Fire, garbage and homelessness increasingly plague the Golden State.
SAN FRANCISCO — Christine Johnson, a public-finance consultant with an engineering degree, was running for a seat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.
She crisscrossed her downtown district talking about her plans to stimulate housing construction, improve public transit and deal with the litter of “needles and poop” that have become a common sight on the city’s sidewalks. More…
For most of this decade owning gold and gold-related investments has required the patience of Job, and the sector is so obscure that it is hard to be sure of anything.
But for months now the unusual developments have been piling up so much that it may be possible to regain some optimism.
There are indications of a shortage of metal not just at the New York Commodities Exchange, where for months now most contracts have been settled through a supposedly “emergency” procedure called “exchange for physicals,” but also in London, the hub of the world gold market, where the usual flow of metal to Switzerland recently reversed, with metal flowing back to London amid increasing demand.
This corresponded with announcements of gold acquisitions by central banks that had not shown any interest in gold.
The Comex has just quickly authorized a vast expansion in what bullion banks can use as collateral for their selling – “pledged gold” held off the exchange, supposedly in London, for whose existence and unimpairment there is no public evidence.
Mike Gleason: It is my privilege now to welcome in JP Cortez with the Sound Money Defense League, a nonpartisan national public policy organization working to restore sound money at the state and federal level. JP is a proponent of and has studied in the Austrian school of economics and his role at SMDL as Policy Director has him regularly testifying at legislative hearings and speaking at various events around the country. His articles and analysis have appeared in many national news publications including the Washington Examiner, Huffington Post, Mises Institute, Foundation For Economic Education and many more, and he’s a frequent guest on various podcasts and national radio shows to talk about the importance of sound money legislation. And it’s a real pleasure to have him back on here with us on the Money Metals Podcast.
The last true enemy of inflation the Federal Reserve has seen died earlier this week.
Paul Volcker, former chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1979-1987, has passed away.
Credited with tampering incredibly high levels of inflation during the Carter and Reagan administration by jacking up interest rates to unpleasant levels, Volcker’s passing harkens back to a time when central bankers weren’t afraid to make tough choices.
Volcker instinctively knew that central planning of the economy by tugging on monetary policy levers was not only a tall order, but also wouldn’t ultimately succeed.
In an interview the former chairman said about the Keynesian “religion,” “…I was a bit turned off by the precision and certainty that these people attached to the doctrine. The analytical framework was very convincing but this feeling they had, that they could press the right buttons and manage the economy pretty exactly, for some reason it turned me off.”
Tall Paul (Volcker was reportedly 6’7”) was also the last chairman of the Federal Reserve who maintained plausible political independence, publicly butting heads with President Carter and President Reagan.
Though Volcker was one of the main architects of closing the gold window and once declared that “gold was the enemy,” he nevertheless seemed at least to understand the severe damage that inflation causes.
In an interview with PBS, Volcker said, “inflation is thought of as a cruel, and maybe the cruelest, tax because it hits in a many-sectored way, in an unplanned way, and it hits the people on a fixed income hardest. And there’s quite a lot of evidence, contrary to some earlier thinking, that it hit poorer people more than rich people…”
At a lecture in Singapore in 2008, when asked about a return to fundamentals of the Austrian school of economics as a response to the Great Recession, Volcker acutely answered, “you know, they [Austrian school economists] have some insights that maybe we have forgotten about…The idea of credit creation being important as one symptom of what is going on has certainly been vindicated.”
Volcker continued, “[Financial firms, investment banks, and commercial banks] all built up the balance sheet on the liability and asset side because of a sense of easy credit and no problems. That’s what’s come home to roost because suddenly they haven’t got enough capital to support the credit, which wouldn’t surprise most Austrian economists, I suspect.”
Former Chairman Paul Volcker wasn’t an Austrian economist – or even a strong proponent of sound money, despite including the term in the title of his memoir. But he understood the perils of inflation and the harm wrought by technocratic manipulation of the economy.
Volker’s approach stands in sharp contrast to that of current Fed Chairman Jerome Powell and his ilk. Far from fighting inflation, they are openly engaging in a campaign to push it higher.
