Multinational Wall Street -vs- Main Street U.S.A…

Originally outlined a year ago. Reposted by request. At the heart of the professional/political opposition the issue is money; there are trillions at stake.

President Trump’s MAGAnomic trade and foreign policy agenda is jaw-dropping in scale, scope and consequence. There are multiple simultaneous aspects to each policy objective; however, many have been visible for a long time – some even before the election victory in November ’16.

If we get too far in the weeds the larger picture is lost. CTH objective is to continue pointing focus toward the larger horizon, and then at specific inflection points to dive into the topic and explain how each moment is connected to the larger strategy.

Today we repost an earlier dive into how MAGAnomic policy interacts with multinational Wall Street, the stock market, the U.S. financial system and perhaps your personal financial value. Again, reference and source material is included at the end of the outline.

If you understand the basic elements behind the new dimension in American economics, you already understand how three decades of DC legislative and regulatory policy was structured to benefit Wall Street and not Main Street. The intentional shift in fiscal policy is what created the distance between two entirely divergent economic engines.

REMEMBER […] there had to be a point where the value of the second economy (Wall Street) surpassed the value of the first economy (Main Street).

Investments, and the bets therein, needed to expand outside of the USA. hence, globalist investing.

However, a second more consequential aspect happened simultaneously. The politicians became more valuable to the Wall Street team than the Main Street team; and Wall Street had deeper pockets because their economy was now larger.

As a consequence Wall Street started funding political candidates and asking for legislation that benefited their interests.

When Main Street was purchasing the legislative influence the outcomes were -generally speaking- beneficial to Main Street, and by direct attachment those outcomes also benefited the average American inside the real economy.

When Wall Street began purchasing the legislative influence, the outcomes therein became beneficial to Wall Street. Those benefits are detached from improving the livelihoods of main street Americans because the benefits are “global”. Global financial interests, multinational investment interests -and corporations therein- became the primary filter through which the DC legislative outcomes were considered.

There is a natural disconnect. (more)

As an outcome of national financial policy blending commercial banking with institutional investment banking something happened on Wall Street that few understand. If we take the time to understand what happened we can understand why the Stock Market grew and what risks exist today as the financial policy is reversed to benefit Main Street.

President Trump and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin have already begun assembling and delivering a new banking system.

Instead of attempting to put Glass-Stegal regulations back into massive banking systems, the Trump administration is creating a parallel financial system of less-regulated small commercial banks, credit unions and traditional lenders who can operate to the benefit of Main Street without the burdensome regulation of the mega-banks and multinationals. This really is one of the more brilliant solutions to work around a uniquely American economic problem.

♦ When U.S. banks were allowed to merge their investment divisions with their commercial banking operations (the removal of Glass Stegal) something changed on Wall Street.

Companies who are evaluated based on their financial results, profits and losses, remained in their traditional role as traded stocks on the U.S. Stock Market and were evaluated accordingly. However, over time investment instruments -which are secondary to actual company results- created a sub-set within Wall Street that detached from actual bottom line company results.

The resulting secondary financial market system was essentially ‘investment markets’. Both ordinary company stocks and the investment market stocks operate on the same stock exchanges. But the underlying valuation is tied to entirely different metrics.

Financial products were developed (as investment instruments) that are essentially wagers or bets on the outcomes of actual companies traded on Wall Street. Those bets/wagers form the hedge markets and are [essentially] people trading on expectations of performance. The “derivatives market” is the ‘betting system’.

♦Ford Motor Company (only chosen as a commonly known entity) has a stock valuation based on their actual company performance in the market of manufacturing and consumer purchasing of their product. However, there can be thousands of financial instruments wagering on the actual outcome of their performance.

There are two initial bets on these outcomes that form the basis for Hedge-fund activity. Bet ‘A’ that Ford hits a profit number, or bet ‘B’ that they don’t. There are financial instruments created to place each wager. [The wagers form the derivatives] But it doesn’t stop there.

Additionally, more financial products are created that bet on the outcomes of the A/B bets. A secondary financial product might find two sides betting on both A outcome and B outcome.

Party C bets the “A” bet is accurate, and party D bets against the A bet. Party E bets the “B” bet is accurate, and party F bets against the B. If it stopped there we would only have six total participants. But it doesn’t stop there, it goes on and on and on…

The outcome of the bets forms the basis for the tenuous investment markets. The important part to understand is that the investment funds are not necessarily attached to the original company stock, they are now attached to the outcome of bet(s). Hence an inherent disconnect is created.

