Deutsche Bank "Mistakenly" Sends $35 Billion Out The Door

Back in the summer of 2015, Deutsche Bank mistakenly paid $6 billion to a hedge fund client in a “fat finger” trade on its foreign exchange desk. The embarrassed bank recovered the money from the US hedge fund the next day, and quickly accused a junior member of the bank’s forex sales team of being responsible for the transfer while his boss was on holiday; as the bank further explained, instead of processing a net value, the person processed a gross figure: "That meant the trade had too many zeroes" a staffer helpfully explained.

Fast forward to today when Germany's largest bank has done it again.

According to Bloomberg, a routine payment at Deutsche Bank "went awry" (or as the article notes "was flubbed") last month when the bank with the €48 trillion in derivatives...

... mistakenly sent 28 billion euros ($35 billion) to an exchange as part of its daily derivatives margin transfers.

While the error was quickly spotted and no financial harm was suffered by the bank which has made clusterfucks into its business model, it represents a terrific case study why one should never confuse gross and net derivative exposure: as Bloomberg adds, the "errant" transfer occurred about a week before Easter as Deutsche Bank was conducting a daily collateral adjustment. The delighted - if only for a short time - recipient of the massive transfer was the Deutsche Boerse AG’s Eurex clearinghouse, in whose account the sum landed.

“This was an operational error in the movement of collateral between Deutsche Bank’s principal accounts and Deutsche Bank’s Eurex account,” Charlie Olivier, a spokesman for Deutsche Bank, wrote in an emailed statement. “The error was identified within a matter of minutes, and then rectified. We have rigorously reviewed the reasons why this error occurred and taken steps to prevent its recurrence.”

Of course, Deutsche Bank vowed the same "rigorous" review took place after the 2015 FX transfer fiasco and clearly nothing changed. Actually no, what changed is that Deutsche Bank has been a chronic underperformer, its stock crashed in 2016 to levels below the financial crisis amid speculation about its solvency, and just last week the bank's latest CEO was fired for what really amounted to incompetence.

Surely a pattern is emerging.

Indeed, as Bloomberg adds, "the episode raises fresh questions about the bank’s risk and control processes, at a time when lenders are faced with increased scrutiny from regulators. It’s another embarrassment for Deutsche Bank at a time when it is undergoing a change of leadership in the wake of its third straightannual loss."

And while the "glitch" took place during the last days of now ex-CEO John Cryan's tenure, it will surely be seen as another wrinkle for the bank's new chief executive Christian Sewing who even before this news already had a mountain to climb, as Deutsche Bank is the worst performing member of the Stoxx 600 banks index this year, with the shares having fallen 26% YTD.

Also, in light of the latest debacle, one wonders if the transfer had anything to do with the recent ouster of bank COO Kim Hammonds, who reportedly called Deutsche Bank "the most dysfunctional company" she’d ever worked for.

Finally, adding insult to injury, as we reported over the weekend Deutsche Bank was asked by the ECB to simulate a "crisis scenario" and an orderly wind-down of its trading book, making the German lender the first European bank to receive such a request from the ECB, which is reportedly using Europe’s largest investment bank as a "guinea pig" before it sends similar requests to other banks.

Then again, other European banks don't have €48.3 trillion in derivatives they would need to wind-down overnight.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-19/deutsche-bank-mistakenly-sends-35-billion-out-door

READ SPLITTING PENNIES BOOK 

ALERT: Syria first strike in World War 3 - Deep Analysis

From www.globalintelhub.com 4/14/2018

Syria has been bombed which calls for a deep analysis of what's going on here.  As we explain in our book Splitting Pennies - what really backs the US Dollar is BOMBS.  Wall Street and the MIC (Military Industrial Complex) are inextricably intertwined, whether you are an armchair intellectual or an investor it's important to understand this economic relationship.

The latest action in Syria is that policy in action.  Let's take a step back and understand this critical but boringly predictable development in Syria, the players involved, their respective relevant histories, and what markets can expect.