Jp Cortez is a graduate of Auburn University and a resident of Charlotte, North Carolina. He is the Policy Director of the Sound Money Defense League, an organization working to bring back gold and silver as America’s constitutional money. Follow him on Twitter @JpCortez27
There is no right to vote, universal sufferage was the fatal blow to the Republic, and its elimination the quickest way to save America.
The United States of America is a Republic, and it was founded by men who hated Democracy with a passion, recognizing it for what it is, the tyranny of the majority. In contrast, a Republic the rule of law, and protects the rights of the smallest and most important minority, the individual.
“It has been observed by an honorable gentleman, that a pure democracy, if it were practicable, would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved, that no position in politics is more false than this. The ancient democracies, in which the people themselves deliberated, never possessed one feature of good government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity.”
Speech to Congress, June 21, 1788
The Constitution provided a house of the people they could elect congressmen to. It had a Senate the state legislatures appointed through various processes to prevent the circus we watch every election. Laws had to pass both the House and the Senate, so people had veto power but the mob could not get its way by ballot alone. The electoral college was also designed as a barrier to Democracy and the madness we see now in directly elected presidential campaigning.
This is the transcript of a talk I gave to the H.L. Mencken Club on November 9, 2019.
By Keith Preston
When it comes to questions of strategy, it is important to base one’s approach on a reasonable estimation of the probable circumstances one will be facing in the future.
I constantly hear claims that there will be a civil war at some point, or an apocalyptic revolution, or a coup, or the election of a populist leader that will set everything straight.
But the probable future of the United States will be something more like what is actually happening on the West Coast at present. In the future, the United States will increasingly start to resemble a Latin American nation in terms of demographics, socioeconomic class structures, and political characteristics.
Many people on the Right tend to focus on the demographic angle, and it is certainly true that the US is experiencing a demographic transformation in the sense that in the future there will be no ethnic majority, but merely a collection of minorities.
However, just as important is the fact that class divisions continue to widen in the US. The gap between rich and poor is the widest it has been since the 1920s, and there is no evidence this will change in the foreseeable future. I would argue that the widening class divisions probably have dozens of causes rather than any singular cause, but it is an issue that is just as important as the demographic issue.
At present, California is starting to look like what a traditional so-called “Third World” model society looks like. In Third World societies, and traditional societies generally, class structures are such that the very rich live in opulent luxury, with a relatively small middle class of ruling class functionaries, and masses of workers and poor people. That is the picture that is emerging in California.
Certain areas of California are among the wealthiest in the nation. There is also a middle class and upper middle class of professionals, tech workers, public sector workers, bureaucrats, and corporate managerial personnel, but what Americans traditionally think of as the conventional working to middle class is shrinking in size, and the ranks of the poor, including those experiencing Third World or Fourth World levels of poverty, are growing. For example, some areas of California have poverty levels that approximate those of the Congo. California cities have a massive homeless population of the kind normally associated with Latin America or South Asia. Certain medieval diseases like typhus and leprosy are making a comeback among the poor in California as well.
It has been said in the past that California is the bellwether of the nation, and I suspect that will prove to be true in this scenario as well. Increasingly, US politics is starting to resemble Third World politics with openly demagogic figures on both the left and right beginning to appear. In Third World politics, it is not uncommon for open socialists and communists as well as right-wing extremists to get elected to parliaments. Corruption, nepotism, ethnic spoils systems, institutionalized bribery, and flagrant incompetence are not exceptions but the expected norm. We see plenty of examples of this happening in the United States as well.
A U.S. representative who
has been pressing the Treasury Department, Federal Reserve, and Commodity
Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) with questions about the gold and silver markets has asked
Attorney General William P. Barr to try intervene and get answers from the
In a letter dated November 1 and made public today, the U.S.
representative, Alex W. Mooney, Republican of West Virginia, commends Barr for
the Justice Department’s recent criminal prosecution of manipulation in the
monetary metals futures markets.
But Mooney calls
attention to the explosion in use of a mechanism called “exchange for
physicals” for settling metals futures contracts in the United States, a
mechanism that, Mooney contends, may pose “some danger of a systemic
issue” if, as seems to be the case, those settlements are being
transferred to European markets.