Subsequently, if the actual stock doesn’t meet it’s expected P-n-L outcome (if the company actually doesn’t do well), and if the financial investment was betting against the outcome, the value of the investment actually goes up. The company performance and the investment bets on the outcome of that performance are two entirely different aspects of the stock market. [Hence two metrics.]

♦Understanding the disconnect between an actual company on the stock market, and the bets for and against that company stock, helps to understand what can happen when fiscal policy is geared toward the underlying company (Main Street MAGAnomics), and not toward the bets therein (Investment Class).

The U.S. stock markets’ overall value can increase with Main Street policy, and yet the investment class can simultaneously decrease in value even though the company(ies) in the stock market is/are doing better. This detachment is critical to understand because the ‘real economy’ is based on the company, the ‘paper economy’ is based on the financial investment instruments betting on the company.

Trillions can be lost in investment instruments, and yet the overall stock market -as valued by company operations/profits- can increase.

Conversely, there are now classes of companies on the U.S. stock exchange that never make a dime in profit, yet the value of the company increases. This dynamic is possible because the financial investment bets are not connected to the bottom line profit. (Examples include Tesla Motors, Amazon and a host of internet stocks like Facebook and Twitter.) It is this investment group of companies that stands to lose the most if/when the underlying system of betting on them stops or slows.

Specifically due to most recent U.S. fiscal policy, modern multinational banks, including all of the investment products therein, are more closely attached to this investment system on Wall Street. It stands to reason they are at greater risk of financial losses overall with a shift in fiscal policy.

That financial and economic risk is the basic reason behind Trump and Mnuchin putting a protective, secondary and parallel, banking system in place for Main Street.

Big multinational banks can suffer big losses from their investments, and yet the Main Street economy can continue growing, and have access to capital, uninterrupted.

Bottom Line: U.S. companies who have actual connection to a growing U.S. economy can succeed; based on the advantages of the new economic environment and MAGA policy, specifically in the areas of manufacturing, trade and the ancillary benefactors.

Meanwhile U.S. investment assets (multinational investment portfolios) that are disconnected from the actual results of those benefiting U.S. companies, and as a consequence also disconnected from the U.S. economic expansion, can simultaneously drop in value even though the U.S. economy is thriving.

♦The Modern Third Dimension in American Economics – HERE

♦How Multinationals have Exported U.S. Wealth – HERE

♦The “Fed” Can’t Figure out the New Economics – HERE

The FED Begins to Question the Economic Assumptions – HERE

♦Treasury Secretary Mnuchin begins creating a Parallel Banking System – HERE

♦Proof “America-First” has disconnected Main Street from Wall Street – HERE

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Budget, China, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Economy, Election 2018, energy, European Union, India, Japan, media bias, NAFTA, President Trump, Trade Deal, Uncategorized, US dept of agriculture, US Treasury, USA. Bookmark the permalink.

74 Responses to Multinational Wall Street -vs- Main Street U.S.A…

  1. HBD says:

    Trump knows what to do. I don’t understand every detail but I trust our President.

    Liked by 9 people

    • Jedi9 says:

      I have been in the short position against the EURO FX trading! Still holding as this mornings session, HK time 12:13 PM Wednesday has the Euro still dropping! The dollar bulls are returning and risk sentiment is waning!

      Like

      • Thank you Sundance. 🌸
        I don’t understand every, ok, most, of the detail, but I know we’ve been shackled by a permanent political class who held a thirty year estate sale of our nation, I watched it happen.
        My “backwards, gun clinging” ethos abide in love of country and loyalty to my fellow Americans. Transnationalism seems to me to diminish our power as citizens, cultural cohesion and opportunity to prosper on OUR terms. I trust President Trump and his brilliant cabinet. They didn’t pretend to represent us while leveraging fortunes from shady deals, They volunteered.
        POTUS supporters aren’t shifting. We are in this for ourselves and for our children.

        Liked by 5 people

  2. treehouseron says:

    Don’t be surprised if Xi actually loses his ‘lifetime’ position in the near future. That’s when we’ll know it’s getting really bad over there.

    Liked by 7 people

  3. fleporeblog says:

    This graph shared by Charles Payne says it all! This is the difference between Presidents that cared about Wall Street versus our Lion 🦁 who cares only about Main Street. All Americans, no matter their educational background, race, gender etc. are given real opportunities to succeed.

    Liked by 12 people

    • treehouseron says:

      I think he’s going to vacuum millions of people who don’t even try to work and are on welfare back into the work force, just like Charles said, by inspiring them.

