Money Flow Trading Method along with Risk Management

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...ops+to+zero%29

Update (6:50 pm ET): In a stunning turnaround, the pound has surged to a session high, erasing its losses for the day, on reports that Dominic Raab, May's former Brexit Secretary, who famously resigned in November rather than endorse the withdrawal agreement that May had negotiated with the European Union, is planning to back her deal.

There have also been reports that some Labour MPs are planning to back May's deal, defying their party's stated opposition.

Earlier, it was estimated that the deal would be defeated by about 25 votes. But given that Raab could presumably carry some MPs with him, and the prospect of more Labour defections, traders are finding a renewed sense of optimism that Theresa May might just pull it off.

https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...%20%282%29.png

* * *

The British pound dropped sharply on the morning of "the day that should have been Brexit" after a Labour Party spokesman confirmed that the opposition party would oppose PM Theresa May's "meaningful vote 2.5", setting the third vote on May's unpopular withdrawal deal with the EU up for almost certain failure.

Sterling dropped to $1.3009, leaving it down roughly 2% for March, though it remained, no pun intended, up 2% on the quarter, making it the best performer among major currencies.

That might come as a surprise to some, seeing as the public has been treated to one Brexit-related disappointment after the next, with May's deal having already been voted down twice by wide margins. Just this pass week, an indicative vote on possible Brexit alternatives showed that not one would received majority support in the Commons.

May and her team have warned MPs that if her deal is defeated again on Friday, they will risk delaying Brexit by months or even years. Then again, there's also the risk that the UK will crash out of the EU (though May and her team have largely glossed over that possibility). International Trade Secretary Liam Fox said Friday that losing the vote would mean a longer extension to Brexit.

The DUP, the 10 unionist MPs from Northern Ireland who help shore up the Tories Parliamentary majority, have already said they will oppose the vote. And many of the ERG leaders, including Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg who said earlier this week that they would back the deal to prevent a longer Brexit delay have flipped-flopped on their stance.

In order to meet Speaker John Bercow's test that "substantial" alterations be made to the withdrawal agreement for it to be brought up for another vote, May decided to separate the WA from the non-binding political declaration - and EU officials confirmed that only the WA would need to be accepted for the UK to leave the EU.

https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...usd%203.29.jpg


Given that it's headed for defeat, observers might wonder why May is even bothering to bring it up for another vote. In an explainer for the BBC, political editor Laura Kuenssberg explained that it's another way for May of "extending the road before it finally runs out."

But the vote, on what was meant to be Brexit Day, is a request to MPs to allow her to keep going, to carry on pursuing her route, with its well-documented flaws.

There's a challenge there too, not just to her own Brexiteers but to Labour and the other opposition parties, to say "no" to a long delay to our departure from the EU, the last moment when Number 10 believes anything even approaching a timely exit can be guaranteed.

There are signs now that many Eurosceptic MPs are ready to say "yes" - not because they suddenly have realised Mrs May's deal is perfect, but because more of them officially realise that it is the clearest break from the EU they can realistically hope for.

Yet her Northern Irish allies are not persuaded. Labour, even though they have sometimes accepted that what's on the table - the divorce deal - will never be unpicked by the EU, will still, in the main, resist.

As things stand, even though some influential Brexiteers believe there is a chance it will get through, it looks like the prime minister is heading for another loss.

But for Number 10, it is another way of extending the road before it finally runs out.

And in this environment, with control slipping away, that, for Theresa May, is worth a try.


No amendments have been selected for debate before the vote, which is expected to take place at 10:30 am ET (2:30 pm London Time).


COMMENTS FROM BENJAMIN: This event today of historical signifigance is a FUNDAMENTAL FACT. There is great risk today trading in any currencies. So now we observe and as I FOCUS and listen in and watch live I see and hear what is unfolding and will come to a vote today at 2:30 PM Eastern Standard Time or New York Time. So the last 1 1/2 hours of trading today in the Forex and other markets could be extremely risky unless you understand the signifigance of the events. Even then because of INTERVENTION by those with the POWER to do so a result that would mean what it means can CONFUSE the traders and the markets because of that planned INTERVENTION.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...ops+to+zero%29

Blain's Morning Porridge, submitted by Bill Blain

This is the day the UK isn’t exiting Europe. Surprised? Not really.

Think I’ll try something different this morning - a review of the week touching on some of the key themes we should be thinking about. Let me know what you think.

But firstly let me apologise for the lack of porridge this week. On Wednesday it was being unable to find anywhere to sit with a computer in London City Airport. Yesterday it was courtesy of Flybe from Edinburgh - I’d like to thank them for leaving us standing in a cold bus while they tried to rustle up a crew. The BA flight took off on time, although I wonder if it went to Duesseldorf?

Let me start with a rant:
Bond Yields and the END OF ABSALOOTLEY EVERYTHING…

While everyone is panicking about US curve inversion and the possibility it is signalling recession, is the real issue even simpler and more obvious? Should we be worried about tumbling global bond yields? Aside from it being impossible for funds to meet long term liabilities, what’s not to like about lower for longer? Actually - quite a lot. Even the ECB has noticed zero bond yields haven’t exactly stimulated growth and jobs across Europe and done nothing in terms of stimulating inflation.

Equities seem blithely unconcerned despite all the cack about trade-wars, rising political anarchy, and a distinct feel this business cycle is likely to wind-down into a slough of earnings downgrades and suchlike unpleasantness. The smart money is not worried, because they understand the truth - there is nothing to worry about BECAUSE A STOCK MARKET MELTDOWN IS ACTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE!

Apparently the taxi firm that isn’t Uber is going to IPO at $72 bln, a phenomenal $25 bln valauation, beating all records as the company getting the most money for losing the most money ever… Why? (Clue the answer is not because Lyft and Uber will be an unbeatable oligopoly - they will probably eat each other, and I have 4 different taxi apps on my phone and none are UBER!)

Nope. The reason is because when bond yields are zero, then stocks become more attractive because they not only offer the potential of dividend yields but also the HOPE of stock price upside. As a result, even the most fantastical, utterly hat-stand, loss-making off the wall crazy as a Mad Fox, Unicorn proposition looks attractive if/when the stock price is likely to rise… (But, remember: Hope is never a good strategy.)


Forget reality - in today’s world equities are all and only about the stock price. And you can square that equation when Global Central Banks can’t afford to admit all their monetary experimentation has been about as much use as tea strainer bailing on the Titanic. The reality is the non-normalisation of monetary policy leaves every single fundamental thing I thought I understood about markets; valuations, yields, risks and returns to be wrong. Utterly.


Central banks are complicit in the illusion - understanding the brutal reality of what their monetary experimentation has led to: a world where the most sensible corporate investment is buying back stock, and stock markets can’t be allowed to fall, because such a collapse in sentiment would utterly undo the little financial good zero interest rates created. Ouch.. “Its a rat trap baby, and you been caught!”


My only recommendation would be in such a mad, mad, mad world… fill yet boots….

There is no point in worrying today about stuff you will have to worry about tomorrow: if and when the illusion ends, you will have zero chance of being able to exit, because concurrent with insane monetary policy experimentation and distortion, global regulators decided they’d better get in on the act and thus they stepped in to regulate markets to prevent a repeat of 2008.

So they introduced new rules and killed liquidity, made hedging irrelevant, and turned markets from being vibrant centres of wealth creation into despondent job creation schemes for compliance officers.


THE FUTURE OF FINANCE AND INVESTMENT
I was up in Edinburgh earlier this week, at Heriot-Watt University’s Centre for Finance and Investment. I’m hoping to become an advisor to the centre. I’d see my mission as altering today’s graduate and post-graduate students to the dangers of regulation, monetary experimentation, but, when all around in financial assets is distorted, especially the opportunities inherent in my alternative assets investments! Get them young I say.. give me the boys and girls today and I shall give you tomorrow’s CIOs!

One of the areas we discussed were ideas for research projects - and that’s particularly interesting; for instance turning around my long held belief that firms with large cash piles tend to underperform because their management lack the imagination to deploy money effectively - empirical research demonstrates they’ve actually outperformed in recent years.

Discussing research ideas with the Centre’s advisory board through up lots of fascinating ideas, concepts and approaches. Topics ranged across the board - from the underperformance of Absolute Return Funds, Corporate Governance and Behavioural Bias, The Woodford Effect, Private Equity distortions, liquidity and a host of other stuff including the promotion of gender equality across finance.

Very happy to hear ideas from readers on areas for academic research - I’ll feed the sensible ones to the centre.

BOEING - A MORE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE?
A few weeks ago Boeing stock tumbled in the wake of the second B737 MAX crash. Then the price stabilised, waiting for the investigative reports to come in. Markets took the view the situation would quickly be fixed, the production run of over 5000 aircraft would continue, and that the 350 B-737 Max aircraft parked around the planet would be allowed to fly again.

Easier this week Boeing released a software update to the suspect MCAS stall prevention system. Yesterday officials investigating the Ethiopia crash confirmed it was broadly similar to the earlier Lion Air disaster: the MCAS system activated. The Ethiopian Airlines flight crashed soon after. 346 people died in the two related disasters.

We know that in the Lion Air the crew spent their last precious seconds desperately trying to find out what was wrong with their the plane from the manuals - a failed sensor meant the stall system was repeatedly pointing the nose down every 15 seconds. As they didn’t know the system was even installed, and the airline hadn’t fitted the “extra cost” warning light, the crash was inevitable.. Pilots are on the record saying crews would have less than 40 seconds to save an aircraft if the stall system went off due to a faulty system - if the crew were unprepared or unaware, then it was impossible.

