Fed Raises Interest Rates for Third Time Since Financial Crisis

The Federal Reserve, which raised its benchmark rate on Wednesday for the second time in three months, this time to a range between 0.75 percent and 1 percent, is finally moving toward the end of its nine-year-old economic stimulus campaign, which began in the depths of the financial crisis.

But Janet L. Yellen, the Fed’s chairwoman, said at a news conference after the decision was announced that the Fed did not share the optimism of stock market investors and some business executives that economic growth is gaining speed. It still plans to move slowly because the economy continues to grow slowly. She suggested that the Fed would have plenty of time to adjust its plans should President Trump and Congress cut taxes or spend massively on infrastructure.

Her announcement was full of confidence. But it certainly was not ebullient. “The data have not notably strengthened,” Ms. Yellen told reporters. “We haven’t changed the outlook. We think we’re moving on the same course we’ve been on.”

The Fed said that the United States economy continued to chug along, expanding at a “moderate pace.” Employers are hiring, consumers are spending and businesses — the laggards in recent months — are starting to plow a little more money into their operations, too.

The Fed’s sobriety did not appear to make much of an impression on investors. The stock market’s heady march that began after Mr. Trump’s election continued apace. The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index rose 0.84 percent to close at 2,385.26 Wednesday, moving up sharply after the announcement. Some said the Fed was still a long way from doing anything that might hurt.

“The first four to eight rate hikes are the low-hanging fruit,” said Deron McCoy, the chief investment officer at SEIA, a Los Angeles firm. “The real test will be whether the economy can withstand positive real rates. And that still seems to be a 2019 topic.”

Some analysts said the Fed will want to see an impact from its actions. “Policy makers hike rates to tighten financial conditions,” said Ellen Zentner, the chief United States economist at Morgan Stanley. “If this easing of financial conditions on the back of today’s hike are sustained, that would tell policy makers they need to do more.”

Ms. Zentner said she expected the Fed to raise rates again at its June meeting. The Fed’s policy-making committee next meets on May 2 and 3.

She noted that the Fed’s longer-term outlook is less clear. Ms. Yellen’s term as Fed chairwoman ends in February, and Mr. Trump could then replace her.

The Fed, charged with maximizing employment and moderating inflation, is close to achieving both goals. The unemployment rate fell to 4.7 percent in February, consistent with the normal churn of people moving among jobs. And after several years of concern that prices were not rising fast enough, inflation is reviving. The Fed’s preferred measure rose 1.9 percent over the 12 months ending in January, close to its 2 percent annual target.

“The basis for today’s decision is simply our assessment of the progress of the economy,” Ms. Yellen said at the postmeeting news conference. “And it’s been doing nicely.”

The Fed, which had made more inflation a central objective, said on Wednesday that it was now focused on stabilizing inflation. Ms. Yellen took the opportunity to note that inflation may now rise a bit above 2 percent, just as it has been below 2 percent the last few years. “It’s a reminder 2 percent is not a ceiling on inflation,” she said. “It’s a target.”

The Fed’s increased confidence was reflected in a new round of policy forecasts it also published Wednesday. An increased number of Fed officials are expecting to raise rates at least twice more this year. Only three of the 17 officials who submitted forecasts expect the central bank to move more slowly. There was a similar coalescing around tighter policy for the following two years, marking the first time in recent years that the Fed’s quarterly economic forecasts have shifted toward a prediction of tighter monetary policy.

This is the third time the Fed has raised rates since the financial crisis. The first hike came at the end of 2015 and the second almost exactly one year later. This time the Fed waited just three months. The benchmark rate remains below 1 percent, a very low level.

People with credit card debt are likely to see an immediate increase of about a quarter percentage point in their interest rates. The effect on longer-term loans is less direct, but the average rate on a 30-year mortgage rose by half a percentage point over the last year.

The nation’s largest borrower, the federal government, will also feel the pinch of higher rates. The Congressional Budget Office expects federal interest payments, measured as a share of the economy, to double over the next decade.

Savers are unlikely to benefit immediately. Banks tend to raise interest rates on loans more quickly than they raise rates on deposits. Last week, the average rate on a six-month certificate of deposit was 0.14 percent. Last year at this time: 0.13 percent.

The Fed’s move to raise rates puts it on course for a slow-motion collision with President Trump, who has repeatedly promised to increase economic growth through policies including cuts in taxation and regulation and more spending on infrastructure and defense.

Fed officials have emphasized that the economy is already growing at roughly its maximum sustainable pace; faster growth would therefore lead to faster increases in interest rates.

Some economists and liberal activists argue that the Fed is raising rates too quickly. Narayana Kocherlakota, an economist at the University of Rochester and a former member of the Fed’s policy-making committee, noted that strong economic growth continued to pull people into the job market while wage growth remained relatively weak. That suggests, he said, that the economy has not yet returned to full employment.

“We should be seeing faster wage growth with this level of employment growth if we were close to full employment,” Mr. Kocherlakota said on Twitter before the Fed’s decision.

Mr. Kocherlakota’s successor as president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Neel Kashkari, cast the sole vote against raising rates on Wednesday.

The Fed’s assessment of economic conditions remained quite measured. The economy expanded by just 1.6 percent in 2016, and there is little sign of an acceleration during the first quarter. Fed officials continue to forecast a Goldilocks economy, with the unemployment rate remaining at 4.5 percent and inflation around 2 percent for the next three years.

Ms. Yellen played down surveys showing a sharp rise in the optimism of consumers and business executives since the presidential election, noting there is little evidence that such surveys predict spending decisions.

She said that Fed officials spoke regularly to business leaders, and that many were undoubtedly in “a much more optimistic frame of mind.” But she added that many of those executives have adopted a wait-and-see attitude — just like the Fed itself.




Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan is ratcheting up pressure on banks to close the accounts of groups that boycott Israel, including one organization that has links to an internationally recognized Palestinian terrorist organization.

“Facilitating the bank accounts of BDS organizations constitutes support for BDS. Banks maintaining such accounts should carefully consider the danger of running afoul of strict anti-BDS legislation in the US and other countries,” Erdan told The Jerusalem Post in an exclusive statement on Thursday.