      Liked by 6 people

      • … back to work from welfare, unemployment, prisons, retirement and parents’ basements.

        Liked by 5 people

      • GB Bari says:

        Unless the Republicans can pass comprehensive reductions in federal social benefits and significant narrowing of qualifications for those benefits, more jobs may not be a tempting enough carrot for a majority of those lazy horses.

        The lure of stable employment will certainly peel off a number of current bench warmers, porch sitters, and basement dwellers, but with a 6M+ déficit in workers, government may well need to consider financially-based inducements.

        Like

        • TPW says:

          Be prepare with Big Brother going after opiate pain relief blindfolded there will be a huge increase in disability claims and suicides

          Like

    • The Boss says:

      Charles Payne is a classy guy. That I can tell you.

      Liked by 3 people

  4. Curry Worsham says:

    It would be nice if the MSM would take just a few minutes away from covering all the wonderful things that Trump is accomplishing such as bringing back Main Street values and getting trade deals that work for America, and ask just a couple of questions about Omarosa.

    Liked by 4 people

    • USTerminator says:

      Whenever pigs fly then MSM will have anything nice to say about DJT. In the meantime, MSM get back to the program Russia, Stormy, Coen, caged children, Russia, Omorosa.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. White Apple says:

    It is a whole different attitude now.Welfare without hope is no way to live a life and run a Nation. There is hope and pride with a job. No longer an excuse to be a “slacker”. Be an American instead of a “nobody”.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Jan says:

      Vocational & tech schools are coming back, on-job training, volunteer openings, there’s a lot more out there now then there was during the OVomit years. Pres. Trump said “jobs, jobs, jobs”. Charlie Payne is the only guy on either Fox News or Fox Business News that understands what Pres. Trump & his “Little Friends” are out there doing. I wish he had Neil Cavuto’s spots on both stations. I’m always so happy when Neil is on vacation. I think Maria B,… is good but I don’t get up that early any more–perhaps one of the best things about being retired.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. jmarshs says:

    We had hoped (back in the 80’s and early 90′) that opening China and Mexico to trade would lead to the greater growth of a vested, wealthy middle-class in both Countries. It never happened.

    Both Countries suffer from “managed poverty” which has resulted in artificially engineered low wages via currency manipulation. Our strategy was a complete failure. Trump knows this.

    The trade agreements have been gamed by the transnational corporations and banks. Ever falling wages in both Countries has been the very definition of a “race to the bottom” and disastrous to the U.S.

    Liked by 1 person

    • John says:

      The transnational corporations and the banks wrote the agreements.What could go wrong?

      Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      Looking back on that now, what on earth in those (then) national discussions, proposals and predictions led us to believe that the middle class would benefit from globalization?

      I remember having a strong gut feeling back then that removing the manufacturing sector from our country was wrought with serious problems. Ross Perot warned us but too many of us did not listen.

      Liked by 1 person

      • AH_C says:

        I listened and voted, not only “against” Pappy Bush, but FOR Perot. Alas. Then I did it again, even tho MSM made it seem like he was losing his marbles the 2nd time around.

        Like

  7. Deplorable_Infidel says:

    “how three decades of DC legislative and regulatory policy was structured to benefit Wall Street and not Main Street. ”

    Printing these posts out for my older, non-computer friends and relatives is a real blessing. Especially earlier ones that describe how NAFTA, etc. has made food prices skyrocket in comparison to cheap imported [not] durable goods, etc.

    Main Street in flyover, USA knew it was being sold out (by the beast politicians that money can buy) the last ~30 years or so. We just did not know to what extent and how exactly is was all being done, or how to describe it to our fellow citizens.

    Before the Internet/social media phenomenon, even if we did know – we could not get the message out to enough people to make a difference. There are only so many people you can reach writing books.

    Liked by 4 people

  8. rjcylon says:

    “CTH objective is to continue pointing focus toward the larger horizon…”
    And that’s why we keep coming here. To learn about what is actually happening. The real, long lasting, significant change President Trump is bringing about.

    I am trying to tune out the noise, the hysteria the left/globalists try to distract us with. At the end of the day, these are the issues people care about, this is what brings people to the polls. And I know President Trump is having a field day restoring our economy and our country. It’s one of the biggest “fix it” projects in history, and he’s just the man for the job.

