Go To THE BEST GOVERNMENTS MONEY CAN BUY
Go To THE G-SIFI LIST *(Too Big To Fail)
The empire’s books tell us his side of the story (his story) and generally omits much of other perspectives.
The victorious conqueror and the glorious battles of conquest.
From my earliest years I have viewed humanity as a ailing group with an illness and the authorities only allow the popular mavericks (those who want to implement healing, healthy environment and a wholesome living society) to apply a band-aid or a splint as if this is a battle-dressing for a wound and not allowed the time for complete recovery and healing. The battle has continued for centuries; will the wars be waged for centuries more?
Many have forgotten that white slavery was once a norm too. Slavery is still unfinished business (doesn’t matter your heritage, age, gender or skin pigmentation – white, brown, red,yellow, and black) has cycled from harsh to mild treatment and now the harshness appears to have returned as the empire thirsts for conquest and domination once again…
What is evident to me is that some of the people don’t realize they have been certificated as slaves, while others think they are playing a game with their HONOR intact and they know how the game is played and with their honor and skill they know how to win! While others gleefully see the rigged game and with predatory cunning will play dirty too and climb the ladders to wealth. & luxury.
I see some of these game players (officers, lawyers, officials, priests and professionals) begin to finally question the game. Is it right to make EVERYONE on the planet play this game?! Where and who are the INVISIBLES (obviously some people are ABOVE the game, ABOVE the law, ABOVE top secret where the RULES do not apply to them or they can break all the rules with impunity)?
WE the people don’t have to play this game. Face your fears and uncertainties with loving creativity because WE are the change.
Meet the Federal Reserve – Toxic Cash
Part 1 of 3
2 of 3
3 of 3 (end of interview)
I interpret what Catherine Austin Fitts (Founder & Pres. of Solari, Inc. and former Asst. Sec. of HUD and managing director board of directors of the Wall Street investment bank Dillon, Read & Co. Inc.) said in the discussions below as a few important revelations:
- POLITICS = Global Corporate Organized Crime (Central Banks, Governments, Military, etc…)
- The Global Financial System is a rigged and manipulated racket.
- Precious metals will not suddenly revert back to “FAIR MARKET VALUE” because this is not a “Fair Market”; the markets are controlled. Everything has a risk in this criminal environment.
- If the globalists loose a major control-lever they are willing to assert their bigger and more deadly weapons to re-assert their control…
Take by force what they have lost or what they covet when they fail to convince you to part with it.
Criminals with this much threatening force can do many things to side-step a fair and just system, consider War, Martial law, Confiscation of wealth, Law changes, new policies and regulations, Taxes & Fees.
Do not count on fairness, justice, market forces or law to protect you.
In other words, manage your expectations, take more control over your personal sovereignty and wean the beast off of preying on your value, energy and time.
6 Sept 2012 Catherine is more direct in this older recording Que 12:45
From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedwire
Formally known as the Federal Reserve Wire Network, Fedwire is a real-time gross settlement funds transfer system operated by the United States Federal Reserve Banks that enables financial institutions to electronically transfer funds between its more than 9,289 participants (as of March 19, 2009). In conjunction with the privately held Clearing House Interbank Payments System (CHIPS), Fedwire is the primary United States network for large-value or time-critical domestic and international payments, and it is designed to be highly resilient and redundant. The average daily value of transfers over the Fedwire Funds Service in 2007 was approximately $2.7 trillion, and the daily average number of payments was about 537,000. 2009 figures show a value of 631 trillion dollars in transfers originated in Fedwire.
Fedwire Funds Transfer System
Fedwire and National Settlement Services
Real-time gross settlement (RTGS)
Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT)
World Global Settlements History With Dr. Todd – September 6th 2012
The entire global financial system is rigged:
Fractional Reserve Banking (all species of MONEY)
BIS (G7, FSB, IMF, WTO, G8, G20)
Barrel of Crude Oil
SEPTEMBER 6, 2013
WEB of DEBT Ellen Brown
“Bernanke’s patting himself on the back right now — at least with respect to Consumer Price Inflation, which came in at precisely the two percent official Fed target. For those of us who don’t eat food or drive a car, the number was a bit smaller: one point seven percent. Previously, Bernanke touted himself in front of the Senate as having one of the best inflation record of any Fed Chairman in the modern era.
Unfortunately, some other economic data was released — specifically regarding manufacturing — that has sent the stock market tumbling. Two Fed surveys — one by the New York Fed, the other in Philadelphia — disappointed greatly. Seems, producers of “stuff” are shipping less of it, orders are going unfulfilled, and inventories are being drawn down — meaning less “stuff” production. In other words, the markets are not going to like a September tapering by the Fed.
And, yesterday marked a new development in the debit card interchage fee fight. Remember free checking? Well, that’s a perk most banks can’t afford since the Fed capped retail swipe fees. But two weeks ago a federal judge threw out the rule saying they’re still too high. Now the courts are saying not only do they have to lower the debit fees further, but banks may also have to reimburse merchants for the difference. So you can expect further unintended consequences to your checking accounts.
And circling the economic news wagon, it turns out China and Japan aren’t “liking” Uncle Sam’s debt. That’s right, according to the US Treasury itself, its two largest creditor nations just dumped $42 billion of US debt — the most in years. Thank goodness for the Fed QE backstop — unless we take the tapering comments to heart. Don’t worry, Bernanke is bluffing.
Youth unemployment is above 16 percent in the US. And recent graduates are clamoring to get work experience– even if it means working for free. However, this trend of unpaid internships may have some unintended consequences for income inequality. Justine presents the case of unpaid interns. Then Bob talks with Ellen Brown, author of “Web of Debt” and more recently “The Public Bank Solution”….”
August 13, 2013
Gold Silver Ratio, Quarterly, 1950-2013 – (GoldCore)
Bull markets end in speculative manias with mass participation by the public and blow off tops where prices become massively overvalued as seen in 1980.
In 1980, silver rose from $6.08/oz on January 2nd 1979, to $50/oz on January 21st 1980, or more than eight fold in less than 13 months.
This has not happened with silver yet. Most of the public does not even know the price of an ounce of silver, let alone its value and how to own it. Silver remains gold’s very poor cousin and gets little or no media attention.
The parabolic spike led to the gold silver ratio collapsing to 17 to 1 ($850 oz / $50 oz). We expect a similar outperformance and parabolic final price move in silver.
Bull markets see prices rise to above their inflation adjusted highs. Sometimes prices rise to multiples of their previous inflation adjusted high.
Silver’s inflation adjusted high was $130/oz and we continue to see that as a realistic long term price target.
Given silver’s volatility, dollar, pound or euro cost averaging into position remains prudent.
It is also important to note that when prices have had a parabolic gain – dollar, pound or euro cost averaging out of a position will be prudent as it will be nigh impossible to time the top.
Ted Butler: Blockbuster in Gold as JP Morgan Likely Acquired 10 M oz of Gold Liquidated by GLD
One of the key considerations in gold has been the redemption of more than 10 million ounces (over $15 billion) since year end from the world’s largest gold Exchange Traded Fund, GLD. I believe that the big buyer of the 10 million ounces of gold liquidated in the GLD was JPMorgan, either alone or with other collusive commercial banks.
I’m not suggesting that JPMorgan did anything wrong by intentionally evading SEC reporting requirements. That potential infraction pales in comparison to the real crime. In this crime (actually more egregious in silver than in gold) the crooked bank manipulated gold prices lower, via the usual COMEX price-fixing mechanics, to induce GLD shareholders to sell. This was a planned and executed operation that left no stone unturned.
It appears to me that JPMorgan and their ilk have bought absolutely massive quantities of gold and silver in many different markets. Unfortunately, much of that buying has come as a result of the deliberate and successful manipulation of price in order to force others to sell. I don’t believe that is fair or even legal. Nevertheless the bloodless verdict of the market suggests we are going a lot higher at some point soon.
If, as I contend, JPMorgan picked up at least 20 million gold ounces they shook out from the GLD and elsewhere, a $300 dollar gold rally will net them $6 billion in ill-gotten gains on that position alone. It could be much more if they are more ruthless in creating higher prices. Generally, with these crooks they usually exceed what you think they are capable of.
READ more: http://silverdoctors.com/ted-butler-blockbuster-in-gold-as-jp-morgan-likely-acquired-10-m-oz-of-gold-liquidated-by-gld/#more-26968
Rob Kirby along with Andy Hoffman’s MUST LISTEN interview on silver manipulation is below:
Rob Kirby and Andy Hoffman join Elijah Johnson for a MUST LISTEN interview on Sunday’s silver smash, which saw 10% shaved off the silver futures price in only 4 minutes in a massive waterfall raid taking the metal to $20.30.
Kirby had this to say about the raid:
The take-down in precious metals is a contrivance, and it reeks and absolutely stinks of desperation on the part of the protectors of the world’s reserve currency, and that would be the US Treasury in cahoots with the Federal Reserve.
I want to take the gloves off here. Let’s just get this right up on the table. JP Morgan’s positions aren’t JP Morgan’s positions.
JP Morgan’s positions are the positions of the exchange stabilization fund, which is a branch of the US Treasury. When the US Treasury intervenes in the markets, they do so through the trading desk of the NY Fed, and their positions are executed by the NY Fed, who farm the trades out to the big derivatives banks. In that context, JP Morgan is the Federal Reserve. They are one and the same!
WASHINGTON, April 15, 2013 (Reuters) – The Federal Reserve on Monday issued a proposal that would force big U.S. banks to pay an annual fee to help cover the cost of regulating them.
Under the proposal, the Fed would look back and start the assessment for the 2012 calendar year, requiring about 70 financial firms to pay a total of $440 million.
It would not start collecting the payments until the rule is finalized. An asset-based formula would be used to determine each company’s assessment. (The proposal can be found at:)
The 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law called on the Fed to issue such a proposal, to help the Fed cover the cost of enhanced supervision and regulation of bank holding companies, and savings and loan holding companies, with $50 billion or more in assets.
It also covers non-bank financial firms that will be designated as “systemic” by the Financial Stability Oversight Council, a council of regulators chaired by the U.S. Treasury secretary that watches the marketplace for emerging risks.
Designated firms will face heightened oversight by the Fed.
The Fed is accepting comments on the proposal until June 15.
The Secret World Of Gold (Full)
Published on Apr 20, 2013
Documentary on CBC-TV – The History, Politics, Economics & The Power To corrupt or to rule for the one who hold the gold
The question is “Where is the Gold and who has it?”
Published on Apr 19, 2013
Nigel Farage, a British MP to the European Union bashed on Wednesday, April 17, other members who approved of the “haircuts” for depositors in Cyprus, saying it was the “death knell for the Euro.” He also called a new German proposal to confiscate a portion of the equity of property held by citizens in the Southern European nations as a new form of communism.
Published on Apr 16, 2013
Dr. William Black predicts, “The U.S. banking system is absolutely primed for the next meltdown. Dr. Black and others think, “There is pervasive fraud at the most reputable banks. . . . The U.S. financial system is sick, and we still have the fundamental dynamic of a regulatory race to the bottom.”
More Chris & Mike Maloney: Why Did Silver & Gold Collapse?
Tue, Apr 16, 2013
While Chris and I were at the GoldSilver offices last Friday (the first day of the smack-down in the precious metals), the media team there filmed this discussion between Chris and Mike Maloney.
In it, they delve into the question Qui bono? (Who benefits?) when precious metals prices are manipulated downward to such grand extent
From the write-up on GoldSilver.com:
From the 4,500 tons of missing gold Eric Sprott pointed to in U.S. export figures, to the 300-ton German gold repatriation, the questions of who benefited from the plummeting prices and how are all answered in this blockbuster video.
Learn how unsophisticated investors got “fleeced,” and how this price event and media blitz may go down as one of “the cruelest jokes ever played on the people who get scared away from gold and silver at this moment in history, given where we are.”
This is the first time in history in which currencies around the globe are failing simultaneously, as more and more currency is printed, and confidence in this mathematically untenable system under which debt is “money” collapses.
As gold and silver’s true values are realized, in the market or by revaluation, we will witness the greatest transfer of wealth ever seen in human history. Episode One of Hidden Secrets of Money, our free series, expands on the big picture view—the cycle of behavior across history revealed as it progresses toward the ultimate resolution.
- The U.S. may have a lot less gold than widely believed
- Replacing these missing reserves would be extremely costly and disruptive
- Understanding this, the recent market manipulation begins to make sense (in a tradable way)
- Why physical ownership is of paramount importance now as supply is increasingly tenuous
There’s growing concern that a lot of official gold has been leased out into the market and that sooner or later, as happened back in the late 1990s, one or more parties, perhaps bullion banks or a metals exchange, would run into difficulty trying to meet a physical gold delivery commitment.
If a lot of gold has been leased out, someday it will have to be rebought, and difficulties may emerge if the gold cannot be rebought in sufficient quantities without creating mayhem within the financial system by causing a very large hike in the price of gold.
Important: The amounts of gold leased by central banks is a very closely guarded secret, and we do not have direct information on them, which means we have to try and back-calculate these amounts by other means.
A recent and thought-provoking study regarding gold leasing was done by Sprott Asset Management in March. After accounting for all known flows of gold into and out of the U.S. over the past 22 years, the Sprott team arrived at a figure of nearly 4,500 tonnes of gold that cannot be accounted for.
Now that you are aware of this possibility you know that war is not the answer, regardless of how much propaganda, false flags, and patriotic reasons they present to you demanding your support to a future war effort against some enemy the government will name.
We can foresee their agenda for war and financial crisis in the making…
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE (aka GLOBAL GOVERNANCE)
A Look at the Windsor Royal Monarchy:
HM Queen Elizabeth II World Sovereign Monarch Lunch at Windsor Castle May 18 2012
Britain’s financial regulator has fined the British queen’s bank for money laundering failures as a French presidential candidate has said part of the queen’s fortune “comes from drug trafficking.”