“Countries have already shut BDS accounts for legal reasons and we urge others to do the same,” he added.

The Post’s ongoing investigative series on financial institutions enabling boycott groups to target Israel revealed that BDS South Africa’s bank account is maintained at that country’s First National Bank.

BDS South Africa – one of the most powerful and aggressive anti-Israel groups internationally – held a series of fund-raisers in 2015 with Leila Khaled, a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which the US and EU have designated as a terrorist organization.

The BDS South Africa website shows a photograph of Khaled hosted by the group with a caption that reads, “Leila Khaled fund-raising dinner in Rustenburg.” A second photograph carries the caption: “Leila Khaled fundraising dinner in Pretoria.”

Khaled was a key member of a terrorist cell that hijacked TWA Flight 840 in 1969. A year later, she participated in the hijacking of EL AL Flight 219. BDS South Africa termed Khaled a “Palestine icon” on its website. It is unclear whether the money raised was sent via the First National Bank account to the PFLP and Khaled, or held in the account to promote BDS in South Africa and abroad.

Concerns about money laundering for crime and terrorism, as well as anti-BDS laws, have triggered the closure over the past year of BDS accounts in Ireland, US, Austria, France, the UK and Germany.

Nainesh Desai, First National Bank’s business chief risk officer, wrote to the Post: “Due to client confidentiality, First National Bank (FNB) cannot disclose information about any of its customers to a third party.”

In June, the Austrian financial giant BAWAG closed the bank account of Vienna’s Austrian-Arab cultural center, OKAZ, because it hosted Khaled in April.

First National Bank maintains a correspondence bank relationship with the UK’s Standard Chartered. When asked if First National used Standard Chartered to transfer BDS funds and payments for the PFLP, Julie Gibson, a Standard Chartered spokeswoman, said: “Whenever we receive complaints or information about potentially suspicious activity, we look into it.”

Gibson told the Post by phone that an investigation had been opened into the BDS account, but Lauren Callie, a Standard Chartered spokeswoman in South Africa, wrote to the Post that Gibson “made no reference nor commitment to the bank specifically investigating the BSD account with First National.”

According to Callie, Standard Chartered’s official position is as follows: “In line with the bank’s commitment to preventing fraud, money laundering and terror financing, Standard Chartered will investigate any external reports or tipoffs we receive. Regrettably, we are unable to provide any specifics on our investigations, in the interest of client privacy and confidentiality.”

Gibson told the Post that Standard Chartered has terminated correspondence bank accounts in the past but has declined to state the reasons. She added that the bank complies with US laws regarding terrorism.

Standard Charted admitted in 2012 that it violated sanctions against Iran, and paid $667 million to the US government.

The US government reopened an investigation in 2015 against Standard Chartered for additional violations of Iran sanctions.

Numerous Post press queries to BDS South Africa were not returned.

The International Association of Democratic Lawyers – a pro-BDS organization that supports Iran’s nuclear program – has accounts with Texas-based Comerica Bank and Spain’s La Caixa. When asked about Erdan’s statement, Wayne Mielke, a spokesman for Comerica, told the Post: “We decline to comment outside of reiterating that we have a robust compliance program in place at the bank.”

An anti-BDS bill is working its way through the Texas legislature.

Several queries to La Caixa were not immediately returned.

Steady U.S. Job Growth Sets Stage for Fed to Raise Interest Rates

A wave of hiring in February — President Trump’s first full month in office — pointed to a strong foundation for the nation’s economy, providing further evidence for the Federal Reserve that the moment to raise interest rates has come.

The Labor Department reported a gain of 235,000 jobs and healthy wage growth in a month when even the weather cooperated. It was the last major data release before Fed policy makers meet Tuesday and Wednesday, when they have signaled their intent to increase the benchmark interest rate.

“The economy is riding a wave of bullish sentiment postelection,” said Andrew Chamberlain, chief economist at Glassdoor, a career website. “We’re seeing strong labor demand across the board and no sign of slowing right now.”

Republicans and Democrats quickly jostled for credit.

Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, said Mr. Trump had “jump-started job creation, not only through his executive action but because of the surge in economic confidence and optimism that has been inspired since his election.”

Mr. Trump, who, as a candidate, repeatedly dismissed the official jobs reports as “phony,” reposted a comment on Twitter from the conservative website Drudge Report that said, “GREAT AGAIN: +235,000.” Mr. Spicer later quoted Mr. Trump on his faith in the report, “They may have been phony in the past, but it’s very real now.”

The Labor Department repeated that it had not changed the way it collected and analyzed jobs data since Mr. Trump took office. “It’s business as usual,” said Megan Kindelan, director of public affairs at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The Republican self-congratulation clearly irked Democrats. Tom Perez, labor secretary in the Obama administration and now chairman of the Democratic National Committee, countered that Mr. Trump had “absolutely nothing” to do with the job gains. “Trump inherited an economy from Barack Obama with the longest streak of private sector job growth in history,” he said.

Although the economic anxiety that helped put Mr. Trump in the White House remains, the official jobless rate is near what the Fed considers full employment — a threshold where, in theory at least, everyone who wants a job at the going rate can find one. The official jobless rate fell to 4.7 percent, from 4.8 percent in January, even as the overall labor force grew.

At the same time, jobless claims are near a 44-year low, and the stock market is surging. Revisions to previous estimates raised the three-month average of monthly job gains to 209,000 and annual wage growth to 2.8 percent, further bolstering the case for those who argue the economy is strong enough to withstand a rate increase.

The overall economic momentum received a push from February’s unusually warm weather, with almost a quarter of the jobs — about 58,000 — coming from construction. Manufacturing and mining rose too.

Also significant was the increase in the labor participation rate to 63 percent, a result of rising employment even among people without a high school diploma. “There’s got to be some optimism that these people are feeling they finally have a chance,” said Diane Swonk, founder and chief executive of DS economics in Chicago.

On the other end are employers who are seeing acute labor shortages. “They’re offering training programs now,” Ms. Swonk said. “They’re complaining about it. But that’s what tight labor markets do. It forces you to invest more to work with less.”

