Category: simonblack

You’ve got to hand it to these people– Congress really knows how to bring out the holiday cheer.

They have some sort of pathological need to pass the most absurd legislation at the VERY END OF THE YEAR giving people very little time to react.

Two years ago, for example, they passed comprehensive tax reform in late December 2017… and the new tax code went into effect only a few days later.

Taxpayers had no time to even understand the new law, let alone plan around it.

That’s the funny thing about taxes– people plan their entire lives around the tax code.

They set up special structures, invest in particular assets, and go through all sorts of legal and accounting work, to make sure they’re following the tax code while they take care of their families.

And then, poof, Congress changes the rules overnight.

Well they just did it again.

A few days ago they passed a 643-page spending bill. And, buried deep within that legislation are provisions that were originally part of the SECURE Act.

I told you about this a few months ago– the SECURE Act was intended to ‘help’ Americans save for retirement. And there are certain sections which are great.

For example, they removed the age limit for contributing to an IRA. It used to be that you could no longer contribute to your retirement after the age of 70 ½.

That limit has been lifted… which should prove useful for many people.

They also increased the age for Required Minimum Distributions to age 72, up from age 70 ½. So you have an additional 18-months before you’ll be required to start taking distributions from your retirement account.

On the other hand, they also passed new rules which are really bad for inherited IRAs.

Under the old laws, your IRA could be bequeathed to your heirs when you pass away. And while your heirs were required to take distributions from your IRA over time, they had the option of stretching out those distributions over the course of their entire lives.

This was a really great way to give your heirs a tax-efficient safety net.

If they suddenly needed a lump some of money, for example, to buy a new house, pay for university, or offset a major medical expense, they could tap into the IRA that they inherited from you.

But if they didn’t need the money, they only had to take a small distribution each year, and keep the tax consequences to a minimum.

Those rules have now been torn up.

Under the new rules, almost all inherited IRAs must be fully distributed within 10-years, whether your heirs need the money or not. And that’s going to trigger significant tax consequences for them.

Again, in fairness there are plenty of provisions in this law that many people will find helpful. And other provisions that people will find terrible.

But that’s not really the point. It’s not about whether the law is good or bad. The issue is that Congress doesn’t give people any time to react.

Responsible people plan around their taxes… especially when it comes to retirement and estate planning. People have to plan literally DECADES in advance and think through generational impacts.

So it’s a pretty nasty surprise when Congress tears up the rules at the very end of the year. They’re basically saying, “Unless you die by Tuesday at midnight, everything you’ve planned over the last several decades won’t work anymore. Merry Christmas.”

This highlights a very important reminder: these people can and will change the rules at any time, with no warning whatsoever. And they couldn’t care less how their changes impact you.

Now, all that said, I’m always an optimist– where there’s a will, there’s a way. And there are definitely ways to dull the negative consequences of this new law.

We can explore these in more detail another time. But to give you an example, transferring your IRA to a special type of trust called a charitable remainder unitrust could still ensure that your heirs receive lifelong favorable tax treatment on an inherited IRA.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/39emOVC
via IFTTT

Are you ready for this week’s absurdity? Here’s our Friday roll-up of the most ridiculous stories from around the world that are threats to your liberty, your finances, and your prosperity.

Kentucky Governor Pardons Murderer after family’s fundraiser

Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin lost reelection in November.

But the governor still had some campaign debt to retire. And it’s not easy to convince people to donate to a campaign that already lost.

Still, one family managed to raise over $20,000 for the governor at a fundraiser they held for him after he lost the election, but before he left office.

Why would they do this? Perhaps it is related to the fact that a few weeks later, Governor Bevin pardoned the fundraiser’s brother– a convicted murderer.

The brother was serving a 19 year sentence for dressing as a cop, invading a man’s home, and shooting him to death.

Believe it or not, that wasn’t the only questionable– to say the least– pardon of the 428 issued by the governor since he lost reelection.

The governor also pardoned (1) a convicted child rapist, (2) a man who murdered his own parents, and (3) a man who hired a hitman to kill his business partner.

Click here to read the full story.

Town dissolves government over income tax

A small town of about 5,000 residents was frustrated over wasteful spending. One example– the government of Amelia, Ohio recently renovated it’s town offices to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

When the mayor pushed through a 1% town income tax without notifying residents, it was the final straw.

In response, on November 5th of this year, town residents voted by a two-to-one margin to entirely dissolve Amelia. The town government, complete with seven police officers, were fired.

Click here to read the full story.

Users want body of dead crypto exchange CEO exhumed

Gerald Cotton was the CEO of cryptocurrency exchange Quadriga CX when he died suddenly in India from complications with Crohn’s disease.

But he was the only person who had access to $180 million worth of cryptocurrency stored on the exchange.