Further, Mooney complains
to the attorney general that the CFTC is “apparently unwilling to answer a
few straightforward questions which I and others have repeatedly posed,
including questions about unusual activity” in the exchange for physicals
Mooney questioned the
CFTC in a letter sent February 5, echoing questions already posed by GATA
and ignored by the commission.
The commission has not
replied to him despite repeated inquiries.
“Given the CFTC’s
delays in answering questions about these notable developments,” Mooney
writes in his letter to the attorney general, “I would like the Department
of Justice to examine the matter and provide me with the scope and purpose of
EFP use, its legality, and whether full disclosure of EFP activity is (or
should be) required.”
please let me know whether the CFTC’s jurisdiction extends to trading by the
U.S. government and/or its agents or if such activity is exempt from oversight.
“With the recent
explosion in EFPs,” Mooney concludes, “the CFTC’s failure to detect
and/or prosecute criminal manipulation by participants in the precious metals
markets is disturbing and needs to be addressed.”
Like GATA’s, Mooney’s
inquiries seek to determine if the U.S. government or its agents are trading in
the monetary metals markets for currency market rigging purposes and if such
trading is subject to ordinary antitrust and commodity trading law and CFTC
jurisdiction or is exempt under the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 as amended since
Mooney’s letter to the
attorney general is reproduced in full here.
We urge U.S. citizens to
write to their own members of Congress calling attention to Mooney’s letter and
asking them to make similar requests for information from the attorney general
and the CFTC.
Chris Powell is a political columnist and former managing editor at the
Journal Inquirer, a daily newspaper in Manchester, Connecticut, USA, where he
has worked since graduating from high school in 1967. His column published in
newspapers throughout Connecticut. He is also secretary/treasurer of the Gold
Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc., (GATA) which he co-founded in 1999 to expose
and oppose the rigging of the gold marker by Western central banks and their
investment bank agents.
Americans hated it when the Federal Reserve handed trillions of dollars to crooked Wall Street banks following the 2008 Financial Crisis. Politicians were confronted about the merits of central banking and bailouts.
For the first time in history, college students were chanting “End the Fed” at campaign rallies as Ron Paul took the central bank to task during his presidential campaigns.
Virtually everyone in America vehemently opposed the central bank handing piles of cash to the same bankers whose greed and fraud had caused the Financial Crisis.
Little has changed, but the public’s revulsion taught them an important lesson. If they give handouts to greedy and fraudulent bankers, they had better do it in secret.
Avoiding a public outcry is probably why there is scant information about what is actually happening in the repo markets right now. The Fed continues to ramp up its overnight lending operations and has now poured in just short of three quarters of a trillion dollars in the past month.
The stated reasons for injecting all of this freshly printed cash are dubious at best.
Another week, another new and expanded repo market
intervention by the Federal Reserve. On Thursday, the Federal Reserve Bank of
New York intervened twice with fresh liquidity injections. Fed officials raised
their offerings for overnight repos up from $75 billion to a staggering $120
This comes on top of the $60 billion per month in
Treasury bill purchases that will extend well into next year and possibly
beyond. Over the past month alone, the Fed’s balance sheet has soared by $200
You might think numbers like these should be quite
alarming to investors and to anyone who holds U.S. dollars. But the strange
thing about these Fed interventions is that hardly anyone seems alarmed.
There’s no sense of rising risk being priced into the stock market. And the
mainstream media is barely even mentioning these massive transfers of paper
Perhaps after multiple rounds of Quantitative Easing
over the past decade, this latest spate of money printing is just part of the
new normal. But we remain concerned that something very abnormal could be
At the very least, there is a persistent liquidity
shortage in overnight lending markets. And Fed officials obviously feared that
it could cause the banking system to freeze up and money market funds to fail.
We don’t yet have all the answers as to what’s
really going on in the bowels of these institutional markets, but we will
continue to question the line the Fed is putting out. When these repo market
interventions were first announced, our research team here at Money Metals, as
well as our recent guest experts on this podcast, immediately suspected a new
Quantitative Easing program was beginning.