First let's look at War Inc. or the Military as a business, or as we have outlined in a detailed article "Cult of War" (a good primer read if you're not up on this topic).  With 800 Billion + per year and a likely real spend of well over a Trillion USD, the US taxpayer needs to get something for their money.   The Military is in a constant state of self-justification.  The US outspends the enemy by such a large figure, there are stockpiles of bombs, planes, tanks, guns, logistic supplies, boats, aircraft carriers, satellites, and just millions of expensive assets getting dusty.  The US could fight World War 2 on 2 fronts and a war in Space and still have assets left over.  There are hundreds of military bases, millions of personnel, it has become just a massive super entity above Presidents, above the Elite, above Governments.  By itself, as a form of Artificial Intelligence, the Military will do anything to prove the need it serves and survive.  The glaring problem - no enemies!  The number of real enemies is dwindling.  But Syria has been on the CIA's hit list for some time, controlling key Oil transport sites and other resources.  Not to mention Israel has wanted to destroy the unfriendly regime for a long time.  Cult of War needs to create conflicts of any size, it's a 'use it or lose it' mentality.  There's no better training drill than the real thing.

The False Flag

False Flag operations are when a government or other body will secretly stage an event to make it look like it was the enemy, thus providing justification for war.  False flag operations obviously need to be handled with laser like precision (ideally, but in reality such as in 911 they are botched).  One of the first significant False Flags in American modern history is the sinking of the Lusitania, staged apparently by warmonger Winston Churchill in an attempt to bring the ruffian Americans into World War I:

The Lusitania set sail for Liverpool on May 1st, 1915 from New York harbor. It was carrying millions of rounds of ammunition and shrapnel. The previous captain Daniel Dow had resigned because of mixing civilian passengers with munitions. The ship was to have a British battleship escort called the Juno but was recalled before the rendezvous in spite of the knowledge that a Uboat was active in the path of the Lusitania.

False Flag operations are nothing new, Hitler burned down the government building and claimed to be able to catch the terrorists and restore order in Germany, finally naming himself Chancellor.  Every powerful regime has a False Flag that they 'own' in order to justify their 10 year run in power.  Their time is limited, people forget, so a new event is necessary every few years, custom tailored to the situation.

This false flag was planned and executed by MI5 (British Intelligence), although the details of the operation are as yet unclear.  What is clear is that it is a Hollywood style staged event which was put together in the last minute with many mistakes and inconsistencies (they didn't have a script supervisor!) as pointed out by countless fact-based witnesses and other governments:

Speaking with EuroNews, Russia's ambassador to the EU, Vladimir Chizov, said "Russian military specialists have visited this region, walked on those streets, entered those houses, talked to local doctors and visited the only functioning hospital in Douma, including its basement where reportedly the mountains of corpses pile up. There was not a single corpse and even not a single person who came in for treatment after the attack.""But we've seen them on the video!" responds EuroNews correspondent Andrei Beketov."There was no chemical attack in Douma, pure and simple," responds Chizov. "We've seen another staged event. There are personnel, specifically trained - and you can guess by whom - amongst the so-called White Helmets, who were already caught in the act with staged videos."  "All these facts show... that no chemical weapons were used in the town of Douma, as it was claimed by the White Helmets."  “All the accusations brought by the White Helmets, as well as their photos… allegedly showing the victims of the chemical attack, are nothing more than a yet another piece of fake news and an attempt to disrupt the ceasefire,” said the Russian Reconciliation Center.

Of course, US warmongers will say that the Russians are protecting the Assad regime.  There's plenty of video and other evidence for internet sleuths to sort through in the coming days.  But we have seen this so many times before we can guess the outcome fairly easily.  It was a false flag, done by the British, in a sad and pathetic last attempt to save what remaining Elite aristocrats have over the masses, post Brexit.  Although actual war is unavoidable in Syria now, one possible outcome of this is a populist movement against such politics, as is happening in Hungary.

Support of the US Dollar

So what's the real reason the US chooses Syria to bomb and not Greenland for example?