You can imagine the horrific situation on the very busy flight deck where the alarms are screaming, the plane is gryating up and down the sky, the sensors are telling them the plane is flying straight and level, but the automatic stall prevention system is trying to plow the plane into the ground. They have 40 seconds to figure it out, switch off the system and resume level flight.

Boeing might be in more trouble than we think. Although Boeing reacted quickly to the first crash and warned operators of the problem, the immediate issues will include; why weren’t operators more fully informed of the system from the outset of the Max programme and did Boeing deliberately downplay the significance of the stall system so they could cut the need for additional pilot training to make their aircraft a cheaper system? The law suites are coming in.

It doesn’t help the rest of the world now distrusts the US Federal Aviation Authority - considering their oversight of Boeing to have been lax, and that they were slow to act following the second crash. While US B737 Max aircraft may be back flying in US airspace in just a few days, the rest of the world could take months to approve the Boeing fix. That has serious implications for deliveries, for current schedules, for aviation linked paper, and replacement aircraft values - call for more info.

There may be a much bigger problem.
At its root is the venerable B-737 design. The decision not to replace the 50 year old design with something new now looks a mistaken management compromise.

Back in the 2000s, Boeing embarked on Project Yellowstone. It was (and may still be) Boeing’s plan to replace its ageing designs with new designs using new composite technologies, cleaner more efficient engines and other next generation design enhancements. So far only the 787 Dreamliner has come to fruition. It’s a fantastic plane.

Plans to replace the B-737 (and the 757/767 series) were dropped/postponed when Boeing decided to go for the cheaper option of simply stretching the workhorse B-737 at little bit more to produce the B-737 Max. That was great for Boeing - no need to tool up for an expensive new plane, instead, keep making something they’d already delivered 10,000 of.. they could make it cheap and cheerfully. And they could say it was a completely new plane because it incorporated modern stuff, and it was called… MAX!

The pitch-book to customers must have looked perfect: an aircraft type they already knew and flew, no need for additional expensive pilot training, no major conversion costs. And it would be pretty efficient.

But, the new design MAX is a lash-up compromise. The new fuel efficient high bypass engines have been made to fit, but only by squeezing them in and making them a little bit less efficient. The are bigger, heavier and change the trim. The undercarriage has to be bigger, upsetting the trim a little more, and was difficult to fit making it a little more less efficient. The shape and weight of bigger engines changed the design – giving a nose up position, hence the need for a stall-management system.

Its now becoming clear its not such a great proposition. Pilots apparently don’t like it - knowing what was once a thoroughbred now has the aerodynamics of a brick, a carthorse of the skies. Passengers are concerned. Airlines are cancelling orders - although Lufthansa just came in with talk of a new order. The good news for Boeing is the Airbus A320/321 series is 30 years old, and is going through a similar modernisation process - the Neo series.

Supporting Boeing is the need for 30,000 new mid-size aircraft in the next 20 years. There just are not enough planes being made. Should they have been introducing a brand-new but expensive aircraft now to take that market? Probably. It will take years before a new plane, the B-797, is ready.

In the meantime, what happens to the 5000 B-737 Max’s currently on order? If I was an airline executive.. I would not be happy.. If I was on the Boeing board…. I’d be nervous.


COMMENTS FROM BENJAMIN: I would not be a buyer of this airline company after reading the comments. My point is that NO TECHNICAL INDICATOR can tell you what we just learned. So now we see the terrible situation the world is in. SO the KEY now is protect your assets of all types.

RISK MANAGEMENT is the KEY to your future. Today will go down and become part of history.

5 Minute Chart - GBP/USD
https://finviz.com/forex_charts.ashx?t=GBPUSD&tf=m5

https://cdn-assets.faireconomy.media...ic356900_2.gif

Benjaminis, do you believe in DIVERGENCE?? plz see the quoted post and advise. thanks,

Still sitting on this trade since 2017. It's more symbolic and an investment lol

All the information is excellent however how would it have worked today on Brexit day ? So the BEST answer that still could work however more likely over the time frame of One Hour or Four Hours.

Do your own research and let me know what you find since you are more skilled than myself on the technical side. Please post any follow up questions here.

Thanks


Benjamin

Good Evening

Please post more charts. I did not forget about your request for information on Turks & Caicos. I will look for my files and when found post information on the weekend.

I need some technical traders to join the team so let me know if you have an interest in this. I can offer equity in my corporation and consulting fees.

Best regards


Benjamin
AKA BWM

Thanks Benjamin. I am flying out tomorrow to Florida and then catch a cruise on Sunday. It would be great if you could get me something by Sunday noon ET. I have chosen not to buy WiFi package and enjoy the beauty of mother nature this time. My son is already revolting with all his might lol

I cannot disclose my real identity to anyone here until I quit my primary line of work. I am shooting for 2-3 yrs and relocate to a destination where we can "retire" and travel around the world (which is our utmost passion) so perhaps we can work something out at a later stage. I have stopped participating in Spot FX (atleast while I am in USA) due to lack of decent brokers so my focus is 100% on Futures (primarily NQ and then Dow and DAX in that order)

Regarding this sterling trade, this was completely my wife pushing me to pull the trigger. She is a British History lover and felt the Mighty Pound can never go below 1.20 so entered a limit order and it sat there for several months lol Small Trade so did not mean much more than a "show of support" to the Queen (in her words lol)

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2827pl.htm

Note: This is a private letter intended for the sole and exclusive use of the patron/donors to the Sisters of Sorcha Faal.

Someone Wants Trump Dead—Trump Finds Out And Kills Assassin—Now France Wants War

30 March 2019

Hello Folks,

During the past week, the people of America have become roiled again after the initial findings of the Special Counsel Robert Mueller report showed that President Trump didn’t collude with the Russians, and Attorney General William Barr further cleared him of all obstruction claims.

However, anyone thinking that this sordid affair is now going to go away couldn’t be more mistaken—as it’s now entered its most deadly and final phase!

To fully understand why this is so, please allow me to bring you back to what future historians will mark as one of the most important dates in the entire history of the United States—5 February 2015—and was the date that one of the Jewish world’s most important publications, named Algemeiner Journal, saw it honoring New York City billionaire real estate tycoon Donald Trump with its Liberty Awardfor his contributions to US-Israel relations.

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/spyone2.jpg

At the same time Trump was receiving one of the highest honors the Jewish peoples can bestow on an American, the decade’s long friend of the Jewish family of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, named Benjamin Netanyahu, was fighting for his political survival in Israel—a fight he nearly lost after President Obama secretly funneled hundreds-of-thousands of dollars into Israel to defeat Netanyahu—as well as Obama humiliating Netanyahu by refusing to allow him into the White House.

A month later, in March-2015, Netanyahu soundly defeated his Obama-backed rival and continues to be the Prime Minister of Israel—but whose saga doesn’t end there, it just moved to a quiet landlocked county in the English Midlands named Leicestershire—and is where the Leicester Hebrew Congregation supports this region’s Jewish community.

The most important to the history of America member of the Leicester Hebrew Congregation that no one in the United States is allowed to know about is a young Jewish autistic savant teenager named Kane Gamble—who, in June-2015, was said to have singlehandedly penetrated the computer security of both the CIA and FBI—most importantly his capturing all of the emails, texts and communications of CIA Director John Brennan and FBI Deputy Director Mark Giuliano—and for which, last April-2018, he was sentenced to serve two years at a youth detention center.

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/spyone3.jpg

Though many intelligence analysts around the world believe that Kane Gamble penetrated the highest security levels of America because of his anger that Obama had tried to defeat Netanyahu, the same cannot be said about Russian intelligence experts—who to this day believe that this 15-year-old teenager was nothing more than a cut-out for the Israeli government’s Institute for Intelligence and Special Operations, that’s otherwise known as MOSSAD.

Supporting this view of Russian intelligence experts is that within days of CIA Director Brennan’s and FBI Deputy Director Mark Giuliano’s secret messages being obtained, Trump announced his plan to run for the presidency—that sent CIA Director Brennan into such panic, he rushed to Paris to meet with the leader of that nation’s spy agency Directorate-General for External Security (DGSE)—followed by his then, likewise, rushing to Moscow, too, but where he was turned away—thus leaving Brennan with only “The London-to-Langley Spy Ring” to stop Trump.

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/spyone4.png

Over these past few months, the increasingly becoming unhinged from reality former CIA Director Brennan has reached a rapprochement with the French spy agency DGSE—that’s not surprising because, for the past 20 weeks, France has been brought to the brink of collapse and outright civil war by its pro-Trump populist citizens—but whose rapprochement between Brennan and the DGSE saw Trump retaliating this past week against by pumping five bullets into France’s most notorious government assassin Daniel Forestier—and that today, now sees the DGSE preparing to retaliate by their launching a false-flag chemical attack in Syria which they intend to use to ignite a war between the United States and Russia.

Now just in these few paragraphs folks, you’ve gained more true information in just few minutes about what’s really going on in your world than in the over 3-years of mainstream media outright propaganda you’ve been subjected to—and I’m wondering when the vast majority of you are going to realize this fact!

In fact, since the very moment Trump rode down his Trump Tower escalator on 16 June 2015 to announce his candidacy, to this very day when Brennan and his French spies are, once again, trying to ignite World War III to cover up these coup plotters’ crimes, the Sisters have told you nothing but the whole truth—and YOU KNOW THIS!

