The bubble has been busting since 1975....Look at these apalling numbers!
Ron Wilson
Note 1:
US BALANCE OF TRADE IN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS
YEAR EXPORTS: IMPORTS: DIFFERENCE:
1880 836,000,000 668,000,000 +168,000,000
1885 742,000,000 578,000,000 +165,000,000
1890 858,000,000 789,000,000 +69,000,000
1895 808,000,000 732,000,000 +76,000,000
1900 1,364,000,000 850,000,000 +545,000,000
1905 1,519,000,000 1,118,000,000 +401,000,000
1910 1,745,000,000 1,557,000,000 +1,88,000,000
1915 2,769,000,000 1,674,000,000 +1,094,000,000
1920 8,228,000,000 5,2950,000,000 +2,950,000,000
1925 4,910,000,000 4,227,000,000 +683,000,000
1930 3,843,000,000 3,061,000,000 +782,000,000
1935 2,283,000,000 2,047,000,000 +235,000,000
1940 4,021,000,000 2,625,000,000 +1,396,000,000
1945 9,806,000,000 4,169,000,000 +5,646,000,000
1950 9,997,000,000 8,954,000,000 +1,043,000,000
1955 14,298,000,000 11,586,000,000 +2,732,000,000
1960 19,659,000,000 15,053,000,000 +4,585,000,000
1965 26,472,000,000 21,520,000,000 +5,222,000,000
1970 42,681,000,000 40,356,000,000 +2,325,000,000
1975 107,652,000,000 98,503,000,000 +9,149,000,000
1980 220,626,000,000 244,871,000,000 -24,245,000,000 -024,245,000,000
1985 213,133,000,000 345,276,000,000 -132,143,000,000 -132,143,000,000
1990 394,030,000,000 495,042,000,000 -101,012,000,000 -101,012,000,000
1995 548,742,000,000 743,445,000,000 -158,703,000,000 -158,703,000,000
1996 625,075,000,000 795,289,000,000 -170,214,000,000 -170,214,000,000
1997 679,325,000,000 877,279,000,000 -197,955,000,000 -197,955,000,000
1998 670,641,000,000 918,800,000,000 -248,159,000,000 -248,159,000,000
1999 estimates -475,000,000,000 -475,000,000,000
Total accumulated negative American trade balance since 1975 =
$1,259,272,000,000
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Kingsbury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 11:01 AM
Subject: [CTRL] BIS warns US Bubble will Pop
> http://www.sightings.com/general2/bub.htm
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Rense.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Bankers' Central Bank
> Warns US Bubble Will Pop
> - US Blackout Of Story
> By John Hoefle
> From Mark Sonnenblick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Executive Intelligence Review
> 6-13-00
>
> Jeff:
>
> This warning in the attachment was the biggest
> story in Europe over the past 3 days, even in the
> international editions of the Wall Street Journal,
> NY Times and Washington Post (IHT) and was on all
> the wires. But there was a total blackout in their
> US editions and in all but a few media here. In
> Lyndon LaRouche's view, everybody should know about
> this. And, Rense.com is the key source of news for
> many people here and abroad.
>
> A complimentary copy of the June 16 EIR (which
> includes graphics and several other articles on and
> quotes from the BIS report) will be sent to any of
> your reader who calls 1-888-347-3258 and mentions
> you.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Mark Sonnenblick
> Executive Intelligence Review
>
> Bankers' Central Bank Warns US Bubble
> Will Pop - US Blackout Of Story
> By John Hoefle
> 6-13-00
>
> The Bank for International Settlements (BIS), in
> a report issued on June 5, and in a major
> international press conference accompanying the
> release of the report at its headquarters in Basel,
> Switzerland the same day, confirmed what Democratic
> Presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche has been
> warning about for years: that a global financial
> crash is right around the corner. While that
> assessment has been given banner headlines
> throughout Europe, the warning has been blacked out
> of the U.S. press. "One point on which virtually
> everyone would agree is that the current rate of
> expansion of domestic demand in the United States
> is unsustainable and potentially inflationary," the
> BIS stated in its 70th Annual Report. The report
> goes on to say that "it could be argued that the
> sooner the bubble deflates, the better."
>
> In remarks at the BIS Annual Meeting the same day,
> BIS President Urban Baeckstroam threw cold water on
> the assertions by the U.S. President's Working
> Group on Financial Markets (a.k.a. the Plunge
> Protection Group) that the U.S. economy was headed
> for a "soft landing."
>
> "We have witnessed too many crises in the last
> decade not to know that market confidence can shift
> suddenly," Baeckstrom said. "A soft landing is by
> no means assured."