Suspicious? Some of the users who lost money think so.

They want to confirm that Cotton actually died, rather than fake his death and take off with their money.

Their lawyers have sent a letter to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, asking to exhume Cotton’s body to confirm his identity and cause of death.

In light of this event, it seems like a good time to remind people that the entire point of cryptocurrency is to eliminate counterparty risk.

Crypto allows you to be your own banker. You can create a paper wallet, write your key down on a piece of paper, and keep it in your safe if you want.

You don’t need anyone else involved… and there’s no sense in introducing counterparty risk where it’s not necessary.

Click here to read the letter.

Six months in prison for eating a cookie

While in a drug treatment program, Gregory Fields participated in an event to feed the homeless.

When the event was over, Gregory ate one of the leftover cookies… without asking permission.

For this offense, Gregory  was kicked out of the drug treatment program.

His case worker managed to get the program to reconsider. But they said they would only let Gregory stay if he started the program over. And that meant a month of detox, plus a month long “blackout period” without any contact with the outside world.

This was ridiculous, because Gregory was already drug free.

So when he declined the extra two months of confinement for eating the cookie, he was instead sentenced to six months in prison.

After a second hearing– and some unwanted media attention– a judge agreed to let Gregory off with probation.

But his public defender said this leniency was an exception rather than the rule.

Click here to read the full story.

Now women are losing jobs over belief in biological sex

I’ve stated this before– I personally have no problems with anyone being whoever they want to be. If anyone wants to identify as a seedless watermelon, go for it.

But it would be silly to presume that there would never be any complications to explore.

We’ve covered a number of these– like formerly male athletes competing against biological females in violent, contact sports (like Rugby) or in events where being a biological male carries obvious advantages.

But we live in an age now where expressing opinions about such matters is tantamount to heresy.

One British woman, Maya Forstater, recently lost her job over Tweets expressing her opinion on male-to-female transgender persons being allowed in women-only spaces.

She said, “framing the question of transgender inclusion as an argument that male people should be allowed into women’s spaces discounts women’s rights to privacy and is fundamentally illiberal (it is like forcing Jewish people to eat pork)”.

The statement certainly seems well thought out and contains no ridicule or intent to offend. It’s merely expressing another side of a complicated issue.

But Maya was fired for this. She then sued. But at her employment tribunal, the judge stated that Maya’s opinions on transgender issues affecting women are “not worthy of respect in a democratic society.”

So she lost the case.

Well there you have it. There’s no room for debate or dissent. You believe what you’re told, otherwise your opinions are not worthy of respect in a deocratic society.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/2Z9LaLv
via IFTTT

By February 1868, President Andrew Johnson had been at odds with Congress for years.

Johnson had been Vice President for barely a month when Abraham Lincoln was assassinated in 1864, and his battles with Congress started from practically Day 1.

Johnson shared Lincoln’s view that the Confederacy should be swiftly and gently reintegrated back into the Union after the Civil War; neither wanted to penalize the South.

But at the time, Congress was filling up with politicians known as “Radical Republicans” who were anything BUT moderate.

They wanted to punish the South and mandate reunification with all sorts of strings attached– the opposite of what Andrew Johnson wanted to accomplish.

So Johnson vetoed nearly every reunification bill that Congress passed.

Congress only had one key ally in the Executive Branch– Secretary of War Edward Stanton, a Radical Republican who did not see eye-to-eye with his President.

And just as Johnson was about to fire Stanton, Congress passed a bill called the Tenure of Office Act, which prohibited the President from firing ANY member of his cabinet.

The law was specifically designed to ensure that Stanton could not be fired– which is COMPLETELY unconstitutional.

Johnson vetoed the bill, but Congress had enough votes to override his Presidential veto… so the Tenure of Office Act still became law of the land.

Johnson ignored this unconstitutional law and fired Stanton anyhow. And within a matter of days he was brought up on 11 articles of impeachment. In addition to violating an unconstitutional law, Johnson was also accused of:

* Making speeches to the public which were “intemperate, inflammatory, and scandalous…against Congress amid the cries, jeers, and laughter of the multitudes…”

* bringing “the high office of the President of the United States into contempt, ridicule, and disgrace, to the great scandal of all good citizens…”

Mostly, Johnson was severely disliked by these Radical Republicans. He was a southern ex-slave owner… a potent combination that attracted seething hatred from his contemporaries. And his impeachment articles were just code for “We hate this racist asshole.”

Realistically, though, Johnson’s impeachment was just an attempted coup.

Congress had a policy agenda they wanted to pass, and Johnson kept getting in the way. So they came up with a bunch of silly charges, including the fact that he violated an unconstitutional law, in order to neutralize him.