    Liked by 5 people

  9. Garrison Hall says:

    Something that is especially disgusting, something that DJT has forced the American body politic to openly admit, is that the globalists had long ago decided that American industrial jobs, the kinds of manufacturing jobs that had always supported lower-middle and middle-class workers, had to be sacrificed in order to create the kind of interrelated, salary rationalized, world marketplace they wanted to be the centerpiece of their “new world order”. During the election, candidate Trump repeated call our attention to the empty, abandoned factories that used to employ America’s workers. He knew what the cause was. It was globalization. And America’s political class has decided America’s workforce had to be sacrificed.

    If Trump did nothing else, he told everyone the truth about the lies inherent in “free trade” (for it to work we all had to become poorer) . . .

    But what would happen if we just pulled the plug on the whole shootin’ match? What if we decided to use our abundant natural resources, our ability to feed ourselves many times over, our ability to basically become completely self-sufficient? What if we decided to to just march away from any foreign dependence at all? I think we could do that. Globalization envisions a global economic system where mutual dependencies mean that everyone cooperates with everyone else. Except of course for China, expect of course for the EU, Mexico, Canada . . . most of our trading partners in fact. My point is that we should ask ourselves just how much we need them? I think the answer would be not very much at all.

    We’re at a point in our history were we can establish a national industrial policy that emphasizes national self sufficiency. What this means that we expand Trump’s America First ideology so that all of the critical industries we need for our national survival can be maintained within our own borders. This is what we did during WWII. At the end of that war America was totally self-sufficient.

    Although we didn’t do it, we could have cut ourselves off from the rest of the world and simply taken care of ourselves. Having that kind of self-sufficiency gave us enormous power. That’s something I think we need to recreate.

    Liked by 9 people

    • Dutchman says:

      Your talking about an extreme, or ultimate protectionist position.

      Firstly, that would take away the big club that POTUS is using; EVERYONE in the world, wants to sell, here.

      Secondly, U.S. companies want to sell their products to the markets outside the U.S., to ‘expand’ their companies.
      And, don’t we want them to? More jobs, making this additional products being sold elsewhere. If we went the total self sufficiency route you suggest, letting in no or very few foriegn products, other countries wouldn’t let OUR products in.

      And, we’d be like China, except unlike us, they can’t produce everything they need.

      Thirdly, we have never HAD true ‘free trade’, only the b.s. promise of it.
      Which is, let countries do what they do best; if A) produces a better quality, less expensive widget than any other country, everyone buys widgets from them, including B) that produces better quality, lower cost whatevers.

      That’s the idea, and the competition actually spurs innovation. The ideal VSG is striving for, is not what you describe, (not that you have to parrot him) he’s using the fact that we COULD, to get other countries to play fair, and let our products in, just as we let theirs in.

      And, the assumption is that, on a fair or level playing field, U.S. companies and workers can compete, ‘toe to toe’ with workers anywhere.

      Liked by 1 person

      • GB Bari says:

        I disagree with your opening assessment of Garrison’s position.
        Garrison advocates that the USA become thoroughly self-sufficient in covering its needs before or simultaneously with our negotiating trade terms with other nations.

        Garrison states at the end of his post that “having that kind of self-sufficiency gave us enormous power.”. He’s correct.

        I also think that President Trump believes likewise, and, through his strategic tariffs and reset of trade terms with other nations, is inducing vital industries to return to this country in order to to improve our self-sufficiency, and thus our security.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Alligator Gar says:

        I think you might be conflating the poster’s argument for economic self-sufficiency with the political doctrine of isolationism. I do not think that the poster above has argued for a return to isolationism in his/her argument.

        Sorry if I have misread you.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Kaiser Derden says:

        we can become self sufficient WITHOUT being protectionist …

        Liked by 1 person

  10. Stillwater says:

    Good article. I’ve digging a lot into these older articles over the last week or so. Collecting links to most of the ones with videos on Wilbur Ross and sequentially organizing them so I can see how the MAGA strategy unfolded. Lots of good stuff. Wish I would have found out about this website a long time ago.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Alison says:

      You are here now & we all become educated by Sundance’s brilliant analysis.

      Thank you SD for repeatedly posting this. It is invigorating to measure Main Street’s positively sunny outlook against this Goliath vs. David match.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Stillwater says:

        I followed the last two Ron Paul presidential runs closely. Read up on austrian economics from the Mises Institute; learned about the central banking and how it creates business cycles(boom & bust), and a lot of other topics on market intervention, etc.. But CTH brings another real world dynamic to the picture. Glad I voted for Trump.

        We needed a tough, highly qualified businessman in the WH that knows all the angles, how to find the best qualified advisers, and how to get things done in an imperfect system.

