Author: admin

While Gundlach spoke for an hour and a half in his first webcast of 2017, perhaps his longest presentation to the broader public yet, and covered many areas in the presentation titled “Just Markets“, one line will be remembered: his direct attack at Bill Gross, whom he called a “second tier bond manager” for calling 2.6% on the 10 Year an important level.

As a reminder, earlier today Bill Gross issued his monthly outlook in which he suggested that 10Y yields rising above 2.60% would spell the end for the bond bull market, and would likely have further dramatic consequences on asset prices:

“This is my only forecast for the 10-year in 2017. If 2.60% is broken on the upside – if yields move higher than 2.60% – a secular bear bond market has begun. Watch the 2.6% level. Much more important than Dow 20,000. Much more important than $60-a-barrel oil. Much more important that the Dollar/Euro parity at 1.00. It is the key to interest rate levels and perhaps stock price levels in 2017.”

Gundlach, obviously, disagreed noting “the last line in the sand is 3 percent on the 10-year. That will define the end of the bond bull market from a classic-chart perspective, not 2.60%” as Gross suggested.  He then added that “almost for sure we’re going to take a look at 3 percent on the 10-year during 2017, and if we take out 3 percent in 2017, it’s bye-bye bond bull market. Rest in peace.” Such a jump would would have “a real impact on market liquidity in corporate bonds and junk bonds.”

It would also hit stocks, as 3% on the 10 Year would spell “trouble for equity markets.” He also said that “a 10-year above 3%, with the 30-year yield approaching 4%, would also be trouble for the equity market because they would start to look like ‘real’ yields to investors.” Previously Goldman reached the same conclusion, however when looking at 2.75% as the selloff bogey.

Gundlach said it’s not radical to forecast a 6% yield on the 10-year by 2020.

However, that won’t come quick: in predicting the next steps for the benchmark Treasury, Gundlach said “I think the 10-year Treasury will go below 2.25 percent … not below 2 percent” before once again starting to rise.

It is unclear how such a move in rates would impact Gundlach’s own DoubleLine, which at the end of December had $101 billion in AUM: as reported previously, in December DoubleLine’s Total Return Bond Fund suffered a $3.5 billion net outflow, its biggest one month redemption in history.

Repeating a claim he has made before, and reiterating a theme voiced previously by Morgan Stanley which said to “Sell the Inauguration”, Gundlach warned of a sell-off in the stock market around inauguration day as investors grasp that “Trump doesn’t have a magic wand to implement the growth plans they are optimistic about.”

Previewing the Fed’s rate hikes in 2017, Gundlach said that “all things being equal, the Fed will hike in June” and said that he expects two hikes this year, with three possible.

Regarding the Trump presidency, Gundlach said there are two major risks regarding Trump’s presidency: shrinking global trade and Trump’s temperament, as Reuters reported.

Additionally, in a follow up interview with Fox Business, Trump had varioous other observations which he did not discuss during his webcast, first among which his dire forecast for the future of the Eurozone, which he predicted could face grave danger as early as this year.

“It was a bull market idea. A group hug of sorts but when push comes to shove, I knew Paris wouldn’t take orders from Brussels, Italy is a disaster, there are countries that will never pay their debts. I’d put a 35 to 40 percent bet that something could even happen this year.  (In the upcoming French elections) Marie Le-Pen could win. She’s said she’d put France’s membership up to a referendum and if that happens… I’d be surprised if it survive another 5 years,” he said.

Some other observations, first on a future trade war with China: 

“I don’t see it. The possible happy scenario is that Donald Trump’s just a deal guy. He strikes deals. China doesn’t want a trade war so Trump dangles it out there and then softens his position on China in exchange for something. China has some control over North Korea. Maybe he strikes a deal to back off a trade war in exchange for China keeping a lid on North Korea (and its nuclear ambitions). But to start a trade war only makes things like apparel more expensive for consumers. Why would you want to do that?”