Johnson was ultimately acquitted by the Senate and finished out the rest of his term. But it still set a precedent.

I know there are countless people losing their minds today because Congress just impeached the President of the United States on charges they find incredibly flimsy.

And there are plenty of talking heads saying that if a President can be impeached on such flimsy charges, that it ‘sets a very dangerous precedent.’

Well, technically this dangerous precedent was set more than 150 years ago; accusations against Andrew Johnson were appallingly flimsy, yet he was still impeached.

In the tenth charge of his Articles of Impeachment, for example, Congress cited a speech Andrew Johnson had given in 1866 in which he said,  “God willing, with your help I will veto [Congress’s] measures whenever any of them come to me…”

According to Congress, that simple statement was an impeachable offense… and set a precedent that they can impeach anyone for anything.

So if you think that today’s impeachment charges are too flimsy and set a dangerous precedent, this is really nothing new.

At the same time, there are also countless people losing their minds because they think ‘there’s a crime in progress’ and they want the President thrown out of office immediately.

Well, if you’re going to impeach someone and throw him out because he’s ‘abused his power,’ then you should apply the same standard to EVERYONE.

Politicians invariably abuse power for personal gain. Every time Barack Obama went to a campaign event for his own re-election in 2012, it cost taxpayers millions of dollars between the Secret Service, Air Force One, Presidential motorcade, etc.

Taxpayers foot the bill for his benefit. And every President in modern history has done the same.

These people pardon their friends, elevate campaign donors to important government posts, and lie constantly. They spend taxpayer resources and pass legislation for the sole purpose of elevating their approval ratings or solidifying their legacy.

Presidents do it. Cabinet secretaries do it. Senators and Members of Congress do it.

And it’s all abuse. Terrible, terrible abuse.

But if people are so juiced up to see one person punished for abuse of power, then why not have a real purge and throw everyone out? I would humbly nominate my 5-week old kitten to take over.

At the end of the day, though, we know this is just more bread and circuses. There’s no chance of anything real happening other than a giant waste of time and money.

Two decades ago they caught then President Bubba Clinton lying through his teeth when he said “I did not have sexual relations with that woman!” and “There’s nothing going on between us,” referring to White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

It was later found that, yes, in fact, Clinton used Lewinsky as a cigar holder. And when confronted about his lie, he had the most remarkable response in US political history:

“It depends on what the meaning of the word is is…”

Clinton was impeached and put on trial in front of the Senate.

But relying on the prevailing legal standard from the 1990s– “If it doesn’t fit you must acquit”, Clinton and his cigar were acquitted by 50% of the Senate, who were apparently also confused about the meaning of the word is.

Historian Will Durant often wrote that, despite the tremendous growth in knowledge over 5,000 years of human history, wisdom is little changed.

I couldn’t agree more. Enjoy the show.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/2s53B7X
via IFTTT

[Editor’s note: This article was written by Sovereign Man staff member Joe Jarvis, who recently moved to Puerto Rico. Joe is also editor at the DailyBell.com]

Frankly, I couldn’t care less about the whole impeachment thing.

I’m a resident of Puerto Rico, so I couldn’t vote in the Presidential election if I wanted to. Which I don’t. I haven’t voted in years because I have a hard time believing that my vote really matters.

Plus, as the animated comedy South Park so eloquently puts it, an election decision usually comes down to a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.

But from time to time the political circus does display some noteworthy acts, and one of those is taking place right now.

We all know that the US has become a giant surveillance state. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either deliberately ignorant or is named Dick Cheney.

Edward Snowden famously revealed the government’s massive efforts to spy on its own citizens. But even prior to that (and many times since) there have been numerous reports describing government surveillance programs.

FCC regulations, for example, require telecommunication companies to retain data on customers such as “the name, address, and telephone number of the caller, telephone number called, date, time and length of the call.”

This is referred to as “metadata” and must be stored by telecom companies for at least 18 months.

In 2015, the USA Freedom Act allegedly reformed the way the government could access your metadata. But nothing really changed.

Instead of collecting and storing it in a government database, the government simply demands the data from AT&T and Verizon.

In theory the government has to seek approval from secret “FISA” courts to obtain access to your data (FISA stands for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act).

But the FISA courts have become mere rubber stamps. According to the Justice Department’s own disclosures, for example, the FISA courts only rejected ONE wiretap application out of more than 1,000 that were submitted last year.

In other words, FISA courts approved more than 99.9% of wiretap requests. So forgive me if I’m a bit skeptical about this system of ‘checks and balances’.

Two years ago, Congress reauthorized the FISA court for another 5 years, and one of the key sponsors of that bill was Congressman Devin Nunes.

In doing so, Rep. Nunes put his name up in neon lights as the number one fan of intrusive surveillance.

