STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
Trump Won? His Attacks on the Fed and Politics Need to Go Even Deeper
By Daily Bell Staff - September 27, 2016

Fed on ropes as Yellen seeks to fend off Trump blows … Populist attacks from all sides make central bank vulnerable to calls to rein it in, say analysts. – Financial Times

The Financial Times continues to provide a blow-by-blow description of Trump’s attacks on central banking.

Trump is hurting the Fed, and well he should. Things will likely get a lot worse before they get better.

Janet Yellen picked a bad time to accept the job. And worse, she has not been able to raise rates, meaning that sooner or later a tsunami of easy money will flood the West and the world. It will be an era, as we’ve pointed out, resembling the 1970s, but on steroids.

Nobody said to her, “Ms. Yellen, the people you are counting on to protect the Fed intend to tear it down,” but that is what’s happening.

Unfortunately, you don’t build world government by plebiscite. It’s not put to a vote.

Banking elites have one way to create real global governance and that is via continued destruction of the current system.

Only when mere shards are left will desperate and dying people agree that the system that has created their plight ought to be expanded, deepened and further globalized.

Destruction precedes further globalization. This is the way.

After World War One, the League of Nations was created. When that didn’t work, another war took place and the globalization deepened. After World War Two, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the UN all were born. The foundation for true globalization was created.

Lord knows what will appear after the next war. But the planning is obviously evolving. That’s one reason the Anglosphere continues to attack Russia verbally and militarily. War will be had, it seems, one way or another.

More:

The rise of populists such as Mr Trump has come at a time when trust in institutions and experts has been ebbing among some sections of the public. This will only make life more difficult for technocratic and somewhat mysterious institutions such as the Fed.

“The Fed recognised after the crisis it needed to go out and explain itself to a broader audience,” Mr Kohn says. “The populace now seems to be more divided and polarised, and the recovery has been slower than many wanted. Maybe these efforts need to be redoubled.”

Notice how the Financial Times returns to the theme of “populism.” We have analyzed the meme of “populism versus globalism” in past articles, most recently yesterday, here.

Donald Trump is playing the role of populist in this election and thus one could see the election as a kind of structured event. Hillary is the wise globalist and Trump is the populist.

In England, the populists won recently via Brexit and one can make an argument that this elite meme is now subject to directed history. In other words, the elite plan is for populism to gain ground in the near future – before disintegrating and ushering in further globalism waiting in the proverbial wings.

If so – despite our suspicion that Hillary has already won the election – Trump may actually have a good chance of winning. The larger question becomes whether his victory, if it takes place, will make a difference.

In his first debate, Trump made a number of good points about the dysfunction of politics and Hillary’s part in sustaining business-as-usual. This is why those who maintain that Hillary won by seeming “presidential” are missing the point. This election is all about people’s desire to move beyond politics as usual.

The attacks against central banking are part of the process. It seems natural enough, of course, but it’s not. It’s what we call “directed history.”

Is Donald Trump part of a larger plan? Hard to say. Certainly, a criticism could be made of Trump that he is still not radical enough. To be truly effective he needs to move beyond solutions provided by 21st century government and create new solutions via private markets and entrepreneurialism.  Call this the “Ron Paul” approach.

Trump’s criticism, as verbalized in last night’s debate, certainly extended far beyond the Fed, even though they should go still farther. Such criticisms are surely supported one way or another by tens of millions of Americans who have seen their living standards decline and their futures dissolve into doubt.

People really do want change, significant change, not just cosmetic adjustments.

The trouble is that the mass of the US electorate is not “conspiratorial” and thus has trouble with a valid analysis of what is taking place. Trump has avoided being “conspiratorial” as well. In fact, many of his solutions involve “law and order” and use of the current government paradigm despite his vehement objections to business as usual.

It’s hard at this point to verbalize a true criticism of the West’s plight without presenting what might be seen as a fairly radical perspective. Point out to most individuals that their entire society – its educational, monetary, military and industrial elements – have been formulated to fail and they won’t believe you, though its true.

As Ludwig von Mises pointed out, even a little socialism is deadly to society and Western societies are slathered with socialism. Schools, banks, corporations – every part of society is filled with government interference in the private sector.

Unfortunately government solutions are significantly leavened by force. Force cannot generate anything other than a price fix, by forcing people to perform certain tasks against their will. Price fixes always distort markets and create manipulated and dysfunctional solutions.

