Secret Whitepapers Warn Super-Wealthy

Secret Whitepapers Warn Super-Wealthy of Impending Crash

All content is © 2005–2015 Port Phillip Publishing Pty Ltd All Rights Reserved

[PUBLISHER’S NOTE: The alarm bell you’re not supposed to hear is getting louder and more insistent, reported the American edition of The Daily Reckoning recently in an essay by Dave Gonigam. I’m going to republish the article here because it’s fascinating. And potentially extremely useful to you.]

There’s an old saying in the stock market that when prices are about to collapse, ‘nobody rings a bell,’’ Jim Rickards reminded us here in nearly a year ago.

Yet sometimes, the global power elites do ring a bell. But they ring it for the wealthiest and most powerful individuals only. Everyday investors like you are not intended to hear it.

Jim was referring then to a passel of reports from the likes of the International Monetary Fund and the Bank for International Settlements. They’re written ‘in highly technical language and were read by only a relatively small number of expert analysts,’ Jim said.

They come with vanilla titles like Uneven Growth: Short- and Long-Term Factors.


Some of these reports may have been picked up and mentioned briefly in the press, but they didn’t make the front pages. For you, such pronouncements are just more financial noise in a flood of information that washes over you every day on TV, radio, the Web, in newspapers and in other publications.

The power elite were not signaling you — they were signaling each other.

Over the weekend, the signals became more accessible to a wider audience.

The Economist has long served as a transmission belt of ideas as they move from global elites down to the worker bees in big finance and big government throughout the Western world. It sets the agenda for the people who carry out that agenda.

For 70 years, the dollar has been the superpower of the financial and monetary system,’ says the editorial accompanying this week’s 14-page special report. No vanilla language here: It concludes, ‘the costs of dollar dominance are starting to outweigh the benefits.

A fault line has opened between America’s economic clout and its financial muscle,’ the editorial goes on. ‘The United States accounts for 23% of global GDP and 12% of merchandise trade. Yet about 60% of the world’s output, and a similar share of the planet’s people, lie within a de facto dollar zone, in which currencies are pegged to the dollar or move in some sympathy with it.

We’ve seen some of the unfortunate results this past summer. ‘In recent months, the prospect of even a tiny rate rise in America has sucked capital from emerging markets, battering currencies and share prices. Decisions of the Federal Reserve affect offshore dollar debts and deposits worth about $9 trillion.

If the figure $9 trillion sounds familiar, that’s the number Jim Rickards has cited time and again during his own warnings here in going back to last January.

But there’s a worse problem: ‘In 2008–09, the Fed reluctantly came to the rescue, acting as a lender of last resort by offering $1 trillion of dollar liquidity to foreign banks and central banks,’ the editorial continues.

The sums involved in a future crisis would be far higher. The offshore dollar world is almost twice as large as it was in 2007. By the 2020s, it could be as big as America’s banking industry.’ And as Jim has pointed out recently, the Fed cannot possibly handle a bailout of those proportions…because the Fed is broke.

And even without a crisis,’ the editorial goes on, ‘the dollar’s dominance will present American policymakers with a dilemma. If foreigners continue to accumulate reserves, they will dominate the Treasury market by the 2030s.

To satisfy growing foreign demand for safe dollar-denominated assets, America’s government could issue more Treasuries — adding to its debts. Or it could leave foreigners to buy up other securities — but that might lead to asset bubbles, just as in the mortgage boom of the 2000s.

Wait a minute: That too would set off another crisis, right? So every possible route ends in a crisis that the Fed can’t handle.

[PUBLISHER’S NOTE: The warning signs are becoming clearer by the week. If you’ve not read Jim’s new book on how to navigate through the coming crisis with your wealth intact, you should. Today. To read a digital version of Jim’s new book The Big Drop: How to Grow Your Wealth During the Coming Collapse, just click here.]


Imminent theft of superannuation by the Australian government

The imminent theft of that superannuation by the Australian government. After years of background research…and a recent three-month investigation by several of our best analysts…I can now announce unequivocally that a concerted plot to confiscate some — or even all — of your superannuation is underway.

It’s called The Genesis 47 Plan.

And we believe you’ll feel the first wave of it full-force in the coming May budget. Tomorrow, sometime in the afternoon, you will be emailed a White Paper where the evidence for this Plan is compiled. Australia’s combined superannuation savings have jumped from under $250 billion in the mid-1990s to more than $1,800 billion ($1.8 trillion) today. That figure’s on track to quadruple over the next 20 years.