See full report:
Australia to Abandon the U.S. Dollar
April 11, 2013 • From theTrumpet.com
Australia chooses a side in the global currency war.
Australia’s announcement that it is abandoning the U.S. dollar for trade with China is the latest broadside in the global currency war. Starting April 10, Australia and China will no longer use the U.S. dollar for trade between the two nations. For the first time, Australian businesses will be able to conduct trade in Chinese yuan. No more need for U.S. dollar intermediation.
This is a significant announcement and key development for China as it continues its campaign to internationalize the yuan and chip away at the dollar’s role as the world’s reserve currency.
Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard made the announcement during an official visit to Shanghai on Monday. She noted that China is now Australia’s biggest trading partner and that the direct currency trading would be a “huge advantage for Australia.”
She called the currency accord a “strategic step forward for Australia as we add to our economic engagement with China.”
According to HSBC bank, more than 40 percent of small and medium-size Australian businesses that trade with China plan to offer quotes for goods and services in yuan. No longer will Chinese customers need U.S. dollars before purchasing Australian goods.
For China, this is a big accomplishment as it works toward its goal of having about a third of its foreign trade settled in yuan by 2015.
But for the U.S. dollar, it is more like the treatment the U.S. Eighth Army got at Chosin Reservoir in Korea.
This Australia-China currency pact isn’t the only whipping the dollar has taken lately either.
On March 26, China and Brazil agreed to cut out the U.S. dollar for approximately half of their trade. Some $30 billion worth of commerce per year will now be conducted in yuan and reals. Brazilian Economy Minister Guido Mantega said the trade and currency agreement would act as a buffer against any unexpected dollar turbulence in the international financial markets.
Less than a week later, China announced its participation in the joint BRICS bank initiative. Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa announced the creation of a new development bank that some analysts say has the potential to rival the U.S.-dominated World Bank and European-influenced International Monetary Fund.
“Most people assume that the current economic crisis has led to a great strengthening of the power of the World Bank and the IMF, and that this power is largely uncontested,” notes Prof. Geoffrey Wood, who teaches at Warwick Business School. “The proposed BRICS development bank represents an important new development that potentially further circumscribes the influence of these bodies.”
America’s other major ally in the Pacific announced last year that it would be curtailing its use of the dollar too. In June, Japan and China began cutting out the dollar in bilateral trade. The initiative was announced as part of a broad agreement to reinforce financial ties between the world’s third- and fourth-largest economies.
Similar dollar exclusion deals have been announced by Russia and China, Russia and Iran, India and Iran, and India and Japan.
“[T]he free lunch the U.S. has enjoyed ever since the advent of the U.S. dollar as world reserve currency may be coming to an end,” writes popular financial blog ZeroHedge. “And since there is no such thing as a free lunch, all the deferred pain the U.S. Treasury Department has been able to offset thanks to its global currency monopoly status will come crashing down the second the world starts getting doubts about the true nature of just who the real reserve currency will be in the future.”
As more nations challenge the dollar’s position as reserve currency it will greatly impact living standards in America. Interest rates will skyrocket. The government will be forced to resort to full-scale money printing to finance its debt. Credit and loans will become unaffordable, collapsing much of America’s consumer economy. Monetary inflation will shoot through the roof destroying the value of people’s savings. And higher levels of unemployment will become a way of life.
By jumping ship and swimming to China, Australia may think it will mitigate the worst of the looming dollar war. But eking out strategic partnerships with China comes with a whole set of other risks that are just as deadly.”
This is not a rhetorical question:
What happens after the Poor, the Middle, and the Upper Classes realize that Government are lying, spying, stealing wealth, and propagandizing them?
When the wealthy start pointing to PROPAGANDA in their own nation then watch-out!
In other words, the only class remaining on top are a small group consisting of the Politicians, Central planners, Central bankers and a hidden group of elites. A changing environment where even the club members, sycophants and defenders of the system are suddenly being “thrown under the bus” with the other outsiders and the poor populous.
Where once a 7-digit figure bank account entitled you to the club membership is now a 9-digit figure membership requirement; yes your assets must exceed 1 Billion dollars, and even this is subject to change!
Is the time upon us when the financial system finally crashes, as the people supporting it are not numerous enough?
The parasites have devoured their host.
Of course it is well known that in the past this is when wars are declared.
But this time are there enough people willing to obey orders to fight for your government?
Perhaps the world will find out the answers to these questions very soon, as in this decade or maybe this year?
“resolving globally active systemically important financial institutions”
“The Got Gold Report’s Gene Arensberg today can’t resist taking a few cracks at one more “journalist” who eagerly disparages gold but can’t be bothered to put a single question to a primary original source of gold trading information, a central bank. Arensberg’s commentary is headlined “Arrogant Gold Bears Press in the Market and in Print” at it’s posted at the Got Gold Report here:
It’s really not journalism about gold, only propaganda, if it doesn’t try putting some questions to central banks about their surreptitious involvement in the market, such as the questions raised here:
http://www.gata.org/node/12395 ~CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.”
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Arrogant Gold Bears Press in the Market and in Print
An example of extremely bearish commentary out there, in this case from Dubai, with a few comments from GGR inserted for a different take. (GGR comments in red.)
Bullion bloodbath: 125-ton sell-order sets gold price for plunge
It may no longer be ‘safe’ to hold on to the ‘safe haven’ precious metal
Gold price suffered a massive decline of 5.6 per cent, or $87 per ounce, on Friday, crash-landing at a 22-month low of $1,477 per ounce.
Reports suggest that a 4 million ounce (124.4 tonnes) sell-order, worth $6 billion (Dh22 billion) at current prices, by a large investment bank spooked the markets and led to this decline.
“It appears that the significant selling pressure last Friday was amplified by a four million ounces (124.4 tons of gold) selling order, to be executed on Comex opening. This was clearly too much for a relatively empty market to handle, and the initial pressure resulted into waves of selling, which in turn attracted further selling all the way down,” Gerhard Schubert, Head of Precious Metals at Dubai-based Emirates NBD, wrote in his weekly report.
“The price for gold is now at par with the price for platinum. This is a very difficult report to write,” he penned at the beginning of his gold report.
Well, if rumours are to be believed, it’s going to be tougher still for him to write next week’s report.
(Ed. Tone setting remark. Reveals bias.)
For, Euro Zone’s troubled economy Cyprus is all set to add to that chaos by reportedly putting its €400 million (Dh1.93 billion) worth of gold on the block, in a bid to shore up its financial health.
(Ed. About 10 tonnes of gold by itself. GLD offloaded about 47 tonnes this week alone in fear.)
In what analysts are terming as a make-or-break moment for the precious metal, gold has failed all safe haven tests and, for the first time in about two years, plunged below the $1,500 mark.
(Ed. Gold bears celebrating gold moving below $1,500, but it took gold 19 months to give back what it put on in 10 weeks in 2011.)
Indeed, it doesn’t seem too good for the gold bull. Gold last saw these levels in July 2011, after which it began its very fast and very steep incline to breach the $1,920/oz mark in September 2011.
Since then, however, the metal is now down by a quarter (23 per cent) – officially in a bear market. It was already, technically speaking, in a recession as the price of gold had shown negative growth for two consecutive quarters (Q4 2012 and Q1 2013).
With this most recent plunge, gold has wiped off almost two years of gains for its loyal investors, with those who pledged their hard-earned money in the safe haven precious metal now in negative equity.
(Ed. Translation: “Gold itself betrayed you, you stupid idiot.” The selldown last week has nothing to do with the paper metal markets or very large hedge funds who also happen to be big supporters of the current U.S. president and somehow managed to escape the 2008 crisis unharmed and unprosecuted. Nothing at all.)
To be fair, just last week we suggested that with the global economy getting back on track, and in the absence of a global shock like the Korean war, gold is set to fall back closer to levels that it saw before the 2008 recession took hold (read: Gold recovers to $1,581, but here’s why it may crash to $1,000).
(Ed. Global ecomomy getting back on track? Only a shock of the magnitude of the Korean War will save gold’s plunge to pre 2008 levels. Really? Believe the illusory improvement in equity markets if you wish, but when the stimulus is withdrawn or no longer works, it won’t be long before the world is focused once again on competitive fiat currency debasement (currency wars), impossible to repay enormous soveriegn debt and public loss of confidence in irredeemable, under backed fiat currency, which is a primary driver of the gold price.)
“The gold market has, more or less, officially slid into a bear market. The popular definition of a bear market is when the commodity in question not only trades but closes at a level of at least 20 per cent under its all-time highs. The reverse psychology indicates that only a close above $1,776 would re-establish the bull market,” wrote Schubert.
(Ed. Schubert’s price symbolism does not go unnoticed here.)
That level, for one, looks more elusive than ever. “It appears that any price rally in the near future can and will only be described as short covering rallies,” says Schubert.
(Ed. Therefore do not believe gold rallies going forward. They would only be short covering, not real demand.)
“I do expect the market to see some short covering next week, as the market closed on the multi-year low. The former support area of $1,526 will become now a formidable resistance area. However, technical selling can be expected on Comex opening on Monday, based on models, which have received sell signals based on last Friday’s close,” he says.
While there are many reasons, a couple of factors were the most overbearing on gold price.
One, Cyprus seems set to offload €400 million (Dh1.93 billion) of its gold reserved in a last-ditch attempt to save face – and its economy. And if Cyprus does so, there is no reason why other Euro Zone economies in the same dire straits – Italy, Portugal, Spain, Hungary, Slovenia… there are plenty in line – won’t do it.
(Ed. Hyperbolic fear mongering. If anyone believes the Italians would sell their gold at the behest of the E.U. think again. They would more likely tell the E.U. to take a flying, uh, … leap at the moon.)
In addition, if they really ‘have’ to sell their family silver, it will make sense for other beleaguered European economies to sell it now rather than after the Cyprus sell-off has pushed gold further down. That is going to see a scramble among European nations as to who sells earlier, and that can’t be good news for the price of gold. In fact, it will be very bad for it.
(Ed. Don’t you love the reference to Cyprus selling a measly 10 tonnes of metal as being able to drive the market down, when the story begins with a 124.4 tonne sell-at-open order or after one ETF (GLD) has sold more than 200 tonnes since this gold pullback began in December and 46.75 tonnes this week alone? Right, like it is going to start a panic sale among E.U. countries, each trying to hit the bid before the others. … That our collective inteligence is under assault here does not go unnoticed.)
“It [The Cyprus sell-off] is a make-or-break moment for gold… if the market can’t handle the reallocation and Cyprus, then there is really a need for a bear market,” Milko Markov, an investment analyst at SK Hart Management, has been quoted as saying.
And it isn’t just Cyprus and other euro Zone nations’ potential dumping of the yellow metal that is putting negative pressure on gold prices.
On Wednesday, leaked minutes of the latest US Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting showed that several members of the committee now believe that the benefits of quantitative easing programme are diminishing, and that costs of the $85 billion per month bond purchases outweigh the benefits.
(Ed. That really was an ‘odd coincidence.’ When was the last time the Fed minutes were released early to way short gold hedge funds? As Don Corleone might have said, “I don’t believe in coincidences.” With so many former Goldman execs now in government, with one important Goldman expat heading up the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, we need not fear any inquiry into that, um, … cluster-blunder.)
This means that this flow of surplus dollars into the market – quite a few of which found their way into gold investments – will stop, leading to demand drying up for the yellow metal.
The US Federal Reserve has, so far, poured more than $3 trillion of easy money into the US since December 2008, when the first round of quantitative easing program was unleashed.
Now that the US Fed is making noises about cutting off that lifeline, gold price will get a nasty shock when – not if – the QE programme comes to a logical end.
(Ed. Q.E. is what is creating the illusion of improvement. If it is removed, even briefly, the improvement will quickly recede, leading to more Q.E. That’s why some are calling it “Q.E. Infinity.”)
Additionally, a number of analysts including investment banks Goldman Sachs and UBS have recently further slashed their average gold price forecast for 2013. Goldman Sachs has cut its 2013 average gold price forecast for a second time within just six weeks, this time from $1,610/oz to $1,545/oz. UBS seems to be a gold price optimist, but it too has slashed its forecast from $1,900/oz to $1,740/oz.
(Ed. Vicky, you left off the modifiers “heavily short” and “book-talking” in front of Goldman Sachs. An oversight?)
These downgrades are linked to the possibility of an early end of the US Federal Reserve-funded QE programme, which comes with gold-negative factors such as investment flowing into equities, low inflation, improving economic growth, and a stronger US dollar.
(Ed. As J. Kyle Bass might say, “It’s all unicorns and rainbows and all is well in the world.” Never mind the $13t explosion to the four largest central bank balance sheets and Japan’s one-quadrillion yen debt bomb about to detonate, and so on. Right now the future looks as bright as the flash over Hiroshima on 6 August, 1945 as “Little Boy” literally atomized.)
With loads of investors dumping paper gold (ETFs) in record numbers during the first three months of 2013, the writing is on the wall for the future of gold.
(Ed. Nice job, Vicky. In a tomahawk sort of way. Ursa Major greetings from a skeptical Texan, should you happen to read this time wasting response. No one would welcome a return of the gold price to “pre-2008 levels” more than I, but I just do not share your “optimism” the price of gold will get there. But do keep the pressure on, please. For those of us now on the sidelines (with short term trading), you are working for us! … Longer term: Got gold?)
(Images added, including the wheelbarrow full of Marks.)
Source for the Emirates story: Emirates247.com
Original story at this link.
WHAT IF: I Still Want To Invest My Wealth?
You may have one hundred thousand dollars (or a government currency) invested for you and your family, but you realize the markets are “RIGGED”.
What should you do with your stored up wealth?
