Intro to Stansberry’s ‘The End of Barack Obama?’


Uncle Sam under the PADDLES

Intro to Stansberry’s ‘The End of Barack Obama?’

Intro by John R. Houk

Intro © October 19, 2013

 

Below is one of those Porter Stansberry ads that begins as a video and after you decide too much of your time has gone by you attempt to exit the webpage. Before exiting a pop-up comes asking you if you desire to “stay” on the page or “leave”. If you click stay you are actually transferred away from the one hour and a half video page to the information below.

 

Stansberry is selling a product. The product is (I believe – I am admitting I did not read to the end) is a subscription to some financial information that is supposed to enable you to make decent decisions on protecting yourself financially for an American and/or global economic collapse.

 

The ad is quite convincing on the immediate future collapse. Briefly Stansberry writes about the American Dollar losing its status as the international standard for reserve currency because of the Quantitative Easing (QE) policy of the Federal Reserve (i.e. printing money to pay government debts). Stansberry uses history and the current Communist Chinese lobbying to revoke the U.S. Dollar reserve standard as reasons to invest in Commodities such as precious metals (gold, silver, etc.), oil products and so on.

 

Stansberry is painting a doom and gloom picture of the economy then going for the close to convince you to subscribe to his financial information. I am not promoting Stansberry’s product; however the journey to get to his sale closing is something I have read in bits and pieces from others. You will be interested in his outlook of a coming collapse of the U.S. and global economies and why it is happening.

 

JRH 10/19/13

Please Support NCCR

A War Between China and Japan: What It Could Cost You


War- Japan-China and USA watching

It is my thought that a World War is inevitable. It is also my thought such a war will embroil the USA because of Islamic cultural hatred for America and the American love (not necessarily the U.S. government’s love) for Israel’s existence.

 

Just as America fought in two major war theaters in WWII, it is quite likely but not talked about enough that a global would again have two major theaters of war. Do you realize that there is a huge conflict dispute increasingly growing between Japan and (Communist) China?

 

Below are an essay and an incredible video effectively illustrating the choices that the USA must make in joining an Asian theater war. It is my opinion that if Middle Easter conflict draws the USA into war, then it will embolden Asian powers to militarily assert their national interests hoping America will be too committed elsewhere to interfere.

 

It is my opinion that Asian powers – China comes to my mind – are mistaken that the USA will not enter the Asian conflict. A less powerful USA entered World War II fighting in two theaters. I fully expect a call of allies will view the USA as the apex to maintain a free world joining in mutual interests to fight despotism occurring on a regional basis. I am just not sure who those allies to America will be. It may take awhile for free nations catch the vision of maintaining freedom on the long term in the face of short term economic benefits.

 

JRH 3/3/13 (Hat Tip: Emily S)

Please Support NCCR

*********************************

A War Between China and Japan: What It Could Cost You

 

OnLineMBA

 

Global economists are keeping their eyes glued to the Asia-Pacific region, where a bitter feud is brewing between two of the world’s most powerful nations over a small collectivity of islands in the East China Sea. The Chinese government argues that a treaty signed during the first Sino-Japanese War (1894-95) conferred ownership of the islands to China. Japan has long disputed these claims, and today argues that the islands are integral to its national identity.

 

The argument came to a head last September, when a boycott of Japanese products led Chinese demonstrators to target fellow citizens who owned Japanese cars. Three months later, the situation escalated when when (sic)Japanese jets confronted a Chinese plane flying over the islands; no shots were fired, but the act of antagonism has set a troubling precedent between the military forces of both nations.

 

The conflict between China and Japan has put the United States in a precarious position: if a full-scale war were to erupt, the U.S. would be forced to choose between a long-time ally (Japan) and its largest economic lender (China). Last year, China’s holdings in U.S. securities reached $1.73 trillion and goods exported from the U.S. to China exceeded $100 billion. The two countries also share strong economic ties due to the large number of American companies that outsource jobs to China.

 

However, the U.S. government may be legally obligated to defend Japan. In November, the U.S. Senate added an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that officially recognizes Japan’s claims to the disputed islands; the U.S. and Japan are also committed to a mutual defense treaty that requires either country to step in and defend the other when international disputes occur. Not honoring this treaty could very easily tarnish America’s diplomatic image.

 

The countries of the Asia-Pacific region are collectively responsible for 55 percent of the global GDP and 44 percent of the world’s trade. A major conflict between the region’s two largest economies would not only impose a harsh dilemma on U.S. diplomats, but also have a significant impact on the entire global economy. It is in every nation’s best interest that the Chinese and Japanese settle their territorial dispute peacefully.

 

VIDEO: The Economic Impact of a War Between Japan & China

 

Video Transcript

 

Whispers of the unthinkable are wafting throughout the Asian-Pacific Region: war between China and Japan over a small cluster of resource rich islands in the East China Sea claimed by China (Diaoyu) and Japan (Senkaku).

 

In September, the dispute quickly came to a boil. Fueled by nationalism and the memory of Japan’s brutal occupation of China during World War II, enraged Chinese crowds filled the streets. They targeted owners of Japanese cars and launched a massive boycott of Japanese products, sending a debilitating gut punch to Japan’s still struggling economy. In November, the Wall Street Journal Live reported that the boycott had cost Japanese companies “billions of dollars.”

 

Since then, both nations have flexed their military muscle. In December, Japan scrambled jet fighters to respond to a Chinese plane flying over the islands. Although no shots have been fired yet, such dangerous confrontations are likely to continue.

 

Should the crisis worsen from its current status to, say, missiles launched and a ship sunk or an airplane knocked out of the sky, the United States will be forced to choose between backing a longtime ally (Japan) and supporting a nation more central to our economic health (China).