Bigger paychecks are something that most Americans are particularly eager to see, after years of stagnant wage growth. The Fed, too, has been waiting for an increase, but it is also wary of wages rising too fast. Its members want to head off incipient inflation without putting the brakes on hiring, especially because the benefits of the eight-year-old recovery have been so unevenly distributed.

The Labor Picture in February

Balancing those two goals is tricky.

Lauren Griffin, senior vice president at Adecco Staffing USA, said the scarcity of qualified workers had compelled employers to raise wages, strengthen benefits and improve amenities at the office. “We’ve got people in orientation classes,” Ms. Griffin said, “and they get up and leave because they’re contacted about another job that might be more money.”

At the same time, a broader measure of unemployment — which includes the millions of Americans who have given up looking for work or who are working part time but would prefer full-time jobs — dropped to 9.2 percent last month but is still high given how tight the labor market looks otherwise.

Cautioning the Fed against moving too quickly with a rate increase, Elise Gould, an economist at the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute, noted that, “Workers throughout the economy, including young workers, workers of color, and low-wage workers, need a chance to make up lost ground on wage growth.”

Many Americans who live outside urban centers also have been excluded from most of the rewards of the recovery.

Large metropolitan counties have had more than twice the annual wage growth of nonmetropolitan areas, according to the latest figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“Higher-wage jobs might be following educated, young workers, who are increasingly living in dense, urban neighborhoods as other demographic groups move to the suburbs,” said Jed Kolko, chief economist at Indeed, a job-search site. “Broader economic shifts also favor big cities: The occupations projected to grow tend to be more urban, while shrinking sectors like manufacturing and farming tend to be located outside large metros.”

That is disappointing for people with longstanding ties to smaller, more rural communities. “A lot of this has to do with mobility,” said Steven W. Rick, chief economist at CUNA Mutual Group, an insurance company. “People are going to have to move where the jobs are and not expect the jobs to come where they are.”

Although the Trump administration has had little time to make any substantial policy changes, the expectation of a reduction in taxes and regulations and the possibility of vast infrastructure spending have created optimism among employers and blue-collar workers.

Mr. Trump has promised to expand the economy by 4 percent a year, create 25 million jobs in the next decade, revive manufacturing and reduce the trade deficit.

Achieving all that would be difficult in the best of circumstances, let alone with the potential headwinds facing the White House. Dissension among Republicans and the unpredictability of Mr. Trump’s course in several policy areas could dampen job growth.

The future of the Affordable Care Act and a possible replacement is making hospitals and community health centers cautious about adding workers. A strong dollar and a potential backlash against the White House’s travel ban could slow tourism and hiring in the sector. And Mr. Trump’s across-the-board hiring freeze on federal government jobs, combined with declines at the state level, will probably reduce the total number of public sector employees.

The uncertainty extends to prospects for tax cuts. Some Wall Street analysts, expecting delays, have pared their growth forecasts for 2017, after recently raising them.

Certainly the snapshot of February’s labor market is good. The question is, if the economy does slow, whether Mr. Trump will accept the legitimacy of weak reports as enthusiastically as he does good ones.

Mr. Spicer suggested the president would. “Numbers are going to go up and down,” he said. “We recognize that.”

The Racist God and Creating Nationalistic Money



I have to admit that this is one of the most serious articles that I have written. We must be ready to fight under any kind of circumstances and throw away every fantasy about getting any kind of help from any kind of institution. When all institutions are controlled by globalist parasites, we have to start creating our own.

After analyzing the current political landscape, I pondered the possibility of ending up in a civil war in which Nationalists, abandoned from the police and all international institutions, have to defend themselves on the streets, face to face against black drug dealers and Arab gangsters (as is now the case in Greece).

In this most extreme of cases, under a collapsed economy, we can succeed only by having a better organization. We would be witnessing the fight of one race against another, where only naked talent and superior blood play the decisive role (without the intervention of Jewish anti-natural selection).

But of course, it would be nice to avoid that; nevertheless we should hope for the best and be prepared for the worst. With a good organization, we have better chances in any possible scenario.

One of the considerations that gives me strength to fight is to imagine that I am already dead. Without a White society, morality and life themselves have no meaning anymore; everything is worthless. But if there’s still some hope, one reason to be here is to fight for a White world. Only with a White world can Beauty be born. Only then can the path towards divinity and The Transcendental be traced.

Let me say clearly from the beginning that this article is not intended to foster pessimism; on the contrary, once we have the right mentality and put ourselves to work, we have good chances for success.

We should not overestimate the capacity of the Globalist elites. Even with all the money they invest on the final enslaving of humanity, they have progressed rather clumsily and slowly. The results they get from investing a billion dollars could be easily outdone by a modest investiture on people driven by love and passion.

This is the case because the results that an intelligent but materialistic person (who prostitutes himself for the best deal) will always be mediocre, in comparison with the results from a creative Idealist who acts out of fanatic love toward his culture.

The materialist has only intellect and lives to feed his ego. The idealist has a connection with The Transcendental and has in his soul an insatiable hunger for improvement, which can only be calmed with the palpable Beauty he creates.

Personal Responsibility

If I could summarize the essence of Hitler’s administration I would do so with the following sentence: We need personal responsibility in order to survive.

And If there is something in common between Christianity, Multiculturalism, modern Democracy, Communism and Capitalism (and all kinds of Jewish ideologies that end with -ism) it is the lack of personal responsibility.

One of the greatest weaknesses of humanity is the easiness with which we fall into promises of avoiding responsibility. Many White people profess the idea of equality because it is a way of avoiding the responsibilities that being the superior Race implies. Isn’t it much easier to be like that negro or the Mexican who doesn’t have to think about the future of humanity, about science or keeping his blood pure?

They envy their simplicity, but nevertheless are aware of White superiority. The best way of fooling ourselves and the world is to be White but claiming equality with other races in order not to do something challenging with our talents.

Responsibility and Gods

Monotheistic religions are also a way of avoiding responsibility. If Odin could have few words about Jesus, he would say that he is an incompetent tutor. A real god doesn’t give his love and help to anyone so easily, much less in proportion to how weak he is. A real god puts his believers to the test and only when they have gone through real challenges, does he help.

