Thursday, April 21, 2016

Martin Armstrong Says 
The Bankers Will Back Hillary Clinton To Win
The U.S. Presidential Election
"The bankers will be backing Hillary with unlimited money. If Trump becomes the nominee, you will see a major effort to put Hillary in the White House. If the bankers do not own the White House, they will be at serious risk between 2017-2020. Right now, they have been hit with big fines for clipping people in just about every market from metals to currencies. There is no possible way Hillary will release the transcripts of those speeches because they would reveal how much she is in their corner. Hillary’s response is simply that she does not believe the people are interested in those transcripts .. She is the most secretive person in Washington circles in many many years."
link here to the reference
[Küle Commentary: The banks will get what they want. They can create as much money from nothing as they deem necessary to get whatever it is they want .. while making everyone else think they live in a free country. Bill & Hillary understand how it works & 'sold their souls' to get to the Presidency. Clinton (Bill) repaid the banks for putting him in power by repealing the Glass-Steagall Act (you know, the 1933 Act that protected Americans for 65 years from the devastation of Depression & provided a degree of protection from being overly abused by the banks .. the Act that should have been re-instated as a condition for the 'bail out').
The right to vote gives the illusion that makes people feel like they live in a free country.
BUT the American Revolution fought for the freedom of people to control their country's money instead of having a small group of the wealthiest banking families control the country's money. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 nullified that hard fought freedom. The Act gave monopoly control of America's money to a small group of the wealthiest Investment Bankers (based on the British model that the Revolutionary War fought against). The GREAT CONFIDENCE GAME (Fiat Money) hides the freedom that has been lost .. American voters cannot possibly overpower the choice of the small group of bankers holding a monopoly over America's money.] 

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Pimco Economist Has A Stunning Proposal To Save The Economy: The Fed Should Monetize Gold

But according to a provocative paper released by none other than Pimco's strategist Harley Bassman, Yves Mersch's inadvertent peek into what central bankers are thinking, may have been on to something.

In "Rumpelstiltskin at the Fed", Bassman goes down the well-trodden path of proposing Fed asset purchases as the last ditch panacea for the US economy, however instead of buying bonds, or stocks, or crude oil, Bassman has a truly original idea: "the Fed should unleash a massive Fed gold purchase program that could echo a Depression-era effort that effectively boosted the U.S. economy."

Bassman says that the Fed should "emulate a past success by making a public offer to purchase a significantly large quantity of gold bullion at a substantially greater price than today’s free-market level, perhaps $5,000 an ounce? It would be operationally simple as holders could transact directly at regional Federal offices or via authorized precious metal assayers."

What would the outcome of such as "QE for the goldbugs" look like? His summary assessment:

A massive Fed gold purchase program would differ from past efforts at monetary expansion. Via QE, the transmission mechanism was wholly contained within the financial system; fiat currency was used to buy fiat assets which then settled on bank balance sheets. Since QE is arcane to most people outside of Wall Street, and NIRP seems just bizarre to most non-academics, these policies have had little impact on inflationary expectations. Global consumers are more familiar with gold than the banking system, thus this avenue of monetary expansion might finally lift the anchor on inflationary expectations and their associated spending habits.

The USD may initially weaken versus fiat currencies, but other central banks could soon buy gold as well, similar to the paths of QE and NIRP. The impactful twist of a gold purchase program is that it increases the price of a widely recognized “store of value,” a view little diminished despite the fact the U.S. relinquished the gold standard in 1971. This is a vivid contrast to the relatively invisible inflation of financial assets with its perverse side effect of widening the income gap.