Martin Armstrong Discussion

[iamnotback]

The problem is that physical silver coin is not ever going to be used as currency ever again, no matter what happens. Period.

1. We are in a digital age and no one is going backwards, no matter what happens. Period.

2. When global collapses ensues such that you think you might be able to use metal coinage, what actually happens is as follows.

You can't transfer digital value when electricity and internet are down. You need substitutes. And I don't mean permanently disrupted, just a week is enough to remember the "barbaric" past. Sure, food will be a priority but those who have access to large stockpiles of food will accept barbaric metals and other such items of value. They would accept digital but electricity and internet will be turned on next week only and so they accept what they have confidence about, many people have confidence about metals. Not to mention that two-three billion people in the world don't have bank accounts (including developed countries) and aren't really accustomed to and haven't gone full digital, and I don't mean tribal people of some remote islands. Everyone knows metals, they will always have some value.

This line of reasoning was already rebutted in the discussion upthread. If you read the entire thread, you will find the rebuttals.

I will add to the upthread points that people will use fiat money at face value, before they will resort to gold and silver coins at metal (not face) value. Not only because it is more well know and trust (also no need to assay the metal value and content purity), but because there won't be enough gold and silver coins in circulation to attain the economies-of-scale to be trusted as a universal unit-of-exchange.

People accept money that they think they can spend. Even those with large stockpiles of food, will want the money they can liquidate for replenishing their farm or operation. The gold market makers are many heads of basically one bank JP Morgan. So gold liquidity can be shut down overnight when they are ready to cause maximum chaos.

• As Fernando “FerFAL” Aguirre points out, only the currency that can be exchanged external to the crisis area has value. People are not bartering silver dimes, rather if you had German DMarks in Bosnia or USA dollars in Argentina, then these were accepted and liquid. Gold coins were much more difficult to liquidate because there is a funnel of few dealers that can't actually exchange them for the externally liquid currencies of USA dollars.
• As Dmitry Orlov points out, everyone's priority is on food, security, and transportation. Direct trade of these is more valued than some metal which can't be traded for these needs, because these metals are not liquid.
• Armstrong has also explained that gold and silver only have a value for as long as the collapse is not total and there is still an external market. During Dark Ages such as in Japan or fall of Rome, the gold and silver become entirely illiquid (is buried in the ground) and only food, guns, fuel, and alcohol+cigarettes become money.

• This is relevant if other fiat currencies have stable value. In FerFAL's time they did. This is not guaranteed as central banks are all in a competitive devaluation race.
• There is a lot of ground and time space leading to what you call total collapse and between that and now there could be temporary disruptions of infrastructure that call for trading metals for items of necessity, while access to digital is limited. A simplest case is ATM malfunction, bank is closed, you have a gold chain you can take to the pawn shop. Expand that to ATMs and banks being closed for a week.
  You can't easily stockpile food to last you a year of these temporary disruptions, unless we talk canned food which is shit and can give you major stomach issues after you consume it for a couple of weeks. You see just two extreme ends: dark age and digital age, one or the other happening fast - this is your problem. There is a lot of distance and a lot of opportunities to use metals and crypto and other items of value, depending where and when you are. Even in most dire circumstances (war, widespread famine) there are always stockpiles of food somewhere that someone has access to and will sell for the right price in valuable items.

The point that gold and silver are not viable alternatives applies regardless of whether there is another stable money to trade to externally. Collapse goes from known currency to barter with food and guns as money. There isn't much coping in the middle unless you have stable barter societies accustomed to operating at that level of low efficiency such as using manual handcranks to pump their water up from the well, and making their own clothing, weapons, and tools from locally sourced cottage industry. That doesn't exist any more in most places in the world. And the places where it does exist, you wouldn't want to be there in a collapse scenario because of the barbarism.

The technology sector is very innovative. Temporary disruptions will cause the networks to become more resilient as the engineers build in infrastructure innovations to future episodes.

I see three scenarios, Digital Age, intervening paper fiat age, and possible Dark Age. We must come out the other side into the Digital Age. There  is no other choice, unless you want to go to nuclear war and reduction of the global population to 500 million.

[1715526887]

1715526887

[1715526887]

1715526887

[1715526887]

1715526887

[1715526887]

1715526887

[iamnotback]

With modern day fiat money it isn't necessary for the value of the metal to be equal to the value of the stamp, rather it can be much less. The $100 bills I use do not contain $100 of paper.

I expected that you would end up saying something along these lines. But this has evidently nothing to do with the trust that people reveal towards precious metals. You seem to have massively forgotten what you started with. Namely, that the trust that people have toward a gold specie doesn't depend on what this specie is made from, but only on the stamp of it.

You are paraphrasing me incorrectly. I wrote:

Money has always been what people trust and have confidence in. This doesn't mean the metal itself, but as Armstrong has explained many times it was the stamp on the metal. Even when the invaders took over the Roman Empire, they used the stamps on the coins from the former Empire because it was more trusted.

By "money" I obviously mean what people trust to be currency (a universal unit-of-exchange). This has nothing to do with chunks of metal (in whatever form) hoarded for speculation and investment. You are conflating orthogonal concerns.

But you still can't escape the simple question why authorities continued to use precious metals for minting coins until very recent...