A real God teaches responsibility, fanatic passion (instead of mediocrity) and struggle. Only when the believer has succeeded on these tests, comes (from The Transcendental) the magic that catapults our work and legitimates all those years of arduous struggle.

Morality is the least of the concerns of a real god. A real god cares about creating Beauty, selecting for more talent and someone who jeopardizes these two in the name of morality can only expect damnation and scourge from the gods.

Morality arises naturally from an advanced race; it is the cherry on top, a result of civilization and not the source of it. The Brehon laws of the ancient Celts show us this is the case. They had no moralizing gods and nevertheless had a sense of fairness to which only the constitution of America came close.

A good method to deal with this human weakness of trying to avoid responsibility through god, is to imagine a god that is “racist” – a “white supremacist”.  Think of any nasty label that the media puts on us in order to intimidate us and think that this god wears these labels gladly without losing a single bit of his glory, beauty, might and righteousness.

We know that gods are beyond human reason, beyond good and evil. If this god is a “racist” or a “hater” or anything else, then he must have a really good reason and he must have a morality that justifies it, therefore you can entrust yourself to him and rest assured that you are doing the right thing.

If there is a god he must certainly be racist, because only through racial selection could the Beauty of Nature and everything that makes us happy have arisen. The capacity to create art, our ability to love, intelligence, High culture, etc. – all came through natural selection.

It must be in the interest of this god that we help Nature continue its path of racial selection and differentiation, therefore he must be pleased with what we do. We must not forget also that it is in his interest that only the superior ones (the ones willing to struggle) succeed in this task.

I’m convinced that if every human race keeps its blood pure and evolves into different species (to the point that it is impossible for us to mix), every one of them will find its own niche and the world will be a more peaceful one. Nature will find its balance again.

…Let the racist god bless our path.

For those who could say that I’m acting out of hate I can only respond that, no, I don’t hate black people or Muslims; in fact it would be very easy for me to like them but… as soon as millions pour into any White society, making it a place unsuited for the survival of Beauty and freedom, I see myself forced to learn how to hate them. No matter how, I will learn, because only through hate can I fight for my survival, that of Beauty and freedom on this earth. I don’t want that, but if I have to I will do it (I will hate just the ones who profane our lands and are unwilling to leave).

And now that I talk about hate, let me also remind ourselves about love. We have to love and feel compassion toward our folk daily, otherwise we can lose our souls. So long we feel the same amount of love and hate we are making progress.

Love, compassion, willingness to sacrifice, laughing and a sense of joy… this is the fuel of our souls that will be burned in the struggle for survival. If we want to win this battle we have to renew this fuel each day by feeling the warmth of our people and giving each other love inside of our communities. This is also meant to be a model for young Whites, to foster unity among our Race and show a positive image of White Nationalism to the whole world.

Among all peoples, the image of freedom, compassion, virtue, love and happiness shall be forever intertwined with the concept of keeping your race pure (at all costs).

Responsibility and Money

A third form of avoiding responsibility is to be part of an economic system that is based on debt. Its easy to hide your role in the community by using money that has no local origin and doesn’t represent a service done to this community. The only honest economy is the one backed up with services and the genetic quality of the population.

Evolution selects for systems (a system = a community = a race) and not for single individuals, nor for single genes. A united race can collectively survive but a million individuals with nothing in common will be enslaved and die out, no matter how intelligent they are.

An economy that knows no borders is a death sentence to every living form on this planet. When the Globalists speak of free market, it’s not difficult to imagine that the greatest obstacle to a “free market” is private property and with it, all our rights and freedoms:

At its advent, the market limited itself to a region or a nation, it was possible from a specific place to regulate and monitor them. Since the time of Globalization, globally operating businesses are able to get resources exactly where they are the cheapest and most favorable, this allows Nations to be blackmailed [..]

[…] The unrestrained competition between free markets will lead in the end to the plundering of all available resources, this includes human resources.

[…] Free market can procure that in the end all possible resources of this planet belong to just a few persons and businesses while the rest of humanity possess literally nothing.”
~ Peter Mersch – Ich beginne zu glauben dass es wieder Krieg geben wird. (Chapter 10 – Der evolutionär-systemische Ansatz)

With fewer words, we are witnessing the final plundering of Nature and of the whole of humanity, including Western culture and our Race, which are in the eyes of the Globalists no different than petroleum.

Just like they drain out the blood of trees, in order to produce cosmetic and fuels, Feminism is draining out the female part of our Race in order to exploit them in the market. Forests and our race are being destroyed by the market.

Now the question arises, how do we get to an economy that is based on work and which excludes parasites? I’m not an economist but I imagine the following system:

  • We create a system of vouchers that represent a service done or a product created.
  • A voucher is signed by the person who received the service or the product.
  • All the people who participate in this system are registered on a database and only people registered can profit from the system.
  • Everyone registered verifies yearly that the vouchers given on his name agree with the services and products he received.
  • Each time you receive an already signed voucher, you keep it and sign a new one with a reference code from the one you keep. This new voucher, with your signature and the reference code is now valid to be used.
  • There’s a database that keeps track of all the vouchers by checking the codes and signatures/names
  • To show every year that the vouchers with your signature correspond to real transactions should not be more difficult than doing your taxes.

If this system seems rather simple and plagued with possible difficulties, let’s not forget that that’s the beauty of Nature. We begin with something primitive (what we can afford and have at hand) and develop it, correct it and adjust it as circumstances arise.

Let’s suppose that John is a race aware person that has a restaurant while Michael who is also race-conscious has a bookstore . They both register to the White Nationalist voucher-system and exchange services and goods, free of debt.

Michael goes with his family to John’s restaurant in order to have traditional German meals and pays with a signed voucher; John, in turn can use this voucher to buy a copy of Mein Kampf (or whatever he wants) from Michael’s store or from anyone around the world who is registered in this system.

This system could be especially good for a Nationalistic group that, for example, needs original material from Hitler’s speeches, special books or to pay for a long translation from German to English, etc. We know that those things can be pretty expensive.

With the coming economic collapse and the rising dissatisfaction among White people, more and more people will have less objections to registering to a “racist” (Nationalist) exchange system.

