The US Government Now Has Less Cash Than Google


Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

In the year 1517, one of the most important innovations in financial history was invented in Amsterdam: the government bond.

It was a pretty revolutionary concept.

Governments had been borrowing money for thousands of years… quite often at the point of a sword.

Italian city-states like Venice and Florence had been famously demanding “forced loans” from their wealthy citizens for centuries.

But the Dutch figured out how to turn government loans into an “investment”.

It caught on slowly. But eventually government bonds became an extremely popular asset class.

Secondary markets developed where people who owned bonds could sell them to other investors.

Even simple coffee shops turned into financial exchanges where investors and traders would buy and sell bonds.

In time, the government realized that its creditworthiness was paramount, and the Dutch developed a reputation as being a rock-solid bet.

This practice caught on across the world. International markets developed.

English investors bought French bonds. French investors bought Dutch bonds. Dutch investors bought American bonds.

(By 1803, Dutch investors owned a full 25% of US federal debt. By comparison, the Chinese own about 5.5% of US debt today.)

Throughout it all, debt levels kept rising.

The Dutch government used government bonds to live beyond its means, borrowing money to fund everything imaginable– wars, infrastructure, and ballooning deficits.

But people kept buying the bonds, convinced that the Dutch government will never default.

Everyone was brainwashed; the mere suggestion that the Dutch government would default was tantamount to blasphemy.

It didn’t matter that the debt level was so high that by the early 1800s the Dutch government was spending 68% of tax revenue just to service the debt.

Well, in 1814 the impossible happened: the Dutch government defaulted.

And the effects were devastating.

In their excellent book The First Modern Economy, financial historians Jan De Vries and Ad Van der Woude estimate that the Dutch government default wiped out between 1/3 and 1/2 of the country’s wealth.

That, of course, is just one example.

History is full of events that people thought were impossible. And yet they happened.

Looking back, they always seem so obvious.

Duh. The Dutch were spending 68% of their tax revenue just to service the debt. Of course they were going to default.

But at the time, there was always some prevailing social influence… some wisdom from the “experts” that made otherwise rational people believe in ridiculous fantasies.

Today is no different; we have our own experts who peddle ridiculous (and dangerous) fantasies.

Case in point: this week, yet another debt ceiling debacle will unfold in the Land of the Free.

You may recall the major debt ceiling crisis in 2011; the US federal government almost shut down when the debt ceiling was nearly breached.

Then it happened again in 2013, at which point the government actually DID shut down.

Then it happened again in 2015, when Congress and President Obama agreed to temporarily suspend the debt ceiling, which at the time was $18.1 trillion.

That suspension ends this week, at which point a debt ceiling of $20.1 trillion will kick in.

There’s just one problem: the US government is already about to breach that new debt limit.

The national debt in the Land of the Free now stands at just a hair under $20 trillion.

In fact the government has been extremely careful to keep the debt below $20 trillion in anticipation of another debt ceiling fiasco.

One way they’ve done that is by burning through cash.

At the start of this calendar year in January, the federal government’s cash balance was nearly $400 billion.

On the day of Donald Trump’s inauguration, the government’s cash balance was $384 billion.

Today the US government’s cash balance is just $34.0 billion.

(Google has twice as much money, with cash reserves exceeding $75 billion.)

This isn’t about Trump. Or even Obama. Or any other individual.

It’s about the inevitability that goes hand in hand with decades of bad choices that have taken place within the institution of government itself.

Public spending is now so indulgent that the government’s net loss exceeded $1 trillion in fiscal year 2016, according to the Treasury Department’s own numbers.

That’s extraordinary, especially considering that there was no major war, recession, financial crisis, or even substantial infrastructure project.

Basically, business as usual means that the government will lose $1 trillion annually.

Moreover, the national debt increased by 8.2% in fiscal year 2016 ($1.4 trillion), while the US economy expanded by just 1.6%, according to the US Department of Commerce.

Now they have plans to borrow even more money to fund multi-trillion dollar infrastructure projects.

Then there’s the multi-trillion dollar bailouts of the various Social Security and Medicare trust funds.

And none of this takes into consideration the possibility of a recession, trade war, shooting war, or any other contingency.

This isn’t a political problem. It’s an arithmetic problem. And the math just doesn’t add up.

The only question is whether the government outright defaults on its creditors, defaults on promises to its citizens, or defaults on the solemn obligation to maintain a stable currency.

