|
SAVE YOUR TEARS FOR YOURSELF
While
bankers do control the issuance of credit, they cannot control themselves.
Bankers are the fatal flaw in their deviously opaque system that has
substituted credit for money and debt for savings. The bankers have spread
their credit-based system across the world by catering to basic human needs
and ambition and greed; and while human needs can be satisfied, ambition and
greed cannot—and the bankers’ least of all.
I have a bad
feeling about what’s about to happen. The Great Depression is the
closest that comes to mind. I, like most, was not alive during the 1930s when
it happened. Nonetheless, what once was feared in private is now being
discussed in public. It’s going to be bad. It’s going to make
high school seem like fun.
THE UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA
THE NEXT ARGENTINA
This Time is
Different: A Panoramic View of Eight Centuries of Financial Crises
by University of Maryland‘s Carmen Reinhart and Harvard’s Kenneth
Rogoff makes for perfect reading when flying between the US and Argentina.
There is
perhaps no better analysis than Reinhart and Rogoff’s on the history of
sovereign defaults; and, as such, Reinhart and Rogoff’s paper was ideal
reading material when traveling between the US
and Argentina, for the
sovereign defaults that happened in the past to Argentina
will soon be happening to the US.
But a US
default will make Argentina’s
debt defaults pale both by comparison and consequence. The US,
unlike Argentina, is the
world’s largest economy, the issuer of the world’s reserve
currency and the world’s largest debtor—and a default by the US
on its debt will shake the very foundations of our increasingly fragile
global economy.
SOVERIGN DEBT
LIQUIDATING AMBITION
The power of
ambition is extraordinary. The power of ambition transformed the US
from the world’s only creditor after WWII into the world’s
largest debtor in less than fifty years. Wanting to emulate England’s
19th century empire in the 20th, the US
instead has mirrored England
decline in the 20th century here in the 21st.
Credit and
borrowing fueled America’s
ambitions in the 20th century as it had England’s
in the 18th and 19th. During the 1980s, to pay for
President Reagan expansion of the military, the US
quadrupled its national debt in less than a decade by borrowing three
trillion dollars during a presidency pledged to balance the budget.
When Reagan
took office, US
debt totaled one trillion dollars. When Reagan left office, US
debt totaled four trillion dollars. Reagan’s vaunted slogan of fiscal
conservatism was just that—a slogan; and while talk is cheap, the debts
now have to be repaid.
Just as the
costs of WWI forced England to abandon the gold standard in the early 1900s,
post WWII military spending forced the US to suspend the convertibility of
the US dollar to gold in 1971; and the consequences, e.g. burgeoning trade
deficits and global currency instability, are now putting unsustainable
strains on a financial system already in extremis.
Ambition has
its price and the bill is now due and owing. The question is: how will the US
pay what it owes? In Hyman Minsky’s Financial Instability Model, the US
is close to “Ponzi status” if not already there since the US is
having to roll its debt forward and borrow from others to pay the interest as
it can no longer pay down the principle.
In 2006, in
an article published by the St Louis Federal Reserve Bank, Professor Laurence
Kotlikoff stated the US was “technically bankrupt” as there was
no way the US could pay the $65.9 trillion it owed.
Evidently,
Professor Kotlikoff was conservative in his estimate or we’re going
downhill faster than he knew. Just three months ago, on May 28, 2008 Richard
W. Fisher, President and CEO of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank estimated the
obligations of the US to be actually $99.2 trillion, 50 % higher than
Kotlikoff’s figures.
Fisher
stated:
In the
distance, I see a frightful storm brewing in the form of untethered
government debt. I choose the words—“frightful
storm”—deliberately to avoid hyperbole. Unless we take steps to
deal with it, the long-term fiscal situation of the federal government will
be unimaginably more devastating to our economic prosperity than the subprime
debacle and the recent debauching of credit markets that we are now working
so hard to correct.
Fisher
should know what the US owes and the danger that sum represents. As President
and CEO of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank, Fisher is a part of the Federal
Reserve
System—the
very system that has indebted America into perpetuity when its credit-based
money forced out gold and silver based money in 1913.
But in his
speech Fisher said nothing about the role the Federal Reserve has played in
America’s fatal dance with debt, warning instead about the increasing
costs of entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare.
