A Major Problem Emerges For The Davos Elite

Last night we reported that while snacking on $40 hotdogs, the global financial, political and entertainment elite will be “struggling for answers” and cowering in “silent fear” as the world’s most powerful people face a force they have never encountered before – the rising tide of populism, first demonstrated by the “unexpected” Brexit vote and subsequently by the “shocking” election of Trump. As Moises Naim of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace put it, “there is a consensus that something huge is going on, global and in many respects unprecedented. But we don’t know what the causes are, nor how to deal with it.”

Adding to the farcical nature of this year’s Davos shindig is that, while one of the main topics of discussion is “populism” and social and wealth inequality, overnight a new Oxfam study revealed that not only 8 people own the same amount of wealth as (the poorer) half of the world, but that since 2015, the richest 1 per cent has owned more wealth than the rest of the planet. It is expected that many of the “eight people” noted by Oxfam will be present at Davos.

 

And while in years past Davos was eager to whistle past the graveyard, and discuss in broad terms the state of the world, ignoring its own role in the unprecedented wealth divide, this year’s Davos conference which is officially starting in just a few hours, is facing more immediate problems which it can no longer afford to ignore.

One of these is that trust in governments, companies, and thus the executives present at the Forum, has plunged over the past year as ballots from the United States to Britain to the Philippines have rocked political establishments and scandals hit business. Trust in the media itself, meant to be an objective and impartial observer of the Davos boondoggle, yet sadly captured, has likewise crashed to record lows across all age groups.

As such, one major problem facing Davos, is one of loss of credibility, as the majority of people now believe the economic and political system is failing them, according to the annual Edelman Trust Barometer, released on Monday ahead of the Jan. 17-20 World Economic Forum.

A simpler way of putting it: “There’s a sense that the system is broken,” Richard Edelman, head of the communications marketing firm that commissioned the research, told Reuters.

And it’s not just the poor who have lost faith: “The most shocking statistic of this whole study is that half the people who are high-income, college-educated and well-informed also believe the system doesn’t work.”

As Reuters puts it, the 3,000 business, political and academic leaders meeting in the Swiss Alps this week find themselves increasingly out of step with many voters and populist leaders around the world who distrust elites. And this time the increasingly angry world is closely watching.

Governments and the media are now trusted by only 41 and 43 percent of people respectively, with confidence in news outlets down particularly sharply after a year in which “post-truth” become the Oxford Dictionaries Word of the Year. Trust in business was slightly higher, at 52 percent, but it too has declined amid scandals, including Volkswagen’s rigged diesel emission tests and Samsung Electronics’ fire-prone smartphones.

The credibility of chief executives has fallen in every country surveyed, reaching a low of 18 percent in Japan, while the German figure was 28 percent and the U.S. 38 percent.

Trust in governments fell in 14 of the countries surveyed, with South Africa, where Davos regular President Jacob Zuma has faced persistent corruption allegations, ranked bottom with just 15 percent support.

Making matters worse, according to a PwC survey released at Davos, even the global business elite is starting to lose oses confidence in the benefits of globalization, i.e. the very bread and butter of the people present at the world’s biggest echo chamber symposium.

 

Which leads us to the second core problem: that of an unprecedented disconnect between “Davos Man” and the real world, and nowhere is this more obvious than in the participants themselves.

As Bloomberg puts it, while “the top executives, financiers, academics and politicians making their way up the mountain to the World Economic Forum will be talking a lot about such non-establishment leaders as President-elect Donald Trump, France’s National Front chief Marine Le Pen and Italian populist Beppe Grillo of the Five Star Movement, they won’t be meeting them. Not one of the leaders bent on overturning the world order as Davos has designed it will be present.”

So much for Davos learning from its mistakes, or truly seeking to reach out to its sworn nemesis: those who have been elected because they represent everything Davos is not.

Still, these s0-called ” upstarts will loom over the proceedings, Bloomberg notes. “Trump, who won’t have an official representative there, has expressed strong feelings about some of the countries sending delegations, including his own.”

Meanwhile, Europe’s populist leaders, for their part, have “their own view of the annual gathering of the rich, the powerful, the famous  and the sycophantic.

And yet, despite the clear and present danger from global populism what does Davos believe is the biggest threat facing the world in 2017?

“Extreme Weather.”

