Catherine Austin Fitts exposes a "crash up" strategy where the U.S. inflates asset values to manage global debt, fueled by black budget fraud and narco dollars laundering through empty Tennessee storefronts. She details how HUD lost $11 million daily due to opaque accounting, while trillions vanish into secret space programs controlled by "Mr. Global." Fitts argues that entities like ISIS and mind control technologies serve to consolidate power for the top 1%, urging listeners to reject victimhood, adopt an "official reality hat," and embrace crowdfunding as a resistance against this engineered financial coup d'état. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
The Economic Crash Up00:02:16
Hi, this is Dark Journalist.
Today we're fortunate to welcome back a popular guest and just an amazing thinker, financial expert Catherine Austin Fitz.
Now, Catherine is the publisher of the Soleri Report.
She's also the former assistant secretary of housing and urban development and was the managing director of monolithic Wall Street firm Dylan Reed and Company, overseeing literally billions in financial transactions.
Now, today Catherine will unmask the hidden machinations of globalism, black budget fraud, mind control, and entrainment technology.
And she'll also tell us where she sees the world heading economically in 2015.
This is the interview you don't want to miss.
Here we go.
Catherine Austin Fitz, economic crash up, and the black budget goes global.
I talk about why Congress can't re engineer the federal budget.
It's all stuck behind the black budget issues.
Because this is the thing that's got to be faced and talked about.
You know, and you know, you've heard me say this before.
If a bunch of soccer moms can't move Tony Soprano out of the neighborhood because he's financing James Bond, we're all stuck behind that.
You have lots of commentators saying, oh, the American economy is going to collapse, we're bankrupt.
Well, it depends.
Yes, you can write down the debt, but you can also crash up the equity.
And it looks to me like the plan underway is to crash up the equity.
You know, when I think of Katherine Austin Fitz and the tremendous impact that she's having on the dialogue surrounding hidden forces that are influencing financial and geopolitical matters, I realize just how lucky we are to have her at this time to navigate the shifting landscape of modern reality.
Now, in this interview, she'll share some very important information about a growing economic trend that she calls a crash up.
What I'd like us all to do is when we post this video to our friends and social networks, is to include the hashtag crash up.
Financial Leverage Buyouts00:15:39
And that's Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, all of them.
Let's make sure as many people as possible understand this important development.
Thank you, and let's get started.
Catherine, it's really terrific to have you back on the show.
We have a lot to cover, even for two hours.
But I wanted to start with this.
You know, I know that you're a serious road warrior and that you rack up hundreds of miles across the country every year.
My question is what are you seeing now?
What are the conditions like on the ground in real America?
Well, you just see how various parts of the economy are doing.
And what's interesting, you know, the last year's wrap up, That we did in January 2014.
I talked a lot about the shift from global 2.0 to 3.0 because I was dealing with certain commentators that say the US economy is collapsing.
And it is collapsing in certain places, but there are other places where it's going gangbusters.
And it's by driving around and relating that to what I'm watching going on in the equity markets that I see that.
It all started, Daniel, you know, this driving around thing started in the 90s.
Yes.
And I had an extremely Offensive experience with both the Washington Post and the New York Times that persuaded me that they were just hopelessly a product of the Matrix and that no truth was ever going to work its way out on important issues.
In other words, the material emissions were rife.
And so I thought, okay, well, that's it.
I'm never going to answer another reporter's question from corporate media.
I'm just going to answer people's questions.
And I started to do radio shows.
And I started to get just an enormous flow of questions.
And it was by answering those questions, you know, I thought I understood the economy because I'd done so much work with database analysis and databases of the US and the global economy.
And because my data flow and intelligence was so rich, particularly doing place based databases, that I really thought I knew the economy well, be wrong.
It was through that flow of endless, you know, thousands of questions that I couldn't answer.
Yeah.
I started to realize, you know, I really don't understand what's going on.
And I just went deeper and deeper.
And I made a pact with myself that I would help any researcher or independent reporter who was really digging into one of the areas I was interested in.
At the time, I said, I want to understand how the money works on all the money disappearing from the U.S. government.
So you had trillions of dollars flowing out the back door of the U.S. government.
And, you know, that involves many different areas.
It's a very complex ecosystem.
And so I. Ended up helping a whole series of different publishers and reporters digging deeper and deeper, answering people's questions, doing radio shows, and it went on and on.
