Showing posts with label Banksters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Banksters. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 13, 2019

Will China Trigger Next Financial Tsunami?

With the US decision to impose added tariffs on more than $300 billion of China trade, and the US Treasury declaring China a “currency manipulator”, global financial markets have reacted with sharp selling. The question is whether this is the beginning of a genuine currency war that will trigger a new Financial Tsunami as bad if not worse than that of the Lehman Crisis in 2008. The timing also coincides with escalation of geopolitical clashes between Washington and Venezuela, between India and China and Pakistan over Kashmir, between Turkey with Syria and with Cyprus, as well as the escalating tensions between Hong Kong and Beijing. Are we on the verge of a so-called “perfect storm” that will transform the post-1945 global order ?

After the breakoff of talks between Washington and Beijing at end of July, US President Trump announced his decision to impose added tariff sanctions on another $300 billion of China products. At that point the Peoples’ Bank of China (PBOC) let the exchange rate of the yuan fall below a psychological resistance level of 7.0 to the US dollar. It had kept the currency above 7.0 for more than a decade to stabilize US trade flows. US stocks reacted with one-day falls of well over 3%, paper losses over $1 trillion and a sharp rise in gold, as investors began to prepare for what could become a dangerous currency war with the world’s second largest economy. In addition, reneging on previous pledges to import more US agriculture products, the Beijing government ordered state buyers to stop all US agriculture purchases at the same time. As well, evidence grows that Beijing is making business more difficult for certain foreign firms in China.

Renminbi Currency Reserves

Although the PBOC over the next two days moved to stop the fall of the Renminbi (RMB), easing fears of all-out currency wars, as of this writing the China currency is poised to fall significantly, putting major pressure on other Asian export countries such as Japan and South Korea and India. At the same time China’s special financial window to the Western markets, Hong Kong, stands on the brink of a possible martial law and military crackdown from the PLA troops of the mainland, to end weeks of huge popular protest against new laws that would weaken agreed provisions of Hong Kong autonomy. Martial law in one of Asia’s major financial centers would not be positive for China’s efforts to get the China currency accepted as a major reserve currency for trade, a cornerstone of the government’s long term strategy. It would also not help China attract hundreds of billions of foreign investment in its own bond and stock markets.

Read the entire article

Friday, October 12, 2018

POWELL CRASHES TRUMP ECONOMIC BOOM! Raises Rates **AGAIN** on Trump — DOW DIVES 1,501 POINTS IN ONE WEEK!

President Trump enjoyed his 102nd stock market record last week.

Then Fed Chairman Jerome Powell raised the interests rates AGAIN under President Trump.

Now the Dow Jones is down 1500 1,743 1,501 points in the last week.

President Trump said the “Fed is crazy.”  He’s right.

Trump has been saying for the past year, with Stocks at all-time highs and unemployment at 50-year lows, the Fed’s interest rate increases show a far-left liberal bias.

Right after Barack Obama was elected President, on December 16, 2008, the Federal Reserve (The Fed) lowered the Fed Funds rate by an entire percent, from 1% down to 0% .

The Fed had not lowered the Fed Funds rate by such a large amount (1% ) since at least before 1990, if ever. The Fed kept this 0% rate for most of Obama’s eight years in office.

Read the entire article

Wednesday, November 01, 2017

Why Is Bitcoin a Big Deal?

Why is bitcoin considered such a big deal? Why has it grabbed so much mind-share, and why is it skyrocketing? And why is the cryptocurrency sector going bonkers?

The short answer is that cryptocurrency is the first major innovation in money in 300+ years, back when central banks first emerged in the late 1600s as centralized clearing houses for international payments and sole issuers of national bank notes/currency.

(Those who trace central banking to the Bank of Amsterdam’s founding in 1609 might say it’s the first major innovation in 400 years.)