But of course, just like two centuries ago with the Dutch, the mere suggestion that the US government may default is tantamount to blasphemy.

Our modern “experts” tell us that the US government will always pay and that a debt default is impossible.

Well, we’re living in a world where the “impossible” keeps happening.

So it’s hard to imagine anyone will be worse off seeking a modicum of sanity… and safety.

Do you have a Plan B?

“The Biggest Show Of Force Since World War II”: Japan To Send Its Largest Warship To South China Sea


Tyler Durden's picture

The tension over the disputed territory in the South China Sea is about to escalate to another level: according to a Reuters report, Japan is preparing to to dispatch its largest warship on a three-month tour through the South China Sea beginning in May, in “its biggest show of naval force in the region since World War Two.”

Japan Maritime Self Defense Force’s helicopter carrier Izumo

The 249 meter-long (816.93 ft) Izumo is as large as Japan’s World War Two-era carriers and can operate up to nine helicopters. It resembles the amphibious assault carriers used by U.S. Marines, but lacks their well deck for launching landing craft and other vessels.

While China claims almost all the disputed waters despite the regular complaints of other nations in the region, and its growing military presence has fueled concern in Japan and the West, with the United States holding regular air and naval patrols to ensure freedom of navigation, so far Japan’s territorial claims have involved the Senkaku island chain in the East China Sea; that however appears to be changing as Japan seeks to stake a military presence in the contested region.

The Izumo helicopter carrier, commissioned only two years ago, will make stops in Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines and Sri Lanka before joining the Malabar joint naval exercise with Indian and U.S. naval vessels in the Indian Ocean in July, before returning to Japan in August.

Why create another point of Chinese antagonism over the region? “The aim is to test the capability of the Izumo by sending it out on an extended mission,” said one of the sources who have knowledge of the plan. “It will train with the U.S. Navy in the South China Sea,” he added, asking not to be identified because he is not authorized to talk to the media. A spokesman for Japan’s Maritime Self Defense Force declined to comment.

  Taiwan, Malaysia, Vietnam, the Philippines and Brunei also claim parts of the sea which has rich fishing grounds, oil and gas deposits and through which around $5 trillion of global sea-borne trade passes each year. Japan does not have any claim to the waters, but has a separate maritime dispute with China in the East China Sea.

 Japan wants to invite Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, who has pushed ties with China in recent months as he has criticized the old alliance with the United States, to visit the Izumo when it visits Subic Bay, about 100 km (62 miles) west of Manila, another of the sources said. Asked during a news conference about his view on the warship visit, Duterte said, without elaborating, “I have invited all of them.”

He added: “It is international passage, the South China Sea is not our territory, but it is part of our entitlement.” On whether he would visit the warship at Subic Bay, Duterte said: “If I have time.”

Japan’s unexpected flag-flying operation comes as the United States is conflicted between taking a tougher line with China and making concessions ahead of Xi’s visit to Trump next month. Washington has criticized China’s construction of man-made islands and a build-up of military facilities that it worries could be used to restrict free movement. Beijing responded in January said it had “irrefutable” sovereignty over the disputed islands after the White House vowed to defend “international territories”.

As Reuters notes, Japan in recent years, particularly under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, has been stretching the limits of its post-war, pacifist constitution and has been making aggressive pushes for a return to militarism. It has designated the Izumo as a destroyer because the constitution forbids the acquisition of offensive weapons. The vessel, nonetheless, allows Japan to project military power well beyond its territory. Based in Yokosuka, near to Tokyo, which is also home to the U.S. Seventh Fleet’s carrier, the Ronald Reagan, the Izumo’s primary mission is anti-submarine warfare.

“Hanging In The Balance” – A Look Inside The War To Repeal Obamacare


Tyler Durden's picture

A few weeks ago we noted that none other than John Boehner, the former Republican Speaker of the House, scoffed at the idea of repealing and replacing Obamacare as he essentially predicted that Republicans would become their own worst enemy (see “Boehner: Full Repeal And Replace Of Obamacare ‘Is Not Going To Happen’“):

 “[Congressional Republicans are] going to fix Obamacare – I shouldn’t call it repeal-and-replace, because it’s not going to happen,” he said.

 “I started laughing,” he said. “Republicans never ever agree on health care.”

