Trump Tries to Deal with the Pension Crisis | Armstrong Economics

Most small businesses do not offer retirement plans because the excessive regulation which drives the costs significantly higher. Trump’s new Executive Order is primarily designed to reduce those costs by streamlining the excessive regulation. The order further makes it clear: “Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Treasury shall consider proposing amendments to regulations or other guidance, consistent with applicable law and the policy…” The biggest problem with retirement plans has been the pretense that they should be “conservative” and that has meant they buy government debt. As the Fed lowered rates to “stimulate” the economy, they have remained well below 8% for more than a decade which has sharply reduced the ability to plan for retirement using bonds. Unless people begin to select more private investment into equities, they stand to lose a fortune and find themselves unable to retire. The sharp decline in the birth rate has also created a dangerous situation. For centuries, you had children to ensure you would be taken care of in your old age. Socialism has destroyed the family unit and taxation with student loans has drastically reduced the earning ability of children to save no less take care of their parents. The entire historical family structure has been undermined and the pension crisis poses a huge social threat in the years ahead.
— Read on www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/pension-crisis/trump-tries-to-deal-with-the-pension-crisis/

Will Impeachment Make the Market Decline? | Armstrong Economics

Trump has said that if he left office, the stock market would decline. Those who are against Trump have actually made comments like: “It’s a ridiculous remark — the kind of thing a Latin American dictator or a Middle Eastern strongman would say to keep supporters in line.” This was carried by CNBC and all this is, is opinion and they then market that as fact. We cannot address such issues from a personal opinion perspective. Why have I said it would create volatility and disrupt the world economy? Simply said, history repeats. It is pointless to offer my opinion and then say it is better than anyone else. The famous saying in politics is that Everyone has an opinion the same as an asshole. That is probably the bluntest statement on the subject I have ever heard. The only thing we can do is look at what happened when Nixon was subjected to impeachment. Taking down Nixon had a profound impact and created the worst economic recession since the Great Depression. Paul Volcker commented economically on what happened with the Nixon impeachment – “t was not until the events of 1974 and 1975, when a recession sprung on an unsuspecting world with an intensity unmatched in the post-World War II period, that the lessons of the ‘New Economics’ were seriously challenged.” (see Rediscovery of the Business Cycle) So will the impeachment of Donald Trump really screw up the world economy? Absolutely!!!!! Pence as President would reverse just about every policy. World trade would go into turmoil. Taxes would start to rise again. The reason the market would DECLINE is rather simple – CONFIDENCE would decline!!!!!!!! Anyone who pretends you can remove any president by impeachment without disruption to the economy is plain and simple not someone who understands history, markets, or the economy. The Clinton impeachment was more of a slap on the wrist. Nobody expected him to actually be removed from office. The Clinton Impeachment was held off as to not impact the elections so they waited until December, which is not the case right now. They are pushing impeachment to undermine the Republicans so the Democrats can take charge and then remove Trump. Nobody expected Clinton to be removed from office so it was more of a sideshow. The attempt to go after Trump is entirely different. This is the Deep State trying to take back control. As stated, Cohen’s lawyer expressly avoids saying that his client said anything. The plea was written by the prosecutor and Cohen agreed because it is unlikely to actually be a crime and is a novel application of the law. Even the Nixon impeachment was about the Rule of Law and a coverup. Clinton committed perjury which was a crime he actually did before a Grand Jury for which prison would be imposed. Even Martha Stewart was sent to prison for lying to a government agent not even under oath. Clinton committed perjury before the Grand Jury. That he too could have gone to prison for 5 years. Even though the Republicans hated Clinton, there was restraint and nobody wanted to actually remove a president from office. What we are dealing with here is the CONFIDENCE in government as a whole, which our models confirmed peaked in 2015.75. The only thing Trump can do is ride it out and go to the Supreme Court. So buckle up is this is what they try to put together now.
— Read on www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/will-impeachment-make-the-market-decline/