And that's when I said, I got to get out of Washington for a variety of reasons.
And I left Washington.
We got three Nissan Pathfinders, all the same color, same look, and I would trade them around.
I was dealing with very serious harassment at the time, so I would trade them around and just travel around on an unpredictable schedule.
And I think I put about 600,000.
Miles on all of those three cars.
But one of the things I discovered was that if you are watching the financial markets on one hand, but then you're driving around and talking to people on the other hand, if you can figure out how the two connect and where they connect, then you can really see what's going on in the economy.
And that's when I wrote a very famous article called Narco Dollars for Beginners.
Oh, yeah.
That's really about the extraordinary money laundering that was going on that was levitating the stock market.
You know, it was very interesting because one of the challenges of independent business people at the time is when you're running a little restaurant in a place like the place I live in, Tennessee, and the franchise next door basically is running $100,000 a year overhead and doesn't need to produce a dime of revenues, that's a real competitive headwind.
There was one franchise which will go unnamed.
I used to pay special interest.
I first noticed it because in a town nearby, I drove past it.
You know, almost once a day for a year, and I never saw a customer in the thing.
And finally, I said, Okay, there was, I drove by and there was a customer sitting there eating, and I thought, Maybe it's a Balo doll.
And I literally stopped and walked in to see if it was a real human being because it was such an unusual thing to see.
And I used to drive for a long time, I drive Tennessee to Washington every month, once a month, about, and I started to notice this one franchise, and they were always empty.
There was one.
On Market Street, I think it was 52nd Market in Philadelphia, that was always going gangbusters that had real business.
But otherwise, weekend, weekday, day, night, there were about 24 on the way up.
I'd pass them up and back, always empty.
And finally, I'd start to go in and talk to the staff and say, well, you know, how many hours are you open?
And what's the, you know, so I pro forma at the overhead.
And finally, I realized, you know, whatever their business is, it ain't food.
Yeah, definitely not.
Well, you've done so much research and analysis on how the black budget is invading our neighborhoods.
And I can't help but think that some of these storefronts are set up there to be a part of that funneling of the money.
And they're hidden in plain sight.
Well, here's what I didn't understand, which was if all of this crazy stuff is going on, when I worked in Washington and Wall Street, I never thought of drugs as being very important.
Because the reality, Daniel, is if you look at the amount of money you can generate on financial fraud, it's far greater than on drugs.
So I never understood what all the hoopla was about the drugs.
Yeah.
And it wasn't until I moved to Tennessee, you know, I live in a little rural farming community, that I started to understand how drugs intersected with control of the cash flows and the politics in a place and how that translates into control of a wide variety of the overt economy.
And then that translates into control of the government money.
And then that translates into being able to do all the financial fraud that really makes the financial fraud unbelievably popular.
And so I really decided to dig in and understand, well, You know, if the Department of Justice says we're laundering $500 billion to a trillion dollars a year of all dirty money, and that translates into a couple thousand dollars per person, you know, where is it?
Because if it happens, it happens in 3,100 counties on the ground.
So I had done a great deal in the 90s to look at the overt economy through taking government money and basically unpacking it on a place based basis.
So I'll give you an example.
You vote for a congressman every two years, but you don't get a financial statement that says, here's the sources and uses of money, government funds within your congressional district.
So you're paying taxes and your money's being allocated both locally and globally, but you can't see it.
And if you're going to hold your Congress critter accountable, you need to be able to see that money.
Anyway, so I had done a lot to create place based financial statements by, you know, whether it was your zip code or your congressional district or your county.
But that was the overt economy.
So, my question in my travels was okay, where is the covert side?
How does it work?
How does it intersect with the overt economy?
And who's really doing this?
Because it's not Washington Wall Street that's doing this.
You know, it's me, it's my family, it's my friends, and we're all pretending we're not doing it, but we are.
Oh, somehow it's deep in there.
Yeah.
Yeah, it's in there.
It's a huge business.
In one sense, it's tiny dollars.
But, you know, my guess is if you take out of a poor county four to five million in pure cash and then you can lever it in all the different ways you can lever it, you're talking about major economic clout within the economy.
Sure.
So it's interesting when you study about how the Anglo American alliance used drugs to move in on the Chinese empire or other countries, you know, basically move in and use it to do the equivalent of what I call a financial leverage buyout of a place.