The way that the US supports and maintains Global Empire via the US Dollar is by bombing countries into submission:

1. The Petrodollar (via comment on The Gateway Pundit):

“The Chinese have recently issued the gold backed Yuan, which they, and others, have vowed to use to sell/purchase oil (amongst other things).  The last two nations that tried to introduce a currency to compete against the petrodollar were Libya and Iraq. The US needs that pipeline through Syria even more than ever now, especially if they are to compete for European gas/oil markets (presently controlled by Russia and their pipeline) and the Chinese Yuan.  But i’m sure none of that has anything to do with it…”

Syria is not only close to the Chinese they are also working closely with Russia.  All of this is a non-USD system they are building, not controlled by DC.  So of course, it has to be destroyed.  This is outlined in great detail in the book Splitting Pennies. 

It's not only about Syria itself, you see.  The GDP of Syria won't make a difference on the USD.  It's about stopping a revolution.  If Syria uses a Russian - Chinese financial and energy system perhaps it will spread to Jordan, Lebanon, and who next?  If half the world is suddenly using a Yuan denominated trading market, it would threaten US hegemony.  So all alternatives need to be stopped in their tracks, period.  That isn't an opinion it is the policy in DC based on research by companies like RAND.

Trump Politics

Trump seems to be a victim of the international cabal that was a step ahead of him the whole time.  In the opinion of this author, Trump is not a 'plant' from the beginning meant to deceive the voters.  The UK is the master planner of this operation, including but not limited to the false flag.  When domestic attempts by the deep state to derail Trump failed, they realized a coordinated effort from abroad was a better approach, one that Trump would be defenseless against, as his experience in international politics is zero (before getting into the White House).  Hence, Trump's involvement in this quagmire is meant to ensnare him in a series of decisions that will weaken his domestic position, alienate his base, while achieving goals of the War Party, Zionists, the Oil industry, and other interests in this confluence.  Trump was forced with a choice:  pick sides, choose the Russian facts (there was no chemical attack) or the British lies.  Being attacked by the domestic media by idiotic yet influential forces, staging a dangerous trade war, and coming to the conclusion of a Russian collusion investigation, backed Trump into a corner.  If he had chosen to side with Russia, it could have backfired and blown up in his face.  Democrats, Leftists, and other Trump enemies would have pounced on the issue accusing him of being Putin's lap boy all along.  Being that this is Trump's first rodeo, he doesn't have the complex knowledge base or pool of advisers to deal with this strongly and independently.  In fact he hasn't been able to build a strong team of advisers independent of deep state snakes working against him.  This is not his fault, it is just the reality of how intertwined everything is in DC.  "Drain the Swamp" is a great marketing slogan, and a noble idea - but implementing it may prove impossible.  And on the surface, everyone loves the hero story - an evil monster gassed innocent people, and we are 'saving' them.  This is a great excuse to spend billions on bombs we don't need and use them.  He bought the party line of the MIC "We have to bomb the village to save it":

“The United States will be a partner and a friend, but the fate of the region lies in the hands of its own people.”

“Tonight, I ask all Americans to say a prayer for our noble warriors and our allies as they carry out their missions. We pray that God will bring comfort to those suffering in Syria.”

God will bring comfort to those we are bombing?  Really?  Can he be any more offensive?

This is the beginning of a series of events that Trump cannot dig himself out of.  The MIC won't stop until the majority of Syria is destroyed and key resources are controlled by US forces.  Some of us remember in the 90s there was 'chatter' that the NeoCons were planning a false flag in a major US City that was 'nuclear' - whether that was 911 or an event that never happened we'll never know.  But one thing is clear - they have the weapons, so they will kill all that stand in their way.  Whether he is one of theirs or is being manipulated by them is irrelevant for his base which was largely anti-establishment and anti-war, anti-globalist, which he has proven to be the opposite.

