Did US Interfere in the Russian Elections in 1999?


COMMENT: Mr. Armstrong, It appears obvious why your film the Forecaster was banned in the USA by Netflix and others. Besides showing the corruption in the American Justice system by Judge Castel, Owen, and Kenan, and the corruption of protecting than bankers, the film exposes the plain fact that the United States interfered in the Russian elections back in 1999. They were the very reason Putin got into power.

No wonder nobody will address this issue. The front-page story in the Washington Post Friday that claimed America’s security is at risk because President Trump refuses to accept findings of U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia interfered in our 2016 presidential election is shocking. Why won’t the press ever report your story? They are too busy trying to overthrow Trump.

KD

REPLY: If the Forecaster appeared on American TV as it has in Canada, Europe, and Asia, then the press would have to face the fact that the Russian elections were the target to try to take over that country forcing Yeltsin to step down. They steered the $7 billion wire through Bank of New York to blackmail Yeltsin to prevent him from running for election in Russia in 2000.

The question has always been was it simply the bankers trying to take over Russia, or was the US government also involved? The bankers at Bank of New York pleaded guilty and got 6 months house arrest with of course no jail time.

The Court Transcript in the Bank of New York case reads:

“Ultimately, as alleged in the information, a total of more than $7 billion of funds was deposited in and transmitted through the Benex, BECS and Lowland accounts at the Bank of 16 New York.”

Lucy Edwards plea transcript id/pg 34 of 84

Government Power & the Inversion Delusion


COMMENT: The Trump Tax Cut,…
Having read your blog now for a couple years, it seems that the problem is squarely upon “why” we have or need Government. To that end, it all hinges on the relationship of Person to Government. What we have now is: People are subservient to Government. There will be no solution to the human condition until the opposite is true: Government must always be subservient to the People. Bad Government leads to crash and burn.

This inversion of priorities is readily seen in the entire tax “reform” effort. It is all about maintaining Government revenue streams. Slavery of the People is acceptable. Until the enslavement of man is terminated, there is no change in the trajectory of civilization. If we start from a different premise, say No Person Can be Obligated to pay more than 10% of income in taxes (of any form: Federal, State, Local, etc.), only then will the control freaks be tamed. A look at history reveals that mentally ill people gravitate to power. It indicates a soulless existence.

Sadly, foolish people have been allowed to manipulate the judicial leg of Government, to up-end the whole point of a US Constitution:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

There is a reason “Posterity” is capitalized, and “ourselves” is but a lowly pronoun.

REPLY: You are absolutely correct. Thomas Paine recognized this inversion process and opens his Common Sense with it. He explained that government believes it is the country and not the people. Once that takes place you see the results. They put Martha Stewart in prison for lying to an FBI agent. Yet government can lie to us all the time and that presents no crime because they view us and the ruled, not the ruler.

Government always begins as a benevolent entity to further the common good. The problem emerges with a Republican form of government. Once you politically elect a “representative” of the people, the system is doomed. A true Democracy, as in Athens, took the form that the head of the household was the person who voted “representing” everyone in that household from the wife and children to the servants and slaves. They distorted this to say women had no right to vote. They really did not need such a right BEFORE socialism since there was nothing the state could do to them. Once we introduced income taxes and socialism, then every person was taxed, not just the household, and regulation began to control the behavior of every individual. Everything was inverted.

The only type of government I would like to see is a return to Democracy where we call can vote from home on a bill and each bill must stand alone with no covert attachments. Income Tax is no longer necessary since the government never pays off the debt anyhow. Rome lasted for 500 years with minimal inflation just creating new money to pay their own bills.

Trump Tax Plan to Allow Small Business to Expand


QUESTION: Hello. You mentioned that the tax cut will allow many companies to expand and hire more staff. At a WSJ forum, Gary Cohen asked a group of CEO’s if they would expand or hire more workers with the corporate tax cut and less than a dozen raised their hands. Some have commented that the savings will be used for stock buybacks and bigger bonuses instead. Which do you think will happen?

Thank you for your blog, it is very helpful.

JS

ANSWER: The businesses that Cohen put that question to were big public business. The big public businesses only employ about 38% of the private sector workforce while small businesses employ 53% of the workforce. Indeed, over 99% of employing organizations are small businesses and more than 95% of these businesses have fewer than 10 employees.

