Wednesday, November 2, 2016

836 Sanders: Brexit a rejection of Globalization. Trump will win unless Democrats abandon Free Trade pacts

Sanders: Brexit a rejection of Globalization. Trump will win unless
Democrats abandon Free Trade pacts

Newsletter published on 1 July 2016

(1) Bravo Brexit: it hits tyranny of the global financial elite - David
(2) Sanders: Brexit a rejection of Globalization. Trump will win unless
Democrats abandon Free Trade pacts
(3) Brexit threatens Trade liberalization - Wall St Journal
(4) ECB Blows €400bn on "Brexit Black Friday" Bank Bailouts
(5) Brexit gives The City of London a black eye - Pepe Escobar
(6) Brexit set to Impact Israeli Trade with Britain
(7) The coming attack on the British economy, by the Fed, ECB, Bank of
Japan, and George Soros
(8) IMF ignores Brexit vote, says TPP and TTIP must be passed

(1) Bravo Brexit: it hits tyranny of the global financial elite - David

Bravo Brexit!

by David Stockman

June 24, 2016

At long last the tyranny of the global financial elite has been slammed
good and hard. You can count on them to attempt another central bank
based shock and awe campaign to halt and reverse the current sell-off,
but it won’t be credible, sustainable or maybe even possible.

The central banks and their compatriots at the EC, IMF, White
House/Treasury, OECD, G-7 and the rest of the Bubble Finance apparatus
have well and truly over-played their hand. They have created a tissue
of financial lies; an affront to the very laws of markets, sound money
and capitalist prosperity.

So there will be payback, clawback and traumatic deflation of the
bubbles. Plenty of it, as far as the eye can see.

On the immediate matter of Brexit, the British people have rejected the
arrogant rule of the EU superstate and the tyranny of its unelected
courts, commissions and bureaucratic overlords.

As Donald Trump was quick to point out, they have taken back their
country. He urges that Americans do the same, and he might just persuade

But whether Trumpism captures the White House or not, it is virtually
certain that Brexit is a contagious political disease. In response to
today’s history-shaking event, determined campaigns for Frexit, Spexit,
NExit, Grexit, Italxit, Hungexit and more centrifugal political
emissions will next follow.

Smaller government—–at least in geography—–is being given another
chance. And that’s a very good thing because more localized democracy
everywhere and always is inimical to the rule of centralized financial

The combustible material for more referendums and defections from the EU
is certainly available in surging populist parties of both the left and
the right throughout the continent. In fact, the next hammer blow to the
Brussels/German dictatorship will surely happen in Spain’s general
election do-over on Sunday (the December elections resulted in paralysis
and no government).

When the polls close, the repudiation of the corrupt, hypocritical
lapdog government of Prime Minister Rajoy will surely be complete. And
properly so; he was just another statist in conservative garb who
reformed nothing, left the Spanish economy buried in debt and gave false
witness to the notion that the Brussels bureaucrats are the saviors of

So the common people of Europe may be doubly blessed this week with the
exit of both David Cameron and Mariano Rajoy. Good riddance to
both.Spain's Mariano Rajoy and Britain's David Cameron in September 2015

At the same time, the anti-Brussels parties of both the left (Podemos)
and the right (Ciudadanos) are certain to make further gains. But even
then, the Spanish government will remain splintered and paralyzed,
leaving no government strong enough or willing enough to execute
Brussels’s inevitable dictates in the event that drastically over-valued
Spanish bond market goes into a tailspin and requires another EU

And that’s the next leg of the Brexit storm. To wit, sovereign bond
prices throughout Europe have been lifted artificially skyward by the
financial snake-charmers of Brussels and the ECB. The massive rally in
Spain’s 10-year bond after Draghi’s "whatever it takes" ukase was not
due to Spain becoming more credit worthy or the fact that its
unemployment rate has dropped from 26% to a mere 20%.

The whole plunge of yields from 7% to a low of 1% about a year ago was
due to a front-runners’ stampede. That is, the fast money crowd was
buying on repo what the ECB promised to take off their hands at ever
higher prices in due course. They were shooting the proverbial ducks in
a barrel.

But as global "risk-off" gathers worldwide momentum, look-out below.
There will be no incremental bid from Frankfurt for a flood of carry
trade unwinds. That’s because the ECB will soon be embroiled in an
existential crisis as the centrifugal forces unleashed by Brexit tear
apart the fragile consensus on which Draghi’s lunatic monetary
experiments depended.