Trump’s effect on business sentiment and his attacks on U.S. companies doing business overseas:

“It’s incredible. We’ve seen a complete 180 degree change in sentiment since he was elected. Trump is  symbolic guy. He picks symbols like Carrier and Ford. They’re very small issues but he makes them seem very big. His pushing them leads to incredible optimism. Did you see uptick in Small Business sentiment?    

On forcing businesses to keep plants in America:

“(Trump) can impose tariffs, he can promise that America will get a bigger share of the pie. But that’s about it. Companies might stay here but they’ll use more robots. The robots won’t go away. Dark factories? It’s already happening. There’s a massive technology shift and you can’t stop it.”

On President Obama’s relationship with business owners: 

“That was the most frustrating thing. People don’t want to be lectured to for being entrepreneurs. When Obama said in 2012, ‘If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that, you didn’t create those jobs,’ I can tell you I’ve created 200 jobs. So I didn’t appreciate that.”

On Trump’s plan to cut taxes and spend on infrastructure:

“It’s a very bad time to launch a deficit explosion.  It’s like drinking a ton of coffee in the morning. You’ll feel pretty good for awhile but in the afternoon, you’re gonna crash hard.”

* * *

Some of his more notable charts:

A recap of 2016:

Where do bond yields go next? “I certainly expect that 2017 will be a third year of rising bond yields.”

A particularly notable chart, Gundlach pointed out the divergence between the stronger dollar (inverted axis) and inflation expectations as shown by 10 year inflation swaps. A strong dollar should be disinflationary, but it isn’t.

The demographic and social challenges faced by Trump and Americans:

The trouble with US debt, and rising rates: “I do think we are going to see a deficit expansion.”

Gundlach does not think a recession is coming as none of his favorite indicators signal that way:

Some advice for investors: shift from financial into real assets. “If you’re all financial assets and no real assets, you might want to peel off a piece and put into something that’s a real asset.”

Why is Gundlach expecting markets to reverse their post-election moves? This chart:

And so on.

His full presentation is below

via http://ift.tt/2ib1Q37 Tyler Durden

Submitted by Eric Peters via EricPetersAutos.com,

Along with the Myth of Authority – the idea that being ordered about by other people is legitimate so long as those people have given themselves titles or wear uniforms – there is this idea that, absent government, we’d never have things like roads.

Much less plowed roads.

It snowed hard over the weekend and I got to thinking about it as I watched the government plow trucks do their thing.

They do it very expensively.

It seems “free,” of course. The trucks rumble by and you aren’t sent a bill . . . for that. But you’re sent a bill – via the IRS, via your state-level IRS – for many other things, most of which (unlike roads and plow trucks to clear them when it snows) you probably don’t use, don’t want and – quite reasonably – would therefore rather not have to pay for.

Like, for instance, the estimated 10,000-plus nuclear warheads possessed by the federal government. Even if you’re not a Libertarian, it probably strikes you that a few hundred of them are sufficient for “defense.”

But we’re all forced to pay for as many nukes – and carrier battle groups – as the federal government decides it wants, even though we have little if any use for such.

The “defense” budget amounts to around $610 billion annually – nearly three times what China spends (appx. $216 billion) and more than seven times what Putin-rearing-his-head spends ($84.5 billion).

If the U.S. “defense” budget were to be cut in half, we’d still be spending as much as the dreaded Chinese and 4-plus times as much as the Russian bogeyman. Surely, sufficient for “defense.” Just imagine how much more money would be available for roads and plows to clear them. Things most of us probably would be willing to pay for and would pay for voluntarily.

Because we could afford to do so.

If, that is, we weren’t forced to pay for so many other things – like “defense” spending that amounts to more than what Russia and China and the entire axis of evil spend together.

Oddly, many Americans (especially Republican ones) believe “our military” is mendicant, like the ragtag Colonial Army at Valley Forge. That “we” must rebuild it. Because Putin, et al. Who – with his single operational Typhoon is going to challenge Uncle to nooklear combat, toe-to-toe, per Major Kong all those years ago.

People buy this stuff.

Literally.