I have probably advised more of the biggest corporations in the world than anyone. The bigger the business grows, the more it becomes like government. The boards are taken over by lawyers, accountants, and political tokens. The original entrepreneurs are usually expelled from boards because they are far too innovative than corporate America.

I had a front-row seat in Radio Corporation of America, where I began my career in computer engineering (software & hardware). Most people are unaware that RCA was a leader in computers. The board of directors thought the computer would be like the radio, which made the company. Everyone during the Great Depression wanted a radio to listen to FDR’s Fireside Chats. Then, RCA had all the government contracts for World War II.

By the 1960s, RCA had the main-frames tied up. They had installed their machines around the world in government installations. They wanted me to go to the most remote outpost and the tour of duty was 1-year and one-day. Thule was top secret back then. The location was the frigid northwestern coast of Greenland and was the U.S. military’s most isolated base. This was the home to one of the Pentagon’s primary tools for keeping an eye out for intercontinental ballistic missile launches from Russia. I turned down the post and that ended my career in computers at RCA.

RCA sold its computer division to IBM and Univac. They kept the servicing contracts of these big installations. However, they thought the computer would decline in price like the radio into crystal sets so they believed they were being smart and sold what they thought was the peak. RCA is now just a subsidiary and no longer a leader in the computer sector. Oh, how the mighty fall.

Why do big companies buy small start-ups? Because the bigger the company becomes, the less innovation they possess. They have to go out and buy start-up to expand. All expansion of technology comes from the bottom moving up. It does not come in the other direction.

The big companies will bring back their cash and some will take-over small companies. Others will use the cash to buy back their stock. It is also like funds management. Give me $100 million and it is easy to produce 50%+ returns annually. Give me $10 billion, the sheer size cannot be traded efficiently as a small amount of money and performance will collapse to a normal level and sometimes 5-8%.

Small companies do the bulk of the hiring, while the big companies contract and impose all sorts of restrictions. The economic growth comes predominantly from small business – not big corporates. So the response Cohen got is absolutely normal. The big contract and the small are the entrepreneurs.

British Parliament Chaos as Tory Rebels Try to Stop BREXIT


The Tory Rebels in the UK Parliament joined forces with Labour and the Remain Camp to defeat BREXIT in reality. They claim that Parliament will now vote on the BREXIT deal, but in reality, they have created an open door for more uncertainty and economic chaos.

The Tory rebels were Mr. Grieve, Heidi Allen, Ken Clarke, Jonathan Djanogly, Stephen Hammond, Sir Oliver Heald, Nicky Morgan, Bob Neill, Antoinette Sandbach, Anna Soubry and Sarah Wollaston. Another Conservative MP, John Stevenson, abstained from voting in both lobbies. Meanwhile, two Labour MPs, Frank Field, and Kate Hoey voted with the government.

The amendment was authored by former attorney general Dominic Grieve and was championed by other pro-Remain campaigners. The fact that the Remain camp indeed remains delusional about the economics of the entire mess is beyond contemplation. This seriously calls into question why there is no qualification to be a politician. They are ignorant of the fact that the GDP of Britain peaked in 1973 and has declined ever since joining the EU. Are they just stupid or corrupt? Britain is disliked in Brussels and has lost just about every case to defend Britains in the EU Court. Yet these people are oblivious to reality.

Nicky Morgan revealed their true motives when he tweeted:

“Tonight Parliament took control of the EU Withdrawal process.”

These Rebels have seriously undermined the process and the Prime Minister. Granted, PM May does not know how to negotiate. Britain holds all the cards. It should go for a HARD BREXIT and watch Ireland and Brussels crawl. The Germans will be on the phone to Brussels calling them an idiot since Britain is Germany’s biggest market for their cars. Already German cars sales in Britain have dropped sharply and diesel cars have become almost not salable.


Meanwhile, the cash Pound closed last week at 13323 leaving it neutral to bearish on our yearly models for now. As we enter 2018, the resistance will fall to the 145 to 151 level. The Pound Sterling thus still remains in a vulnerable position against the dollar.