Attendees appear to be less focused on Trump’s presidency or on upcoming elections in France, the Netherlands, Germany and possibly Italy than on other global concerns. The forum’s annual survey on the most likely risks for 2017 found that “extreme weather events” was the top worry. “Failed national governance,” the closest category to such surprise events last year as Brexit and Trump’s election, wasn’t in the top five, although it placed third in 2015.

Adding to the surreal nature of this year’s meeting, no economic risks have even made it into the top 5 “risk” categories for the second year in a row.

While we would be the first to acknowledge that no tangible change in the world can take place without these most important and influential decision-makers sitting down and tackling pressing global issues, what is clear is that the biggest problem facing Davos may also be the simplest, and most reflexive one: a complete failure to diagnose and isolate the biggest problem facing the world at this moment is: the utter cluelessness of Davos itself. Unfortunately, we see no reason why and how this could change.

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

British Pol Claims Trump Marked for Assassination

Via The Daily Bell

 

British Politician Warns Trump ‘CIA Is Plotting Assassination’ – British politician George Galloway has warned Donald Trump the American deep state is engaged in a “soft coup d’etat” and the CIA is planning to assassinate him. “There is a clear and present danger on his life.”

George Galloway is a somewhat popular but wildly leftist, English politician who says thing that other pols avoid. That’s why it’s no surprise that he is behind this assassination story.

Galloway has been involved in the Iraq-oil-for-food controversy along with numerous other controversies and has been kicked out of the Labor party years ago for making statements against the Iraq war.

His statements regarding a potential Trump assassination are similarly incendiary but like some other statements are, nonetheless, surely agreed to by some other British politicians and mainstream voters as well.

“If I were him, I wouldn’t be going near any grassy knolls. I wouldn’t be on any motorcades in Dallas. I wouldn’t be traveling in an open-top car. “I’d be very careful if I was Donald Trump about my personal security. I think I’d have to employ guards to guard the guards.”

 

Galloway, who has served 31 years as an elected British Member of Parliament, also dismissed claims that Russia was interfering in US politics – and instead pointed the finger at British intelligence services.

 

“It turns out it was Britain that was interfering in the US presidential elections – not Russia. At least I’ve seen no evidence the Russians were, but there is plenty of evidence emerging about the British role.”

Galloway’s remarks regarding a potential British role in any assassination is part of a large position that he has taken in the past regarding Britain. He makes no secret of this position that hold England in particular has a long history of smearing other governments.

“In 1925 something called the Zinoviev letter helped to bring down the first ever Labour government in Britain. It purported to be a letter from the head of the Comintern, Gregory Zinoviev, to his lieutenants in British politics … It had been produced by, you guessed it, British intelligence services. That bought down the Prime Ministership of Ramsey MacDonald – and this one is aimed at another Donald. Donald Trump.”

Galloway also says the coalition assembling in Washington against Trump is unusual because of its large size. In addition to the usual overt military industrial constituencies, it includes the Democratic opposition.

Galloway says the newly enlarged coalition has mixed Democrats in with Republicans they’d previously not had contact with such individuals such as John McCain. They have embraced the CIA as well, even though they know its communiques are often propagandistic and pro war.

It is the pro war element that Galloway is the most emphatic about. He claims that ultimately the entire coalition is pro-war because that’s how the groups involved make  money.

Galloway says that Trump wants to make money in ways that don’t involve war but that the top American outfits have found war to be the easiest way to make massive profits. For this reason, he says, Trump has been targeted.

Trump himself is aware of the bad blood between him and the CIA but may not believe it runs as deep as Galloway thinks it does. But, it is true, he is now proposing that the CIA is directly involved in leaking in various Tweets.

Conclusion: He may hope that his selection for the new CIA boss, presumably happening next week, will make a difference and bring the CIA under control. But many elements of the CIA are not directly under the control of the new head. Trump may be miscalculating.

Other stories:

Trump Vaccine Experts Are Not Industry Types and Might Recommend Real Change

The Best Way for Economists to Stay Relevant Today Is to Go Out of Business

Bank of England’s Andrew Haldane Admits Economic Forecasting Errors

via http://ift.tt/2jRiukL TDB

Mark Carney Made A Monetary Policy Mistake Reacting to Brexit Vote

By EconMatters


We discuss the British Pound in this video, regarding the cross currents of England currently experiencing a hot economy, but facing a real threat of recession as Brexit ramifications start hitting the British economy. Basically, Mark Carney overreacted to the Brexit Vote. British citizens are getting the worse of it in both regards, higher inflation with negative real rates, and a highly probable recession and FTSE market Crash down the line coming at the worst possible time.