When George Soros says that Europe should indebt herself in order to pay for more refugees, he wants to make sure that we are never able to pay back this debt (and work forever for him) and that we lose our ability to organize, by being burdened with the chaos and loss of identity that these refugees bring.

We must start acting and organizing now, and not forget that the Globalists work day and night for the final enslaving of humanity, where 99% of the population are poor farm animals, with no property, nor rights nor freedoms.

Adolf Hitler’s Economic Reforms



Under Hitler, the strategy for recovery was largely the work of his economics minister, Hjalmar Schacht. The NSDAP leadership looked upon the charging of interest on loans as immoral and by forcing banks to abolish the practice of usury millions were freed from slavery of debt.

Set to Lift Interest Rate, Fed Embraces Investors’ Optimism

The Federal Reserve is poised to raise its benchmark interest rate in mid-March, significantly sooner than investors had expected, as it moves to keep pace with a wave of economic optimism that started with the election of President Trump.

In an unusually clear statement about a pending decision, the Fed chairwoman, Janet L. Yellen, said on Friday in Chicago that the central bank was likely to act at its next policy-making meeting — barring any unpleasant economic surprises.

Ms. Yellen added that the Fed still expected to raise rates twice more later in the year, which she said would bring the benchmark rate close to a level that the Fed regards as neutral, with low rates no longer providing an inducement for borrowing and risk-taking. That outlook signals that an end is finally in sight for the Fed’s economic stimulus campaign, devised during the depths of the financial crisis more than eight years ago.

Stanley Fischer, the Fed’s vice chairman, delivered the same message at the same time at a conference in New York. “We’ve seen a lot of substantial change in a relatively short time,” Mr. Fischer said of the postelection shift in economic conditions. “There is almost no economic indicator that has come in badly in the last three months.”

Asked whether Fed officials were delivering a coordinated message, Mr. Fischer responded wryly, “If there has been a conscious effort, I’m about to join it.”

The impending rate increase could heighten tensions with the White House, which wants to stimulate growth by cutting taxes, reducing regulation and increasing defense and infrastructure spending. Fed officials have concluded the economy is already growing at something close to the maximum sustainable pace, meaning faster growth should be offset by faster rate increases.

Financial markets, however, are taking the prospect of higher rates in stride. The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index, which is up more than 11 percent since Election Day, ended trading on Friday mostly flat.

The prospective Fed move has modest short-term implications for consumers. Interest rates on car loans and some kinds of credit card debt will tick upward, but remain at low levels by historical standards. Rates on 30-year mortgages are up by about half a percentage point over the past year.

The broader consequences depend on the Fed’s ability to raise interest rates without slowing economic growth. The Fed’s goal is to return rates to a level that neither encourages nor impedes economic activity. Over the past century, however, most of the central bank’s attempts to strike that balance have ended in economic recessions.

The American economy is in the midst of one of the longest expansions in the nation’s history, but it is also one of the weakest. The economy expanded by 1.6 percent in 2016, compared with 2.6 percent in 2015, according to the government’s most recent estimate.

Fed officials have concluded, however, that monetary policy cannot deliver faster growth. The Fed’s job is to minimize unemployment and moderate inflation. The unemployment rate, at 4.8 percent in January, is in a range Fed officials regard as healthy, and prices rose 1.9 percent in the 12 months ending in January, the closest the Fed has come since 2012 to hitting its target of 2 percent annual inflation.

In December, the Fed raised its benchmark rate for just the second time since the financial crisis, to a range of 0.5 percent to 0.75 percent, and predicted three increases in 2017.

At the beginning of the week, however, Wall Street analysts and investors did not expect the Fed to raise rates again any earlier than June. The Fed issued a measured statement after its policy meeting in early February, and the meeting minutes, published three weeks later, conveyed little sense of urgency.

Now, after a week of discussions, analysts regard a March increase as highly likely.

Michael Feroli, the chief United States economist at JPMorgan Chase, described the shift in Fed language as “remarkably swift and decisive.” Investors put the chances at almost 80 percent in trading on Friday, according to an analysis of asset prices by CME Group.

Some Fed officials appear particularly focused on the rise of the stock market. William C. Dudley, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, who described markets as “very buoyant” on Tuesday, has said in the past that if markets did not respond to rate increases, the Fed might need to act more forcefully to tighten financial conditions.

It is also getting harder to dismiss the market’s reaction to Mr. Trump’s victory as a bout of temporary euphoria. Mr. Fischer noted on Friday that the stock market boom was creating wealth that people would begin to spend.

Ms. Yellen pointed to an improvement in the global context. “The prospects for further moderate economic growth look encouraging, particularly as risks emanating from abroad appear to have receded somewhat,” she said.

What Happens When the Fed Raises Rates, in One Rube Goldberg Machine

Exactly seven years ago, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates to almost zero in order to nurse the ailing economy back to health. Recently it changed direction. This is how it works.

The shift in the Fed’s language over the last week also may reflect a recognition that market expectations were not keeping pace with the Fed’s evolving view of the economy. Ms. Yellen, in a February appearance before Congress, hinted that the Fed might be providing a little too much stimulus, describing the Fed’s policy as “accommodative.” But at the start of this week, investors still put a low probability on a March increase.

Markets are wary of the Fed’s flirtations with interest rate increases, as the central bank in recent years has often found reasons for last-minute postponements.

This time, the Fed chose to overwhelm any lingering doubts.

On Tuesday, Mr. Dudley told CNBC that the case for a rate increase “has become a lot more compelling.”

On Wednesday, Lael Brainard, a Fed governor who has been one of the most consistent supporters of raising interest rates slowly, suggested that she too was ready to act.

“We are closing in on full employment, inflation is moving gradually toward our target, foreign growth is on more solid footing, and risks to the outlook are as close to balanced as they have been in some time,” Ms. Brainard said at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. “Assuming continued progress, it will likely be appropriate soon to remove additional accommodation, continuing on a gradual path.”

Fed officials often bury their latest views on monetary policy at the end of their speeches. Ms. Brainard’s remarks came at the beginning, so that no one missed the point.

On Thursday, another Fed governor, Jerome H. Powell, issued a similarly blunt notice of intent in an interview with CNBC. “I think the case for a rate increase for March has come together, and I think it’s on the table for discussion,” he said.