>
> He also warned of the rising levels of household
> and corporate debt in the United States, and the
> growing dependence of the United States upon
> foreign goods and money-flows. "Household and
> corporate balance sheets may look healthy when
> asset prices are stable or increasing, but what
> will they look like if prices fall?" he asked.
>
> To underscore the BIS's warnings, the German
> economic daily Handelsblatt, in a commentary by
> Klaus Engelen on June 6 entitled "Dangerous Dynamic
> on Financial Markets," noted that while the
> International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and
> the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
> Development had proven records of not seeing
> financial crises in advance, the BIS had warned of
> instability in the emerging markets before the
> Mexican and Asian crises erupted. However, Engelen
> said, "all such earlier warnings from Basel had
> been ignored by euphoric markets." Market
> participants are still not paying sufficient
> attention to the "emphatic warnings of the BIS
> concerning ever higher financial asset prices and
> the unsustainable foreign trade imbalances, in
> particular the U.S. current account deficit which
> is running out of control." Engelen said that the
> issue was not one of how big the chances were of a
> soft landing, but rather whether there is any
> chance at all to prevent a hard landing.
>
> The blunt warnings reflect the realization by the
> BIS that the current global financial and monetary
> system is unsustainable, and that major changes are
> required to keep the system together. Such
> warnings, as far as they go, are valid, and
> represent a better understanding of the state of
> the world than anything flowing out of official
> Washington, but they still fall far short of
> reality.
>
>
> - Hard Landing, or Mid-Air Explosion? -
>
> The whole debate about "soft landing" versus "hard
> landing" is a fraud. The idea behind the soft
> landing is that the U.S. economy is growing so
> fast, that the pace of growth is unsustainable and
> might trigger inflation. Therefore, to slow the
> pace of growth and head off potential inflation,
> Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has been
> raising interest rates. By gently putting the
> brakes on the economy, to use the aircraft
> metaphor, the Fed hopes to bring the economy down
> from its lofty heights to a safe and soft landing.
> The hard-landing crowd likewise assumes that the
> plane will land, but perhaps with significant
> damage. What is absent from this controlled
> discussion is a third possibility, that of a
> mid-air explosion.
>
> In citing "the record U.S. current account
> deficit," the BIS pointed squarely to the fact that
> the U.S. economy is being subsidized by the rest of
> the world. The current account balance ({{Figure
> 1}}), which hit a record $100 billion deficit for
> the fourth quarter of 1999, represents the extent
> to which the U.S. economy is dependent upon foreign
> goods and investments. The deficit reflects both
> the inadequacy of U.S. goods-production to meet the
> needs of the nation's population, and the extent to
> which foreign funds have flooded into the country
> to participate in the U.S. market bubble and
> purchase other U.S. assets. Were this inflow to be
> interrupted or reversed, by a stock market crash or
> a sharp decline in the value of the dollar, the
> "soaring" U.S. economy would be lucky to make it to
> the ground in one piece.
>
>
> - Controlled Burn -
>
> One aspect of the effort to bring the U.S. economy
> in for a soft landing, is the attempt to deflate
> the overblown U.S. stock market without triggering
> an investor panic. Make the change gradually
> enough, and the public will stay in the market even
> as it declines, a variation of the frog-in-the-pot
> theory. (It is said--I've certainly never tested
> it--that one can put a frog in a pot of water on a
> stove, and that if one heats the water slowly
> enough, the frog will stay in the pot until it
> boils.)
>
> But a controlled and limited deflation of a bubble
> is a tricky operation, one which can easily get out
> of hand and trigger the very panic one is trying to
> prevent.
>
> An analogy for the danger is the fire set by the
> U.S. National Park Service on May 4 in the
> Bandelier National Monument in New Mexico. The
> fire, intentionally set as a "controlled burn" to
> burn brush and dried timber on 1,000 acres in order
> to reduce the danger of a wildfire, rapidly went
> completely out of control, triggering the very
> wildfire it was designed to prevent. The result was
> the immolation of some 48,000 acres, the
> destruction of more than 200 homes and apartment
> buildings in the nearby town of Los Alamos, and the
> destruction of parts of the Los Alamos National
> Laboratory.
>
> The 33% drop in the Nasdaq from mid-March to
> mid-April, including a 25% drop in just the week of
> April 10, shows all the hallmarks of a controlled
> burn ({{Figure 2}}). The drop was preceded by an
> international media propaganda campaign, beginning
> in Europe and then spreading to the United States,
> about the unsustainable nature of the "Internet
> bubble" and the necessity of a "correction." One
> key aspect of the propaganda campaign was to
> prepare the public psychologically for the sharp
> drop, to keep "investors" from panicking and
> fleeing the market. That aspect of the campaign was
> successful, as no panic occurred; the market
> stabilized, at least in the short-term, at a lower
> level, without an immediate collapse.