Ironically, that intrusive government surveillance was quickly turned against him.

Rep. Nunes’ name comes up rather frequently in the impeachment inquiry report that was just released by the House Intelligence Committee.

The report cites phone records of between Nunes and other prominent targets of the probe:

“Phone records also show contacts on April 10 between Mr. Giuliani and Rep. Nunes, consisting of three short calls in rapid succession, followed by a text message, and ending with a nearly three minute call.”

Nunes was in contact with many of the characters involved in the whole Ukraine aid scandal, around the time it was all going down.

And how did the House Intelligence Committee get all those phone and text records? Because Nunes championed the government’s authority to spy on everyone’s metadata. Including his own.

Now Nunes’s metadata is being used against him to suggest that he was involved in criminal misconduct.

The even more ironic part of this story is that Nunes plans on suing AT&T, Verizon, and House Democrats for turning over his call records to Congressional investigators.

I’d love to see that argument in court. “Your honor, I am the person who championed the surveillance on Americans’ metadata… but it’s not fair that my own law can be used against me.”

Sorry Devin. These records and investigatory powers have been used exactly as intended. It’s just that you’re now on the receiving end.

That’s the funny thing about government powers. Even if you trust the people currently in charge– just give it a few years for the cast of characters to change.

Surveillance that was once used only on suspected spies and terrorists has quickly become a tool against political rivals and journalists.

And these intrusive powers are especially concerning given the crop of rising Bolshevik political superstars.

As the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises said, “The worst thing that can happen to a socialist is to have his country ruled by socialists who are not his friends.”

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/38Rj24f
via IFTTT

In late 2002, about 17 years ago at this time of the year, I was a young Army officer deployed to the Middle East.

It was just a few months before George W. Bush gave the order to invade Iraq, though all my fellow officers and I knew with 100% certainty that we would be going to war.

That turned out to be an extremely formative experience for me.

It was clear that Saddamn Hussein did not have any weapons of mass destruction, and that the pretext for the invasion was total bullshit.  And at 23-years old, I was naive enough to be appalled that politicians would do something so irresponsible.

But it led me down a life-changing rabbit hole: if they were so irresponsible and cavalier about starting a war and putting people’s lives on the line, what else was rotten?

As I later learned– quite a bit.

I started studying everything I could get my hands on about so many things I had taken for granted.

I learned about our system of money, and how unelected central bankers (who are primarily appointed by big Wall Street banks) manipulate interest rates and create financial bubbles.

I learned about the national debt, and the enormous Ponzi scheme of Social Security.

I also learned that it was a big world out there with incredible opportunities in places that I had never even considered.

One of those places was Panama.

Because of the all-important Panama Canal, the US military had established military bases in the country for most of the 20th century. And one of the Soldiers in my unit had been stationed there in the 1990s.

And he would NOT stop talking about how great Panama was, like it was some sort of Shangri-La earthly paradise.

Finally, I promised this guy I would go to Panama if he would only just shut up about it. He did. And I kept my promise. The following year I took my first trip to the country.

It was 2003. And when I landed at the main international airport, it looked and smelled like an old garage. It was about as small as a garage too… the main arrivals hall was tiny, cramped, and swarming with mosquitos.

There was no highway into town, and the streets were dimly lit. In fact, it seemed like the place was generally lacking electricity. All around it just looked like chaos.

But after meeting with lawyers and entrepreneurs, I found out that there was investment pouring into Panama.

I kept coming back every year and witnessed extraordinary growth and development.

I still make sure to go back at least once a year. And I’m always astounded by how much the country has changed.

They modernized the airport, developed the highways, and even expanded the Panama Canal.

The capital city even has a metro system, not to mention a sprawling skyline of oceanfront skyscrapers.

There are top quality residential developments all over the country that have attracted really interesting communities of expats in places ranging from the beautiful beaches on both the Pacific and Caribbean sides of the country, to the mountains near the Costa Rican border.

Panama continues to attract a crowd of foreign investors and entrepreneurs who put their capital and talents to work in many of the country’s key growth areas.

It helps that Panama makes it so easy for people to become legal residents. And one of the easiest ways is called the Friendly Nations Visa.

The US, Canada, Australia, the UK, Israel, South Africa, every member of the European Union and several Asian and Latin American countries are all considered “friendly” nations with close ties to Panama.

All the Friendly Nations Visa requires is registering a company in Panama, and depositing as little as $5,000 in a local bank account.

But your company doesn’t actually have to do anything. And you can withdraw your money as soon as you obtain permanent residency, usually within a few months.

You don’t need to maintain a home in Panama either. You just have to show up every year or two to renew your residency. And after five years, you’re eligible to apply for naturalization and Panamanian citizenship.

