Who predicted the Financial Crisis of 2008?

I was at church this past Sabbath, and someone randomly mentioned
"the collapse of the dollar in July..."

after two minutes of me probing for the source, I said:

"that sounds like porter stansberry..."

indeed it was, which brought to mind the question:

"Who predicted the Financial Crisis of 2008?"

so I'm re-sending this email in hopes to show people what's really going on.

check this out:

10/08/2013 @ 2:00PM
John Tamny Forbes Staff
If They Tell You They Predicted The Financial Crisis, They're Lying

As early as June 12, 2006, and many times after that, this column at varying locales pointed to the rush into housing as a very negative economic signal. The aforementioned 2006 Op-ed noted that the housing boom of the Bush era made his economic presidency most similar to that of Jimmy Carter’s.

In an Op-ed from late October of 2007, I wrote:

“Lastly, it should be remembered that housing’s greatest decade as an asset class occurred during the inflationary, malaise-ridden 1970s. With the dollar in free fall, housing served as a classic hedge for unsophisticated investors eager to shield their wealth amidst the dollar’s fall. That real estate became the asset of choice of the new millennium wasn’t so much a signal of a flush economy, but more realistically was the result of renewed dollar weakness that once again made Americans very risk averse.”

But did I predict a “financial crisis”? Not by a long shot. All I predicted was basic economics. Housing is not investment, rather it’s consumption. To buy a house isn’t to add to the capital base on the way to productivity enhancements, software innovations, cancer and heart disease cures, and transportation innovations, rather housing is just a sink of wealth whose buoyancy relative to actual investment signals economic problems. I didn’t predict a crisis, but I did understand as did anyone who’d read Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill (to name two Classical thinkers) that the housing boom signaled a weak, investment starved economy.

Moving to hedge fund manager John Paulson, he raised a $147 million dollar fund to buy insurance on mortgages and mortgage securities that he felt would eventually go bust. Paulson wound up making billions off his trades, but did he predict the financial crisis? Not even close.

Indeed, going back to the undeniable truth that mortgages, home construction and housing purchases represent consumption, Paulson simply predicted a very economically healthy market correction. Mass consumption of housing signals, on average, a capital deficit (notable here is that the IPO market all but dried up during the Bush housing boom) for the businesses eager to attain financing in order to acquire human and physical capital so that they can grow. Since it does, Paulson’s riches weren’t the cause of a crisis as much as they provided a precious signal to the markets that further consumption of housing and investment in the securities that enable the latter would be a bad idea.

What about those people whom we all know who kept telling us that housing was headed for a collapse in the years leading up 2007 and 2008. Did they predict a crisis? No, they did not. For an individual to suggest that a falling market for consumption goods could cause a crisis would be for that person to rewrite simple economics.

To paraphrase Schumpeter, there are no entrepreneurs without capital, so any correction of manic consumption could hardly have authored a crisis. Furthermore, and this is contrary to most of the media narrative to this very day, by ’07 and ’08 housing hadn’t corrected all that much. As Michael Lewis noted in The Big Short, for the mortgage skeptics to eventually profit, “Home prices didn’t even need to fall. They merely needed to stop rising at the unprecedented rates they had the previous few years for vast numbers of Americans to default on their home loans” (my emphasis).

So once it’s properly understood that a correction in the mortgage and housing markets couldn’t have caused a financial crisis, it’s useful then to point out what did. What needs to be stressed is that there was nothing ‘financial’ about the crisis.

Since there wasn’t, for one to have predicted the ‘financial’ crisis it’s surely the case that this amazing ‘seer’ into the future first predicted the failure of Bear Stearns, or some other financial institution like it. Having predicted the latter, this same individual with a hotline to the future would have had to predict a bailout of Bear, or some institution similarly situated. After that, to have seen a crisis in his or her crystal ball this visionary would have pointed out that with the markets having priced in bailouts for everyone, a panic would naturally ensue once an even larger financial institution (Lehman Brothers) than Bear was allowed to go under.