Why is it an innovation? There are four basic reasons:

1. It’s a form of private-sector issued money. It is not issued or controlled by any government or central bank.

2. It is structured in a completely different manner than conventional central-bank issued currency: it is a digital form of money that is issued as payment for those who maintain the database (the blockchain) on their privately owned computers. Since the blockchain is distributed over numerous computers, it is decentralized and distributed rather than centralized.

3. It enables trusted transactions between parties without requiring the services of an intermediary, i.e.a bank which acts as a trusted clearing house for transactions.

4. In the case of the first cryptocurrency, bitcoin, its issuance of tokens (coins) is limited by its design to 21 million coins. No central authority can issue more bitcoins, nor does the structure of the bitcoin blockchain allow for further issuance.

Read the entire article

Monday, May 09, 2016

Obama: TTIP Necessary To Protect Megabanks From Prosecution

On May 7th, Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten, or German Economic News, headlined, “USA planen mit TTIP Frontal-Angriff auf Gerichte in Europa” or “U.S. Plans Frontal Attack on Europe’s Courts via TTIP,” and reported that, “America’s urgency to sign TTIP with Europe has solid reason: Megabanks must protect themselves from claims by European investors who allege that they were cheated during the debt crisis. … The U.S. Ambassador to Italy has now let the cat out of the bag on this — probably unintentionally.”

In this particular case, the megabank that’s being sued isn’t American but German, Deutsche Bank, which the U.S. Ambassador to Italy has cited as his example to defend, perhaps so as to appeal to Germans to protect their megabanks against lawsuits from foreign investors (such as Italians) who complain. In that case it was investors in the Italian city of Trani, population 53,000. The smallness of the city was an issue the Ambassador raised against the suit’s having been brought there.

Reuters headlined on May 6th, “Italian prosecutor investigates Deutsche Bank over 2011 bond sale”, and reported that, “An Italian prosecutor is investigating Deutsche Bank (DBKGn.DE) over its sale of 7 billion euros ($8 billion) of Italian government bonds five years ago, an investigative source told Reuters. A prosecutor in Trani, a town in southern Italy, is investigating because Deutsche Bank allegedly told clients in a research note in early 2011 that Italy’s public debt was no cause for concern, and then sold almost 90 percent of its own holding of the country’s bonds.” The U.S. bond-rating agencies are also subjects in this suit, because Trani had relied upon their ratings of those bonds.

The Obama Administration (through its Italian Ambassador) seems thus to be saying, in effect, that unless TTIP is passed into law, Europe’s megabanks (and the U.S. bond-rating agencies, S&P, Moody’s and Fitch) will be able successfully to be sued by cheated investors, just as has been happening with such American banks as JPMorgan/Chase and Goldman Sachs in the United States, which — since TTIP hasn’t yet been in force anywhere, including in the U.S. — were forced to pay billions to cheated investors. Apparently, Obama would be happier if those suits had been impossible in the U.S. The argument here, though only implicitly, seems to be that TTIP is the way to protect megabanks and the bond-rating firms. It concerns specifically the selling of sophisticated derivative investments.

Read the entire article

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Government-Sponsored Corporatism Leading to Rise of Populism

As we’ve often pointed out, there are three areas where judicial force has been applied, swelling corporations to titanic sizes.

The first is intellectual property rights.

If corporations had to protect their own trade secrets rather than relying on government to do it for them, it is very probable that many corporations would be a good deal smaller.

The second is corporate personhood.

Corporate personhood makes it a good deal easier for individuals to avoid culpability for corporate acts.

Those lodged within a corporation can often avoid penalties that would otherwise expose them to significant personal jeopardy. Because they stay in charge, continuity isn’t disrupted and exceptionally aggressive corporate strategies can be maintained.

The third area is monopoly central banking.

Monopoly fiat money benefits the world’s largest corporations inordinately. The money coming out of central banks, especially Western central banks, often finds its way to the largest multinationals first, providing significant liquidity to these massive entities.

Read the entire article