Price fixes simply don’t work, in other words. And laws are price fixes. (Think of how many price fixes are contained in the Fed’s $3 trillion annual budget, a virtual tidal wave of economic dysfunction.).

None of this is mere happenstance. Powerful forces have turned a republic into a government driven entity and it is most questionable as to whether there is a way back.

Donald Trump is arguing that America can become “great” again, but even some of Trump’s prescriptions involve leveraging government to create increasingly evanescent prosperity.

Nonetheless, it would seem that Trump would make a better president than Hillary Clinton because Hillary is the ultimate expression of elite plans for the West. Wealth is to be drained in increasingly massive quantities by war, monetary debasement and industrial dysfunction. All of this is taking place.

The real problem is that even if Trump wins, the larger currents of Western society are seemingly locked into place and will continue to create catastrophe.

This is why we regularly argue that people need to take their destiny into their own hands. Socioeconomic and political decisions are going to be generated out of a system that is already dysfunctional and have little possibility of working, even with  someone like Trump driving them.

Conclusion: Seek out places where you have access to a regular food supply and potable water. Buy and hold precious metals – near you if possible. Self-employ as feasible even if it means a lower income. The more independent you become, the less dependent you will be on the dysfunctional vagaries of the society around you.

 

 

Tagged with:
Posted in STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
  • Marten

    The real winner of last night’s debate was Lester Holt, and I agree with Jon Rappoport on this one

  • June

    Wow! This is a lot to contemplate….
    Seems the masses like all this government control, as long as they keep getting handouts. Should all the “free stuff” stop landing in their laps, they just may have to get jobs! Perhaps the democrats fear they may revolt rather than try to get jobs?

    • Don Duncan

      A dependent mob revolt would give the militarized police a chance to “play” with their new toys. Blind violence meets professional killers. Duck & cover.

    • Mark

      So what percentage of these people that are getting free stuff can work? And what about your parents? Are they collecting social security and medicare? If they are how much did they contribute to these funds versus how much are they collecting?

      And if work builds character maybe we should pass a law that outlaws all automation? Or do you believe that automation creates more jobs and if it does what type of jobs and what type of skills would you need?

      Would you appreciate it if I made gross generalizations about you as a conservative or libertarian? I assume you consider yourself an informed voter because you get your information from conservative or libertarian media rather then biased liberal media? And if that is the case how can you call yourself informed? Maybe you have no problem with self-indoctrination as it is more comfortable?

      Now I do not know you so I could be making a lot of assumptions of who you are based on a narrow view of the world as far to many people that vote do.

      I do not self-indoctrinate myself at any conservative or liberal media sites. I do not tie myself to any economic view of the world, all have good ideas. I am a pragmatic moderate, a progressive libertarian. I do not start with my political ideology of how the world should be and filter the facts and those that I should listen to.

      I am a firm believer that America is still and will always be a great place to live because of our Democracy not our free markets and capitalism.

      I am more then willing to discuss economics, healthcare, education, monetary policy, sectoral economics, etc. In fact I would put myself up in a debate with Donald Trump any day and am fairly confident I could make him look like a fool. With Hillary it would be a bit more difficult because she is far more informed.

  • Renov8

    The real winner will be those who vote for Trump…..at this point anything having to do with the Establishment is a lose/lose proposition for the people of this nation. I would rather go with the new and untried, than stay with the tried and true corrupt, elitist gov. at hand. Ammo and guns are pretty inexpensive right now….might want to consider arming up now while you don’t need it, rather than later when you might and won’t have it.

    • Mark

      Because you cannot get your way in a Democracy get your guns. Is this what you are saying. Their is one difference between the patriots of past and the so called get your gun patriots of today. You can vote, you can run for office, and you can be uninformed in the complexity of this world and still vote.

      I am a firm believer that in a Democracy people get what they want.

      • Renov8

        Democracy? Are you a tool for the Left? Because they sure are handling like one. This country stopped being Democratic when the special interest groups and lobbyists moved into town. A study conducted by Rutgers Univ. found that when laws and regulations are written in this country today, the amount of input and consideration given to such new laws and regulations from “THE PEOPLE” is statistically irrelevant. Meaning, our input and or opinions are not included or even considered in the adoption of these said new laws and regulations. We live in a Corporatocracy. Look it up!

