Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion - page 367. (Read 647251 times)

It may deter him from including bitcoin if there's talk of the reports being shared around, I would like to get in at the bottom if we are going to see a massive dump 

I've sent emails to MA in the past, since there are generally on BTC he seems to largely ignore them. But I've been thinking about a group buy of this report as $500 is more than it's worth me paying considering my small funds, but split amongst a group it is probably worth buying.

If anyone else is interested ping me a message and maybe I'll set up a thread.

Unfortunately, it's not only the Clintons. Following the 80-20 (aka: Pareto principle) most people don't (or simply won't) understand how their neighbor steals from them. I'm copy-pasting the latest from Yanis Varoufakis from his page regarding the situation in the Eurozone:

Something is rotten in the eurozone kingdom – my op-ed in the Financial Times
Plan would have eased Greece’s chronic liquidity shortage, writes Yanis Varoufakis in the Financial Times.

A paradox lurks in the foundations of the eurozone. Governments in the monetary union lack a central bank that has their back, while the central bank lacks a government to support it.

This paradox cannot be eliminated without fundamental institutional changes. But there are steps member states can take to ameliorate some of its negative effects. One such step that we contemplated during my tenure at the Greek ministry of finance focused on the chronic liquidity shortage of a stressed public sector and its impact on the long-suffering private sector.

In Greece, where the central bank is unable to support the state’s endeavours, government arrears to the private sector — both companies and individuals — have been a drag on the economy, adding to deflationary pressures since as far back as 2008. Such arrears consistently exceeded 3 per cent of gross domestic product for five years.

The phenomenon is both the cause and consequence of delayed tax payments to the state, reinforcing the cycle of generalised illiquidity.

To address this problem, our simple idea was to allow the multilateral cancellation of arrears between the state and the private sector using the tax office’s existing payments platform. Taxpayers, whether individuals or organisations, would be able to create reserve accounts that would be credited with arrears owed to them by the state. They would then be able to transfer credits from their reserve account either to the state (in lieu of tax payments) or to any other reserve account.

Suppose, for example, Company A is owed €1m by the state; and it owes €30,000 to an employee — plus another €500,000 to Company B, which provided it with goods and services. The employee and Company B also owe, respectively, €10,000 and €200,000 in taxes to the state. In this case the proposed system would allow for the immediate cancellation of at least €210,000 in arrears.

Suddenly, an economy such as Greece’s would acquire important degrees of freedom within the existing European monetary union. In a second phase of development, which we did not have time to consider properly, the system would be made accessible through smartphone apps and identity cards, guaranteeing that it would be widely adopted.

The envisaged payments system could be developed to create a substitute for fully functioning public debt markets, especially during a credit crunch such as the one that has afflicted Greece since 2010. Organisations or individuals could buy credits from the tax office online using their normal bank accounts, and add them to their reserve account. These credits could be used after, say, a year to pay future taxes at a discount (for example, 10 per cent).

As long as the total level of tax credits was capped, and fully transparent, the result would be a fiscally responsible increase in government liquidity and a quicker path back to the money markets.

Handing over the reins of the finance ministry to my friend, Euclid Tsakalotos, on July 6, I presented a full account of the ministry’s projects, priorities and achievements during my five months in office. The new payments system outlined here was part of that presentation. No member of the press took any notice.

But when a subsequent telephone discussion with a large number of international investors, organised by my friend Norman Lamont, and David Marsh of the London-based Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum, was leaked — despite the Chatham House rule we agreed with listeners, under which speakers are not identified — the press had a field day. Committed to unlimited openness and full transparency, I granted OMFIF permission to release the tapes.

While I understand press excitement about elements of that exchange, such as having to consider unorthodox means of gaining access to my own ministry’s systems, only one matter is of significance from a public interest perspective. There is a hideous restriction of national sovereignty imposed by the “troika” of lenders on Greek ministers, who are denied access to departments of their ministries pivotal in implementing innovative policies.

When a loss of sovereignty, arising from unsustainable official debt, yields suboptimal policies in already stressed nations, one knows that there is something rotten in the euro’s kingdom.

Read the last paragraph again; this is not only in the Eurozone. The USofA has it too; it may be unnoticeable to the unpracticed eye, but that's due to their infrastructure! It lies behind a bold federalism -which the EU is trying to forcefully establish- right now. I've posted here my musings about such an initiative; it will FAIL boldly. Not because the people will arise against their plans (80% are non-doers), but because the economic inauguration is rotten in its very own roots.

http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2015/08/01/something-is-rotten-in-the-eurozone-kingdom-my-op-ed-in-the-financial-times/

You are not going to tell MA anything he doesn't think he already knows.

He is not interested in listening except to find support for his existing conceptualizations.

I have much more to gain by expending my finite time in other areas. I stopped badgering him because he was just defending his biases. I'd email him, he'd write a refutation on his blog to refute what I wrote in email. I'd refute what he wrote, then he'd refute again publicly.

All of us have our biases. I think we each need to go do what we are best at. Then we see where it all meets.

...

SMTFC! 

Actually, don't, there is NO WAY I would understand it... 

*   *   *

I understand your problem trying to break through all of his clutter, he is running a business, and high-intellect discussions are probably beyond his time and brain-energy (word?) constraints.

Still, if he were REALLY SMART, he would (should) have someone on his team checking exactly the kinds of matters that you raise.

I contacted him many times in the past and traded several emails with him. I couldn't get enough understanding going in email to lift him above his preconceived bias wherein he thought I was typical goldbug thinking everything is a conspiracy. I wasn't able to lift our dialogue to an intellectual exchange of ideas. I would need to meet in person to have a shot of that.

