For the sake of argument, let’s assume the Democrats are correct about Donald J. Trump. This author does not accept their argument, but let’s go with it to see where it leads.
Trump is the apotheosis of evil. He wants to destroy democracy. He wants to destroy the Constitution and rule as a despot.
Biden says he needs to be put in a bullseye. Harris calls him a threat. A Congressman has called for him to be eliminated.
To counter this threat from Trump, Democrats have jailed many of his supporters who attended a rally in DC on January 6, 2021, reserving some of the harshest treatment for those who tried to restrain violent attenders who were probably provocateurs and for those who were trying to create organizations to resist state overreach. This sends a powerful message to everyone who opposes the Democrats.
The Democrats have repeatedly and unprecedentedly attacked Trump through the courts, in most if not all cases for things the present president or former presidents have either done or exceeded in seriousness and illegality (none of which is to excuse misdeeds, but to set them in context).
They have tried to destroy his wealth, his reputation, his freedom, his legacy, his legitimacy, and his movement. And whether the individuals involved were incited and supported by others or not, two people have tried to kill him. A third attempt using some chemical or light agent might have been used in Tuscon to injure or kill him.
Now, if Trump is indeed the apotheosis of evil, all these actions would likely make sense. After all, knowing what we know, who would condemn someone who assassinated Adolf Hitler in 1939? (Yes, if that happened, we wouldn’t know what we know. This thought exercise is offered simply to demonstrate that Marquess of Queensberry rules often go out the window when fighting the devil.)
And again, though not overly enamored of the man, this author strongly refutes such a characterization of Trump. But that’s not the point here. The point is that the Democrats believe it and have continuously and powerfully acted on it. What does that mean in the context of the upcoming election?
If all of this is justified in their eyes, and they believe they stand to lose everything at Trump’s hands if he becomes the leader of the free world (which could happen), what will they do to prevent it? Will they start a war to galvanize support for the party in power? Will they declare martial law after a Trump victory to save the country from a convicted felon who intends to destroy the Constitution (according to them)? Will they do something even more drastic?
This author certainly has no crystal ball on this or any other subject, but this is important to think about. As the content creators below describe the crescendo in economic stress and the fragility of the everything bubble, our political world is also under extreme pressure. Yet most Americans believe their political and economic structures will hold. Will they? They’re only as strong as those who empower and enforce them, and the Democrats’ “long march through the institutions” has been shown to be nothing if not thoroughgoing and virtually complete. While many Republican officials have been enriching themselves and losing slowly, the Democrats have been strategic, persistent, and far more unified.
Vice President Harris is famous for a phrase she has uttered in many documented addresses: “what can be, unburdened by what has been.” This is poetic restatement of classic Marxist dogma. Referring to early communist publications that did not yet understand the means entirely, but understood the end well, The Communist Manifesto says on page 59 of the Marxists Internet Archive version: “Such fantastic pictures of future society…correspond with the first instinctive yearnings…for a general reconstruction of society. But these Socialist and Communist publications contain also a critical element. They attack every principle of existing society.” (emphasis added)
The economics of the far left have ironically become more fascist than communist, but the goal and process are still the same: the attainment of utopia via radical centralization of state power and the abolition of individualism. Will that offer the world a better future? The communist experiment is over 100 years old now, and it has a perfect record. It has never provided its citizens a better quality of life than can be had in free Western countries.
In the meantime, if the American experiment comes to an end or is substantially altered, have you protected yourself? The situation is about to get serious no matter who wins the election. Do you have money that doesn’t depend for its worth on a bankrupt government under existential attack or one that doesn’t believe you should own anything—including money—in the first place? If not, you might want to look into the subject.
Key Takeaways:
- Rate cut logic—what’s missing here?
- Going up the down escalator
- That thing that no one wants to talk about
- The Fed’s walk doesn’t match the Fed’s talk
The McAlvany Weekly Commentary: Powell Dilemma: Inflation Or Recession?