They pay for “rebuilding” (endlessly, excessively) the military – and lately, on top of this, the Homeland Security apparat. So there is less available to pay for things like roads and trucks to plow them.

Much less.

How many miles of new road could be paid for with $300 billion dollars – just half the current loony sum burned up on the “defense” budget? America would likely not be invaded or nuked in the meanwhile. The 10,000 nukes in stockpile will keep and if even nine out of ten of them are duds, probably 1,000 Hiroshima-plusses ought to suffice to keep Putin from rearing his head. But most Americans – trained to an extent that Dr. Goebbels, were he still around, would find startling – react exactly as required, siding with the government as it sticks its hands in their pockets yet again. Note that both candidates in the late election worked hard to outdo the other as the greatest champion of “defense.”

Even “small government” conservatives defend the defense budget – not grokking that “defense” is also government.

And very big.

Like the rest of the federal budget. It takes so much from us that we have very little left to spend on ourselves. On the things we need and want.

Most middle class people pay about 28 percent off the top in federal taxes; add more if you are self-employed and have to pay “your share” of the federal tax (it is actually called a contribution) toward FICA, also known as the Social Security tax. These taxes have the effect of making it very difficult to set aside money for retirement – because all your  working life, you are taxed to pay for the retirement of other people, many of whom do not “contribute” much and sometimes nothing at all. Regardless, the point is you could have provided for your own retirement – and probably, retired at a much younger age – if you hadn’t been fleeced at every paycheck to provide money for other people’s retirement.

All of us would be better off; and better able to help people who needed help. Non-coercively, too. Imagine that.

 

The faulty premise behind the anti-Libertarian argument that “we’d have no roads” and other needful things rests on the assumption – almost never questioned – that we would not have the money available to spend on such things, currently taken away from us to spend on other things.

Including “administration” (make-work government “workers”) and so on.

Imagine if you were allowed (vile, isn’t it, that such language is necessary?) to keep what you earned. Not 60 percent of it. All of it. To spend as you see fit, on only the things you need and want.

Probably, there would be roads. Very good ones.

And plow trucks, too.     

via http://ift.tt/2igF74b Tyler Durden

Years ago the number of ad dollars spent on online advertising overtook the amount spent on offline advertising (TV, print, radio).  This demographic shift was presented as form, not essence.  It was presented as the evolution of media, firms were adapting and changing.  But something much deeper was happening, it’s the end of an industry cycle called ‘media’ which is being replaced by ‘independent online media’ like Zero Hedge for finance, and thousands of other sites for their respective topics.  Although the MSM (Main Stream Media) fights this, it’s bigger than them, it’s not something they can control.  People who are holding on to their newspapers are old and dying (no offense, Grandpa).  Cursive writing is no longer being taught in schools – and why should it?

Along with this shift comes a new host of problems as well, children addicted to social media oblivious to the ‘real world’ – but in the context of the MSM, it’s just a swan song they are singing loudly ‘we are still relevant! we are still relevant’  The fact is the old MSM model doesn’t work.  State sponsored media like the BBC and PBS has always been at the core of investigative journalism, anyway.  WaPo is losing money at an alarming rate.  From 2013 we’re talking 85% drop in profit:

The Washington Post Co. on Friday reported bad news for its newspaper division, with revenue totaling $127.3 million for the first quarter of this year — down four percent from 2012 — and an operating loss of $34.5 million.  Overall, the company posted a profit of just $4.7 million, an 85 percent drop in earnings from the net income of $31 million for the first quarter of last year.

But what are we talking about?  WaPo is a big example but there are many.  Exceptions such as Bloomberg are different because, they are not supported by media.  Bloomberg never was a media outlet, Bloomberg provides an information service to traders and technology – and charges ALOT for it.  Central banks trade on Bloomberg Terminals.  The news division is something they do in order to advertise their core business.  This model is sustainable.  WaPo, NYT and others, will likely not exist in the years ahead – in the best case they will *really* evolve into a different model.  

The fact that the MSM missed the election to such a large degree was akin to a ‘nail in the coffin’ signaling the end of the MSM completely.  

