Top Trump Economist: Harris Stole Yet Another Trump Economic Policy

Kevin Hassett, a former senior adviser to former President Donald Trump and chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, said this week that Vice President Kamala Harris stole another proposed economic policy from the Republican presidential nominee.

Hassett said during an interview on PBS’ “Firing Line” with Margaret Hoover that Harris’ proposed $50,000 small business tax credit was actually something that she was against when Trump was in office and he proposed increasing the tax credit.

“So that policy, the small business deduction, it’s $5,000 in the law now,” he said. “And in 2018, President Trump and the Republicans wanted to expand the deduction to $20,000. It actually passed the House with very little Democratic support. And so, you know, Republicans are on the record as saying that there should be a bigger deduction for the start of a small business. And so this is an example of her reaching into Donald Trump’s playbook and taking one of his policies.”

“Expanding the deduction for startup business is a good idea. And it’s something that Republicans tried to do in 2018, but the Democrats were opposed to it,” he continued. “And so, it’s something that she was opposed to before she was for it. And so you could say, well, is she really for it now? Or, you know, could she explain why she changed her mind?”

Keep reading

The Big Collapse Awaits

In the 1970s when I served in the congressional staff and in the 1980s when I served in the executive branch, there was still some intelligence in the US government, with the exception of the Federal Reserve, where there has never been any intelligence.

Today there is no sign of intelligence anywhere in the US government. That fact is documented every day on my website.

As I recently reported, about 900,000 new jobs that had been claimed over the preceding year have just disappeared in a revision. A further downward revision could follow.

These non-existent jobs were the Federal Reserve’s evidence for a hot inflation-prone economy justifying high interest rates. All the time the Fed was preaching inflation, the Fed was contracting the money supply, a contraction that has been underway for 2.5 years. This in itself is proof that the “inflation” was really higher prices caused by the shortages the senseless Covid lockdowns caused. In other words, the higher prices were due to mandated shortages, not to inflation. A central bank too stupid to recognize this is too stupid to justify its existence.

Whenever the Fed contracts the money supply recession follows. If the contraction is too large and lasts too long, as it was following the 1929 stock market crash, the result is a decade of depression and high unemployment.

A contraction in the money supply means that the same level of economic activity and employment cannot be maintained at the same level of prices. Either economic activity and employment fall or prices fall. Historically, it has been economic activity and employment that fall first, and prices follow. Generally, that means profits fall.

Keep reading

Analysis: Green New Deal will make your electric bill SURGE by at least 28 times its current cost

An analysis has found that the Democratic Party’s Green New Deal plan could see electric bills multiply by as much as 28 times.

This is according to a report by the think tank the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, which found that the Green New Deal’s proposed plan to shift the United States’ energy system to be run solely on renewable energy could make electricity bills soar to 28 times its current cost.

Dr. David E. Wojick, a journalist a policy analyst, breaks down some of the major costs that come with implementing the Green New Deal.

The first is the need for massive amounts of battery storage. Replacing fossil fuels with energy harnessed from renewable sources like solar and wind power would require that there be around 250 million megawatt-hours worth of storage capacity in the United States.

If battery storage costs $300,000 per megawatt-hour, the total price tag for these batteries comes to a staggering $75 trillion. Spread over 20 years, that amounts to $3.75 trillion each year.

With U.S. households using about 1.5 trillion kilowatt-hours of electricity yearly, this cost translates to roughly $26,250 per household annually – 14 times higher than today’s average bill of $1,800.

Electrifying transportation and heating would double the electricity demand – potentially pushing costs up even further to $52,500 per year per household, or 28 times the average.

While these figures paint a grim picture, it is important to remember that they are based on current estimates and assumptions. Battery costs could decrease or new technology might improve efficiency. However, the sheer scale of this shift presents a significant challenge and it is unlikely economic changes or technological shifts would suddenly make the Green New Deal a profitable endeavor for American households.

Keep reading

Shell Game: How America’s Money Devolved from Gold to Fiat

Imagine a street performer standing behind a small table, moving three shells around at lightning speed, concealing a pea beneath one of them. As the audience watches closely, they try to follow the pea’s location, only to realize that no matter how well they track it, they’ve been fooled.

Now, replace that street performer with the Federal Reserve and the U.S. government, the shells with gold, silver, and paper money, and the pea with real value.

This, dear reader, is how the public got tricked into believing in fiat currency—a shell game of epic proportions.