It's the same thing that happened after World War II.
We opened up the country not only to, you know, we opened up the consumer markets, but we also opened up the consumer markets to illegal goods.
Oh, yeah.
So.
You know, it's a very interesting study we've done to our own population, what we did to the global population.
So it's all part of globalization.
We're all equal now.
Right, right, right.
Well, it's an interesting point about the drugs.
And actually, with your x ray vision, having looked behind the curtain on some of these sensitive issues the way that you have, what is your take on these states like Colorado, for example, legalizing marijuana and that's spreading to other states?
Now, is the black budget behind that?
Are these black budget forces getting a piece?
Is this something that they're against and they want to stop this movement?
How do you see that?
Well, it's interesting.
I think what happened with 9 11 was we changed the budgeting and financial infrastructure at a federal level so that we could start to legalize drugs.
In other words, if you look at the use of illegal activities to finance the black budget, I think it was getting very dysfunctional.
And the amount of time and effort used in cover ups, and I think a lot of what happened after 9 11.
Was a shift to move the black budget on budget, if you will, and to make it much easier to shift money into the black budget without all kinds of very expensive dysfunction.
The margin on organized crime was getting too high.
So it would seem to me that legalization, in certain respects, is coming.
If you sit down and talk with drug dealers, what you'll find is the number one use of illegal drugs in most counties is pain medication.
So they don't have health insurance.
They're not covered, and it's cheaper to get marijuana, or they prefer marijuana to a pharmaceutical painkiller.
So, you're basically talking about the majority of that market, I think, being competitive with pharmaceuticals.
So, and as pharmaceuticals get more liberal and Obamacare happens, the line between those two keeps shifting.
So, that's number one.
But number two, if you look at how much of the local share of something like marijuana is going to state revenues, You know, at some point, the states are going to want the tax dollars.
So, you're going to see the local share go from the covert side up onto the overt state budget.
And I think that's what's happening.
So, if you look at the biggest cash crops in California or in my state, Tennessee, in 2005, we were number two in per capita marijuana revenues.
By far, the biggest cash crop in a state like Tennessee.
So, if you look at any state where it's a huge cash crop, there's going to be real pressure on the state legislature to bring that money into the overt side of their budget.
Presumably, somebody locally is getting the local share on the covert side.
Who that is, I don't know.
Right.
But if I was the state legislature, I would be wanting those dollars.
I know we see Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul now promoting legalization of hemp.
Yeah.
Which is not a drug, it's a fantastic economic product.
Now, whether that's serious or that's just Mitch and Rand pitching to the constituents, the small farmers would love that.
It would be great news for the small farmers.
Oh, yeah, absolutely.
Well, we recently did a show with Professor Peter Dale Scott.
And we were talking about drug trafficking, and he mentioned that in the 90s, when the Taliban had the rule of Afghanistan, the heroin production actually went down to zero.
And that we went in there and took over, and now it's the largest producer again.
So there's obviously a link there between our military action and the drug flow out of that region.
Well, my assessment is that the Anglo American Alliance essentially controls and operates the drug trade globally.
Not to say that there isn't, you know, everybody's in on the cash flows.
And the reality is, it's the drug money, but it's also the related laundering.
It's a big financial.
And the reinvest, you know, the power in that thing is the reinvestment of the cash flows.
I see.
And here's the fundamental economics to understand.
Let's pick a business, any business.
So let's pick the grocery business.
And let's say the margins are very thin 2%.
Okay.
So let's say I have a 2% margin in the underlying business and my stock trades at 10 to 20 times.
So, on $100, I make $2.
If my stock is trading at $10, then my market value is $20.
Now, if I can launder 30% margin drug money through my publicly traded stock, and I can combine a 30% margin with a multiple of 10 or 20 times, then you're talking about a much bigger number.
And a fee flow to the banks, and it levers on their stock.
You know, and God forbid we talk about how you could lever it with debt and derivatives.
We won't even go there.
Right.
So, the powerful position globally is, you know, normally if Tony Soprano came into Goldman Sachs and said, look, you know, I have this great business and it's 30% margins, but it's all illegal, Goldman Sachs would say, no, you know, we can't do a prospectus for a criminal enterprise.
Yeah.
At least not over, you know, bluntly and overtly and clearly.