What you don’t know, though, is that for reasons we still don’t know about, a few months ago, without either our knowledge or consent, our main US computer server was suddenly moved to a new location just 26 miles from CIA headquarters in Langley-Virginia—with our only being told about this new facility by their stating:

The entire facility is protected by federal-grade security that meets the stringent demands of DOD and DCID compliance.

Security

K-12 fencing, guarded entrances, man traps, biometric access controls and multiple video surveillance zones

Minimum 150’ secured vehicle standoff, vehicle arrest barriers

ATFP compliant with controlled site perimeter greater than 150’ from the building

An MEP separated from the IT on the data floors

All that we do know at this time is that our previous server hosting company in the US named Servint was acquired by Leaseweb, and is now known as Servint-Leaseweb—and is a secretive private company located in Amsterdam whose reach extends around the entire world—and that since taking over the management and security of our servers, has seen the constant attacks on them grind to a total stop!

Now whatever “angel” has swooped down from Heaven to protect us we don’t know, but they did bring a “devil” along with them—which is the cost to the Sisters of having to pay for what is admittedly the greatest world-class military grade security any computer server can have—but that we in no way can afford without your support!

For whatever reason, someone very powerful is protecting the Sisters and this site to keep the truth flowing to you—left only needing to be asked is if you’re going to help too?

Without you helping us, TODAY, we’re done for folks—I can’t make this any more simple or truthful—but, whomever that powerful “someone” is who’s now protecting us, I can’t help but believe that “they” believe in you, too—and know that you’ll go below and give what you can so that truth and freedom won’t be extinguished.

Thank you for listening and aiding us in our hour of desperate need, and, as always too, please feel free to write me at [email protected] with any comments/questions/suggestions, and remembering to put ATTN: BRIAN in the subject line.

All the best folks,
Brian

Webmaster
Paris
Fr.

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...pHBudhNN4YpCVk

On Thursday, rockets were fired at Tel Aviv for the first time since 2014, and Israel responded by hammering Hamas with airstrikes. This latest exchange has brought Israel closer to another war with Hamas than ever. But as you will see below, Israel is also on the brink of war with Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. And on top of everything else, the most pivotal election in Israel in many years is on April 9th. If more rockets are fired at Tel Aviv, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cannot afford to look weak because that could cost him a lot of votes in this very tight election. But he must walk a very fine line, because a military response that is seen as too harsh could potentially spark a major regional conflict.


Everyone knows that Israel is simply not going to tolerate rockets being fired at Tel Aviv, and so it was quite a shock to learn what had happened on Thursday. The following comes from the Jerusalem Post…

The Israeli military confirmed that two rockets were fired towards central Israel on Thursday evening, with at least two loud explosions heard in the Gush Dan region.
According to the IDF, although the Iron Dome missile defense system was activated, there were no interceptions as both rockets fell in open territory.

It was the first time sirens were activated in Tel Aviv since the last war with Gaza in 2014 and several Israelis were treated for shock.

It was inevitable that there would be a substantial response from the Israeli military, and airstrikes were conducted very rapidly. According to Fox News, a Hamas naval base was one of the primary targets…

The strikes were occurring in Khan Younis, roughly 15 miles south of Gaza City, according to The Associated Press. There were no immediate reports of injuries.
A Hamas naval base was targeted, the outlet reported, citing Palestinian media.

Originally, Hamas had seemed to deny responsibility for the rocket attacks, but the IDF later confirmed that they were fired by Hamas…

We can confirm that the rockets fired from #Gaza at #TelAviv earlier tonight were launched by the Hamas terrorist organization.

If Hamas doesn’t fire any more rockets, this will probably be the end of it for now.


But with Hamas, things are never truly over.

Meanwhile, Israel is also on the brink of war with Hezbollah in the north.

In recent days, Israel has been dealing with massive tunnels that Hezbollah has constructed for the purpose of rapidly moving military forces into northern Israel. So far, five tunnels have been discovered, but there are probably a lot more.

We are being told that the tunnels are absolutely enormous. Reportedly, they are large enough “to move heavy military equipment”…

For the first time since 1973, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) confronts the very real prospect of a sizable incursion. Years of fighting alongside Russian and Iranian forces in Syria have transformed Hezbollah into a formidable military force capable of launching such a raid, relying on coordinated infantry, artillery, and even armor and drones. This represents a major leap from Hezbollah’s small hit-and-run tactics in the 2006 Lebanon war.

The tunnels are integral to this new threat. Built in violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 prohibiting Hezbollah’s rearmament in this area, they are reportedly wide enough to move heavy military equipment and large troop units.

Hezbollah’s leadership continues to threaten Israel with a new war, and it has been estimated that they have built up an arsenal of approximately 150,000 missiles for the next conflict.

Israel is roughly the same size as New Jersey. Just imagine what would happen if 150,000 missiles were suddenly fired at towns and cities all over New Jersey, and you will have some idea of what Israel is potentially facing.

Of course the Israeli military is far superior to Hezbollah’s forces, but if Israel has to fight Hamas and Hezbollah simultaneously that would be a real challenge.
And then there is Syria. After eight years of civil war, you would think that Syria would have had enough fighting by now.
Unfortunately, as I pointed out in a previous article, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad just threatened to attack Israel if the Israelis do not leave the Golan Heights.

The following comes from the Jerusalem Post…

Syria vowed to attack Israel unless it withdraws from the Golan Heights, World Israel News reported on Thursday.

Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad submitted an official warning to the head of the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) Kristin Lund, in what seemed to be an attempt to prevent official US recognition of Israeli sovereignty in the Golan.

Can you imagine the stress that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu must be going through right now? A major election is less than a month away and he is literally fighting for his political life, and meanwhile several of Israel’s neighbors appear to be preparing for war with his nation.

And Iran appears to be eager for a fight too. A few weeks ago, a top Iranian general threatened to completely wipe Israel off the map…

Asked by a reporter in Tehran about Israeli threats to strike Iranian forces deployed in Syria, Brig. Gen. Hossein Salami was quoted by Iranian news outlets as saying, “Our strategy is to erase Israel from the global political map. And it seems that, considering the evil that Israel is doing, it is bringing itself closer to that.”

He added: “We announce that if Israel does anything to start a new war, it will obviously be the war that will end with its elimination, and the occupied territories will be returned. The Israelis will not have even a cemetery in Palestine to bury their own corpses.”

And Netanyahu also seems to anticipate that a conflict with Iran is coming. The following comes from NBC News…

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu startled Iranians and even the White House on Wednesday with a strident call for Israeli-Arab action against the government in Tehran that was translated by his office as urging “war with Iran.”

Although Israeli officials tried to soften the reference by altering the English translation, the provocative comment was likely to further the perception that Israel, its Gulf Arab neighbors and the United States are interested in using military action to topple the government of Iran.

I have been warning that a major war is coming in the Middle East for a long time, and now we are closer than ever.

Let us hope for peace, but as we have seen in the past, any peace in the region is always just temporary.

Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran are all fundamentally committed to the complete and total destruction of the state of Israel and nothing is going to change that. War is coming at some point, and it is going to be extremely bloody.
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/w...Of-The-End.png

About the author: Michael Snyder is a nationally-syndicated writer, media personality and political activist. He is the author of four books including Get Prepared Now, The Beginning Of The Endand Living A Life That Really Matters. His articles are originally published on The Economic Collapse Blog, End Of The American Dream and The Most Important News. From there, his articles are republished on dozens of other prominent websites. If you would like to republish his articles, please feel free to do so. The more people that see this information the better, and we need to wake more people up while there is still time.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...ops+to+zero%29


"Brexit Is A Big Shitshow" - Senior German Official Slams 'Elitist' MPs After 3rd Failed Vote


https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...?itok=LY4e264-

by Tyler Durden

Sun, 03/31/2019 - 08:45


Anybody who has been following (or at least trying to follow) the interminable Brexit trainwreck has probably, from time to time, felt a twinge of muted, inchoate rage while struggling to understand exactly why the Tories and DUP have made such a big deal out of the "Irish Backstop" when the goal of the whole process is to never put it into practice - and why, nearly three years after the historic vote, MPs just can't put their sniping and bickering aside and get on with it.


Unsurprisingly, the European bureaucrats who effectively hung their esteemed colleague Theresa May out to dry by refusing to reopen negotiations, even after a third vote on the deal failed the pass, feel the same way. And on Saturday, one senior German official decided to let it all out during a profanity-laced rant delivered during what many had probably expected would be an unremarkable meeting of party functionaries.


https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...18.36%20PM.png


Deputy Foreign Minister Michael Roth, who has in the past delivered a few politely-worded exhortations that the Commons implement the withdrawal agreement before all hell breaks loose, slammed May and her cabinet as "clueless boarding school graduates" who have been setting the common man up for disaster, per BBG.

"Brexit is a big shitshow, I say that now very undiplomatically." Michael Roth said at an event of his Social Democratic Party in Berlin on Saturday, accusing “90 percent” of the British cabinet of having "no idea how workers think, live, work and behave."

Roth said it would not be those U.K. politicians "born with silver spoons in their mouths, who went to private schools and elite universities" that will suffer the consequences of the mess.