Mark Carney should have waited to lower the interest rate, and provide stimulus to the British economy when it is actually needed. None of the ramifications of Brexit have occurred, and right now the British economy is running hot with regards to inflation, which probably gets worse in the upcoming months.

In effect British Citizens will be punished twice for Brexit, now with much higher inflation, and down the line with a substantial recession when they actually start to experience the effects of leaving the European Union. Central Bankers should take heed of the lesson here not to use up limited ammunition, and save this ‘dry powder’ for when it really is needed to mitigate the effects of a substantial economic recession.

 

© EconMatters All Rights Reserved | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | Email Digest | Kindle    

via http://ift.tt/2iuCmh7 EconMatters

New Video Exposes Anti-Trump Groups Plotting Criminal Acts To Disrupt Inauguration

In the latest undercover video from Project Veritas, investigators uncovered a group of protesters known as the DC Anti-fascist Coalition plotting to disrupt President-Elect Donald Trump’s inauguration by deploying butyric acid (aka “stink bombs”) at the National Press Club during the Deploraball event scheduled for January 19th.  In a dose of irony, the planning meeting for the attack was held at Comet Ping Pong, the DC pizza restaurant that recently gained infamy as the location of the Pizzagate controversy.

Apparently “Plan A” of the disaffected agitators was to set off “stink bombs” in the ventilation systems of the building hosting the “Deploraball.”

“I was thinking of things that ruin, that would ruin the evening, ruin their outfits or otherwise make it impossible to continue with their plans.  Make sure they get nothing accomplished.”

 

“Yeah, if you had…a pint of butyric acid, I don’t care how big the building is, it’s closing…And this stuff is very efficient, it’s very very smelly, lasts a long time a little of it goes a long way.”

 

“If you get it into the HVAC system it will get into the whole building.”

Meanwhile, “Plan B” entailed an effort to simultaneously set off the sprinkler systems throughout the building which had the “added benefit” of sending party goers “outside in the freezing cold.”

“I’m trying to think through how to get all the sprinklers to go off at once.  There’s usually a piece of like fusible metal or a piece of glass with liquid in it that will blow”

 

“And the added benefit, everybody is going to walk outside in the freezing cold.”

Because of the nature of the threats, Project Veritas notes that they notified the FBI, Secret Service
and DC Metro Police of the content of this video prior to its release.

With that, here is the full video:

via http://ift.tt/2jp8QsY Tyler Durden

FBI Arrests Widow Of Orlando Nightclub Shooter

The last time we heard of Noor Salman, the widow of the Orlando nighclub shooter, she was said to have disappeared from the authorities’ radar, whether on purpose or because she was not a suspect. That changed on Monday, when law enforcement officials told AP that the widow of the Orlando nightclub shooter was arrested Monday by the FBI. 

The official said Noor Salman was taken into custody Monday morning in the San Francisco area and is due in court Tuesday in California. She’s facing charges in Florida including obstruction of justice. 

According to the NYT, investigators interviewed Ms. Salman for hours after the attack and came to believe she was not telling the truth about her husband’s plans to carry out the rampage.

Noor Salman moved to the San Francisco area after her husband, Omar Mateen, was killed in a shootout with SWAT team members during the June 12 massacre at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. He was the only shooter, and by the time a three-hour standoff between Mateen and law enforcement had ended, 49 patrons were killed and another 53 people required hospitalization.

Mateen pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group during the standoff.

Prior to the attack on Pulse, a handful of other U.S. gay bars had been targeted, including Neighbours, a popular gay nightclub in Seattle. It was packed with New Year’s Eve revelers on Dec. 31, 2013, when a man poured gasoline on a carpeted stairway and set it ablaze. No one was injured; Masub Masmari was sentenced to 10 years in prison for arson.