So, the question is, you know, What's interesting is even though a 30% margin is high, the ability to lever your 2% margin with a 10 to 20% times multiple in the stock market, or to lever it with liquid finance, debt, derivatives, that financial leverage is much more powerful.
But financial leverage depends on the rule of law.
So I've got one guy, Tony Soprano, with a margin of 30%.
I've got another guy, let's call him the Masons, and he's got a 2% margin, but a 10 to 20 times pop.
He wins, he beats Tony Soprano.
Now, the question is can somebody come down the middle and combine that, you know, take the 30% and combine it with the financial leverage and do that globally?
If they can, they're the winner.
I see.
Because they've got the high margins and the high financial leverage in combination.
And that's why, you know, I spent a lot of time in my, I've got an online book called Dylan Reed and the Aristocracy of Stock Profits.
Combining Margins Globally00:07:56
I think you've taken a look at it.
Oh, yeah.
And I spend a huge amount of time explaining to people why so much money.
Is invested in the pretense of the rule of law.
You know, I know you're a successful journalist and you know, you know, sometimes it gets so wacky and Orwellian.
Why is everybody spending so much time making up what are obviously complete lies?
Right.
You know, you watch the corporate media and they struggle not to laugh as they say some of these things.
That's true.
You know, so the question is, why are we spending all this money on the pretense?
It's so expensive, you know, and it's so ridiculous at some point.
Well, that's because.
You're trying to preserve that combination of the high margin with the financial leverage.
And if you admit to what you're really doing, you run the risk of losing the financial leverage.
And ultimately, that has always been the greatest power behind the Anglo American alliance.
Oh, that's so interesting.
Well, you know, the Kill the Messenger movie came out late last year and was widely attacked in the major media.
Of course, Kill the Messenger tells the story of investigative reporter Gary Webb, who uncovered a link between the CIA working with the Contras in Central America.
And the crack epidemic that was happening in Los Angeles.
Now, you did a lot of analysis on Webb's book, Dark Alliance, and you believe that his research was totally legitimate, right?
Yes.
Gary, you know, it's interesting because I'm a person who's fascinated by the nuts and bolts of operations.
Yeah.
So when I worked as a regulator in the government, I was very, you know, I had a very, one of the largest line management financial operations.
So we had about a portfolio of about at the time.
$350 billion of mortgage insurance enforcement and about 7,000 people.
So I really got very interested in the nuts and bolts of how the line management operation works in government, how you get things done in government, because we were implementing a lot of change at the time.
And when I read Gary Webb's Dark Alliance, one of the things I found was that in terms of the nuts and bolts of government operations and enforcement, his entire All of his work was absolutely impeccable.
And there's no way he could do that with his experience unless he really had the story.
So, you know, so I'm convinced Webb had the story.
And part of it was when Webb published The Dark Alliance, we were publishing databases of mortgage defaults.
And after I read Dark Alliance and sort of read his work, I realized that he was, you know, that a lot of what we were showing with the mortgage.
Defaults were patterns that were very similar to what he was describing with the drugs.
And what was very interesting is when he published the story, a real effort was made by the Department of Justice, and it took them about a year to then seize all of our data and databases and software tools and keep it under lock and key for six years.
And I think that's because if we had continued to put up on the internet the data about the mortgage defaults, people like Webb and the different minority.
Journalists who were downloading his documentation were going to put two and two together, and the mortgage game was going to be in jeopardy.
And I think the mortgage game, and particularly with the sort of pump and dump of the housing market starting in the mid 90s and ending with the bailouts, that produced fantastic amounts of money that were pulled out of the US government.
And so I think disclosure of the mortgage financing by place was really going to blow the game.
I do have to mention one thing about Kill the Messenger.
Yeah.
Interestingly enough, NBC is owned by Comcast.
Okay.
Kill the Messenger was distributed by a subsidiary of NBC.
And you have to ask the question, Daniel, what in the world?
Comcast is in the middle of a big merger with Time Warner and has approvals before the Department of Justice.
And the Kill the Messenger story is very embarrassing for what was then the current Attorney General, Eric Holder.
Right.
And after Kill the Messenger came out, I think the timing was then Holder resigns.
And you have to ask the question.
Why is Comcast, who's trying to get an approval from the Department of Justice, allowing a subsidiary to come out with this movie at that time?
And what does it have to do with Eric Holder's resignation?
Big unanswered question.