The amount is not the subject here, because you may have a few Million, or you may have a few Billion, or you may have only a few Thousand, but whatever you have it is not Safe in a Financial Institution.
Yes, there is ample evidence that all the Markets are rigged; the Economy, indeed the ENTIRE SYSTEM IS RIGGED.
Commercial Law is the Big Game.
Just like a game of RISK or a game of MONOPOLY…
See these reports to remind you of the global scams:
Grant Williams tells Hong Kong conference about gold price suppression
Grant Williams, portfolio adviser to Vulpes Investment Management in Singapore and editor of the Things That Make You Go Hmmm. … newsletter —
Whistleblower claims that energy market is rigged
Big Banks Have Criminally Conspired Since 2005 to Rig $800 Trillion Dollar Market
… But Receive Only a Light Slap on the Wrist
THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS IS ALREADY FACTORED IN.
How can the wealth (energy exchange) be shared or as some call it “put to good use”?
Instead of hoarding it and locking it away as a precious heirloom and caged property that can not be taken with you in the next transition of Eternal Consciousness, consider sharing it.
Some possibilities are to locate a existing community and transform it in preparation of the emerging new paradigm.
Invest your currency and precious metals/comodities in Community Farming and Home Food-gardens, renewable Technologies and non-toxic materials for inspiring community innovation and engineering.
Invest in Community transportation, Community electricity or other alternative Energy Technologies…
Imagine Solar powered cars, tractors as well as homes.
Imagine home food gardens and community farms supplying food to everyone in the community.
Imagine free, non-polluting public transportation for the community.
Imagine a healthy, vibrant, innovative and prosperous community
Some may think a new community is a good idea but I caution that existing communities are more available and more impactful in that they already exist and the need for helping existing families facing challenges already exist.
We are the solution.
When you are about to choose an investment strategy instead of commodities consider life, consider farms, consider homes, consider community energy, consider re-engineering, consider food seeds…
This, investing in communities, will reward you in many ways and also nurture the next generation.
We are the Solution.
Christopher Greene shares his opinion offering 3 reasons why the state of Texas wants its gold back.
Published on Apr 1, 2013
British Queen urged to relinquish power because of ill health
… Lord Prescott, a member of the Privy Council which advises the Queen, tried to appear affectionate and friendly towards the queen, noting that “the monarch should break with convention and consider enjoying a long and fulfilling retirement”, according to the reports.
“His concern was that the Queen, who is 87 next month, is overburdening herself,” he said.
Lord Prescott also referred to the queen’s ongoing ill health because of which she has been increasingly cancelling her public duties recently, saying that “she had done a remarkable job over her 60 years on the throne”.
“My friend noted the monarch would be delivering her 61st queen’s speech in May, where she’ll announce her future trips abroad, on top of her many other public duties.
“So he asked me, as a privy councillor, to tell her that he didn’t expect her to see out her royal duties as the Queen.
“She deserves a break and he wouldn’t think less of her if she stepped down”, said Lord Prescott.
This is while that the queen herself had said on her 21st birthday that she regarded ruling Britain as a job for life.
Read Report Here:
US Citizens Defined as Property of the Government
By American Kabuki
This UCC document appeared on one of the Skype chats yesterday, it seemed familar to one mentioned to me by a very connected financial person. The UCC filing statement from 2011 raised 14.3 Trillion in money under the Obama Administration by using the the people of the United States as “property improvement” capital on the land for purposes of collateral. You can’t file a UCC on property, but you can file on property improvements.
Essentially they sold you for 14.3 Trillion dollars in borrowed funds. This is quite separate and additional from the birth certificate bonds.
I emailed my banking finance contact and they provided me with President Clinton’s 1997 Presidential Order, publicly defining the people of the United States as Property of the United States.
Defining people as property has been going on since the 1930s but was only declared publicly in 1997 by President Clinton.
Here’s the quote from my anonymous contact:
The UCC-1 filing that you posted is related to this matter however, The executive order specifically mentioning publicly that we are Human Capital was Executive Order No. 13037 March 4, 1997 (specifically section 2 subsection ( b ) ). Prior to this the registrations of birth was secretly used in order to create a ‘Bond’ or debt on each individual. This has been taking place since 1933 in private.
US Citizens Defined as Property of the Govt
WORLD’S FIRST BITCOIN ATM LAUNCHED…IN CYPRUS!
WORLD’S FIRST BITCOIN ATM LAUNCHED…IN CYPRUS!
MARCH 25, 2013 BY THE DOC
Bitcoin (which incidentally has approximately doubled in value over the past week as Europe pulls their money from the banks and looks for alternate savings vehicles) has launched its first ATM…in Cyprus!
Does Visa International. Still hold the patent or was it released with all UCC filings?
US 20120233072 A1
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION
Embodiments of the present invention will now be described more fully hereinafter with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which some, but not all, embodiments of the invention are shown. Indeed, the invention may be embodied in many different forms and should not be construed as limited to the embodiments set forth herein; rather, these embodiments are provided so that this disclosure will satisfy applicable legal requirements. In the following description, for purposes of explanation, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of one or more embodiments. It may be evident; however, that such embodiment(s) may be practiced without these specific details. Like numbers refer to like elements throughout.
Various embodiments or features will be presented in terms of systems that may include a number of devices, components, modules, and the like. It is to be understood and appreciated that the various systems may include additional devices, components, modules, etc. and/or may not include all of the devices, components, modules etc. discussed in connection with the figures. A combination of these approaches may also be used.
The steps and/or actions of a method or algorithm described in connection with the embodiments disclosed herein may be embodied directly in hardware, in a software module executed by a processor, or in a combination of the two. A software module may reside in RAM memory, flash memory, ROM memory, EPROM memory, EEPROM memory, registers, a hard disk, a removable disk, a CD-ROM, or any other form of storage medium known in the art. An exemplary storage medium may be coupled to the processor, such that the processor can read information from, and write information to, the storage medium. In the alternative, the storage medium may be integral to the processor. Further, in some embodiments, the processor and the storage medium may reside in an Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC). In the alternative, the processor and the storage medium may reside as discrete components in a computing device. Additionally, in some embodiments, the events and/or actions of a method or algorithm may reside as one or any combination or set of codes and/or instructions on a machine-readable medium and/or computer-readable medium, which may be incorporated into a computer program product.
This article was originally printed in Numismatic News.
Sales of 1-ounce silver and gold American Eagle coins are soaring as market prices for the precious metals drop.
In fact, February sales of gold Eagles from the U.S. Mint were up 240 percent year over year, with sales of silver Eagles up 126 percent from February 2012 to 2013. The total number of troy ounces of gold sold during the two months in the form of Eagles was 230,500. For silver, the total was 10,866,500.
“More buyers are turning to physical gold and silver because of concerns over the U.S. debt and the crisis this huge debt level may bring to the U.S. economy over the next several years,” said Michael Haynes, CEO of American Precious Metals Exchange (APMEX).
Gold sold for about $1,750 an ounce a year ago, while today it hovers around $1,575. Silver dropped from around $34 an ounce in February 2012 to around $29 a year later.
“January and February for us were record type months,” Haynes said. “Our volume is extremely good; the physical markets are alive and well.”
Its APMEX Bullion Center on eBay had two of its top selling days ever in February, he said, and was frequently among the top 10 sellers on eBay.
Haynes called it “a perfect example of how many of the investors outside of the coin and bullion markets are being introduced to gold and silver.”
People are taking note of how the federal government debt is creeping up toward the debt ceiling, he said.
“Basically, you can’t grow the debt at 15 percent and grow the economy at 2 percent and expect to have a good result,” Haynes said.
That’s what people who are buying silver and gold bullion coins are thinking about, he said. And they like having their investment within reach.
“They prefer the physical because it is tangible and it’s not a promise like a piece of paper,” Haynes said. “They don’t want to ask anybody if they can have it.”
And the World Gold Council confirms that the annual net purchases of physical gold bars and coins have more than tripled since 2008.
While gold and silver Eagles are the most popular 1-ounce bullion coins in the U.S., Haynes said they by no means make up 50 percent of sales. Canadian Maple Leaf gold and silver coins also sell well, he said.
“A lot of people like Australia’s Kangaroo. It has a low premium over gold content. If you compare the Kangaroo and the Eagle, the Kangaroo is a little less expensive,” he said.
The Krugerrand is popular, but probably comes in at No. 4, he said, while in Europe it would rank first or second.
New Johnson Matthey 1- and 10 -ounce silver bars are really popular he said, as well as fractional bars.
So is now the time to buy silver and gold?
“It’s difficult to time markets. You don’t know what you don’t know,” Haynes said.
The best thing to do is look at your total investment portfolio, he said. Many financial advisors recommend a 5 percent minimum investment in precious metals.
Coin collectors have traditionally seen gold and silver as an investment hedge, Haynes said.
“Now the rest of the world is starting to figure it out, and they figured out it’s not just a speculative thing. They are figuring out that precious metals belong as a basic part of an investment portfolio.”
By Emily Flitter and Stella Dawson and Mark Hosenball
NEW YORK/WASHINGTON | Wed Mar 13, 2013 6:51pm EDT
(Reuters) – The Obama administration is drawing up plans to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens and others who bank in the country, according to a Treasury Department document seen by Reuters.
The proposed plan represents a major step by U.S. intelligence agencies to spot and track down terrorist networks and crime syndicates by bringing together financial databanks, criminal records and military intelligence. The plan, which legal experts say is permissible under U.S. law, is nonetheless likely to trigger intense criticism from privacy advocates.
Financial institutions that operate in the United States are required by law to file reports of “suspicious customer activity,” such as large money transfers or unusually structured bank accounts, to Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).
The Federal Bureau of Investigation already has full access to the database. However, intelligence agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, currently have to make case-by-case requests for information to FinCEN.
The Treasury plan would give spy agencies the ability to analyze more raw financial data than they have ever had before, helping them look for patterns that could reveal attack plots or criminal schemes.
The planning document, dated March 4, shows that the proposal is still in its early stages of development, and it is not known when implementation might begin.
Financial institutions file more than 15 million “suspicious activity reports” every year, according to Treasury. Banks, for instance, are required to report all personal cash transactions exceeding $10,000, as well as suspected incidents of money laundering, loan fraud, computer hacking or counterfeiting.
“For these reports to be of value in detecting money laundering, they must be accessible to law enforcement, counter-terrorism agencies, financial regulators, and the intelligence community,” said the Treasury planning document.
A Treasury spokesperson said U.S. law permits FinCEN to share information with intelligence agencies to help detect and thwart threats to national security, provided they adhere to safeguards outlined in the Bank Secrecy Act. “Law enforcement and intelligence community members with access to this information are bound by these safeguards,” the spokesperson said in a statement.
Some privacy watchdogs expressed concern about the plan when Reuters outlined it to them.
A move like the FinCEN proposal “raises concerns as to whether people could find their information in a file as a potential terrorist suspect without having the appropriate predicate for that and find themselves potentially falsely accused,” said Sharon Bradford Franklin, senior counsel for the Rule of Law Program at the Constitution Project, a non-profit watchdog group.
Despite these concerns, legal experts emphasize that this sharing of data is permissible under U.S. law. Specifically, banks’ suspicious activity reporting requirements are dictated by a combination of the Bank Secrecy Act and the USA PATRIOT Act, which offer some privacy safeguards.
National security experts also maintain that a robust system for sharing criminal, financial and intelligence data among agencies will improve their ability to identify those who plan attacks on the United States.
“It’s a war on money, war on corruption, on politically exposed persons, anti-money laundering, organized crime,” said Amit Kumar, who advised the United Nations on Taliban sanctions and is a fellow at the Democratic think tank Center for National Policy.
The Treasury document outlines a proposal to link the FinCEN database with a computer network used by U.S. defense and law enforcement agencies to share classified information called the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System.
The plan calls for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence – set up after 9/11 to foster greater collaboration among intelligence agencies – to work with Treasury. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment.
More than 25,000 financial firms – including banks, securities dealers, casinos, and money and wire transfer agencies – routinely file “suspicious activity reports” to FinCEN. The requirements for filing are so strict that banks often over-report, so they cannot be accused of failing to disclose activity that later proves questionable. This over-reporting raises the possibility that the financial details of ordinary citizens could wind up in the hands of spy agencies.
Stephen Vladeck, a professor at American University’s Washington College of Law, said privacy advocates have already been pushing back against the increased data-sharing activities between government agencies that followed the September 11 attacks.
“One of the real pushes from the civil liberties community has been to move away from collection restrictions on the front end and put more limits on what the government can do once it has the information,” he said.
Michael German, senior policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said that U.S. officials had floated a similar scheme to pool such data a decade ago, but that funding for the plan was later withdrawn by Congress.
He said one of the problematic aspects of the plan is that there is “wiggle room” on how the information will be used. In the past, the National CounterTerrorism Center, which is supposed to ensure that critical threat information is shared among various agencies, was obliged to “promptly identify and purge any innocent U.S. person information.”
But the guidelines were subsequently loosened so that “not only can they keep the data for a number of years, but they can continue to use it,” German said.
Once spy agencies get such data, German said, “it’s in a black hole. Time and again, we have evidence, unfortunately well after the fact, that somebody’s civil rights have been violated, that the intelligence community simply ignores the rules.”
(Reporting by Emily Flitter in New York, Stella Dawson and Mark Hosenball in Washington; Editing by Tiffany Wu and Leslie Gevirtz)
Okay, Here We Go,
PUSHING THE SCHEME FOR GOLD BACKED CURRENCIES WILL KEEP CONTROL OF THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM IN THE HANDS OF THE CROOKS WHO OWNS MOST OF THE GOLD AND MINING OPERATIONS; ALONG WITH MAINTAINING THE SAME OLE MEME OF SCARCITY VALUED COMMODITIES! The scarcity meme (“Trickle-Down” economics) devalues abundance sharing that is observe in Nature.