"Brexit Is A Big Shitshow" - Senior German Official Slams 'Elitist' MPs After 3rd Failed Vote

1. Post 6,336
2. Cleanup
3. Quote
4. Mar 24, 2019 6:43am

1. https://cdn-assets.faireconomy.media...ar392875_2.gif BenjaminIs
2. | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 5,363 Posts | Online Now

1. Post 6,225
2. Cleanup
3. Quote
4. Mar 16, 2019 6:05pm

 

1. https://cdn-assets.faireconomy.media...ar392875_2.gif BenjaminIs
2. | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 5,301 Posts | Online Now

 

1. Post 6,208
2. Cleanup
3. Quote
4. Mar 14, 2019 9:19am

 

1. https://cdn-assets.faireconomy.media...ar392875_2.gif BenjaminIs
2. | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 5,200 Posts | Online Now

Prof. Václav Klaus, former President of the Czech Republic (2003-13), slammed the European Union as being worse than the Soviet Union's Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (Comecon) that ruled over the economies of EasternEurope between 1949 and 1991. Having lived under communism for 40 years, Klaus said, he has the experience to make such a criticism.
On March 12 Klaus was the featured speaker at the Presidential Lecture Series of the Center for Financial Studies,Goethe University Frankfurt, under the auspices of its President, Prof. Otmar Issing. In his presentation, entitled, "The EU Is Not Europe," Klaus laid out several key policies which have made the EU a most undemocratic union.

First he slammed its environmentalist policies at a time when not one environmentalist party in Europe could come anywhere close to winning an election. He particularly slammed, by name, the Club of Rome. Second, he slammed the climate-change policy as entirely unproven and now promoting a Malthusian agenda. Third, he attacked the so-called information society in which Europe's universities are graduating unemployable degree holders. Fourth, he attacked the euro single currency as having generated mass inequality throughout Europe. He charged that the Eurozone, through the European Central Bank's Target 2 real-time gross settlement (RTGS) system, is already a transfer union but has notbenefitted any of its members. After its 20 years of existence, it has proven to be a failure.

The fifth point he made was a passionate defense of the nation-state and national sovereignty as the only basis fordefending the political and economic rights of the people. He pointed out that a "democracy," by definition, requires a"demos," but it is only the sovereign nation-state, not "Europe," that fulfills the requirements of a demos. The text of hisremarks is posted to his English website,https://www.klaus.cz/clanky/4374.

Given that the city of Frankfurt now considers itself a "European city" and is the headquarters of the European Central Bank, the audience was polite and respectful, but nonetheless hostile, which showed in their questions, which Klaus handled quite well. Asked to comment on Brexit, he expressed the shock at the way the EU dealt with it. He recalled how he, as Prime Minister (1993-97), oversaw the split between Czechia and Slovakia. Although he disagreed with the division of Czechoslovakia, he did implement it, since the Slovaks insisted. The division took only six months and was carried out in the most cooperative and friendly manner; whereas with the Brexit, he said, while the British could have been more clever, the way the EU addressed it was outrageous. He also admitted that, when the Brexit vote occurred, 'we uncorked the champagne bottles.'

When the question of so-called "populism" in Europe came up, he replied that the term is meaningless, and is being used simply to put on a derogatory label on those who disagree with EU policy.
To the last question, asking him to comment on what he believes the future holds for Europe, he referred to a famous Marlon Brando movie, in which Brando's character asks a fortune teller what the cards hold for his future. The fortune teller looks at the cards, and tells him, "You have no future." He said he expected that the EU will collapse after some painful muddling through.

It should be noted that Klaus's economic policy, on which he did not really elaborate in his presentation, is well known to be very free-market-oriented. The hostile atmosphere was so strong, that when asked, after his presentation, about the Belt and Road policy, he thought it was a hostile question and answered that he did not want to get into China-bashing and that the entire topic would take a much longer discussion. When asked by a Chinese journalist about Chinese "investment," he pointed out when he had been in government and met with the Chinese, he had told them that his country did not need investments but wanted to trade with China. It should be noted that he was the first CzechPresident to visit China, making more than one official visit, and he defended his China policy in the face of phony human rights activists.

Prof. Issing, former chief economist and member of the board of the European Central Bank, and a critic of the Eurozone policies, told this author that he had invited his good friend Prof. Klaus in order to bring another view into the debate. He said he felt there would have been more voices in support of Klaus, if not for the tremendous social pressure created by the Europeanists and environmentalists.

On March 11, Klaus gave a very similar, polemical speech at the meeting of the energy firm E.ON, held in Prague, also posted on his English webpage. [DEA]


Václav Klaus: EU is not Europe

ENGLISH PAGES, 13. 3. 2019
Many thanks for the invitation and for the opportunity to address this very distinguished audience. My thanks go especially to Otmar Issing, the President of the Center for Financial Studies, who asked me to deliver this year´s CFS Presidential Lecture. Thank you. It is a great honour for me.

When I looked at the list of the past speakers in this series, I was not at all sure if someone like me who spent the last thirty years in the political arena actually deserves it. Even though I have been all that time an active Professor of Finance at the Prague School of Economics, even though I continued teaching and writing economic texts even during my Presidential era, I am fully aware of the fact that my engagement in politics didn´t allow me to be fully involved in the academic activity and to follow the events in the economic science on every day basis. Nevertheless, I believe in the general validity of the law of diminishing marginal returns even as regards the returns of the new contributions to the economic science. I am, therefore, convinced that the old proven pillars of economics are still there and that most of the new, sometimes very promising, highly appraised, allegedly revolutionary ideas in the economic theory don´t look so great as they pretend to be.

As a side remark, I should say that I am not that often in Frankfurt, in this “bastion” of banking, in this very modern and flourishing city. The wealth of the city is not surprising. The high purchasing power of the bankers who work here and spend their huge incomes in this city is no doubt the main reason behind its prosperity.

We are here at the gathering of economists or of people from the economic, financial and banking community but I will not confine my talk to the narrow field of economics. The topic of my today´s speech is not strictly an economic one. In addition to it, we, the economists, should admit that the economic discourse ceased to be the main and the most relevant issue of the current highly controversial and ideologically divided era. Whether we like it or not, the people in our countries don´t pay that much attention to us[1]. This is partly because the people reflect their relative very high level of affluence and partly because the era of charismatic exponent of freedom and of free markets is over.

In the communist era, travel to the West was almost impossible for someone like me in Czechoslovakia and as a result, it was not until January 1990 that I was allowed to come here for the first time. It was two months after the fall of communism in my country and I was a newly appointed Minister of Finance in the first non-communist government. I was invited by Karl Otto Pöhl to have lunch with the board of the Bundesbank. It gave me a fascinating opportunity to discuss the challenges of the post-communist transition in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the economic aspects of the forthcoming German unification (Wiedervereinigung) with this highly distinguished group of people.

I remember our very close views as regards the topic of the day, which was the search for the appropriate exchange rate between the two German currencies in case of unification. As some of you remember, the German politicians of that era didn´t listen sufficiently to what the economists had to say. They chose the exchange rate which was neither in conformity with reality, nor with the majority view of German economists. The politicians were, as it is often the case, wrong. I am, however, not sure that the economists used all their arguments and presented them in a strongly enough way.

Let me say that I allowed myself to explicitly warn the German politicians and economists already in January 1990 that the German unification shouldn’t be done as a substitute for the fundamental systemic transformation of the East German society and economy. Based on my strong belief in the economic theory, I was convinced already at that time thatunification without transformation would be very costly and for many East Germans extremely frustrating. I can use many convincing arguments in this respect but let me remind you that theannualfiscal transfers from the West to the East of Germany in the 1990s reached on the average the level of the Czech GDP at that time (in some years were higher)! Many times I found out that not even many German economists are aware of the magnitude of these transfers.[2]

As I said, my first visit to Frankfurt took place still in the Velvet Revolution era. I dare say that some of us in the ex-communist countries were prepared for what happened. We spent decades in the irrational and oppressive communist economic and political system but we tried to use this time at least partly efficiently. Some of us – instead of only criticising the reality – spent these years studying contemporary economics and especially the literature in the field of comparative economic systems.

We also learned a lot by living in such an irrational and inefficient system. We were frustrated by seeing the tragic consequences of the absence of the autonomy of economic thinking and economic decision-making in our part of the world. The politics dictated the topics and principally predetermined the answers to all kinds of economic questions and issues. Due to it, one of our first tasks after the fall of communism was to get rid of the dominance of politics and to establish the autonomy of economic decision-making. Only in such a situation it is possible to think clearly and without understatements. The political compromises are, of course, necessary – but only ex-post, not ex-ante. The thinking has to be done without compromises.

This idea should be repeated again and again because this problem has become relevant in the current era again. These days, in the “brave new world” of the European Union and of political correctness, even more. In my country we were aware of the relevance of this idea since the very beginning and succeeded in making a radical change in this respect very soon. We see now, however, that we have been losing this favourable state of affairs once again.

I would like to be very explicit by stressing that I don´t have in mind the former communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe only or mostly but the whole Western Europe and America. This time, the politicization of economic life has not been organized by the communist apparatchiks or by the emissaries from Moscow. It has arisen from inside, it is a home-made problem.These shifts have been relatively silently, slowly and incrementally growing inside the contemporary Western society during the last decades, especially after the fall of communism.The threat of communism blocked the emergence, the expansion and the dissemination of such views and ideas. The change has come from the West itself this time. It has not been imported (neither officially imported, nor illegally smuggled) from the East now. It is different now.