Copies of most of the emails are in AnonyMint's archives.

I am not a big fish. Just a (nearly bankrupt) loud mouth who hasn't shown any code.

...

Arguably, YOU (TPTB) ought to contact Armstrong, as YOU are the one doing the heavy-lifting around here, and are most familiar with what and how he thinks...

The "other" (= bad) TPTB already know who you are if they think you're a threat.  I don't think "Little Fish" like us are what .gov is really after (although I will read your nestmann link of earlier re IRS targeting small fish).

I do believe the model could look for cases where certain things were tried in the past and what the outcome was in the context of the other wavefronts. But I also think the model is already capable of seeing where we are in the cycle and what is impossible and possible. And thus it is all preordained and I believe MA knows this, so he appears to be playing himself as the fool. I believe he is hoping against hope that the variability in his model allows for a very, very small probability of the types of collectivized reforms he is proposing to occur sooner. I also think he is resigned to that being very minute probability.

I would ask him to look at cases where new frontiers were discovered that mitigated a crisis. I believe those discoveries of frontiers can occur in cryptoland. Well I am hands on right now to some new unpublished discoveries of significance.

He is so focused on the power of the government that he has apparently lost sight of how a innovative humans are in the small, not in the collective. Not all of SpainPortugal sailed (circumnavigated) around the world! Magellan did.

Absolutely. While The Yamato Dynasty only touches on the Yamashita's Gold myth, Gold Warriors is all about it. It's a fascinating read, thoroughly documented (you can purchase a CD with all evidence: waybills, photos, etc etc). And, if you are in the Phillipines, the majority of the story is based there.

It deals with the OSS & its pivotal figures, Birch Society, private companies helmed by CIA cast off's, through the Marcos reign (and his eventual loss in court re: Rogelio Roxas' gold buddha, biggest civil payout in history), to the dirty tricks used to deny gold & "57's" holders access to their accounts, Nixon's China agreement, all the way up to Citibank / John Reed's unlawful denying of owners.

I wasn't even suggesting his model was doing simulations. I was suggesting that he could model conditional on some inputs, in effect "simulating" (but not in the sense of a discrete or continuous simulation model as you describe) different possible futures in order to compare them

But without knowing more about how is model works I will concede that approach may not be compatible with its structure.

The Fed are buffoons whose strings are being pulled by higher-echelons. There may be some winks along the way though, so for example if Summers had been installed at the helm instead of Yellen, then the winks would certainly be present.


That is the point of my recent post upthread wherein I am saying the highest echelons of the elite wield enormous power and influence, but they couldn't make the world "nice" even if they wanted to. They are victims of the power vacuum also. They must play for power, because everyone else is also. Their role is to keep all the underlings spanked (e.g. tricking them into fighting with each other). I am not even asserting that the same overlords retain power over time. I believe they must form alliances to try to remain relevant, e.g. see Nick Rockefeller all over China past decade or so. Their common interest of maintaining grip on power pushing them to common goals such as a global new world order with Technocracy (smart meters, digital control over the underlings, etc).


No should I? Slightly aware of the Japanese gold, Marcos, the funding of the Communists, etc..

TPTB and smooth

There is a lot of potentially interesting math that Armstrong and his crew might be doing.  With enough data, and enough of a bright team, Princeton  Economics could probably come up will all kinds of interesting relationships, some of which might be valid and perhaps even of predictive power.

Probability.  Simulations.  Neural Networks.  Time Series.  Who knows what else.  Of course, I am just speculating here.

I'm completely without evidence etc but most commentary I read that talks of the Fed etc behind the curtain says a similar thing along the lines of 'it's an experiment and they are in a sense flying blind in unchartered waters'. I tend to agree with that in part.

On the other hand, at the last big shift of power post WW2, the US used the recovery of vast sums of looted gold to finance the massaging of international politics to its liking (ie anti Communist). In this case there definitely was a group of shadowy figures who operated behind the scenes to push their own agendas.

@TPTB need war - are you familiar with the works of Sterling Seagrave re: Yamoto Dynasty / Gold Warriors?

His model(s) are not doing simulations. My rough guess is the models are formed by searching for patterns that repeat throughout history incorporating multi-dimensional models that involve wavefront interference (the waves of the cyclic patterns). It is complex chaos model, not a discrete (nor continuous) time simulation of events that cascade. He is looking at order from a more abstracted manifold then you are proposing when you insert the term simulation.

If his computer is as impressive as he claims, he ought to be able to run conditional sims, and tell us what happens to the forecasts if his recommendations are enacted and how those outcomes compare to alternatives.

...

NO ONE can say that Martin Armstrong is wrong about the Clintons, if he is wrong on anything, it would be on small details only.

I have not made up my mind on how much to accept of Armstrong and his analyses.  My current thinking is that his supercomputer system and software are exploring very interesting terrain, and that there is something to his ideas of cycles.  And he has demonstrated to my satisfaction (at until now) that he reads his history write, and he has made some excellent calls.

I do agree with TPTB that many of his prescriptions are likely off-base.  "We MUST do this..." ain't gonna cut it, Martin.  How about what EACH OF US can do re the turbulent times ahead?

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/28406

The Majority Are Just Fools

Posted on March 17, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

In 2000, Bill and Hillary Clinton owed millions of dollars in legal debt. Since then, they’ve earned over $130 million. Where did the money come from? Most people assume that the Clintons amassed their wealth through lucrative book deals and high-six figure fees for speaking gigs. Now, Peter Schweizer shows who is really behind those enormous payments.