Noor Salman is expected to make an initial appearance on Tuesday in federal court in San Francisco.

via http://ift.tt/2js97uP Tyler Durden

While Davos Elites Address Populism, Just “Eight Men Own Same Wealth As Half The World”

Submitted by Joseph Jankowski of PlanetFreeWill.com

As political and business elite gather at the Swiss ski resort of Davos, a new report is shining light on the shocking reality of the wealth gap between the very rich and poor that is “pull our societies apart.”

A report by Oxfam released ahead the World Economic Forum in Davos shows the gap between the ultra-wealthy and the poorest half of the global population is starker than previously thought, with just eight men owning as much wealth as 3.6 billion people. And since 2015, the richest 1 per cent has owned more wealth than the rest of the planet.

The report urges the elite to address the problem, warning that public anger against this kind of inequality will continue to grow and cause more political firestorms such as the election of populist Donald Trump as U.S. president or Brexit.

“From Brexit to the success of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, a worrying rise in racism and the widespread disillusionment with mainstream politics, there are increasing signs that more and more people in rich countries are no longer willing to tolerate the status quo,” Oxfam said in its new report.

“It is obscene for so much wealth to be held in the hands of so few when 1 in 10 people survive on less than $2 a day,” said Winnie Byanyima, executive director of Oxfam International, who is attending the exclusive meeting in Davos. “Inequality is trapping hundreds of millions in poverty; it is fracturing our societies and undermining democracy.”

The same Oxfam report last year showed that it was 62 people holding as much wealth as the bottom half of the population.

This year’s report was revised using the Forbes’ billionaires list published in March 2016 which shows that Microsoft founder Gates is the richest individual with a net worth of $75 billion.

Here are the top 8 individuals on the list:

1. Bill Gates

Net Worth: $75 B

Source of wealth: Microsoft

 

2. Amancio Ortega

Net Worth: $67 B

Source of wealth: Zara

 

3. Warren Buffett

Net Worth: $60.8 B

Source of wealth: Berkshire Hathaway

 

4. Carlos Slim Helu

Net Worth: $50 B

Source of wealth: telecom

 

5. Jeff Bezos

Net Worth: $45.2 B

Source of wealth: Amazon.com

 

6. Mark Zuckerberg

Net Worth: $44.6 B

Source of wealth: Facebook

 

7. Larry Ellison

Net Worth: $43.6 B

Source of wealth: Oracle

 

8. Michael Bloomberg

Net Worth: $40 B

Source of wealth: Bloomberg LP

The Oxfam report also slammed corporate lobbying and crony capitalism.

“Crony capitalism benefits the rich, the people who own and run these corporations, at the expense of the common good and of poverty reduction. It means that smaller businesses struggle to compete and ordinary people end up paying more for goods and services,” states the report.

In Davos, the elite of the political and business world will discuss how to respond to the rising rejection of such inequality and the populist wave it has formed.

“Regardless of how you view Trump and his positions, his election has led to a deep, deep sense of uncertainty and that will cast a long shadow over Davos,” said Jean-Marie Guehenno, CEO of International Crisis Group, a conflict resolution think-tank.

Among the titles of the discussion panels at the Davos are “Squeezed and Angry: How to Fix the Middle Class Crisis”, “Politics of Fear or Rebellion of the Forgotten?”, “Tolerance at the Tipping Point?” and “The Post-EU Era.”

Surprisingly, some Davos attendees have admitted to not knowing what is causing the populist turmoil or how to deal with it.

“There is a consensus that something huge is going on, global and in many respects unprecedented. But we don’t know what the causes are, nor how to deal with it,” Moises Naim of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace explained.

Klaus Schwab, founder of the annual Davos meeting, said “it’s important to listen to the populists,” which is why he intends to reach out to populist politicians who are riding the wave of discontent.

From ABC News:

Critics often accuse the yearly World Economic Forum in the Swiss Alps of being a snow-covered playground for well-heeled business and political elites. But founder Klaus Schwab said this year’s event, which opens Monday before a public start Tuesday, is reaching out to populist politicians who have ridden a wave of discontent among the masses.

 

“It’s important to listen to the populists, and actually we have several sessions where we deal with these issues, and we have representatives of populist parties here with us,” Schwab said Sunday. “We have to take it [populism] seriously.”

 

For a forum that strives to take the pulse of the world each year and produce “a real hub of a global discussion,” Schwab said “it would be soundly unrealistic and far from realities if we did not integrate the concerns of populists very much into our own deliberation.”