        Liked by 1 person

    • GB Bari says:

      Welcome to SDU! (Sundance University).

      Courses in economics, criminal justice, political science, behavioral psychology applications in propaganda, and general discussions on current events abound in these webpages.

      The student population is large and diverse, but share a common love of country and deep respect for the current Commander In Chief. Discussions are lively and often add much to the lesson at hand.

      Tuition is voluntary but strongly encouraged. (Use the Donate link on the upper right).

      Liked by 3 people

  11. Sunshine says:

    We need a lot of Great News to survive in today’s world.
    I’m reading so many terrible incidents happening everywhere today, between a bridge collapse due to bad maintenance to uncontrollable Islamic attacks in Western Europe. Another day, another attack and more.
    America is the Land of the Free and the Brave. Protect your 2nd Amendment and you will remain so.

    Like

    • Dutchman says:

      Sunshine;
      We KNOW the media is working on concert, to promote a Conmunist agenda.
      Having people scared, depressed, worried makes them more receptive to illogical, emotion based arguments.
      Gee, you don’t suppose they are deliberately reporting bad news, in order to make people more receptive?

      Nah, they wouldn’t do that! /s

      Liked by 1 person

  12. Dutchman says:

    You know how totally p.o.’s we all were, after meltdown, as we saw NO repercussions, for those who created it?

    Read,the above article again: repercussions, baby! Those playing monopoly with derivatives, are gonna get their cummupence, but NOT trash the economy, in the process. The ‘shift’ from a wall street engine, to a main street engine, is simply going to take away the board. No board, no game.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jan says:

      “Repercussions” are also what we need in the our federal, state & local governments, courts & agencies–as in you screw up or politicize your job & don’t follow the laws, there are repercussions. Not just getting voted out of office or fired, but get prosecuted when it’s criminal and sued civilly when someone is injured or killed out a breach of duty to protect and/or not carrying out their duties/obligations under the law. Sovereign immunity from being sued or prosecuted has to end with respect to sanctuary governments, schools, colleges & Universities, etc. The angel families need justice and recourse, which they can’t get now.

      Liked by 2 people

      • G. Combs says:

        “[…] Sovereign immunity from being sued or prosecuted has to end[…]”

        It has ended under the Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law | Department of Justice

        […]For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

        The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

        TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242

        Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

        Unfortunately with George Soros bought judges and district attorneys seats NOW is not the time to press the issue.

        I sure hope there are a LOT of governors, councilmen, mayors, police officers, and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges and district attorneys indicted for Color of the Law violations in those 45,000+ Seal Indictments.

        Don’t forget once an indictment has been brought the time clock on the Statue of Limitations STOPS!

        Liked by 1 person

  13. daughnworks247 says:

    Of all the great work done by Sundance, this is one of my favorites. I’ve used the lemon example at least 50 times in various conversations. Perfect. Well done. Thank you.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. G. Combs says:

    Here is another very good article that goes with what Sundance is saying:

    Federal Regulations Have Made You 75 Percent Poorer (Regulations COST MONEY to comply with AND ENFORCE, Americans pay BOTH COSTS!)

    The growth of federal regulations over the past six decades has cut U.S. economic growth by an average of 2 percentage points per year, according to a new study in the Journal of Economic Growth. As a result, the average American household receives about $277,000 less annually than it would have gotten in the absence of six decades of accumulated regulations—a median household income of $330,000 instead of the $53,000 we get now.[…]

    Regulations at ‘Lowest Count Since Records Began Being Kept in the Mid-1970s’

    Economy advances while administrative state recedes; lefty commentators hardest hit.

    As the economy and stock market continue to chug along nicely, many analysts and presidents are giving at least partial credit to the Trump administration’s aggressive regulatory reform efforts.

    Unsurprisingly, this is driving some commentators insane.

    “Trump’s Deregulatory Binge Makes the Bush Years Look Like Stalinist Russia,” runs the headline in The Daily Banter, a website that was “started in 2007 when Editor in Chief Ben Cohen got fed up with watching the corporate news not doing its job properly,” and that further claims “not do viral content” or “trick readers with misleading headlines.” (Cohen’s misleading subhed, by the way, begins: “The Bush years were characterized by a deregulatory binge that saw deep cuts to virtually all aspects of government with little to no reasoning behind them,” despite the fact that people who actually study this stuff will inform you that Bush increased the reach, budget, and staffing of the administrative state—including on financial regulation—at a far greater clip than his Democratic predecessor, while overseeing an eight-year government spending bender.)[…]