Fisher is
part of a larger effort to now blame America’s entitlements as the
primary cause of our problems, assiduously avoiding the role his own Federal
Reserve Bank has played in sinking our once wealthy nation into perpetual
indebtedness.
In truth,
the entitlement program that poses the greatest threat to America
is—and always has been—the Federal Reserve System. Without the
Federal Reserve’s credit-based money whose compounding interest (paid
to the bankers) is obliged to be paid for by a possibly unconstitutional US
income tax [note: the Federal Reserve Act and Federal Income Tax were both
instituted the same year in 1913], the US would not be indebted and bankrupt
as it is now.
If Ben
Bernanke and Richard Fisher et. al. at the privately owned Federal Reserve
Bank resigned and stopped plundering the US for their own benefit at the
expense of the public in order to line the pockets of their banker friends
with public funds, the US might have a chance of successfully getting out of
this mess.
But, of
course, they won’t and the now privately controlled US government will
continue to indebt the American public so insiders can continue to profit
immensely at the public trough. But the question still remains, how will the
US pay its unpayable debt? The answer is as clear as it is obvious. It
won’t because it can’t.
DEBT & DESTRUCTION SOUTH OF THE BORDER
In their
well-researched paper, Serial Defaults and Its Remedies, Reinhart and
Rogoff write “Cycles in capital flows to emerging markets have now been
with us for two hundred years”. If we are to understand the dynamics of
serial default, it would do us well to look at these cycles and their
relevance to what is happening today.
Serial
Defaults and Its Remedies, Section 2. Capital Flow Cycles and the Syndrome of
“This Time Is Different”:
..a pattern
of borrowing followed by crisis is evident in the string of defaults during
1826-28 in Latin America that come on the heels of the first wave of massive
capital flows from Britain into Latin America in 1822-25…A second wave
of capital flows from Britain came during the 1850s and 1860s. The cycle
ended with the crisis of 1873. The next wave of capital flows into emerging
markets coincided with the shift of the financial epicenter of the world from
London to New York. Among Latin American countries, the borrowing binge of
1925-28 was [financed] with “cheap” money from New York. Capital
flows peaked in 1928, the year before the U.S. Stock market crash ushered in
financial and currency crises around the world and eventually an
international debt crisis during 1929-33.
Argentina is
at the very epicenter of Latin America borrowings and defaults and a cursory
judgment may well lay the blame for such on Argentina. But understanding the
past is akin to sedimentary sampling and a deeper reading of events reveals
far more than the too familiar story of a spendthrift deadbeat nation
borrowing more than prudence would otherwise dictate.
The capital
flows from England and the US in the last two hundred years to Latin America
were flows of credit, not money. The distinction is critical in understanding
what has happened during the last two centuries. It explains the basis of the
British Empire and current American power. It also explains the exploitation
of Argentina.
The British
Empire was founded on the central bank invention of credit-based money and
the subsequent ability to substitute this new “money” for costly
gold and silver; and the issuance of paper money allegedly backed by gold and
silver is a critical component in the confidence game of central bankers to
pass off their printed coupons as the real thing.
What the
private bankers accomplished with the creation of the Bank of England was the
government’s “legitimization” of the bankers’ new
credit based coupons, sic paper money—coupons upon which the
private bankers could now charge interest just as they had when loaning
actual gold (what a wonderful scam). The new coupons were a lot easier to
come by, especially when the king gave them a monopoly over its issuance.
The
advantage to the king was that the king now had an unlimited supply of
“money” that could be used to finance his wars—wars which
led to the establishment of the British Empire; the cost of which was
transferred directly as a burden to the people as the new counterfeit
debt-based money was now an obligation of the state, not of the king.
This was the
genesis (genius to the bankers and government) of the modern income tax where
the people are forced to pay interest on the credit-based money issued by
their own government. This was also the beginning of credit-based markets,
deceptively called capitalism in order to closely identify the newly
counterfeit credit based economy with the real money it had replaced.
CAPITALISM
THE SPREAD OF DEBT IN DISGUISE
The flow of
credit from England and then from its surrogate successor, the US, to
developing nations such as Argentina was but the flow of printed coupons
designed to harness and indebt the wealth and productivity of new lands.
The
“capital” was really only credit, thinly disguised debt in the
form of paper money originally issued by central banks, the Bank of England
in Britain and the Federal Reserve Bank in the US, the twin towers of
monetary Mordor.