I was asked to review the documents when Hillary amazingly made hundreds of thousands of dollars trading futures at the same precise time she was in meetings. Her lawyer had an account at the same firm and a trade would be put on but left open until the end of the day. It would be a spread long and short the same commodity. At the end of the day, the losing trade went to her lawyer and the win into her account. Today, that is called money laundering.

This is why society must crash and burn. It is just too damn corrupt and the majority are simply sheep who believe whatever they say. The politicians know the people are stupid and the press is on their side. So how can we reform without being forced? Sorry, it is just impossible.


http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/33502

Boehner Wants to Join Obama to Raise Taxes on Small Business

Posted on June 16, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

John Boehner, Mr. Ultimate Establishment Republican, is desperately trying to secure the passage of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) for Obama, which would give him fast-track authority to secure congressional approval of at least three secretive trade deals without the public having a right to know what the hell is going on. Why is Boehner so willing to violate the Constitution and surrender what remains of some Democratic/Republican process? There must be something behind the curtail deal for him and his family somewhere.

The Democrats shot Obama’s dictatorial trade deal down and Boehner is aligning himself with Obama. This is really strange. Boehner is now secretly supporting an increase in taxes on small businesses. Boehner is destroying the Republican Party for he is simply Mr. Washington. Perhaps this deal is the straw that breaks the camel’s back and splits the Republican Party.

Unfortunately, we should expect taxes to rise sharply over the next four years. The government budget will fail and as interest rates will rise, so will the deficit. Their solution is ALWAYS to raise taxes – never reform.



http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/35517

Why the Politicians are Laughing – Hillary’s Unapologetic Corruption

Posted on July 30, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

According to the Wall Street Journal[1], total donations by UBS to the Clinton Foundation grew from less than $60,000 at the end of 2008 to approximately $600,000 by the end of 2014. The Wall Street Journal reports that the bank also lent $32 million through entrepreneurship and inner city loan programs that it launched in association with the Clinton Foundation. At the very same time, they were paying former President Bill Clinton $1.5 million to participate in a series of corporate Q&A sessions with UBS Chief Executive Bob McCann. You really cannot make up this stuff.

On top of that, the Inspector General recommended that the Justice Department investigate Hillary’s erasing of emails for that would have clearly been criminal. Of course, the Justice Department[2] would NEVER investigate Hillary while in the hands of the Obama Administration. This is why the whole executive structure of government is broken.

The Justice Department is way too political, as are the judges who endorse whatever the government does. In our own case, here I was with tapes documenting market manipulations by the banks. The court receiver, Alan Cohen, was appointed to run Princeton Economics. Goldman Sachs then hired Cohen after threatening to imprison all the lawyers if the deid not hand over all tapes. Goldman made Cohen a member of the Board of Directors. However, Cohen NEVER resigned from the court and continued running Princeton Economics from the board at Goldman. Come on! You cannot make up this type of outright corruption/conflict of interest; it is to the point where they simply do not care.


[1] http://www.wsj.com/articles/ubs-deal-shows-clintons-complicated-ties-1438223492

[2] http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-email-justice-department-probe-criminal-investigation-356891



http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/30365

Goldman Sachs & Hillary Clinton – A Marriage Made in Washington

Posted on May 10, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

Hillary Clinton is already bought and paid for[3], She netted $400,000 for giving two speeches for a few minutes at Goldman Sachs. This is by no means a speaking fee. This is what I believe is outright bribery. A speaking fee will be $35,000 to $50,000 tops. She has nothing to offer Wall Street for $400,000. Even the FT recently reported that Goldman Sachs returns to political center stage. Even the top five contributors[4] to Hillary’s bid for the Senate back in 1999 were:

    Citigroup Inc ….. $782,327
    Goldman Sachs ….. $711,490
    DLA Piper ….. $628,030
    JPMorgan Chase & Co ….. $620,919
    EMILY’s List ….. $605,174

Gary Gensler (born October 18, 1957) worked at Goldman Sachs for 18 years and at 30 became the youngest partner. He then, like most people from that firm, strangely seem to suddenly care about how government functions and then crosses over into public life after filling their pockets at Goldman,

Yes he was nominated by Obama to be the 11th chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in 2009, which is the most notoriously corrupt regulator perhaps in the world. Lawyers joke about the CFTC saying that they hire the lawyers the SEC rejects.

It was Bill Clinton who opened the door for Gensler to serve in the United States Department of the Treasury as Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions from 1997-1999, and then as Undersecretary for Domestic Finance from 1999-2001. As Assistant Secretary, Gensler served as a senior adviser to the Secretary of the Treasury in developing and implementing the federal government’s policies for debt management and the sale of U.S. government securities. Keep in mind that this is also when Robert Rubin came from Goldman under Clinton to head up the Treasury. Some inside sources said that it was Rubin who recruited him from Goldman.

As Undersecretary of the Treasury for Domestic Finance, Gensler participated in the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999. He generally assisted Treasury Secretaries Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers on all aspects of domestic finance, which was the whole deregulation to free up banks making that shift from Relationship Banking to Transactional Banking. This certainly included formulating policy and legislation in the areas of financial institutions, public debt management, capital markets, government financial management services, federal lending, fiscal affairs, government sponsored enterprises, and community development, all of which were altered to set the stage for the major financial crisis in 2007-2009 and now he his on board with Hillary.

Gensler was not done. After leaving the Clinton Administration in 2001, he then joined the staff of U.S. Senator Paul Sarbanes, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, as a senior adviser writing the Draconian Sarbanes-Oxley law which was touted to tighten accounting standards in the wake of the Enron and WorldCom scandals. However, this law increased the burdens upon corporate management requiring investment banking adviser.