    (Snicker)

    A quick review of the economic models from pure Capitalism to Communisim.
    “Evil Socialism” vs “Evil Capitalism”

    […]Oddly, you can look at Communism as the “limit case” where there is ONE corporation and it IS the government. At the other extreme is “laissez faire” with huge numbers of competitors. As you move toward Communism you pass through stages of ever more “concentration” of control. Just shy of communism is Classical Socialism with it’s state planning boards and commissions. A bit more toward L.F. [laissez faire] you get “Market Socialism” (with some sub-types in between). […]

    And another useful article by EM Smith (He is trained as an economist but worked in IT including at Disney.)
    Monopoly, Monopsony, Oligopoly, Collusion

    The site is well worth a visit on a regular basis to see what tidbits are available. And the commenters are intelligent (and sometimes over my head.) For example Simon “… I’ve worked in computers, failure analysis and electronics design, and have a degree in nuclear physics. Now I’m retired I’ve been working in the energy field to find a way of producing it more cheaply….” Gallopingcamel, a personnel friend I met through that site, is another physicist who used to work for Duke Univ….

    Liked by 1 person

    • G. Combs says:

      I am going to add one more E.M. Smith article because it is very good and directly relates to what Sundance is talking about.

      Under the category ‘Corporatism’
      “Of Coal, GE, Obama, and fascist style Corporatist Socialism”
      14 February 2011 Does GE have Obama in it’s pocket?

      […]The near ‘identity’ of what the government is doing with what makes more money for GE is “not good”. It speaks to graft, corruption, influence pedaling. Just the sort of thing that recently brought down a government in Egypt.
      Food for thought, that….

      So while I’d like to think that the USA is above such things; the facts just are.

      At any rate, here is the story, you decide:[…]
      [Links to a Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet article AND a Dallas News article and discusses]

      One could say that EM was correct, “Just the sort of thing that recently brought down a government in Egypt.
      Food for thought, that….”
      Yeah, the ‘graft, corruption, influence pedaling’ DID bring down the corrupt government in DC, but as our Founders hoped we did it through the Ballot Box and Soap Box WITHOUT recourse to the last ‘box’ the Ammo Box.

      Jason Calley says:

      @ E.M. You are right. What we are witnessing is a corporate kleptocracy. Oh, don’t get me wrong; there are other factors involved, but the corporate kleptocracy part is large enough to be a good start on explaining what we see….

      In my opinion, shoddy and paranoid as it is, the USA has been in the process of a preplanned and systematic disassembly and strip mining of assets since the Nixon administration. That’s just me, though.[…]

      I think Jason summed up the last 30 years in just one sentence. 😥

      Liked by 3 people

      • Mrs.E says:

        Yes he did sum it up, but it is more like 40+ years. I know because I’ve lived every one of them. Nixon was the first president I voted for when I graduated from high school, a very long time ago.

        Liked by 2 people

  15. Pyrthroes says:

    Would updating provisions of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act, declared by Wild Willy “no longer applicable” on passage of the so-called GLBA (“Graham-Leach-Bailey”) Act in November 1999, do much to solve this Main Street-Wall Street (real vs. casino) “disconnect”, or are there substantive “post modern” (sic) macro-economic trends at work?

    Parenthetically, in November 2011 non-algo trading volume on the NYSE abruptly diminished near two-thirds, and has not proportionately recovered since. Could this have been the moment Main Street realized that the game was rigged?

    Like

  16. kiskiminetas says:

    Thank you Sundance for re-posting this. I believe it would be beneficial to re-post it now and then all the way to the mid-terms and beyond. New people have been joining our ranks and they in turn are telling others about CTH.

    Like

    • G. Combs says:

      Just handed out a business card with the ConservativeTreeHouse website on the back yesterday.

      I am planning my ‘attack’ on a nineteen year old neighbor hoping to get him to realize it is HIS future we are all fighting for.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Albertus Magnus says:

      Totally agree, Kiskiminetas! And it is a good education for those fine folks who think that MAGA is ONLY about immigration and/or cleaning the swamp!

      Liked by 1 person

  17. Mrs.E says:

    THE BEST NEWS is that those with just a HS diploma, and even those who did not graduate will now be able to find work!! It is dignity. And many go on to further educate or train after being in the work force, so those that dropped out will probably go onto other things. Thank God for this turnaround for America! There is HOPE again.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Alligator Gar says:

      Exactly. My son, God bless him, is 13, homeschooled, high functioning autistic, apraxic, social, kind, but socially naief. He thinks everyone is his friend, though he is learning better. He is a Christian boy and knows right from wrong. He hates school. Hates academics. Hates reading. He’s got an abysmal language arts IQ, but an overall math IQ in the genius level. What a shame for me about the academics…. But he loves cars.