Put very plainly, Lehman only caused the markets to convulse insofar as the allowance of its bankruptcy surprised the markets. Investors logically panic when information is opaque, and as such, Lehman was only a crisis for investors lacking a clear understanding of the hapless Bush administration’s policies toward financial institution failure. On its own Lehman’s decline could never have caused a crisis owing to the basic economic truth that a capitalist system thrives on constant failure that releases poorly managed assets and human capital to better managers. If this is doubted, readers need only visit Silicon Valley. A visit there would alert them to the happy reality that the world’s foremost tech locale thrives precisely because failure is the economy and innovation-boosting norm. Banks are no different, and the system is only weakened when failures are not allowed.

From there, this billionaire (only a billionaire could possess such foresight) would have had to sense months ahead of it happening that the Bush administration would not only blink on bailouts that were wholly unnecessary (if Japan can revive itself quickly after having two atom bombs dropped on it, our economy could surely have handled the failure of Citigroup without the financial system collapsing on the way to the “Mother of All Great Depressions” – Bernanke), but that it would be so obtuse as to ban short sellers too. To be blunt, if you want to add gasoline to the fire of a financial crisis, ban the very short sellers whose skepticism brings precious price signals to a market bereft of them, and who for being short sellers bring to a market desperately needed buying power that will eventually put a floor under the collapsing market. But when short sellers were needed most, the Bush administration banned the price information and buying power that they offered in abundance on the way to even more market panic.

And then having predicted a series of anti-capitalist errors, the predictor of the crisis would have had to understand the very negative implications for finance that would result from all of this intervention. While free markets crushed central planning in the 20th century, the visionary would have to know that calls for massive re-regulation of the economy would quickly rise to the top of governmental priority lists, thus scaring markets even more, not to mention those same governments doing everything possible to blunt the positive market corrections that would quickly revive the global economy.

To be very clear, the financial ‘crisis’ had nothing to do with market corrections that spoke to a healthy capitalist economy fixing itself, rather the ‘crisis’ was wholly a creation of governments – the Bush administration most notably – running away with great speed from the very capitalistic fixes that would have authored a powerful rebound from previous errors. And since no one predicted the various mistakes foisted on the global economy by governments, it’s a tautological truth that those who claim to have predicted the ‘financial crisis’ are lying in a very obnoxious way.

Despite this, self-aggrandizing pundits continue to claim that they saw all of this coming. Recently in the Los Angeles Times, Institute for New Economic Thinking senior editor Eric Weiner comically asserted that “some people did foresee the disaster. I was one of them.” No Mr. Weiner, you did not.

Weiner’s Op-ed from July of 2007 argued that corporate takeovers were the driver of Dow 14,000, and would subsequently lead to ugly times. Ok, if you believe Weiner then you probably believe the symbol that is Wall Street could easily keep markets constantly buoyant by virtue of engaging in lots of M&A activity. If only finance were as easy as non-financiers like Weiner presume. M&A involves a lot of debt, and if investors don’t buy into the underlying economics of takeovers, the market is going to be rather quiet.

To be fair to Weiner, he concluded his ’07 piece with “if history is any guide, this party could turn ugly.” Yes, it surely turned ugly, but not for the reasons that his Op-ed stated. The economy-asphyxiating rush into housing consumption didn’t even rate mention in his Op-ed that allegedly ‘predicted’ the crisis, and then he certainly didn’t foresee the interventions that turned what would have been a healthy correction into something much worse.

Nouriel Roubini has most famously made a career out of having allegedly foreseen the carnage, and while he nowhere predicted the mistaken intervention that convulsed the markets, at least in his case it can be said that was correct in drawing a connection between housing health and the eventual ‘crisis.’ Problematic for Roubini is that in his case he turned Smith and Mill upside down. By Roubini’s economic illogic, an eventual housing moderation or collapse would on its own be the economy and financial system’s downfall.