The
wonderfully sounding idea of unfettered capitalism is but a smokescreen for
bankers to leverage their coupons in the form of credit and thereby indebt
and control the productivity and wealth of others. As such, it has
accomplished its goal admirably but its success will now cost the bankers
dearly.
Three
centuries of indebting nations, businesses, and the citizenry with constantly
compounding debt is no longer sustainable. This is why central bankers in
London, New York, Paris, and Tokyo are in such distress. Debtors can no
longer pay their debts, defaults are on the rise and bankers may actually
have to find real jobs if their confidence game continues to disintegrate.
BANKERS’ FEARS
Lawrence
Summers’ credentials as a banker are impeccable. Educated at MIT and
Harvard in economics, Summers has served as Chief Economist for the World
Bank, US Secretary of the Treasury and President of Harvard University.
Recently, in
March 2008, Summers stated:
..we are
facing the most serious combination of macroeconomic and financial stresses
that the U.S. has faced in a generation--and possibly, much longer than
that…It's a grave mistake to believe in the self-equilibrating
properties of economies in the face of large shocks. Markets balance fear and
greed. And when fear takes over, the capacity for self-stabilization is not
one that can be relied upon.
On June 29,
2008 the Financial Times quoted Summers:
... we are in an economic
environment where we have
more to fear than fear itself…
Lawrence
Summer’s fears are not to be taken lightly. They are the banker’s
equivalent of Jim Cramer’s televised fit of fear when interviewed on
CNBC last year, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWksEJQEYVU&eurl=http://eddriscoll.com/archives/2007_08.php.
While
Summers is rightfully fearful of the current economic environment, the rest
of us have far more to fear from bankers like Lawrence Summers and others
like him. Summer’s role in the manipulation of the price of gold is
found in his 1988 paper Gibson’s Paradox and the Gold Standard co-authored
with Robert Barsky, published in the Journal of Political Economy
(vol. 96, June 1988, pp. 528-550).
The hubris
of bankers such as Summers is stunning. Fixing the price of gold hoping to
control interest rates and prices is like fixing the temperature of
thermometers hoping to control global warming. Such is the short reach of
Summers’ considerable intellect.
EVIL BANKERS
FACT OR FICTION?
But the real
danger of bankers like Lawrence Summers lies not in their untethered
intellect but in their cold ambition and selfish greed that sees nations and
people as but living fodder to be milked, used and discarded as they and
others profit.
In 1991,
Summers issued the following memo while serving as Chief Economist at the
World Bank:
…developed
countries ought to export more pollution to developing countries because
these countries would incur the lowest cost from the pollution in terms of
lost wages of people made ill or killed by the pollution due to the fact that
wages are so low in developing countries…the economic logic behind
dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we
should face up to that.
As the World
Bank’s Chief Economist, Summer’s memo is a chilling reflection of
the heartlessness that lies at the core of bankers and banking
establishments. The World Bank itself seems to be a favorite watering hole
for those of questionable intent.
Robert
McNamara, the architect of the Vietnam War was President of the World Bank as
was Paul Wolfowitz, the architect of the Iraq War. The current President of
the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, is also an ardent supporter of the Iraq War
(also on Zoellick’s considerable list of “credits” is his
service as advisor to Enron, his membership on the Council on Foreign
Relations and Trilateral Commission and his attendance at the secretive
Bilderberg meetings from 1991 to the present and his role as Senior
International Advisor to investment bank Goldman Sachs).
It is no
coincidence that those heading the World Bank are closely associated with
America’s vast war machine. Bankers have profited from fueling the
military ambitions of both England and the US for the past two centuries and
continue to do so today.
But perhaps
the most damning indictment yet of the World Bank and today’s bankers
is John Perkins’s Confessions of an Economic Hitman (Barrett
Koehler, 2004) in which Perkins reveals the hidden intent of the World Bank
and US bankers to cold-bloodedly indebt third world countries such as
Argentina and profit by their misery.
In their
review of Confessions of an Economic Hitman, Russell Mokhiber and
Robert Weissman write:
Remember
Smedley Butler?
He
was perhaps the most decorated Major General in Marine Corps history. In the
early part of this century, he fought and killed for the United States around
the world. Butler was awarded two Congressional Medals of Honor.