World War 3 

With the ascent of Russia, China, and smaller states building their armed forces without reason, it is only inevitable that they are used.  War between China, Russia, the US and allies is inevitable.  But wait - it's not what you are thinking!  There will not likely be strikes on US, Chinese, or Russian soil.  Rather, as in the Hunger Games, war games will be played in theaters such as the South China Sea, Syria, and other hotspots.

World War 3 will likely last 50 - 100 years, like the cold war, it will be an going unresolved war in places like Syria.  Flare ups and skirmishes will be the extent of the action.  Nukes may be used but tactical nukes in a limited, regional capacity.  PROBABLY.  Of course, it could completely spiral out of control.  But deep analysis indicates not.  There needs to be just enough war to justify the military and not enough to destroy it.  In the same way the MIC needs a war to justify its own existence, a complete obliteration of a major player would also be an endgame (including but not limited to a humanitarian outcry if a major city was destroyed in one bombing such as London or Berlin.)

Remember folks there was only one country that has used nuclear bombs to kill millions and that country is the United States of America.

The War Inc. model - 2 new players

China and Russia are both copying the War Inc. model from the United States.  Both countries do not have any real threats (except from the United States, but as a game) with the exception of terrorism.  Japan has no army and is not a threat to China.  China has destroyed all the regional competitors and has no real major state enemy.  Domestic politics may be a bigger threat to China than any foreign military (as China was once a chaotic, multi-state region).  China is a little bit like the Soviet Union, but through the prism of their culture of course.  The point is multi-ethnic super states usually collapse given enough time, as there are competing domestic interests at play.  That is China's focus not to be a military power, their external show of force is to play the American game.  America needs an enemy.  The China 'copy and paste' model, a threat to the IP of US tech companies, is also at play with War Inc.

Russia MIC

Russia is an interesting case here.  During the Soviet Union Russia was a defense oriented country that did little in foreign countries outside of the Iron Curtain.  After decades of high quality propaganda, at a cost of tens of billions of dollars, Russia realized that if they wanted to be a major player in the world and participate in the new growing economic power center they needed to switch to Capitalism, which they did in 1991.  This was a hard shift, it is difficult for those outside Communist countries to understand what it means to 'switch' from a state controlled economy to 'free market' economy.  Russia's markets were so free in the 90s it led to massive growth by organized crime which was borderline legit business (they were like the Robber Baron's of the industrial age in USA).  Basically Russia is 80 years behind the US, socially.  Since 1991 Russia has taken all the advice given to them by their Western economic advisers.  They have implemented a stock market, there are entrepreneurs in Russia starting businesses on a daily basis, they even have a Silicon Valley style incubator in Moscow Skolkovo (and others - see more info on starting a venture in Russia here).  Russia has implemented many reforms in their plan to make Russia a market leader.  They have a long way to go, their manufacturing standards have become a joke when Putin opened the door of a Russian car and the handle came off.  But the world seems to forget that this was the 'Communist' country that the West sold on a better, capitalist life.  One of the trimmings of a Capitalist society is War Inc.  The partnership between Syria and Russia is a natural one; there are critical oil pipeline routes in Syria and Syria is a Christian foothold in a predominantly Muslim region.  Russia didn't invent the War Inc. model however it is now operating it based on a business plan that was sent to them by Washington during the Cold War.   It should come as no surprise that they are doing what they were convinced to do by Capitalist Generals in Washington.  Billions upon billions were spent on Hollywood produced propaganda programs including films, radio (Air America), Television programs, news, and later internet campaigns.  They are influenced by reports such as "What the bombing of Syria means for your 401k" and other reports.  Russia is playing the role of War Inc. - a model copied directly from US interventions in Iraq and other places (Iraq is most similar).  There is no real skin in the game for either country, Syria is just a proxy state to be used and abused for the war profiteers.  This is the first time Russia is playing this role and it is playing it well.  It wouldn't be surprising if Russian and US generals were exchanging encrypted communications on their competing computer game theory simulations while contemplating their next moves with each others open feedback.

