This is a hybrid interest rate system that would eventually collapse as all pegs do. But it will allow, initially, for a bifurcation of rates.

They REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY do not want me to talk about this publicly.

This is feeding into what we see coming for the next wave. They realize QE has failed. They cannot allow rates to rise as it would blow out the budgets.

This is not a long-term solution. The interest rate peg collapsed in 1951 due to Korean War inflation

Public v Private Interest Rates & Sovereign Debt Crisis


QUESTION: Dear Martin I have a question for the blog. There has been forecasts for a sovereign debt crisis but recently you have discussed how various governments may manipulate govt bond interest rates down as has happened in Europe and Japan. If Europe and Japan are anything to go by then this could go on for some time. If govts are successful in this, does this mean that there may not be a sovereign debt crisis?

ANSWER: The Sovereign Debt Crisis involves crossing the line where the private sector no longer trusts government debt. We have begun to cross that lines in Europe and Japan where the central banks are buying the debt in bulk. There have even been German auctions of bonds where there was no big.

Yes, the central banks can artificially keep government interest rates low, but that is only possible when they are the buyers.

We are experiencing already interest rates rising in the peripheral governments where their central banks do not engage in QE – namely emerging markets. We will witness private rates rise for that is a free market. However, from the government side of the table, the Sovereign Debt Crisis among the developed countries engaging in QE has unfolded as NO BID. They can artificially keep rates low ONLY because the central banks buy the debt – nobody in the private sector would buy 10 years paper at 1% to 3% when they need 8% to break even in pension funds.

Also, pay attention to the state/provincial debt where they do not have the ability to buy their own nonsense. The manipulation of rates will be at the federal level, not in the state/provincial and municipal levels of government.

So, pay attention to the bifurcation in rates that is unfolding between PUBIC v PRIVATE.