It hasn´t been accidental. We live in the era of a new authoritarianism of illiberal elites, of neomarxists of the Frankfurter Schule, of so called “experts”, of bureaucrats of international organizations, of IT protagonists and lobbyists[3], of loud and noisy exponents of political NGOs. As a result of it, we are the witnesses of an important institutional change, of a shift in power from elected representatives to permanent functionaries, from local councils to central bureaucracies, from legislators to executives, from national parliaments to Brussels and Strasbourg, from the citizen to the state. The form and substance of political discourse have changed substantially as a result.

Let me once again mention the name of Otmar Issing, one of the most distinguished German economists and bankers whom I have been privileged to repeatedly meet on many occasions at different places of the world in the last thirty years. We sometimes held and expressed similar views on various economic issues but – not to undermine his reputation in the politically correct world of current Germany – I want to say very loudly that he has always been much more pro-European and much more pro-establishment than myself.
In spite of that, the title of my today´s speech – EU is not Europe – was suggested by him. I only accepted it, but I did it with a great pleasure, because the title has a meaning. It sends a very clear message to all those who see these two terms as perfect substitutes. It is a message to the European political elites, to the uncritical admirers of the EU in politics, media and academia as well as to the EU huge and permanently growing nomenclature. All of them behave as if these two terms were identical.

They are wrong, but I understand why – they have a vested interest in pretending the EU and Europe are identical. They want to be the owners of Europe. They want to be recognized as the authentic heirs of all European historic events and achievements. They believe they have a right to authoritatively interpret current events and to decide whether they are European or un- or anti-European. For them the EU is the personification of Europe.

This is, of course, untenable. All democrats should oppose this way of thinking. Europe is a historically evolved cultural and civilizational entity (with more or less widely accepted geographical borders), whereas the EU is a man-made constructwhich has its well-defined beginning and will have – undoubtedly – its glorious or not so glorious end.
The only superficial attention to the European issues leads to the underestimation of the fact that the EU is not a constant structure. It is a moving and variable entity[4]. Every EU summit redefines its substance – some of them only marginally, some fundamentally. The changes go, however, all in one direction. The well-known ratchet effect functions in this field as well as in many others: every treaty or summit takes Europe closer to a centralised European state. This is not surprising because the main goal of the European political elites (and their fellow-travellers) is the dislocation of national sovereignty and the overcoming of the state. These people consider the sovereign nation-state as an obsolete historical anachronism which should be defeated.

Last decades were characterized by the consequences of two such fundamental systemic and institutional restructurings. Both the Maastricht Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty brought about significant changes in the EU (originally EC) arrangements. I have to say quite resolutely that I see it as a very negative development.

We were not yet members of the EU in the moment of the Maastricht Treaty and had no “voice” in European debates then. We couldn´t express our disapproval or disagreement. However, as it is well known, I was the last President of all EU member-states who – under tremendous pressure both at home and abroad – capitulated and signed the Lisbon Treaty. I remember that even Otmar Issing wrote several years ago that “the Maastricht Treaty was the triumph of political ambitions over economic reservations”.[5] This is also my position but I stress the political reservations as well.

Both of these treaties – neither of which was fully democratically approved and implemented – were in my opinion historic mistakes. They transformed the original concept of integration into something else, into unification. They pushed the heterogeneous community of sovereign European states into a union of subordinated regions and provinces (Länder in German terminology). They substantially augmented the power of the bureaucratic central agency in Brussels. They supressed democracy and turned it into a post-democracy (misleadingly called liberal democracy). I agree with John Laughland that these treaties created “a mechanism which allows governments to pass laws for which they would prefer not to argue in public, safely away from the glare of democratic scrutiny and parliamentary opposition”.[6]

By unifying (by means of averaging) important economic parameters (currency, exchange rates, interests rates, all kinds of obligatory non-economic standards, etc.) these two treaties turned some regions of the EU into the position of winners, some into losers. The level of these parameters was advantageous for some parts of Europe only, especially for the North of the continent. They proved to be detrimental for the European South.

Instead of facilitating the mutually advantageous cooperation of European countries, these – economic realities not respecting – unification measures created deep disparities inside Europe. These disparities asked for the unwanted and unplanned emergence of a transfer union, which exists without authentic solidarity and is based on a non-voluntary redistribution.

Another unification measure, the liquidation of internal borders inside Europe, was supposed to facilitate the movements of the Europeans inside Europe and to create a new European Man, Homo Europeus[7]. It had an important side-effect. It led to the mass migration of non-Europeans who mostly didn´t come to Europe as future Europeans or as a labour force, who don’t intend to be assimilated and who don´t want to accept European culture, religion, values, habits, ways of life[8].

I can continue in the same spirit and extend the briefly stated arguments, but I know that we are in an economic institution and should pay more attention to the economic aspects of these processes. The EU – in its doctrine which I call Europeism – builds its policy on the very debatable non-traditional ideas and doctrines and presents them as “undisputable truths”. To oppose them is considered politically incorrect. I will briefly touch upon some of them:

1) One of the most important (and most detrimental) aprioristic prejudices which have been aggressively pushed forward in the EU is the almost religious belief that the environmental imperatives should be put before any economic considerations. It is not relevant that these ideas never succeeded in winning elections. They are presented as eternal truths. This way of thinking has a long tradition, especially here in Germany, but the decisive breaking point was the formation of the Club of Rome fifty years ago and its aggressive denial of long established fundamental pillars of the economic theory and of the economic way of thinking[9].

I will mention – just as examples, without analysing them – the main pillars which have been undermined – the concept of the non-exhaustibility of economic resources, the understanding of the role of prices in any rational decision-making, the role of economic incentives in human behaviour, the proper dealing with externalities, the seeing of the environmental protection as a luxury good, etc. All of them deserve to be discussed in detail and especially they deserve to be returned to their fundamental place in political and economic discourse where they belong.[10]

2) Not less important and not less detrimental is the almost religious belief in the global warming (or climate change) doctrine and the economic consequences of that belief. This doctrine represents the victory of the non-economic thinking by underestimating the information hidden in politically unmanipulated prices and the decisive impact of the long-term growth of income and of technical progress on the outcomes of economic decision-making. This doctrine set us back two centuries to the old Malthusian fallacies.
The arbitrarily chosen size of the discount rate in climatology (both implicitly in the climatologists´ thinking and explicitly in the climatological modelling) denies the role of time and of opportunity costs as the economists see them. By using a low discount rate, the exponents of these doctrines harm current generations. By claiming to fight for future generations, they pursue only their own political agendas. The war against oil, coal and cars impoverishes millions of people in spite of the fact that there is no measurable effect of human production of carbon dioxide on global temperature. All of that are, however, topics for serious lectures.

3) By claiming that we live in a knowledge economy, in an information economy, in an IT world, the EU apostles misinterpret the true sources of economic growth and development, they disregard the Adam Smith´s theory of the causes of The Wealth of Nations and they deny the fundamental contribution of the genuine creative behaviour of the free, unregulated and unmanipulated people to the economic performance. By adoring the role of formal education (and especially of mass high education), they underestimate the role of the quality of the economic system and – as a side-effect – produce the unemployable army of holders of university degrees in useless disciplines (or produce formally overeducated workers). It reminds me of the way of thinking and the rhetoric of the Leonid Brezhnev´s era.

4) By believing that it is possible to have a common currency in a non-optimal currency area, the EU political elites contribute to the evident economic decline of Europe and to the slow economic growth of the Eurozone countries in the last decades. The recent 20th anniversary of the euro was not used as a basis for a serious debate about the advantages and disadvantages of the European common currency. This is inexcusable, because the already 20 years’ long experience gives us sufficient data. One conclusion is clear: the single currency in Europe needs either an explicit or an implicit transfer union.

The explicit transfer union is not politically feasible (for many of us also undesirable), but the euro hasn´t yet collapsed because of the existence of an implicit transfer union in the form of the ECB´s “target balances”. This “union” was very innovatively described by the first Presidential Lecture speaker Hans-Werner Sinn[11] in many of his writings. It is now well-known that – within the current European monetary system – the governments can finance themselves via the European Central Bank. They cannot, of course, directly print euros but can issue their own government bonds which can be bought by the ECB.[12] This is also a transfer union.

5) My last remark relates to the still existing belief in the idealistic hypothesis of the so called “Great Moderation”, in the doctrine about the possibility to avoid economic fluctuations by clever, technocratically, not politically oriented macroeconomic policies. This idea rather surprisingly survived the undisputable reality of the 2008-2009 crisis. The students of Schumpeter should always remind us of the significance of the process of creative destruction.[13] Thanks to Schumpeter, we know that there is no growth without the previous destruction of obsolete equipment, machines, businesses, the whole industries. We witness it currently in the Czech Republic – the lowest rate of unemployment in Europe is not just a victory. It reveals the rigidity of our economy.


Conclusion: The Never-Ending Struggle for Free Economy and Society
I didn´t come here to start a revolution. I am, nevertheless, convinced that Europe needs to be liberated. To be liberated again. The ingenuity of free people should be made possible to bring fruits. We need a change, wir brauchen eine Wende. The dictate of the status quo is very powerful.

It may sound too ambitious but we shouldn´t capitulate to the intellectual trends of the time. I know that it takes political courage to admit that the eventual change will be slow and painful. I know that it is easier to say that in a position of a retired politician whose oversensitivity stems from his life in communism and who sharply sees the signs of the coming dangers. In a position of someone who knows that the growing politicization of economic life increases rent-seeking and creates low growth equilibrium. In a position of someone who is afraid of the consequences of the end of the malignant quantitative easing.