Trying to Overthrow Trump has Avenatti Misled Stormy Daniels? | Armstrong Economics

Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels’ attorney, worked at a political opposition and media firm, The Research Group, which was run by Rahm Emanuel who was Barack Obama’s White House chief of staff. He also worked on Joe Biden’s U.S. Senate campaign. He is out to take down Trump for the Democrats. Avenatti has publicly stated that with Michael Cohen’s plea “will permit us to have the stay lifted in the civil case & should also permit us to proceed with an expedited deposition of Trump under oath about what he knew, when he knew it, and what he did about it.” The case is supposed to relieve Stormy Daniels of accepting a $130,000 to remain silent. If we analyze her case, it really is frivolous. The porn star was looking for a way to air details of her alleged affair with Donald Trump. She was paid for sex. So what? What can she say? Donald said he loved and lied for sex from a sweet innocent pron star? Daniels accepted $130,000 under a confidentiality agreement struck with Trump’s personal lawyer days before the 2016 presidential election. She now wants a judge to void it. However, Trump didn’t sign the deal, she argues in a suit she filed. Therefore, she claims that she shouldn’t be bound by its clause requiring disagreements to be settled in private arbitration. But she took $130,000 regardless of who it came from. If the deal is void, she has to pay back the $130,000. So who is bankrolling this case? This is not going to be so easy for Daniels to prevail. The lawsuit could also expose her to accusations that she breached the contract herself. Everyone knows about it. She walked away with the cash and keeping silent about the alleged affair established that she considered the agreement a done deal without Trump’s signature. Her silence for several months certainly would make a jury presume that all parties were relying on the agreement as if it had been formally consummated. Stormy Daniels would not be very sympathetic in the eyes of a jury given she is a porn star. She can be forced on the stand to give all the details about her career and they will dig up every time she ever lied for money. Her claims that she had an affair with Trump that began in the summer of 2006 in Lake Tahoe and continued well into 2007, are claims denied by Trump and the White House. She got to publicly reveal the confidentiality agreement by attaching a copy to the complaint. This includes the possible existence of text messages and photos stemming from their relationship. Since it doesn’t mention the alleged affair itself, this means that Trump will be free to defend the contract’s validity in court filings without discussing the existence of any relationship. In reality, she already went to private arbitration and lost. Cohen even won a temporary restraining order against Daniels at a closed-door arbitration proceeding back on February 27th, 2018. She claims that the arbitration was a “bogus” and not fair. She claims she wants to set “the record straight,” according to her lawyer, Michael Avenatti. The argument that Trump failed to sign the agreement is nonsense, It clearly states that counter-parties can sign the contract, and it’s signed by Cohen. She accepted the money and under virtually every jurisdiction that would be enough to enforce it against the parties. It should be a DONE DEAL. It appears that Daniels’s case is extremely weak and frivolous to put it mildly. She runs the risk of perjury herself. How does she answer this? She never had an agreement? Even getting Trump under oath, which seems to be the entire issue to try to get him in a perjury charge, the circumstances are not so different from Bill Clinton’s Impeachment. They were able to impeach Clinton, but they could not reach the requires votes to throw him out of office. If Trump says he “does not recall” his conversation with Cohen, he escapes perjury charges. If he were, to tell the truth, that he knew about the deal, that does not result in a win for Stormy Daniels. If he said he did not know, that still does not relieve her in this case. The contract would stand and since she has violated that agreement, she would be liable for the return of $130,000 and punitive damages. It appears that she has been used as a tool by the Democrats to try to overthrow Trump and there is nothing but the downside here for her. If she spent the $130,000, she will have to pay that back. If she doesn’t have it, who pays it for her? Trump could take the facts and move for Summary Judgement. His deposition would not change the outcome of the case. Clearly, Stormy Daniels has been fed a lot of nonsense to use her as a political tool.
— Read on www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/trying-to-overthrow-trump-has-avenatti-misled-stormy-daniels/