They debased the coins in the Roman Empire and got away with it up to a point, because people trust the stamp and the strength of emperor stamped on it. But eventually the emperors were being overthrown every decade, so the stamp had to be backed by more metal value in order to bring back the confidence.

Also modern banking and paper money had not yet been invented in Western Europe yet, and I believe not until Florence, Italy if I am not mistake. China had already invented paper money though.

So if the government is perceived to be strong and stable (e.g. the USA since at least WW2), then that government can debase the hell out of their fiat, which is exactly what the Fed has been doing with the world's reserve currency and formerly strongest military power.

And why people started evading such coins when the authorities began debasing them

No one stopped using FRNs and zinc pennies and quarters. The USA government is still perceived to be strong. But we are witnessing the fall of the USA empire now. Exactly as predicted by Armstrong's model. In fact, Armstrong's model for the US empire peaked on the day Edward Snowden made his final move of no return for releasing the NSA exposé.

[iamnotback]

Goldbugs will likely have at least one more dead-cat bounce to sell before any collapse back to $1050 and potentially below:

Gold should bounce and rally to test the 1340 level by year-end. We need a weekly closing above the 1336 level to show some sustainability. Resistance begins at 1308 and we need a daily closing above 1319 to be impressive.

But by no means does this mean that USA stocks and the dollar are poised to crash. Rather gold is just getting some dead-cat bounces because of the uncertainty over the US election. As the dollar and USA stock blast off in 2017 due to the massive dollar short coming home and the stampede into the dollar safe haven, then dollar up, gold down:

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; So many people keep calling for a stock market crash. At the same time, it has hung on to the 18000 level in the Dow for dear life. Do you see such a devastating crash as even possible?



ANSWER: No possible way. Retail participation is at near record lows. It has just started to lift begrudgingly. Even the Gallup poll on Americans shows the same thing. Retail participation is at best 55% down from 65% in 2007. Liquidity, however, is still off by 50%. This does introduce the likelihood of Flash Crashes and Flash Rallies. Such events are by no means because of a pending major crash. Just where do you put money if bonds are dead and banks a questionable? Of course some will yell gold. But gold is for the individual. Pension funds and institutional investors with billions and trillions cannot invest in gold bullion with no yield. Gold stocks, yes, but bullion no.



November is a Directional Change and then our next big target is January. We will be doing a Gold Video Update tomorrow.

[sidhujag]

Note @sidhujag has been added to Ignore for being a envious, blind, fool. I have clearly documented upthread that Putin invaded Middle East precisely on the day (Oct 1) of 2015.75.

Money has always been what people trust and have confidence in. This doesn't mean the metal itself, but as Armstrong has explained many times it was the stamp on the metal. Even when the invaders took over the Roman Empire, they used the stamps on the coins from the former Empire because it was more trusted.

Bitcoin (crypto-currency on a blockchain) enable trustless money, where we don't have to trust any authority. We trust the decentralized protocol. Now that was the ideal. Unfortunately Satoshi's proof-of-work centralizes and thus we end up trusting Gregory Maxwell and the Chinese mining cartel

I disagree that that trust in the case of hard currencies has anything to do with authorities and the stamp on the metal they make. In fact, in medieval times you could just grab a piece of gold and take it to the royal mint where you got your royal coins stamped for a small fee. This tells us that the stamp had rather a utilitarian function than an existential one. On the other hand, if it all came down to trust in authorities, there would be no case for Gresham's Law where you had essentially the same stamp but, nevertheless, different levels of trust...

Which wouldn't be ever possible unless you in fact trusted the metal more than the stamp on it as you claim

Sorry but if you have access to a lot of data such as Armstrong who has collected all the ancient coins (at enormous cost), you will come to learn that your understanding is factually incorrect.

Why did we build the largest coin collection in the world? Because coins are the documented history of the fiscal mismanagement of centuries of mankind. There is nothing that does not fluctuate even what is used for money.

The Mongols conquered China and maintained their monetary system. They honored the paper money in circulation and used that as the monetary base rather than coins.

The barbarians issued coins at first maintaining the pretense of the Roman Empire pretending that they now held the throne.

...the next target marks the end of the Roman Empire that formally falls in 476AD with the last real emperor. However, then the barbarians assume the throne for a brief period of time. They issued coins that appeared to be Roman in appearance. Effectively, at the end, the barbarians wanted to be Romans where as the Vandals just stripped even the copper from the roofs of temples in Rome.

The idea that money must be tangible also has no basis in fact. Money has been many things to many people. The entire basis of money is you will accept something as money as long as you have CONFIDENCE that in turn someone else will accept it from you.

This idea that somehow gold coin is not fiat has been so misleading. Here is a Roman tax collector gold bar because the government minted gold coins cheating in quality but refused to accept them in return for taxes. Thus, taxes were imposed based upon weight – not coins! Therefore, the gold coins of the day were not trusted and even government had no CONFIDENCE in them, which is why they were NOT legal tender (acceptable for taxes).

...

Early attempts at wage and prices controls always failed from Babylonian times right up to the Wage & Price Controls of Diocletian (284-305AD) who attempted to restore silver coinage AFTER the Great Monetary collapse. It did not matter that coinage was restored. CONFIDENCE still collapsed and the coinage was rapidly hoarded and vanished from circulation. So yes, even when the money is of full value, it still will not circulate if people do not BELIEVE government. Indeed, there was still another war and finally Constantine (309-337AD) emerged as Emperor after defeating all rivals. He enjoyed some success but had to abandon Rome and created a new Capital Constantinople and revised the monetary system again.