And Panama citizenship includes a valuable passport that provides visa free access to 121 countries around the world. It’s ranked 64 out of 198 countries on our Global Passport Ranking.

In total candor, if you have zero ties to Panama, never spend any time in the country, and don’t speak a word of Spanish, I could definitely see that citizenship application being rejected, or at least being moved to the bottom of the pile.

But here’s the thing– while we frequently talk about the benefits of obtaining a second passport & citizenship, many of these same benefits can be realized simply by having legal residency.

Just like having citizenship, legal residency ensures that you and your family will always have a place to go– to live, work, and invest, in case you ever need to leave your home country.

And you can maintain residency with minimal effort or travel.

Plus there’s also practically zero tax consequences; Panama has a ‘territorial tax’ system, which means you are only taxed on income that you earn from sources within Panama (like a local restaurant, for example.)

So even if the citizenship process doesn’t fully pan out, you can still derive lasting benefit just from having residency.

To dive deeper, check out our free in-depth article on How To Obtain Panama Residency, Citizenship & Passport here.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/2PqujAJ
via IFTTT

Are you ready for this week’s absurdity? Here’s our Friday roll-up of the most ridiculous stories from around the world that are threats to your liberty, your finances, and your prosperity.

British school controls where children eat and shop after school

Imagine a man in a high visibility jacket comes into your take-out restaurant, and starts berating your customers, telling them to leave, and threatening them if they don’t.

That is what business owners in Bristol, England are dealing with. The man in the official looking high-viz reflective vest was a teacher, and the customers were students.

It is school policy to restrict what shops and restaurants students can patronize on their way home from school, by sending teachers out to patrol the streets.

Students who disobey the rule are punished with detention, even though this happens outside of school hours and off school property.

The business owner had to call the police to get the teacher to leave, and stop blocking the doorway to his shop (which prevented customers from entering).

He says it has cut down on his business significantly, including intimidating other customers besides the school children.

When the man spoke to the school Superintendent, he was treated to a lecture about how his food is unhealthy, and should not be available to students.

Click here to read the full story.

San Francisco spends almost $30 per flush for public toilets

Amid a homelessness crisis, San Francisco is trying to find ways to keep the streets from being littered with human feces.

They ran a pilot program over the past three months to keep public toilets open all night.

Dividing the costs by the number of flushes, it came out to $28.50 per flush.

Most of the costs were for the two staff members at each bathroom, to stop drug use and other criminal activity.

To see if the program was effective, the city compared how many calls for human waste cleanups they got in the surrounding areas in the three months before the test, compared to the three months during the test.

The best results showed calls fell from 190 before the pilot, to 166 during the trial– less than a 13% drop in reports of human waste.

Click here to read the full story.

American gun purchases on Black Friday could arm entire British Military

Here’s an interesting fact we discovered recently: on Black Friday this year, Americans bought 202,500 firearms, according to the number of FBI background checks conducted, which are required for gun sales.

That’s enough to arm the entire British military of 190,000 soldiers, including reserves, with a cool 12,000 firearms leftover

This Black Friday is just 1,000 guns below the all time record for guns purchased in one day, which was on Black Friday in 2017.

Click here to read the full story.

Bitcoin Futures CEO appointed to US Senate

US Senator Isakson is stepping down from his position at the end of this year due to health reasons.

In his place, the Governor of Georgia has appointed Kelly Loeffler to the seat.

This is only interesting because she is the current CEO of Bakkt, a company that facilitates Bitcoin futures trades.

So now there is actually someone in government who might understand cryptocurrency…

Click here to read the full story.

Guns confiscated over Joker Meme

In the beginning of October, Charles Donnelly had his guns seized under Washington state’s Red Flag law over a meme.

These laws allow police to take guns from innocent people over fears they will commit a crime in the future.

Donnelly posted a photo of himself with two AK-47s and the text “One ticket for Joker please.”

It was a common meme at the time, poking fun at the media’s repeated speculations there would be a mass shooting at a Joker screening.

Obviously, the meme was in very poor taste. There had been a shooting at an Aurora, Colorado theater in 2012, during a screening of The Dark Knight Rises, which featured Heath Ledger as the Joker.

But the meme was still satire. And however distasteful or offensive, jokes are protected free speech.

Prosecutors also used previous satirical social media posts to argue Donnelly’s guns should be confiscated.

Click here to read the full story.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/2tgYpOL
via IFTTT

File this one away under ‘completely ridiculous’.

You might have heard that Elon Musk was on trial last week in Los Angeles; he was being sued because he claimed (multiple times) that British spelunker Vernon Unsworth was a pedophile. (He’s not.)

It’s generally damaging to one’s reputation when a world-famous billionaire erroneously calls you one of the worst things anyone could possibly be.  So Unsworth sued for defamation.