The case that we’ll make on Saturday is that the government is coming for this money. For six years the State has been circling around your retirement savings. Nibbling a little bit here in higher levies. Stealing a little bit there in ‘unclaimed super’. It does this with impunity. Because the government doesn’t really believe it’s your money at all. To the politicians in Canberra, superannuation is a ‘national asset’. It’s for the country to decide how to spend it, rather than you. Now the State wants that nationalisation to be written in law.

By that I mean… The government wants ALL OF IT. And it’s making plans to TAKE ALL OF IT.

Does that sound hysterical or far-fetched? All I ask is you reserve judgment until you’ve seen what we’re going to send you tomorrow. I’m expecting it to make some waves. And we’re probably going to get some…let’s say colourful…coverage in the mainstream press. But this is a story only Port Phillip Publishing can break. We have no links to the funds industry. We have no corporate media paymasters. We don’t make any money from transaction or management fees or commission from stocks or funds. We aren’t beholden to any of the advertisers and special interest groups that prevent regular media from going near the sacred superannuation cow.

Still, despite that, for 10 years, we’ve avoided TRULY digging into the bucket of maggots that is the Australian superannuation complex. Because this system is at the heart of every Australian’s future. We figured, collectively, that the crack-up and breakdown of this system would be too scary for many readers to contemplate. Well, we can’t stay quiet anymore. The Genesis 47 Plan is underway. And it’s a plan to ‘nationalise’ your retirement savings. All of the evidence … is in the public domain…  little-known web archives and obscure Treasury ‘Consultation Papers’. Virtually none … has been picked up by the media. And there’s a good reason for that, as you’ll also see. But know this from the outset: this attack can’t be prevented or called off.As you’ll see, it’s already in motion.

All you can do is learn about it. And then take a series of evasive measures to prepare for it. The White Paper you’ll get tomorrow has a section that shows you how to do this.

It’s a ‘wealth confiscation prevention kit’ of sorts. And I’ve had my research team working on it longer than any other piece of research we’ve published over the last decade. I’d be lying if I said that, as a publisher, I’m not more than a little nervous about what we’re about to kick off this weekend. But I’m also determined to get our findings into your hands, so you can make your own informed decisions about the safety of your superannuation money.

And then, if you feel compelled, take the several measures we’ve uncovered to protect it. Watch your inbox this weekend.

Until then, Kris Sayce The Daily Reckoning

All content is © 2005 – 2015

Port Phillip Publishing Pty Ltd All Rights Reserved Port Phillip Publishing Pty Ltd holds an Australian Financial Services License: 323 988. ACN: 117 765 009 ABN: 33 117 765 009 All advice is general advice and has not taken into account your personal circumstances. Please seek independent financial advice regarding your own situation, or if in doubt about the suitability of an investment. Calculating Your Future Returns: The value of any investment and the income derived from it can go down as well as up. Never invest more than you can afford to lose and keep in mind the ultimate risk is that you can lose whatever you’ve invested. While useful for detecting patterns, the past is not a guide to future performance. Some figures contained in this report are forecasts and may not be a reliable indicator of future results. Any potential gains in this letter do not include taxes, brokerage commissions, or associated fees. Please seek independent financial advice regarding your particular situation. Investments in foreign companies involve risk and may not be suitable for all investors. Specifically, changes in the rates of exchange between currencies may cause a divergence between your nominal gain and your currency-converted gain, making it possible to lose money once your total return is adjusted for currency. To remove your name from The Daily Reckoning and associated external offers sent from The Daily Reckoning, visit this link. To cancel by email, write us at: Port Phillip Publishing Attn: The Daily Reckoning PO Box 713 South Melbourne VIC 3205 Tel: 1300 667 481 From overseas: +61 3 9037 8309

Superannuation – Why It Won’t Be Yours for Long

It Won’t Be Your Super for Long
By Bernd Struben, Melbourne, Australia
Originally Published 18 July in The Daily Reckoning


Today I’d like to focus on superannuation. Specifically, whether you should contribute any extra salary into your super to take advantage of the tax breaks.

Tuesday’s release of the Financial System Inquiry Interim Report — or Murray inquiry — offers some relevant insight into why, in fact, you should not.

One of the recommendations made by the report is to mandate the use of ‘retirement income products’ like annuities. Annuities, by the way, pay out a stream of payments over time. If you think of your super as water in a bathtub, an annuity would be like allowing a fixed amount to trickle through into your cup each month.

Currently, you already have that choice. And it’s not a bad option if that suits your needs. But currently you also have the choice of dumping out the entire bathtub the day you reach the magic — and ever-changing — age when you’re allowed to access your super funds. It is your money, right? You worked your entire life for that payout. Whether you choose an annuity or a lump sum payment is no one’s business but your own.