...

Government then began to stamp the image or badge of the city to impress people.However, the first city to “coin” money was also the first to discover “fiat” meaning the value is simply dictated by government

...

The whole reason people began to use banks was because the “money” could not be verified. Just because the coins were silver or gold did not mean anything. They could be debased, shaved, or forged. You deposited money in a bank and the bank CERTIFIED you were paying in “good” money. People did not want coins, they wanted the bank paper receipts. Like the moneychanger, the bank was certifying the transaction was taking place with proper value in “money”. Thus, paper money began in middle ages as receipts certifying deposits.

...

Ancient Egypt always had “fiat” money receipts for grain in public warehouses trading as money. They did not have any coinage until Alexander the Great conquered them in 334BC. Virginia also had the same system of tobacco receipts that circulated as money in colonial times.

China and Japan were the same. They never had circulating gold or silver coinage. This nonsense that money has to be tangible is NOT supported by the facts. Money has always been based solely upon what someone else is will to accept. Go to a WaWa or Starbucks and try to buy with a gold coin. They will not accept it. Hell, some places will not even take a $100 bill anymore and want plastic. If they do not BELIEVE gold is acceptable for payment or you hand them $1 in 1964 silver quarters to by a $5 coffee, you are out of luck. They will see it as $1 not worth $5. This is the real economy. MONEY is only valuable based upon what the OTHER person believes – not you!

It is NOT the fiat. It is simply CONFIDENCE. Bank and warehouse paper receipts have circulated as money for thousands of years. Even dollars under Bretton Woods gold standard were simply receipts redeemable in gold in international transactions. It was NOT gold that actually circulated. When people as a whole distrust government, then barter replaces official “money” and that can be a lot of things and the worse it gets the more likely it boils down to food. We have run every possible correlation and have the database to do so.

When Genghis Khan invaded China, which was using paper money, he too accepted it and did not devalue the paper money that was in circulation. He too accepted the paper money from the previous emperors.

By the time this economic implosion is over, you will PRAY for HYPERINFLATION. What we face is far worse. It is loss of everything with the risk of tanks rolling down your streets hunting money!

It has always been a confidence game. Those in power are constantly trying to boost the confidence of the people in order to stabilize their control over society. Above is a Roman coin from the tetrarchy period of Diocletian & Maximinus. The term meant “leadership of four” whereas there had been a chaotic period that spanned across 20 emperors whereby they came to power only to be overthrown by another. There was no political stability. The Emperor Diocletian sought to create political stability and established the tetrarchy where there were two emperors and two “Caesars” who were like vice presidents in waiting. The power of governing the empire was split and marked the end of the crisis of the third century.

You do not see hyperinflation in Britain or China despite the fact that both declined from major economic peaks. Money never becomes worthless in a major core society for if the core were to collapse then everything else must fall as well. Genghis Khan accepted the paper currency of China upon his conquest and did not render it worthless. It continued to circulate and he accepted it in payment himself. That is showing the Moguls wanted the dignity of conquering civilization and merely replaced the emperor.

Human nature does not change with time. It remains consistent and this is why history repeats. With the fall of Rome, the invading barbarians wanted to be Roman. Their rulers initially issued coins merely pretending to be the emperor. One of the great kings was Theodebert I (534-548AD) whose tomb is erected and still standing as if he too had been a Roman Emperor. Thus the invaders wanted to be the head of the civilization both in China and Europe showing confidence did not vanish, just a change in ownership and no hyperinflation.

The term ‘barbarous coinage’ of the 3rd century refers to imitative coins that are typically crude in style. Their origin stems from the use of Roman coins outside the empire and as a result there was a high demand that was not often met. Consequently, then shortage of official coinage was compensated by the strike of imitative coinage that was underweight, but there was no real intrinsic metal value. Like US dollars circulate in Russia and China, it is the confidence in the foreign government that provides the inherent value to the monetary instrument rather than the metal content.

Indian Ancient Imitations of Roman Coins

The peripheral economy with respect to the center core economy has routinely imitated the coinage of the dominant economy which is the financial capital of the world. In the case of India, these imitations of Roman coinage in gold are known as far back as the Roman Emperor Tiberius (14-37AD). These are imitations rather than counterfeits for the metal content is the same or at times even better. Pictured here is an Indian contemporary Indian imitation of a gold aureus of Tiberius (AV Aureus 19mm, 6.69 grams) copied from a coin struck at Lugdunum (Lyon) mint issue in modern day France which obviously made it to India.

Even your example is another confirmation that it is indeed the confidence the public has in the authority which drives the use as currency, because the public innately understands that power vacuum of society which I had explained.

You misunderstand Gresham's Law. The hoarding is for the melt value, not for the currency value. In fact, the hoarding is removing the currency attribute.

Funny how you misread what I wrote and apply your misunderstanding in further assumption to try to prove to yourself that you are right when you couldn't be further away from the truth, Anonymint. I have proven my statement numerous times, but you misinterpret like a socketpuppet that you are.