GoldMoney’s Macleod interviews Hinde’s Davies about gold backing for currencies
Submitted by cpowell on Fri, 2013-02-22 16:53. Section: Daily Dispatches
8:45a PT Friday, February 22, 2013
Dear Friend of GATA and Gold:
Interviewed this week by GoldMoney’s Alasdair Macleod, Hinde Capital CEO Ben Davies discussed, among other things, the possibility of repairing the world financial system by restoring gold backing to currencies. Davies added that the market for real metal is fairly tight, which previously has been an indicator of price bottoms. The interview is 28 minutes long and can be heard at GoldMoney’s Internet site here:
Treasury’s report on gold at Fed is like queen’s visit to Bank of England’s vault, Turk says
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Continuing his interview with King World News today, GoldMoney founder and GATA consultant James Turk says the U.S. Treasury’s report this week on gold held by the Federal Reserve is the equivalent of Queen Elizabeth’s recent visit to the Bank of England’s gold vault. “It’s trying to make people (and countries) feel comfortable that the gold is really there,” Turk says. “But why should they keep gold in other vaults? We’re not on a gold standard anymore. We don’t need to have gold stored in different vaults around the world to settle international payments. The gold is really just a country’s reserve, and the only way you can make certain that you have control of that reserve is to store it in your own central bank’s vault.”
An excerpt from the interview is posted at the King World News blog here: http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2013/2/19_James_Turk_-_US_Treasury_Enters_The_Gold_War.html
James Turk – US Treasury Enters The Gold War
Today James Turk told King World News that the US Treasury has entered the gold war. Turk’s statements were concerning the so-called audit of the Fed’s New York gold. This is the final piece of the stunning written interview series which KWN has released today. Turk’s extraordinary audio will follow later today.
Eric King: “Chris Powell noted that they had not discussed the leases or swaps at all (in the so-called audit of gold at the New York Fed).”
Turk: “That’s really the important point. There’s no indication whatsoever that the gold isn’t double-counted, encumbered, pledged, swapped, hypothecated, re-hypothecated, or any of the other things that happens to gold in various assets these days….
READ FULL REPORT:
go to top page
‘Catastrophic’ EU exit would leave City defenseless against regulatory attack
European regulators have the means to shut down key parts of London’s financial centre at a stroke if Britain left the European Union and would not hesitate to do so, leading central bank experts have warned.
The regulatory assault on the City has been an escalating drama since the Lehman crash in 2008
Membership of the EU single market is the UK’s only legal defence against an onslaught of regulations aimed at forcing banks and fund managers to decamp to the eurozone, they say.
“It would be catastrophic and suicidal for Britain to leave. The UK would lose the protection it currently enjoys as the eurozone’s major financial centre,” said Athanasios Orphanides, a former member of the European Central Bank’s governing council.
Mr Orphanides said the ECB is already clamping down on payments, clearing and settlement systems conducted in euros outside its jurisdiction, a move deemed necessary to head off future crises. “The only thing stopping regulation that would shift all such activities from London to the eurozone is the legal protection the City enjoys in the EU,” he told The Daily Telegraph.
While Britain is in a “very strong” position now as an EU member outside the eurozone, this would evaporate the moment the UK tears up its membership card. “The UK would be the big loser. I don’t believe it will happen because Britain has the best technocrats in the world, and the British people are rational,” he said.
Legal guerrilla warfare is already under way and EU officials say privately that the struggle for control over the financial industry is reaching a critical point, with Britain rapidly key losing allies. The UK Treasury filed a case at the European Court in late 2011 to block ECB plans that would limit euro transactions by clearing houses if they take place outside EMU territory. It said large-scale euro contracts should come under the sway of the ECB, since no other central bank can issue the currency as a lender of last resort in an emergency.
Britain said the plans breach single market laws allowing firms to set up a business anywhere in the EU. The ECB has held fire for now but the case is still pending. “This is a very real threat,” said Mats Persson from Open Europe.
Dino Kos, a former head of markets at the New York Fed, said the City is more vulnerable to a regulatory squeeze than people realise. “Governments have the power to control where clearing happens, and therefore where trading happens. Central banks can say businesses must have an onshore presence,” he told a Bloomberg forum.
The prize is big. Some 75pc of Europe’s over-the-counter derivatives trades take place in London, and 40pc of global trades. The worldwide market is around $640 trillion in notional contracts, churned constantly.
The ECB’s proposed rules would force LCH Clearnet, and other clearers such as ICE and CME, to hive off part of their business to eurozone hubs. Leaked documents from the Banque de France in 2009 revealed that Paris was pushing behind the scenes for a French clearing house, explicitly to break London’s stronghold. France has since tried to push through a directive requiring clearers to have access to ECB liquidity for euro trades.
Graham Bishop, an expert on EU regulation, said there is a string of parallel disputes, covering such arcane areas as “UCITS” depositories for EU unit trusts or rules on fund management. “The big danger is that foreign banks and funds quietly locate their new business in Frankfurt and Paris, and after five years we will discover that the centre of gravity has moved,” he said.
Deutsche Bank bases its global business and trading in London with 8,500 staff in the UK, much to the irritation of German lawmakers. France’s top lender BNP Paribas has a big trading centre and 8,000 staff in Britain. Both banks are under political pressure to repatriate operations.
The regulatory assault on the City has been an escalating drama since the Lehman crash in 2008. Three EU agencies have been created covering banking, insurance and markets with binding powers that can overrule a British veto on key matters in extremis, effectively stripping Westminster of final control over regulation of the City for the first time in 300 years.
The key measures were signed into law by the Coalition shortly after taking power, before it understood the full significance. The ECB and the Bank of England will share oversight as the EU’s new banking union takes shape, but it is a compromise fraught with trouble.
Giles Merritt, the head of Friends of Europe in Brussels, warned that EU leaders could become vindictive if Britain’s in/out referendum degenerates into a slanging match. “If British eurosceptics turn it into a sneering campaign against Europe, then the Europeans will play hardball,” he said.
Published on Jan 26, 2013
In this episode, Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert discuss the American legal system that authorizes plunder, a moral code that glorifies it and a financial system that profits from it. In the second half of the show, Max Keiser talks to Professor Steven A. Ramirez, a former Enforcement Attorney at the US Securities and Exchange Commission, about the broken social contract, when that contract got broken and how to mend it.
go to top page
DAVOS: Burning Man for Billionaires
World Economic Forum Revealed
What Really Goes on at the Davos Carnival to Celebrate the Global Economic System
by Johnny Punish
By now everyone in the business and political in-crowd knows about the annual World Economic Forum meeting held in Davos, Switzerland commonly known as “Davos”.
This is an invite only event for the worlds movers and shakers. Rumors that it’s led by the Bilderberg group abound making it really a dictate for their global vision as they “share” their visions with the political, business, and communication leaders from around the world.
The USA Leads in Billionare attendees at Davos
The attendees attend meeting halls and group sessions to discuss and resolve the worlds biggest challenges. But outside the halls, many Davos participants pay no mind. They loiter in various lounges carrying on conversations with each other. The talked and talk—as though they hadn’t been talking all day. The talk while sitting on panels or while skipping panels that others sit on.
They discuss issues like “How Did We Get Here?,” “The Compensation Question,” “Global Risks 2013: over the course of five days. There are more than two hundred such sessions.
Many Davos participants rarely, if ever, attend even one. Instead, they float around in the slack spaces, sitting down to one arranged meeting after another, or else making themselves available for chance encounters, either with friends or with strangers whom they will ever after be able to refer to as friends.
The Congress Center, the daytime hub, is a warren of interconnected lounges, cafés, lobbies, and lecture halls, with espresso bars, and juice stations.
The participants have their preferred hovering areas. Wandering the center in search of people to talk is like hunting on a African savanah; one could observe, over time, which water holes were full with game, and what times of day they liked to feed.
Jamie Dimon, running shoes in hand, might be near the espresso stand at the Global Leadership Fellows Program. In the early afternoon, you may see CNNs Fareed Zakaria happily engaged with unamed others hanging out in the Industry Partners Lounge. Eventually, the trolls will emerge from their deep holes and secret passageways. And they will glide through the crowds with aides alongside like remoras stuck to their shark like bodies.
* NOTE: The World Economic Forum overtly says that Davos is an entourage-free zone. But this doesn’t seem to apply to the biggest of the fish; like heads of state. It is said that the faster you walk the more important you are.
We are talking a name-dropper’s paradise. Central bankers, industrial chiefs, hedge-fund titans, gloomy forecasters, astrophysicists, monks, rabbis, tech wizards, museum curators, university presidents, financial bloggers, virtuous heirs.
Participants get in conversations with a newspaper columnists and an executives from big think tanks; every one with an agenda.
Everyone says that you can’t get the hang of Davos until you’ve been three or four times. So many things are going on at once that it is impossible to do even a tenth of them. You could spend the week in your hotel room, puzzling over a plan, wrestling with your doubts and regrets, but a person who would do this is not the kind who would be invited to Davos anyway. This is a place for the real in-crowd. They know who they are….. and if you get invited, well, get ready for the indoctrination.
The World Economic Forum was first conceived in January 1971 when a group of European business leaders met under the patronage of the European Commission and European industrial associations. German-born Klaus Schwab, then Professor of Business Policy at the University of Geneva, chaired the gathering, which took place in Davos, Switzerland.
What happens in Davos stays in Davos!
Davos is like Congress, the Factory, Scientology, the Mormon Tabernacle, the Bohemian Grove, the “best dinner party in the world,” the financial system, Facebook, Burning Man, boot camp, high school…. Davos is an onion, a layer cake, a Russian doll. Participants are NEVER out of the loop. They are the loop.
Whether you think the World Economic Forum is a worthy enterprise or a bunch of garbage, its annual meeting is an extraordinary creation—a miniature society that controls 7 billion of us through the global economic system
Forty-two years ago, a German academic named Klaus Schwab founded this cabal. Now, at seventy-five, he continues to nurture it, with dogged sincerity. Is he the most connected man on the planet?
Around the Congress Hall, they say no one walks faster than Klaus. The only question is… where does Klaus go for his marching orders? And that’s the big secret of Davos.
Some say there is another unseen level of leadership. Some say it’s the Bilderberg group. Whatever it is, it’s providing direction through influence to the worlds movers and shakers providing them a Burning Man-esque cultish experience to enjoy each and every year; a carnival to celebrate and perpetuate the global monetary economic system.
Jan 25, 2013 15:01 Moscow Time
© Colalge “The Voice of Russia”
As we strive to restore confidence and growth globally, leaders cannot continue with a “risk-off” mindset if our collective goal remains to seize transformational opportunities that can improve the state of the world. Dynamism in our hyperconnected world requires increasing our resilience to the many global risks that loom before us.
By their nature, global risks do not respect national borders, as highlighted in this report. And we now know that extreme weather events exacerbated by climate change will not limit their effects to countries that are major greenhouse gas emitters; false information posted on social networks can spread like wildfire to the other side of the globe in a matter of milliseconds; and genes that make bacteria resistant to our strongest antibiotics can hitch a ride with patients on an intercontinental flight.
I, therefore, invite you to read the case studies in this report of the three examples cited above to understand better the international and interdependent nature of such constellations of risks. I think you will agree that each one makes a compelling case for stronger cross-border collaboration among stakeholders from governments, business and civil society – a partnership with the purpose of building resilience to global risks. They also highlight the need for strengthening existing mechanisms to mitigate and manage risks, which today primarily exist at the national level. This means that while we can map and describe global risks, we cannot predict when and how they will manifest; therefore, building national resilience to global risks is of paramount importance.
Resilient Dynamism is the theme for this year’s World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos-Klosters, and I am pleased to introduce the Global Risks 2013 report in the same spirit. Based on an extensive survey of over 1,000 experts worldwide, the report – now in its eighth edition – serves to orient and inform decision-makers as they seek to make sense of an increasingly complex and fast-changing world. I hope this report challenges, provokes and inspires you, and I invite you to engage – if you have not already done so – with the World Economic Forum’s Risk Response Network, which provides private and public sector leaders with a collaborative platform to build national resilience to global risks.
Founder and Executive Chairman
World Economic Forum
Resilience is the theme that runs through the eighth edition of this report. It seems an obvious one when contemplating the external nature of global risks because they are beyond any organization’s or nation’s capacity to manage or mitigate on its own. And yet global risks are often diminished, or even ignored, in current enterprise risk management. One reason for this is that global risks do not fit neatly into existing conceptual frameworks. Fortunately, this is changing. The Harvard Business Review recently published a concise and practical taxonomy that may also be used to consider global risks.1 There are three types of risks as categorized by Professors Kaplan and Mikes.
First are “preventable” risks, such as breakdowns in processes and mistakes by employees. Second are “strategic” risks, which a company undertakes voluntarily, having weighed them against the potential rewards. Third are “external” risks, which this report calls “global risks”; they are complex and go beyond a company’s scope to manage and mitigate (i.e. they are exogenous in nature). This differentiation will, we hope, not only improve strategic planning and decision-making but also increase the utility of our report in private and public sector institutions.
The concept of resilience also influenced this year’s Global Risks Perception Survey, on which this report is built. The annual survey of experts worldwide added a new question asking respondents to rate their country’s resilience – or, precisely, its ability to adapt and recover – in the face of each of the 50 risks covered in the survey. More than 1,000 experts responded to our survey, making the dataset explored in this report more textured and robust than ever.
Per the revamped methodology introduced in 2012, the 2013 report presents three in-depth “risk cases” exploring themes based on analysis of survey data, as well as detailed follow-up expert interviews and partner workshops. This eighth edition increased its geographic breadth and disciplinary depth by bringing on two new report partners from academia: the National University of Singapore (NUS) and the Oxford Martin School at the University of Oxford. We also entered into an exciting editorial partnership with Nature, a leading scientific journal, to push the boundaries of the imagination further with a revamped “X Factors” section of the report.