 “So this is not all that hard to figure out.  Except this, in the 25 years I served in the United States Congress, Republicans never, ever, not one time agreed on what a healthcare proposal should look like.  Not once.”

 “And all this happy talk that went on in November and December and January about repeal, repeal, repeal…if you pass repeal without replace, you’ll never pass replace because they will never agree on what the bill should be.  The perfect always becomes the enemy of the good.”

Now, it’s looking increasingly like Boehner may have been right as the so-called “TrumpCare” attempt to repeal and replace Obamacare will face a number of challenges, starting this week, in its journey to Trump’s desk.  The first challenge comes from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) which is expected this week to release its score of the legislation.  The CBO is widely expected, even among Republicans, to estimate that millions of people would no longer have health insurance under the plan.  Per The Hill:

 With that in mind, Republicans are already looking to discredit the office and downplay the importance of the score.

 “If you’re looking at the CBO for accuracy, you’re looking in the wrong place,” White House press secretary Sean Spicer said earlier this week.

 Ryan, meanwhile, compared CBO scores to a “beauty contest.”

 “Our goal is not to show a pretty piece of paper that says we’re mandating great things for Americans. Our goal is to get a vibrant health care system that’s patient-centered, that brings down costs, that increases choices, that has a marketplace so that we lower the costs and increase, and therefore increase the access to affordable care,” he said.

Paul Ryan

 

Then there are the Republican governors from states that took ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion who are also wary of the healthcare legislation.

 “Phasing out Medicaid coverage without a viable alternative is counterproductive and unnecessarily puts at risk our ability to treat the drug addicted, mentally ill, and working poor who now have access to a stable source of care,” Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) said in a statement Wednesday.

 The governors met with the White House and GOP leadership about ObamaCare and Medicaid during their annual conference earlier this month, but Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval said this week the resulting plan “doesn’t include anything that the governors have talked about.”

 “We’ve said all along, ‘work with the governors,’ that it should be a governor-led effort and for the Congress to rely on their governors,” Sandoval said.

 And then there are the conservative elements of the splintered Republican party that would prefer to simply repeal Obamacare altogether, without a replacement plan, and start from ground zero.  While Paul Ryan has guaranteed that his bill can pass the House, assuming all Democrats vote no, it would only take 21 House GOP defections to kill the bill.  That said, Republican control of the Senate is much more narrow and several Senators, including Tom Cotton (Ark) and Rand Paul (KY), don’t seem all that eager to support the current iteration of the bill.
  Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said the House GOP should “start over” on its replacement plan.

 “House health-care bill can’t pass Senate without major changes,” Cotton Tweeted Thursday.

 “To my friends in House: pause, start over. Get it right, don’t get it fast.”

 The legislation has been criticized by at least 11 senators, including some from Medicaid expansion states who don’t want to see the expansion rolled back.

 Conservatives like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), meanwhile, are backing the Freedom Caucus’s push for repealing more of ObamaCare. Paul has introduced his own legislation to repeal ObamaCare.

All political rhetoric or is Trump about to get bogged down in the swamp?  He seems optimistic…

Sturgeon To Give May An “Ultimatum” As UK Preapres For Critical Vote Ahead Of Article 50


Tyler Durden's picture

Britain’s minister for leaving the European Union, David Davis, urged lawmakers not to hold back PM Theresa May’s ability to negotiate a Brexit deal in talks she could trigger as early as this week. Davis on Sunday called on lawmakers to vote to drop two amendments that were added to a bill authorizing the talks with the bloc’s other member states, saying May should be able to enter with no strings attached the WSJ reported.

On Monday the Brexit bill returns to the House of Commons, the U.K.’s lower house, for debate after the House of Lords said it wanted guarantees that EU citizens living in the U.K. could stay after Brexit and that Parliament could vote on the final terms. The final bill must be approved by both houses. Should the bill pass Monday, the government could invoke Article 50 as early as Tuesday according to weekend press reports, but negotiations in Parliament could last several days. The Brexit spokesman for the main opposition Labour Party, Keir Starmer, told Sky News he expects the government to trigger it on Wednesday or Thursday.

Even if the House of Commons votes in favor of the amendments, May is expected to keep her timetable of triggering by the end of the month. But it would underline how small her majority is in the lower house. Complicating matters is a tweet moments ago by BBG political editor Laura Kuenssberg, who reported that Scotland’s Nicola Sturgeon will give May an ultimatum: give Scotland a different Brexit deal or she’ll call for section 30, the indyref process.