      So, a GED and Vo-Tech education are in his future. I told him I’d like to see him start to work at a local garage I use for my truck if the garage owner would let him work part-time at 16–just as a “grease monkey” a few hours a week to get his feet wet as he goes to tech school.

      Then I told him I see ads everywhere in town for certified mechanics. I expect his butt to be in a full-time job as soon as he is certified if not sooner. Then, after he learns the business, I told him I’d help him set up his own garage if he’s of a mind to do so once he has some regular clients who like his work and depend on him. (Lawyers, we know this as our “book of business.”)

      He knows the value of a dollar and what hard work is.

      And he loves our President and America.

      This is your future, Treepers, your new generation of blue collar America.

      Liked by 2 people

      • L. E. Joiner says:

        Encourage him, but don’t over-program him. You might find that at 14 he’ll discover some literature (mysteries? science-fiction?) and suddenly he’ll be reading. He might not enjoy mechanics, but might enjoy computer-aided design. You just never know. /LEJ

        Like

  18. Jane Smith says:

    The Globalists won’t stop until they have destroyed this Country.
    We have to level the playing field in elections and demand accountability from those that we elect.
    We should reverse Citizens United and institute Term Limits for Congress.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. Lactantius says:

    Sundance writes: “…..the Trump administration is creating a parallel financial system of less-regulated small commercial banks, credit unions and traditional lenders who can operate to the benefit of Main Street without the burdensome regulation of the mega-banks and multinationals. This really is one of the more brilliant solutions to work around a uniquely American economic problem.”

    To understand this, watch “It’s a Wonderful Life” again. Small town America always had a few rich guys who were bankers. They loaned money locally. The store owner could get a “bridge loan” for the Christmas inventory. The farmer could get a loan for a new tractor. The Ford dealer could get a “floor plan” loan for the new model year.

    The bankers knew their customers, the store owners, the farmers, the successful, the failures, the risk takers, etc. And, if you wanted a mortgage for a house, you went to the savings and loan where their “banker” took your measure and decided on whether you were a good risk. Everything was personal in the sense that the bankers had an enormous personal interest in a thriving community.

    A town of 20,000 would have three or four banks and a couple of savings and loan places. Just enough for competition to keep them on their toes and not too many for the community to support. At the bank board meetings, a list of names was read of people who bounced a check or were behind on payments. The board of directors were also aware of who was having temporary financial troubles and who was beginning to be a problem for the bank. They worked with the person as a first and second effort. The bankers were competitors, but they were also friends. They had the community interest at heart.

    This may sound too wonderful, but if you walk into the “main branch” building built before the 1970’s of any town bank you will find lots of offices for home town bank employees who worked for the bank and its interests in and for the community. In 2018, all of that is gone and is handled by algorithms on the computers connected with the headquarters in some city in another state where the “main” bank has a beehive of numbers crunchers. Joe Smith who needs a loan to get his tractor repaired so he can get his corn to market is not on the radar screen of the mega-bank. There is no local loan officer to even care.

    Liked by 2 people

  20. Larry says:

    With regards to Main Streets around the world, I wonder how the Amazon – Australia experience is working out:
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-31/amazon-blocks-australia-shopping-deal-how-it-affects-you/9820312

    I’m curious if bricks & mortar retailers have seen any relief of the “Amazon” onslaught.

    Like

  21. HHC - 2nd 16th says:

    This posting should be required reading before a kid graduates from high school.

    Like

  22. Tree Knot says:

    MAGA has the Democrats and their media buddies scared. Just seen an article where they are rewriting history for former President Obama to put these gains in the economy onto Obama’s legacy.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Orygun says:

    I am not sure when Wall Street went from companies going public and selling stock in their companies to provide money for expansion and maintenance to this thing we have today that seems like a Vegas gaming house.

    I understand believing in a company has a good product or service so you purchase stock in that company but betting that a company is going to meet a certain goal or not is purely a game of chance. This is not what you should find in a market that is an indicator of the countries financial well being. Soros has made billions manipulating the game show part of the Wall Street financial game.

    I guess I am just old fashioned but this part of Wall Street seems ill conceived and leads to people trying to manipulate outcomes for profit at the detriment of the company. I can’t believe Wall Street started out this way and I guess I will have to do some extra reading to figure out how it became the world’s largest casino.