Keep reading

Mathematical Models Are Weapons of Mass Destruction

In 2007, the total value of an exotic form of financial insurance called Credit Default Swap (CDS) reached $67 trillion. This number exceeded the global GDP in that year by about fifteen percent. In other words – someone in the financial markets made a bet greater than the value of everything produced in the world that year. 

What were the guys on Wall Street betting on? If certain boxes of financial pyrotechnics called Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs) are going to explode. Betting an amount larger than the world requires a significant degree of certainty on the part of the insurance provider. 

What was this certainty supported by? 

A magic formula called the Gaussian Copula Model. The CDO boxes contained the mortgages of millions of Americans, and the funny-named model estimated the joint probability that holders of any two randomly selected mortgages would both default on the mortgage. 

The key ingredient in this magic formula was the gamma coefficient, which used historical data to estimate the correlation between mortgage default rates in different parts of the United States. This correlation was quite small for most of the 20th century because there was little reason why mortgages in Florida should be somehow connected to mortgages in California or Washington.

But in the summer of 2006, real estate prices across the United States began to fall, and millions of people found themselves owing more for their homes than they were currently worth. In this situation, many Americans rationally decided to default on their mortgage. So, the number of delinquent mortgages increased dramatically, all at once, across the country. 

The gamma coefficient in the magic formula jumped from negligible values ​​towards one and the boxes of CDOs exploded all at once. The financiers – who bet the entire planet’s GDP on this not happening – all lost.

Keep reading

What Do They Know? Russia Increases Daily Gold Purchases by 700%

In a significant move, Russia’s Finance Ministry has announced plans to allocate 8.2 billion rubles ($92 million) each day for gold and foreign currency purchases until October 4, the nation’s Finance Minister announced.

“The amount of funds allocated for purchases of foreign currency and gold totals 172.9 billion rubles,” the ministry said in a statement. “Transactions will be carried out from September 6 to October 4, 2024, respectively, daily volume of purchase of foreign currency and gold will equal 8.2 billion rubles.”

This marks a sevenfold increase in purchases of physical precious metals over the previous spend, which has already been much higher for the last year. The Finance Ministry also projected “windfall” oil and gas revenues of 162 billion rubles in September, noting that actual oil and gas revenue in August exceeded initial expectations by 10.9 billion rubles ($129 million).

These revised figures “make it possible to estimate the volume of operations conducted by the Bank of Russia on the currency market related to the replenishment and use of the National Wealth Fund,” the ministry added.

With the new transaction volumes set for the September 6 to October 4 period, the Central Bank is expected to sell 0.2 billion rubles per day during the previous period.

After an 18-month hiatus, Russia’s finance ministry resumed gold and currency purchases in August 2023, capitalizing on higher oil prices. The country had previously paused foreign exchange interventions in January 2023, selling yuan reserves as part of a budgetary strategy to shield the economy from commodity market volatility. This program was initially suspended following the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Keep reading

Biden Admits Inflation Reduction Act was NEVER Intended to Reduce Inflation

PSA:  Joe Biden is still the president of the United States. Biden has been hiding on a beach in Delaware ever since his disastrous debate with Donald Trump that hard-launched Kamala Harris as the Democrat nominee. Biden is speaking off the prompter once again and revealing hard truths that have been concealed from the public. The Inflation Reduction Act, the largest spending measure in American history, was never intended to reduce inflation.

“We should have named it what it was!” Biden said at an event in Westby, Wisconsin, where he unsuccessfully attempted to tout the success of Bidenomics. The president referred to the Inflation Reduction Act as “the most significant CLIMATE CHANGE LAW ever,” adding, “by the way, it is a $369 billion bill, it’s called the–we we we should’ve named it what it was.”

Keep reading

US-born workers lost 1.3 million jobs in last year, foreign-born workers gained 1.2 million

US-born workers lost over 1.3 million jobs in the past 12 months, while foreign-born workers gained more than 1.2 million jobs during the same period.

According to a review of Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data from Fox 13, as of August, there were 129.7 million native-born workers, down from 131 million in August of last year. Conversely, the number of foreign-born workers increased from 30.4 million to 31.6 million over the same period.

These figures emerge amid recent data from the Congressional Budget Office, showing that over 9 million immigrants have entered the United States since the beginning of the Biden administration, with about 6.5 million being illegal immigrants, according to Fox News. The jobs report from the BLS does not differentiate between foreign-born workers who are in the country legally versus those who are not.