>
> That does not mean, however, that no damage was
> done. The sharp drop in tech stocks generated
> serious losses for many investors, those not warned
> of the central bankers' plans. Hardest hit were
> those who had hitched their futures to the
> Internet, and those playing with borrowed money.
> Some $2.2 trillion in value (albeit virtual, rather
> than real) evaporated between March 10, when the
> value of all stocks traded on the Nasdaq peaked at
> $6.7 trillion, and April 14, when it dropped to
> $4.5 trillion. Many of the investors who got wiped
> out were playing with borrowed money, as indicated
> by the sharp drop in margin debt outstanding, by
> clients of the brokers which belong to the New York
> Stock Exchange. After rising 55% to $279 billion
> from September 1999 through March 2000, margin debt
> fell by $27 billion--nearly 10%--during April,
> ending the month at $252 billion ({{Figure 3}}).
> Most of that reduction was due to investors getting
> hit with margin calls, and having to sell
> stock--and their most valuable stock at that--in
> order to pay their debts.
>
> The impact of such market declines goes well beyond
> the markets themselves. Many people working in the
> tech sector have taken stock options in lieu of
> higher salaries, betting that the money made from
> rising stock prices will more than offset the lower
> wages. While this gamble has made many millionaires
> in a rising market, it will have the reverse effect
> in a declining one. Many would-be stock-option
> millionaires are under water, the option prices on
> their stock higher than the current market prices,
> rendering their options worthless. Some of these
> have borrowed heavily against that planned
> stock-option money; in California's Santa Clara
> County, the home of Silicon Valley, for example,
> the median price of a single-family home was
> $577,820 in April, up 45% in one year; nationally,
> the median price for a single-family home was
> $136,700, suggesting hard times ahead for the
> Silicon Valley real estate market, as well as for
> other high-tech centers such as Northern Virginia
> and Austin, Texas. The commercial real estate
> market will also suffer from the shakeout on the
> tech sector, since all the new Internet companies
> required lots of office space, the demand sharply
> increasing rents in many areas.
>
> The danger is also great in New York City which,
> according to a study by the New York Fed, is more
> dependent than ever upon Wall Street. The July 1999
> study by the bank's Jason Bram and James Orr, shows
> that the securities sector generated 19% of the
> city's earnings in 1998, nearly double its
> contribution in 1987 and more than four times
> higher than in 1969. The securities sector itself
> employed 4.5% of the city's workforce in 1998, and
> given the U.S. Department of Commerce's estimate
> that each job on Wall Street generates two
> additional jobs in other sectors, Wall Street is
> directly or indirectly responsible for roughly 14%
> of the total employment in New York City.
>
> In fact, according to economist James Parrott, Wall
> Street workers accounted for an astonishing 97% of
> the increase in the city's payrolls between 1990
> and 1997.
>
> There is an unexpected bright spot in the city's
> economy, according to the Fed study, and that is
> manufacturing, or rather the lack thereof. The
> manufacturing sector accounted for nearly half of
> the city's job losses and more than two-thirds of
> the decline in real earnings during the city's
> slump in the early 1970s, and was "a severe drag"
> on the local economy during the 1989-92 recession,
> as well. Today, manufacturing accounts for just 6%
> of local earnings, compared to 20% in 1969.
> "Because its importance to the city's economy has
> diminished significantly, another decline in the
> manufacturing sector would likely put far less
> pressure on the local economy than was true in
> previous downturns," bubbleheads Bram and Orr
> concluded, showing that the Fed doesn't have a clue
> when it comes to physical economy.
>
>
> - Reorganization and Manipulation -
>
> Coincident with the newly emerging bear market is a
> reorganization of certain financial warfare
> operations, particularly the large hedge funds.
> Julian Robertson's Tiger Management group of hedge
> funds, which once had $23 billion under management
> and controlled many times that through leverage,
> has closed down, said to be a victim of Robertson's
> bet that the Old Economy would prevail over the
> New. The impression is given that Robertson was an
> old-style investor who just didn't understand the
> new era, when in fact Robertson was one of the
> bloodiest speculators on the planet. Stanley
> Shopkorn, the man who, as head trader at Salomon
> Brothers, is credited with doing much to prevent
> the Black Monday Crash of 1987 from melting down
> the financial system, and is now an investment guru
> with the $10 billion Moore Capital hedge fund
> group, is taking a sabbatical this summer to cruise
> the Mediterranean.