But the change has to be done.

Václav Klaus, CFS Presidential Lectures, Center for Financial Studies, Goethe University, Frankfurt, March 12, 2019
[1] This is also due to the fact that we economists have stopped focusing on big economic issues, on what people really care about. Our science is focused on very partial, esoteric research.

[2] I discussed this issue on the occasion of receiving the honorary doctorate degree at the Technische Universität Dresden 12 years ago, see my “Komparative Analyse der Transformation im Multavialand und Albisland”, Dresden, 2007, https://www.klaus.cz/clanky/15 The economic decline in the former GDR was much deeper than in my country (the output in the former GDR was for about 25 years roughly at the pre-transition level), unemployment has been all three decades substantially higher, etc.

[3] See my recent speech in Vienna, „Europas wirtschaftliche Zukunft in Zeiten der Digitalisierung und Globalisierung“, Wiener com.sult Kongress, Vienna, January 28, 2018https://www.klaus.cz/clanky/4356

[4] Paradoxically, its protagonists claim that the EU development has always been following the commitment to subsidiarity. This concept is close to the communist concept of “democratic centralism”.

[5] The International Economy, Winter, 2014

[6] John Laughland, „European Integration: A Marxist Utopia?“, The Monist, No. 2, 2009.

[7] I discovered recently that I spoke critically about “Homo Europeus” already in my article in The Economist, September, 1994.

[8] See my book “Völkerwanderung” written together with Jiří Weigl, Manuscriptum Verlagsbuchhandlung, Leipzig, 2016. Its English version has a title „Europe all inclusive“, IVK, Prague, 2017.

[9] I have to claim that I saw this new danger very clearly already in the – in many respects hopeless and frustrating – situation in Czechoslovakia after the Warsaw Pact invasion in August 1968 when we had totally different worries.

[10] I tried to do it in my book ”Blue Planet in Green Shackles“, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Washington, D. C., 2008 (The German version ”Blauer Planet in grünen Fesseln“, Carl Gerold´s Sohn, Vienna, 2007).

[11] H. W. Sinn, „Die reale Seite der Krise und der Rettungsschirm der EZB“, CFS Presidential Lecture, Frankfurt, 26 February 2014. More about it in his book „Die Target-Falle – Gefahren für unser Kinder“, Hanser: München, 2012.

[12] My critical views on the European common currency can be found in ” First Five Years since the Outbreak of the Greek Crisis”, Notes for Le Cercle Washington Meeting, The Fairfax at Embassy Row, Washington, D.C., June 28, 2015, https://www.klaus.cz/clanky/3771.

[13] I consider it very important that even Alan Greenspan in his recent book “Capitalism in Amerika: A History”, Allen Lane, 2018, written together with A. Wooldridge, reminds contemporary readers of this concept and says that “the central mechanism of progress has been creative destruction”. I suppose, however, that the banking community here in Frankfurt doesn´t like his recommendation that the capital/asset ratios should be radically increased.

https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/econo...EuwFix0_LzU3A/

Plans are underway for no-deal by the EU and finally the UK. The former claims to be prepared.


That plans are underway does not imply no deal. That Parliament voted against no deal does not imply that it won't happen.

A range of possibilities still exist although some are more likely than others.

Legalities
A Brexit Central "Civil Servant" notes a Fourth Vote on the Withdrawal Agreement Would Require New Legal Authority.

If the Prime Minister insists on ramming her totally unacceptable Withdrawal Agreement through Parliament with another vote, then she will need to take the considerable political risk of going to Brussels to ask for a new European Council decision for this purpose, which will then require an amended Statutory Instrument to be passed in Parliament.

May’s Withdrawal Agreement is dead. It is time to chuck it in the shredder, change Prime Minister, and get out of the EU.


Here’s the full text of the European Council decision of 22nd March:
“Under the European Council decision, in the event that the withdrawal agreement is approved by the House of Commons by 29 March 2019 at the latest, the extension will be until 22 May 2019. In the event that the withdrawal agreement is not approved by the House of Commons by 29 March 2019, the extension will be until 12 April 2019. In that event, the UK will indicate a way forward before 12 April 2019, for consideration by the European Council. The decision makes clear that for the duration of the extension the United Kingdom remains a member state with all the rights and obligations set out in the treaties and under EU law. If the UK is still a member state on 23-26 May 2019, it will be under the obligation to hold elections to the European Parliament. The extension also excludes any re-opening of the withdrawal agreement. Any unilateral commitment, statement or other act by the UK should be compatible with the letter and the spirit of the withdrawal agreement.”


Legalities vs Practicalities
Legally, that's very clear. It says Parliament has until March 29 to approve the withdrawal agreement. Parliament did not do that. What remains is an option to indicate a way forward before April 12.

"Civil Servant", whose identity is protected, has this correct.

As a practical matter, throw the analysis in the ashcan. If May holds a 4th vote and it passes, the EU will honor it.
Thus, May's deal is not dead.

MP's Gave May Authority to Leave With No Deal
Here's a similarly useless opinion: MPs have given Theresa May the authority to leave the EU on 12th April without a deal.

MPs have indeed voted against many things: the Withdrawal Agreement, leaving without a deal, a managed No Deal, a customs union, a confirmatory referendum and various versions of EFTA/EEA including so-called Common Market 2.0.

Let’s focus, however, on the indicative vote on Motion L, tabled by Joanna Cherry of the SNP: “Revoke Article 50 to avoid No Deal”. This motion stated that if we were two days before the scheduled date of departure from the EU and with no Withdrawal Agreement in place, the Government should put a motion to the House asking it to approve No Deal and if that was not approved, then the Government would be forced to revoke Article 50. The motion was defeated overwhelmingly by 293 votes to 184. To understand the significance of this vote, recall that if the Withdrawal Agreement was not approved before Friday 29th March, the extension to Article 50 granted by the EU would last only until Friday 12th April. Now it has not been approved, the default remains that we leave the European Union without a deal.

Given that MPs have indicated they are opposed to every other option, we are in precisely the situation envisaged by Motion L.

Now that the Withdrawal Agreement has been voted down three times, the only defensible strategy the Prime Minister has is to ensure the UK leaves the EU on 12th April.

Once again, this makes perfect sense logically. Once again, it is a waste of time to do anything but quickly dismiss it.

Way Forward
A Guardian editorial states MPs Offer a Way Out

This week MPs voted for the first time since 1906 to take back control of parliamentary business from the government and hold a series of indicative votes on where they thought Brexit should go.

There is now a straightforward choice: either change Brexit policy or change the parliament. The latter requires a general election, but the odds are against any party gaining a big majority. The predicament the nation finds itself in is in part a consequence of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011. This does not allow for the dissolution of parliament when a prime minister has been defeated on the government’s legislation. The act says two-thirds of MPs have to approve a motion for an early election to be called.


Mrs May should pay attention to the outcome of next week’s votes. She is running out of time to come up with a plan that either parliament or her party and its allies can support. Mrs May needs to tell EU leaders at an emergency European council meeting on 10 April how the UK intends to proceed. The UK must also come up with proposals before 12 April to avert a ruinous no-deal Brexit, which MPs have voted against. Restoring the sovereignty of parliament was one of the major aims of Brexit. Mrs May could honour that by accepting what MPs vote for.


One Useful Fact Accompanied With Lies
The "way out" is a lie. The Guardian wants a customs union. That is not a way out, it is a way to remain in the EU with all the problems and none of the benefits.

The Guardian's portrayal of no-deal as ruinous is another lie.

The useful fact is something I meant to discuss previously but did not do so.
May can call for elections, but she might not get them, and in fact probably wouldn't. It takes two-thirds of MPs to go along and enough Tories wouldn't.

Snap Elections Blocked
Please consider furious Tory MPs tell May: We’ll Block Snap Brexit Election.

Conservative MPs from across the party are threatening to vote down any attempt by Theresa May to lead them into a snap election, warning it would split the Tories and exacerbate the Brexit crisis.

In a sign of the collapse in authority suffered by the prime minister, cabinet ministers are among those warning that there will be a serious campaign by Conservative MPs to vote against an election headed by May, a move she hinted at last week to break the Brexit deadlock.

The threat of an election immediately angered both pro-Brexit and pro-Remain MPs. May would need a two-thirds majority in the Commons to secure one, meaning a serious rebellion by Tories could block it. May would then be forced to secure an election by backing a no-confidence vote in her own government, which only requires a simple majority of MPs.

Vote of Confidence
Even some pro-remain MPs don't want snap elections. Also note the odd proposal that May could back a vote of confidence against herself to force an election.

Although it only takes 50% for May to be removed in a vote of confidence, that does not explicitly force elections either.

Wikipedia notes that under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, if a motion of no confidence in the government is passed in express terms, the house must then adopt a vote of confidence in that same or an alternate government within 14 days, or a general election is held.


There is a 14 day window to form a new government with uncertain outcomes. And although Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn is itching for an election, he seems poised to lose it, at least according to recent polls.

Finally, it is unclear if France and the rest of the EU would wait for these political shenanigans. And even if the EU would wait, it would only be if the UK agrees by April 12 to hold EU parliament elections. That has not happened yet.

What's Next

https://imageproxy.themaven.net/http...5Emm4PkZxNxE4A


Key Question
That useful diagram is from the BBC.

The key question that "Avid Remainers" consistently miss is "Will Theresa May Accept the Plan?"