Spain Government Bond 10Y

Moreover, Spain is by no means unique. Italy’s 5-Star movement, which
just came from winning 9 out of 10 mayoral contests including Rome, will
surely now be energized mightily. Its Northern League ally has already
called for a referendum on exiting the euro.

Needless to say, Italy’s fiscal circumstance is far more dire than even
Spain’s. The likelihood that its10-year bonds are money good at last
week’s 135 basis points of yield are between slim and none. Either the
threat of an exit or a 5-Star/populist coalition government would send
the front-runners who scarfed up Italy’s bonds running for the hills.

Since Italy owes upward of $2 trillion on it government accounts alone,
its bond market is an explosion waiting to happen. And that means its
bedraggled banks are, too.

That’s because one feature of the Draghi Ponzi was that national banks
in the peripheral nations started buying up their own country’s rapidly
appreciating sovereign debt  hand-over-fist. Italy’s banks own upwards
of $400 billion of Italian government debt.

That’s the one and same Italian government that cannot possibly cope
with its existing 135% debt to GDP ratio. And that’s also before the
populists take power and are forced to bailout the country’s already
insolvent banking system. The latter will suffer from a shock of capital
and depositor flight after the current government falls (soon), and
Prime Minister Renzi joins Cameron and Rajoy at some establishment rehab
center for the deposed.

Italy Government Bond 10Y

During the last financial crisis our elite rulers cried financial
"contagion", and from the resulting panic by the politicians,  the
current regime of massive bailouts and relentless money pumping was
confected. The effect of was to bailout the gamblers from the
Greenspan/Bernanke housing and credit bubble, and then to shower
unspeakable windfalls on the 1% as they reflated an even more monumental
bubble during the regime of QE, ZIRP and NIRP.

But now they are going to be on the receiving end of an even more
virulent and far-reaching political contagion. This time populist and
insurgent politicians are not going to roll-over for the rule of
unelected central bankers and the international financial apparatchiks
of the IMF and related institutions.

In that context, it can be said that the Eurozone and ECB are finished.
Good riddance!

And when the monstrosity that Draghi created implodes into every nook
and cranny of the bloated and radically mispriced financial system that
resulted, central bankers everywhere will be on the run.

(to be continued)

(2) Sanders: Brexit a rejection of Globalization. Trump will win unless
Democrats abandon Free Trade pacts

Bernie Sanders: Democrats Need to Wake Up


JUNE 28, 2016

Surprise, surprise. Workers in Britain, many of whom have seen a decline
in their standard of living while the very rich in their country have
become much richer, have turned their backs on the European Union and a
globalized economy that is failing them and their children.

And it’s not just the British who are suffering. That increasingly
globalized economy, established and maintained by the world’s economic
elite, is failing people everywhere. Incredibly, the wealthiest 62
people on this planet own as much wealth as the bottom half of the
world’s population — around 3.6 billion people. The top 1 percent now
owns more wealth than the whole of the bottom 99 percent. The very, very
rich enjoy unimaginable luxury while billions of people endure abject
poverty, unemployment, and inadequate health care, education, housing
and drinking water.

Could this rejection of the current form of the global economy happen in
the United States? You bet it could.

During my campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, I’ve
visited 46 states. What I saw and heard on too many occasions were
painful realities that the political and media establishment fail even
to recognize.

In the last 15 years, nearly 60,000 factories in this country have
closed, and more than 4.8 million well-paid manufacturing jobs have
disappeared. Much of this is related to disastrous trade agreements that
encourage corporations to move to low-wage countries.

Advertisement Continue reading the main story

Despite major increases in productivity, the median male worker in
America today is making $726 dollars less than he did in 1973, while the
median female worker is making $1,154 less than she did in 2007, after
adjusting for inflation.

Nearly 47 million Americans live in poverty. An estimated 28 million
have no health insurance, while many others are underinsured. Millions
of people are struggling with outrageous levels of student debt. For
perhaps the first time in modern history, our younger generation will
probably have a lower standard of living than their parents.
Frighteningly, millions of poorly educated Americans will have a shorter
life span than the previous generation as they succumb to despair, drugs
and alcohol.

Meanwhile, in our country the top one-tenth of 1 percent now owns almost
as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent. Fifty-eight percent of all new
income is going to the top 1 percent. Wall Street and billionaires,
through their "super PACs," are able to buy elections. Sign Up for the
Opinion Today Newsletter

Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists,
The Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.