 

In terms of economics, China has the clear bottom-line edge, serving as America’s biggest lender. As of September, China’s holdings in US securities ($1.73 trillion) topped the global list of creditors.

 

In terms of trade, the most significant US relationship in the Asia-Pacific Region is with China – by far. According to the Office of the US Trade Representative, the export of US goods to China amounted to $104 billion in 2011, while exports to Japan over the same period were $66.2 billion.

 

 

Then there’s the extensive outsourcing by American companies, which ties the economies of China and the US even closer. A case in point is Apple, which designs its iPhone and other products in the US, but has them assembled at China’s massive Foxconn City facility.

 

All of this could be put at risk if the US sided with Japan in the current dispute – and the Chinese retaliated. A boycott would obviously harm American companies that ship agricultural products as well as cars and other finished goods to the Chinese market. Less clear is whether Chinese anger would extend to US firms such as Apple, which have deeper Chinese economic roots.

 

There’s also the possibility that China, to punish the US, could sell off its stash of US securities, a move that would devalue the dollar. It’s possible but not likely, at least according to a December report by the Congressional Research Service. Among other consequences, such a sale “could diminish the value of these securities” and “lead to large losses” for China.

 

In November, the US Senate unanimously approved an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act recognizing Japan’s administration of the Senkakus and opposing the use of force. The Japanese cheered, and the Chinese howled. But the provocative sentiment expressed in the amendment should be no surprise.

 

 

In 2011, President Obama announced a major foreign policy shift. He declared that the Asia-Pacific Region – which generates “approximately 55 percent of world GDP and about 44 percent of world trade” – would be a top US security priority. The declaration was couched in normal and nuanced diplomatic niceties.

 

It could also prompt the Japanese to scrap their antiwar constitution – adopted after the US However, China and the other nations of the region weren’t fooled.

For the United States, China is a classic “frenemy” – an economic partner, a rival, and a potential enemy that has upgraded its military capacity and used it to reinforce its claim to other disputed islands in the South China Sea.

 

More importantly, the US and Japan – which is home to ships of the powerful US Seventh Fleet – are bound together by a mutual defense treaty, which commits the US to defend its longtime ally. US failure to support Japan would undermine US credibility not just in Japan but throughout this strategically important region. Firebombing of Japanese cities and the atomic devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II – and commit their deep pool of technological skills and talent to a single goal: a massive rearmament program that could include nuclear weapons. No one doubts that the Japanese, have the capacity to become a world-class military power – an outcome no rational person wants to see.

 

Should a shooting war erupt, the US will side with Japan despite the nightmarish economic scenarios that could follow. The challenge facing US officials and diplomats in 2013 is to help China and Japan find a face-saving way to keep the dispute from getting that far.

_____________________________

Copyright © 2013

 

About OnlineMBA

 

OnlineMBA Guide

Gold and Oil work for USA rather than Against


Petro_Gold

John R. Houk

© February 14, 2013

 

Not long ago I posted on how OPEC controls the global economy which of course affects the U.S. economy through a monopolizing bloc controlling oil. The theme of the post ran something like if the USA developed alternative fuels for motor vehicles it would eliminate the OPEC stranglehold on our economy. Here is a quote for thought:

 

If you follow our email alerts you know that last year we actively supported a bill called The Open Fuel Standard Act. Simply put, this bill would break up the liquid fuel monopoly that now exists. This monopoly guarantees that the only fuel you can buy for your car or truck is gasoline (or, at most, gasoline containing a small percentage of ethanol).

If we are to ever really break the back of the OPEC price-fixing cartel, we must break the gasoline monopoly. The first step is ensuring that cars can actually run on other fuels such as methanol, which can be made from natural gas, coal, even waste such as grass clippings.

Did you know that, with just a few minor alterations to your car, it’s possible to run it on methanol—at a significant savings over the cost of gas?

 

I was excited about this visionary thinking.

 

NOW I just finished reading an article about Russia and China hoarding gold as a medium of exchange by eliminating U.S. dollars as the global currency thus ending the power of petrodollars. You have to realize that Russia and China are friends with the OPEC giants.

 

The implication of the article is gold-currency will replace petrodollars thus placing a coffin nail in the U.S. economy.

 

I am just thinking out loud here. What if Russia and China succeed in replacing petro-gold for petrodollars? Essentially the fall of the dollar would again bring back a gold standard as the foundation of the global economy. I think that is a good thing.

 

Yes adjustments would have to be made for the U.S. dollar. A forced global gold standard could force America back to a gold standard because of the global oil economy. AND STILL the USA can use innovation to develop alternative fuels to at least end any American dependence of OPEC oil. Russia and China might succeed in supplanting the dollar with gold, but a transformed fuel economy free of fossil fuel from OPEC would also stimulate the U.S. economy. Suddenly America might become the exporter of alternative fuel competing with OPEC fossil fuel.

 

So here’s the thing. Gold replaces debt as the standard for the U.S. economy. A new industry involving alternative fuel for motor vehicles will effectively compete with OPEC but also place a huge crunch in their profits which in turn might actually drive down the price of fossil fuel again.

 

Essentially folks this is a win-win for the U.S. economy in placing the dollar back on a market economy rather than a debt economy while at the same time innovating a globally competitive industry again strengthening America as a financial giant.

 

Like I said I am just thinking out loud because I certainly am no economist. Nonetheless, grass roots Capitalism will benefit all Americans over the Eco-Marxism that fearless leader President Obama supports.

 

JRH 2/14/13

Please Support NCCR