Then,
when he returned to the United States he wrote a book titled “War Is A
Racket” which opens with the memorable lines: “War is a racket.
It always has been.”
“I
was a high class muscleman for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the
Bankers,” Butler said. “In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster
for capitalism.”
In
a speech in 1933, Butler said the following:
“I
helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in
1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank
boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central
American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. The record of racketeering
is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of
Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for
American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that
Standard Oil went its way unmolested.”
Smedley
Butler, meet John Perkins.
Perkins
has just written a book, “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”
(Barrett Koehler, 2004). It is the War is A Racket for our times. Some of it
is hard to believe. You be the judge.
In
1968, after graduating from Boston University, Perkins joined the Peace Corps
and was sent to Ecuador. There, he was recruited by the National Security
Agency (NSA) and hired by an international consulting firm, Chas. T. Main in
Boston.
Soon
after beginning his job in Boston, “I was contacted by a woman named
Claudine who became my trainer as an economic hit man.” Perkins assumed
the woman worked for the NSA.
“She
said she was sent to help me and to train me,” Perkins said. “She
is extremely beautiful, sensual, seductive, intelligent. Her job was to
convince me to become an economic hit man, holding out these three drugs
–- sex, drugs and money. And then she wanted to let me know that I was
getting into a dirty business. And I shouldn’t go off on my first
assignment, which was going to be Indonesia, and start doing this unless I
knew that I was going to continue doing it, and once I was in I was in for
life.”
Perkins
worked for Main from 1970 to 1980. His job was to convince the governments of
the third world countries and the banks to make deals where huge loans were
given to these countries to develop infrastructure projects. And a condition
of the loan was that a large share of the money went back to the big
construction companies in the USA – the Bechtels and Halliburtons.
The
loans would plunge the countries into debts that would be impossible to pay
off.
“The
system is set up such that the countries are so deep in debt that they
can’t repay their debt,” Perkins said. “When the U.S.
government wants favors from them, like votes in the United Nations or troops
in Iraq, or in many, many cases, their resources – their oil, their
canal, in the case of Panama, we go to them and say – look, you
can’t pay off your debts, therefore sell your oil at a very low price
to our oil companies. Today, tremendous pressure is being put on Ecuador, for
example, to sell off its Amazonian rainforest -– very precious, very
fragile places, inhabited by indigenous people whose cultures are being
destroyed by the oil companies.”
When
a leader of a country refuses to cooperate with economic hit men like
Perkins, the jackals from the CIA are called in. Perkins said that both Omar
Torrijos of Panama and Jaime Boldos of Ecuador -– both men he worked
with – refused to play the game with the U.S. and both were cut down by
the CIA -– Torrijos when his airplane blew up, and Roldos when his
helicopter exploded, within three months of each other in 1981.
If
the CIA jackals don’t do the job, then the U.S. Marines are sent in
–- Butler’s “racketeers for capitalism.”
Perkins
also gives lurid details of how he pimped for a Saudi prince in the 1970s, in
an effort to get the Saudi royal family to enter an elaborate deal in which
the U.S. would protect the House of Saud. In exchange, the Saudis agreed to
stabilize oil prices and use their oil money to purchase Treasury bonds, the
interest on which would be used to pay U.S. construction firms like Bechtel
to build Saudi cities.
For
years, Perkins wanted to stop being an economic hit man and write a tell-all
book. He quit Main in 1980, only to be lured back with megabucks as a
consultant. He testified in favor of the Seabrook Nuclear power plant
(“my most infamous assignment”) in the 1980s, but the experience
pushed him out of the business, and he started an alternative energy firm.
When
word got out in the 1990s that he was starting to write a tell-all book, he
was approached by the president of Stone & Webster, a big engineering
firm.
Over
seven years, Stone & Webster paid Perkins $500,000 to do nothing.
“At
that first meeting, the president of the company mentioned some of the books
that I had written about indigenous people and said –- that’s
nice, that’s fine, keep doing your non-profit work,” Perkins told
us. “We approve of that, but you certainly would never write about this
industry, would you? And I assured him that I wouldn’t.”
Perkins
assumes the money was a bribe to get him not to write the book.
But
he has written the book.
You
be the judge.
Evil
bankers? Fact or Fiction? You be the judge.
