Many people hate corporations. Progressives and populists blame them for a host of sins, and several libertarians assert they couldn’t exist in their present form without the State. We at DownsizeDC.org oppose the crony capitalism of the Corporatist State, and we cringe whenever people assume our pro-free market philosophy is a “defense” of corporations.
That is why our new campaign is a “heresy.” What we propose may shock you, but we have good reasons.
Our position is that even if you hate corporations . . .
Abolishing corporate income taxes is in your self-interest.
These taxes are unproductive as revenue-generators, but what they really do is make politicians more powerful, at your expense.
by Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, and host of The Peter Schiff Show, broadcasting live from WSTC Norwalk CT from 10am to noon Eastern time every weekday, and streaming at www.schiffradio.com.
Today the U.S. government officially borrowed beyond its $14.29 trillion statutory debt limit. And even though the Obama administration has assured us that accounting gimmickry will allow the government to borrow for another few months, the breach has given seeming urgency to Congressional negotiations to raise the debt ceiling. Republicans are making a great show of acting tough by linking their “yes” votes with promises for future budget cuts (that could even slow the rate of debt increases at some uncertain point in the future). But as we go through the process, many novice observers may wonder why we have a debt ceiling at all when our government has never shown the slightest inclination to respect its prior self-imposed limits.
The ceiling was first imposed in 1917 as part of a deal that passed the Liberty Bond Act that funded America’s entry into the First World War. To make it easy for the Treasury to sell those bonds, Congress also amended the Federal Reserve Act to allow the Fed to hold government bonds as collateral. But given the potential for unchecked Federal deficits, Congress sought to limit taxpayer exposure to $11.5 billion.
Quote of the Day: “Liberty is the possibility of doubting, the possibility of making a mistake, the possibility of searching and experimenting, the possibility of saying “No” to any authority — literary, artistic, philosophic, religious, social and even political.” — Ignazio Silone (1900-1978) Source: The God That Failed, 1950
The politicians are trying to tax the Internet again. Let’s stop them.
by John Browne, Senior Market Strategist at Euro Pacific Capital
When Fed Chairmen speak, the public is supposed to listen; and, historically, they have. Yet, Chairman Bernanke’s remarks at his historic first press conference were met by a tidal wave of skepticism. Although many of the mainstream outlets, especially those lucky enough to be granted question slots, characterized his performance as “serious” and “masterful,” most rank-and-file Americans were left with a very different impression.
Any casual glance at the broad internet coverage of the event shows that the public is deeply skeptical of Mr. Bernanke and the actions he is taking. If that skepticism runs more than skin-deep, it could herald a fundamental change in American politics and a restoration of sound finance in America. Already politicians seem to be taking notice.
The struggle over raising the national debt ceiling has prompted many members of Congress to talk about a negotiated and practical plan to slash government spending. The early posturing has begun. While much of it is merely window dressing, as politicians continue to escalate their rhetoric, they will eventually be forced to actually do something to make good on their promises. Their mouths are writing checks that their budget proposals may have to cash.
Ron Paul is on fire. That is my opinion of his performance in this first GOP debate. Of course, I’m biased. Feel free to make your own judgement after watching the entire debate below. There were a few stellar moments from Ron Paul, including his answer when asked about legalizing drugs, and his answer about being the “Founding Father” of the Tea Party movement regarding Michele Bachmann.
I don’t agree with a lot of what Herman Cain says, but I have to admit he has charisma that will give him a lot of support. Expect the other candidates to start attacking him if his poll numbers go up. I think they will.
Gary Johnson did very well with a few odd moments. If I’m looking at him through social-con or neo-con eyes voting for him would likely be impossible. He did come off as a very honest “make the hard choices” candidate. Sort of like Cain without the charisma.
Pawlenty seems to be channeling John McCain a bit too much and Santorum just comes off as angry. Both seem to be going after the George W. Bush voting block; however small that is these days.
I have worked on Wall Street my entire life, and one thing I’ve learned is that large institutional investors, like pension funds and endowments, rarely veer from the herd. They manage too much of other people’s money to stick their necks out alone – if their investments go bad, at least they can point to everyone else who fared just as poorly.
For this reason, these funds are often lagging in their perception of crucial market changes – changes such as a doomed currency. While many of us are buying precious metals to hedge against the collapse of the dollar, gold and silver have been taboo investments on Wall Street for years. Fund managers are taught that gold is a “barbarous relic” – much better to stick with government bonds and blue-chip stocks. That’s what everyone else is doing.