Gensler will fully support the tax on money (negative interest rates) that was floated by Larry Summers who claim to fame was simply being a man without practical experience functioning as a professor of economics . From 1991 to 1993 Summers was chief economist of the World Bank and from 1995 to 1999, he was Deputy Minister of Finance under Robert Rubin at the US Treasury and then 1999-2001 he became US Treasury Secretary, of course, under Bill Clinton. Summers was the immediate successor of Robert Rubin. Then in 2008 Obama announced that Summers would be National Economic Advisor to the Government. The position he held of finance minister under Robert Rubin, was then filled by Timothy F. Geithner.

Summers retired in 2010 from the National Economic Council to return to Harvard. Once in the game, you never leave. Summers delivered a balloon speech at the IMF Research Conference on November 8th, 2013, which he launched the tax on money idea presenting it as NEGATIVE INTEREST RATES. So all those who saved for retirement who have watched their savings amount to nothing to live on, should include Larry Summers on their Christmas card list or just send him a thank you note for wiping out your future to protect his banker buddies,

So here we go again with more Clinton cronies to wipe out society and Western Civilization and they filled there pockets with mints as they leave the restaurant where someone else paid the bill.


[3] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2482262/Hillary-Clinton-nets-400K-2-speeches-Goldman-Sachs.html

[4] https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00000019



http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/30764

Hillary Clinton’s Lucrative Life of Crime

Posted on May 21, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

It is very interesting how outside of the U.S. people see Hillary for who she really is What is really interesting is that outside the USA, everyone sees Hillary for what she really is — a greedy politician. Of course, MSNBC would never say a bad word against Hillary for she walks on water. When the law requiring balanced media reporting vanished in 1987, mainstream media gradually moved toward propaganda machines. It was the Fairness Doctrine of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), originally introduced in 1949. This required the holders of broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance, and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission’s view, honest, equitable, and balanced. The FCC eliminated the Doctrine in 1987, and in August 2011, the FCC formally removed the language that implemented the Doctrine. That set in motion the propaganda machine of mainstream media. The real goal of this was to prevent investigative reporting since media was no longer required to present the truth. The FCC turned media into one giant propaganda machine.

Outside the USA remains a totally different. Edward Snowden had to go to London to get the word out, for no major American news organization would have protected him. They would have offered him coffee while waiting for the NSA to come get him. I myself chose to go with the European media for the very same reason. No Russian activist would have expected Pravda to protect them either. So what does that say about the American press? The banks paid $5.7 billion in fines for manipulating FX markets. Not to mention the fact that I had all the evidence on bank manipulations back in 1999. Allan Cohen seized that evidence and was granted board membership at Goldman Sachs — yet did not reign from the court. One would think keeping both positions would raise an eyebrow in the New York press. Obviously not if they are bought and paid for.

The Japanese Times has reported “Hillary Clinton’s Lucrative Life of Crime”[5]. This would NEVER appear in the U.S., for the press loves her just because she is a woman. They loved Obama because he was black. They handed him the Noble Peace Prize and then he tore apart everything previous administrations accomplished to create world peace. He has pissed off just about everyone and in Europe, where they call him a “great disappointment”. In the case of Hillary, we indeed know where she stands – in the back pocket of the New York banks.

The fact that the Japanese Times has titled their story “Hillary Clinton’s Lucrative Life of Crime” is indicative of what our model has been warning for 2015.75. This should be the peak in government; what comes after is the battle of all battles — their quest to destroy the democratic process to retain power at all costs. With her adviser being Gary Gensler, formerly of Goldman Sachs, we know what to expect – economic meltdown.


[5] http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2015/05/19/commentary/world-commentary/hillary-clintons-lucrative-life-of-crime/



http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/33930

John Boehner – the Most Evil Dictator in the History of Congress

Posted on June 25, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

John Boehner is one good reason why there should be a law that if a state continues to elect someone who will destroy the nation, that state should be ejected from the union until its comes to its senses. California gave us the corrupt Dianne Feinstein, which is reason enough to hand it back to Mexico and say please take it back – we are sorry. Ohio has sent Boehner, who is the poison pill, to destroy the Republican Party for 2016.

Boehner is perhaps the most corrupt House Speaker ever. No bill can come to the floor without his palm being greased. Boehner has sold out the country numerous times, but the worst of it is he acts like a dictator. He removes anyone from any committee who dares to disagree with him. Boehner retaliates and punishes[6] anyone who votes against him in his own party. This is so anti-Democratic it is off the charts. We elect people to REPRESENT US, not to do as Boehner commands. The fact that Boehner sees it as his kingdom warns us that this is politics at its very worst. It is a shame we cannot hand Ohio to Canada and say here – take him please.

It is Boehner who will PREVENT Rand Paul from ever becoming the Republican candidate. I am constantly asked why I do not run for President. I respond by saying they have no idea what is really involved. Boehner would not even allow Ron Paul’s name to be placed into nomination at the Republican Convention, despite the fact that the people of some states had so voted. Boehner is by far the MOST EVIL politician I have ever encountered in Washington, whereas Hillary Clinton is probably the most corrupt, and Obama is the most incompetent, this trio will go down in history. If Hillary is elected, the medical hospitals and insurance companies will buy their way to more money and Hillary will bring massive tax increases[7].

So our forecast for a sharp rise in Third Party activity and the split will come from the Republicans, well you just met the man who will be the cause of that trend – John Boehner. Please Ohio, go your own way just take him with you.