DEFAULT OR JUST DEADBEATS
While
Reinhart’s and Rogoff’s work on sovereign default is worthwhile
and important, their glaring avoidance of the geopolitical aspect of
credit flows from England and the US to Latin America and other developing
regions is indicative of the blind eye scholars turn to the activities of
those who pay them.
Lawrence
Summers was President of Harvard University where Kenneth Rogoff is now
employed. It is not likely those who hired the likes of Summers would look
kindly upon Rogoff should he begin asking questions whose answers would lead
to truths Harvard’s trustees would rather not see the light of day.
So instead
of dealing with the critical issues raised by John Perkins, Reinhart and
Rogoff consider the phenomena of sovereign defaults as an innocent rite of
passage much like high school through which developing economies must pass.
Perhaps it is so, perhaps not.
But their
“trained” eye wanders a bit, even to an untrained eye such as
mine. According to Reinhart and Rogoff, the US is a “default
virgin”, sic the US has never missed a debt repayment or
rescheduled on at least one occasion. While this is strictly so, the US is
nonetheless at the center of the largest default in monetary history.
In the
1970s, the US defaulted on its gold obligations under the Bretton-Woods
Agreement. After overspending the greatest hoard of gold in history, 21,775
tons, between 1949 and 1971, the US had 7,000-8,000 tons of gold left and
still owed perhaps over 31,000 tons to others.
In 1973,
when the US officially refused to convert US dollars held by other countries
to gold, it was the biggest monetary default ever. In that one act, as a
consequence the entire global monetary system shifted from a gold-based
system to a fiat-paper system.
Of the US
default on its gold obligations, Professor Antal Fekete wrote in June 2008:
http://www.professorfekete.com/articles%5CAEFItsNotADollarCrisisItsAGoldCrisis.pdf
Thirty-five
years ago gold, symbol of permanence, was chased out from the Monetary Garden
of Eden, replaced by the floating irredeemable dollar as the pillar of the
international monetary system. That’s right: a floating pillar. The
gold demonetization exercise was a farce. It was designed as a fig leaf to
cover up the ugly default of the U.S. government on its gold-redeemable sight
obligations to foreigners. The word ‘default’ itself was put
under taboo even though it punctured big holes in the balance sheet of every
central bank of the world, as its dollar-denominated assets sank in value in
terms of anything but the dollar itself. These banks were not even allowed to
say ‘ouch’ as they were looking at the damage to their balance
sheets caused by the default. They just had to swallow the loss, obediently
and dutifully join the singing of the Hallelujah Chorus of sycophants in
Washington praising the irredeemable dollar and the Nirvana of synthetic
credit.
Debt virgin?
Hardly, and whether the US defaulted or not is not just a question of
semantics, it is a matter of truth—which, like credit, is now
surprisingly hard to come by.
THIS TIME IT’S DIFFERENT
Carmen
Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff’s paper, This Time It’s Different,
refers to the idea that sovereign defaults are a thing of the past. That we
have somehow fixed what was wrong and it won’t happen again. Reinhart
and Rogoff think otherwise.
But this
time, in a different way it really is different. This time default will come
to both banker and debtor alike. The bankers’ system itself is now
collapsing under the weight of debt that the bankers’ debt-based money
has produced.
Banks are
finding themselves increasingly bankrupt as are the governments the bankers
used to debase the world’s currencies. This time, not only will
Argentina possibly suffer another sovereign default, so too will its
creditor, the US, as will many of the US banks that issued that debt.
The default
of the US will remain, however, outside the limited definition of default
used by Reinhart and Rogoff. The US will not miss a payment or reschedule its
debt. Unlike Argentina, the US prints the currency in which the Argentine and
US debt is denominated. The US will print its way out of its debts. Argentina
cannot.
Because of
the enormity of the US debt, the amount of dollars necessary to print to pay
down the debt will lead to the hyperinflation in the US and the destruction
of the US dollar. Those who live by the sword sometimes die by the
sword—though not often.
In that same
article where Professor Kotlikoff estimated US liabilities to be $65.9
trillion, Kotlikoff also wrote:
The United
States..appears to be running the same type of fiscal policies that
engendered hyperinflations in 20 countries over the past century.
Maybe this
time it isn’t different..