[sidhujag]

glad to see that so many people are finally getting what a dirty charlatan MA is, except for this hopeless clown TBTB. He miserably failed at his own forecasts (even though nobody has ever asked him for his views) on gold and virtually anything but still is denying the reality. Gold bottomed last December and since then is rising but he together with his con artist idol is refusing to admit his stupidity. Eleven months!

Which is exactly what gold did in 2011 and the resulting decline to $1050 before 2015.75. And in the 2014/5 gold report, MA further clarified that the final low would be in Q1 2016 < $1000 (perhaps < $850).

Gold < 850 in Q1? Ok, now gold is at 1160 and keeps rising. We have one month to go down more than $300. Should we wait till March to yet again witness your stupidity or shall we ask you to admit it right now?

 

MA has always been a failure but this year he managed to go even further. After failing at gold, the Dow, USTs, the USD, etc, he simply stopped publishing his bs forecasts because even complete and utter idiots figured it out. Now once that stopped working, he turned his cheap blog into news agency posting political news in poor efforts to capitalize on people's anger and frustration from politics. That's how he now sells his bs conferences, because even idiots like tbtb won't buy them because they are broke after listening to MA's advice.

I think he's still waiting for his single digit Bitcoin in Q1 2016!! Back to the time machine marty! He probably deleted those posts by now I took him on a wager and he lost and withered away from acknowledging defeat.

[iamnotback]

People will use fiat money when they have it and when the other side accepts it. Hint: they will gradually stop accepting it in hyperinflation surroundings, sorry but legal tender law can't help in hyperinflation -

Hyperinflation NEVER occurs in a major economy:

HYPERINFLATION has ONLY taken place in minor peripheral economies. It has NEVER taken place in a major economy. All major economies implode from deflation because as they need money, they attack their citizens destroying their own economies as we are doing right now. So while you wait for HYPERINFLATION, your taxes will rise, your rights will vanish, and you will see tanks on your streets before $30,000 gold that will still be the cost of a men’s suit. Forget this HYPERINFLATION and fiat nonsense.

We have run every possible correlation and have the database to do so. It is just hype! Just as the stock market has never peaked with the same level of interest rates, you cannot find any such evidence that if money is “fiat” then it collapses and going into HYPERINFLATION. Good sales pitch – but’s it.

By the time this economic implosion is over, you will PRAY for HYPERINFLATION. What we face is far worse. It is loss of everything with the risk of tanks rolling down your streets hunting money!

ore silver coinage AFTER the Great Monetary collapse. It did not matter that coinage was restored. CONFIDENCE still collapsed and the coinage was rapidly hoarded and vanished from circulation. So yes, even when the money is of full value, it still will not circulate if people do not BELIEVE government. Indeed, there was still another war and finally Constantine (309-337AD) emerged as Emperor after defeating all rivals. He enjoyed some success but had to abandon Rome and created a new Capital Constantinople and revised the monetary system again. That lasted for some time and once more you find silver vanishing from circulation.

QUESTION: I have done my own homework and it appears you are correct regarding monetary history and that simply because a currency is “fiat” does not result in hyperinflation, Even the Greenback of the US Civil War did not result in hyperinflation. Is it correct to say then that hyperinflation takes place only with revolutionary new governments?

ANSWER: To be precise, hyperinflation takes place when there is a collapse in confidence that supports a government so it can be an established government such as in South America. The key is the currency is not accepted by the people. That comes FIRST and then we see that they print more and more following the trend and propelling it. This is the chicken or egg dilemma. It is not the REVERSE that the supply increases and that causes the currency to decline as characterized by the gold promoters.

Hyperinflation unfolds when the people no longer trust the government and that can occur with an established government as in South America without war, but it is traditionally associated with revolution such as the American colonies during the American Revolution, French Revolution, German 1918 Communist Revolution, Russian Revolution, Hungary etc.

The British economy peaked in 1914. There was no hyperinflation thereafter despite the abandoning of the gold standard. So both the USA during the Civil War and Britain abandoned gold during war and neither entered into hyperinflation so it is true – fiat does not automatically create hyperinflation. Sorry. I believe in gold as an asset class. I do not believe in gold as the economic savior, exclusive form of money, or any other nonsense that cannot be demonstrated on a CONSISTENT basis in history.

Many people pay attention to the German Hyperinflation of the 1920’s, yet fail to understand that such an economic crisis followed the German Revolution of 1918. The German Revolution was a politically driven civil conflict in Germany at the end of World War I, which resulted in the replacement of Germany’s imperial government with a Weimar Republic.

Nonetheless, keep in mind that the Russian Revolution was 1917. Consequently, the German revolutionaries were certainly inspired by the emerging communist ideas. However, the German communists failed in their effort to hand power to soviets as the Bolsheviks had done in Russia. In Germany, it was the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) leadership that refused to work with communists who supported the Bolsheviks. Moreover, the SPD feared that an all-out civil war would erupt in Germany between the communists and the German conservatives. Hence, the SPD struck a middle ground and did not plan to completely strip the old imperial elites of their power and assets. The SPD sought a compromise whereby they were integrated into the new social democratic system. The left wing fell into political fragmentation that prevented Germany from turning communist at the time. The Weimar Constitution was adopted on August 11th, 1919. It was this government that moved into hyperinflation, not the old Imperial Government.