On my campaign, I’ve talked to workers unable to make it on $8 or $9 an
hour; retirees struggling to purchase the medicine they need on $9,000 a
year of Social Security; young people unable to afford college. I also
visited the American citizens of Puerto Rico, where some 58 percent of
the children live in poverty and only a little more than 40 percent of
the adult population has a job or is seeking one.

Let’s be clear. The global economy is not working for the majority of
people in our country and the world. This is an economic model developed
by the economic elite to benefit the economic elite. We need real change.

But we do not need change based on the demagogy, bigotry and
anti-immigrant sentiment that punctuated so much of the Leave campaign’s
rhetoric — and is central to Donald J. Trump’s message.

We need a president who will vigorously support international
cooperation that brings the people of the world closer together, reduces
hypernationalism and decreases the possibility of war. We also need a
president who respects the democratic rights of the people, and who will
fight for an economy that protects the interests of working people, not
just Wall Street, the drug companies and other powerful special interests.

We need to fundamentally reject our "free trade" policies and move to
fair trade. Americans should not have to compete against workers in
low-wage countries who earn pennies an hour. We must defeat the
Trans-Pacific Partnership. We must help poor countries develop
sustainable economic models.

We need to end the international scandal in which large corporations and
the wealthy avoid paying trillions of dollars in taxes to their national

We need to create tens of millions of jobs worldwide by combating global
climate change and by transforming the world’s energy system away from
fossil fuels.

We need international efforts to cut military spending around the globe
and address the causes of war: poverty, hatred, hopelessness and ignorance.

The notion that Donald Trump could benefit from the same forces that
gave the Leave proponents a majority in Britain should sound an alarm
for the Democratic Party in the United States. Millions of American
voters, like the Leave supporters, are understandably angry and
frustrated by the economic forces that are destroying the middle class.

In this pivotal moment, the Democratic Party and a new Democratic
president need to make clear that we stand with those who are struggling
and who have been left behind. We must create national and global
economies that work for all, not just a handful of billionaires.

A version of this op-ed appears in print on June 29, 2016, on page A25
of the New York edition with the headline: Democrats Have to Wake Up.

(3) Brexit threatens Trade liberalization - Wall St Journal

Trade Pacts Face Another Hurdle With ‘Brexit’ Vote in EU Referendum

U.S. trade agenda is already beset by slowing global growth

By Nick Timiraos

June 24, 2016 6:17 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON -- A U.S. trade agenda already buffeted by slowing global
growth and a rising backlash over trade liberalization faces new
obstacles with Britain's decision to leave the European Union.

The indirect financial spillovers from the "Brexit" vote are likely to
matter far more to the U.S. economy than any direct hit on trade or
import prices with the U.K. Sharp stock and currency moves, such as
those on Friday, threaten to curb investment and chill growth more broadly.

Global trade earlier this year already registered its largest decline
since the financial crisis of 2008-09 amid big drops in commodity prices
over the past three years.

Slow global export growth "is a bigger issue by far than the separation
of Britain from the EU alone," said Carl Weinberg, chief economist at
High Frequency Economics in Valhalla, N.Y.

The U.K. is America's seventh-largest trading partner but accounts for a
relatively small share, 3%, of U.S. trade. The Brexit result could have
far bigger ramifications for U.S. investment in the U.K. because many
large banks and other multinationals have located operations there as a
gateway to continental Europe.

Economists and policy makers said Friday that the U.K. vote marked a
sharp backlash against globalization and that its greater ramifications
would be geopolitical. The vote "needs to be a wake-up call" for
pro-trade advocates, said Sen. Mark Warner (D., Va.), a strong supporter
of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a treaty negotiated last year with 12
nations in Asia and the Americas. Trade advocates "need to more clearly
acknowledge" and respond to the downsides of trade, he said.

Thursday's vote plunges the Pacific trade pact and another such
agreement sought by the Obama administration into further uncertainty.
The TPP has faced a rough reception in Washington during an election
season in which the likely presidential nominees of both parties have
opposed it.

The Obama administration has been in three years of negotiations on the
second agreement, called the Transatlantic Trade and Investment
Partnership, between the U.S. and the 28 member states of the European

"Without the United Kingdom, it will be far harder to conclude TTIP in
2017 or beyond" because continental Europe is "less disposed to free
trade and investment than the British," said Gary Hufbauer, an economist
at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Both America and Britain are each other's largest foreign investors.
Some analysts have suggested a Brexit could hasten a bilateral trade
deal between the U.S. and U.K. Such agreements, particularly between
close allies, have generally been easier to approve than larger
multilateral ones.