Looking at the Pound against the Euro, it closed last week at 88200. The Yearly Bearish Reversal rests at the 82800 level. Our pivot point for resistance in 2018 will be 88120. This makes this very interesting. A closing above that means the Euro can still rally to exceed the 2016 high of 94150. A closing beneath 88120 will be a sign of weakness for the Euro and BREXIT will still unfold.

Support will be at 78800 in 2018 and resistance will stand at the 93100 level and that appears to be very firm.

Trump Tax Reform & Charitable Donations


QUESTION:  Hi Marty,
I have been reading your blog daily for the last few years, as well as the archives. I just read your explanation of the difference between the house and senate versions of the tax cuts. The only thing that baffles me is not including charitable giving as a deduction. It seems to me that many people will stop giving what they can’t deduct. Then all these charitable organizations will then end up hat in hand pleading funds from the government. I would think it would be less expensive to the government keep charitable deductions than not.
ANSWER: Both plans keep the charitable deduction and the property tax deduction will be capped at $10,000. Your assumption that people donate simply because they get a tax deduction is wrong. All the donations of the famous millionaires like Rockefeller were before the income tax. I personally bought computers for everyone at the grade school I went to and put in the necessary educational software. I never took a deduction because something that big ends up only causing an audit.

I have never known anyone to donate large sums only because they get a deduction. Donations are typically made because you have a passion for something not because you get the deduction. Under that theory, nobody would care who you gave money to. Even when we sold my mother’s house, we donated most of the furniture and they give you a slip[ for a deduction, but it’s just not worth the hassle to use it.

The big donations that get written off are usually from estates.

Taxing the Per Mile you Drive – Hunt for Taxes


There are a number of states now looking into imposing a tax on every mile you drive your car. The leader of the pack has been the West Coast.  I previously reported that California wanted to tax space shots per mile they flew into the sky. Then California wants to tax taxi drivers per mile they drive.  Oregon was looking into taxing per mile you drive. Illinois was looking at taxing motorists 1.5 cents per mile they drive.

Well, California is losing money as oil prices are down and people are shifting to electric cars more so there than perhaps anywhere else in the country. So what is the solution to needing more money? Of course, you guessed it, California now says what the heck, let’s just tax everybody per mile they drive and that will make up for the loss at the gas pump.

Bitcoin = Money, Commodity, or Shares?


QUESTION: I read your article on Bitcoin. I found it fascinating that defining what it is changes everything. You did not actually say what you thought it was, money, stock, or a commodity. Curious as to what you would classify Bitcoin as.

All the best

ANSWER: The definitions I presented are from the government perspective of taxation. They will naturally define it to be whatever produces the greatest tax for themselves.

Economically speaking, anything that can be exchanged to facilitate a barter transaction becomes a MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE. That really can be anything. It has been food, sheepskins, seashells, cattle, bronze, silver, gold, or a derivative of something as paper money began.

Pictured here is a bronze ingot of the Minoan society. It is bronze cast in the form of a sheepskin. This reflects the transition from sheepskin to the Bronze Age. Above is a Roman ingot with the picture of a bull, which also reflects that this was a transition for cattle that was money previously.

Cryptocurrency is the next transition from tangible items being used for money moving toward electronic. It is a Medium of Exchange and that makes it really a currency and not the object itself of desire. Money will always exist in different forms because humans are not all equal in motivation, only human rights and that depends if the government has something to gain then you have no rights at all at that moment.

The Practicality of Cryptocurrencies – Not Really Ready for Prime Time


Trying to actually use Bitcoin in the economy is anything but something that will replace any government currency. The transaction fees are outrageous typically 3 to 4 times that of a cash withdraw from an ATM. In this video, a journalist tries to actually use Bitcoin. The pizza ends up costing him $76.16 and the fee to use Bitcoin is $9.47.

To use Bitcoin, there are middlemen who are the equivalent of a foreign exchange broker. It can take hours to get a simple order in to buy a pizza.

From a practical viewpoint, cryptocurrencies are not quite ready for prime time. They are all hype and offering a futuristic vision of beating the governments, but the computing time it takes to actually use cryptocurrency and the complexities, demonstrate that what we are dealing with is by no means some instant success story that has beaten paper currency or a credit card, which is really also electronic money.