Independent blogs, resources, and other sites will be the center of a new online media ecosystem.  Checkout one example – http://ift.tt/2fY9QmK

As a loyal ZH contributor, we’re happy to be a part of this shift. 

We are often reminded of systems used in times past, as we will one day remember about the days of CNN and New York Times:

Visit our sponsor Please Order It.com

via http://ift.tt/2j5vgPK globalintelhub

Speaking at a conference in London, Goldman MD Christian Mueller-Glissmann warned investors, "valuations are at very high levels. And that concerns us when it comes to making progress in stocks, unless you maintain a very high level of optimism." The firm's aggregate risk appetite index reached record highs in December – the same peak reached in 1999/2000 and 2007… and we know what happened next.

"This is a chart which a lot of people have in the back of their mind right now. It's our risk appetite indicator. That essentially shows you across asset classes what the risk appetite is. And it has equity risk premium in there it, it has VIX, it has everything that reflects how bullish markets are and it's real time."

Mueller-Glissman goes on…

"And guess what, in the middle of December, that indicator had the highest level in the history of the indicator. We are not at the beginning of this optimism trade, we're really in the middle of that optimism trade."

Roughly translated, like small business optimism, this is as good as it gets for markets.

Here's two examples of that 'risk appetite'…

via http://ift.tt/2iD4sCQ Tyler Durden

As reported moments ago, CNN is leading with a story about a 35-page dossier compiled by a former member of British intelligence, which had been distilled into a 2-page appendix presented to Trump last Friday by the US intel community, and which contains “explosive, but unverified, allegations” that the Russian government has been “cultivating, supporting and assisting” President-elect Donald Trump for at least 5 years and “endorsed by Putin” gained compromising information about him, with the aim of “encouraging splits and divisions in the western alliance.”

The memo has allegedly been circulating among elected officials, intelligence agents, and journalists for weeks.

The dossier, which is a collection of memos written over a period of months, “includes specific, unverified and potentially unverifiable allegations of contact between Trump aides and Russian operatives, and graphic claims of sexual acts documented by the Russians” according to Buzzfeed.

Of course, the question on everyone’s lips is what are these “unverified and potentially unverifiable allegations” contained in the memo. We now know the answer, courtesy of Buzzfeed which fill published the full document “so that Americans can make up their own minds about allegations about the president-elect that have circulated at the highest levels of the US government.”

There are just a few problems with this revolutionary Rosetta stone that should, at least superficially, discredit the Trump presidency as a puppet of the Kremlin. As eve BuzzFeed observes, “the document is not just unconfirmed: It includes some clear errors. The report misspells the name of one company, “Alpha Group,” throughout. It is Alfa Group. The report says the settlement of Barvikha, outside Moscow, is “reserved for the residences of the top leadership and their close associates.” It is not reserved for anyone, and is also populated by the very wealthy.”

Even more amusing is that the documents have circulated for months, and were available to the Clinton campaign should she have chosen to use them to discredit Trump yet for some “odd reason” she did not, and furthermore “acquired a kind of legendary status among journalists, lawmakers, and intelligence officials who have seen them.”

Mother Jones writer David Corn referred to the documents in a late October column. Harry Reid spokesman Adam Jentleson tweeted Tuesday that the outgoing Senate Democratic leader had seen the documents before writing a public letter to FBI director James Comey about Trump’s ties to Russia. And CNN reported Tuesday that Arizona Republican John McCain a gave “full copy” of the memos to FBI Director James Comey on December 9, but that the FBI already had copies of many of the memos.

So with all this information floating around “for months”, and duly noted by everyone in US government, from intelligence to the FBI, and certainly peopple in the unsuccessful Clinton campaign, it only emerges now, ten days before the Trump inauguration?

Coincidence?  Readers can decide on their own.

For those pressed for time, here is the best – as in most laughable – part, discussing “Trump’s personal obsessions and sexual perversions”, in which we learn that when staying at the Ritz Carlton Moscow hotel, in order to defile a bed in which Obama had stayed in previously, he employed “a number of prostitutes to perform “golden showers” show in front of him.” Good stuff.

