Long Time Friend Gene Inger Reviews World Matters

Posted By on January 27, 2011

Gene Inger’s Daily Briefing . . . for Friday January 28, 2011:
Good evening;
Consider ‘global revolution’ . . . as rising beyond its infancy if Egypt, the largest of all Arab nations, overthrows the 30-year old Mobarek regime. As we first reported just a couple days ahead of the major news media, the President’s wife and son already had fled to London on separate flights (or seemingly fled, rather than a shopping trip).
‘Revolution’ in Egypt, likely led by Mohamed El Baradei (yes, the nuclear expert from Vienna who headed the UN nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, and is not extremist at all as far as anyone knows; thus might NOT welcome radical Moslem Brotherhood support), will be (if it goes thusly) a kind of change the United States should support. So would Israel, as there would be no reason for a challenge to mutual recognition as well as no reason to envision any radical effort to block or limit Suez Canal usages. It might be only monarchs down the Arabian Peninsula who will shake in their thrones.
If matters sour (given that El Baradei has arrived in Cairo so that exposes him to risk, should the Brotherhood extremists attempt to hijack the popular demand for reforms, and perhaps new governance), then all hell breaks loose, as this is a strategic issue. A million plus protest that succeeds or installs El Baradei, could be the best outcome hoped-for by both the Egyptian people overall, and the Western world in particular. It is not so relevant that Egypt is not a notable oil producer, but that much oil traverses the Suez Canal, as well as the Peace Agreement by which Israel allowed Egypt on the Sinai side of the Canal only based upon peace and respect between the parties.

If a radical group took control and seized Canal operations; you’d be facing a crisis in some aspects similar to the 1956 situation, which sparked the Anglo-French invasion to retake the Canal (a joint British / French project which Egypt’s Nasser nationalized) and which was opposed by both Russia and the United States (stupidly as we were it seems swept-up worrying about the Hungarian Revolution at the time and threats by the Russians to nuke London and Paris if the ‘brits and French didn’t retreat from the very success swift retake of what was their property. Frankly, it occurs to me that the successful takeover by Nasser of Suez, emboldened other Arab states to nationalize oil properties later, with the creation of OPEC ensuing (to create an illegal cartel that to this day is operating oil wells and facilities established by what now comprises the ARAMCO operations (Arabian American Oil Co. and so on). This was originally the so-called ‘five sisters; ie: Chevron, Standard of New Jersey (now Exxon/Mobile); and of course Mobile, Texaco and British Petroleum.

Now… to my point about ‘global revolution’. Lots of Americans (and others who are in a society which benefits from profit-motive objectives) want really honest free-market capitalism, not the elitist-semi-fascist (solely) pro multinational corporate cabals that’s been dominant for at least the last two decades, while (both parties allowed lengthy) dismantling of our manufacturing base was encouraged by absurd national policies. If this leads to a ‘default’ on the astronomic promises our (mostly) parents made during the immediate post-war decades, as were amplified by our baby-boomer generation, you could see the basis for getting out of the impossible ‘money-printing’ absurdity of the current era, which historically has not ended well for any (empire or nation) doing it. What started after World War II as growing personal or family net worth while being compassionate to others and maintaining a strong defense (today that might be what is advocated closest by ‘blue dog Democrats’ or moderate Republicans or Tea Party advocates, albeit not all of them) morphed into a twisted acceleration of excess greed that increasing made decisions based presumably on necessity and not on humanity.

Yours truly predicted this mess over 25 years ago as you know (warning shoe maker firms at two annual American Footwear Assoc. gatherings), because the government here was not replicating protective policies there, and in fact trying to help foreigners at the expense of the U.S., particularly with respect to facilitating the China opening. Of course it deterred confrontation, but invited degradation (intended or not) here for the U.S.A. Almost three decades later (more slightly) little has been done but finally it is recognized (right; after the most damaging collapse since the Great Depression as we forecast back in 2007). They would love to blame housing and leverage for it all; but the blame goes far deeper and absolutely relates to government tax/trade policy.  

Bottom-line: the nexus for societal discontent is something we’ve warned of from the May of 2007 ‘epic debacle’ call. Why then and not 20 years ago? Because creation of paper wealth, and perceived asset equity growth (like real estate) gave the illusion to the mass of the population to keep them content, and complacent about politics while the industrial base of the Nation was being persistently and perceptibly dismantled. A few commentators and writers addressed the subject, but generally the media acted as propaganda spokesmen for the various Administrations, with little journalism that addressed the implosion of the real capability of making most things we need here in the United States. Now we have a President (and we applaud the statement) saying we will do so here. But how fast and with what new policies? Even now there’s been no ‘urgency’ really impressed upon Congress, such as demanding a trade policy or tax reform bill on his desk within 3-6 months at the most. The clock is ticking on the American peoples’ patience; so now Washington gives this lip-service, but little more.

In the backdrop we think the Fed is in total panic (they won’t reveal that), as they now realize neo-Keynesian monetary policy did not work the way they implemented it (and just as I warned back in 2007 they would do, and said then don’t, as it won’t work). As we look at history, some of the biggest moves in financial history started slowly at first, then accelerated so rapidly, that once unleashed there was really no stopping it.

More at: www.ingerletter.com

About the author


Comments are closed.

Copyright © 2018 The Stated Truth