Interstate Banking & Changes to the Federal Reserve


QUESTION: 

Hi Marty,

You say, “The one-size-fits-all policy of central banks with regard to interest rates pits East v West in both Canada and the United States. Farmers, oil producers, and miners are forced to pay higher interest rates when their economies are declining because of speculative booms in Toronto or New York.”

I can see how regional Central Banks could have supplied different stimulus in different regions back in the time of the Fed’s formation when the mediums of communication were not what they are today, but how would that work now. With the ability, today to borrow money electronically from where ever it is cheapest, wouldn’t people in the high-interest regions simply borrow in the regions where the money was cheapest defeating that strategy?

Regards,

F

ANSWER: About 70% of small business are routinely turned down for business loans. The small farmers, miners, and oil producers cannot simply borrow from the cheapest source. I myself always found banks calling me asking if wanted to borrow money when things were great and I never needed it. If you are watching your business model decline, nobody will lend to a ship taking on even a little water. There is a huge difference between a consumer loan on credit cards and a small business.

Consumers already pay interest rates set by a bank which are usually covering various regions. It is true, after the collapse of 9,000 banks with the Great Depression, thereafter banks were prohibited from Interstate Banking. Indeed, Interstate Banking allowing banks across state lines became widespread in the mid-1980s, when state legislatures passed legislation that allowed bank holding companies to acquire out-of-state banks on a reciprocal basis with other states. I had been on the board of a regional bank in the early 1980s. After Interstate Banking was allowed, a New York bank came down and put in a bid for Capital State Bank. It was sold and everyone cashed-in on their shares.

The main point is that there remain regional lending problems. The banks will lend to a market that is booming and will shun away from the regions in trouble. Today, a major bank in New York goes down and it impacts the entire country thanks to Interstate Banking.

So yes, you are correct – things are different today. The regional approach served the local economies. Even the S&L industry was regional and intended to serve the local economies. Today, the restructuring of the central banks eliminating and responsibility for regional disparities combined with Interstate Banking produces a completely different set of problems that will fuel the various separatist’s movements. In Europe, we see a huge disparity between the local economies of Southern Europe v Northern Europe and there too they are trying to impose the one-size-fits-all approach to central banking. Wherever we see economic disparities, we will see separatist movements

The Dow & Trump Tax Reform


The Trump Tax Reform reducing the corporate tax to 21% and taking effect January 1st, 2018 rather than being delayed until 2019, will be one of the biggest positive catalysts for US equities in decades. This is very interesting because it is now fundamentally validating what our computer has been projecting for highs going up to the 40,000 level on the Dow back in 2009.

Many of the domestic and institutional investors overseas are NOT in this market. They will now be forced to reposition their portfolios once the bill is passed. How to Trade a Vertical Market is absolutely critical at this point in time. This is by no means going to be easy.

We are already above the top of the Upward Channel and this will be 21,017.30. Our projections for 2017 stood at 25,648.40 and this rises to 28,045.71 for 2018. This is the next area of resistance. Once we push through that projection, the market will come back to test it. That will be the start of the slingshot upward.

The same model produced the projection at 195.97 for 1928. The year 1928 opened above the projection at 203.40, fell back to retest it dripping to 194.50, and then entered the slingshot running to 301.60 intraday and closed that year at 300.00. Keep in mind our project model gives us 25,648.40 so we are not yet through that level.

This is why I have always warned AGAINST fundamental analysis. The fundamentals ALWAYS unfold to validate what our computer forecasts to start with. Our forecast that BREXIT would win and Trump back in 2016 was possible ONLY because the computer was picking up the change in public sentiment which is driven by economics. The Trump Tax Reform is a reflection of the discontent underlying the economy. The Democrats will naturally vote in block against it because they simply like the higher taxes even if it produces fewer jobs and lower economic growth. They cannot change their color now.

NOBODY could have forecast this back in 2009. Barron’s though we were crazy back in 2011 forecasting the Dow was off to new record highs. Socrates can beat anyone, even me. So why will mainstream media not report our model’s success? Because it is not in the self-interest of themselves or government. Why interview people with opinions to fill their pages if all you have to do is try to figure out why the forecasts Socrates puts out will unfold on schedule? Don’t worry about it. Our big clients prefer that our forecasts are not on their front pages.

After the New Year, we will produce a special report on the US share market for 2018 with the turning point and price objectives for the year.