The full memo, courtesy of BuzzFeed, is below (link).

via http://ift.tt/2jAXL8O Tyler Durden

In a report that will likely set much of the liberal media on fire in the coming days, CNN reports, citing “multiple US officials”, that top intelligence officials last week briefed President-elect Donald Trump about Russian operatives’ claims that they have compromised Trump’s personal and financial information. The two-page document which was presented to Trump as an appendix to last week’s briefing on alleged Russian interference in the presidential election, also noted allegations that there was an exchange of information between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government during the campaign.

Supposedly the information is far more damaging than audio recording of Trump talking about “grabbing women by the pussy”, and yet one wonders how nobody in the Clinton campaign, with all its extensive connections, was able to get to it.

According to CNN, the allegations have emerged from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative, “whose past work US intelligence officials consider credible.” The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Trump.

In other words, just like the report about Russian interference has yet to provide any evidence, so this latest accusation is mostly based on the analytical work of a source some “officials consider credible.” Still, even without proof, the implied allegation in the CNN report, namely that Trump is a puppet of the Kremlin, will promptly become a fact, and will be used to escalate the anti-Russian sentiment in the US. That this report comes just ten days before Trump’s inauguration is probably not coincidental.

Why was the 2-page synopsis included?

“One reason the nation’s intelligence chiefs took the extraordinary step of including the synopsis in the briefing documents was to make the President-elect aware that such allegations involving him are circulating among intelligence agencies, senior members of Congress and other government officials in Washington, multiple sources tell CNN.”

Furthermore, CNN’s angle with this release is to further showcase that while Russia had compiled information potentially harmful to both political parties, it “only released information damaging to Hillary Clinton and Democrats. This synopsis was not an official part of the report from the intelligence community case about Russian hacks, but some officials said it augmented the evidence that Moscow intended to harm Clinton’s candidacy and help Trump’s, several officials with knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.”

Further discrediting the Trump team, “the two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials.”

Sources tell CNN that these same allegations about communications between the Trump campaign and the Russians, mentioned in classified briefings for congressional leaders last year, prompted then-Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid to send a letter to FBI Director Comey in October, in which he wrote, “It has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government — a foreign interest openly hostile to the United States.”

A question emerges: how did CNN obtain this high confidential information? While we don’t know, we are confident Trump, who last week demanded a probe into why NBC got a leaked version of the intelligence report, will be curious.

CNN notes that is has reviewed a 35-page compilation of the memos, from which the two-page synopsis was drawn. It then admits that “the memos originated as opposition research, first commissioned by anti-Trump Republicans, and later by Democrats”, or said otherwise, a hit piece. Furthermore, CNN adds that it has “not reporting on details of the memos, as it has not independently corroborated the specific allegations. But, in preparing this story, CNN has spoken to multiple high ranking intelligence, administration, congressional and law enforcement officials, as well as foreign officials and others in the private sector with direct knowledge of the memos.”

Well, if it’s a story which can not be substantiated either way, CNN may as well run with it, especially if it further delegitimizes Trump.

A video summary of the CNN report is below:

 

Meanwhile, in related but contradictory news, Reuters reports that Russia hacked into Republican state political campaigns and old email domains of the Republican National Committee but there is no evidence it successfully penetrated President-elect Donald Trump’s campaign, FBI Director James Comey said on Tuesday.

Still, even without hacking Trump, something which dilutes the CNN story as Russia would likely not have been able to obtain said “compromising materials” otherwise, the narrative once again returns to Trump being a pawn of the Kremlin, because “Comey also told lawmakers Russia did not release information obtained from the state campaigns or the old RNC email domains, comments that may buttress the U.S. intelligence view that Moscow tried to help Trump against Democrat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 campaign.”

Comey declined to comment on whether or not the FBI might be investigating links between Russia and associates of Trump, who frequently called during the campaign for improved relations between Washington and Moscow.