It is not clear how many proposals there will be but it is thought supporters of a "softer Brexit" than the PM's deal will look to join forces and combine elements of separate proposals to try and broker a compromise.

However, any plan including a customs union will require more Conservative support than it has hitherto enjoyed and the government has explicitly ruled out the idea up to now.

A motion calling for any deal approved by Parliament to be endorsed by the public in a confirmatory referendum is expected to return in some form. 268 MPs voted for it last time although, again, the majority of Tories and many Labour MPs remain opposed.

Runoff
The BBC's political correspondent Alex Forsyth said if a majority of MPs ended up backing either a customs union or referendum on Monday, senior government sources aren't ruling out the idea of a run-off, giving MPs a straight choice between that and the PM's Brexit plan.

The majority will not back a referendum. The referendum idea died many months ago if it was ever really in play in the first place.

The runnoff idea is yet another way May can force MV4.

My idea that May could head to Europe to discuss a customs union and purposely come back empty-handed is also in play.

Under that scenario, May would present Parliament with the choice of My Deal or No Deal on April 9 or 10.

Both cannot be ruled out making for MV5.

EU Prepares for No Deal
Meanwhile, the BBC reports EU Leaders Plan for No Deal as Other Options Dissolve.

EU leaders head into this weekend with a heavy heart. They know, in theory, that all Brexit options remain on the table and they haven't entirely given up hope of a negotiated UK departure, but there is little trust here that the prime minister or Parliament will manage to pull it off.

Despite all the drama, the money and time spent by EU leaders on Brexit over the last two years (summits, dedicated governmental departments, no-deal planning), all the hard, hard graft put in by the EU and UK negotiating teams, Europe's leaders are asking themselves what there is to show for it all.

Ongoing Brexit divisions in parliament, in government and in Theresa May's cabinet were on screaming technicolour display again last week.

EU leaders used to use the threat of a no-deal Brexit as a negotiating tactic (as did the UK). They now believe it to be a very real prospect. That has led to a number of countries - notably France - questioning the logic of delaying Brexit for much longer.

Final Days
Without another extension, for reasons the EU will accept, we are down to the final 11 days.


Say what you want of May, but give her credit for brilliantly running down the clock. She succeeded although the outcome is unknown.


Negotiating Too Good a Deal
If no-deal is the result, don't blame May entirely. She was a terrible negotiator, but this was a joint effort.


If anything, one can blame the EU more for insisting on provisions that the UK ultimately would not go along with.

No-deal is a fantastic opportunity for the UK. Yes, there will be some short-term pain, but the benefits will be lasting.


For further discussion, please see Forcing MV4: Binary Choice vs Conspiracy Theories and Accidents.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

COMMENTS FROM BENJAMIN: My job is to educate myself and learn and be aware and share my knowledge for my corporation and it's business model.

Please contribute by posting your questions or your own opinions and observations.

1. Post 6,382
2. Cleanup
3. Quote
4. Mar 28, 2019 5:44am

1. https://cdn-assets.faireconomy.media...ar392875_2.gif BenjaminIs
2. | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 5,366 Posts | Online Now

Quoting fx2019
{quote} Hello Benjaminis, Great you are enjoying your young age. Indeed the passion you have for the fundamentals is great.Been reading alot about this thread and how you follow the market in detail!Wow! You are a treasure. Alot of info regarding the collapse of the banking system and brexit...Global stuff,thanks for the info. Its unfortunate the time i have discovered your thread, you are about to leave but will ask a few questions here, hope you find time for them 1) Trend to you is money flow........With the various info that keeps hitting the...
1) Trend to you is money flow........With the various info that keeps hitting the market to change sentiment, how are you able to cope up?
Benjamin: Good Morning Fellow Forex Trader

The KEY is to know and understand all the issues involved. I usually spend about 6 hours a day reading and understanding the current world issues that the world has to deal with such as Brexit or the FED now on hold or the turmoil in the Middle East. However it is not that difficult or complex as long as you have a plan of action that works.

So here is the most simple way to use my plan. Each morning at 8:30 AM Eastern Standard Time or say New York Time , I decide if we have RISK ON or RISK OFF. How do I do that ? It is as simple to see the FUTURES on the Dow 30 and the SP500. Recently my friend and star student loveandpeace has been losing money. That is because he has developed a habit which I allowed him to do so that he could learn once I told him which I am doing for the first time today. He has been putting on trades for no reason other than to trade usually around 7:00 PM Eastern Standard Time as the Asian Markets open in Japan when the money flow is at it's lowest with only Japan open. So he is trading before we set our standard for the day starting at 8:30 AM.


Do u have a greater picture of sentiment regardless of the news that keeps coming in?
Benjamin: Here is where we use my 5 or 6 Trade Plans set every three months. As loveandpeace asked me recently what is my top 6 Forex Trading Plans for
April 1, 2019 to June 30, 2019.
(1) SHORT 100 units of Dow 30
(2) SHORT 50 units of SP500
(3) SHORT 100 units of USD/JPY
(4) LONG 100 ounces of Gold
(5) LONG 2500 ounces of Silver

The TREND IS YOUR FRIEND. I only TRADE in the direction of the Three Month Trend. That is not that complicated and I INFORM you what the Trend is so that you do not need to do as much reading and research that I do during each Forex trading day.


When do u decide to alter your direction(Wc economic news do u think can alter sentiment from the shortterm to long term?)
BENJAMIN; I answered that question above however please feel free to ask me any follow up questions that you have. Again I STRONGLY encourage anyone coming to my thread to register so that you can post and ask me questions and learn from my answers.



2)With evryone talking about the recession coming, and the collapse of the stock exchange market, why is it that the stocks are still doing well?
Benjamin: We do not have FREE Markets. We have INTERVENTION every day. The MONEY FLOW and knowing the RULES OF THE GAME allow you to play the GAME with them. The Central Banks of the world led by the CORRUPT FED. So when they print money out of thin air and the BOJ and the ECB and the FED are buying stocks when we have RISK ON then we need to wait for some unexpected BAD NEWS in the Economy to go to RISK OFF and then we trade our plan. We watch the MONEY FLOW from Equities to the largest market in the world which is the trillions of dollars in the Bond Markets of the world.


are the people buying them unaware and what do u think will be the last blow to the stock exhange market before we head into the recession?
Benjamin: We have the EDGE if WE know what 95% of all the traders in the world have no or little clue about. So one of my closest friends and fellow trader in the equity market asked me that question. My call is for June 2019 for many Geopolitical reasons.
(1) Brexit
(2) Elections in the Euro Zone
(3) The situation in France and Italy.
The start of the collapse as first the ECB goes into recession and MONEY FLOWS into the US Bond Market and the US Dollar for safety although it is not really safe since the US Dollar Fiat Currency is not worth what people think that it is worth. When the US Dollar chokes off the rest of the world that needs US Dollars then we start the FINAL LEG down to World Depression later this year.



3)At some point you highlighted that the bond market is very critical to the movement of the financial markets. I understand bonds are risk off/longterm assets. How can a forex trader trading shortterm be able to use the bond market to help them to trade spot forex?
Benjamin: You follow the Trade Plan and only trade on days where we start with RISK OFF. Of course now that can change in seconds so that is where you can be alerted by using my corporate website for 24/7 information.



4) Do you use the bond market open times,libor fix time,gold auction times to influence your decissions? and if so why and how?
Benjamin: I use all of the above and sometimes much more as I watch the GEOPOLITICAL situation.



5) Do u think a trend in a high yield currency vs low yield currency ie AUDJPY is enough to determine money flow? If not, why?
Benjamin: No I use the main indicators such as Gold and USD/JPY and of course EUR/USD to see where the MONEY is FLOWING each day. AUD/JPY is a MINOR Currency. I only trade certain currencies as they have each their own characteristics.



6)When you point out your direction to trade, do u use technicals ie S/R to pinpoint entry or you just enter and how do u place your stops
Benjamin: I use technicals only to see when the trading vehicle will reach longer term Support or Resistance. I will go into more detail at another time as I have other important things to do such as having my breakfast. I wanted to keep my word and answer most of your excellent question this morning. So for stops that comes back to my method of trading and Risk Management most important in this trading environment.

loveand peace may want to explain this as he knows and by him teaching he learns even more which is why as I teach I also learn and improve my Forex trading results.



7) Do u use any kind of valuing/correlations in your trading to determine if instruments are underpriced or over priced ? If so, would love to know more on how you do this
Benjamin: I do not really concern myself with this other than knowing the difference between REALITY and PERCEPTION which is usually always wrong.
REALITY is the FED reversing 100% their position.


Sorry about my long post but would be glad if you find some time to answer...Thank you once gain for this thread. Great info,Hope you find that great 25 year old to enjoy the rest of your life.More hapiness to you

1. Post 6,383
2. Cleanup
3. Quote
4. Mar 28, 2019 5:51am

1. https://cdn-assets.faireconomy.media...ar392875_2.gif BenjaminIs
2. | Commercial Member | Joined Dec 2014 | 5,367 Posts | Online Now

https://deviantinvestor.com/10713/yo...nt+Investor%29

You Should Own Gold

Posted on March 28, 2019 by Gary Christenson

Guest Post from David Smith, Money Metals Exchange

Maybe you have some gold (and silver) but not enough. Maybe you haven’t added to your stash for quite awhile, and you kinda’ forgot why you bought it in the first place.

Or perhaps you don’t own any precious metals at all!