  • Heywood Jablome

    Unfortunately, the last conclusion is fast becoming a reality at least IMHO, and I am making plans to vacate the environs of the g8 as it has become a haven for rabid progressives, from the faux leaders at all levels of coercion down to the welfare and union types who take an increasingly larger slice of the pie, to make sure they are relieved of all responsibility for their own lives and actions. I plan to live simpler in another jurisdiction free from all the government rules and regulations which serve to drive up government expenses and drive down government services , which for the most part are unnecessary and abysmal at best.

  • Harry de Vries

    Is Donald Trump part of a larger plan? Hard to say

    Even if Trump is not an “insider”, not a willing participant he will still be part of the larger plan because power elite are opportunists “pur sang”, they are real masters in using people, spontanious grasroots movements and sometimes (random) events for their goals. However there is one exception being the internet.

    • Don Duncan

      That was my take also, and if all else fails, there is always a “lone gunner”.
      The VP will be no trouble, no hero. Political courage left the govt. with Dr. No.

  • esqualido

    “Janet Yellen picked a bad time to accept the job. And worse, she has not been able to raise rates.” Any tears Janet sheds over rates are alligator tears, I assure you: the Fed provides funds virtually interest-free to the very banks that own it (ditto the other CB’s), who in turn get to charge customers double-digit rates on their credit cards and use the “low rates” argument to deny savers any return whatsoever. I’d call that banker’s paradise.
    As for Trump being a populist, when Hillary assailed him last night for not releasing his tax returns because maybe, she suggested, he was paying no taxes, what does the Great Populist mutter: “That’s smart.” Not real smart, and certainly not something a “man of the people” would ever say.

    • Praetor

      Give us a brake! Only fools want to continue feeding the beast. I go along with Trump, that is a smart idea. If the spears and arrows don’t do it in, starve the beast to death!!!

      • Mark

        So destroy the country and possibly the lives of hard working Americans? So if my neighbors house is burning down because he was an idiot the fire department should not be called because of moral hazard and if my house should burn then so be it.

    • Bruce C.

      Think about what you’re saying. Government and taxes are fundamentally extortionist so, as (Democrat) Pres. Truman said, ‘one is required to pay their taxes but not a penny more.’ So why if one figures out what is in fact required is one accused of “evasion?”

      The problem – and Trump points it out in various ways, and is a corner stone of his campaign – is that the system as it has evolved is f—ed up and it is those very “regulations” that has led to all the crony capitalism and distortions we have now. Virtually EVERY US citizen takes advantage of every loop hole and inconsistency they can to avoid paying taxes and takes advantage of every “kick back” program. Why should one who is expected to pay nominally 40% of their income be considered any different – or more “greedy” – than one who is mandated to pay 15% and seeks every opportunity to pay less?

      Extend the analogy to some other area if you have trouble grasping that. Consider food. Everybody pays the same amount for a loaf of bread, say, regardless of their income. Do you think higher income earners should pay more? That would make a mockery of the entire economic system.

      • esqualido

        I’m all for abolition of the IRS (there would have been no America if Columbus had to file quarterly ES-statements like the rest of us poor bastards), but the world’s greatest sophists are never going to convince me or the electorate that an arrogant, smug, smirking Donald Trump bragging that he paid no taxes, as he did(see the tape of the debate), is going to resonate with the American people. Truman is the last guy you should cite- this very decent, honest man left office to a modest home in independence, MO. He did not feather his nest at the expense of 100 million taxpayers, was not a millionaire, much less a billionaire. He would have laughed at your argument.

        • Bruce C.

          Unfortunately, I don’t have the time to respond to you more fully, but the existential choice here is Trump or Clinton. If you don’t like/trust Trump then either vote for Clinton (who I personally think is vile and as “bad” as Trump or worse and in many other areas including legallly avoiding (unjust) taxes) or vote for someone else or not at all.

        • timamac

          Reagon is last guy you should cite. Truman probably best Democrat POUS.

      • Mark

        So Trump demonizes those that do not pay taxes such as hedge fund managers and yet he is the genius.

        • Bruce C.