While Trump has disputed the accusations of Russian cyber attacks during the election, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday that the New York businessman accepts the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusions that Russia was responsible, and that further action may be taken against Moscow.

We are confident that following the CNN report, which dramatically escalates the narrative of the illegitimacy of the Trump presidency, that the president-elect will have some very harshly tweeted responses in the coming hours. However, we are certain that no matter Trump’s response, the political atmosphere in the US over the next ten days, until the president-elect officially moves into the White House, will reach a level of toxicity never before seen.

via http://ift.tt/2iCW0DH Tyler Durden

A year ago it was the Ruble, but for much of the last year it is the South African Rand that has been the most volatile currency in the world. That is until the last week, as Turkey deals with rising domestic instability (and Erdogan's push for total rule), the Lira has become the world's most unstable currency…

As we noted earlier, market focus has turned on the lira as a result of Turkey's large external borrowing requirement which makes its currency one of the most vulnerable currencies to tightening by the Fed.

Not helping matters is that Turkish residents have been flocking to the stability of hard currencies, the opposite of what President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been urging. As the following Bloomberg chart shows, deposits in foreign exchange for individuals and companies excluding banks rose for a third week, signaling a lack of confidence in the lira. It’s the biggest loser among world currencies so far in 2017.

 

 

Additionally, Turkish economic growth has remained sluggish and inflation is rising, yet the central bank has been under pressure from President Tayyip Erdogan not to hike interest rates. A series of gun and bomb attacks have heightened security concerns. On Tuesday the Turkish parliament voted to press on with a debate about constitutional reform to strengthen the powers of President Tayyip Erdogan.

 

"Nobody wants to be the last one in there and everyone is running for the door. There are no signs from the authorities that they are taking it seriously," said Jakob Christensen, head of EM research at Danske Bank. Christensen said the risk of further attacks was undermining the tourist sector, which is vital for the economy and balance of payments.

 

Making matters worse, and confirming the currency crisis is becoming one of credit, Turkish five-year credit default swaps rose four bps to 288 bps according to Markit data, a one-month high, and the yield premium paid by Turkish sovereign bonds over U.S. Treasuries on the JPMorgan EMBI Global Diversified widened out 4 bps to 377 bps.

Of course, some might suggest there is an 'alternative' currency that is more volatile than the Lira…

via http://ift.tt/2iCPqNy Tyler Durden

Submitted by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

In the nineteenth century, the Americans invented a new sport—baseball. At one time thought of by us Britons as a sort of “poor man’s cricket,” baseball eventually became an international sport and, at this point in time, in virtually any country in the world, the exclamation “Three strikes—you’re out” means to all and sundry that the individual in question is finished for the time being.

And the phrase is sometimes used in investment circles. One investor can be heard advising another, “Don’t buy that stock—they’re underfunded, have poor management and an unsustainable business plan. You’d have three strikes against you even before you started.”

If the investor receiving the advice is wise, he would, of course, avoid the stock as he would avoid a plague. Although there might be some chance of success, the odds are so thoroughly stacked against him that he’s almost certain to lose his money.

But what of an entire country where the investor has three strikes against him before he starts? What if some country were to pass a series of laws that were so draconian that, whilst it may be possible that the investor might survive, the odds are stacked so much against him that loss is almost a certainty?

An excellent example of such a country is the home of baseball—the USA. Once regarded worldwide as “the land of opportunity,” the US has declined precipitously in recent decades and, as developed countries go, has become one of the world’s dodgiest jurisdictions in which to retain wealth.

Strike One: Confiscation of Wealth

 

In 2010, the US government passed the massive (2,300 pages) Dodd-Frank Act. Ostensibly, Dodd-Frank was intended to end the excessive risk-taking that had led to the 2008 crash. Although Congress could simply have reinstated the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 (a mere 37 pages, the 1999 repeal of which led to the crash), it passed Dodd-Frank. Many congressmen admitted that they had never even read it before passing it. Unfortunate. Buried in that bill was legislation that allowed the opposite of what the bill was claimed to have been meant to do. It allowed US banks to confiscate account holders’ deposits—in other words, it codified the bail-in process.