No, it wouldn’t have been. Once again, the economy’s problem back in the early 2000s was that the productive and capital intensive aspects of it were suffering a capital deficit at the hands of a housing market that was booming. When consumption is crushing savings that’s always an economic negative, and its driver was the Bush administration’s cheap dollar policies that fostered a run into sinks of wealth least vulnerable to the dollar’s devaluation. The run was global given the simple truth that devaluation in the U.S. is nearly always and everywhere a worldwide event.

Roubini predicted an economic crash based on a moderation of housing consumption, and in doing so he missed the true economic forest fire, which was the rush to housing to begin with. A correction of this could never have caused the ‘crisis’ that was and is now being misnamed as something ‘financial’ in nature. Furthermore, if Roubini truly understood or predicted anything, he would have said housing is set to crash, it will be good for the economy when this occurs, and to ensure quick recovery the financial institutions and businesses most exposed to the sector should be allowed to fail so that they can be acquired by executives and entrepreneurs possessing a better understanding of how to deploy capital entrusted to them.

Roubini did no such thing. Instead, he remarkably called for a stimulus package triple the size of the one President Obama and Congress foisted on the economy, and then later on told the Wall Street Journal that U.S. banks should be nationalized. Not only was Roubini’s ill-gotten reputation made by the very government intrusion that he advocated, his post-crisis musings, if implemented, would have made a bad problem much worse.

Roubini’s general contention several years back was that if governments were to “take away the monetary and fiscal stimulus too soon – when private demand remains shaky – there is a risk of falling back into recession and deflation.” Rarely has a mere portion of a sentence been so pregnant with falsehoods and misunderstandings.

First off, there’s no such thing as fiscal stimulus of the spending kind. Though it’s well known at this point, governments can only spend money they’ve first taken from the private sector. In short, governments can at best merely steal demand from certain economic sectors in order to fund generalized waste and a bigger state. There’s no economic growth to speak of, rather there’s decline.

Secondly, it bears mentioning once again that no act of saving ever detracts from demand. Roubini’s suggestion that governments must spend when individuals don’t defies what saving entails. Indeed, short of stuffing dollars/pounds/euros/yen/yuan under mattresses, when individuals save, their funds are either shifted to others with immediate consumptive needs, or lent to businesses eager to grow.

Even if one wants to believe despite basic economics and simple evidence that the moderation of housing caused the crisis, for Roubini to have predicted anything would have been for the NYU professor to have understood the simple steps to emerge from the same crisis. Roubini clearly didn’t as evidenced by an economy that continues to limp along thanks to economists and politicians not Roubini doing as this vastly overrated economist advised: suffocating the economy even further with nosebleed federal spending, dollar cheapening, and programs meant to prop up the very housing market whose government authored artificial levels remain one of the bigger barriers to an actual economic recovery. In short, Roubini at best predicted what should have been an economy-boosting housing correction, and even the latter he plainly misunderstood as evidenced by his post-crisis droolings.

So while it’s possible someone, somewhere predicted government errors that turned a healthy correction into a horror show, there’s no ready evidence in print or online that anyone did. In that case, if readers want to know when they’re being lied to, rest assured that one of the most certain signals that a grand fib is being told is when someone self-assuredly contends that they predicted all the carnage that morphed into a ‘financial crisis.’ They did no such thing. They’re lying.

here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2013/10/08/if-they-tell-you-they-predicted-the-financial-crisis-theyre-lying/

==================================================

The Man Who Predicted The Economic Meltdown
by David Folkenflik
December 04, 2008 12:07 PM ET

As one in a small group of analysts who publicly predicted the collapse of the American financial system, Peter Schiff was a lonely — and much maligned — voice on cable's financial news shows.

In August 2006, Schiff, the self-confident president of the Connecticut-based brokerage firm Euro Pacific Capital, warned viewers on CNBC that the U.S. economy would be hampered by "too much consumption and borrowing and not enough production and savings."
"What's going to happen is that the American consumer is basically going to stop consuming and start rebuilding his savings, especially when he sees his home equity evaporate," he said. "And when you have the economy 70 percent consumption, you can't address those imbalances without a recession."
Schiff was even more blunt when speaking on Fox News Channel in December 2006: "You're going to start to see both the government and the lenders re-imposing lending standards and tightening up on credit — and these sky-high real estate prices are going to come crashing back down to earth."