We have introduced unique content and data online, including an interactive website through which you can explore the risks landscape and a one-year-on follow-up of the three risk cases presented in the 2012 report from a perspective of how to promote resilience.
Our Special Report this year takes the first steps towards developing a national resilience measurement with regard to global risks. It explores the use of qualitative and quantitative indicators to assess overall national resilience to global risks by looking at five national-level subsystems (economic, environmental, governance, infrastructure and social) through the lens of five components: robustness, redundancy, resourcefulness, response and recovery. The aim is to develop a new diagnostic report to enable decision-makers to track progress in building national resilience and possibly identify where further investments are needed. The interim study will be published this summer.
Linked to this research effort is the launch of an online “Resilience Practices Exchange”, where leaders can learn and contribute to building resilience using the latest social enterprise technology. These new efforts will enable the World Economic Forum’s Risk Response Network (RRN) to become the foremost international platform to enable leaders to map, mitigate, monitor and enhance resilience to global risks. Therefore, I invite you to get in touch with the RRN and share your ideas and initiatives to assess and to improve national resilience to global risks.
Risk Response Network
The World Economic Forum’s Global Risks 2013 report is developed from an annual survey of more than 1,000 experts from industry, government, academia and civil society who were asked to review a landscape of 50 global risks.
Figure 4: Top Five Risks by Likelihood and Impact
The global risk that respondents rated most likely to manifest over the next 10 years is severe income disparity, while the risk rated as having the highest impact if it were to manifest is major systemic financial failure. There are also two risks appearing in the top five of both impact and likelihood – chronic fiscal imbalances and water supply crisis (see Figure 4).
Figure 5: Top Five Changes by Likelihood and Impact
Unforeseen consequences of life science technologies was the biggest mover among global risks when assessing likelihood, while unforeseen negative consequences of regulation moved the most on the impact scale when comparing the result with last year’s (see Figure 5).
Three Risk Cases
The report introduces three risk cases, based on an analysis of survey results, consultation with experts and further research. Each case represents an interesting constellation of global risks and explores their impact at the global and national levels. The three risk cases are:
Testing Economic and Environmental Resilience
Continued stress on the global economic system is positioned to absorb the attention of leaders for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, the Earth’s environmental system is simultaneously coming under increasing stress. Future simultaneous shocks to both systems could trigger the “perfect global storm”, with potentially insurmountable consequences. On the economic front, global resilience is being tested by bold monetary and austere fiscal policies. On the environmental front, the Earth’s resilience is being tested by rising global temperatures and extreme weather events that are likely to become more frequent and severe. A sudden and massive collapse on one front is certain to doom the other’s chance of developing an effective, long-term solution. Given the likelihood of future financial crises and natural catastrophes, are there ways to build resilience in our economic and environmental systems at the same time?
Digital Wildfires in a Hyperconnected World
In 1938, thousands of Americans confused a radio adaptation of the H.G. Wells novel The War of the Worlds with an official news broadcast and panicked, in the belief that the United States had been invaded by Martians. Is it possible that the Internet could be the source of a comparable wave of panic, but with severe geopolitical consequences? Social media allows information to spread around the world at breakneck speed in an open system where norms and rules are starting to emerge but have not yet been defined. While the benefits of our hyperconnected communication systems are undisputed, they could potentially enable the viral spread of information that is either intentionally or unintentionally misleading or provocative. Imagine a real-world example of shouting “fire!” in a crowded theatre. In a virtual equivalent, damage can be done by rapid spread of misinformation even when correct information follows quickly. Are there ways for generators and consumers of social media to develop an ethos of responsibility and healthy scepticism to mitigate the risk of digital wildfires?
The Dangers of Hubris on Human Health
Health is a critical system that is constantly being challenged, be it by emerging pandemics or chronic illnesses. Scientific discoveries and emerging technologies allow us to face such challenges, but the medical successes of the past century may also be creating a false sense of security. Arguably, one of the most effective and common means to protect human life – the use of antibacterial and antimicrobial compounds (antibiotics) – may no longer be readily available in the near future. Every dose of antibiotics creates selective evolutionary pressures, as some bacteria survive to pass on the genetic mutations that enabled them to do so. Until now, new antibiotics have been developed to replace older, increasingly ineffective ones. However, human innovation may no longer be outpacing bacterial mutation. None of the new drugs currently in the development pipeline may be effective against certain new mutations of killer bacteria that could turn into a pandemic. Are there ways to stimulate the development of new antibiotics as well as align incentives to prevent their overuse, or are we in danger of returning to a pre-antibiotic era in which a scratch could be potentially fatal?
Special Report: National Resilience to Global Risks
This year’s Special Report examines the difficult issue of how a country should prepare for a global risk that is seemingly beyond its control or influence. One possible approach rests with “systems thinking” and applying the concept of resilience to countries. The report introduces five components of resilience – robustness, redundancy, resourcefulness, response and recovery – that can be applied to five country subsystems: the economic, environmental, governance, infrastructure and social. The result is a diagnostic tool for decision-makers to assess and monitor national resilience to global risks.
X Factors from Nature
Developed in partnership with the editors of Nature, a leading science journal, the chapter on “X Factors” looks beyond the landscape of 50 global risks to alert decision-makers to five emerging game-changers:
- Runaway climate change: Is it possible that we have already passed a point of no return and that Earth’s atmosphere is tipping rapidly into an inhospitable state?
- Significant cognitive enhancement: Ethical dilemmas akin to doping in sports could start to extend into daily working life; an arms race in the neural “enhancement” of combat troops could also ensue.
- Rogue deployment of geoengineering: Technology is now being developed to manipulate the climate; a state or private individual could use it unilaterally.
- Costs of living longer: Medical advances are prolonging life, but long-term palliative care is expensive. Covering the costs associated with old age could be a struggle.
- Discovery of alien life: Proof of life elsewhere in the universe could have profound psychological implications for human belief systems.
The Global Risks report is the flagship research publication of the World Economic Forum’s Risk Response Network, which provides an independent platform for stakeholders to explore ways to collaborate on building resilience to global risks. Further information can be found at www.weforum.org/risk
The Evolving Risk Landscape
Figure 6: Top Five Global Risks in Terms of Impact and Likelihood, 2007-2013
How do the top risks as identified by the annual Global Risks Perception Survey change over time? Figure 6 shows how this list changed over the past seven years. The average ratings of the risks have changed slightly, as described in detail in Section 4 of the report, but the relative ranking of the risks according to their impact or their likelihood is less affected. Interestingly, the diffusion of weapons of mass destructionhas moved into the top five risks in terms of impact.iii
Global Risks 2013
In this section, developed in collaboration with Nature, a leading science journal, the Risk Response Network asks readers to look beyond our high-risk concerns of the moment to consider a set of five X factors and reflect on what countries or companies should be doing to anticipate them.
In a world of many uncertainties we are constantly on the search to identify “X factors” – emerging concerns of possible future importance and with unknown consequences. Looking forward and identifying emerging issues will help us to anticipate future challenges and adopt a more proactive approach, rather than being caught by surprise and forced into a fully reactive mode.
X factors are serious issues, grounded in the latest scientific findings, but somewhat remote from what are generally seen as more immediate concerns such as failed states, extreme weather events, famine, macroeconomic instability or armed conflict. They capture broad and vaguely understood issues that could be hatching grounds for potential future risks (or opportunities).
Runaway Climate Change
X Factors: Runaway Climate Change
X Factors: Runaway Climate Change
The threat of climate change is well known. But have we passed the point of no return? What if we have already triggered a runaway chain reaction that is rapidly tipping Earth’s atmosphere into an inhospitable state?The natural greenhouse effect is a prerequisite for life. Without it, the Earth’s global average surface temperature would be far below zero. But our planet’s climate is a volatile beast. Small fluctuations in the Earth’s orbit around the sun can exert a major influence on our climate. So can the varying concentration in the Earth’s atmosphere of heat-trapping molecules such as carbon dioxide, to which we have been adding through greenhouse gas emissions.
How pronounced and how fast the warming will be (and how it will affect rainfall and storminess) is hard to say as even the most sophisticated computer models cannot capture all the factors involved in a system as complex as the Earth. But it could be more dramatic and difficult to adapt to than most scientists predict because of the natural feedbacks in the system, linked to processes in the oceans1 and on land.2 They have the potential to amplify climate change to a point of fundamentally disrupting the global system. The much debated questions are where these tipping points lie, how soon they might be reached, whether they can be predicted – and what will happen when they are crossed.3
The perhaps best-known positive feedback mechanism is the so-called ice-albedo feedback. In a warmer world there will be less snow and sea ice. Their melting reveals the darker land and water surfaces below, which absorb more solar heat. More absorption then causes yet more melting and warming, and so forth, in a self-reinforcing feedback loop. The unprecedented thawing of 97% of Greenland’s surface ice in July 2012, for example, has led to a darkening of Greenland’s ice cap, meaning that it will begin to absorb higher levels of solar energy and melt faster still.
Melting of the complete Arctic summer sea ice – the Arctic is expected to be seasonally ice-free by around 2040 – could probably be reversed on human timescales if greenhouse gases are reduced and temperature drops. But if the several kilometre-thick ice sheets that cover Greenland and Antarctica dwindle, they may not so easily reappear in a cooler world. New ice would have to form at low elevations, where temperatures are higher.
Permafrost melting, land use and vegetation changes, and the effects of changing cloud cover provide for other major feedback mechanisms. Some scientists suspect that by 2040 up to 63 billion extra tonnes of carbon – and up to 380 billion tonnes by 2100 – might be released by the thaw and degradation of permafrost soil alone.4
Finally, there is the potentially huge feedback effect of water vapour, a natural greenhouse gas in itself. A warmer atmosphere can hold more water. As the average air temperature soars in response to our burning of fossil fuels, evaporation and atmospheric concentration of water vapour will increase, further intensifying the greenhouse effect. On Venus, this probably caused a runaway greenhouse effect, which boiled away the oceans that may have existed in the planet’s early history.
Luckily, man-made climate warming has virtually no chance of producing a runaway greenhouse effect analogous to that of Venus. Even so, scientists with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assert that the water vapour feedback on Earth could be strong enough to double the greenhouse effect due to the added carbon dioxide alone.
While climate change debates of the past decade centred on whether or not humans could be responsible for altering a system as great as Earth’s climate, we may be rapidly moving into forced discussions on how best to strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to cope as Earth’s climate auto-pilot mercilessly hurtles us towards a new and unknown equilibrium.
Significant Cognitive Enhancement
X Factors: Significant Cognitive Enhancement
X Factors: Significant Cognitive Enhancement
Once the preserve of science fiction, superhuman abilities are fast approaching the horizon of plausibility. Will it be ethically accepted for the world to divide into the cognitively-enhanced and unenhanced? What might be the military implications?Scientists are working hard to develop the medicines and therapies needed to heal mental illnesses such as Alzheimer’s and schizophrenia. Although progress has been slow, it is conceivable that in the not too distant future researchers will identify compounds that improve existing cognitive pharmaceutical enhancers (e.g. Ritalin, modafinil). Although they will be prescribed for significant neurological disease, effective new compounds which appear to enhance intelligence or cognition are sure to be used off-label by healthy people looking for an edge at work or school.
Enhancement could come from hardware as well as drugs. A handful of studies in people show that electrical stimulation – either directly via implanted electrodes, or through the scalp with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) – can boost memory. Cochlear implants are already standard treatment for the deaf, and motor implants for controlling neural prosthetics and devices are developing fast and will likely become more widely available in coming years. Retinal implants for the blind are a bit further behind, but the field is booming and it seems likely that they will be worked out soon.
The best interfaces still rely on invasive brain electrodes (non-invasive techniques do work, but are slow and inefficient), which is the major barrier to these being adopted by healthy people. But it seems conceivable that within 10 years either we will have a new method for recording brain activity or the non-invasive signals will be decoded more efficiently. Direct brain interfaces of devices and sensors within our lifetimes are not out of the question, opening a new realm of enhanced neurobiology for those who can afford it.
This will pose ethical issues in many walks of life akin to those which surround “doping” in the world of professional sports. Will we accept the idea that significant cognitive enhancement should be available to purchase on the open market? Or will there be, as there is with performance enhancers in competitive sports, a push for legislation to maintain a more level playing field?
There is, in addition, a significant risk of cognitive enhancement going very wrong. Cognitive enhancement pharmaceuticals work by targeting particular neurotransmitter systems, and, therefore, will most likely have a wide-ranging action. There is a significant possibility of unintended effects on other systems – for example, drugs to enhance learning may lead to a greater willingness to take risks; drugs to enhance working memory may lead to increased impulsive behaviour. Recent research suggests that, in addition to boosting memory, TMS could be used to manipulate a person’s beliefs of right versus wrong or to suspend moral judgement altogether. It could also be used to “erase” memory and deliberately cause permanent brain damage without the use of invasive procedure or blunt force trauma.
Both the intended and unintended effects of such new technologies would open whole new categories of potential dual-use dilemmas. (Dual-use describes technologies which can be used for good as well as for substantial harm.) It is not difficult to see how such drugs could find applications in armed forces and law enforcement contexts, or conversely by criminal organizations and terrorist groups. They could spark an arms race in the neural enhancement of combat troops.5
Such advancements could have profound impacts in 20 to 50 years on societal norms affecting how we approach issues including education and training, disparity between groups in society, informed consent and exploitation, and international laws on warfare.