Vacuum dirt analogy

Why are vacuum cleaning manufacturers honest and politicians are not?  Because when you buy a vacuum, you immediately see how it works (the dirt and particles are caught in the transparent tank).  If a vacuum didn't work or had poor suction it would be immediately apparent and people would return them or complain.  Politicians control the information flow, especially during war, because they have power.  This is especially true of government employees who are publicly elected.  In private business there is a lot of oversight and ultimately you will fail or succeed, you can't lie to investors quarter after quarter.

Armchair Intellectuals and the Great American Hobby

Finally, there is this class in America not sure how to describe them, perhaps "Saturday Night War Experts" - they support any show of US force.  They are mostly middle aged males with health issues, mostly on multiple prescriptions, they enjoy watching infographics explaining the differences between cruise missiles and smart bombs, right after their 5th glass of Merlot.  This class isn't completely handicapped, but they choose to spend their free time sitting in Lazyboy chairs watching Fox News and other sources during wartime.  When they're not tuned in, they enjoy to debate with their friends different methods how the US could use its arsenal to completely destroy Syria or "Make it GLASS" as I'm sure all readers have heard someone say once.  This grotesque hobby is what gives those in DC power to enact such measures.  You don't read headlines that Norway has unilaterally destroyed Sweden.  In New Zealand for example there is a ban on Nuclear anything.

The info trade

During the last Iraq was there was an interesting correlation between US strikes, war actions and info, and the US Dollar.  It was caused by speculators not real money flows.  War is information and the markets live on information.  All markets will be impacted by this war, it can even be a trading strategy by itself.  Defense stocks will have a boost on successful missions.  Key victories will lead to USD being bid up.  It's a busy time and there's a lot happening.  War traders must be tuned in 24/7 as the smallest bit of info that hasn't hit the wires yet can cause markets to move.  Traders need to become information junkies.

Don't skip over the obvious facts that are staring us in the face.  This is the beginning of World War 3 - but don't worry - it's good for the economy.  Game on!

To read about the inner workings of this system checkout Splitting Pennies.  Support great journalism and shop at www.ubuy.me and invest at www.alphazadvisors.com  You read this quality analysis free - please share this article especially to friends with a TV!

Reference articles

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-11/6-simple-reasons-why-trump-going-war-syria

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-13/watch-live-president-trump-expected-announce-military-strikes-syria-tonight 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-13/map-syrian-war-who-who-and-where

SEC Chief Touts Benefits of Crypto Regulation

The SEC's highest-ranking official appears to be softening his sentiment toward ICOs.

At a Princeton University event Thursday, SEC chairman Jay Clayton went so far as to reject the idea that all ICOs are fraudulent, answering "absolutely not" to a question centered on whether his agency's actions against the founders of blockchain projects amounts to such an admission.

Clayton's remark came during a talk on "Cryptocurrency and Initial Coin Offerings," one that was notable given his past statements, including his most famous issued in February, in which he said that he believes "every ICO" he's seen qualifies as a security. Indeed, Clayton opened the talk by telling the assembled students he believes that "distributed ledger technology has incredible promise for the financial industry."

The SEC chairman went on to argue that the steps taken by the agency in recent months could actually help the industry mature overall.

He told attendees:

"Is the approach taken in Washington by the SEC adversely affecting distributed ledger technology in other areas? My quick answer is that my hope is that it's actually helping - because this technology is being used for fraud and to the extent that it's being used for fraud, history shows that government comes down harshly on that technology later."

Clayton continued: "I think if we don't stop the fraudsters, there is a serious risk that the regulatory pendulum - the regulatory actions will be so severe that they will restrict the capacity of this new security."

Utility token debate

Elsewhere, Clayton discussed the evolving terminology of the industry.

One of the issues with token sales, he remarked, is the attempt to classify them as so-called "utility tokens," which would ostensibly free them from any kind of designation as a security. As such, he reiterated his view that almost all token sales purport to sell such products, despite the fact that they are actually securities.