>
> Then there's the case of drug-legalizer George
> Soros and his Soros Fund Management, at one time
> worth $22 billion. After the March-April slide of
> the Nasdaq, Soros announced he was downsizing his
> operation into a more conservative style of
> investing. With the change came the resignations of
> his two top fund managers, Stanley Druckenmiller
> and Nicholas Roditi, and the departures of chief
> financial officer Peter Streinger and chief
> executive Duncan Hennes.
>
> Nominally, the reorganization at Soros Fund
> Management comes as a result of sharp losses on the
> tech stocks in the wake of the April-May Nasdaq
> slide, but there are indications that the truth
> runs deeper. Last autumn, with his funds down
> slightly for the year, Soros made a sharp push into
> technology stocks, buying enough to end the year up
> 35%. Between mid-October and mid-March the Nasdaq
> Composite Index nearly doubled, rising an
> unprecedented 88%. Some Wall Street observers have
> attributed a significant portion of that rise to
> Soros's heavy buying.
>
> The timing between the controlled burn of the
> Nasdaq and the announcement of the reorganization
> of the Soros funds, suggests the possibility that
> Soros also played a role in setting that particular
> fire.
>
> The idea of an orchestrated run-up and take-down in
> this highly manipulated environment is nothing new.
> By running up the Nasdaq at the end of the year,
> large profits could be gained to offset
> losses--particularly hidden losses--from the spring
> and summer turmoil. Once in the new year, the
> insiders could sell off into a rising market,
> taking one last profit fling while sticking the
> suckers with the looming losses. Even investors in
> the Soros funds, which were down 22% for the year
> as of the end of April, could have covered their
> losses with offsetting bets.
>
>
> - Hyperinflation -
>
> Beginning with the global financial crisis which
> broke out in Asia in the summer of 1997, and
> continuing through the subsequent "Russian," "Long
> Term Capital Management," "Brazilian," "Tiger," and
> other, better-hidden events, the central bankers
> have responded to each crisis with what Soros
> himself called "a wall of money." Throwing money at
> problems is nothing new for the bankers, as the
> sharp growth in the U.S. money supply since 1992
> indicates ({{Figure 4}}). But as the money flows
> in, the instability grows and the crises come ever
> faster and larger. That is because the increased
> money for the bubble comes by further cannibalizing
> the physical economy, heaping ever more financial
> claims on an economy whose ability to pay those
> claims is shrinking.
>
> The result is a self-accelerating, leveraged
> turbulence which, according to LaRouche, has
> reached the point where the monetary aggregates are
> now growing faster than the financial aggregates.
> In such a period, the money will begin to lose
> value faster than it can plug the holes, leading to
> a Weimar-style hyperinflation, where the value of
> money itself goes into a free-fall.
>
> Another aspect of this nascent hyperinflation is
> the surge in commodity prices in the recent period,
> typified by the rise in the price of oil. One of
> the factors in this is the accelerating level of
> mergers in the economy ({{Figure 5}}). Due to the
> extraordinary levels of debt taken on in these
> mergers, the companies are forced to raise prices
> in order to show a profit. Thus, the attempt to
> outpace the collapse via consolidation, actually
> brings closer the demise.
>
> While the warnings issued by the BIS have some
> validity, the solutions it puts forward do not. The
> BIS does not wish to kill this global financial
> parasite--which would be tantamount to suicide--but
> merely to exert tighter control over its growth, to
> avoid killing its host. The BIS is, as its report
> shows, in favor of the continued deregulation and
> globalization of financial markets, taking ever
> more control out of the hands of nation-states and
> giving it to the oligarchic forces which control
> the financial system and the BIS itself. It is not
> the process, but the perceived excess, which the
> BIS deplores.
>
> Thus, the BIS, like the speculators it is trying to
> curb, is doomed by its inability to break free of
> its own failed axioms. They are all actors on a
> stage, not controlling the action, but being
> controlled by it, in a tragedy of historic
> proportion. Only by stepping out of their roles and
> joining LaRouche, can they survive.
>
>
>
>
>
> .
>
> <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
> ==========
> CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing
propagandic
> screeds are unwelcomed. Substance-not soap-boxing-please! These are
> sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'-with its many half-truths,
> misdirections
> and outright frauds-is used politically by different groups with major and
> minor
> effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being
said,
> CTRL
> gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to
readers;
> be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
> nazi's need not apply.
>
> Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
> ========================================================================
> Archives Available at:
> http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
> <A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
>
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
> <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
> ========================================================================
> To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Om
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths,
misdirections
and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and
minor
effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said,
CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