Then came Friday, the last day on which Fed rules allowed officials to comment on monetary policy before the March meeting, and Ms. Yellen delivered the last word.


“At our meeting later this month,” she said, “the committee will evaluate whether employment and inflation are continuing to evolve in line with our expectations, in which case a further adjustment of the federal funds rate would likely be appropriate.”

The committee is scheduled to meet in Washington on March 14 and 15.

Trump’s Newest Cabinet Pick Wilbur Ross (White Freemason) Has Financial Ties to Vladimir Putin (Kike) and Russian Oligarchs (Jews and White Freemasons)

A study prepared exclusively for DCReport.org by James S. Henry reveals deep financial ties between Donald Trump’s nominee for Commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, and three Russian oligarchs, whose lives and fortunes depend on staying in the good graces of Vladimir Putin. (Read the full report.)

These connections raise many new questions about Trump’s reliance on the Putin regime, which all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies say interfered in the presidential election on Trump’s behalf, but which Trump disputes.

These relationships between nominee Ross and the oligarchs involve ownership and management of a European bank with a reputation for laundering Russian money and making bad loans.

The study also compared flight records of Trump’s campaign plane and a plane used by one of the oligarchs. During the campaign, the two planes often were at the same airports at the same time.

Henry, DCReport.org’s senior editor for economics investigations, gathered the information and connected the dots. The records Henry combed through show that Ross and his team invested more than $1 billion in the troubled Bank of Cyprus. Ross became one of two vice chairman of the bank. Putin appointed the other.

Soon Ross named a new chairman, who earlier left under a cloud as chairman of Deutsche Bank. On his watch, Deutsche Bank paid $20 billion in fines. Among these was a $650 million fine for helping launder Russian money through Deutsche Bank offices in Moscow, New York City and Cyprus.

Deutsche Bank is Trump’s largest known lender, having extended him more than $300 million of loans that remain outstanding.

Why Ross would appoint anyone with such a poor record of banking conduct, and why he worked with the Russian oligarchs, remains a mystery.

During Ross’s confirmation hearing last month, these and other issues that James Henry examines were not explored.

David Cay Johnston’s latest book is The Making of Donald Trump. He won a Pulitzer Prize while at the New York Times, and is the founder and editor of DCReport.

Capitalism: A Cause for Concern?

This is my first post here. I present here some points from the massive tome I mention below that support my views on society. It is around 1,000 pages, so I bet you’re glad I read it so you don’t have to. You are more than welcome to do your own take on it none the less. The book mostly focuses on economics, but touches on politics and society over all as well. There is also my take on what its author said, next to the quotes, along with some more of my own comments in the last few paragraphs. What I feel is significant to mention may not be viewed that way by others, or vice versa, but in the end, I’m still trying to only help.

These quotes are taken from the Bantam classics edition, with the page number I found it on listed. Some of the page markers fell out.

Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith (Capitalism)

Economics 101. If that fills you with dread, you’re certainly justified. Most, if not all, say that an economy is a vital aspect of a society, but no one agrees on the definition, or which of the multiple versions currently existing to implement. Producing a new version is thrown around, and is likely the best bet. At the moment, there is a long time veteran contender with lots of followers, willing or not. This option’s name? Capitalism. Let’s explore its adopted playbook, The Wealth of Nations.

Let’s start out with the role of money/ the economy in politics:

1. Adam Smith says that monopolies use their power to influence the government to thwart workers and other companies. There are laws against monopolies, at least here in the US, but some companies are so large that they are effectively monopolies, and/or the sector of the economy they are a part of can be a large chunk of the overall economy, so an organization representing them can have lots of say.

2. page 908 – “making the administration of justice subservient to the purposes of revenue could scarce fail to be productive of several very gross abuses” : many politicians don’t listen (although many say what the “common” people  want to hear) to what the “common” people need/want, only to who got them elected, i.e. the lobbyists.

3. page 1029 -“A leader’s dignity should match that of their nation”: Although most “western” nations are overall wealthy, their wealth isn’t distributed very equally, so the “dignity” of most of their nation is much less. There are politicians for instance whose medical “problems” consist of getting Botox to fight a wrinkle and they have multiple homes, while a homeless person has frostbite and is lucky to find an intact cardboard box to shelter under.

4. page 537 – Smith says that the government has three economic goals: enough resources for the population, the chance for everyone to access those resources, and resources for public services. The U.S. apparently has lots of resources to spare, but a lot is either wasted (look at the dumpster of a restaurant or grocery store for starters) and/or doesn’t get this to those that need it. As for public services, I’d suppose we have a decent enough time there, although there are instances such as the national parks being closed, and our infrastructure is apparently falling apart. How about lay off a fighter jet or two and take care of some problems inside the country?

A slice or two about violence:

1. page 1017 – “parties enthusiastically attack established authority.” People must have been more active back in the 1700s when this book came out, although there are still people fighting. However, they are more likely to complain via a march or blog (although print and protests were used back then as well), i.e. something more peaceful. This could be due to the next line.

2. page 887 – “As society advances, the people become more unwarlike”. Conflicts of late have been either solved, or at least initially attempted to be solved, by a more diplomatic and/or economic approach. However, being more advanced also creates more things to bicker over, and when the wars do happen, they are much more destructive due to the increased technological level of the weapons.

Some lines about money /society/ the economy overall:

1. pages 44/47 – “labor is the real purchasing power, money is a symbol.” I suppose that having the symbol may create more trust that this person is actually working, but the amount they receive for their labor may not be a true representation, and they could have gotten it from other means, such as stealing or the lottery.

2. page 224 – “the poor survive by appealing to the rich by being as efficient and cheap as possible.” If they’re so efficient, shouldn’t their good work pay them more? I suppose they’re so relieved at having some sort of likely crummy position that they don’t care what the compensation is, and try to look as good as possible in order to stick around.

3. page 339 – “it comes from an order of men, whose interests is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it.” This was linked to controlling the market, although the quote is certainly fit to describe control in any format. Those in charge look after only themselves and their cronies, and sometimes not even their cronies.