If a startup is "offering something that depends on the efforts of others, it should be regulated as a security," he told the gathering of students on Thursday.

Clayton used an analogy to describe the difference between a utility token and a security token.

"If I have a laundry token for washing my clothes, that's not a security. But if I have a set of 10 laundry tokens and the laundromats are to be developed and those are offered to me as something I can use for the future and I'm buying them because I can sell them to next year's incoming class, that's a security," he explained.

Still, he suggested that such a definition can evolve over time.

"What we find in the regulatory world [is that] the use of a laundry token evolves over time," he continued. "The use can evolve toward or away from a security."

Further, nations may experiment with sovereign cryptocurrencies, while startups might develop different kinds applications with the underlying technology, he added.

Whether a token qualifies as a security could also change as the industry evolves, he said, adding:

"Just because it's a security today doesn't mean it'll be a security tomorrow, and vice-versa."

Jay Clayton photo by Mahishan Gnanaseharan for CoinDesk

https://www.coindesk.com/sec-chief-not-icos-bad/ 

This post sponsored by Alpha Z Advisors - Strategies based on anomalies

Bitcoin headed to zero as NSA plan plays out

Bitcoin in USD is down to 7,000 which is really a huge number when you think about it, but HODLrs who got in at more than 10,000 are feeling the pain, those who got in with leverage above that are freaking out, many wiped out.  And the thing about Bitcoin although there are hundreds of better alternatives, Bitcoin remains 40%+ of the market cap of the entire crypto currency universe.  As we explained in our groundbreaking book on this topic Splitting Bits, and on Zero Hedge in an exclusive article, we believe the only possible creator of Bitcoin is the US Government itself, specifically the NSA.  Because of the size of the Bitcoin market now, and the new paradigm created, the creator of Bitcoin is relevant.  People are borrowing against their 401k to invest in Bitcoin or start their own crypto, and we don't even know the identity of the creator of this phenomenon?  We know, it's the NSA - but the NSA is an organization.  Saying it's the NSA is a bit like saying it was the CIA that killed JFK.  Well the CIA certainly couldn't possibly kill anyone because it's an entity, people use guns and guns kill people, not entities.  It would be interesting indeed to unmask the real creators of Bitcoin, if they haven't been retired or disappeared on their GS-15 package.  Perhaps they are living it up with the witsec family, or have changed their face and are pursuing their hobbies whatever they may be.  Whoever it is, it is likely a dead a buried secret.  Who knows how the market would react if the real creator came forward and ultimately liquidated the millions of bitcoin on the market.  (For those of you who don't know, there are 42,000 zombie addresses of Bitcoin meaning they are not used but storing Bitcoin which can be seen publicly on the network, see here.)  Wait a minute - 42 is the meaning to life, according to an AI computer that was built to answer the age old question 'What is the meaning of life?' 

Could it be that what Adams really means is that 42,000 Bitcoin is the meaning of life?  Now we're getting somewhere.  42 Million is the meaning of life.  Where are all the numerology nutjobs when you need them?  3/30/2018 / 42 = 78,619.

Bitcoin is genius, perhaps the most intelligent creation of the digital age.  It served several purposes:  it's a perfect marketing engine (it allowed small investors to potentially earn a big return, the only asset to do so although many have claimed this), it created a new paradigm of digital currency, it changed the way the entire world looks at banking and trading, it has caused the entire tech sector to reshift it's business, all at a cost of likely a few million dollars.  If you follow the thinking that Bitcoin was in fact a child of an NSA lab, you have to continue the thought that the US Government and more specifically the military is the first real form of Artificial Intelligence.  Billions of dollars are invested every year and we all complain about waste, and there is waste - but there is also Bitcoin.  And unlike many successes of the intelligence apparatus, they will never be acknowledged, there will never be a statue in DC with the creator, never a parade.. But such is the life of a spook.  They signed up for it.  But the monetary rewards and the real intellectual pleasure of watching this game play out are so rewarding well it cannot be bought with money.  Some things in government service are priceless, this is one - thank you Mr. Mathematician!  You are the real hero, and heroes (likely it was a team effort).  There are some names on their 1996 paper but anything that is visible electronically in reference to the NSA can be assumed to be inaccurate, misleading, an intentional disinformation, or in any case a dead lead.  But it's worth having a look - click here to read it.