45 Years of Davos and the Elite Still Running Away with the Worlds Wealth

The meeting in Davos will not find solutions to narrow the wealth gap which is now astronomically leaning towards the tip-top of the upper rungs of the population.

This year’s meeting marks the 45th time the elite have gathered at in the Swiss alps, and never has the wealth gap been so glaring.

The meeting is all about managing the lack of wealth of the population and the political turmoil which is bound to accelerate because of it.

Among the discussion at Davos will be the “fourth industrial revolution.” The elite will be discussing how millions of jobs held by the average person are going to be eliminated by artificial intelligence and how this revolution might play out on the political scale.

Last year, Klaus Schwab and managing board member of Davos Richard Samans, wrote a report titled “The Future of Jobs” that estimated 7 million jobs will be lost with just 2 million gained as a result of technological change in 15 major developed and emerging economies.

Reports released this year by the World Economic forum repeat this forecast.

From Computer Weekly:

The WEF’s Global Risks 2017 report warns that, as a result of AI and other disruptive technologies, long-term jobs are giving way to self-employment in the “gig” economy, leaving individuals to shoulder more responsibility for the costs of unemployment, sickness and old age.

 

Technology disruption, more than globalisation, deteriorating job prospects and industrial decline, has been the catalyst for anti-establishment voting, which led to Brexit in the UK, the election of Donald Trump in the US, and Italy’s rejection of its former prime minister’s constitutional reforms, the report claims.

 

Unless there is a concerted effort from governments and the private sector, the trend will put pressure on economies and may lead to social unrest, said Cecilia Reyes, chief risk officer of Zurich Insurance Group.

 

“Without proper governance and reskilling of workers, technology will eliminate jobs faster than it creates them,” she said. “Governments can no longer provide historic levels of social protection, and an ant-establishment narrative has gained traction, with new political leaders blaming globalisation for society’s challenges.”

As the populist wave gets larger, the Davos meeting will only shine more light on the fact that those at the upper rung of the economic ladder are at the steering wheel of economic future. The discussions of humanities future taking place in the Alps will only trickle down in sound bites and excerpts for the average person to only ignore as they work 9-5 at a job that may not be there long term in order to pay the rent.

via http://ift.tt/2iz910h Tyler Durden

US Marines Land In Norway For The First Time Since World War II, Angering Russia

Just one week after thousands of US troops arrived in Poland to “support NATO’s Anti-Russian buildup” across Eastern Europe, 300 U.S. Marines from Camp Lejeune landed in Norway on Monday for a six-month deployment, marking the first time since World War II that foreign troops have been allowed to be stationed there, in a deployment breaking with decades of tradition by Norway not to host foreign forces, and angering Norway’s Arctic neighbor Russia, according to Reuters.


A 747 carrying 300 Marines arrived on Monday. Photo: Ned Alley / NTB scanpix

After leaving North Carolina aboard a chartered 747 on Sunday evening, the troops landed at 10am CET on Monday with their luggage and weapons at the Vaernes airport near Trondheim, Norway’s third-largest city, television footage showed. The Marines will be hosted at the Vaernes base of the Norwegian Home Guards near Trondheim, Norway’s third-largest city.

The US soldiers, which will stay in Norway for a year with the current batch of Marines being replaced after their six-month tour is complete. Until now, the US has had large quantities of military materiel pre-positioned in tunnels dug into Norway’s mountains, but no troops.

A spokesman for the Norwegian Home Guards, who will host the Marines at the Vaernes military base, about 1,500 km (900 miles) from the Russian border, said the U.S. troops will learn about winter warfare. “For the first four weeks they will have basic winter training, learn how to cope with skis and to survive in the Arctic environment,” said Rune Haarstad, a Home Guard spokesman. In March, the Marines will take part in the Joint Viking exercises, which will also include British troops, he added.

As the deployment coincides with the U.S. sending several thousand troops to Poland to beef up its Eastern European allies worried about Moscow’s assertiveness, Russia has been understandably concerned. However, both Norway and the US deny the notion that the deployment is meant to “irk” Russia as part of NATO’s wider campaign to oppose what it calls “Russian aggression” in Europe, by sending additional troops and weapons closer to the Russian border. A spokeswoman for Norwegian Ministry of Defence also said the arrival of U.S. Marines had nothing to do with concerns about Russia.

