page-loading-spinner

Premium Archives

by JHK

Executive Summary

  • A middle ground approach is best at this stage
  • While the Deep State is threatened by its own dysfunction, a collapse will not be pretty for citizens
  • How not to volunteer for victimhood
  • Where hope lies

If you have not yet read The State of the Deep State, available free to all readers, please click here to read it first.

On general principle, the sort of odious operations represented by the Deep State, including warrantless police actions, immersive surveillance, and even assassination, ought to be opposed by Americans who care about their country and the ongoing project of remaining civilized. The Deep State’s totalitarian tendencies are self-evident. Therefore, “we the people” are obliged to dismantle it as expeditiously as possible, ideally by voting for electoral candidates who vow to work toward that end, but by resistance if that fails. Political actions might include getting rid of all the redundant “security” agencies piggybacked around the CIA since 9/11; voting the Patriot Act out of existence; and introducing legislation to re-define the “personhood” of corporations and their putative “rights” to “free speech” as defined by flinging money at elections.

However, the electoral process, being subject to the depredations and manipulations of the Deep State, may itself be too much a part of the problem at the present time. Resistance, on the other hand, can beat a fast path into the perilous realm of revolution and sedition, inviting punishment by the Deep State. For the moment then, the preferable action probably lies in the middle ground: political persuasion, speaking out against the Deep State. There is simply not enough of this now, especially among serious people in positions of authority. This, by the way, was exactly what turned the nation against the folly of the Vietnam War.

It begs the question: where are the Bobby Kennedys, Gene McCarthys, and William Fullbrights of our time? Where are the visible people of stature willing to take a stand, to put their careers on the line? Not just…

How To Oppose the Deep State
PREVIEW by JHK

Executive Summary

  • A middle ground approach is best at this stage
  • While the Deep State is threatened by its own dysfunction, a collapse will not be pretty for citizens
  • How not to volunteer for victimhood
  • Where hope lies

If you have not yet read The State of the Deep State, available free to all readers, please click here to read it first.

On general principle, the sort of odious operations represented by the Deep State, including warrantless police actions, immersive surveillance, and even assassination, ought to be opposed by Americans who care about their country and the ongoing project of remaining civilized. The Deep State’s totalitarian tendencies are self-evident. Therefore, “we the people” are obliged to dismantle it as expeditiously as possible, ideally by voting for electoral candidates who vow to work toward that end, but by resistance if that fails. Political actions might include getting rid of all the redundant “security” agencies piggybacked around the CIA since 9/11; voting the Patriot Act out of existence; and introducing legislation to re-define the “personhood” of corporations and their putative “rights” to “free speech” as defined by flinging money at elections.

However, the electoral process, being subject to the depredations and manipulations of the Deep State, may itself be too much a part of the problem at the present time. Resistance, on the other hand, can beat a fast path into the perilous realm of revolution and sedition, inviting punishment by the Deep State. For the moment then, the preferable action probably lies in the middle ground: political persuasion, speaking out against the Deep State. There is simply not enough of this now, especially among serious people in positions of authority. This, by the way, was exactly what turned the nation against the folly of the Vietnam War.

It begs the question: where are the Bobby Kennedys, Gene McCarthys, and William Fullbrights of our time? Where are the visible people of stature willing to take a stand, to put their careers on the line? Not just…

by Gregor Macdonald

Executive Summary

  • Anemic employment & wages growth depresses the odds of near-term interest rate hikes
  • Why energy costs increases are experiencing a lull, keeping inflation lower than many expected
  • The demographic arguments for deflation
  • Why the US is becoming more vulnerable to a repricing of natural gas — vs oil — in the coming decade

If you have not yet read Part I: When Every Country Wants to Sell, Who Buys?, available free to all readers, please click here to read it first.

The most recent US jobs report was once again a disappointment, despite the headline number of 192,000 jobs created. Over the past two years, the economy has reliably created about 150,000 jobs per month. This has been just enough to keep up with population growth, but alas, not enough to put the long-term unemployed back to work. The concerning data in the report came in the details of the jobs created: as usual–and this has been a trend for several years now–mostly in the lower wage sectors. A few wrap-up tweets from Dan Alpert of Westwood Capital summed up the facts rather nicely:

Other notable observations from recent trends in US jobs reports include the fact that job creation in 2013 was no higher than in 2012. Not exactly an encouraging trend for those who would be looking for inflation risk, or strong growth in 2014.