Consequently, this was a revolutionary government. All economic activity stopped. The wealthy were scared to death. They saw the bloodshed in Russia in 1917. Capital hoarded and the velocity of money imploded. So while many point to the German Hyperinflation and then say we will enter the same result, are taking only the hyperinflation and ignoring the events that caused it. There were NO gold reserves. There were no lenders to the government. There were no bond markets. There was absolutely nothing. Nobody would dare lend anything for the fear was Germany would go the way of Russia.

This is why I say the hyperinflation of Germany and Zimbabwe are just not even plausible today.  Yet these events are touted and used as sales tools for gold and that is dangerous for when the fundamentals do not pan out, confusion and crisis follow. Feeding people bullshit stories is highly dangerous for when the truth emerges, they lose confidence rapidly.

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; What did people really do during the German hyperinflation? It seems that all you hear about has been people running around with wheelbarrows of cash to buy anything. Was that truly reality or just the extremes?

ANSWER:
Life actually went on. People used American dollars and other foreign currency. In December 31, 1923, Time Magazine reported that the German currency was worth almost nothing and yet $12 in American money could pay for good seats at the National Opera in Berlin to see Mattia Battistini. As countries move toward an inflation crisis, it is CONFIDENCE that collapses and so they turn to external currency. The American dollar will still rise and its usage will remain in cash transactions. Ukraine is currently using the US dollar in the face of their currency’s inflation. Zimbabwe has lost the right to print its own money. People use the currencies of other nations to this day. The same result took place in Japan when the government lost the CONFIDENCE of the people and was unable to produce money that people would accept. The Japanese used rice and Chinese coins, but not their own currency.
In Germany, people used foreign currency. The hyperinflation was the result of a collapse in CONFIDENCE of the German government. The people turned mostly to foreign currency. They did not trust the new Communist Revolutionary government. This is why the hyperinflation took place. The bulk of the people turned to commodities, and others used foreign currency. This is a standard pattern which has ALWAYS emerged. Therefore, life goes on, just as we see in Kiev. However, apartments for rent in Kiev are prices in foreign currency right now, not its domestic currency. The people lack CONFIDENCE in the government and will not retain savings in their local currency, which will propel inflation.

Hyperinflation aside, just 3% of fiat money exists in paper notes. When you don't have paper banknotes (electricity has been down for a week in your area, they promise to fix it next week), what will you do? You will trade PMs, even at a discounted metal value.

I already told you that there isn't enough gold and silver coin available and widely enough distributed to even make any dent in that usage scenario.

Onboarding a new currency is very difficult as Bitcoin is finding out.

It doesn't need to be a universal unit-of-exchange, it only needs to be a unit of exchange that your local owner of food stock accepts.

Incorrect and that demonstrates that you have a very low IQ and/or a lack of education in the area of economics and monetary systems.

You don't seem to understand anything about how economies work and the reason economies-of-scale in units-of-exchange and liquidity-of-exchange are critical. And I don't have time to teach you.

I have a good feeling many of them will accept PMs as they always did and do in war times, in other calamities.

They did not accept PMs in other calamities. Not unless PMs were already the legal tender.

Study history. Learn. Or continue to be fooled by incorrect propaganda from goldbugs.

You assume that the dark or digital age will happen everywhere in the world at the same time.

No. I know that if there is stable external currency, the region in crisis will adopt that because they can't adopt PMs.

The truth is there will be spreads between status of dark chaos or of digital enlightenment in different parts of the world lasting years, decades probably. This presents opportunities for exchange and liquidity, arbitrage. You only need good enough, not the best, liquidity to make a trade when you're hungry. Fiat paper money of course works best until it doesn't.

Regardless PMs will never be widely accepted as currency. Never.

But don't listen to me. Please buy moar precious metals now before the drop to $1050 or below.

[iamnotback]

I think he's still waiting for his single digit Bitcoin in Q1 2016!! Back to the time machine marty! He probably deleted those posts by now I took him on a wager and he lost and withered away from acknowledging defeat.

So now we see you are a liar also. So I equate you with Hillary Clinton. Good riddance.

[sidhujag]

I think he's still waiting for his single digit Bitcoin in Q1 2016!! Back to the time machine marty! He probably deleted those posts by now I took him on a wager and he lost and withered away from acknowledging defeat.

So now we see you are a liar also. So I equate you with Hillary Clinton. Good riddance.

nope, all facts check your history

[iamnotback]

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Further proof that Rothschilds caused the Oct. 28 ECM cycle date event!
From:    "Shelby Moore"
Date:    Wed, November 2, 2016 7:56 pm
To:      armstrongeconomics@gmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Martin,

After receiving my email below, you wrote:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/deliberate-leaks-are-being-strategically-made-to-stop-clinton-inc/

All our indications from behind the curtain are suggesting that there are
many within the “intelligence” sector and “law enforcement” sector who are
deeply troubled with the Clintons. They are trying to release documents
and info to stop the Clinton Inc. Machine. That’s all we can say on this
topic right now. Suffice it to say, there is a real internal battle going
on in Washington.