Since then, the economy has played out pretty much exactly the way Schiff said it would.

"Peter Schiff said a year ago on our air the Dow will fall below 10,000," says Liz Claman, an anchor for the year-old Fox Business Network. "Several people on the set scoffed, [but] he was right, as you see today."

Schiff's message of economic gloom made him a popular guest — and whipping boy — on the cable financial shows. CNBC dubbed him "Dr. Doom," and Fox business news anchor Neil Cavuto once joked on-air that he expected Schiff to expose the truth about Santa Claus.

Such verbal roughhousing is common on the cable financial shows, which blend the atmosphere of a high school locker room with an abundance of money talk. Though executives at CNBC and Fox say they try to ensure all sides are heard, Newsweek financial columnist Daniel Gross says it's different for analysts like Schiff who are leery of investing in American markets.

"They would almost be brought on for entertainment value — to be swatted around and laughed at, or ridiculed or otherwise marginalized," Gross says.

He adds that Schiff stands in contrast to the underlying message of the cable shows, which tend to promote buying American stocks.

"People don't want to be around short-sellers," Claman says. "People don't want to be around people who talk down hard-working U.S. companies and employees who are working toward a goal."

Schiff says he did hundreds of interviews, and the reception was typically hostile. "People were calling me things like a communist. ... People would roll their eyes at me. You know, they would snicker."

These days, Schiff is in demand as a pundit, but his views remain unorthodox. For one thing, he favors pegging the dollar to the value of gold, which hasn't happened for nearly 40 years. And he opposes new government spending and strict government oversight of the markets. He also thinks domestic automakers should be allowed to fail.

If you had followed Schiff's recommendations in investing, you would have done very well — until this year, that is, when his choices tanked. Schiff had not guessed the dollar would become stronger. But he predicts that will change. And, yes, he has said that on TV.

audio here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97801606

=========================================

The economist who predicted the financial crisis just sounded another alarm—it would be wise to listen this time

By Manuel Hinds September 22, 2013
Manuel Hinds is El Salvador's former finance minister. He also has worked with the World Bank in the public and private sector. In 2010, he won the Manhattan Institute's Hayek Prize.


Raghuram Rajan, left, was not afraid to take on Alan Greenspan. And now, he's sounding another clarion call as India's new central banker. Reuters/Danish Siddiqui

In his first official act as the new governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Raghuram Rajan raised the benchmark interest rate from 7.25 to 7.5%, causing a ripple of surprise in financial circles and eliciting protests from various business representatives. But for people who know the current condition of emerging markets and Rajan’s professional trajectory, this was not surprising, at all.

Rajan has no qualms about staging such challenges. In 2005, Rajan was chief economist of the International Monetary Fund and attended the top central bankers’ get together in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, to present a paper on how the financial sector had evolved during Alan Greenspan’s era.  As Rajan later described the meeting, which was to be Greenspan’s last, in his book Fault Lines: “Some of the papers in the conference, in keeping with the Greenspan-era theme, focused on whether Alan Greenspan was the best central banker in history, or just among the best.”

Not Rajan. He argued that under Greenspan, incentives had been artificially skewed in favor of the managers of the financial system, which reaped millenary rewards if things went fine but paid very little, if at all, when things turned sour. And he added that things were likely to turn sour because the skewed incentives were offering incentive to those managers to take excessive risks. He then focused on the “credit default swaps” which promised to repay delinquent loans in exchange for moderate insurance premiums. Noting that nobody really knew how realistically these swaps were priced, Rajan said that the banks were probably taking excessive risks because they trusted that the insurer would repay them. In these circumstances, a sudden increase in defaulting loans could exceed the reserves of the insurer, leading to a financial crisis. This is exactly what happened two years later, leading to the 2008 financial crisis.