Now, despite the Fed chairman Jerome Powell’s
repeated denials, it’s pretty apparent we were right.
It is indeed QE, and we can only guess as to how
much bigger it will get in the weeks to come. In fact, it’s looking more and
more like “QE4ever.” Fed money printing certainly does carry implications for
higher rates of price inflation down the road in the real economy.
The inflationary effects of previous QEs were
largely absorbed by capital markets and stunted by relative weakness in the
economy. This time around the Fed’s balance sheet surge is starting with the
stock market at extremely elevated levels and many conventional economic
indicators coming in strong.
We wouldn’t be surprised if precious metals markets
soon begin to reflect rising inflation risk.
This week gold and silver markets showed signs of
moving toward an upside breakout. On Thursday, gold
prices rallied above the $1,500 level while silver rallied
up to its 50-day moving average.
Looking ahead to next week, metals investors will
await the Fed’s decision on interest rates at its policy meeting. Fed
policymakers appear likely to roll out another rate cut. It will come on top of
all their other recent liquidity injections.
The risk for gold and silver markets is that Wall Street celebrates by pushing the stock
market to a record high. If that happens, it could temporarily quell buying
interest in the metals. But it won’t necessarily trigger any kind of big
sell-off. A rising sea of liquidity does ultimately tend to lift all boats.
Precious metals markets have performed well overall
this year on the heels of major multi-year breakouts. The consolidation phase
over the past few weeks in no way undermines those breakouts or their
longer-term bullish implications.
Looking ahead to next year, we can expect a very
polarized and at times very nasty political campaign to begin moving markets
once it’s clear who the Democrat nominee will be. Right now the momentum within
the radicalized Democrat voter base is behind Elizabeth Warren.
Given Warren’s plans to jack up taxes and break up
large American companies, some on Wall Street fear a Warren victory would crash
the stock market by 20% or more.
One of Warren’s signature campaign promises is to
impose a “wealth tax.” It would introduce a dangerous new concept into the tax
code – namely that the government gets to tax not just capital gains on
investments, but also the market value of investments and other household
assets taken together.
A wealth tax would force you to account for the
value of all your assets – from your financial accounts to your home, your car,
your personal possessions, and your gold coins.
Under current law, gold and silver coins generate no
tax liabilities or reporting requirements until they are sold. Under a wealth
tax, gold coins and other tangible assets in your possession could get an
annual scalping by the government.
Regardless of whether such a proposal ever gets
enshrined into law, and regardless of who wins next year’s election, the
government will be looking for new ways to raise revenues as budget deficits
expand. One way to hedge against a Warren wealth tax or a Biden capital gains
tax hike is by moving assets into a tax-sheltered IRA.
The government can’t tax IRA assets, including
IRA-eligible physical precious metals products, until you take distributions. And
with a Roth IRA, you may be able to avoid taxes completely – even as tax risks
and inflation risks rise.
Mike Gleason is a Director with Money Metals Exchange, a national precious metals dealer with over 50,000
customers. Gleason is a hard money advocate and a strong proponent of personal
liberty, limited government and the Austrian School of Economics. A graduate of
the University of Florida, Gleason has extensive experience in management,
sales and logistics as well as precious metals investing. He also puts his
longtime broadcasting background to good use, hosting a weekly precious metals
podcast since 2011, a program listened to by tens of thousands each week.
Metals investors are anxiously awaiting the market’s reaction to next week’s Fed meeting. We may see players in the futures markets move to smash gold and silver prices down to lower support zones in the trading around the Fed’s decision.
But flushing out some more speculative longs and late comers with weak hands would be a healthy development in setting up the next rally.
Those who got left behind in this summer’s big moves in metals markets should certainly consider taking advantage of favorable buying opportunities as they present themselves ahead of a possible seasonal push higher in the sector this fall.
Conventional financial markets could become volatile as uncertainties surrounding America’s economy and political future weigh on investors. We are potentially only one election away from falling into socialism and one quarter’s GDP report away from falling into recession.
Lately, the mainstream media has been fixated on the possibility of the Trump economy heading toward recession.
Yes, at some point there will be a recession. But it’s not here yet. And economic forecasters as a whole have a terrible track record when it comes predicting major turns in the economy.