Rogue Deployment of Geoengineering
X Factors: Rogue Deploying of Geoengineering
X Factors: Rogue Deploying of Geoengineering
In response to growing concerns about climate change, scientists are exploring ways in which they could, with international agreement, manipulate the Earth’s climate. But what if this technology were to be hijacked by a rogue state or individual?Geoengineering can refer to many things, but it is most often associated with a scientific field that has come to be known as “solar radiation management”. The basic idea is that small particles could be injected high into the stratosphere to block some of the incoming solar energy and reflect it back into space, much as severe volcanic eruptions have done in the past. In stark contrast to decades of technological evolution and political disputes about overhauling energy infrastructure to reduce greenhouse emissions, solar radiation management would act quickly and would be cheap to implement – though side-effects may make it a very expensive option.
Most research has focused on sulphur injection via aircraft. Recent studies suggest that a small fleet of aircraft could inject a million tonnes of sulphur compounds into the stratosphere – enough to offset roughly half of the global warming experienced to date – for US$ 1 billion-US$ 2 billion annually.li In theory, the technology would be tantamount to a planetary thermostat, giving humans direct control over global temperature. The direct impact of dimming the sun would be felt within weeks to months.
However, a long series of ethical, legal and scientific questions quickly arises about countless additional effects that might be much more difficult to assess. The problem is that incoming solar radiation drives the entire climate system, so reducing sunlight would fundamentally alter the way energy and water move around the planet. Almost any change in weather and climate patterns is likely to create winners and losers, but determining causation and quantifying impacts on any given region or country would be a huge challenge.
Nobody envisions deployment of solar radiation management anytime soon, given the difficulties in resolving a suite of governance issues (evidenced by the fact that even the relatively simple SPICElii experiment in the United Kingdom foundered in the midst of controversy).6 Beginning with the United Kingdom’s Royal Society, many academic and policy bodies have called for cautious research as well as broader conversation about the implications of such technologies.
But this has led some geoengineering analysts to begin thinking about a corollary scenario, in which a country or small group of countries precipitates an international crisis by moving ahead with deployment or large-scale research independent of the global community. The global climate could, in effect, be hijacked by a rogue country or even a wealthy individual, with unpredictable costs to agriculture, infrastructure and global stability.
The problem is that the only way to truly test solar radiation management is at scale. This potentially conflates large-scale research with deployment, thereby giving rogue nations political cover under the guise of science. Much research has gone into whether a programme could be targeted at the Arctic, for instance, where the impacts of global warming are being felt the most, but some researchers suggest that the impacts could quickly migrate from the Arctic to other regions. Many say that a true test of solar radiation management would have to be global.
Due to such complexities, most of the science to date has been conducted via computer modelling, although scientists are looking for ways to test these ideas with local experiments. But overall, despite calls for more coordinated government science programmes, the funding landscape for this kind of science remains spotty.
This leaves a gap for unregulated experimentation by rogue parties. For example, an island state threatened with rising sea levels may decide it has nothing to lose, or well-funded individuals with good intentions may take matters into their own hands. There are signs that this is already starting to occur. In July 2012, an American businessman sparked controversy when he dumped about 100 tonnes of iron sulphate into the Pacific Ocean off the west coast of Canada in a scheme to spawn an artificial plankton bloom. The plankton absorbs carbon dioxide and may then sink to the ocean bed, removing the carbon – another type of geoengineering, known as ocean fertilization. Satellite images confirm that his actions succeeded in producing an artificial plankton bloom as large as 10,000 square kilometres.
The individual hoped to net lucrative carbon credits, but his actions may have been in violation of two international agreements.7 Observers are concerned that this may be a sign of what is to come.8
Costs of Living Longer
X Factors: Costs of Living Longer
X Factors: Costs of Living Longer
We are getting better at keeping people alive for longer. Are we setting up a future society that must struggle to cope with a mass of arthritic, demented and, above all, expensive elderly who are in need of long-term care and palliative solutions?The blessings of 20th-century medicine appear ready to explode with the deciphering of the genome and attendant advances. It is hoped that big inroads against common banes such as heart disease, cancer and stroke may be in the offing. But these advancements may also enhance risks. Consider the impact on society of a growing number of elderly infirm who are protected from the most common causes of death today, but with an ever deteriorating quality of life, as other ailments that do not kill, but seriously disable, start to dominate.
Current trends are already setting the stage for such a future scenario in the West. The demographics of the Baby Boom are such that, according to conservative estimates, the number of Americans afflicted with Alzheimer’s disease will at least double, to 11 million, by mid-century.9 Similar rises are projected for many countries, with the global population of the demented expected to double every 20 years until it exceeds 115 million in 2050.10 A key driver will be increasing elderly populations and potentially declining fertility rates in low- and middle-income countries.
The looming expense of caring for these masses is huge, especially in high-income countries. The United Kingdom, for instance, spends nearly as much each year caring for the demented (£23 billion) as it does on strokes (£5 billion), heart disease (£8 billion) and cancer (£12 billion) combined.11 And the numbers afflicted with all of these maladies are only going to grow.
Consider Medicare, the US health programme for the elderly. Assuming no policy changes – for instance, no increase in the age of eligibility – the programme’s outlays are expected to exceed its taxpayer-funded income by more than US$ 24 trillion over the next 75 years.12liii The spending trend is not limited to government support, either. In the United States, the cumulative total of public and private consumption by the elderly has ballooned in the last half-century. The burden is accentuated in rapidly ageing countries such as Germany, where the ratio of effective producers per consumer is projected to decline nearly 25% by 2030.13
Life expectancy has increased steadily in every decade since 1840, but these gains do not necessarily portend better health in later life.14 Thus, a new wave of disabled seniors may be on the way. The proportion of Americans aged 50 to 64 who reported needing help with personal care activities – such as getting into and out of bed and climbing 10 steps – increased significantly in the decade ending in 2007. Arthritis was the top cause and diabetes played a prominent and growing role.15
Are there fixes that can avert the coming storm? There are well-known but difficult-to-implement preventive measures that could help us live longer and to have better quality of lives: paramount among them is exercise, with its near-universal benefits for our physiologies and for warding off pathology.16 Obvious ways to mitigate cost implications would include raising the eligibility ages for the programmes that support the elderly from the public purse – retirement income, social support services or reduced-cost health care – and raising the retirement age, requiring older adults to be productive economically for longer. One recent analysis, using a “delayed ageing” model, found that hundreds of billions of dollars in increased costs to the US Medicare and Social Security programmes could be entirely offset by raising the eligibility ages for Medicare and Social Security by a few years (from 65 to 68, and from 67 to 68).17
However, increasing eligibility ages for public services is not a panacea, in part because financial costs are not the only challenge. The impacts of ageing populations will be felt throughout society, from changing best practices in urban planning to impacting social norms on care-giving. More research is needed to turn chronic conditions to acute conditions (i.e. by developing curative treatments), and to find solutions that increase the capacity of all citizens to manage chronic conditions and to create wealth at the same time.
Discovery of Alien Life
X Factors: Discovery of Alien Life
X Factors: Discovery of Alien Life
Given the pace of space exploration, it is increasingly conceivable that we may discover the existence of alien life or other planets that could support human life. What would be the effects on science funding flows and humanity’s self-image?It was only in 1995 that we first found evidence that other stars also have planets orbiting them. Now thousands of “exoplanets” revolving around distant stars have been detected. NASA’s Kepler mission to identify Earth-sized planets located in the “Goldilocks zone” (not too hot, not too cold) of sun-like stars has been operating for only three years and has already turned up thousands of candidates, including one the size of Earth. The fact that Kepler has found so many planet candidates in such a tiny fraction of the sky suggests that there are countless Earth-like planets orbiting sun-like stars in our galaxy. In 10 years’ time we may have evidence not only that Earth is not unique but also that life exists elsewhere in the universe.
Suppose the astronomers who study exoplanets one day find chemical signs of life – for example, a spectrum showing the presence of oxygen, a highly reactive element that would quickly disappear from Earth’s atmosphere if it were not being replenished by plants. Money might well start flowing for new telescopes to study these living worlds in detail, both from the ground and from space. New funding and new brain power might be attracted to the challenges of human space flight and the technologies necessary for humanity, or its artificial-intelligence emissaries, to survive an inter-stellar crossing.
The discovery would certainly be one of the biggest news stories of the year and interest would be intense. But it would not change the world immediately. Alien life has been supposedly discovered before, after all. Around the turn of the 20th century, the US astronomer Percival Lowell convinced many people (including himself) that Mars was crisscrossed by a vast system of canals built by a dying civilization. But the belief that humankind was not alone did not do much to usher in an era of goodwill and earthly harmony, nor did it stop the outbreak of World War I in 1914.
The discovery’s largest near-term impact would likely be on science itself. Suppose observations point to a potential future home for humankind around another star, or the existence of life in our solar system – in the Martian poles, in the subsurface oceans of Jupiter’s frozen moon Europa, or even in the hydrocarbon lakes of Saturn’s moon Titan. Scientists will immediately start pushing for robotic and even human missions to study the life forms in situ – and funding agencies, caught up in the excitement, might be willing to listen.
The fledgling space economy had a big year in 2012, which saw the birth of space trucking when the first commercially built and operated spacecraft had a successful rendezvous with the International Space Station, and a host of celebrity billionaires declared intentions to make asteroid mining a reality. Discovery of an Earth 2.0 or life beyond our planet might inspire new generations of space entrepreneurs to meet the challenge of taking human exploration of the galaxy from the realm of fiction to fact.
Over the long term, the psychological and philosophical implications of the discovery could be profound. If life forms (even fossilized life forms) are found in our solar system, for example, the origin of life is “easy” – that any place in the universe life can emerge, it will emerge. It will suggest that life is as natural and as ubiquitous a part of the universe as the stars and galaxies. The discovery of even simple life would fuel speculation about the existence of other intelligent beings and challenge many assumptions that underpin human philosophy and religion.
Through basic education and awareness campaigns, the general public can achieve a higher science and space literacy and cognitive resilience that would prepare them and prevent undesired social consequences of such a profound discovery and paradigm shift concerning humankind’s position in the universe.
THE BEST GOVERNMENTS MONEY CAN BUY
THE BEST GOVERNMENTS MONEY CAN BUY (GLOBALLY)
INSTITUTIONAL RACKETEERING & GLOBAL CRIME SYNDICATE
November 30, 2011
$700 Billion Bank Bailout was Secretly $7 Trillion
November 30, 2011. Washington. In 2008, President Bush, Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke crafted a bank bailout program they termed TARP or the Toxic Asset Relief Program. It was created in the middle of the night, over a weekend, because if they didn’t act by Monday they said, there wouldn’t be an America anymore. With confusion and fear in his eyes, President Bush handed the reins of power to the former CEO of Goldman Sachs. And instead of limiting himself to the $700 billion Congress grudgingly approved, Hank Paulson printed $7 trillion dollars, funneled it through the Federal Reserve and handed it over to the world’s biggest banks with no strings attached and in total secrecy.
Hank Paulson, former Goldman Sachs CEO and architect of the bank bailouts
While watching Whiteout Press’ favorite morning business show, ‘In Business with Margaret Brennan’ on Bloomberg TV, the show was interrupted by a startling announcement. Bloomberg investigators had uncovered details that the most powerful men in Washington and New York were desperate to keep secret. In fact, Bloomberg had to sue the Federal government for access to the events of 2009 and 2010 regarding the US bank bailout. The Federal Reserve however, insisted all details of the largest bank bailout in the history of the world had to be kept completely secret from the American people.
The government fought releasing the secret details all the way the US Supreme Court. Earlier this year, Bloomberg won their lawsuit. Treasury and the FED weren’t going to surrender to the American people that easy however. The FED turned over 29,000 documents and details of 21,000 transactions made during the time period covered by TARP and the nation’s bank bailout. Attempting to handcuff Bloomberg investigators with an avalanche of documentation, imagine their surprise when Margaret Brennan’s show was interrupted yesterday with the unbelievable news that the bank bailout American’s were led to believe was only $700 billion, was actually $7.77 trillion. According to the NY Fed, the total amount of US currency in circulation in the entire world at the time was only $829 billion.
While the events are difficult to follow for anyone who’s not familiar with the strange way America’s banking and economic system works, not to mention all the government and Wall Street secrecy, here’s a novice’s view of what happened during the panicked early days of America’s economic collapse. When the $700 billion bank bailout authorized by Congress wasn’t going to be anywhere near enough to save banks like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citigroup and Bank of America, Ben Bernanke and the FED opened up the nation’s discount borrowing window – to the tune of $7.77 trillion dollars.
Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX) could do a much better job of explaining the almost criminal nature of the FED than this Whiteout Press author ever could. With his pledge to abolish the FED, Rep Paul might explain – imagine you Joe Citizen walk into your city hall and ask for a $10 billion dollar loan at zero percent interest. They give you, and only you, that loan because you’re ‘special’. You then loan that $10 billion out to others at 5, 10 or 20 percent yearly interest for things like homes, which are guaranteed by the taxpayers, so there’s no risk of nonpayment. When that $15 or $20 billion is paid back to you, you pay back the FED the original $10 billion and keep the rest.
Instead of loaning that $7.77 trillion to the American people as the American government intended, banks throughout the world took advantage of the US taxpayer and used that money to secretly cover massive losses the banks were suffering from their stupidly investing in their own worthless financial instruments – instruments the banks knew were worthless and doomed to fail. Like a modern day shell game, trillions of dollars floated from one banking institution to another, appearing to fill all balance sheet holes everywhere. Not all the banks used the money to fill holes however. Some used it to make massive profits.
The Bloomberg reporting revealed banks like Barclays, Banco Santander and BNP Parabas made a fortune on the US taxpayer program. Barclays turned their money into a $26.7 billion profit. Banco Santander profited $29.2 billion and BNP Parabas made $17.1 billion.