His warning was not well received.  Many people thought that Rajan didn’t understand modern finance. As it turned out, he understood it all too well—and it was those who looked down on him who did not.

Now Rajan has issued another warning by increasing the benchmark rate in India, shortly after the US Federal Reserve decided to keep on buying $85 billion of securities per month under its quantitative easing 3 program, to the general happiness of financial sector managers and traders. The Fed’s announcement spurred an immediate mini-boom in all financial instruments. The day after the announcement, I published an article in Quartz in which I argued that the current high rate of monetary creation and the extremely low interest rates caused by QE3 are unsustainable and that, sooner than later, interest rates are bound to increase. I argued further that the long prevalence of extremely low interest rates is likely to be creating the conditions for a serious financial crisis; all the economic activities that are profitable due to low rates will become unprofitable and will not be able to repay their obligations.

For this reason, it is necessary to prepare for such eventuality. This is what Rajan is doing by increasing interest rates in India, by easing the appetite for unsustainable activities that can survive only with low rates. The Financial Times quotes his rationale: “Let us remember that postponement of tapering is only that—a postponement…Let’s not lose the chance, the warning that we have been given, because this is going to come back and what we need to do is put our house in order before.”

This is a warning that the entire global economy should take seriously.  Not just other emerging markets.

What can be done in this situation? In emerging markets, central banks should start increasing interest rates now that it can be done very gradually. Higher interest rates would deter investment in unsustainable activities and attract funds to more solid ventures. Moreover, they would help in stopping capital outflows that are seeking higher rates in the United States, and alleviating the trend toward currency devaluations, which are only accelerating those outflows. The postponement of the interest rates increases in the United States will allow these countries to go through the adjustment process in a gradual way. In a crisis, interest rates are raised in leaps, which causes considerable more damage to the economy.

Individual investors should see ahead of the curve, noticing that a world of higher interest rates looms. People now holding the kind of assets that would experience a sharp fall if interest rates go up should get out of them, particularly if these investments are burdened with fixed obligations that will not be reduced as interest rates go up. Of course, this is the kind of advice that cannot be useful for everybody at the same time. Aggregate losses cannot be avoided. Someone will have to absorb them because, as interest rates go up, the prices of the assets will go down. If you sell your assets before prices fall, for example, it is the buyer who will have to take the loss. This is the price that society has to pay for having unsustainably low interest rates for a long time.

Rajan’s warning is just one of the many that point to higher interest rates in the near future.

here:
http://qz.com/126875/the-economist-who-predicted-the-financial-crisis-just-sounded-another-alarm-it-would-be-wise-to-listen-this-time/

=========================================



Below is the email I sent out a few months back in March.

======================

Obama’s new July 1st 2014 law will shock most Americans

Dear Reader,

We’ve been critical of several Obama Administration policies over the past few years…

But a new law set to go into effect on July 1st, 2014 (less than five months from now), might be the Administration’s worst decision yet.

On this date, Title V of House of Representative Bill #2847, known as “FATCA,” goes into effect.

We believe this could precipitate a huge collapse in the U.S. dollar… and a rapid decrease in our standard of living.

Of course, we’re not the only ones who believe this new U.S. law is going to be a disaster for our country and American citizens.

Andrew Quinlan of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity says: “FATCA is pound-for-pound the single worst tax law on the books.”

Even the normally liberal Atlantic Monthly magazine said: “FATCA seems to be turning into a nightmare and disaster.”

What does this law do… and why is it so bad for America?

The founder of our Research Firm has put together a detailed explanation of what is happening in America right now, and why this new law is something EVERY American should pay close attention to.

Get the facts for yourself, free on our website, here…

======================

I click the link and see this:

Write Down This Date: July 1st, 2014
"On this date, U.S. House of Representatives Bill “H.R. 2847” goes into effect. It will usher in the true collapse of the U.S. dollar, and will make millions of Americans poorer, overnight. You now have just several months to prepare..."

and another stupid video on the 'End of America'.