          No, that’s not it. What Trump is saying is that both “they” and he and many others are able to avoid paying income taxes LEGALLY by taking advantage of the current tax code. Only a “chump” or socialist/communist/collectivist (and evidently you too, I guess) thinks that one should pay any more than they’re legally required. How much more, then, “should” one pay than that? Basically you’re advocating a purely voluntary tax/revenue system in which each person pays according to what he/she “feels”(?) or thinks they “should”, similar to charitable giving.

          That is why he claims to know how the current system works and how it could/ought to be changed. He’s not saying that’s the way it “should” be but only that it is and so he and -frankly- everyone else pays as little as they legally can.

          There is a difference between demonizing rich people because they have more and demonizing the tax system for allowing such inequities.

          “Making America great again” means – among other things – making the law more objective and equal for all, not a maze for special interests.

  • Praetor

    Trump won from our view, because he brought up the Feral Bank, and the balloon its blowing up, bad Feral Bank.

    To bad most of the people are plugged into the matrix of propaganda in one way or another. Take those that just make a living off the beast. They work for the beast, they receive their food housing medical from the beast, how about the rich ones that make millions of the beast from no bid contract, and these are just a few of the liberty haters.

    I do remember the debates from the GOP, Trump didn’t look so good in those either, but in the end he waxed the floor with haters of liberty, and now he stands there looking at the biggest hater of liberty of all, Hillary Rodham Clinton!!!

    • Mark

      “To bad most of the people are plugged into the matrix of propaganda”

      Please list the internet sites, talk radio stations or cable news outlets that you “inform” yourself with. Is this site not propaganda if it does not provide counter arguments to the articles on this site. In the end are you not self-indoctrinating yourself, abdicating your liberty to your ego.

  • spekulatn
  • deanharrington

    “In his first debate, Trump made a number of good points about the
    dysfunction of politics and Hillary’s part in sustaining
    business-as-usual. This is why those who maintain that Hillary won by
    seeming “presidential” are missing the point. This election is all about
    people’s desire to move beyond politics as usual.”
    This attempt at ushering in the ‘One World Government’ is run by an elite that have one purpose and that is to own everything on the planet, control everything on the planet and that includes people. With FEMA camp barbed wire facing inward … it’s not difficult to understand it’s purpose.
    As George Carlin said, ‘ it’s a club folks and you and I aren’t in it’. Trump may just be a patsy … we may find that out or he may actually understand the stakes and understand that if he’s President he has the possibility to reset the Republic. That will entail re-establishing the Constitution of 1776-81 with it’s ‘Bill of Rights’ enforced and repudiate the bankruptcy signed by Roosevelt in 1932 or so. The people of the U.S. have grown soft and fat over the last 70 years … it’s time to get lean and mean.

    • Praetor

      If the U.S. is to be run like a business, (not that is should), but if it is, the waste needs to stop!!!

      • Mark

        Does this mean we should do away with Democracy, the will of the people to orient society as they want? Are you telling me their is no waste in public or private companies?

  • Ernie Hopkins

    Good analysis!!!!

  • I have always wanted to be a bison rancher in Montana anyway. Sounds like a great fall back plan in case of the worst.

  • georgesilver

    As long as a politician doesn’t say that they will get rid of fiat debt based currency and introduce sound money nobody wins.
    Failure to address this fact shows they are just puppets.

    • Mark

      What does sound money look like?

  • rahrog

    Another spot on conclusion DB.

  • Dave Mende

    Horse s–t. Private freedom means political contributions as much as you like. As now. The only true solution is the middle. Nationalism and socialism in combination. Six million good new jobs in three years. For Americans only.

  • Bastiat

    Yes Trump’s attacks on the Fed need to go deeper, and not just be a one-time thing during a debate.

  • Mark

    If we get rid of the Fed what would we replace it with? Should we replace it with free banking? Should our paper currency be backed by gold? And if our paper is backed by gold how do we control the wild swings in inflation and deflation? Am I to assume that before the Fed and when on the gold standard the economy of the US and the world was the best it ever has, that there were never any economic bubbles, deep depressions of bank failures?

    My guess is that these would be hard discussions for most people commenting on this thread because like all internet sites/blogs, cable news (liberal and conservative), and talk radio (liberal or conservative) or economic theories they exist to support ones beliefs on how people should live.

loading
Sign up now and join our exclusive international network for free-market thinkers
Privacy Assured: We will NEVER share your personal information.