They weren’t alone. According to Bloomberg’s data, 97 different financial institutions around the globe turned their ‘discount window’ into profits during the two years of the financial crisis. The most suspicious part – the US government insisted on keeping every single transaction a secret. In one day alone at the end of 2008, the Federal Reserve gave out $1.2 trillion dollars to banks – the most on any day before or since.
For those who remember, Bank of America was accused of using its funds not to bailout underwater homeowners, but instead to purchase a bank in China. Bank of America made a profit of $14.2 billion using their ‘special’ discount borrowing privilege. Bank of America wasn’t the only player in the middle of the US financial collapse that made massive profits off the US taxpayer. Wells Fargo made $12.1 billion. JP Morgan made $13.8 billion, Goldman Sachs made $12.7 billion, American Express made $1.4 billion, Discover made $1.4 billion, US Bancorp profited $7.2 billion, HSBC made $11.6 billion, PNC Financial $1.4 billion, Lloyds made $9.6 billion and the list goes on and on.
Not all the banks that made massive profits off the US taxpayers during the peak of the financial crisis were well-known American brands. Foreign banks also made billions in profits, including the National Australia Bank, Bank of Toronto, Mitsubishi, Skandinavista, Chang Hwa, the Israel Discount Bank and dozens more.
Goldman Sachs personnel in the ObamaWhite House
Lael Brainard: Brainard is the United States Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs in the administration of Obama
Gregory Craig: Former White House Counsel, Recently hired by Goldman Sachs
Thomas Donilon: Deputy National Security Adviser(despite having a career that is mostly involved with domestic politics). Donilon was a lawyer at O’Melveny and Myers and made almost $4 million representing meltdown clients including Penny Pritzker (of Chicago) and Goldman.
William C. Dudley : president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, partner and managing director at Goldman, Sachs and was the firm’s chief U.S. economist for a decade
Douglas Elmendorf: Obama Director of the Congressional Budget Office in January 2009, replaced Furman as Director of the Hamilton Project (Note that the Hamilton Project was funded by Robert Rubin and Goldman Sachs)
Rahm Emanuel: Obama Chief of staff, on the payroll of Goldman Sachs, receiving $3,000 per month from the firm to “introduce us to people,” in the words of one Goldman partner at the time.
Dianna Farrell: Obama Administration: Deputy Director, National Economic Council, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Financial Analyst
Stephen Friedman: Obama Administration: Chairman, President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director, 2005
Michael Frohman: Robert Rubin’s Chief of Staff while Rubin served as Secretary of the Treasury and an Obama “head hunter” according to “Rubin Proteges Change Their Tune as They Join Obama’s Team” in the New York Times.
Anne Fudge: appointed Fudge to Obama budget deficit reduction committee. Fudge has been the PR craftsman for some of America’s largest corporations. She sits, according to the Washington Post, as a Trustee of the Brookings Institution within which the Hamilton Project is embedded.
Jason Furman: directed economic policy for the Obama Presidential Campaign, served as the second Director of the Hamilton Project after Peter Orszag’s departure for the Obama administration
Mark Gallogly: Sits on the Hamilton Project’s advisory council. He is also, according to Wikipedia, currently a member of Obama’s President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board.
Timothy Geithner: Secretary of the Treasury, a former managing director of Goldman Sachs
Gary Gensler: Obama Administration: Commissioner, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and Co-head of Finance
Michael Greenstone: the 4th Director of the Hamilton Project. Just as attorney Craig went from advising Obama to defending Goldman Sachs against the SEC complaint, Greenstone has used the revolving door to go from went an economic adviser position to Obama to one of the Goldman Sachs outlets, in this case its think tank embedded in the Brookings Institution and funded by Goldman and Robert Rubin. All 3 previous Directors of the Hamilton Project work in the Obama administration.
Robert Hormats: Obama Administration: Undersecretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, State DepartmentFormer Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs Group
Neel Kashkari: served under Treasury Secretary Paulson and was kept on by Obama after his inauguration for a limited period to work on TARP oversight, former Vice President of Goldman Sachs in San Francisco where he where he led Goldman’s Information Technology Security Investment Banking practice.
Karen Kornbluh: (sometimes called “Obama’s brain”) Obama Ambassador to the OECD, was Deputy Chief of Staff to Mr. Goldman Sachs, Robert Rubin
Jacob (AKA “Jack”) Lew: the United States Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources. According to Wikipedia, Lew sits on the Brookings-Rubin funded Hamilton Project Advisory Board. He also served with Robert Rubin in Bill Clinton’s cabinet as Director of OMB.
David Lipton: now at Obama’s National Economic Council and the National Security Council. Lipton -worked with Larry Summers and Timothy Geithner, on the US response to the Asian financial crisis of the 1990’s. MergeFoundations reports that Lipton worked closely with Robert Rubin:
Emil Michael: White House Fellow, former investment banker with Goldman Sachs
Eric Mindich: Former chief strategy officer of New York- based Goldman Sachs, started Eton Park in 2004 with $3.5 billion, at the time one of the biggest hedge-fund launches ever. …..Hank Paulson Tipped Off The Goldman-Led “Plunge Protection Team” About Fannie Bankruptcy 7 Weeks In Advance (2007): Goldman operative Eric Mindich in the hierarchy of the Asset Managers’ committee of the President’s Working Group on Capital Markets, better known of course as the PPT (in 2009)
Philip Murphy: Obama Administration: Ambassador to Germany, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Head of Goldman Sachs, Frankfurt
Barack Obama: Obama owes his career to Goldman Sachs which was not only his biggest financial contributor when he ran for the presidency but also his biggest contributor when he ran for the Senate
Peter Orszag, Obama Budget Director, founding director of the Hamilton Project, funded by Goldman Sachs and Robert Rubin. Wikipedia indicates that Robert Rubin, Goldman’s ex-head, was one of Orszag’s mentors.
Mark Patterson: Obama Administration: Chief of Staff to Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geitner, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Lobbyist 2005-2008; Vice President for Government Relations
Mark Peterson: Chief of staff to Timothy Geithner, Goldman Sachs vice president and lobbyist
Steve Ratner: the shady billionaire financier who Obama appointed as his “car czar” and who resigned after it was revealed that his company, the Quadrangle Group, was apparently involved in “pay to play” for a billion dollars or so of New York State pension funds, and was under possible indictment by the New York AG and the SEC, also sits on the Advisory Council of the Goldman funded Hamilton Project
Robert Reischauer: a member of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission from 2000-2009 and was its vice chair from 2001-2008. He too sits on the Hamilton Project’s advisory board.
Alice Rivlin: Obama named Alice Rivlin to his so called deficit reduction commission.
James Rubin: Son of Robert Rubin. Served as a headhunter for Obama per the New York Times article, “Rubin Proteges Change Their Tune as They Join Obama’s Team”
Gene Sperling: advisor to Timothy Geithner on bailouts, Sperling paid by Goldman Sachs for one year of consulting work.
Adam Storch: Obama Managing Executive of the Security and Exchange Commission’s Division of Enforcement Vice President in the Goldman Sachs Business Intelligence Group
Larry Summers: Obama chief economic adviser and head of the National Economic Counsel, Worked under Robert Rubin at Goldman Sachs
John Thain: Obama Administration: Advisor to Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geitner, Former Goldman Sachs Title: President and Chief Operating Officer (1999-2003)
Under the Bush Adminstration:
Joshua Bolten: Bush II Administration: White House Chief of Staff (2006 – 2009), Former Goldman Sachs Title: Executive Director, Legal & Government Affairs (1994-99)
William C Dudley: NY Federal Reserve: Current President/CEO, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and managing director – 2007
Edward C. Forst: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson 2008 Former Goldman Sachs Title: Co-head of Goldman’s investment management business
Stephen Friedman: NY Federal Reserve: Former Chairman of the Board – 2009, former Goldman Sachs Title: Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director, 2005-)
Gary Gensler: Bush II Administration: Undersecretary, Treasury (1999-2001) and Assistant Secretary, Treasury (1997-1999), Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and Co-head of Finance
Reuben Jeffery III: Bush II Administration: Undersecretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, State Department (2007 –2009) Former Goldman Sachs Title: Managing Partner Paris until 2002 Security Investment Banking Practice
Dan Jester: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson 2008, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Deputy CFO
Neel Kashkari: Bush II Administration: Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability, Treasury (2008 – 2009) Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice President, San Francisco; led Information Technology Security Investment Banking Practice
Eric Mindich: Former chief strategy officer of New York- based Goldman Sachs, started Eton Park in 2004 with $3.5 billion
Henry Paulson: Bush II Administration: Secretary, Treasury 2006 – 2009, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Chairman and CEO (1998-2006)
Robert Rubin: Bush II Administration: Secretary, Treasury 1995-1999, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman (1987-90)
Robert Steel: Bush II Administration: Under Secretary for Domestic Finance, Treasury, (2006 – 2008) Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman – 2004
Steve Shafran: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson 2008 Former Goldman Sachs Title: Private equity business in Asia until 2000
Kendrick R. Wilson III: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson 2008 Former Goldman Sachs Title: Chairman of Goldman’s financial institutions groups
Robert Zoellick: Bush II Administration: United States Trade Representative (2001-2005), Deputy Secretary of State (2005-2006), World Bank President (2007 -), Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman, International (2006-07)
Other Noteworthy Appointees:
Mark Carney: Current Title: Governor, Bank of Canada, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Managing Director Goldman Sachs Canada until 2003
Mario Draghi: Current Title: Governor of the Bank of Italy (2006- ), Former Goldman Sachs Title: European Deputy Chairman/Partner until 2006
Edward Liddy: Current Title: AIG CEO, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director, 2005-)
Duncan Niederauer: Current Title: Chair/CEO NYSE, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Managing Director – 2007
Romano Prodi: Current Title: Prime Minister of Italy (1996-1998 and 2006-2008) and President of the European Commission (1999-2004), Former Goldman Sachs Title: Paid adviser/consultant 1990 – 1993
Massimo Tononi: Current Title: Italian Deputy Treasury Chief (2006-2008), Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner 2004 – 2006
Malcolm Turnbull: Current Title: Federal Leader, Liberal Party, Australia, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner (1998-2001)
David Watson: Current Title: Monetary Policy Committee, Bank of England, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Chief European economist
Not all banks used the US taxpayers to make billions in extra profits. Some banks tried, and lost.
Among the banks that lost money on the secret loan program were Citigroup, losing $29.3 billion, Royal Bank of Scotland lost $45.3 billion, Credit Suisse lost $4.1 billion, Deutsche Bank lost $433 million, Fifth Third lost $1 billion, Wachovia lost $31.6 billion, Merrill Lynch lost $35.9 billion, Arab Banking lost $77 million, Allied Irish Banks lost $3.4 billion, Morgan Stanley lost $3 billion, Industrial Bank of Korea lost $559 million and the list goes on and on.
Readers can take their pick regarding which aspect of this story to be most angry about. Some will be outraged that for-profit banks are taking advantage of the US taxpayer and making billions in free money. Others will be angry that based on the above list, it appears the US taxpayer is also guaranteeing the profits of foreign banks all over the world. And some will be outraged by the fact that the entire story was kept secret from not only the American people, but also their representative in Congress and even officials at the FED.
Bloomberg asked one longtime critic of giant banks, Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), to comment. “When you see the dollars the banks got, it’s hard to make the case these were successful institutions,” she says, “This is an issue that can unite the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street. There are lawmakers in both parties who would change their votes now.”
Bloomberg also quotes other individuals who should have been aware of what was going on, but weren’t. Gary H. Stern, Minneapolis FED Chairman at the time, insists he, “wasn’t aware of the magnitude.” Rep. Brad Miller (D-NC), member of the House Financial Services Committee, says, “TARP at least had some strings attached. With the Fed programs, there was nothing.”
With hindsight being 20/20, Bloomberg looked at some of the biggest emergency borrowers and compared their financial situation with the outlook and forecasts made by the bank’s CEO’s to their shareholders. One such example is Ken Lewis, CEO of Bank of America. On November 26, 2008 he informed shareholders that BofA was, “one of the strongest and most stable major banks in the world.” We’ll let you the reader decide – Bank of America owed the US government a staggering $86 billion on that day.
Another example is JP Morgan Chase’s CEO Jamie Dimon. On March 26, 2010, he reassured his shareholders that JP Morgan didn’t need a bailout and only participated in the program in the beginning, “at the request of the Federal Reserve to help motivate others to use the system.” In reality, JP Morgan was still taking advantage of the emergency program and owed the US government $48 billion dollars more than a year after the program began.
As far as the American people go, the two Representatives of theirs in Congress that should have been made aware of what was going on, weren’t. Both the Republican and Democratic overseers of the massive bank bailout, Rep. Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), both confirmed to Bloomberg they were kept in the dark.
“We were aware emergency efforts were going on” Frank said, “We didn’t know the specifics.” Congressman Frank announced his retirement earlier this week. Rep. Judd Gregg simply responded, “We didn’t know the specifics.” Former Congressman Judd Gregg is now employed by Goldman Sachs.
Most Americans couldn’t explain how banks function or how the bank bailout worked if their lives depended on it. But most assume the US taxpayer loaned billions to banks to save the industry and avoid economic collapse, rampant unemployment and a housing crash. But if one were to take a step back and look at the new landscape, a new picture emerges of what the bank bailout was really about. In the five years from before the crisis in 2006 to after the crisis in 2011, the six largest US banks increased their assets, or money and property they own, from $6.8 trillion dollars to $9.5 trillion.
Dallas Federal Reserve President Richard Fisher summed up the thoughts of many when he called that fact, “un-American”. For more information about the US economic collapse, read the Whiteout Press Special Report, ‘What Caused America’s Economic Collapse’. Special thanks to Bloomberg Marketplace for their detailed reporting.
go to top page
December 4, 2012
List of Goldman Sachs employees in the White House
December 4, 2012. Washington. At best, it’s considered a revolving door for powerful individuals between Wall Street and the White House. At worst, it’s an economic coup that has been successful in infiltrating and subverting the United States federal government. What is it? The multi-national global banking syndicate known as Goldman Sachs. And more and more, its employees and the federal government’s employees are becoming one and the same.