I'm thinking, here we go again.

1) The man who is attempting to scare you is Porter Stansberry, and he's been wrong before.

The End of America
Uploaded on Feb 8, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvLDTwvPR3w

Porter Stansberry: We're All Going to Have a Big Problem
Uploaded on May 11, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fa2wxN5cx14

> Example, he talks about GM. Last I checked GM was still in business and making money:

source:
GM Sales Up 19.9% in China
by Zacks Equity Research   Published on March 05, 2014
http://www.zacks.com/stock/news/125330/GM-Sales-Up-199-in-China

February 20, 2014 at 4:52 pm
GM: China auto sales may rise as much as 10% this year
Tim Higgins Bloomberg News
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140220/AUTO0103/302200108

2) This quote: “FATCA seems to be turning into a nightmare and disaster.” is from 2011, concerning 2012.

Fatca: The Menace You'll Hear About in 2012
James Fallows Dec 31 2011, 8:23 PM ET

But in practical terms, Fatca seems to be turning into a nightmare and disaster. Banks around the world are suddenly rejecting Americans as clients or customers, because they don't want the reporting and bureaucratic hassles, plus the potential exposure to draconian penalties. Non-Americans are pulling their assets out of U.S. banks. I get emails every day from American expats who say they are facing all kinds of problems bringing their long-standing foreign-based banking life into compliance with this new law. Some of them say they're getting ready to renounce their citizenship. That's silly: the real reason to do so is in protest of U.S. tolerance of leafblowers.* Over the years I've had accounts with banks in England, Japan, Malaysia, China, and now Australia when living or working in those places, and I'm wondering what I have to worry about to make sure the remaining ones "comply."

SpiegelFatca.png

more here:
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/fatca-the-menace-youll-hear-about-in-2012/250667/

==============

The man said to put your money in gold, and now gold is not worth what it was.
I put the documentation concerning gold on my blog:

gold, predictions, and the real agenda - 2013 - 12.31.2013
http://globalistnews.blogspot.com/2014/03/gold-predictions-and-real-agenda-2013.html

====

Update on Gold:

yes, china is buying gold.
no, it does not change the fact that we are moving to cashless.

2/20/2014 @ 7:13AM
China Seeks Seat On Gold Fix Table. What Does It Mean For The Gold Price?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/chriswright/2014/02/20/china-seeks-seat-on-gold-fix-table-what-does-it-mean-for-the-gold-price/

==

6:16 am Mar 4, 2014 Asia
China Now Biggest Driver of Gold Prices, HSBC Says

“We would argue that physical demand trends in the emerging world will largely define gold’s price movements this year,” HSBC analysts James Steel and Howard Wen said in a research note.

more here:
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/03/04/china-now-biggest-driver-of-gold-prices-hsbc-says/

==

PRECIOUS-Gold up 1.3 pct to highest since Sept on China, Ukraine
Wed Mar 12, 2014 2:32pm EDT
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/12/markets-precious-idUSL3N0M92EI20140312

==

3/18/2014 @ 9:50AM
China's Secret Vaults: Where Is All The Missing Gold?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/shuchingjeanchen/2014/03/18/chinas-secret-vaults-where-is-all-the-missing-gold/

==============

The bottom line is, if Porter wanted to really help you, he would not have to sell the Truth:

Proverbs 23:23
Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding.

============== more below if you are interested.

H.R. 2847 (111th): Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act
111th Congress, 2009–2010. Text as of Aug 25, 2010 (Passed Congress/Enrolled Bill).

(e) Extension of Authorizations Under Title V of SAFETEA–LU

(1) In general

The programs authorized under paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 5101(a) of the SAFETEA–LU (119 Stat. 1779) shall be continued—
(A) for fiscal year 2010, at the funding levels authorized for those programs for fiscal year 2009; and
(B) for the period beginning on October 1, 2010, and ending on December 31, 2010, at ¼ the funding levels authorized for those programs for fiscal year 2009.