All the recession talk now spewing from the media is speculative at best – politically calculated at worst. Let’s face it, some anti-Trump partisans in the media are giddy over the potential for a recession to bring down the President’s poll numbers.
That said, we do see signs of an economic slowdown of at least some magnitude. Despite a low official unemployment rate, jobs are being created at the slowest pace since 2011. Corporate earnings growth is also weakening. And GDP growth in the in the second quarter fell from 3% to 2%.
I think class is real, and that class conflict is real. The Marxists have a lot of insight into that but I don’t agree with them that class is the determining factor in everything. Vilfredo Pareto had a pretty good critique of the Marxist perspective.
“In Pareto’s view, the Marxist emphasis on the historical struggle between the unpropertied working class — the proletariat — and the property-owning capitalist class is skewed and terribly misleading. History is indeed full of conflict, but the proletariat-capitalist struggle is merely one of many and by no means the most historically important. As Pareto explains:
‘The class struggle, to which Marx has specially drawn attention, is a real factor, the tokens of which are to be found on every page of history. But the struggle is not confined only to two classes: the proletariat and the capitalist; it occurs between an infinite number of groups with different interests, and above all between the elites contending for power. The existence of these groups may vary in duration, they may be based on permanent or more or less temporary characteristics. In the most savage peoples, and perhaps in all, sex determines two of these groups. The oppression of which the proletariat complains, or had cause to complain of, is as nothing in comparison with that which the women of the Australian aborigines suffer. Characteristics to a greater or lesser degree real — nationality, religion, race, language, etc. — may give rise to these groups. In our own day [i.e. 1902] the struggle of the Czechs and the Germans in Bohemia is more intense than that of the proletariat and the capitalists in England.’
Marx’s ideology represents merely an attempt, Pareto believes, to supplant one ruling elite with another, despite Marxist promises to the contrary:
‘The socialists of our own day have clearly perceived that the revolution at the end of the eighteenth century led merely to the bourgeoisie’s taking the place of the old elite. They exaggerate a good deal the burden of oppression imposed by the new masters, but they do sincerely believe that a new elite of politicians will stand by their promises better than those which have come and gone up to the present day. All revolutionaries proclaim, in turn, that previous revolutions have ultimately ended up by deceiving the people; it is their revolution alone which is the true revolution. “All previous historical movements” declared the Communist Manifesto of 1848, “were movements of minorities or in the interest of minorities. The proletarian movement is the self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority.” Unfortunately this true revolution, which is to bring men an unmixed happiness, is only a deceptive mirage that never becomes a reality. It is akin to the golden age of the millenarians: forever awaited, it is forever lost in the mists of the future, forever eluding its devotees just when they think they have it.”
The Marxist idea that the working class is a universal monolith, or that the proletariat everywhere has the same interests, is mistaken. Also the “workers vs capitalists” class conflict isn’t the only class conflict. Today, upper-middle class vs upper-class conflict, working-class vs professional class, upper proletariat vs lower proletariat, petite bourgeois vs wage laborers, “respectable poor” vs the lumpenproletariat are all just as common forms of class conflict.
The administration of US President Donald trump views China as the “primary enemy” amid a growing divide between political and business leaders in the United States over how Washington should treat China’s growing military and economic threat, an American political analyst says.
Keith Preston, director of attackthesystem.com, said some in Washington supported Trump’s ongoing military and economic pressure against Beijing while many others called for less tensions in the relationship.
The divide between the elite became clearer on Friday, when Trump implied that the US central bank chief was a greater “enemy” than Chinese President Xi Jinping.
He made the remark after Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell warned the trade war with China is a risk to the US economy.
“We have a very strong dollar and a very weak Fed. I will work ‘brilliantly’ with both, and the US will do great,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “My only question is, who is our bigger enemy, Jay Powell or Chairman Xi?”
Preston told Press TV on Sunday that American corporations relied heavily on China because of cheap labor in the country as well as Beijing’s policy of handing out loans to foreign businesses.
This is while some parts of the US establishment believe the growing trade imbalance between the two sides was hurting the US as it allowed China to boost its economy at America’s expense, Preston added.