Oh, and the government’s. They, of course, will be deciding how much water can trickle from your tub of savings into your cup each month. Continue Reading →

You Have the Right to Remain Silent


Tell the government to stay out of your data


Melbourne, Australia
Friday, August 8th, 2014





–On the subject of power, let’s get into the purely philosophical part of today’s Daily Reckoning. The context for this discussion is the Australian government’s new anti-terror proposals included in the National Security Amendment Bill that Parliament will vote on soon. One of the provisions of that bill is that telecommunications companies will be forced to keep your ‘metadata’ for up to two years. This is called ‘data retention’.–Exactly why Australia wants to emulate America in creating a police state where people fear their government and fear to speak out is unclear. But that’s what’s happening. The government assures us that ‘metadata’ is not the content of your communication (your texts, your emails, your chats, and your web camera footage). It’s merely information about how, when, where, and for how long you use a particular device to access the internet.

–That’s almost certainly wrong. There are plenty of stories out now that show that workers at the US National Security Agency have, in fact, used retained data to review the contents of individual Americans’ internet and mobile phone use. And not to combat terror. But to spy on ex-girlfriends or rivals.

–That kind of abuse of a program can be managed. But that’s not the real threat here, although it’s creepy and shows you that, given enough time, government bureaucrats will tend to abuse their power at the expense of citizens. But the real issue is missed by most people.

–In fact, read the comments on the ‘metadata’ stories on Australian websites and you find two common refrains. First, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Second, if the retention of this data and its review (subject to a warrant) prevents just one terrorist act and saves just one life, it’s worth it.

–For the latter comment, the NSA hasn’t shown that its data rendition program has actually prevented any terrorist attacks. In the meantime, the agency vacuums up phone calls, text messages and emails at an astonishing rate. But really, is the ‘solution’ to terrorism the creation of a permanent police state where the apparatus of surveillance has a chilling effect on what you say and do in your public and private life?

–If you permit the government to create a surveillance system like this, you no longer live in a free, liberal society. No one can be trusted and everyone must be monitored for the safety of all. Do you really want to live in that world?

–The first comment, that if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear, also misses the point. The law can change. Let’s say, in 10 years, a radical party takes over Parliament and decides that atheists are terrorists, or that if you don’t believe in global warming you’re a ‘denialist’ and likely to be subversive. Using retained data, the prosecutors could mine it to find out who broke the law in the past (even though it wasn’t illegal then) and charge you with a crime.

–If you think this sounds fanciful or impossible, think again. First, you can bet that once it gets its hands on the data, the government is going to keep it for a lot longer than two years. It’s going to keep it forever. Second, the abuse of metadata by the police state to convict people of thought crimes is exactly the road we’re on today.

–In fact, we’re probably much further down it than we realise. It would not surprise me if the NSA already had a great deal of ‘metadata’ from Australians, even if the Australian security agencies were unaware of this. The NSA hasn’t exactly been asking for permission to do these things. And through facilities in Darwin, Geraldton, Canberra, and Pine Gap, Australia is up to its eyeballs in collaboration with the NSA.

–You may think you have nothing to hide. But the government might disagree. And that’s assuming they mine the data and find something about you they don’t like. Let’s not even discuss the possibility that the data can be fabricated and you can be framed, all quite by the book.

–In the future, everything you say, read, write, watch, or listen to can and will be used against you. And perhaps not in a court of law. That’s the ultimate goal of a police state anyway; to cow the people into mental submission. To enforce thought compliance through the implied threat of violence or prosecution.

–The other perplexing thing about the argument that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, is that it presumes the government has a right to know these things. That’s backwards. From the Magna Carta to John Locke’s Second Treatise on Government to the US Declaration of Independence, the foundational premise of Western liberal orders is that a man has rights before the formation of a State.

–Those rights are natural, or given by God. A man can surrender some of his natural rights in exchange for forming a government constituted to pursue certain ends. But the presumption of liberty lies with the individual. If you’re a free man, you don’t have to prove to anyone that you have nothing to hide.

–And for those that say you already give this information to Facebook and Google, so why not the government, there is an easy answer. I consent to give that information to Facebook and Google. It’s my choice. I know they’ll use it. But they’ll use it to try and sell me something.

–When the government gets your data without your permission, it’s not going to try and sell you anything. It’s going to try and find out if you’ve done anything criminal. And if it’s not criminal now, it might be later. To defeat terrorism, it was necessary to destroy liberty.

–I’m on holiday next week. But while I’m away, I’m going to set up a petition you can sign telling the government to stay out of your data. If you disagree, you’re probably going to forward this note to ASIO. Please do, but be aware that they’ll probably keep a record of it. In the meantime, comments, support, outrage, or reaction can be sent to


Dan Denning
For The Daily Reckoning Australia