Why are you refusing to admit the Assange connection (and Rothschilds
involvement with Assange), when Steve Pieczenik has admitted that Assange
is instrumental in the current counter-coup which you mentioned above?

http://www.inquisitr.com/3668257/steve-pieczenik-hilary-clinton-coup-clinton-takeover-former-deputy-assistant-secretary-of-state-julian-assange/

Additionally, note very carefully the words of Steve Pieczenik, "the
emails that we gave him". Meaning that the hacked emails that Assange has
originated from those in the intelligence community, thus implying that
Assange is merely a coordinator for those inside the USA intelligence
community who want to anonymously release information.

Are you too embarrassed to admit you were wrong about the residual power
of the global elite Rothshilds family? Or are you beholden to Rothschilds
in some way?


---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Rothschilds caused the Oct. 28 ECM cycle date event!
From:    "Shelby Moore"
Date:    Sun, October 30, 2016 2:02 am
To:      armstrongeconomics@gmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Greetings Martin,

I was waiting for you to write that the FBI reopened the Clinton case on
your ECM cycle turn date of Oct. 28 (which you only noted w.r.t. to the
Bundy acquittals,
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/future-forecasts/ecm/did-something-happen-of-the-ecm-turning-point/).

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/did-comey-come-out-precisely-on-target-of-the-ecm/


I had immediately noticed that and written about it publicly before you
did. But I had also noticed that Wikileaks was driving this with their
plan to announce on Tuesday, Nov 1, information that could irrefutably
incriminate Clinton and possibly Obama:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/breaking-julian-assange-next-leak-will-lead-arrest-hillary-clinton/


And I was pleased to see that you became aware that Wikileaks is forcing
the hand of the FBI:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/the-fbi-reopens-hillarys-emails-too-hot-to-handle/

The RELIABLE sources from behind the curtain (1) say the Wikileaks has
made the FBI look like fools, besides I reported previously that those
working on the case unanimously believed she should be indicted. (2) the
latest “new” emails go all the way to Obama...

But consistent with our past debates about whether the globalists had
their messy hands in the Ukraine and Middle East nation-building, you have
apparently not been aware that Rothschilds family clan are apparently the
funders for Wikileaks and they are the ones who have arranged his safe
harbor:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1637496.msg16695733#msg16695733

Click the above link and review all the sources! Damn it. Otherwise you
are just being obstinate and refusing to learn what has been exquisitely
documented.


Consistent with the speculative theory you raised on your blog about
Clinton + Obama + USA incumbent political establishment might be trying to
foment war with Russia to blame an election failure or rigging scenario
and justify Marshall law or to provide justification for snuffing out any
Trump post-election protest, the involvement of Rothschild is creating
this pressure on Clinton and Obama raises the question of what is the
strategy of the global elite?

One possibility is as I wrote here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1639006.msg16695728#msg16695728

Now others are picking up on what I (and Armstrong) were writing:

https://steemit.com/money/@dollarvigilante/brexit-ii-is-donald-trump-a-false-flag

Trump is the way for the Joe Blows get to blow up the system and then the
economic collapse (and war) gets laid on Trump's lap.

Another possibility is that the global elite want to force war in the
Middle East, dump all the problems on Trump, and more over what I wrote:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1049048.msg16719991#msg16719991

I think the some Americans are willing to fight to the death for their
culture and way of life. Perhaps that is why Rothschilds may be promoting
Trump to the Presidency (via the alleged control of Wikileaks), so as to
unleash the conservatives against the Liberals in all out civil war mixed
with a potential war with Russia, so as to divide-and-conquer.

You can't kill the conservatives easily (there is a gun under every blade
of grass, and you can take each one from a cold dead hand). So let them
burn themselves out fighting several enemies.

This also fits with Armstrong's theme of the USA breaking up into regions
of conservatives and liberals self-segregation.

Martin, I would like for you to also contemplate that Bitcoin wasn't
likely created by some imaginary Satoshi in his garage. More likely its
development was funded by the global elite for the purposes of breaking
down resistance by nation-state currency systems and turf battles
resistance by banks, while also enabling digital tracking of every
transaction on a public blockchain. Knowing full well that profitable
proof-of-work does not remain decentralized (China's mining oligarchy
controls 65+% of the Bitcoin hashrate, thus controls the protocol).

Also Martin it makes me suspicious of you that you do not admit that a
global elite is a natural order within your models. It is as if you want
to deny the inviolable power-law distribution of wealth.


Shelby Moore III
https://ph.linkedin.com/in/shelby-moore-iii-b31488b0

[iamnotback]

I have no time to argue with stubborn mules.

Ditto. It is a mutual perception. My perception is based on a higher IQ comprehension than yours. Yet you are welcome to stick with your Dunning-Kruger "reality". Idiots always think they are correct, because they lack the mental capability to build a comprehensive model (of reality).

I do encourage you to bring some gold and silver coins into any collapsed economy right now and test your theory. Go to Venezuela and try spending gold and silver coins. Lol. Make a YouTube for us.

[iamnotback]

The facts for 2016:

Gold +22.5% YTD
Long Bond US Treasury TLT +9.1% YTD
SP500 +2.7% YTD

Armstrong & shills predictions for 2016:
OMG gold going to sub $1000 or even to sub $850.
Bonds US Treasury exploding to the downside (the infamous 2015.75 big bang).
SP500 skyrocketing due to capital flows.

The BS is over. No verbal (or should I say written) diarrhea is going to change anything. The emperor is naked.