“It has nothing to do with Russia or the current situation” Haarstad doubled down.

Moscow disagrees. While the Russian Embassy in Oslo did not immediately reply to a request for comment by Reuters on Monday, it previously questioned the need for such a move and when the rotational deployment of US Marines in Norway was confirmed last year, Russia said it was puzzled by it.

“Taking into account multiple statements of Norwegian officials about the absence of threat from Russia to Norway we would like to understand for what purposes is Norway so … willing to increase its military potential, in particular through stationing of American forces in Vaernes?” it told Reuters at the time.

This “for sure won’t make better (the) security situation in Northern Europe,” a spokesman for the Russian embassy in Oslo, Maxim Gurov, told AFP in an October email.

Norway, which is a founding member of NATO, has pledged not to host foreign forces to allay Moscow’s concerns that it could serve as a platform for a surprise attack. According to RT, for decades the Scandinavian country stashed massive stockpiles of weapons in preparation for a possible conflict, but only allowed in other allies’ troops for training purposes. Oslo dismisses the notion that the deployment goes against the old commitment, saying that American troops would be rotated rather than stationed permanently. NATO routinely applies the same reasoning to all its deployments in Eastern Europe as a way to circumvent the alliance’s agreement with Russia, which bans permanent deployments of “significant” forces near Russia.

Meanwhile, the US Marine Corps touted the practical benefits of a full-time deployment as the reason for the move. “We’ve been going to Norway for 25 years. So I don’t really know what the hype is about,” Maj. Gen. Niel Nelson, commander of Marine Corps Forces Europe and Africa, told Military.com ahead of the deployment. “We’re just doing our job, from a more economical standpoint. I don’t put a lot of stock in people pointing back and forth.”

“By putting Marines in Norway and above the Arctic Circle for 30-60 days at a time, that’s a whole different environment,” Nelson added. “You not only learn to survive, you are surviving. It’s a harsh environment; it takes a lot of tough lessons and we reinforce that by the length of time.”

Norway and Russia share a small land border far in the north. The Vaernes base is located 1,500km from any part of Russia, but the Arctic training program involves traveling closer to it. We anticipate that the inevitable retaliatory Russian deployment of troops in proximity to the Norwegian border, will be promptly dubbed by NATO, and western media, as a provocative act.

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

America – Under New Management

Submitted by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

In 2008, the majority of Americans voted for “change,” and in some ways, they got it. They received a heavier dose of collectivism in the form of Obamacare, but in addition, they received an even heavier dose of “more of the same.”

Mister Obama did not put an end to Guantanamo as he promised. And, although he did remove troops from Iraq (only to send them back a few years later), he expanded America’s military adventures overall, invading numerous sovereign nations.

As for his promise to come down hard on the sworn enemies of democrats—the evil usurpers on Wall Street—he instead dug in deeper. His Treasury secretaries were banking insiders, not the “reformers” that had been anticipated.

Many who had voted for Mister Obama were deeply disappointed. Under him, government had grown, warfare had expanded, the economy worsened and Wall Street became even fatter than before.

In 2016, Americans, in large part, sought the selfsame changes—less central government control, less overseas aggression and a reigning-in of Wall Street and banks. But to achieve these ends, voters switched sides once again and voted for a Republican, one who boldly committed to “drain the swamp.”

So, what are the odds that they’ll receive those changes? Let’s have a look.

When a new leader is elected, the best first assumption to make is that his campaign promises probably had little or no relationship to his actual intentions. More likely, his intentions will be to continue to pander to the Deep State and those that helped him to get elected.

Therefore, it’s always a good idea, in any country, to pay attention to the new leader’s choice as his posse. The US president-elect has been active in choosing the gunslingers who will ride with him into Washington and the choices may provide an early warning as to who the new president really intends to be.

So, first off would be his closest advisors—his chief of staff and his chief strategist. Mister Trump’s choices, respectively, are Reince Priebus and Stephen Bannon. Mister Bannon is a Goldman alumnus. In addition, Gary Cohn, Goldman’s president, has been chosen as director of the National Economic Council. By any measure, the cabinet will be somewhat of an extension of Goldman.