[6] http://www.newsweek.com/punished-republican-house-rebels-consider-next-move-346239

[7] http://finance.yahoo.com/news/hillary-elected-president-ready-massive-091500288.html



http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/34115

Yanis Reveals EU Denial of Any Right of the People to Vote

Posted on June 29, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

Greece’s Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis has come out[8] to reveal the quite shocking and anti-democratic events that took place during the last Eurogroup meeting. First, they do hate Yanis’ guts, for he understands far more about the economy than anyone in Brussels. At their demand, any further discussions will be without him. What led to the EU breaking off was exactly what we reported previously — they do not want any member state to EVER allow the people to vote on the euro. Brussels has become a DICTATORSHIP and is so arrogant without any just cause, believing that they know better than the people.

We are watching the total collapse of Democracy and the birth of a new era — Economic Totalitarianism from arrogant people who are totally clueless beyond their own greed for power and money.

[8] http://greece.greekreporter.com/2015/06/29/yanis-varoufakis-historic-speech-at-the-last-eurogroup-as-it-happened/




http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/30574

Abolishing Cash – New Age of Economic Totalitarianism

Posted on May 18, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

Europe is moving full speed ahead to eliminate all cash. Instead of reforming and tackling the economic problems, government always seeks to maintain the same course of thinking that now leads us to the totalitarian approach coming from Brussels. To maintain the euro, they must maintain the banks. However, the bank reserves are debts of all member states. As government becomes insolvent as in Greece, the banking system is undermined. The only way to prevent the banking collapse is to prevent people from withdrawing cash. Hence, we see this trend is surfacing in all the mainstream press to get the people ready for what is coming after 2015.75 – the elimination of cash. We are even starting to see this advocated in parts of Germany. We will not be able to buy or sell anything without government approval. That is where we are going, and it may be the major event that erupts after 2015.75.

The bail-in that took place in Cyprus managed to get away without bloodshed. The people just took it. This has encouraged governments everywhere, since now they know they can safely do the same thing and the people are like sheep – dumb and stupid. Just how much will society take before they say no?



http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/30145

The New Age of Economic Totalitarianism & the London Meeting to End Currency

Posted on May 3, 2015 by Martin Armstrong

I have been warning that the governments of the West are in severe trouble. We face the worst economic crisis, perhaps in modern history, with the distinct risk of moving into a state of Economic Totalitarianism. The governments are well aware of the Economic Confidence Model (ECM). Many people have questioned, “Why have they not killed you?” since it appears that most of the others central to events covered in the movie “The Forecaster” are dead. I believe the answer is rather simple, for even when I was released and appeared on Capitol Hill, I was introduced as the guy with the model they are trying to suppress.

Government is not a single entity. The forces I stood up against were restricted to the corruption in New York City. The New Yorker Magazine was able to get in to interview me[9], only by going to Washington. When I was thrown in the hole, it was a letter from Congress asking who ordered that treatment which resulted in my instant release. And as for my release from contempt, that only took place when the Supreme Court ordered the government to respond to my petition, for then the Solicitor General is the only one who can argue before the Supreme Court, not the corrupt prosecutors from New York City. So it is never just a single entity we call government. There are always internal forces that fight over the crumbs of power like pigeons on the ground under the tables at a sidewalk cafe.

I have advised many governments in my life, so there are those on the economic side of power who are well aware of what I stand for, not merely the prosecutors who salivate over the opportunity to take down someone famous to further their personal careers. I was perhaps the first and only analyst or Forecaster invited by the Bank of China to fly to Beijing during the Asian Currency Crisis back in 1997. I may even be the only analyst who has ever had such an experience on a truly global scale. I have been just about everywhere, and at times it appeared that if there were crisis, somehow I was dragged into it by some government somewhere. There is scarcely a major nation who is not aware of the ECM.

Consequently, even when Margaret Thatcher spoke at our conference, she publicly stated that government has thought in terms of trends, but perhaps it should begin to look at things in terms of cycles; there is little doubt that many at the very top are well aware of the ECM. The question that really has jumped out at so many who have written, “Will they act just for once?”

Britain’s David Cameron publicly stated upon the conclusion to the 2014 G20 meeting in Brisbane, Australia on November 17, 2014, that a second financial crash was imminent. He stated that the “red warning lights are flashing on the dashboard of the global economy” in the same way as when the financial crash brought the world to its knees 2007-2009. Cameron was quite frank, and warned that there is now “a dangerous backdrop of instability and uncertainty.” He further commented that the Eurozone economy was slowing down, and this would impact trade and employment as exports and manufacturing declined. That prompted many emails since it suddenly mirrored our forecast.

Indeed, government interest rates have moved into negative interest rates on about 30% of Eurozone total debt. This has become an effective tax on money itself, with respect to whatever you have left in your account after paying taxes. We are heading for economic Armageddon and the day of reckoning is rapidly approaching. Many have noted that his comments came at the end of the G20 meeting and others have stated that the governments indeed were preparing for another downturn in the fall, which strangely aligned with the ECM.

Governments may indeed be now using the ECM for timing since it certainly appears they are now aware of cycles. Nonetheless, they are retreating from the world in any democratic position for they are preparing for what appears to be a shift toward Economic Totalitarianism rather than reform. Governments shifted at the G20 in favor of more Draconian taxation enforcement. They have not yet changed their way of thinking, and you cannot solve a crisis by following the same path of thinking that has created the nightmare. Governments as a whole are imposing extra taxes, at least through enforcement that is tearing the world economy apart at the seams.