Certainly no one is going to find out anything by searching Google!

So more to the point, Bitcoin going lower before it goes higher, if it ever does.  Real price of BTC/USD could be $100 or $200 - maybe $500.  In a market where money is chasing any higher returns than offered by the traditional markets - bubble psychology took off and fueled a historical hockey stick that will never repeat in crypto.  It can only repeat in some other format - like Quantum computing or if Elon Musk finds Helium 3 on the moon for example.  Something really value-shifting.  Aliens admit that 90% of valley technology came from them.  Bitcoin isn't going to $1 Million, at least it's not likely, but then again we have been shocked by the race to $10,000 and $20,000.  Remember investors that the only thing that drives the price of any asset higher is buyers.  The buyers have stalled and there have been waves of big sellers.  Bitcoin isn't going to be used as a replacement of the US Dollar any time soon.  It may be the dream of some Elite Globalists as a one world currency but it's not happening.  Bitcoin is flawed, slow, and only secure if you use it properly which no one does of course except maybe a few hackers.

Other new Cryptos which are designed better, have more appropriate designs which can empower their niche to flourish have much better chances for long term survival.  But as many know, this is nothing new or innovative, in the United States during the Wildcat currency period there were thousands of active currencies in the United States.  

Bear in mind the real value of Bitcoin is only what investors decide, just as they decided to drive it higher they can drive it to zero.  There is no intrinsic value in Bitcoin itself, as Roubini candidly pointed out recently.  

As some have pointed out, the real value with Blockchain can be building a specific use-case for your business or solving an economic problem, which many Crypto are aiming to do.  So it will be an interesting paradigm shift, and it's only beginning.  But Bitcoin will likely sink a lot lower before it goes higher.  In the meantime, you can checkout Splitting Bits, our short guide to make you a Crypto Genius!  Or for a full Currency History of the USA and beyond checkout Splitting Pennies.  

Nothing Exceeds Like Excess

Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

The first panacea for a mismanaged nation is inflation of the currency; the second is war. Both bring a temporary prosperity; both bring a permanent ruin. But both are the refuge of political and economic opportunists.

—Ernest Hemingway

Military spending is the second largest item in the US federal budget after Social Security. It has a habit of increasing significantly each year, and the proposed 2019 defense budget is $886 billion (roughly double what it was in 2003).

US military spending exceeds the total of the next ten largest countries combined. Although the US government acknowledges 682 military bases in 63 countries, that number may be over 1,000 (if all military installations are included), in 156 countries. Total military personnel is estimated at over 1.4 million.

The reader could be forgiven if he felt that a US military base was rather unnecessary in, say, Djibouti or the Bahamas, yet the US Congress will not allow the closure of any military bases. (The Bi-partisan Budget Act of 2013 blocked future military base closings under the argument that they’re all essential for “national security.”) And Congress has a vested interest in keeping all bases open and consuming as much in tax dollars as possible (more on that later).

Of course, those bases need to be kept well-stocked with small arms, tanks, missiles and aircraft. Yet, in spite of the admittedly incredible number of US military bases across the globe, the additional stockpile of weaponry is so great that the government has difficulty finding places to put it all.

One storage location is pictured in the photo above - Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Arizona. In spite of the size of the photo, it shows only a portion of the aircraft located there. (And bear in mind, such aircraft often cost over $100 million each.)

If asked, the military states that, although these aircraft are in dead storage and many have never seen any use whatever, they might possibly be called up for service, “if needed.” Of course, if they’re needed, they’re unlikely to be of use if located in Arizona. And, in addition, they may not be useful for warfare, as war technology has moved on since the days when such aircraft designs were suitable.