Mister Trump railed against Wall Street during his campaign and vilified his opponent on Twitter, stating, “Hillary will never reform Wall Street. She is owned by Wall Street!” His supporters had every reason to expect that he would prove to be the reformer they hoped for, yet his choices above suggest that that’s not the plan.

This likelihood is further enforced by his choice of Steven Mnuchin, who spent 17 years at Goldman, as Treasury secretary. His choice for commerce secretary is Wilbur Ross, a billionaire investor who is also unlikely to emerge as an advocate for reform.

As to whether warfare will be diminished in the coming administration, Mister Trump has stated clearly, in reference to ISIS, that he intends to “bomb the shit out of ’em.” (No uncertainty there.) His choice for national security advisor is Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, whose primary focus is in ramping up tensions with Iran. His choice for secretary of defense is Gen. James Mattis, who has declared his desire to invade Iran. In addition, Mike Pompeo, who also favours an invasion of Iran, has been selected as head of the CIA.

These choices are not likely to sit comfortably with Mister Putin, with whom the president-elect suggests he will enjoy a good relationship. Nor will they sit well with the many throughout the world who already feel the US has gone far beyond its limit in seeking to police the world. Rather than back off from the dreaded Wolfowitz Doctrine, the choices of cabinet members, taken collectively, suggest a continuation of the foreign boondoggles that began in 2001.

The one departure may be in the important position of secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, a lifetime employee of Exxon who has developed good relations with Russia and opposes government regulation of business. He may be the one pick that reflects Mister Trump’s campaign claims. Still, Mister Tillerson falls right in line with the ever-expanding corporatist relationship extant in the US government.

Finally, those who hope that Trump will reverse the trend of the Deep State’s near-total control over the US will be disappointed not only by the choice of Mike Pompeo for the CIA, but of Trump campaigner and establishment insider Jeff Sessions as attorney general.

None of the above guarantees that the voters who chose Mister Trump will soon be experiencing buyer’s remorse, but the indicators that Americans may find themselves out of the pan and into the fire are significant.

There’s an old saying that “the more things change, the more they stay the same,” and the lineup of new players above suggests that that may well be the case in the next administration. Meanwhile, not only the US, but the entire world will be holding its collective breath over the coming months. The new president is less likely to spend as much time on the golf course as his predecessor. He’s far more likely to hit the road running. The question will be in what direction he chooses to run. His choices for cabinet suggest that that direction might have less relationship to his campaign rhetoric and more relationship to the ongoing Deep State programme. To be sure, his clear choice of Washington insiders for so many of his primary cabinet positions informs us that the swamp will not, in fact, be drained. Big Business, the military-industrial complex and Big Banks will dominate the Trump cabinet.

Whatever the world will be treated to under the new American presidency, the words of Neil Innes ring true: “No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in.”

*  *  *

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/2joMvvG Tyler Durden

Two Things to Read on Martin Luther King Day

On this day when we honor the legacy of Dr. King, I’ve decided to republish last year’s piece, Two Things to Read on Martin Luther King Day, in full below. Enjoy.

When evil men plot, good men must plan. When evil men burn and bomb, good men must build and bind. When evil men shout ugly words of hatred, good men must commit themselves to the glories of love. Where evil men seek to perpetrate an unjust ‘status quo’, good men must seek to bring into being a real order of justice.

– Martin Luther King Jr

The more I read of Dr. King’s words, the more impressed I become with his timeless wisdom, intellect and courage. On this day when we remember the man, it’s very important to appreciate two things. First, while MLK was a peaceful man, he was unquestionably a fierce revolutionary against the prevailing status quo. While his cause and struggle look so obvious in 2016, in his day many segments of American society considered him the enemy, including the U.S. government. For example, we now know that the FBI actually wrote him a letter suggesting he commit suicide.

As such, beyond his eloquent words, his message of love and a relentless fight for justice, we must also remember that the power structure was very much against the man and everything he stood for. Indeed, the reason “the state” is almost always on the wrong side of history, is because “the state” is typically nothing more than a collection of self-serving entrenched interests battling to preserve their wealth and power at all costs. All too often, such costs are the well being of the population in general. This is the situation we once again face in 2016.

To start, I want to share a post I wrote in 2013, titled, Martin Luther King: “Everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was Legal”. Here are a few excerpts:

continue reading

from Liberty Blitzkrieg http://ift.tt/2jh5rK6
via IFTTT