DON’T CRY FOR ME ARGENTINA
SAVE YOUR TEARS FOR YOURSELF
In 1976, the
Argentine military overthrew the democratically elected Argentine government.
The first to recognize the dictatorship was the US. The second was the
International Monetary Fund, and within 24 hours of recognizing the
soon-to-be most brutal regime in recent history, the IMF arranged a loan to
the military junta.
At the time,
Argentina’s external debt totaled $7 billion. When the bloody
dictatorship ended with the return of democracy six years later,
Argentina’s debt totaled $43 billion, a debt owed mainly to US banks.
The common
law concept of caveat emptor has particular relevance here, caveat
emptor—Latin, “let the buyer beware", is a legal precept
that buyers must take responsibility for the conditions under which the sale
was made.
If
you loan to a dictatorship, don't expect to be repaid if a democracy emerges.
Richard
Perle, former US Assistant Secretary of Defense and neoconservative lobbyist
Richard
Perle who supported the Iraq War said those words shortly after the US
invaded Iraq. While it is doubtful Perle believes the same applies for debts
incurred by the US supported dictatorship in Argentina, the truth of
Perle’s words extend beyond Perle’s situational principles or a
lack thereof. In a court of law, an illegal contract cannot be
enforced—unless, of course, the court has been bought off.
A
critical distinction between the debt “owed” by Argentina and the
debts owed by the US is that Argentina’s debt was illegally imposed
upon Argentina by the IMF, the US and international bankers without the
consent of the Argentine citizenry, The US debt, however, was incurred with
the consent of the American people—or was it?
That,
my fellow Americans, is a $99.2 trillion question.
BANKRUPT BE THE BONDS THAT BIND
Americans
with their outstanding obligations now measured in trillions of dollars of
outstanding US bonds have much in common with the Argentine people. We have
both been enslaved and bankrupted by the same financial system.
While
it is impossible for the debt burdened Argentines to do something about US
banks, it is not impossible for Americans to do so. The US Federal Reserve
Bank—the largest emitter of debt-based money in the world—while
not an official US government agency is nonetheless still subject to the
rules and laws of our land.
STIRRINGS IN THE ELECTORATE
Dissatisfaction,
the beginning of change, is now occurring. The two political polarities are
finally awakening to the fact that both have been callously used by those in
power. The US has lurched right then left then right again, but it continues
to go in the same disturbing direction, a direction now equally distasteful
to those on the left and on the right.
In
modern democracies, successful politicians must possess two qualities: They
must say what the people want to hear and they must do what those in power
want done.
It
has been easy to manipulate those on the right as well as those on the left.
The Republicans and Democrats have done so for years. But where’s the
beef? The nation’s finances have been even more badly managed by the
Republicans than the Democrats—and Iraq? Sure, vote for the Democrats
and stay mired in a conflict they promised they would end.
Both
parties are controlled by the same money, the same money that now controls
global governments and institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF, the
same money that buys politicians, scholars, the military, lawyers, TV
anchors, radio talk show hosts and anyone else whose influence they can
use for their own ends.
There
is a reason why we are indebted as we are and there is a reason why we are
mired in a war that one wants except the few that do, the few that now
control our nation and many others. In the midst of this most unreasonable
world, there are reasons—whether you want to know them or not.
Humanity
now finds itself at the beginning of a profound shift, a shift that will
force us—if we are to survive, if we are to triumph—to put aside
our differences to accomplish together what we obviously cannot accomplish
apart.
The
two political polarities must find common ground or they will soon find there
is no ground at all. What is happening is bigger than money and power
although it involves both. It involves humanity, it involves all of us and
unless we find each other we will soon find there will be nothing left to
find at all.
We
are closer to the end than to the beginning. Keep your own counsel. Buy gold
and silver. Keep the faith.
In
Argentina, I read in a recent issue of Scientific American that physicists
now believe that in the beginning of time the Universe was only one
centimeter across. That knowledge heartened me. We have come a long way.
Note:
I will be speaking at Professor Fekete’s last session of Gold Standard
University Live to be held in Canberra, Australia from November 11th
to the 14th. The focus of the session will be trading the gold and
silver basis for profit. For further
details, contact feketeaustralia@yahoo.com.
Darryl Robert Schoon
www.survivethecrisis.com
www.drschoon.com
| 