If one of these circumstances fits you, then it’s time to refresh your memory on the multiple reasons why you should own gold, assess your risk profile and unique financial circumstances… then act!


The oft-stated Gresham’s Law tells us that when a government dictates the exchange rate between different types of money, the “good,” or undervalued method of exchange gets chased out by the “bad,” or overvalued version.

Thus the “bad” money stays in circulation and, as debasement (inflation) picks up, is quickly spent.

Unbeknownst to most – for now – U.S. inflation (greatly understated by “official” statistics) is increasing across the board. It doesn’t need to hit double digits in order to move the dial on gold and silver prices. Invariably, the “smart money” sniffs out the potential well beforehand – which is what it’s been doing for the last 9 months!

The “good” money in the U.S. is in reference to gold after FDR’s infamous 1933 edict banning circulation… and later, the removal of silver from our coinage starting in 1965.

Today, a pre-1965 quarter at $16/ounce silver is worth about $2.75. Why would anyone exchange it for an 8% copper/92% nickel slug? As for a gold coin, don’t even bother doing the math!

In Venezuela, according to the IMF, inflation will rocket along this year at 10 million percent! How long do you think the ironically-named Bolivar Fuerte (“strong bolivar”) stays in someone’s pocket, bank account, backpack… or large cardboard box?

You probably recall the reasons for owning gold. Here’s a timely review…

It’s durable. Spanish gold bars and coins have been recovered from shipwrecks submerged for centuries… no worse for the wear!
It’s portable. A 25 (troy) ounce tube weighs less than two (avoirdupois) pounds and is worth around $33,000 today.
It’s divisible into small portions. 1/10th of an ounce is the size of a thin dime, but you can buy/store it by the gram – or in blocks of grams.
It’s difficult to counterfeit. Just about any quality coin shop can spot a “weight problem” in relation to the expected size of a bullion coin or bar that a crook – or a naive buyer – might bring in for fiat trade.

It stores easily. Significant dollar amounts can be squirreled away just about anywhere.

Gold available for purchase is in finite supply. At a fairly consistent production rate of around 2%/year (and falling), gold is unlikely to experience a “production spike” like a base metal might.

It can serve as collateral for loan agreements, and as financial insurance.
https://deviantinvestor.com/wp-conte...2003-2024.jpeg

Gold (and silver) make great gifts. My daughter still has the 1 troy ounce Krugerrand she received as a high school graduation present. The cost: $275. Her brother has a tube of 25 American Silver Eagles purchased for $7.50 apiece.

It’s costly to mine. The industry gauging standard of All-In-Sustaining-Costs (AISC) for even the most efficient miners is still about 80-90% per ounce of what they’re paid from the sale of production. What’s more, miners have a wasting asset that – unless the deposit can be replaced with additional ore – diminishes the value of their project with every ounce they sell.

Anonymous Storage. Gold can be stored by you personally, or in vaulting jurisdictions that don’t have reporting requirements. In recent years, the government narrative has been advanced that equates privacy with illegality.

The reality is that a certain level of privacy is the cornerstone of a free people. As governments around the globe seek to limit the size – and scope – of cash (fiat) transactions, privacy by definition becomes less and less possible.

When there’s a crisis, individuals and central banks accumulate gold. There are many straws in the wind right now. Most of us have an uneasy feeling that “something’s just not right” – but we can’t pin it down.

What’s interesting is that the world’s central banks laid in more gold last year than they’ve done for the past 50 years! Shouldn’t we be paying attention too?
https://deviantinvestor.com/wp-conte...t-since-n.jpeg


Gold is money. It’s more liquid than real estate, or just about any other possession you own.

In the early 1980’s, the school in a small Alaskan town faced having to close down due to lack of funds. Into the board meeting came an old Sourdough, offering the gift of a wooden box… full of gold bullion coins. Two days later that stash had been turned into cold, hard cash – enabling the school to operate in the community’s interest for the next thirty years.

David Morgan is known in certain circles as “the Silver Guru,” but his prescient calls at major market turns over the years have demonstrated that he has an equal understanding about gold, copper, uranium, and the energy markets as well. Recently he stated,
Extreme price movement in gold is experienced when demand is increasing rapidly, while at the same time, those who currently possess gold wish to hold on to what they have – or buy more.

This is a rare phenomena where the confidence in the currency system breaks down and a “run to gold” begins. Almost overnight the belief that a “dollar” has value is recognized for what all fiat is and always has been – a giant confidence (read con) game played on a trusting pubic by the banking elite. Once enough people act on the truth (not just recognizing – but acting on that understanding), the system’s days are numbered.


Which leads to Jim Rickards’ (and my) pithy conclusion:
“If the price of gold moves sideways or down a little, you won’t make or lose much money. That’s fine; it’s like another form of cash. If gold soars, you’ll make a dollar-denominated fortune regardless of your particular entry price. That’s fine too.

The danger is not having the gold in the first place and not being able to acquire it when the demand and price are soaring and there’s no supply. At that point, you’re just a spectator. The gold train has passed you by.”
https://deviantinvestor.com/wp-conte...d-image-7.jpeg


David H. Smith is Senior Analyst for TheMorganReport.com, a regular contributor to MoneyMetals.com as well as the LODE Cryptographic Silver Monetary System Project. He has investigated precious metals’ mines and exploration sites in Argentina, Chile, Peru, Mexico, Bolivia, China, Canada and the U.S. He shares resource sector observations with readers, the media, and North American investment conference attendees.

Thanks to David Smith


COMMENTS FROM BENJAMIN: One of my skills is to know and share important information so others can have their eyes open wide by learning and understanding the difference between FALSE PERCEPTIONS and HARD COLD FACTS AND REALITY.

Now time for my breakfast. One hour invested well as it helped to focus my thinking for today.

https://seekingalpha.com/news/344726...ine#email_link

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...ops+to+zero%29

Authored by Lawrence Thomas via GoldTelegraph.com,
For almost a decade, global central banks have been avid gold buyers. Gold purchases by central banks in 2018 rose 36 percent over the previous year. Central banks are now holding 366 tons of the yellow metal. These gold purchases are the largest since 1971 when President Nixon ceased the gold standard and the tie between the U.S. dollar and gold, which rapidly led to the devaluation of the U.S. dollar.

https://zh-prod-1cc738ca-7d3b-4a72-b...old-wall_0.jpg
Not every central bank has followed this trend. Venezuela, which is in the midst of an economic collapse, sold 25 tons of gold in 2018 in an attempt to repay its debts. But Venezuela is an exception. Other central banks are eager to increase their gold reserves as a hedge against economic uncertainty. Gold ownership by central banks is at a 50-year high as global purchases have increased 75 percent over the past year.
1. United States
The Federal Reserve holds the largest amount of gold of any other central bank, 8,133.5 tons. This is 75.2 percent of its foreign reserves. The Federal Reserve has not been as active in the gold-buying spree as other countries in an effort to keep the dollar from devaluing.
2. Germany
Germany’s central bank has been busy repatriating 674 tons of gold from the Banque de France and the Federal Reserve Bank. During the Cold War, the country’s closeness to what was then Russia-controlled East Germany drove Germany to store its gold with other countries. Now, the Deutsche Bundesbank is calling its gold back home. This move is expected to be completed by 2020. Germany currently holds 3,370.0 tons of gold, which account of over 70 percent of its foreign reserves. Germany, which experienced hyperinflation in the 1930s which saw the Deutschmark become valueless, has learned its history lesson.
3. Italy
Italy plans on holding on to its 2,451.8 tons of gold. The Bank of Italy has stated that it considers gold a safe investment in times of economic turmoil and a safeguard against the volatility of the U.S. dollar. Gold represents 67.9 percent of Italy’s foreign reserves.
4. France
France has gradually ceased selling its gold reserves in an effort to hold on to the 2,436.0 tons of gold it currently has. This amounts to over 60 percent of the country’s foreign reserves. Marine Le Pen, leader of the National Front Party, has advocated for a freeze on the sale of gold, as well as repatriation of all of France’s gold currently being held by foreign countries.
5. Russia
The Russian Central Bank has been bullish on gold for six years. In 2017, it overtook China to become the fifth largest holder of gold reserves. Much of this is due to trade tensions between the U.S. and Russia. Two years ago, Russia purchased 224 tons of gold and sold off much of its U.S. Treasury debts. This move is seen as a defensive effort to weaken the U.S. dollar as the top global reserve currency. Currently, Russia holds 2,119.2 tons of gold in reserves. The Russian Central Bank is leading the way in gold purchases in its efforts to devalue the dollar.
Since the U.S. placed economic sanctions against Russian, its central bank has been accumulating gold as a safety net against having its assets frozen. In 2018, it purchased 8.8 million ounces of gold.
6. China
China, which currently holds 1,864.3 tons of gold in reserve, a low amount among the leading gold-holding countries, but there have been many reports that the country has left some of the gold purchases off its books. However. China is expanding its reserves slowly. It is also the leading producer of gold in the world.
Global central banks now hold the greatest share of the world’s gold, approximately 33,800 tons. Gold has been a critical diversification tool, a safety hedge against inflation, or as collateral for loans.
Central banks in Austria and Switzerland have also indicated that they consider gold an essential reserve against future emergencies. The Polish central bank expressed the fact that their gold reserves allow diversification and greater independence and less reliance on the financial stability of other countries.
Sweden, Greece, and Portugal have expressed the same sentiments. Gold is a haven of safety during economic turndowns.