But perhaps worst of all has been the number of workers leaving the workforce. Part of this can be explained, of course, by demographic retirements. It’s no secret that the US has an aging population, and there’s a bulge of retiring workers that will admittedly create some gaps in the labor market over the next decade. But the large numbers of workers exiting the workforce is also explained by discouraged workers, and that unemployment benefits for many have started running out.

What many in the public do not understand, is that workers taking unemployment checks are counted as active seekers of employment. They are added to the composition of the workforce, and when they continue to take unemployment checks but do not find work, they serve to keep the unemployment rate elevated. But when unemployment benefits expire, and workers leave the workforce, the unemployment rate may…

Why Demand Will Become Even More Scarce
PREVIEW by Gregor Macdonald

Executive Summary

  • Anemic employment & wages growth depresses the odds of near-term interest rate hikes
  • Why energy costs increases are experiencing a lull, keeping inflation lower than many expected
  • The demographic arguments for deflation
  • Why the US is becoming more vulnerable to a repricing of natural gas — vs oil — in the coming decade

If you have not yet read Part I: When Every Country Wants to Sell, Who Buys?, available free to all readers, please click here to read it first.

The most recent US jobs report was once again a disappointment, despite the headline number of 192,000 jobs created. Over the past two years, the economy has reliably created about 150,000 jobs per month. This has been just enough to keep up with population growth, but alas, not enough to put the long-term unemployed back to work. The concerning data in the report came in the details of the jobs created: as usual–and this has been a trend for several years now–mostly in the lower wage sectors. A few wrap-up tweets from Dan Alpert of Westwood Capital summed up the facts rather nicely:

Other notable observations from recent trends in US jobs reports include the fact that job creation in 2013 was no higher than in 2012. Not exactly an encouraging trend for those who would be looking for inflation risk, or strong growth in 2014.

But perhaps worst of all has been the number of workers leaving the workforce. Part of this can be explained, of course, by demographic retirements. It’s no secret that the US has an aging population, and there’s a bulge of retiring workers that will admittedly create some gaps in the labor market over the next decade. But the large numbers of workers exiting the workforce is also explained by discouraged workers, and that unemployment benefits for many have started running out.

What many in the public do not understand, is that workers taking unemployment checks are counted as active seekers of employment. They are added to the composition of the workforce, and when they continue to take unemployment checks but do not find work, they serve to keep the unemployment rate elevated. But when unemployment benefits expire, and workers leave the workforce, the unemployment rate may…

by charleshughsmith

Executive Summary

  • The Deep State, and its dawning realization that Wall Street is a foe vs an ally
  • Why Wall Street's threat to the dollar hegemony is of such concern
  • History gives us many examples to predict a 'war of elites' (e.g. Wall Street vs the Deep State) is highly likely
  • Who will lose? And what implications will it have for the rest of us?

If you have not yet read Have We Reached Peak Wall Street?, available free to all readers, please click here to read it first.

In Part 1, I sketched out why the financial sector—the Fed, Wall Street and “too big to fail” banks—pose a strategic threat to the nation, as their policies threaten one key foundation of American pre-eminence, the U.S. dollar.   Should money and credit creation cause the dollar to lose its reserve status, the nation would lose the fundamental advantages that go with being able to print a reserve currency.

I then suggested that the Deep State might eventually wake up to the strategic threat posed by a self-serving financial sector, and this would lead to a showdown between the financial Elites and the Deep State.

The Systems-Level view: the S-Curve works on Wall Street, too

Long-time readers know that I often refer to systems-level dynamics, one of which is the S-Curve, which traces the rise, maturation and decline/crash of systems both natural and human-designed. An astonishing array of systems has been found to follow an s-curve, from the spread of infectious diseases to financial bubbles.

Why would Wall Street be uniquely immune to these systemic forces? I submit that Wall Street’s power has topped out and is about to decline precipitously, just like any other system which has over-reached by sucking its habitat dry.

I think we can chart Wall Street’s S-Curve thusly…

The Implications of a ‘War of Elites’
PREVIEW by charleshughsmith

Executive Summary

  • The Deep State, and its dawning realization that Wall Street is a foe vs an ally
  • Why Wall Street's threat to the dollar hegemony is of such concern
  • History gives us many examples to predict a 'war of elites' (e.g. Wall Street vs the Deep State) is highly likely
  • Who will lose? And what implications will it have for the rest of us?