4. page 423 – “The labor of some of the most respectable orders in society is like that of menial servants, unproductive of any value, and does not fix or realize itself in any permanent subject, or vendible commodity, which endures after that labor is past, and for which an equal quantity of labor could afterwards be procured.” An example: Bankers, politicians, and others may be looked up to or considered higher class, but when they work, they’re only debating and/or creating ideas/symbols, as opposed to say a blacksmith, which creates an actual “solid” object.

5. page 851 – “it is never in the interest of the unproductive class to oppress the other two.” None the less, they most definitely do. I suppose that by oppressing the other classes, they may be indirectly harming themselves, since they rely on the others to empower them, like a parasitic leech, and if their power source is lessened, they may lose some, and/or the other classes may get tired of being pushed around and fight back (apparently hasn’t happened yet, at least all that effectively). They may also oppress because “power corrupts”, and they feel that lashing out is the best way to hold onto this illusion, or perhaps they’re just butt holes from the start (personality). This also bring up another question – Are there any nice/good people in positions of power? Nominate them if you can.

6. page 539 – “the great affair, we always find, is to get money.” A big deal is made of it and most are forced to chase after it, in the so-called rat race.

7. page 551 – “Money is the known and established instrument of commerce, for which everything is readily given in exchange, but which is not always with equal readiness to be got in exchange for everything.” This seems to say that although everything is (allegedly) tradable for money, not everybody wants to trade their item for money. This could be since you could have all the money ever, but if the items are unobtainable, you effectively don’t have anything.

8. page 717 – “what encourages the progress of population and improvement encourages that of real wealth and greatness.” I would say that the wealth and greatness would be improvements, and that progress and improvement are similar, so a bit wordy here in my opinion. Otherwise, seems true, although wealth can imply something more than finances.

9. page 814 – “the evils come from the system, not from the character of the men who administer it.” Then what’s the quote from 339 about? Also, I would say that they affect each other. None the less, there’s now bad people running a bad system.

10. page 1044 – “a lot of inequality is better than a little uncertainty.” This may be a reason that so little action has been taken addressing the money issue. If something is a certainty, chances are it will be the same no matter what, and if some things are the same, how are they not equal? Thereby, inequality and uncertainty are the same thing, and the original statement doesn’t work. If you don’t want to use this approach, the blatantly obvious inequality does lead to uncertainty, such as when am I going to get this illness looked at, eat again, change my clothes, … and how is this a better situation?

Some have said that communism is equally shared poverty, and capitalism is unequally shared wealth, meaning there will still be people in poverty. Both will off everyone involved though. How communism has worked is that most folks are grouped together, and it takes out big chunks of the average person/masses at a time in some huge slaughter, and then the leaders start taking each other out. It’s more of an acute/sudden illness or condition, like stroke or heart attack. In capitalism, competition is encouraged, so all the sides usually don’t have the chance to 100% annihilate each other, and take each other apart piecemeal, making it more of a lingering, chronic illness, like Lou Gehrig Disease.

A problem with capitalism at least is that it promotes competition, but humans are allegedly social creatures. Being social, at least to me, just means that we interact a lot with each other, not that those interactions are always friendly, but being nice isn’t usually a bad thing, and is likely preferred. However, you can be too nice, which lets others take advantage of you openly or secretly. Working together, along with our increased intelligence, is what supposedly allowed us to progress to where we are today, versus other species, and will likely play a role in future development as well. There seems to be a claim that people need competition as a motivator in order to improve. By competing, if one gains, another or more may stay were they’re at, or even slide backwards, which is certainly not improving them. Furthermore, I stated earlier that science is driven by curiosity. In addition, folks may undertake something since they like doing it, and by continuing to do said action by the drive the resulting joy produces, they will get better at it, such as if they take up an instrument or a version of art, such as painting or drawing. However, you could say that they are competing against themselves, to see how fast/far they can progress in this undertaking.

On this note, this claim went on to say that without competition, people would even become gloomy. I do suppose that some people who have a more aggressive/competitive personality may get bored or upset, but it would be a load of relief for the rest. Tying in with this, a lot of the competition is “keeping up with the Jones’s”, which means having more and/or nicer material things. That fancy car may make your life more enjoyable and/or easier, but that doesn’t mean your life is truly improved. Furthermore, if that fancy car got damaged, you would likely be more upset over it than if you had a more modest car, and especially if you went from junker to junker. This is materialism at its worse, where you allegedly need to have a lot of stuff, and preferably a lot of the best stuff, in order to be a good and or complete person. No surprises to anyone else on this site I’d imagine, but this isn’t true.

There’s the concept of classes, usually based on income level. There’s the homeless and others like them, which are in bad shape, and can possibly not be counted as part of the system, as this system only “cares” for you if you have money. Those on welfare/government assistance have all of, or at least a good chunk off, major expenses, such as housing, food and medical covered through the government. If you’re the wealthy upper class, you don’t have to worry about those things either, as you’d have more income than you could spend. If you’re in the middle class, one surgery can put you in debt for the rest of your life, if not beyond, as there’s plenty of people who don’t finish the payments. I wouldn’t be surprised if the debt collectors didn’t summon up the debtors soul, spirit, ghost, essence or whatever you want to call it and hold it hostage in a otherworldly prison until the debt was paid off by their living relatives and or friends. At the same time though, the debt collectors are likely only interested in the material realm, so they might not do that.

Overall, the US ISN’T a truly capitalistic society, at least according to Smith’s standards. He wouldn’t like the current system, but that doesn’t mean one should like his “real” capitalistic system either.

Under the Heel of the Jewish Rothschilds



By Arch Stanton

And one man, Donald Trump, is supposed to reverse all this?” — Arch Stanton

That America is on “life support” has been clear for a long time—in fact, ever since the Swinging Sixties and the end of the Vietnam war. America’s rapidly deteriorating condition of the late seventies is what led to my search for what happened to the promise of “the American dream”.

What I cannot comprehend is all this wringing of hands, rending of garments and gnashing of teeth. It’s like that old scorpion story. Didn’t America know what was going on before Trump was elected to ride on its back? Apparently not.