In this Raymond Balze painting from the 1850’s, Jesus chistises the ‘money changers’ in the Temple, and by doing so, a major tenent in the Christian faith is born.
Goldman Sachs and the White House
The following list was compiled by Nachumlist.com and published in May 2012. With a new Obama administration taking control after the first of the year, the below names will change somewhat. Many of the current White House staff and paid advisers will go back to their Wall Street firms, such as Goldman Sachs. While new Wall Street power players, many of the same individuals from previous Presidential administrations, will take their place.
What follows is a list of Goldman Sachs employees and paid agents who have moved over to positions in the Barack Obama White House. The second list below includes many additional Goldman Sachs employees who were hired by the Bush administration and were hold-overs into President Obama’s first term. The third and final list reflects the Goldman Sachs individuals who have moved on to positions at other global or foreign governments and institutions.
The Money Lenders
As we can see, and federal and state election disclosures confirm, Goldman Sachs has little or no loyalty to either the Republicans or the Democrats. The global bank is a major partner in administrations from both parties, contributes to both parties, and some would argue, controls both parties. This battle between the citizens of a country against the self-serving power and influence of the global banking cartel is not new. In fact, it’s been going on since Biblical times when Christianity banned ‘usury’ – the charging of interest on loans or debts.
For a detailed and historical recap, read the Whiteout Press Special Report, ‘The Illuminati’.
The following two historical quotes sum up the eternal struggle that still goes on today:
“Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.” – Mayer Amschel Rothschild, 1790.
“History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance.” – James Madison, 4th President of the United States.
Showing that this eternal struggle – between those cursed with a sickness of unquenchable greed versus those they prey upon – is alive and well even today, the following list presents many of today’s individuals who’ve left their multi-million dollar positions at Goldman Sachs to take a powerful and influential roll inside the White House.
Naming Names – The List
*Note: A number of the below names reference ‘The Hamilton Project‘, a Brookings Institute owned political and policy think tank and advisory organization.
From Nachumlist.com (May, 2012), listed in alphabetical order:
Goldman Sachs Personnel in the Barack Obama White House
Lael Brainard: Brainard is the United States Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs in the administration of Obama.
Gregory Craig: Former White House Counsel, Recently hired by Goldman Sachs.
Thomas Donilon: Deputy National Security Adviser (despite having a career that is mostly involved with domestic politics). Donilon was a lawyer at O’Melveny and Myers and made almost $4 million representing meltdown clients including Penny Pritzker (of Chicago) and Goldman Sachs.
William C. Dudley: President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, partner and managing director at Goldman Sachs and was the firm’s chief U.S. economist for a decade.
Douglas Elmendorf: Obama Director of the Congressional Budget Office in January 2009, replaced Furman as Director of the Hamilton Project (Note that the Hamilton Project was funded by Robert Rubin and Goldman Sachs).
Rahm Emanuel: Obama Chief of Staff, on the payroll of Goldman Sachs receiving $3,000 per month from the firm to “introduce us to people”, in the words of one Goldman Sachs partner at the time.
Dianna Farrell: Obama Administration: Deputy Director, National Economic Council. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Financial Analyst.
Stephen Friedman: Obama Administration: Chairman, President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Board Member (Chairman 1990-94; Director 2005).
Michael Frohman: Robert Rubin’s Chief of Staff while Rubin served as Secretary of the Treasury and an Obama “head hunter” according to “Rubin Proteges Change Their Tune as They Join Obama’s Team” in the New York Times.
Anne Fudge: Appointed to Obama budget deficit reduction committee. Fudge has been the PR craftsman for some of America’s largest corporations. She sits, according to the Washington Post, as a Trustee of the Brookings Institution within which the Hamilton Project is embedded.
Jason Furman: Directed economic policy for the Obama Presidential Campaign, served as the second Director of the Hamilton Project after Peter Orszag’s departure for the Obama administration.
Mark Gallogly: Sits on the Hamilton Project’s advisory council. He is also, according to Wikipedia, currently a member of President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board.
Timothy Geithner: Secretary of the Treasury, former President of the New York Fed. a former managing director of Goldman Sachs.
Gary Gensler: Obama Administration: Commissioner of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and Co-head of Finance.
Michael Greenstone: The 4th Director of the Hamilton Project. Just as attorney Craig went from advising Obama to defending Goldman Sachs against the SEC complaint, Greenstone has used the revolving door to go from an Obama economic adviser position to one of the Goldman Sachs outlets – in this case its think tank embedded in the Brookings Institution and funded by Goldman Sachs and Robert Rubin. All 3 previous Directors of the Hamilton Project work in the Obama administration.
Robert Hormats: Obama Administration: Undersecretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, State Department. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs Group.
Neel Kashkari: Served under Treasury Secretary Paulson (a former Goldman Sachs CEO) and was kept on by Obama after his inauguration for a limited period to work on TARP oversight. Former Vice President of Goldman Sachs in San Francisco where he led Goldman’s Information Technology Security Investment Banking practice.
Karen Kornbluh: (Sometimes called “Obama’s brain”) Obama Ambassador to the OECD. Was Deputy Chief of Staff to ‘Mr. Goldman Sachs’, Robert Rubin.
Jacob “Jack” Lew: The United States Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources. According to Wikipedia, Lew sits on the Brookings-Rubin funded Hamilton Project Advisory Board. He also served with Robert Rubin in Bill Clinton’s cabinet as Director of OMB.
David Lipton: Now on Obama’s National Economic Council and the National Security Council. Lipton worked with Larry Summers and Timothy Geithner on the US response to the Asian financial crisis of the 1990’s. MergeFoundations reports that Lipton worked closely with Robert Rubin.
Emil Michael: White House Fellow. Former investment banker with Goldman Sachs.
Eric Mindich: Former chief strategy officer of New York-based Goldman Sachs, started Eton Park in 2004 with $3.5 billion, at the time one of the biggest hedge-fund launches ever. …..Hank Paulson Tipped Off The Goldman-Led “Plunge Protection Team” About Fannie Bankruptcy 7 Weeks In Advance (2007): Goldman operative Eric Mindich in the hierarchy of the Asset Managers’ committee of the President’s Working Group on Capital Markets, better known of course as the PPT (in 2009).
Philip Murphy: Obama Administration: Ambassador to Germany. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Head of Goldman Sachs, Frankfurt.
Barack Obama: Obama owes his career to Goldman Sachs which was not only his biggest financial contributor when he ran for the Presidency, but was also his biggest contributor when he ran for the US Senate.
Peter Orszag: Obama Budget Director. Founding director of the Hamilton Project, funded by Goldman Sachs and Robert Rubin. Wikipedia indicates that Robert Rubin, Goldman’s ex-CEO, was one of Orszag’s mentors.
Mark Patterson: Obama Administration: Chief of Staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geitner. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Lobbyist 2005-2008; Vice President for Government Relations.
Mark Peterson: Chief of staff to Timothy Geithner. Goldman Sachs Vice President and lobbyist.
Steve Ratner: The shady billionaire financier who Obama appointed as his “car czar” and who resigned after it was revealed that his company, the Quadrangle Group, was apparently involved in “pay to play” for a billion dollars or so of New York State pension funds, and was under possible indictment by the New York AG and the SEC. Sits on the Advisory Council of the Goldman funded Hamilton Project.
Robert Reischauer: A member of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission from 2000-2009 and was its Vice Chair from 2001-2008. He too sits on the Hamilton Project’s advisory board.
Alice Rivlin: Obama named Alice Rivlin to his so-called Deficit Reduction Commission.
James Rubin: Son of Robert Rubin. Served as a ‘headhunter’ for Obama per the New York Times article, “Rubin Proteges Change Their Tune as They Join Obama’s Team”.
Gene Sperling: Advisor to Timothy Geithner on bailouts. Sperling paid by Goldman Sachs for one year of consulting work.
Adam Storch: Obama Managing Executive of the Security and Exchange Commission’s Division of Enforcement. Former Vice President in the Goldman Sachs Business Intelligence Group.
Larry Summers: Obama chief economic adviser and head of the National Economic Counsel. Worked under Robert Rubin at Goldman Sachs.
John Thain: Obama Administration: Advisor to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. Former Goldman Sachs Title: President and Chief Operating Officer (1999-2003).
Goldman Sachs personnel in the George W. Bush White House
Joshua Bolten: Bush II Administration: White House Chief of Staff (2006 – 2009). Former Goldman Sachs Title: Executive Director, Legal & Government Affairs (1994-1999).
William C Dudley: NY Federal Reserve: Current President/CEO. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and Managing Director – 2007.
Edward C. Forst: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson 2008. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Co-head of Goldman’s investment management business.
Stephen Friedman: NY Federal Reserve: Former Chairman of the Board – 2009. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director 2005-).
Gary Gensler: Bush II Administration: Undersecretary of the Treasury (1999-2001) and Assistant Secretary, Treasury (1997-1999). Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and Co-head of Finance.
Reuben Jeffery III: Bush II Administration: Under Secretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, State Department (2007–2009). Former Goldman Sachs Title: Managing Partner, Paris until 2002 Security Investment Banking Practice.
Dan Jester: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson 2008. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Deputy CFO.
Neel Kashkari: Bush II Administration: Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability, Treasury (2008 – 2009). Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice President, Goldman Sachs San Francisco; led Information Technology Security Investment Banking Practice.
Eric Mindich: Former chief strategy officer of New York-based Goldman Sachs. Started Eton Park in 2004 with $3.5 billion.
Henry Paulson: Bush II Administration: Secretary of the Treasury 2006 – 2009. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Chairman and CEO (1998-2006).
Robert Rubin: Bush II Administration: Secretary of the Treasury 1995-1999. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman (1987-1990).
The news shouldn’t be left wing or right wing, conservative or liberal. It should be the news. It should be independent – Whiteout Press
Robert Steel: Bush II Administration: Under Secretary for Domestic Finance, Treasury (2006 – 2008). Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman – 2004.
Steve Shafran: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson 2008. Former Goldman Sachs private equity business in Asia until 2000.
Kendrick R. Wilson III: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson 2008. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Chairman of Goldman’s financial institutions groups.
Robert Zoellick: Bush II Administration: United States Trade Representative (2001-2005), Deputy Secretary of State (2005-2006), World Bank President (2007 -). Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman, International (2006-07).
Other Noteworthy Global Appointees
Mark Carney: Current Title: Governor, Bank of Canada. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Managing Director Goldman Sachs Canada until 2003.
Mario Draghi: Current Title: Governor of the Bank of Italy (2006- ). Former Goldman Sachs Title: European Deputy Chairman/Partner until 2006.
Edward Liddy: Current Title: AIG CEO. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Board Member (Chairman 1990-94; Director 2005- ).
Duncan Niederauer: Current Title: Chair/CEO NYSE. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Managing Director – 2007.
Romano Prodi: Current Title: Prime Minister of Italy (1996-1998 and 2006-2008) and President of the European Commission (1999-2004). Former Goldman Sachs Title: Paid adviser/consultant 1990 – 1993.
Massimo Tononi: Current Title: Italian Deputy Treasury Chief (2006-2008). Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner 2004 – 2006.
Malcolm Turnbull: Current Title: Federal Leader, Liberal Party of Australia. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner (1998-2001).
David Watson: Current Title: Monetary Policy Committee, Bank of England. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Chief European economist.
The above list of names and their descriptions is reprinted in its entirety from Nachumlist.com.
Changes to the G-SIFI List
In November 2011, the Financial Stability Board (FSB) published its initial list of Global Systemically Important Banks (G-SIBs). On 1 November 2012, the list was updated, with BBVA and Standard Chartered being added to the list and Commerzbank, Dexia and Lloyds all being removed.
The significance of being classified as a G-SIB lies in the fact that, under Basel III, any bank identified as a G-SIB in November 2014 will be required to maintain additional loss absorbency. This requirement will be phased in between January 2016 and January 2019 and ranges between 1% and 2.5% of risk weighted assets depending on the significance of the individual firm. G-SIBs are also required to meet higher supervisory standards for risk management functions, data aggregation capabilities, risk governance and internal controls. Any firm newly designated as a G-SIB is required to implement certain resolution planning requirements within specified deadlines. Furthermore, even where a financial institution is no longer designated as a G-SIB it will continue to be subject to the requirement to prepare an RRP to the extent that it is assessed by its national regulator to be systemically significant or critical in the event of failure.
For the first time, the current list of G-SIBs has been allocated into provisional buckets corresponding to the required level of additional loss absorbency, as set out in more detail in Annex 1 below. The timetable for implementation of resolution planning requirements for newly designated G-SIFIs is detailed in Annex 2 below.
|Bucket||G-SIB in alphabetical order within each bucket|
|4(2.5%)||CitigroupDeutsche BankHSBCJP Morgan Chase|
|2(1.5%)||Bank of AmericaBank of New York MellonCredit SuisseGoldman SachsMitsubishi UFJ FGMorgan Stanley
Royal Bank of Scotland
|1(1.0%)||Bank of ChinaBBVAGroup BPCEGroup Credit AgricoleING BankMizuho FG
Sumitomo Mitsui FG
|G-SIFI Requirement||Deadline for completion following date of G-SIFI designation|
|Establishment of Crisis Management Group (CMG)||6 months|
|Development of recovery plan||12 months|
|Development of resolution strategy and review within CMG||12 months|
|Agreement of institution specific cross-border cooperation agreement||18 months|
|Development of operational resolution plan||18 months|
|Conduct of resolvability assessment by CMG and resolvability assessment process||24 months|
go to top page
[…] GLOBAL FINAINCIAL KINGDOM […]