While TPP can't easily be renegotiated, Mr. Hufbauer said adding the
U.K. to the agreement might help rebrand it, "giving the pact a
decidedly different and more palatable flavor" in Congress and with the
American public.

Write to Nick Timiraos at

(4) ECB Blows €400bn on "Brexit Black Friday" Bank Bailouts

by Wolf Richter o June 26, 2016

Dealing with a Financial Crisis under cover of Brexit Chaos

Remember TARP, the Troubled Asset Relief Program that the US Congress
approved to bail out banks and other companies during the Financial
Crisis? $700 billion were authorized, later reduced to $475 billion. The
Treasury eventually dispersed $432 billion. I bring this up because the
ECB bailed out the European banks with more than TARP, in just one day:
on Brexit Black Friday.

The ECB saw what was happening to the shares of the largest banks on
that propitious day. It saw a blooming financial crisis [...]

Companies with cross-border operations – this includes all major banks
and brokerages – have gigantic headaches, and the UK’s 2.2 million
financial-sector employees are fidgeting on the edge of their chairs. It
might take a couple of years for the UK to actually exit the EU, if it
even happens at all, so there’s a little breathing room.

But where there’s apparently no longer any breathing room is with banks,
and the ECB went into panic mode.

With bank stocks collapsing on Brexit Black Friday, the frazzled folks
at the ECB decided it was high time to start bailing out the banks – and
not dabble at the margins, but pull out the whatever-it-takes
money-printing machine, and do so under the cover of Brexit chaos when
no one was supposed to pay attention.

On Friday, the ECB pulled a huge magic trick, larger than TARP. Under
one of its alphabet-soup programs – long-term refinancing operations
(LTRO) – it handed teetering banks $399.3 billion, or $444 billion.

€399.3 billion – like a used car is advertised for €19,999.99 – because
€400 billion might have been too much of a sticker shock. So let’s round
it to €400 billion.

And as central banks do, it didn’t ask legislators for permission. It
just did it.

(5) Brexit gives The City of London a black eye - Pepe Escobar
From: Paul de Burgh-Day <> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016
19:25:36 +1000 Subject: Pepe Escobar: Why the UK Said Bye Bye to the EU

Why the UK Said Bye Bye to the EU

By Pepe Escobar

June 24, 2016

So what started as a gamble by David Cameron on an outlet for domestic
British discontent, to be used as a lever to bargain with Brussels for a
few more favors, has metastasized into an astonishing political
earthquake about the dis-integration of the European Union. {...}

The City gets a black eye

Brexit defeated an overwhelming array of what Zygmunt Bauman defined as
the global elites of liquid modernity; the City of London, Wall Street,
the IMF, the Fed, the European Central Bank (ECB), major
hedge/investment funds, the whole interconnected global banking system.

The City of London, predictably, voted Remain by over 75%.  An
overwhelming $2.7 trillion is traded every day in the "square mile",
which employs almost 400,000 people. And it’s not only the square mile,
as the City now also includes Canary Wharf (HQ of quite a few big banks)
and Mayfair (privileged hang out of hedge funds).

The City of London – the undisputed financial capital of Europe — also
manages a whopping $1.65 trillion of client assets, wealth literally
from all over the planet. In <> Treasure
Islands, Nicholas Shaxson argues, "financial services companies have
flocked to London because it lets them do what they cannot do at home".

Unbridled deregulation coupled with unrivalled influence on the global
economic system amount to a toxic mix. So Brexit may also be interpreted
as a vote against corruption permeating England’s most lucrative industry.

Things will change. Drastically. There will be no more "passporting", by
which banks can sell products for all 28 EU members, accessing a $19
trillion integrated economy. All it takes is a HQ in London and a few
satellite mini-offices. Passporting will be up for fierce negotiation,
as well as what happens to London’s euro-denominated trading floors.

I followed Brexit out of Hong Kong – which 19 years ago had its own
Brexit, actually saying bye bye to the British Empire to join China.
Beijing is worried that Brexit will translate into capital outflows,
"depreciation pressure" on the yuan, and disturbance of the Bank of
China’s management of monetary policy.