Observe: the Rothschilds consolidated their European holdings of wealth and power by the late 1700s. By the turn of that century, they virtually owned, and most certainly controlled Britain, the sole superpower of the day, a global power on whose colonial holdings “the sun never set.”

The Rothschilds also exercised considerable influence over the outcome of the Napoleonic wars (1803-1815) that served to strangle the rise of another potential superpower: France. The financial power of the Rothschilds had originally been based in France, but when Napoleon began to resist their economic plans for his country, the Rothschilds diverted money to Britain and stirred up conflict between Britain and its traditional enemy France. The result: the demise of Napoleonic power at the battle of Waterloo (1815).

From that point on, Rothschild power grew by leaps and bounds. They played a critical part in fomenting and influencing the American revolution (1765-1783), the war of 1812 between America and Britain, the Mexican-American war of the late 1840s, and the American “Civil War” of 1861-1865.

By this time, the Rothschilds had begun expanding their parasitical power base to the “New world.” These wars reflected their emerging interest in America and their gradual abandonment of Britain as their center of power. With the Jews it has always been about war, war, war and more war. Since the day Jews fabricated their Torah, it’s always been about bloody war.

By the end of the 19th century, the Rothschilds had begun consolidating their control over America. Around the same time, a small portion of their global plan was unveiled by the sensational publication  of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (1903), since conveniently dismissed as a “forgery”.

A scant twelve years after the new century began, the Rothschilds’ full economic control over America was finally accomplished with the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act (December 1913). Within seven months of that Act, the world was at war, dragging America (with its massive army of two million troops) into the bloodshed. This was in April, 1917.

The Federal Reserve act was the very same Br’er Rabbit scheme replayed with Trump’s election.

Jewish economic influence then fomented two of the most murderous wars in history, first one in 1914 and then a second in 1939, a scant quarter of a century after the first major killing campaign. From the very beginning of the century, brush wars raged throughout the century in places like the Philippines and South America.

In spite of this headline in a major newspaper in March 1933, you will still hear Jews hotly deny that they had anything to do with starting WWII. Regarded as an “anti-Semitic canard”, any public statement along the lines that Jews helped to kickstart the bloodbath of WWII can lead to loss of employment, social ostracism and other dreadful sanctions. The truth is no defense.

Just after the midpoint of the century’s global wars came the “sexual revolution” of the 1960s. This was a thinly disguised, Jewish, cultural Marxist revolution that served to destroy American culture, reducing it to one of ignorant, stupid, rutting beasts that have now taken over the country, willingly marching in  lockstep behind the Jews’ unanimous cry for more warring bloodshed around the planet.

So there should not be the slightest surprise in finding the world in its present uproar, with war once again on the horizon. Thanks to the Jews’ destabilizing wars and revolutions, almost all the Near East has been destabilized and destroyed. The secondary effect of this destruction has been the unrestricted flooding of Europe with immigrants, thereby destabilizing and destroying most of Europe and its different cultures.

You are naturally not allowed to say that the Jews had anything to do with the “migrant crisis”—unless of course you happen to be an extraordinarily foolish Jew who lets the cat out of the bag by openly blabbing about Jewish responsibility for this major catastrophe:


Thanks to Jewish economic control that enabled them to eviscerate American manufacturing and industry—with a tidy profit to Jewish middle-men—America is now fully dependent on global trade for its survival. America can no longer survive without a constant infusion of foreign trade that is completely controlled by Jewish economic policy.

And one man, Donald Trump, is supposed to reverse all this?

How can anyone be so naive as to believe that any one person, or even a small group of people, could ever reverse this continuous parade of long-standing historical trends that began with the Rothschilds’ accumulation of a major portion of the world’s wealth?

This should be especially obvious considering Jews have all the wealth to fund their agenda with, while the goyim are left with little more than angry words.

LD comments: I revealed in a recent article that the Rothschild family is widely reported to own as much as the rest of the world’s 7.5 billion people put together, if not more:

Jews make up 11% of the world’s billionaires, so the Jews are doing exceptionally well given that they make up only 0.2% of the world’s population. (Source)

Jews make up only 2% of America’s population; but according to a recent Forbes Israel list, they make up a whopping 24% of American billionaires. Out of 442 US billionaires, 105 were Jews. (Source). With such enormous wealth concentrated in the hands of American Jews, is it any wonder they own the mass media and major corporations as well as have huge reserves left over for the bribery and corruption of American politicians?

The statement that the Rothschild family alone owns FIVE times as much as the combined wealth of the world’s EIGHT wealthiest billionaires in the world combined, is obviously calculated to create unbounded astonishment at the vast wealth of the Rothschilds. And yet to many astute observers the statement will be seen as a deliberate underestimate of Rothschild wealth.

It is widely known—or at any rate, suspected—that the Rothschilds own roughly $500 TRILLION. This amounts to exactly half of the $1000 trillion owned by the rest of the world’s 7.5 billion population. (See here) [LD]

ARCH  STANTON (continues) :  It must surely be obvious to all that the world is running straight, narrow and true on rails paid for by Rothschild money. What I see in all this brouhaha about Donald Trump is exactly what was to be expected, i.e., another Jewish dog-and-pony show intended to occupy the public while other, far more critical, events pass unnoticed.

This is exactly the way Jews have been playing the deception game since the days of the Old Testament when they marched around Jericho singing, shouting and blowing horns to disguise their sappers undermining Jericho’s fortifying walls.

Jews pride themselves on their magical acumen. Magicians base their act on deception. Hey, look at what this hand is doing! —so you don’t notice what the other hand is up to! This is the game being enacted now in the Trump charade, n’est-ce pas?

From the beginning of their rise to a global, economic power, the Rothschilds and their Jewish henchmen have been calling the shots like the global criminal mafia they have always been. Whether the world recognizes this and takes action to excise this virulent, diseased parasite or suffer the terminal consequences of watching the big game on television while the world goes up in flames, remains to be seen.

If past performance is an indication of future outcome, the world can expect a nuclear war any time soon. So far, Jews have a better performance record at creating war then a Warren Buffet fund has at creating wealth.

Why complicate this issue when it’s really simple?

The American dream, thanks to the machinations of the Rothschilds and their minions, has now morphed into a full-blown nightmare.