Facts:

• Edward Snowden making his final move of no return to release NSA exposé on the exact turn date (April 22, 2013) for Armstrong's model of the peak of the USA empire.
• Putin officially entered the war in Syria on Oct. 1, 2015, precisely Armstrong's major ECM (Economic Confidence Model) turn date 2015.75.
• Per my prior post above, Assange+USA intelligence+FBI initiated a counter-coup against the Establishment politicians on Oct. 28, 2016, precisely to the day of the current turn date of Armstrong's ECM. Also the Bundy's were acquitted which was the first time a jury went against the Establishment in 200 years.
• Dollar is up since the peak (various currencies peaked between 2011 and 2016):
  +90% against gold
  +60% Australian dollar
  +41% British pound
  +53% Canadian dollar
  +60% Chilean peso
  +13% Chinese yuan (non-floating currency rate)
  +38% Euro
  +35% Indian rupee
  +60% Japanese yen valley-to-peak (note the dollar has slumped against yen so far in 2016)
  +43% Swiss franc
• FX exchange volume $5.3 trillion daily, versus $3 billion monthly for precious metals
• USA DJIA up +75% in same period. Armstrong's model has been predicted a double to triple since 2011.
• Armstrong's War Cycle model pinpointing Ukraine, Middle East, and rapefugees crisises decades before they occurred.
• etc

You'd have to be a fucking blind moron to not see what is going on.

[marcus_of_augustus]

bitcoin's up ... how did ole code-hacker marty score on that one?

[iamnotback]

bitcoin's up ... how did ole code-hacker marty score on that one?

No prediction from him. Not enough data for his computer model perhaps.

I explained more here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg16734890#msg16734890

All he has written about Bitcoin is that he expected the governments could clamp down it later. No price predictions.

[OROBTC]

...

iamnotback

I did not see the adjective "pugnacious" in the Summary section of your LinkedIn profile...     :p    

Perhaps Armstrong could use a guy like you?  Side benefit: US doctors could take a crack at your conditions as well.

*  *  *

I am always suspicious of cherry-picked dates when looking at performance of various assets.  Picking a period of 2016 Year-to-Date vs. the past five years (or whatever time frames) will yield "the answer you want".  Picking the performance of gold since 2000 for example (arbitrary, but a "round number, ha ha) would get you an approximate quadrupling of the price of gold vs. the US$.

For some commodities the value will be roughly stable around a certain relative value vs. other things on a longer term horizon (certainly gold, but I don't know about other commodities, my *guess* is that many commodities would exhibit similar (though declining, as iamnotback has mentioned elsewhere) through the years).

*  *  *

The Rothschilds apparently like gold a lot.  It is not at all clear how much they own, but is reputed to be substantial...  Where else are you going to invest your $billion$ after you have plenty of castles and vineyards?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family

It would not surprise me at all if the Rs own many tonnes of gold.

Do the Rothschilds know something you don't?  

That family is the classic example of owning lots of quietly held gold, passed down through the generations (other wealthy Europeans have been doing the same for centuries).

[OROBTC]

...

I don't know what to think about Bitcoin.  Yes, it has made another nice move, it's around $740 now, up a nice meaty 14% or so in a week or so.

But, as the constant bickering of TPTB in Bitcoinistan continues to bother me (hard forks, etc.), well I don't know if I trust the system to remain intact.  Granted, my use of BTC has been "dual-use" (spend some, throw some into cold storage -- insulates me a bit vs. the high premiums I have had to pay at BTC ATMs).  Nonetheless, the risky-seeming & perhaps rickety BTC system gives me some willies...  

Since I am not a programmer nor know much about Bitcoin's internal workings, perhaps my concerns are unwarranted.

[DigiLab]

iamnotback, as I've said before, I like when someone challenges you and you spill out all this good stuff. It's reinvigorating the forum as well.
For the ones that don't agree with this, there is nothing against your views. There is no intention, neither to oppose, nor support them.

Inter alia, that stuff about Freeman Dyson, talking about the ability to see the bigger picture, wow. I'm nowhere close to Dyson's IQ, and I was in line with Richard Dawkins thinking. Till I read and understood Dyson's response, impressive, to say the least.

As for Martin Armstrong, for me he explains the economy in a practical fashion. I call it, Understanding of things vs. just their Interpretation.

[Thenoticer]

To my BCT friends who are goldbugs, the reason I speak frankly is because I want you to look at the situation objectively. I know from my own infatuation in the past with precious metals, that the drug of fighting back against the system is very intoxicating.

But the fact is that absent our existing governance and monetary system, a power vacuum forms, which sucks in roaming armed gangs which then gives rise to warlords. The warlords are the market makers. Feudalism. Power is a fact of physics and nature.

The only way your fantasy of a silver dime monetary barter system would take form is if you have an organized community with governance, security, and enshrining silver dimes as the monetary system to give it the confidence it needs. And then some market makers to provided the liquidity between debt, silver dimes, and production. And you have to then provide for defense against more powerful invaders, so your community can't be too small.

If you don't understand how governance, market makers (i.e. power-brokers), and the economy are all dependent on each other, then you of course will make silly fantasies about people trading silver dimes as a fall back option.