Government borrowing has continued and this may appear to be an easy solution along with taxation, but these steps will prove only to be a repeat of the very same mistakes of the past and will accelerate the economic decline on the horizon. Some think the debt crisis is improving since the debt to GDP ratio has declined, yet this is a false indicator since such a trend has been unfolding thanks to the move toward negative interest rates. The consumption of government as a real percentage of the total real economy continues to grow. They have no solution for the unemployed youth since they keep raising taxes, and now negative interest rates are wiping out the income of the elderly.

The G20 has taken decisive steps towards clamping down on individual tax avoidance, targeting 92 tax authorities that were cooperating by sharing information, thereby enabling G20 countries to raise an extra $32bn in tax revenues through enforcement right out of the gate. The politicians claim that this is to target corporations, but corporations are the big political donors. The real target is always the small business and individuals, for they represent more than 70% of the job creation and wealth – not major public corporations. This is the leading cause of the rise in youth unemployment – the lost generation.

Even David Cameron said at his closing press conference: “[t]he more we can make sure big corporations pay their taxes properly, the less we have to tax hardworking people who I want to make sure can keep more of their own money so they can spend as they choose.” That, unfortunately, is always the spin. The truth – this is never the result. Instead, it is propaganda for any rise in taxation or enforcement, which is always targeted against the individual who government views and attacks as some endless supply of revenue.

It is the rising burden of taxation and benefits that the political forces are also imposing upon small business. It is always about government, not truly about the people. We have far too many lawyers running governments and nobody with practical experience in foreign exchange, capital flows, or simply running a business operation. As lawyers, they look at the numbers and are only concerned about the rising unemployment, which emerges from a civil unrest perspective. Those in power do not care about, no less understand, the changing job market for they only see their own pockets, not those of the people.

In Germany, the government has not merely imposed a minimum wage of €8.5 an hour, but they have also created a European nightmare of sovereignty. This brings up certain questions. Should Germany’s national minimum wage laws apply to truck drivers passing through a certain EU member state? On one hand, companies will hire non-German firms to move goods. On the other hand, the government cannot control the labor market domestically while allowing open borders.

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Administration introduced Germany’s first nationwide wage floor of €8.50 per hour earlier this year. The law was the brainchild of the Social Democrats (SPD), who made it a condition of joining Merkel’s coalition in 2013. This is the demand of the socialists who are trying to force higher wages upon businesses who are already starting social unrest. Small business simply cannot hire people now, for the risk of compliance is the burden. Meanwhile, companies are now fighting back by charging workers for their tools to do the job, from knives to compensating staff with tanning salon vouchers and use of company computers. German employers are coming up with creative ways to avoid paying the new minimum wage, which is angering unions.

At the traditional May 1st Communist Day celebrations which take place in the old section of East Berlin and around the country, we are starting to see the classic class warfare crisis reemerging. Right winged violence erupted at Weimar May Day celebrations as unions seek to protect minimum wage. The German anti-capitalism protests in Hamburg turned to violence and vandalism. May 1 is known in Germany and elsewhere as the unofficial International Workers’ Day, and is marked with demonstrations and rallies that have, in some instances, turned violent. Violence erupted this year also in Turkey.

The German government created financial police auditors who go into small businesses searching for violations. If found, they can impose a fine up to €50,000. Small firms have stopped hiring even part-time interns. No one can even offer to work for free just to get their foot in the door.

This German move to establish a minimum wage to gain the socialist support in Germany stands in contrast to Stephen Poloz, the Bank of Canada governor, who publicly recommended that jobless university graduates build their resumes by working for free. With Germany’s approach, they cannot work for free. Far too many world leaders are clueless as to the cause of massive youth unemployment, or 65% of graduates saddled with burdensome student loans, unable to find a job in their field of study. Even the U.S. Post Office is only hiring part-time workers to avoid providing benefits they cannot afford. This new trend toward the casualization of jobs is due to laws attempting to force benefits upon jobs that cannot support such costs. This casualization of part-time work is leading to higher unemployment and greater insecurity in the labor market, which is spreading across the world. This further drives the trend toward replacing minimal jobs with automation to save on the burdens imposed upon business by government. This exacerbates the entire trend toward technological skills that is similar to the shift in agriculture during the 1920s introduced with the combustion engine.

These trends are weakening the foundation of the global economy, changing its very structure. Governments are fighting the trend, yet seem aware that the economy will turn down. The ECM is warning that we will face a much worse decline than 2007-2009, and governments are digging in their heels rather than trying to solve the problems that they are aware of looming on the horizon. The central banks are indeed taking up these growing signs and are planning drastic restrictions on cash itself. They see moving to electronic money will first eliminate the underground economy, but secondly, they believe it will even prevent a banking crisis.

This idea of eliminating cash first floated as the normal trial balloon to see how the people would take it. Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard University, and Willem Buiter, the chief economist at Citigroup, first launched the concept. Their claims have been widely hailed and their papers are now the foundation for the new age of Economic Totalitarianism that confronts us. Rogoff and Buiter have laid the groundwork for the end of much of our freedom, and one day will be considered the new Marx with hindsight. They sit in their lofty offices but do not have real world practical experience beyond theory. Considerations of their arguments have shown how governments can seize all economic power and destroy cash in the process of eliminating all rights. Physical paper money provides the check against negative interest rates, for if they become too great, people will simply withdraw their funds and hoard cash. Furthermore, paper currency allows for bank runs. Eliminate paper currency and what you end up with is the elimination of the ability to demand to withdraw funds from a bank.