 

Although no confiscation has yet taken place, a trial balloon for confiscation was sent up in Cyprus in 2013 and the world accepted the concept. The path is now paved for similar confiscation in the US. In essence, this means that any funds that are entrusted to any bank in the US are unsafe.

 

Strike Two: Civil Forfeiture

 

The stated purpose of the civil forfeiture law is to seize property that may have been connected in some way to a crime. In the 1980s, the US Congress gave the green light to law enforcement agencies to retain the proceeds of their seizures. In addition, the traditional “innocent until proven guilty” principle was thrown out. The onus was now on the accused to prove that his property was not connected to a crime. If he could not do so, the authorities could keep the proceeds.

 

But the enforcement of this law has not been focused on wealthy drug kingpins. Nationwide, it has been focused on the average citizen, who is limited as to his ability for recourse. Typically, he’s stopped by police as he’s driving down the road. His possessions (particularly cash) are seized on the claim of a minor traffic offense. Another method of seizure is to raid a home or business premises. Often, anything of value is taken, under the assumption that it “may have been connected to a crime.” And often, the charges are trumped-up and the arguments flimsy.

 

The accused must then fight in court to regain his property, which happens rarely. Most cases never reach the courtroom. In many that do, the individual finds he cannot afford the legal fees, so he either gives up or settles. Abuses abound and in some jurisdictions, seizure has become a full-time activity, netting hundreds of millions in value, little of which is ever returned, even if no charges are ever filed against the accused.

 

Strike Three: Removal of Free Speech

 

In December of 2016, the US Congress passed the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act, following a television campaign warning that “fake news” created by Russia had increased support for presidential candidate Donald Trump, allowing him to defeat Hillary Clinton.

 

The law provides for the implementation of an Orwellian “Ministry of Truth” to counter “foreign disinformation and manipulation” that ostensibly threatens “security” and “stability.”

 

No single government agency has been charged with the enforcement of this law, which suggests that any government agency that objects to published information that disagrees with its own will have the power to take action. It may punish “the extensive and destabilising foreign propaganda and disinformation operations being waged against us.”

 

The upshot of this is that the US government will have the authority to crack down on any group or individual that it decides is disseminating “propaganda,” including punishing and/or shutting down any source it deems guilty of disseminating information that does not match its own propaganda.

 

And so, returning to our investor, he’s looking at a country in which he already has three strikes against him. He’s almost certain to lose. What will he do? Well, sad to say, human nature dictates that he’s most likely to simply put his head in the sand and continue on regardless. If he’s already neck-deep in the US investment game, he’ll be inclined to continue and hope for the best, much to his eventual regret.

Historically, whenever any country declines to the point that its government has removed the rights of property ownership and freedom of speech, most people do tend to just hang in there and ride the train to the bottom.

Very few choose to vote with their feet and decamp to another jurisdiction where the laws are not so draconian. For whatever reason, that which is so easy to understand in baseball is very hard to understand with regard to investment and residency.

*  *  *

Unfortunately most people have no idea what really happens when a government goes out of control, let alone how to prepare… The coming economic and political collapse is going to be much worse, much longer, and very different than what we’ve seen in the past. That’s exactly why New York Times best-selling author Doug Casey and his team just released an urgent video. Click here to watch it now.

via http://ift.tt/2j5jwwP Tyler Durden

Look at that – a week after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) introduced a constitutional amendment on congressional term limits, he’s co-sponsoring a bill to designate the Muslim Brotherhood and Iranian Revolutionary Guard corps as terrorist groups.

You know, the same Muslim Brotherhood Huma Abedin is allegedly tied to.

Read below:

Proud to introduce Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act w @MarioDB. It’s time to call the enemy by its name https://t.co/0V7Psi2jC1 http://pic.twitter.com/YPM47AQjNH

— Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) January 10, 2017

via http://ift.tt/2idveRi ZeroPointNow