Understanding power vacuums, the power-law distribution of wealth in nature, etc.. are critical to forming a rational assessment of the future.

Money has always been what people trust and have confidence in. This doesn't mean the metal itself, but as Armstrong has explained many times it was the stamp on the metal. Even when the invaders took over the Roman Empire, they used the stamps on the coins from the former Empire because it was more trusted.

Bitcoin (crypto-currency on a blockchain) enable trustless money, where we don't have to trust any authority. We trust the decentralized protocol. Now that was the ideal. Unfortunately Satoshi's proof-of-work centralizes and thus we end up trusting Gregory Maxwell and the Chinese mining cartel.

So crypto-currency is not quite ready for being independent of the powers-that-be yet.

Someone may invent a solution. I happen to know someone who claims he may have such a solution. We'll see...

Question for you.

What is the most ideal money system?

In the now Id suppose this would be the system with the most liquidity and fungibility.

However if one was to theorize what the most ideal money system was, what would it

As Dmitry Orlov points out, everyone's priority is on food, security, and transportation. Direct trade of these is more valued than some metal which can't be traded for these needs, because these metals are not liquid.

Thinking towards your better then steemit line of thought. The next generation social network would do well to focus on these things. Allow the economy(trade of goods and services) to flourish freely. Decentralize food preparation and distribution. (Ie: uber/air bnb like: you cook some extra food and use a local service to sell and deliver it, build a rep, etc). Decentralize security, neighborhood militia, cop liasons, neighborhood watch, etc. Decentralize transportation, uber.

(Decentralization in this case, still uses a network as the centralizer, however it allows regular people to participate. Ie: gives the purpose..a job, when no ones hiring)

[sloanf]

glad to see that so many people are finally getting what a dirty charlatan MA is, except for this hopeless clown TBTB. He miserably failed at his own forecasts (even though nobody has ever asked him for his views) on gold and virtually anything but still is denying the reality. Gold bottomed last December and since then is rising but he together with his con artist idol is refusing to admit his stupidity. Eleven months!

Which is exactly what gold did in 2011 and the resulting decline to $1050 before 2015.75. And in the 2014/5 gold report, MA further clarified that the final low would be in Q1 2016 < $1000 (perhaps < $850).

Gold < 850 in Q1? Ok, now gold is at 1160 and keeps rising. We have one month to go down more than $300. Should we wait till March to yet again witness your stupidity or shall we ask you to admit it right now?

 

MA has always been a failure but this year he managed to go even further. After failing at gold, the Dow, USTs, the USD, etc, he simply stopped publishing his bs forecasts because even complete and utter idiots figured it out. Now once that stopped working, he turned his cheap blog into news agency posting political news in poor efforts to capitalize on people's anger and frustration from politics. That's how he now sells his bs conferences, because even idiots like tbtb won't buy them because they are broke after listening to MA's advice.

I think he's still waiting for his single digit Bitcoin in Q1 2016!! Back to the time machine marty! He probably deleted those posts by now I took him on a wager and he lost and withered away from acknowledging defeat.

yes, and real estate is just 0.2 from 2006 peak and is rising https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CSUSHPINSA, where charlatan Martin Armstrong failed big time. That's why he stopped posting his failures in his blog and entered into "reposting political news" business in a desperate attempt to make some money on people's anger. And then he claims the Fed, the IMF, Chinese authorities, Blackrock, PIMCO, etc are all reading him. What a cheap dirty charlatan and a broke dillusional scamster!

[deisik]

With modern day fiat money it isn't necessary for the value of the metal to be equal to the value of the stamp, rather it can be much less. The $100 bills I use do not contain $100 of paper.

I expected that you would end up saying something along these lines. But this has evidently nothing to do with the trust that people reveal towards precious metals. You seem to have massively forgotten what you started with. Namely, that the trust that people have toward a gold specie doesn't depend on what this specie is made from, but only on the stamp of it.

You are paraphrasing me incorrectly. I wrote:

Money has always been what people trust and have confidence in. This doesn't mean the metal itself, but as Armstrong has explained many times it was the stamp on the metal. Even when the invaders took over the Roman Empire, they used the stamps on the coins from the former Empire because it was more trusted.

By "money" I obviously mean what people trust to be currency (a universal unit-of-exchange). This has nothing to do with chunks of metal (in whatever form) hoarded for speculation and investment. You are conflating orthogonal concerns

The problem is that the very metal these chunks were minted from was considered money (in whatever form and state), not the stamp impressed on it as you and your buddy Armstrong erroneously claim. In other words, people trusted the metal, not the stamp. I have already told that people paid a relatively small fee (several percentages) for having royal coins minted from the gold or other coins they had brought to the royal mint. And that fee was the real "market" price of the stamp. This can be very easily explained by the fact that every king or emperor had been minting and accepting as legal tender his own coin, so the stamp itself cost virtually nothing. For the simple reason that rulers back then had been killed, assassinated, and overthrown every other day. The invaders that took over the Roman Empire fit into this scheme of things perfectly...

Just imagine what your 100 dollar bill would be worth if it had been outlawed every time a new POTUS came to power

[r0ach]

In fact, Armstrong's model for the US empire peaked on the day Edward Snowden made his final move of no return for releasing the NSA exposé.

Well, the US did peak in the 1950's, so I guess his model was only 70 years off.