Brexit could even seriously affect China-EU relations, as Beijing in
thesis might lose influence in Brussels without British support. It’s
crucial to remember that Britain backed an investment pact between China
and the EU and a joint feasibility study on a China-EU free trade agreement.

He Weiwen, co-director of the China-US-EU Study Centre under the China
Association of International Trade, part of the Ministry of Commerce, is
blunt; "The European Union is likely to adopt a more protectionist
approach when dealing with China. For Chinese companies which have set
up headquarters or branches in the UK, they may not be able to enjoy
tariff-free access to the wider European market after Britain leave the EU."

That applies, for instance, to leading Chinese high-tech companies like
Huawei and Tencent. Between 2000 and 2015, Britain was the top European
destination for Chinese direct investment, and was the second-largest
trading partner with China inside the EU.

Still, it may all revert into a win-win for China. Germany, France and
Luxembourg – all of them competing with London for the juicy offshore
yuan business – will increase their role. Chen Long, economist with Bank
of Dongguan, is confident "the European continent, especially Central
and Eastern European countries, will be more actively involved in
China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ programs."

So will Britain become the new Norway? It’s possible. Norway did very
well after rejecting EU membership in a 1995 referendum. It will be a
long and winding road before Article 50 is invoked and a two-year UK-EU
negotiation in uncharted territory starts. Former UK Chancellor of the
Exchequer Alistair Darling summed it all up; "Nobody has a clue what
‘Out’ looks like."

(6) Brexit set to Impact Israeli Trade with Britain

From: "Ken Freeland [shamireaders]"
<> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 18:19:55
-0500 Subject: [shamireaders] Brexit set to Impact Israeli Trade with

By Anthony Bellchambers

Global Research, June 27, 2016

Brexit could seriously impact the Israeli economy and its bilateral
trade with Britain as UK becomes free from being a signatory to the
EU-Israel Association Agreement that gives unrestricted access to
Israeli exporters from the Middle East into the British market.

Britain’s decision to leave the EU will enable more accurate
identification of those lobbyists in and around the House of Commons
whose agenda it is to influence Members of Parliament to pass
legislation and trade deals that are advantageous not to the UK but to

This is particularly relevant to the pharmaceutical and defence
procurement sectors where millions of pounds of contracts are concluded
with Israeli firms by the NHS and government defence departments as a
result of pernicious lobbying by pro-Israel interests in both Brussels
and London.

All this will now change as any remaining future British trade with
Israel will now need to be far more transparent and based on open
competition instead of free trips to Israel and other often covert
inducements offered by lobbyists in order to secure UK government contracts.

(7) The coming attack on the British economy, by the Fed, ECB, Bank of
Japan, and George Soros

From: Paul de Burgh-Day <> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016
16:44:21 +1000 Subject: Paul Craig Roberts:  The Brexit Vote + Despite
the Vote, the Odds Are Against Britain Leaving the EU

The Brexit Vote

By Paul Craig Roberts

June 24, 2016

What does it mean?

Hopefully, a breakup of the EU and NATO and, thereby, the avoidance of
World War III.

The EU and NATO are evil institutions. These two institutions are
mechanisms created by Washington in order to destroy the sovereignty of
European peoples. These two institutions give Washington control over
the Western world and serve both as cover and enabler of Washington’s
aggression. Without the EU and NATO, Washington could not force Europe
and the UK into conflict with Russia, and Washington could not have
destroyed seven Muslim countries in 15 years without being isolated as a
hated war criminal government, no member of whom could have travelled
abroad without being arrested and put on trial.

Clearly, the presstitute media lied about the polls in order to
discourage the leave vote. But it did not work. The British people have
always been the font of liberty. It was the the historic achievements of
the British that transformed law into a shield of the people from a
weapon in the hands of the state and gave accountable government to the
world. The British, or a majority of them, understood that the EU is a
dictatorial governing mechanism in which power is in the hands of
unaccountable people and in which law can easily be used as a weapon in
the hands of unaccountable government.

Washington, in an effort to save its power over Europe, launched a
campaign, willingly joined by presstitutes and the brainwashed
left-wing, who flocked to the One Percent’s banner, that presented the
effort to preserve British liberty and sovereignty as racism. This
dishonest campaign shows beyond all doubt that Washington and its media
whores have no regard whatsoever for liberty and the sovereignty of
peoples. Washington regards every assertion of democratic rule as a
barrier to its hegemony and demonizes every democratic impulse.
Reformist leaders in Latin America are constantly overthrown by
Washington, and Washington asserts that only Washington and its
terrorist allies have the right to choose the government of Syria, just
as Washington chose the government of Ukraine.

