Thursday, 13 Jun 2013 03:45 AM
By Newsmax Wires
Before you dismiss the possibility of a 90% drop in the stock market as unrealistic, consider Wiedemer’s credentials.
In 2006, Wiedemer and a team of economists accurately predicted the collapse of the U.S. housing market, equity markets, and consumer spending that almost sank the United States. They published their research in the book America’s Bubble Economy.
The book quickly grabbed headlines for its accuracy in predicting what many thought would never happen, and quickly established Wiedemer as a trusted voice.
A columnist at Dow Jones said the book was “one of those rare finds that not only predicted the subprime credit meltdown well in advance, it offered Main Street investors a winning strategy that helped avoid the forty percent losses that followed . . .”
The chief investment strategist at Standard & Poor’s said that Wiedemer’s track record “demands our attention.”
And finally, the former CFO of Goldman Sachs said Wiedemer’s “prescience in (his) first book lends credence to the new warnings. This book deserves our attention.”
In the interview for his latest blockbuster Aftershock, Wiedemer says the 90% drop in the stock market is “a worst-case scenario,” and the host quickly challenged this claim.
Wiedemer calmly laid out a clear explanation of why a large drop of some sort is a virtual certainty.
It starts with the reckless strategy of the Federal Reserve to print a massive amount of money out of thin air in an attempt to stimulate the economy.
“These funds haven’t made it into the markets and the economy yet. But it is a mathematical certainty that once the dam breaks, and this money passes through the reserves and hits the markets, inflation will surge,” said Wiedemer.
“Once you hit 10% inflation, 10-year Treasury bonds lose about half their value. And by 20%, any value is all but gone. Interest rates will increase dramatically at this point, and that will cause real estate values to collapse. And the stock market will collapse as a consequence of these other problems.”
See the Proof: Get the Full Interview by Clicking Here Now.
And this is where Wiedemer explains why Buffett, Paulson, and Soros could be dumping U.S. stocks:
“Companies will be spending more money on borrowing costs than business expansion costs. That means lower profit margins, lower dividends, and less hiring. Plus, more layoffs.”
No investors, let alone billionaires, will want to own stocks with falling profit margins and shrinking dividends. So if that’s why Buffett, Paulson, and Soros are dumping stocks, they have decided to cash out early and leave Main Street investors holding the bag.
But Main Street investors don’t have to see their investment and retirement accounts decimated for the second time in five years.
Wiedemer’s video interview also contains a comprehensive blueprint for economic survival that’s really commanding global attention.
Now viewed over 40 million times, it was initially screened for a relatively small, private audience. But the overwhelming amount of feedback from viewers who felt the interview should be widely publicized came with consequences, as various online networks repeatedly shut it down and affiliates refused to house the content.
“People were sitting up and taking notice, and they begged us to make the interview public so they could easily share it,” said Newsmax Financial Publisher Aaron DeHoog.
“Our real concern,” DeHoog added, “is the effect even if only half of Wiedemer’s predictions come true.
“That’s a scary thought for sure. But we want the average American to be prepared, and that is why we will continue to push this video to as many outlets as we can. We want the word to spread.”
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/billionaires-dump-economist-stock/2012/08/29/id/450265?PROMO_CODE=110D8-1&utm_source=taboola#ixzz2WAstAHoM
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!
A new report says that the CIA has been sending bags of cash to Hamid Karzai totaling tens of millions of dollars
It’s like something out of a mob movie: Suitcases, backpacks, and sometimes plastic shopping bags packed full of cash, delivered discretely to a willing politician.
The purported money-exchangers: The Central Intelligence Agency and Afghanistan‘s President Hamid Karzai. According to a report in The New York Times, Karzai’s office in Kabul has been on the receiving end of tens of millions of dollars from the U.S., and is still getting paid to this day.
Khalil Roman, Karzai’s deputy chief of staff from 2002 until 2005, called it “ghost money,” according to the Times. “The biggest source of corruption in Afghanistan,” one American official told the paper, “was the United States.”
While the CIA refused to comment on the story, Matthew Rosenberg, who reported the Times story, said on Twitter that Karzai confirmed his account of events:
— Matthew Rosenberg (@mrosenbergNYT) April 29, 2013
The purpose of the cash was to “maintain access to Mr. Karzai and his inner circle and to guarantee the agency’s influence at the presidential palace.” Most people, of course, would call that a bribe.
Where did the money go? Politicians and warlords, including some who had connections to Afghanistan’s drug trade, and even the Taliban. The money appeared to have no restrictions placed on it.
To be fair, if the United States had not been paying Karzai, he might not still be in power. Steve LeVine of Quartz points out that in 1992, Mohammad Najibullah, the Russian-backed president of Afghanistan, ran out of money to pay off Abdul Rashid Dostum, an influential northern warlord, after Moscow pulled its patronage. The result? Dostum gathered his allies and overthrew Najibullah.
Still, both Afghan and American officials have called the bribes ineffective, saying that the CIA “has greased the wheels of the same patronage networks that American diplomats and law enforcement agents have struggled unsuccessfully to dismantle, leaving the government in the grips of what are basically organized crime syndicates,” writes Rosenberg.
Another indication that the CIA’s bags of cash are questionable: Iran had, for some time, been doing the same thing — to little effect. Tehran eventually halted its payments, but, at the very least, Afghan officials tell the Times, Iran was more transparent about its donations, sending millions of dollars through Karzai’s chief of staff, who would then have it stored in a state-run bank and the contribution announced at the next cabinet meeting.
Afghanistan, the third most corrupt country in the world, according to Transparency International’s 2012 Corruption Index, is well-known for its illicit government dealings — but it seems now we have pretty clear evidence that the U.S. plays a big role in keeping Afghanistan dishonest.
Yahoo News (2013). The biggest source of corruption in Afghanistan: The United States? Retrieved from http://news.yahoo.com/biggest-source-corruption-afghanistan-united-states-120500373.html
Real talks. Real issues. Why is the application of rule of laws and principles still biased?
The “Bush Tax Cuts” officially expired when the clock struck midnight on the morning of January 1st. Taxes had already gone up for all Americans before Congress actually voted on and passed the “Fiscal Cliff” deal. So what we have now are the “Obama Tax Cuts” which held on to 98% of the “Bush Tax Cuts”.