“China only has about half the economic power of the United States but the Chinese economy has grown exponentially in recent decades and there are some policymakers and some elites in the United States who are concerned about that and they wish to level this trade imbalance somewhat,” Preston argued.
“Another issue is the fact that China is increasingly viewed [by the US] as a geopolitical rival not only militarily but also economically,” he continued.
The United States is also heavily dependent on China for its military technologies, another factor that has split US officials about the correct approach.
“It is clear that the Trump administration represents a vein of the American that do view China as a primary enemy and wish to take a more hawkish position towards China,” the analyst added.
Trump lashed out at China on Friday, vowing a quick response to its announcement of new tariffs and ordering US companies to leave the country.
China announced earlier on Friday it would impose new tariffs on US soybeans, lobsters, peanut butter and other imports worth $75 billion in retaliation for Washington’s latest round of punitive duties that take effect in two rounds, September 1 and December 15.
The United States will raise existing tariffs on $250 billion in Chinese imports to 30 percent from 25 percent, beginning on October 1, Trump said on Twitter Friday.
He added that the duties on another $300 billion in Chinese products, set to take effect on September 1, will be increased by 5 percent, reaching 15 percent.
While most market analysts who have denied central bank and government intervention against gold have long since gone silent on the issue, Managing Partner Jeff Christian of metals consultancy CPM Group continues to disparage such complaints as “conspiracy theory.”
In an interview last week with Money Metals Exchange’s Mike Gleason, Christian tries to reduce the issue to what he considers ordinary and small-time market manipulation by individual traders.
“We don’t see grand conspiracies and we see a tremendous amount of evidence that these grand conspiracies do not exist,” Christian says.
That is, Christian doesn’t see the monthly interventions of the Bank for International Settlements in the gold market on behalf of its central bank members, interventions confirmed by the bank’s own monthly statements of account.
He doesn’t see the “central bank incentive program” of trading discounts extended by CME Group, operator of the major U.S. futures exchanges, to governments and central banks for their surreptitious trading of all major futures contracts, including gold and silver.
He doesn’t see the refusal of the U.S. Treasury Department and Federal Reserve to answer U.S. Rep. Alex Mooney’s questions about which markets they are secretly trading in and why.
He doesn’t see the closed meetings regularly held by the major international financial organizations, from the BIS to the International Monetary Fund to the G-7 Gold and Foreign Exchange Committee, wherein intervention policy is formulated and implemented in secret — the very definition of “conspiracy.”
The American elite are
divided over what the economic relationship between the United States
and China should be like, says a political analyst.
Keith Preston made the remarks in an interview with Press TV on
Saturday when asked about President Donald Trump’s furious reaction
after Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell had warned the trade war with
China was a risk to the US economy.
In a furious flurry of tweets on Friday, Trump attacked the Powell’s stewardship of the world’s biggest economy.
“As usual, the Fed did NOTHING! It is incredible that they can
‘speak’ without knowing or asking what I am doing, which will be
announced shortly,” Trump wrote on Twitter.
“We have a very strong dollar and a very weak Fed. I will work ‘brilliantly’ with both, and the US will do great,” he added.
“My only question is, who is our bigger enemy, Jay Powell or Chairman Xi?”
Preston said, “There is a split within the American elite, within the
American economic and political elite over the question of what the
economic relationship between the United States and China ought to be.”
“It’s clear that the Trump administration represents a vein of the
American elite that do view China as a primary enemy and wish to take a
more hawkish position towards China when it comes to things like tariffs
and trade and those kinds of issues, economic relationships and also
military relationships as well.”
“On the other hand, there are other sections that the American elite
that are very concerned about maintaining a trade relationship that
currently exists between the United States and China, they do not want
anything to disrupt that,” he added.
Trump lashed out at China on Friday, vowing a quick response to
China’s announcement of new tariffs and ordering US companies to leave
The attack came after China announced earlier on Friday it would
impose new tariffs on US soybeans, lobsters, peanut butter and other
imports worth $75 billion in retaliation for Washington’s latest round
of punitive duties that take effect in two rounds, September 1 and
The United States will raise existing tariffs on $250 billion in
Chinese imports to 30 percent from 25 percent, beginning on October 1,
Trump said on Twitter Friday.