But there are early signs that the herd is changing direction.
by John Browne, Senior Market Strategist at Euro Pacific Capital
Despite loud huzzahs from a variety of boosters who proclaimed that Chairman Bernanke spoke with gravitas and wisdom at the first ever Federal Reserve press conference, the wider investing public clearly saw the performance as unconvincing. During and immediately after the proceedings the prices of gold and silver rose strongly to new highs as the U.S. dollar plummeted. The affair seemed to solidify the understanding that Bernanke and his cohorts have no intention whatsoever to reverse the current trend of inflation and a weakening dollar.
With all the preliminaries swept away, it appears that the great dollar slide that we have long feared will not be interrupted. In the last year alone, the dollar has fallen 25 per cent against the Swiss Franc, (the gold standard of fiat currencies) – with one quarter of that decline coming since the beginning of April alone. Against gold itself (the gold standard of all forms of money), the decline has been even worse, 31 per cent so far this year, and 8 per cent this month.
Ominously, the dollar index (the broadest measure of dollar strength) is just a percentage point or two above the all time lows that it set before the financial panic of 2008 sent spooked investors into the apparent safety of America’s deep and liquid Treasury market. It appears that spell has now been fully broken.
by John Browne, Senior Market Strategist at Euro Pacific Capital
As a result of active “demonetization” efforts by the IMF and its member central banks, gold and silver have experienced the type of volatility that has given conservative investors reasons not to perceive the metals as dependable cash alternatives. Instead gold and silver have become known as the asset class to hold as a hedge against inflation.
However, during the 1990′s, when inflation was in general much higher than it has been since the turn of the millennium, gold and silver prices drifted lower and stagnated. However, since 2000, gold and silver have risen by over 400 and 700 percent respectively. Remarkably, this has occurred over a time frame during which, by most accounts, low inflation has prevailed. How can this be explained?
In 1944 when the U.S. dollar was considered ‘as good as gold,’ it was made the international reserve currency. This unique status is the reason that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke was recently able to say that, “The U.S. Government has a technology, called the printing press that allows it to produce as many dollars at it wishes at essentially no cost.”
by Michael Pento, Senior Economist at Euro Pacific Capital (www.europac.net)
In the same vein as medieval physicians believed bloodletting would cure illness, modern snake-oil economists still perilously cling to their claim that rising wages and salaries are the cause of inflation. With my recent debates with these mainstream economists, I’ve heard the following: “without rising wages, where does the money come from to push prices higher?” I was tempted to respond, “where do the employers get the money to pay those higher wages?” But economists tend to get a little nasty when you make them feel stupid.
It is actually the predominant belief that wages and salaries rise before aggregate price levels in the economy and thus during periods of rising inflation, real wages are always increasing. However, economic history has proven over and over again that real wages actually decrease during periods of rising inflation. Nominal incomes do increase, but this is merely a response to the inflation that has already been created.
The essence of this folly is that modern economists don’t have a firm grasp on the mechanics of inflation. At the most basic level, inflation comes from too much money chasing too few goods. The battle against rapidly rising inflation always has its genesis from a central bank that prints money in order to monetize the nation’s debt.
by Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, and host of The Peter Schiff Show, broadcasting live from WSTC Norwalk CT from 10am to noon Eastern time every weekday, and streaming at www.schiffradio.com
The only thing more ridiculous than S&P’s too little too late semi-downgrade of U.S. sovereign debt was the market’s severe reaction to the announcement. Has S&P really added anything to the debate that wasn’t already widely known? In any event, S&P’s statement amounts to a wake up call to anyone who has somehow managed to sleepwalk through the unprecedented debt explosion of the last few years.
Given S&P’s concerns that Congress will fail to address its long-term fiscal problems, on what basis can it conclude that the U.S. deserves its AAA credit rating? The highest possible rating should be reserved for fiscally responsible nations where the fiscal outlook is crystal clear. If S&P has genuine concerns that the U.S. will not deal with its out of control deficits, the AAA rating should be reduced right now.
Liberty Maven
by Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, and host of The Peter Schiff Show, broadcasting live from WSTC Norwalk CT from 10am to noon Eastern time every weekday, and streaming at 
by John Browne, Senior Market Strategist at Euro Pacific Capital
Loading ...