(2) Distribution of funds

Funds for programs continued under paragraph (1) shall be distributed to major program areas under those programs in the same proportions as funds were allocated for those program areas for fiscal year 2009, except that designations for specific activities shall not be required to be continued for—

(A) fiscal year 2010; or

(B) the period beginning on October 1, 2010, and ending on December 31, 2010.

(3) Additional funds

(A) In general

No additional funds shall be provided for any project or activity under this subsection that the Secretary of Transportation determines was sufficiently funded before or during fiscal year 2009 to achieve the authorized purpose of the project or activity.

(B) Distribution

Funds that would have been made available under paragraph (1) for a project or activity but for the prohibition under subparagraph (A) shall be distributed in accordance with paragraph (2).

here:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr2847/text

========= some older stuff on Porter:

Dow Really Headed to 20K?
Fri 03 Jun 11 | 07:20 PM ET
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000025675

==

Dow 20,000 vs. ‘The End of America’: Altucher Debates Stansberry
Daily Ticker | 6:29 | Fri, Aug 12, 2011 7:00 AM EDT
http://screen.yahoo.com/dow-20-000-vs-the-end-of-america-altucher-debates-stansberry-26313069.html

==

His side of the lawsuit:

Why The SEC Sued Me – And Why You Should Care
By Porter Stansberry
http://dailyreckoning.com/why-the-sec-sued-me-and-why-you-should-care/

==

the lawsuit he lost:

Meet Porter Stansberry, the fraudster behind ominous ‘NewAmerica3′ ads
Published: 11:14 PM 11/08/2011    | Updated: 9:54 AM 11/09/2011

The SEC complaint declared that Stansberry “engaged in an ongoing scheme to defraud public investors by disseminating false information in several Internet newsletters.”

Approximately 1,217 individuals took the bait and purchased the report with fraudulent information after reading an email solicitation signed by Stansberry’s pseudonym “Jay McDaniel.” The solicitation was sent to at least 800,000 people, and netted a total of $1,005,000.

In 2007 Stansberry was ordered to pay $1.5 million in restitution and penalties for the scam. The judge ruled that his actions “undoubtedly involved deliberate fraud” and “making statements that he knew to be false.”

In 2009 an appeal by Stansberry was denied. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that “it would take an act of willful blindness to ignore the fact that Appellants profited from the false statements.”
more here:
http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/08/meet-porter-stansberry-the-fraudster-behind-ominous-newamerica3-ads/

==================================================

more here:

Collapsing Currency

Claim:   The U.S. dollar will officially collapse on 1 July 2014 due to the implementation of H.R. 2847.

Examples:   [Collected via e-mail, April 2014]

Write Down This Date:
July 1st, 2014

On this date, U.S. House of Representatives Bill "H.R. 2847" goes into effect. It will usher in the true collapse of the U.S. dollar, and will make millions of Americans poorer, overnight. You now have just several months to prepare ...

Origins:   This item about the passage of H.R. 2847 causing the U.S. dollar to collapse as of 1 July 2014 is another example financial scarelore put out in conjunction with an investment come-on, in this case an ominous sales pitch put out by the folks at Stansberry & Associates Investment Research LLC.

This latest panic piece is offered in a Stansberry & Associates presentation featuring a number of scary-sounding statements about how we in the U.S. are soon to experience a "near-complete shutdown of the American economy," will see "the savings of millions wiped out," will be living under the imposition of martial law by the federal government, and will be struggling in the aftermath of a number of other apocalyptic financial scenarios.

And according to Stansberry & Associates, this remarkable, radical collapse of the United States monetary system and "our normal way of life" is going into effect in a mere matter of months (just like a similar recent conspiracy scare about the federal government's plan to eliminate 16 states from the U.S. in the very near future).

But wait ... all one needs in order to avoid suffering from this devastating national calamity, one that will collapse our entire monetary system and spell doom for the American way of life, is a little information. Information that can be yours if you'll just shell out $149 for a one-year subscription to Stansberry's Investment Advisory newsletter.
more here:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/hr2847.asp