The British people, or a majority of them, gave Washington the bird. But
the fight is not over. Perhaps it hasn’t really yet begun. Here is what
the British can likely expect: The Federal Reserve, European Central
Bank, Bank of Japan, and George Soros will conspire to attack the
British pound, driving it down and terrorizing the British economy. We
will see who is the strongest: the will of the British people or the
will of the CIA, the One Percent, and the EU and neocon nazis.

The coming attack on the British economy is the reason that leave
supporters such as Boris Johnson are mistaken in their belief that there
is "no need for haste" in exiting the EU. The longer it takes for the
British to escape from the authoritarian EU, the longer Washington and
the EU can inflict punishment on the British people for voting to leave
and the more time the presstitutes will have to convince the British
people that their vote was a mistake. As the vote is nonbinding, a
cowardly and cowed Parliament could reject the vote.

Cameron should step down immediately, not months from now in October.
The new British government should tell the EU that the British people’s
decision is implemented now, not in two years and that all political and
legal relationships terminated as of the vote. Otherwise, in two years
the British will be so beat down by punishments and propaganda that
their vote will be overturned.

The British government should immediately announce the termination of
its participation in Washington’s sanctions on Russia and hook its
economy to the rising nations of Russia, China, India, and Iran. With
this support, the British can survive the Washington led attack on their

(8) IMF ignores Brexit vote, says TPP and TTIP must be passed

IMF warns against Sovereignty, Nationalism and a sound Immigration Policy

Published at: 11:45, June 23, 2016 by Luis R. Miranda

The director of the IMF, Christine Lagarde says that the TPP and TTIP
must be passed, although she admits that the adoption of such agreements
will widen the gap between rich and poor in the short term.

Globalism’s success depends on regions without nations and nations
without borders. It feeds from countries whose governments have been
thoroughly absorbed my regional, non-elected organizations who then
transfer the power to global non-elected elites.

The reality described above is the reason why nationalism is demonized
by international non-elected organizations, such as the IMF, the World
Bank and the European Union. Countries with borders and independent
governments pose an obstacle, and if the country is large enough, it
poses a threat to globalism.

The notion that a country creates its own laws and manages its own
resources and currency are repulsive for elite members who want to
politically and economically conquer "belligerent" countries that dare
have their own voice on their own affairs.

Today, nationalism and putting self-interest first is called
protectionism, isolationism and globalist entities often warn against
countries that seek independence from them, governments that prefer to
disassociate themselves from the chains of eternal debt and serfdom.

Most governments are known for mortgaging the lives of their citizens by
acquiring debt which later will have to be paid by unborn citizens in a
true example of modern slavery. Those empty promises made during
political campaigns, where powerful donors buy political candidates off
in exchange for easy cash to run for office, condemn entire nations to
perpetual debt.

Once in government, politicians that were bought off during the
campaign, begin their hard work to favor donors and powerful interests
while neglecting the will of the people.

Having a truly free and independent government, is key to containing its
ever growing thirst for power. While a small, well-controlled
bureaucracy may actually manage to work for the people, most governments
tend to grow larger and more powerful and that power is always in the
hands of special interests, not in the hands of the people.

Any call for nationalism or putting the interests of a nation first is
portrayed by so-called leaders, as dangerous and unnecessary, because it
directly affects the grip they have on the people. That is why movements
such as BREXIT, Scottish and Catalan independence or renouncing treaties
that destroy industry, trade and economic sovereignty are immediately by
oligarchs, corporate leaders and the heads of international organizations.

Recent calls by Marie Le Pen, to leave the Euro zone, the move for
Britain to exit the Euro system and Donald Trump’s plan to put America
first above all other interests have been demonized by people like
International Monetary Fund Director, Christine Lagarde.

While avoiding to mention Donald Trump by name, Lagarde said on
Wednesday that the United States should "resist" any form of
"protectionism". Trump, the presumptive Republican candidate, has railed
against the new free trade agreements and the damage that globalization
has caused American workers, a groundbreaking speech among conservatives
in which he coincides with Bernie Sanders.

The IMF today called to ratify these new agreements (TPP and TTIP)
between Pacific Rim countries and Europe as it attempted to address
another of the great debates of the American political campaign: the
impoverishment of workers. Lagarde then called for raising the minimum wage.