Defamation in the United States is actually quite difficult to prove.

In order to win a defamation case in the US, the claimant has to demonstrate that you knowingly said something false, or that you completely disregarded whether or not something was false.

It’s pretty clear that Musk knew his comments were false; he acknowledged that Unsworth is not a pedophile.

But winning a defamation case in the US also requires proving that Musk had the deliberate intent to harm Unsworth’s reputation.  And that’s tough to do.

Musk claimed he was just engaging in ‘idle trash talk’ and didn’t actually intend to harm Unsworth’s reputation.

If the case had been held in the United Kingdom, Musk would have lost in a heartbeat.

English defamation law is totally different than in the US; in the United Kingdom, if you say something, you have to be able to back it up. And Elon would have had to prove that his comments were accurate (they weren’t).

It’s a huge difference. And Musk was fortunate to find a sympathetic jury in Los Angeles, because they ruled in his favor.

But the really interesting thing about this trial was what Musk disclosed about his personal finances.

He told the jury under oath that, despite being worth more than $25 billion, he actually has very little money.

That’s because Musk’s wealth is both illiquid AND unprofitable.

He owns around 20% of Tesla, for example, which is worth about $13 billion. But he can’t really sell his shares… for a number of reasons. They’re controlled by a trust. He has regulatory limitations. Many of his shares are either restricted or are already pledged.

This isn’t unique to Musk; Warren Buffett is the largest shareholder of his company Berkshire Hathaway, and he’s never sold a single share.

(Buffett’s stake in Berkshire is worth roughly $90 billion.)

The difference is that Buffett’s company is consistently profitable and always generates positive cashflow.

Tesla has had a few good quarters here and there. But for the most part the company has lost more than $10 billion in cumulative NEGATIVE free cash flow over the past decade.

Buffett’s net worth is derived from his company’s financial performance. Berkshire Hathaway has over $100 billion in CASH on its balance sheet and generated nearly $40 billion in Free Cash Flow last year. Buffett owns a huge piece of that success.

Tesla has tiny amount of cash by comparison, a growing pile of debt, and lost a billion dollars last year.

So Elon’s 20% stake in Tesla means that he has a 20% share of last year’s billion dollar loss.

Investors continue to believe that there’s value in Tesla’s financial misery. But that doesn’t put any money in Elon’s pocket.

And he’s definitely not the only ‘billionaire’ in this situation. All across Silicon Valley (and much of the world) we see tech entrepreneurs loaded up with shares of their loss-making businesses, but short on any actual money.

The founder of Snapchat is worth more than $3 billion thanks to his company’s stock price; yet the business has lost billions of dollars since inception and has never generated positive cash flow in a single year, ever.

Uber, WeWork, Lyft, Slack, Peloton, Pinterest– there are so many tech companies, or companies masquerading as tech companies– that consistently lose tons of money. It’s absurd.

In finance, a startup that eventually becomes worth more than a billion dollars is referred to as a ‘unicorn’ because it’s supposed to be so rare that it borders on impossible.

Now, I remember my parents taking me to the circus when I was a kid, and the feature attraction was supposed to be a unicorn. I must have been around 4 years old and I couldn’t have been more excited.

Finally, after seeing the bearded lady and the lion tamers and all that jazz, they finally paraded the unicorn out for all the spectators to see.

Even as a little kid I knew instantly– it was just a friggin’ donkey with a fake horn on it.

And that’s basically what these companies are– donkeys with fake horns. They’re not real unicorns.

They bleed cash. Many of them have no hope of ever turning a profit. And the rock-star famous people who own them are often just “Billionaires In Name Only,’or BINOs.

We live in a world where central bankers have conjured trillions of dollars out of thin air and have even made interest rates NEGATIVE in a number of countries.

Well, when interest rates are zero (or negative) and central bankers create money at will, it means that money has no value anymore.

And this is the result: you can become a ‘billionaire’, at least on paper, without your company ever generating a single penny of profit, or even having a plan to turn a profit in the future.

I also read this morning that, over the weekend at an art fair in Miami, someone paid $125,000 for a piece of ‘art’ that was nothing more than a banana duck-taped to the wall.

That’s pretty much the equivalent of lighting your money on fire… and another extreme example of how little people value and respect capital anymore.

I’ve learned over the years that it’s a fool’s errand to predict a ‘top’. This sort of absurdity always lasts longer than anyone can possibly imagine.

But it always comes to an end. It won’t happen today, and it probably won’t happen tomorrow. But at some point this madness will stop.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/38s35RI
via IFTTT

We just capped off a spectacular weekend in St. Lucia with members of our Total Access group to explore this country’s Citizenship-by-Investment program.