Race is a touchy subject in the West. People across the aisle, especially white folk, tend to avoid it like a plague. A big part of the reason behind this reservation has to do with the fact that both the left and the right maintain an equally immature grasp on the subject. While the right seems to be convinced that race is some kind of scientific fact like a species of bird, the left seems to view it as an inescapable historical prison sentence with no hope for escape. Like usual, the left is wrong and the right is way fucking wrong. There is nothing scientific or permanent about race. It is a social construct as fluid in nature as gender or sexuality, and it is constantly evolving. Almost every known race was created by a collision of former races that have ceased to exist. About the only thing that the clueless class in the left-right paradigm gets right is that the white race is a very unique creature, and a dangerous one.
The white race is unique in that it is the first defining race of the imperial era and modern day imperialism defines its very existence. The Western Europeans designed the concept of whiteness to justify their expanse and enslavement of the New World and it’s dark skinned cousins across the Global South. As the insatiable nature of capitalism demanded endless expansion, it’s moneyed mandarins required the creation of a new super-class to rationalize the enslavement of the darker nations. This concept became even more necessary with American independence and the fall of monarchism.
This new white aristocracy replaced the royal bloodline and shaped the very nature of the planet’s economic ecosystem. The First World was created with the excess wealth pillaged from the Third World, and it’s subjects soon became victims of new races invented to further empower the white race. The colored races of black and Latino were constructed to both consolidate white supremacy’s ill-gotten gains and to rob the many tribes that made up these racial monoliths of color of their diverse indigenous cultures. The white race is unique, not simply by the Machiavellian nature of its design, but by the necessity of its supremacy over other similarly constructed mass races to justify its very existence. But like most imperial schemes, white supremacy backfired.
Policies relating to sound money have been the subject of substantial debate at the state level this year, with bills, hearings, and/or votes taking place in nearly a dozen legislatures.
As most state legislatures have now wrapped up their work for the year, let’s review the victories (both offensive and defensive)—and lone defeat—for sound money during the 2019 session.
The Sound Money Defense League’s primary goal is to remove every kind of taxation imposed on constitutional money. Given its practical importance, the hottest issue in the states has been taxation—i.e. whether citizens should face a levy when buying or selling gold and silver.
● House Bill 2684, introduced by West Virginia Delegate Pat McGeehan, aimed to remove all taxes (sales tax, corporate income tax, and personal income tax) from gold and silver. Meanwhile, Senate Bill 502, sponsored by Senator Craig Blair, exempted only precious metals from the state’s sales tax.
The West Virginia bill removing sales taxes passed overwhelmingly through both chambers, and Governor Jim Justice signed SB 502 into law.
● House Bill 2140, introduced by Kansas Representative Jim Kelly, included a sales tax exemption on the sale of gold and silver as part of a larger bill rife with new taxes. Governor Laura Kelly signed the measure in May.
Following months of cajoling by the White House, the Federal Reserve finally cut its benchmark interest rate. However, the reaction in equity and currency markets was not the one President Donald Trump wanted – or many traders anticipated.
The Trump administration wants the Fed to help drive the fiat U.S. dollar lower versus foreign currencies, especially those of major exporting countries.
Instead, the U.S. Dollar Index rallied throughout July ahead of the expected rate cut and continued rallying after Fed chairman Jerome Powell made it official on Wednesday.
In fact, the Federal Reserve Note broke out to its highest level since early 2017.
The Fed also announced it would end its balance sheet reduction program a month earlier than originally scheduled.
These dovish policy changes apparently weren’t dovish enough. The central bank could have gone for a 50-basis-point cut instead of the more routine quarter point cut it delivered. It could also have announced a new Quantitative Easing program.
Perhaps the biggest market-moving disappointment (equity bearish, dollar bullish) was Fed Chairman Jerome Powell shooting down the idea of an extended rate-cutting cycle.
In his press conference, he described the cut as “mid-cycle adjustment” that didn’t necessarily imply follow-up cuts.