The Fund added social burden to the message to also request a
progressive tax reform. The "warnings"are contained in the report on the
US, which is a kind of annual review that the IMF takes on the
economies. The organization also issues a battery of recommendations.

According to the IMF, the diagnosis is uneven, as disparate as the
economic health of citizens in the first global power. "The unemployment
rate is at the lowest level since the eve of the Great Recession, 4.7%",
says the report, which can be considered full employment, with GDP
stringing its seventh consecutive year expansion.

At the same time, the agency urges a stronger fight against poverty in
the richest country in the world and calls for a federal minimum wage
rise because "exclusion affects not only unemployed, but also many
people with jobs but miserable wages."

"The need to tackle poverty is urgent," says the Fund. One in seven
Americans lives in poverty, one out of five if it comes to children. And
having a job is no guarantee of anything, since about 40% of the poor
work. So the Fund calls for a more favorable tax treatment and a rise in
the federal minimum wage.

It is the lacerating inequality that has given wings to populist calls
such as those of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, who are considered by
their parties as fringe candidates despite the massive support
accumulated during the primary season. Both Trump and Sanders have had
to deal with all kinds of fraudulent practices carried out by the
political elite of the country to keep them out of the presidential race.

Sanders gave Hillary Clinton a tougher battle than expected but has
already been overcome by the former Secretary of State. Although they
differ in almost everything else, both Trump and Sanders have lambasted
the new trade agreements as one of the causes of the destruction of
industrial production as companies have left the US to countries where
labor is cheaper.

On Wednesday, in a speech in New York, the Republican magnate blamed
Hillary Clinton accused Hillary Clinton of "getting rich" at the expense
of poor Americans.

Meawhile, the IMF defends the old and new agreements. "The free exchange
of goods and services has been one of the characteristics of the
economic success of the United States. New trade agreements such as the
Trans Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership (TPP), serve to bolster and
expand this principle as they go beyond the elimination of tariff
barriers, which are already low, and include rules on investment,
competition policy, intellectual property rights and regulations," the
Fund says.

Also in Europe the trade agreement has aroused enormous social rejection
by the consequences that entails for workers in richer countries. This,
in the language of the IMF is called "transition costs" for employment
and income, which must be compensated with "temporary" aid for affected
Americans. The Fund acknowledges that, in the first instance, the
agreements will exacerbate the wealth gap in the United States.

Regarding immigration, the institution argues that there is potential
for foreigners to compensate for the loss of an active European
population in the country due largely to the aging of the population.
The document also calls for "immigration reform" based on the skills of
foreigners, but it doesn’t go into detail.

As many other globalist organization have done, the IMF has issued a
warning regarding the possible exit of Britain from the EU. The IMF has
issued a package of recommendations where it also calls for more public
investment in infrastructure to boost business productivity, which has
spent nearly two decades. The report also warns of future imbalances in
public finances and calls for tax reform to improve the income of the
public coffers and reduce inequalities. "Demographic trends and interest
rates rising will cause higher fiscal imbalances over the medium term,"
said technicians at the Fund, who estimate that public debt will begin
to grow in 2019 and exceed 80% of GDP.

The Fund has reduced forecasts for US growth to 2.2% from 2.4% due to
what it calls global uncertainty, among other things. However, the
managing director told the press that the possible departure of the UK
from the EU would lead to a recession. "A vote to leave the EU would
have some effect on the US economy. How big it will be, is debatable. We
agree with the president of the Federal Reserve, Janet Yellen, that it
would not lead to a recession in the US," said Lagarde.

In sum, the head of the IMF attempts to sell the same old ideas that
have brought the global economy to the current situation. Larger, more
powerful governments, higher taxes, more debt and the adoption of
treaties and agreements that will further deteriorate the stability of
nations worldwide. Lagarde wants measures that give more power to
entities such as the one she leads and less decision-making power to the
nation-States. She wants global rules for local governments and a
centralized control of all human activity via trade agreements that have
been proven to be disastrous for all countries that decide to sign it.
The IMF itself has admitted that trade agreements such as the TPP and
the TTIP will indeed widen the gap between the poorest and the richest
people. Interestingly, the IMF report has nothing to say about what will
happen in the long run after countries surrender their sovereignty to
the corporations that have written the TPP and TTIP.

No comments:

Post a Comment