Additionally, the latest jobs report fell short of expectations. Initially, it was projected that 160,000 new jobs would be added in August, but the actual number came in at 142,000. Despite this, the unemployment rate dropped slightly from 4.3 percent in July to 4.2 percent in August. The 4.3 percent rate in July was the highest since October 2021, a period when the country was still grappling with the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Keep reading

Great Replacement Job Shock: 1.3 Million Native-Born Americans Just Lost Their Jobs, Replaced by 635,000 Immigrants

At the start of the year, many months after we first pointed out that the biggest untold story of the US labor market was the “great replacement” of native born workers with foreign-born workers (most of whom we subsequently learned were illegal aliens), we asked how is the great replacement of US workers “not the biggest political talking point right now” considering that “since October 2019, native-born US workers have lost 1.4 million jobs; over the same period foreign-born workers have gained 3 million jobs.”

Nine months later, we are delighted to see that our relentless efforts to bring attention to this critical topic finally worked, and the relentless replacement of native-born workers with immigrants and illegal aliens was finally the biggest political and media talking point, as demonstrated by such articles as “How Immigration Remade the U.S. Labor Force” by the WSJ and “Without Immigrants, US Working-Age Population Would Shrink” from Bloomberg, both of which are an extension of the latest and greatest narrative, first spawned by Fed chair Powell, and then picked up by Goldman, which came down to the following: you can have (record) illegal immigration, or you can have even more (breakneck) inflation. So don’t be bad and just accept the roving gangs of Venezuelan murderers in your neighborhood if you know what’s good for you.

Keep reading

The Regime’s War on Cash Could Destroy the Economy

According to some “experts,” there is an urgent need to remove cash from the economy. It is held that cash provides support to the “shadow economy” and permits tax evasion. Another justification for its removal is that, in times of economic shocks, which push the economy into a recession, the run for cash exacerbates the downturn—it becomes a factor contributing to economic instability. Moreover, it is argued that, in the modern world, most transactions can be settled by means of electronic funds transfer. Money in the modern world is allegedly an abstraction.

The emergence of money

Money emerged because barter could not support the market economy. A butcher, who wanted to exchange his meat for fruit, might not be able to find a fruit farmer who wanted his meat, while the fruit farmer who wanted to exchange his fruit for shoes might not be able to find a shoemaker who wanted his fruit. The distinguishing characteristic of money is that it is the general medium of exchange. It has evolved as the most marketable commodity. On this process, Mises wrote,

“…there would be an inevitable tendency for the less marketable of the series of goods used as media of exchange to be one by one rejected until at last only a single commodity remained, which was universally employed as a medium of exchange; in a word, money.”

Similarly, Rothbard held that,

Just as in nature there is a great variety of skills and resources, so there is a variety in the marketability of goods. Some goods are more widely demanded than others, some are more divisible into smaller units without loss of value, some more durable over long periods of time, some more transportable over large distances. All of these advantages make for greater marketability. It is clear that in every society, the most marketable goods will be gradually selected as the media for exchange. As they are more and more selected as media, the demand for them increases because of this use, and so they become even more marketable. The result is a reinforcing spiral: more marketability causes wider use as a medium which causes more marketability, etc. Eventually, one or two commodities are used as general media—in almost all exchanges—and these are called money.

Since the general medium of exchange emerged from a wide range of commodities, money is a commodity. Again, according to Rothbard,

Money is not an abstract unit of account, divorceable from a concrete good; it is not a useless token only good for exchanging; it is not a ‘claim on society’; it is not a guarantee of a fixed price level. It is simply a commodity.

Moreover, in the words of Mises, “…an object cannot be used as money unless, at the moment when its use as money begins, it already possesses an objective exchange value based on some other use.” Why must this be the case? Rothbard explains further,

In contrast to directly-used consumers’ or producers’ goods, money must have pre-existing prices on which to ground a demand. But the only way this can happen is by beginning with a useful commodity under barter, and then adding demand for a medium to the previous demand for direct use (e.g., for ornaments, in the case of gold).

Hence, money is that for which all other goods and services are traded. Through an ongoing selection process over thousands of years, people settled on gold as money. In today’s monetary system, the money supply is no longer gold, but coins and notes issued by the government and the central bank. This fiat-money still has exchange-value because of its prior connection with true money and the inertia caused by the fact that it is already accepted as a general medium of exchange. Consequently, coins and notes still constitute money, known as cash, which are employed in transactions. Goods and services are exchanged for cash.

Keep reading