I’ve written about Citizenship-by-Investment programs before; these are completely legal programs that exist in several countries where foreigners can invest a particular sum of money in a country and become a citizen.

These programs are often called “Economic Citizenship” programs as well. And they’re typically the fastest way to get a second passport.

The investment amounts for Economic Citizenship (or Citizenship-by-Investment) programs vary from country to country.

Long ago there were very only a handful of countries offering this, including (surprisingly) Austria, which would demand a foreigner to invest a hefty seven-figure sum in order to obtain citizenship there.

Then countries in the Caribbean started offering the program. It was cheaper, but it would still be several hundred thousand dollars.

Then more and more countries jumped on the bandwagon. And just like any other product or service, as more countries began offering economic citizenship, the price fell.

Here in St. Lucia the investment can be as little as $100,000. (And I’ve negotiated an arrangement for our Total Access members to receive a healthy discount.)

$100,000 is pretty close to the cheapest in the world, especially for a single applicant.

But not all economic citizenship programs are created equal.

Reputation matters; there are some countries that offer economic citizenship which do a pretty terrible job of weeding out bad applicants.

The economic citizenship programs in Dominica and St. Kitts both have a number of black eyes in this department; a number of their economic citizenships have been issued to known criminals, suspected terrorists, convicted financial fraudsters, etc.

And frankly whenever a country offers citizenship to people like that, it devalues the program for everyone else.

One of the most important characteristics about an Economic Citizenship program is the quality of the passport: how many countries can you travel to, visa free, with that passport?

Most of the Caribbean economic citizenship programs are good quality passports. With a St. Lucian passport, for example, you could travel to 144 countries, including all of Europe, visa-free (or visa-on-arrival).

Our Sovereign Man Passport Ranking analyzes this further, and shows that a passport from Antigua (which has its own economic citizenship program) is slightly better, with visa-free travel to more countries like Russia, Brazil, and South Africa.

The Prime Minister of St. Lucia joined our event over the weekend and addressed our Total Access members about his country’s Economic Citizenship program.

For him, it’s a no-brainer. So far the program has brought in around $30 million for St. Lucia, which is a decent sum of money in such a tiny country with only 180,000 people.

He pointed to nearby Dominica, which has generated hundreds of millions of dollars from its program in recent years.

He knows that money can do a LOT of good in developing new infrastructure, healthcare, pensions, and tax cuts in St. Lucia, and he’s intent on making St. Lucia’s economic citizenship program the most successful and most attractive in the Caribbean.

Specifically, he is pushing to increase the visa-free travel options of a St. Lucian passport, as well as protect the reputation of the program by enforcing strict due diligence procedures and ensuring total transparency in the program.

If they’re able to execute on this vision, St. Lucia could quickly become the best economic citizenship program in the world.

When he and I were speaking privately later, he gave me his unique perspective of these economic citizenship programs.

It’s commonplace for countries all over the world to raise money by selling bonds and going into debt. Japan does it. The United States does it. Canada does it.

These bonds are often referred to as ‘Sovereign Bonds’ because they are issued by the governments of sovereign nations around the world.

Rather than issuing Sovereign Debt, however, the Prime Minister views economic citizenship as way to raise capital through “Sovereign Equity”.

It’s similar to how a private company raises money by selling shares (i.e. ‘equity’) to people that invest in the business.

Investors who contribute capital and buy equity in a company become shareholders.

Economic citizenship is similar; individuals who invest in the country and buy ‘Sovereign Equity’ receive a passport, essentially becoming a stakeholder in the country.

I think that’s an astute way of looking at these programs.

And remember, if you’re not willing or able to write a $100,000 check, there are three other ways you can obtain a second passport:

1. Ancestry. If you are lucky enough to have ancestors from the right country, you may be eligible for second citizenship by descent. This is traditionally the easiest way to obtain a second passport and one that we recommend everyone look into before pursuing the other options.
2. Time. Most countries will naturalize residents who have lived a certain number of years in the country. The time can vary but can be as little as two years in countries like Argentina or Peru.
3. Flexibility. If you are willing to put in the effort, you can obtain a second passport by giving birth in another country, marrying a foreign citizen or even changing your religion…

Having a second passport is the ultimate insurance policy.

It ensures that no matter what happens in your home country, you always have a place to go.

And it opens up numerous opportunities for you to thrive, invest, build a business, live and even retire overseas.

It could even become a generational asset that can be passed on to your grandchildren’s grandchildren long after you’re gone.

There are few things we can do in life which have that much lasting benefit.

My team recently compiled a free article where you can read in more detail how exactly anyone can acquire a second passport & dual citizenship.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/2PwMnIv
via IFTTT

Are you ready for this week’s absurdity? Here’s our Friday roll-up of the most ridiculous stories from around the world that are threats to your liberty, your finances, and your prosperity.