Willem Buiter has even discussed creating insane devices for paying negative interest rates on currency, such as stamp taxes, as the British use to use. Stamp taxes asserted that currency could remain valid only if it were regularly stamped to reflect tax payment. This would be a completely impractical nightmare to administer, and demonstrates his lack of practical experience and historical depth to the issue. These people lack any common sense for history and cannot see beyond their nose what kind of world they are proposing. This is indeed Marxism on steroids where you retain ownership only in your imagination.

Anything that hands government more power is always welcome to those in power. In many nations, specific measures have already been taken demonstrating that the Rogoff-Buiter world of Economic Totalitarianism is indeed upon us. This is the death of capitalism. Of course, the socialists hate capitalism and feel other people’s money should be theirs. What they cannot see is that capitalism is freedom from government totalitarianism. The freedom to pursue the field you desire without filling the State’s needs that supersede your own.

There have been test runs of this Rogoff-Buiter Economic Totalitarianism to see if the idea works. I reported on June 21, 2014 that Britain was doing a test run. A shopping street in Manchester banned cash as part of an experiment to see if Brits would accept a cashless society. London buses stopped accepting cash payments from July 2014. Meanwhile, Currency Exchange dealers began offering debt cards instead of cash that they market as being safe alternative for travel. The Charlton, South Manchester experiment tested customers and business reaction to the idea of physical currency disappearing inside 20 years.

France passed another new Draconian law; from the summer of 2015, it will now impose cash requirements dramatically trying to eliminate cash by force. French citizens and tourists will only be allowed a limited amount of physical money. They have financial police searching people on trains just passing through France to see if they are transporting cash, which they will now seize. Meanwhile, the new French Elite are moving in this very same direction. Piketty just wants to take money from anyone who has more than he does. Nobody stands on the side of freedom or on restraining the corruption within government. The problem always turns against the people, for we are the cause of the fiscal mismanagement of government that never has enough for themselves.

In Greece, a drastic reduction in cash is also being discussed in light of the economic crisis. Now, any bill over €70 should be payable only by check or credit card; it will be illegal to pay in cash. The German Baader Bank founded in Munich expects to formally abolish cash and enforce negative interest rates on accounts, which is really taxation on whatever money you still have left after taxes.

The end is near and starkly in focus. It is so shocking that we have to rub our eyes to ensure that we are even awake. By the end of May, the subject of eliminating cash on the formal table will be up for discussion, among the major countries at a major conference in London. The advocates to end our economic freedom to move toward a new world economic order of an Economic Totalitarian state where we will no longer be able to buy or sell anything anonymously with paper money will have their say in London – namely Rogoff and Buiter. At this meeting, there will be participation of central banks from Switzerland, Denmark, the Euroland, and the United States. No, I am not invited, for I am not in agreement with Rogoff-Buiter’s Economic Totalitarian vision. The aim of this meeting is to create a solution for the pending economic emergency that the ECM is forecasting.

Clearly, behind the curtain there appears to be actual preparation for an economic downturn underway for the first time. However, the possibility of a dramatically sharpened financial crisis looming in the fall appears to be in consideration, and now broadly accepted as inevitable. There is obviously a serious threat of a possible global bank run thanks to the faulty structure of the Euro and its lack of a consolidated debt from the outset. The European bank reserves lack a single status, and as the member states get into trouble, so will the banking system. This could spill over into a global crisis as people see banks fail in Europe and prudent people begin to withdraw cash in North America as a precaution setting in motion a contagion.

The problems within the European banking system can obviously set off a further loss of confidence in the global financial institutions worldwide. The abolition of cash in this context is seen as a serious tool to defend the system. However, complete abolition of cash threatens our very freedom and rights of citizens in so many areas. Those in the emerging economies, even in Eastern Europe in places such as Ukraine, where people do not trust banks and conduct business in cash, the world economy could be split entirely in two between the developed and underdeveloped nations. How can commerce exist when people lack the basic confidence in government as well as the banks?

Paper currency is indeed the check against negative interest rates. We only need to look to Switzerland to prove that theory. Any attempt to impose, say a 5% negative interest rate (tax), would lead to an unimaginably massive flight into cash. This was recently demonstrated by the example of Swiss pension funds, which withdrew their money from the bank in a big way and are now stored in vaults in cash in order to escape the financial repression. People will act in their own self-interest and negative interest rates are likely to reduce the sales of government bonds and set off a bank run, as long as paper money exists.

Obviously, government and bankers are not stupid. The only way to prevent such a global bank run would be the total prohibition of paper money. This is unlikely, both in Switzerland and in the United States, because their economies are dominated by a certain “liberalism” to some extent, but also because their currencies also circulate outside their domestic economies. The discussion of the cash ban in the context of a global conference with the participation of the major central banks of the U.S. and the ECB, demonstrates by itself that the problem is not a regional problem.

Nevertheless, there is a growing assumption that the negative interest rate world (tax on cash) is likely to increase dramatically in Europe in particular, since it is socialism that is collapsing. Government in Brussels is unlikely to yield power and their line of thinking cannot lead to any solution. The negative interest rate concept is making its way into the United States at J.P. Morgan, where they will charge a fee on excess cash on deposit starting May 1, 2015. Asset holdings of cash with a tax or a fee in the amount of the negative interest rate seems to be underway even in Switzerland.

Ironically, when money was coin, bank money on deposit came at premium over coins simply because the coins could be clipped, shaved, or counterfeited. Then there were often two-tier monetary systems where gold served only for international trade and silver was the currency for wages and prices locally. Disparities between the two would often swing and create a financial crisis that would at times even result in hanging the bankers.