It’s been said that generals are forever fighting the last war, and this is certainly true. Even a layman can observe that such conventional aircraft will never see use, as they serve no purpose in modern warfare.

And yet, these storehouses are being dramatically added to every year.

This year, production will be increased for the F-35 and F/A-18 aircraft. To get an idea of the cost of such expansion programmes, the F-35 Joint Strike aircraft alone will cost $400 billion for 2,457 planes. However, most of this cost will be for development and testing, not the planes themselves.

To save you the arithmetic, that’s about $162 million per plane. (I’m guessing that Henry Ford might have been able to produce them a bit more cheaply. It’s difficult to imagine what they could possibly be made out of to justify their extraordinary price tag.)

But, even though a staggering amount of money is spent on such aircraft, only to then send them to storage facilities at some point, why not, at the very least, sell off the surplus cheaply or scrap them and close down the costly bases that warehouse them?

Well there’s a bit of a snag there. If they were to be scrapped, it would be necessary to admit that they weren’t really necessary. And if they weren’t necessary, why were they purchased?

It may well be that the answer lies in the fact that the military industrial complex is a major political contributor, paying heavily into the campaign funds of both political parties.

It’s probably safe to say that, in doing so, they’re likely to expect something in return, and of course, that’s just what they get. As stated above, the “defense” budget is far beyond what it would cost to defend the US, and ridiculously so.

However, as far as the military industrial complex is concerned, the ideal situation might be for the US to enter into a policy of perpetual warfare with vaguely-stated military goals, and to do so on many fronts globally. If Congress were to approve a budget that would allow for that, the amount of kickback to the military industrial complex would not only be maximized, but it would be ongoing, from one year to the next.

So, is that what has occurred?

Well, if we look back at say, World War II, the most costly war in history, we see a war that was fought on three continents and cost the lives of between fifty and eighty million people, yet it was concluded a mere four years after the US joined.

By comparison, the undeclared war with Afghanistan has been a minor one, costing roughly 150,000 lives. Again, based upon arithmetic, as compared to World War II, it should theoretically have taken just over two months to conclude, yet to date, it’s been ongoing for seventeen years, and its daily cost has far exceeded that of a world war.

So, are we to conclude that the US military has become so inept that it can’t fight a war and win, no matter how much firepower they have and no matter how much time it takes?

If this is not the case, then there’s only one other conclusion to draw. (As Sherlock Holmes often said, “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”)

In this case, what remains is that winning the war is not the objective and, in fact, never was the objective. The objective would be to consciously create perpetual warfare; to extract billions in tax dollars each year from the electorate, in order to pass the revenue on to the military industrial complex in the form of armaments contracts. Whether those armaments are needed, or even useful, would be of minimal importance.

In recent years, the US military has gone far beyond its original concept of “defense.” It’s invaded more countries than ever before in its history, often with no direct provocation whatever, on the basis of “making the world safe for democracy.” (It should be borne in mind that invading a country, largely destroying it, then installing a puppet government is not exactly “democracy.”) In addition, these have not been actual “wars,” as, under US law, only Congress can declare war and has not done so since 1942.

In addition, the “enemy” in each case has been vague indeed. The US is not at war with any country specifically, but with “terrorism,” a non-specific enemy, one that’s even more vague than George Orwell described when writing 1984.

If nothing succeeds like success, it’s also true that nothing exceeds like excess. If this thought is troubling now, it will be even more troubling when the US makes good on its threat to attack North Korea, a small country next door to China, or to invade Iran, an ally of both China and Russia.

When the fur really starts to fly, it will be highly doubtful if the American taxpayer is able to pony up the further cost of a true world war, which would be far beyond what they’re shouldering at present.

And, since the loser in a war is almost always the country that runs out of money first, and the US is for all purposes broke, the outcome of such a war would not be in favour of the US.

*  * *

You don’t have to sink with the US… There are practical steps you should take to prepare—before America makes a dangerous military move. Get the details straight from Jeff in our guide to Surviving and Thriving During an Economic Collapse.