Canadian Comedian fined $35,000 for joke

A Canadian comedian must pay $35,000 to a disabled man he made fun of in some of his acts.

A Quebec appeals court upheld the decision by the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal. It said Mike Ward exceeded the limits of free speech when he told jokes about a disabled man’s performance singing in front of the Pope.

Making fun of a disabled guy is obviously in poor taste.

But it’s a pretty dangerous precedent to set when the courts start telling us that offensive jokes exceed ‘limits’ of free speech.

Click here to read the full story.

Bank of Japan releases report exploring digital currency

We’re pretty happy to see this one–

The Bank of Japan, Japan’s central bank which issues currency, released a report exploring the legal possibilities of the bank issuing a digital currency.

The report says that although the Bank of Japan has no plans to issue a digital currency, it would be crazy not to explore the possibilities, with information technology advancing at such a rapid rate.

Digital currency would give regular people and businesses access to depositing money with the central bank, which is currently only available to financial institutions.

Tokenizing the money supply would also make it possible to hold money, other than cash, outside of the banking system.

We’re not holding our breath to see this become a reality anytime soon, but it’s great to see a major central bank take at least a small step in this direction.

Click here for the full report.

Cops charge man with theft for removing tracking GPS from truck

Suspecting a man of selling drugs, police got a warrant to secretly place a GPS tracker on the man’s car.

But the suspect found and removed the tracker.

When the GPS stopped signaling his location, police checked the car and realized the tracker was missing. So they got a warrant to search the man’s home for the GPS.

They found it, and charged him with theft. But they never did end up charging him with dealing drugs.

The Indiana Supreme Court just heard the case. Now they’ll decide if it’s theft to remove a GPS from your own car.

Click here for the full story.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/2qtPqZx
via IFTTT

Are you ready for this week’s absurdity? Here’s our Friday roll-up of the most ridiculous stories from around the world that are threats to your liberty, your finances, and your prosperity.

Crackdown on homeschooling coming across Great Britain

A few weeks ago we talked about how the Labour Party in Great Britain wants to eliminate private schools.

Now, in addition to that, regional governments across Great Britain are launching an assault against homeschooling.

Despite the fact that public education is lacking, the government thinks it is the parents who should have to prove themselves if they want to homeschool their own children.

In Wales and the Isle of Man, authorities are attempting to pass measures that will allow them to interview each homeschooled child. The children will have to pass subjective tests, with government officials deciding the criteria.

Parents will be fined or jailed for failing to comply with government orders if their child fails the subjective evaluations.

Scotland recently tried to introduce rules assigning a state “guardian” to each homeschool child, who would be allowed to intervene in home life including what kids watch on TV, eat, and how they decorate their bedrooms.

Luckily that measure was defeated, but it shows how desperate governments are to get into your home and dictate family life.

Click here to read the full story.

Boston police using robot dogs

Back in the 70s, the government said that SWAT teams would only be used in extreme cases, like hostage situations. That slowly morphed into using them today for tiny drug busts which often turn up nothing.

So forgive me for being skeptical when Boston Police claim the new robot police-dog they are testing will not be weaponized.

The Boston Police acquired its creepy robot dog from Boston Dynamics– you can see a video here.

Click here to read the full story.

California wants to punish a company that orders Ubers for the blind and elderly

“GoGo Grandparent” is a service that allows people who don’t have or can’t use smartphones to order ride services by calling a toll free number.

This is really convenient for visually impaired people, and the elderly.

But the People’s Republic of California thinks that GoGo Grandparent is a transportation company. So authorities fined GoGo $10,000 for not having a license.

California also said the company needs $1 million of insurance for their cars (which don’t exist, they call Uber) and to hand over a list of their drivers to the state (again, they don’t have drivers, they call Uber).

A judge sided with GoGo to dismiss the fine, but that decision still has to be ratified by regulators, who are dragging their feet on a vote.

Click here to read the full story.

30% of average Americans think the dollar is backed by gold

A recent survey of 1,000 English-speaking Americans showed that 29.3% of respondents still think the dollar is backed by gold, and another 23.6% have no idea if or what it’s backed by.

Almost a quarter of respondents thought the Federal Reserve’s job was to secure America’s gold reserves.

30% stated the US government backs the US dollar, and 7% responded that “nothing” backs the US dollar. That last one is probably the most accurate response.

It got even worse when respondents were asked about their money in the bank.

27% thought the bank had to hold all their deposits.

And of the people who knew banks are only required to hold a portion of your money in reserve, only 9% realized they hold as little as 2% of your deposits.

Clearly people have no idea how money and banking actually work.

Click here to download the full study.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/2R0J5iT
via IFTTT