Bank money developed out of necessity. Cash transactions required authentication each and every time the coins changed hands. Therefore, bank money became more valuable than cash. This type of throwback to the 14th century is certainly possible today.  We could see the establishment of an exchange rate between book money and cash, as it had previously existed at the dawn of banking coming out of the Dark Ages. We could see a divergence between the market price/value of a bank deposit v cash reflected to the extent of the desired negative interest rate. For example, such a regime could result in a 2% negative interest rate on bank deposits and a 5% tax to withdraw cash. Trying to withdraw cash in the USA on $3,000 or more is already sparking reports to the IRS, and some banks are charging small business fees to deposit cash. A family member owns a restaurant and his bank is now charging fees to accept cash deposits.

The movement toward electronic money is moving at a high speed, and this says a lot about the state of the financial system. The track record of the major financial institutions is nearly perfect – they are always caught on the wrong side when a crisis breaks, which requires their bailouts. The fact that we have already seen test runs with theory-balloons flying, the major financial institutions are in no shape to withstand another economic decline.

For depositors, this means that they really need to grasp what is going on here, for unless they are vigilant, there is a serious risk of losing everything. We must understand that these measures will be implemented overnight in the middle of a banking crisis after 2015.75. The balloons have taken off and the discussions are underway. The trend in taxation and reduction of cash seems to be unstoppable. Government is not prepared to reform, for that would require a new way of thinking and a loss of power. That is not a consideration. They only see one direction and that is to take us into the new promise land of Economic Totalitarianism. The depositors and investors should now realize that a greater diversification for themselves is mandatory, which should above all be sure to keep investing large sums in any one or more asset classes.

Unfortunately, the availability of assets is limited and we now must broaden our view to incorporate the global economy as a whole. Flexibility is truly the radical measure required for what we face on the horizon. This will require a sort of crash course in understanding the world economy as a whole, as well as understanding how capital flows both domestically as well as internationally. For this reason, we are opening to all clients our famous capital flow map so you can see the movement of capital on a daily basis.

At the same time, the close monitoring of the global currency markets is critical since the currency will often rise or fall like a share in a corporation based upon the CONFIDENCE in that particular country. The tools we will soon premiere will allow you to see the Global Market Watch and view any instrument in whatever currency you denominate your personal wealth.

There will be differences in the global landscape with regard to this new period of financial repression and the age of Economic Totalitarianism. Timely knowledge of alternatives, such as public shares, private bonds, foreign exchange, precious metals or commodities, seems more urgent than ever. This is not a time for bias or propaganda by salesmen.

There are some problems moving toward a cashless society that must be noted. True, the rapid growth of substitutes for cash, particularly debit and credit cards and Google Wallets, has led economists to predict the advent of the “cashless society”. Yet, cash holdings in most developed economies continue to grow and in the United States, per capita currency holdings now amount to $3,000 if we assume a domestic circulation. The long-standing controversy concerning the whereabouts of U.S. cash should not be ignored or taken lightly. Specifically, the Obama sanctions against Russia has led to the reduction of dollars circulating in Russia mainly for political reasons. This has been replaced by the Euro even in Ukraine, but the plight of the Euro could reverse that trend in 2016. Employing a confidential data source on net shipments of U.S. currency abroad reveals a reversal of the trend from the 1990s began in 2012. The amount of U.S. currency held overseas was once estimated at 65%, but is now down sharply to about 25%. This reduces the domestic cash holdings amounting to roughly $2,250 per capita. This warns that moving to a cashless society for nations such as the United States and Switzerland may be far more difficult that the myopic domestic perspective.

The governments are well aware of the Economic Confidence Model (ECM). It certainly appears as though they are now focusing on the cycle rather than just the trend. Nevertheless, they have not changed their thinking process and in that line the future appears very grim. We are heading into Economic Totalitarianism, unless the people wake up.


[9] http://armstrongeconomics.com/press/new-yorker-magazine-the-secret-cycle

Thank you,i didnt know him,very interesting


Gold Tears of the Sun ,Barbaric Relict of The Past- i agree in 100% even in 10000%
november 500$ very much  possible
thanks,will read him more

There he goes again myopically focusing on the underlings and declaring that the high-level elite are not organized. That is inane. Of course the high-level elite are by design expecting the bureaucrats to run around like chickens with their heads cut off.

The highest-level elite are not in control in the sense that if they tried to steer the ship another direction away from NWO eugenics, they could not because the people and the Industrial Age is conducive to socialism. If they tried, they would open a power vacuum that others would fill and take power away from them. They are just filling a demand in the dying Industrial Age.

Yeah MA is correct, the ship is on auto-pilot but the high-level elite are scheming and doing their role as preordained by the structure of the system.

I will agree with Armstrong's skepticism on cryptocurrencies. We can even see that Bitcoin is becoming increasingly centralized (by design) and will be easily regulated by the international cooperation to hunt down all "tax cheaters" (which is a euphemism for "any one who doesn't agree to expropriation and slavery").

To subvert the tremendous flaws in cryptocurrency is going to be a monumental effort.

And then, can we prevent the bastards from filtering our packets?

Lots of technical hurdles and some may be insurmountable (but not if smart people get to work, but I don't see very many smart people really working on the issues and we are running out of time...looks rather hopeless).

IMPORTANT: Could someone please email Armstrong immediately and ask him to include some analysis of the Bitcoin price and potential bottom in his upcoming precious metals report (private assets correlation)? Tell him many of us will buy the report if he does. We really need his computer model's analysis of Bitcoin's price.