If you have not yet read Have We Reached Peak Wall Street?, available free to all readers, please click here to read it first.

In Part 1, I sketched out why the financial sector—the Fed, Wall Street and “too big to fail” banks—pose a strategic threat to the nation, as their policies threaten one key foundation of American pre-eminence, the U.S. dollar.   Should money and credit creation cause the dollar to lose its reserve status, the nation would lose the fundamental advantages that go with being able to print a reserve currency.

I then suggested that the Deep State might eventually wake up to the strategic threat posed by a self-serving financial sector, and this would lead to a showdown between the financial Elites and the Deep State.

The Systems-Level view: the S-Curve works on Wall Street, too

Long-time readers know that I often refer to systems-level dynamics, one of which is the S-Curve, which traces the rise, maturation and decline/crash of systems both natural and human-designed. An astonishing array of systems has been found to follow an s-curve, from the spread of infectious diseases to financial bubbles.

Why would Wall Street be uniquely immune to these systemic forces? I submit that Wall Street’s power has topped out and is about to decline precipitously, just like any other system which has over-reached by sucking its habitat dry.

I think we can chart Wall Street’s S-Curve thusly…

by charleshughsmith

Executive Summary

  • The Fed's inability to recognize the true dynamics of the 2008 crisis has re-inflated a market bubble and unfairly rewarded the big banks
  • More credit/liquidity cannot solve valuation/collateral crises. But that's exactly what central banks are trying to do.
  • How the Crisis of 2014/2015 will differ from 2008
  • Why this time, failure of the system will collapse under its futility

If you have not yet read Why 2014 Is Beginning to Look A Lot Like 2008, available free to all readers, please click here to read it first.

In Part 1, we noted the similarities between early 2008 and 2014, and dismantled Alan Greenspan’s claim that the global meltdown of 2008 was unforeseeable. If markets are fractal, as argued by Benoit Mandelbrot, then we can anticipate more “once in a lifetime” crises than economists expect, and that such crises will be less predictable than expected.

After reviewing some technical charts that suggest trouble ahead in 2014 (or perhaps 2015 if certain cycles hold up), I asked how asset bubbles can be considered a “social good” if the current bubble is not boosting employment or income for the vast majority of Americans. I also wondered how the presumed fundamentals of “growth” (sales, profits, creditworthiness, etc.) can continue expanding if income is stagnating.

In Part 2 of this report, the goal is to examine the policies of the states (central governments) and central banks around the world that have boosted assets such as stocks, bonds and real estate to new highs. What repercussions are they creating, why they are failing, and why they will cause a crisis that will be as damaging as 2008 — yet unfold quite differently…

What Will Be Different About the Crisis of 2014/2015
PREVIEW by charleshughsmith

Executive Summary

  • The Fed's inability to recognize the true dynamics of the 2008 crisis has re-inflated a market bubble and unfairly rewarded the big banks
  • More credit/liquidity cannot solve valuation/collateral crises. But that's exactly what central banks are trying to do.
  • How the Crisis of 2014/2015 will differ from 2008
  • Why this time, failure of the system will collapse under its futility

If you have not yet read Why 2014 Is Beginning to Look A Lot Like 2008, available free to all readers, please click here to read it first.

In Part 1, we noted the similarities between early 2008 and 2014, and dismantled Alan Greenspan’s claim that the global meltdown of 2008 was unforeseeable. If markets are fractal, as argued by Benoit Mandelbrot, then we can anticipate more “once in a lifetime” crises than economists expect, and that such crises will be less predictable than expected.

After reviewing some technical charts that suggest trouble ahead in 2014 (or perhaps 2015 if certain cycles hold up), I asked how asset bubbles can be considered a “social good” if the current bubble is not boosting employment or income for the vast majority of Americans. I also wondered how the presumed fundamentals of “growth” (sales, profits, creditworthiness, etc.) can continue expanding if income is stagnating.

In Part 2 of this report, the goal is to examine the policies of the states (central governments) and central banks around the world that have boosted assets such as stocks, bonds and real estate to new highs. What repercussions are they creating, why they are failing, and why they will cause a crisis that will be as damaging as 2008 — yet unfold quite differently…

Total 1184 items