    IMHO

    Liked by 1 person

  24. L. E. Joiner says:

    The collapse of the derivatives market for bad real-estate loans was the principle cause (after the bad loans themselves) of the crash of 2008. One has to wonder whether there should be limits on such markets. They seem to militate against the whole point of having a free market in shares of companies. Will it be enough to just recreate local banks? Maybe it really is time to resurrect Glass-Stegal, which prevented banks from becoming investment speculators. LEJ

    Liked by 2 people

    • Alligator Gar says:

      You know, I followed the beginnings of that insanity. “Tranches” of mortgages were sold and when peoples’ homes were foreclosed the owners of those “abstract” pieces of air called “tranches” of the mortgage tried to get in on the action. It was a mess. I laughed.

      Who actually held the paper on the home? Litigation went on for years. Sometimes banks get too smart for their own good.

      I read during that time also that the idiot savant that invented “derivatives”, much like Pandora, had no idea what he let out of the box The result of his invention was that the amount of “value” in all of the derivatives floating around out there vastly outstrips the global GDP by magnitudes. Magnitudes. Trillions. Yep. Trillions. All because some pencil-necked geek on Wall Street had a “bright idea”. So much for Haaaaahvahhhhd Business.

      Run away, do not walk.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Lactantius says:

        Who actually held the paper on the home? They are still covering their butts over that question. A lot of financial “gurus” caused stuff to happen which blew up and those same people point fingers at everyone but themselves.

        To borrow money in a free market, the interest rates are determined by matching the supply of money from savings to the demand for it for investment. To make money in a free market, banks must also charge an interest rate higher than the inflation rate. The Fed’s policy of keeping interest rates below the inflation rate is impossible for a free market. That discourages savings, encourages borrowing and fosters mal-investments. Example: homeownership.

        In 1977, Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act, which forced banks to make home loans to high-risk borrowers under the guise of “fairness.” Then, in 1999, the Clinton administration turned up the heat on the banks by penalizing them if they did not do more subprime loans. This came after previous regulations “permitted” zero-down low-rate loans, another thing that a free market cannot do.

        Adding to the mess, two other government creations, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, bought mortgages from banks to encourage more lending by them. In turn, they bundled those high-risk mortgages with other mortgages that hid their risk and fraudulently sold them as safe investments, as government-backed securities.

        Read Gretchen Morgenson documented evidence of this mess in her book, “Reckless Endangerment.”

        Liked by 1 person

    • Jim in KC says:

      Getting the government out of the loan guarantee business would be a good start. Obama’s buddies at Fannie and Freddie were using the power of the federal government to lean on banks to loosen standards to let them underwrite worse and worse loans so they could sell the them to the idiots on Wall St and earn themselves enormous bonuses. Anyone in favor of rational loan standards was, get this, a racist… (Yeah, I know. Almost nobody got called a racist in the Obama years… )

      Liked by 1 person

  25. Joe says:

    Main Street Report !!!!!!

    I have commented a few times here and there and so I wanted to provide some small business stories from the “main street” for those that like to see tangible results.

    I own a small Heat Treating facility 7000 sq ft staterd in 2014 and Veteran owned.

    My company makes metal a certain hardness for machine shops aerospace etc.

    The last year and a half we have seem upwards of 200% growth.

    As of today I just got off the phone with a Manufacturer of off road compentents that were making these articles in China. The articles they were having made failed in use and in testing. Most manufacturers who produce safety critical objects have rejected Chinese materials long before tariffs – not reported like most fake news.

    I have a friend who owns a small machine shop he was a battered conservative and reluctantly voted for Trump.

    He now has thousands of dollars in product sitting on his floor. Returning from…..India.

    Tariffs are a great thing.

    Americans are fickle and impatient.

    MAGA!!!!!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Lactantius says:

      Joe, you are in the production sector of the economy. The elites decided some decades ago that we were a “service” economy in which people sold their labor, not a product. Those zillionaire hot shot people in The Hamptons are service sector types. They make deals, not products.

      President Trump is returning us to the blue collar world where what we produce is how we make our living. Produce junk and your income circles the drain. The “average” American has no idea how the economy is shaped and functions. If they did, they would immediately know that socialism is a Ponzi scheme and a hoax.

      Liked by 1 person

  26. James Street says:

    One of President Trump’s recurring themes in the books he writes is that he doesn’t invest in the stock market because he doesn’t have control. He invests in businesses where he has control.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s