On the topic of Brexit, Reuters reported on Sunday that David Davis is also drawing up “contingency plans” for Britain in the unlikely event it has to walk away from divorce talks with the European Union without a deal. Ahead of the start of Article 50 negotiations, which could be triggered as early as Tuesday, a committee of lawmakers warned it would be a serious dereliction of duty if the government failed to plan for the possibility of not reaching an exit deal. “I don’t think, firstly, that is remotely likely,” Davis told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, responding to the report. “It’s in absolutely everybody’s interest that we get a good outcome.”

Parliament’s Foreign Affairs committee warned that a breakdown in negotiations would be a “very destructive outcome,” causing economic harm to both sides as well as creating uncertainty and legal confusion for individuals and businesses.

 “The simple truth is we have been planning for the contingency – all the various outcomes, all the possible outcomes of the negotiations,” Davis said. “One of the reasons we don’t talk about the contingency plan too much is that we don’t want people to think ‘Oh, this is what we’re trying to do.'”

Asked when May would trigger talks, Davis declined to name a specific date. “Each date has different implications in terms of when it could be responded to by the (European) council … I’m not going to get into the details why, but there’s politics in terms of achieving success.”

Finally, for a frank, “on the ground” take on the current state of Brexit, here is an excerpt from Bill Blain’s latest Morning Porridge edition:

Saturday Night Live’s Attack on Trump/Alex Backfires!


Published on Mar 12, 2017

Saturday Night Live opened their show with an absurd Trump/Alex Alien skit. What they didn’t know was that their subconscious inversion of truth would be laid bare for all to see. Alex breaks down how they are struggling to flip the narrative and create their own absurd reality based on the

Shots Fired At Ferguson Market After CNN Broadcasts Fake News and Edited CCTV Footage…


Source: Shots Fired At Ferguson Market After CNN Broadcasts Fake News and Edited CCTV Footage…

WikiLeaks Vault 7 Maybe Bigger than Snowden


Wikileaks

 

CIA FrankfurtThe Wikileaks Vault 7 of the CIA espionage has exposed the fact that they are spying on every individual in Germany from Frankfurt. Here is yet another blow to undermining public confidence in government. The CIA is allowed to spy on the entire German economy, every individual citizen, every politician, every lawyer, every businessman and all European partners from Frankfurt. There is nothing anyone can do about protecting European citizens anymore or their businesses. It came out before that Merkel was fully aware of the CIA operations in Frankfurt spying on everything, which emerged as a scandal creating the biggest crisis yet for the country’s foreign intelligence agency and that was back in 2015. The German government appears to have been aware of widespread US spying, possibly including economic espionage, against European targets and yet it did nothing to stop it.

On March 8, 2017, WikiLeaks launched the first tranche of secret CIA documents to provide an overview of CIA cybercrime practices for Europe, Africa and the Middle East. These documents have by far surpassed the damage that the Snowden publications have made a few years ago. The published papers are from the years 2013 to 2016 and revealing the common operational practice of the CIA. The period coincides with the discoveries in the NSA affair in Germany from mid-2013. What is noticeable here is the fact that the CIA has been expanding Frankfurt as a center of American espionage activities in Europe – even during the Snowden affair. We have previously reported that even the UK has been tapping everything.

claper-james-testified-11-17-2016However, those who think this is not a real concern because they are not terrorists, remain clueless that this is also about gathering every piece of information on everyone for tax purposes. Monitoring absolutely everything is by no means practical for preventing terrorist attacks. The Boston terrorist attack with two culprits using cell phones proved that when you monitor everything, there is no possible way to sort through all that info to prevent anything. People like Clapper have no regard for the people or any right to privacy whatsoever. They cannot sleep at night worrying that someone might be doing something they didn’t know about.

ConquestThe world has changed. Neither Russia nor China has any desire to invade and occupy the United States. This is not World War I or II strategies any more. Occupying forces no longer are practical and inevitably they cannot control a country forever. Intelligence has become a state of paranoia in La-La-Land. They have funded groups to overthrow another group and then the first turns back upon the hand that fed them. All they have done is deprived everyone of privacy and failed to make the world safer in the least.