David and Kevin take a look at incongruity this week. At recording time, it was widely known that the imminent FOMC meeting would generate a cut in interest rates of at least 25 basis points (the actual cut ended up being 50 bps). However, as the hosts point out conclusively, historical Fed logic would react to current economic developments (data and trends) with a 25 bps increase in interest rates, not a cut of any kind. The hosts do not try to divine motives, they simply point out that in saying it wants four and being possessed of three, the Fed did not add one. Instead, it took one away. The hosts simply ask the question: why? Math does not fail, so the equation must be incomplete. The hosts note that both Wall Street and incumbent politicians very strongly favor large rate cuts. The former wants more money and the latter want more votes—both of which are dependent on lower rates. Perhaps pressure from these heavy hitters—or others—can explain the discrepancy. Or perhaps inflation, which hurts everyone but especially the little guy, is preferable to collapsing the markets, which hurts everyone but especially the well-off. In that light, the hosts turn to the markets and economic indicators, concluding that many that are not already negative are beginning to turn that way. And in turn, “Whatever gold is sniffing out, reaching to new all-time highs, it’s worth paying attention to. Gold is telling you something here.” Not many in America have been paying attention, though that is slowly changing.
Credit Bubble Bulletin: September 20, 2024: Fed Goes Big
Doug launches his analysis this week by putting the Fed’s 50 basis point cut into perspective, “This period will be analyzed for decades, if not generations… The Fed aggressively loosened monetary policy with financial conditions already exceptionally loose, following a ‘tightening’ cycle where financial conditions remained loose throughout.” The implications are immense, and Doug spends some time laying some of them out. In doing so, the results imply some things about the Fed that Doug then gives voice to. Prone to missteps at critical junctures, this Fed is wary (to the point of imprudence) of causing a market accident. Doug’s “overarching concern continues to be the Fed’s flawed analytical and policy frameworks.” He then ties up the entire issue in a single impactful paragraph: “I’m troubled that the Fed continues to send the message that it will do whatever it takes to suppress market instability and prevent recession. Efforts to thwart market, economic and Credit cycles are doomed to fail. It may appear a successful strategy for a while, but the process ensures deep structural maladjustment. Repeatedly postponing corrections and adjustment comes with a steep cost to financial and economic stability.”
Hard Asset Insights: Something is Rotten in the State of Denmark
Morgan also takes a look at what’s said vs. what’s so in regard to the Fed’s historic cut in interest rates. Chair Jay Powell essentially declared victory in the fight against inflation as he instituted the aggressive cut. This is clearly a case of the emperor extolling the virtues of his new wardrobe while parading around in the altogether. Anyone actively involved in the paid procurement of products or services knows it. “So, what’s going on? Why is Jay Powell so seemingly anxious to declare mission accomplished and pronounce that everything is great while simultaneously…aggressively cutting interest rates in a fashion historically reserved for emergencies? In HAI’s view, the likely answer isn’t what most on Wall Street are debating. The likely answer is the US fiscal problem.” A hare doesn’t typically reverse course when being chased by a fox unless he is faced with a wolf. The US fiscal problem is certainly a metaphorical wolf. The problem is that an inflationary fox can still kill a hare. Morgan’s analysis is nothing if not logical and well-documented. Having a fox behind and a wolf before is dire, but Morgan always shows the sideways option where there are no teeth, only a briar patch for the hotly pursued.
Golden Rule Radio: Interest Rate Cuts Shifting the Markets
Eric joins Tory and Miles this week for a careful look at market price action in detail during and after the FOMC meeting. As he points out, the 50 basis point cut was not the whole story. During the press conference after the meeting, Jay Powell stated that the so-called neutral rate (the interest rate at which monetary policy neither stimulates nor restricts economic growth) was likely higher than the Fed had believed theretofore. As Eric describes, this changes the scale of economic activity: “if your baseline gauge was off, that changes things.” Powell’s comment caused a rapid reversal of the effects that had manifested immediately after the rate cut was announced. Most assets and indexes went up on news of the cut, and then sank after the comment was made. The dollar was the lone exception in both cases. The hosts then discuss the precious metals’ performance over the summer, and conclude that a notable divergence was due to the difference in nature of gold. While many people consider it merely a commodity, it is money. Therefore, while commodities chopped sideways over the summer, gold has been on a tear. When the economy becomes weak, demand for commodities wanes. But when the economy is weak, demand for true money waxes. Tory describes the groups that benefited from the rate cut, which were likely much of the reason for it. But Powell tried to push back against the cut’s inevitable inflationary consequence by talking hawkishly after the meeting.