These people act as if this is a child’s game of world domination. It’s time to grow up and stop trying to rule the world only to make everything worse. The two enemy states are only North Korea and Iran. As for Terrorists, we created them with all these strategies of placing one group against another. This is all part of the crisis we have in our confidence within government.have in

NY Prosecutor Preet Bharara Who Protected Bankers is Fired


Bharara Preet

The Trump administration moved on Friday to sweep away virtually all of the remaining vestiges of the Obama administration prosecutors at the Justice Department. They ordered 46 holdover U.S. attorneys to tender their resignations immediately. Demanding resignations from US attorneys is actually standard operating procedure in the DOJ whenever a new administration assumes power. Traditionally this is just standard and the fact that Preet Bharara refused demonstrated he was trying to make a political statement clearly illustrating he could not be trusted.

Historically, Presidents clear out almost all the US attorneys from the prior administration. Bill Clinton appointed 80 new US attorneys in his first year of office, out of 93 posts. Preet Bharara, the rather notorious Indian-born New York Prosecutor of the SDNY appointed by Obama who has protected the bankers since taking office August 13, 2009, refused to resign. He Tweeted that he was then fired definitely showing he could not be trusted.

Bharara Preet Tweet

It was Bharara’s decision not to prosecute any of the bankers when he came to office in 2009. All other prosecutors tendered their resignations and left and most did so before even being asked because this is always a political post. That is simply the way things work. The fact that there were 46 holdovers begs the question why did they try to stay? Then why did Bharara refuse to resign? This seems very strange and he desired to turn this into a political issue against Trump. That really calls into question his motives. The fact that he then Tweets: “I did not resign. Moments ago I was fired” seems like he is obviously trying to play politics here. Prosecutors can do anything to anybody for the system is just too corrupt.

Chief Judge Sol Wachtler of New York state, coined the term in a January 1985 interview with the New York Daily News‘  that a prosecutor has so much power that is one-sided since a defendant cannot present any evidence to refute their claims he delivered the famous saying that prosecutors can “indict a ham sandwich.” Wachtler believed grand juries “operate more often as the prosecutor’s pawn than the citizen’s shield.” Indeed, Peet Bharara illustrated that he is politically motivated, not moved by the Constitution or the rule of law. In retaliation for Wachtler’s views that prosecutors had way too much power, they indicted him in 1992.

Real Estate & the Financial Crisis


Financial Crisis

QUESTION: Hello Armstrong, Thank for you the great post “The Future – Putting it All Together”. It helps a lot to get a good overview, considering everything is connected. One question, you say “Real estate is nice for some part of a cash holding, but it is taxed to hold it and it is not liquid.” regarding where to put your money when it all comes crashing down with the Sovereign debt crisis. Is this just for risk management, considering we are currently in a long wave down from 2015.75 to 2032 in real estate? Referring to your forecast on the real estate market. Also is this model for the US only, or global?

Thank you!

ANSWER: There are two types of investment – the hedge and the speculation. The overall real estate is in a decline. A friend of mine in the business said more than 33% of the houses in New Jersey would all come on the market if prices ever got back to 2007 levels. The areas that has risen sharply when looked at closely are those attracting foreign capital. This is the hedge trying to get off the grid. They are often buying places and not even renting them out as in Scandinavia. We even see some of that in Dubai. This is money simply parking.

The real estate cycle peaked and it is headed down in terms of appreciation. This is the general market and not the high-end, although that has begun to turn down in many places often due to taxation of rising regulation as in Miami or Sydney Australia.

However, because of the Sovereign Debt Crisis, we will begin to see this surface with the Obama-Boehner Debt Crisis Crisis that pushed off into 2017 when they would not be accountable. As this starts to become more and more aware to the general public, that is when the confidence in currencies begins to drop. That appears to be on schedule for 2018.

All tangible assets will rise in value according to the decline in a currency. This will be “currency inflation” that is expressed by the old joke a man is frozen until a cure is found and he can be revived. He put his $1 million into stocks and calls his stock brokerage house upon his revival. They say his portfolio is worth $50 million. He jumps for joy until the operator breaks in and says he owes $1 million for the next 3 minutes.

When we swap to a new currency, then tangible assets will make that transition in value. It is not that you will make a profit, the name of the game is that you just break-even.

There are still some areas where there will be profit opportunities. Stay tuned for those

‘Clinton And ISIS funded by same money’ – Assange interview w/John Pilger (Courtesy Darthmouth Films)


There is little doubt than any of this in not 100% true.