And then, you know, so what I, in fact, I said this on Money and Markets last night.
I said, I have no idea what's going on at Comcast, but if I own the stock, this would make me very nervous.
Yeah, yeah, definitely.
Well, this is the way that certain hits are organized.
And one thing you've explained, like in the case of Eric Holder, the power group is not afraid to turn on their own.
I remember when the John Corzine story was out there, and he, of course, had done all these shady money deals for his financial pals, but they were only too happy to turn around on him, and he was stuck in a pretty bad situation.
I don't know what the, you know, I would say in Corzine's case, it's probably a well deserved hit.
No doubt about it.
But I would say Corzine, it looks like, has gotten off pretty light given what was happening.
I mean, basically, Corzine took over a firm and bet the ranch on a market position.
Who knows why?
Maybe he thought he had.
Inside skinny.
But he bet the ranch, and a lot of people got hurt.
And if you look at how they got hurt, you know, it's pretty ugly.
So, you know, whatever Corazine did, it's not pretty, but we don't know what the real story is.
You know, it'd be wonderful in these situations if the real story comes out.
Definitely.
And I think, you know, the tough thing for us, because you and I are both trying to help people understand what's really going on, is the story is never the story.
I always say in America, fact is fiction, and fiction is fact.
True.
But, you know, you watch, you know, so you watch Kill the Messenger come out telling the story of how unfairly this reporter was treated.
And then you turn around and you watch what's going on with Cosby and Brian Williams.
And you say, was this just a training film?
Right, right.
Yeah, exactly.
It's a training film.
So, you know, clearly, the other thing I think that I drew from all these situations is, you know, life in the top 1% is not so nice now.
Yeah.
You know, this is very ugly because.
When a corporation makes more money by destroying its talent than working with its talent to create new things, that's a very bad sign, Daniel.
And, you know, we're watching life in the top 1% get very bitter, mean, and ugly.
Absolutely.
So it makes me uncomfortable to watch it.
And I'm very happy to be out.
Yes.
Yes.
You escaped.
Well, I would say I got spat out.
Oh, yeah.
Funny because my dream my whole life was I won out.
I don't want.
I've always told the story when the guy came to me and said, It's time for you to join the Council on Foreign Relations.
I said, I really just don't want to go there.
And so I always wanted out, but I could never figure it out.
I kept trying to get out.
There's this great scene in The Godfather where Michael says, Every time I think I've gotten out, they claw me back in.
So I felt always clawed back in.
Reengineering Government Money00:15:25
And what was funny is, if you look at what happened to me, my theory, and it's just conjecture, is that a bunch of private guys falsified, tried to frame me with false evidence.
No question.
And as a result, I think they lied to the committee about getting this done.
And so the committee got lied to.
They falsified the evidence.
When it was all said and done, it was a huge mess, and everybody had egg on their face.
And so I got out, but it was kind of.
You know, you ask God for something and you get it.
And next time I'll ask, you know, please make it a pleasant process.
Oh, yeah.
But, you know, I did manage to get out, but I think because they spat me out the way they spat me out.
So I feel kind of lucky.
Absolutely.
And before we leave that, have you ever figured out the exact reason why they targeted you in the first place?
You know, it's one of those shaggy dog stories.
It's long and complicated, it's like a train, and people get on and off.
It went on for 11 years.
And you get all sorts of information.
You know, people show up and say, This is what happened, and they give you tips.
I think it was a combination.
If you look at what we were doing, you know, I do think that if you re engineer government investment, we can create many multiples of the wealth that we have currently.
So let's just look at the domestic economy.
If you take the government investment, government investment is allocated much more.
To manage risk and to control, than it is to optimize return on investment in the economy.
And if you could re engineer the investment to optimize return on investment in the economy, you could create just enormous wealth.
Now, my vision of doing that in the 90s was let's have the local community and the pension funds share the equity, you know, institutional investors invited in, and, you know, and let's just make the pie as big as possible, but really.
Give the wealth, the majority of the wealth to the pension funds.
The problem with that proposal was you had an entire economy who depended on a fee flow from the current way things were.
And if you look at that fee flow, it included a lot of people, and those people didn't want change.
They wanted more fees.
So the control, the top down control system generated a lot of fees to a lot of folks.
And I think those folks, but more importantly, I do think we were coming into what I call the financial coup d'etat.
So, I think a decision was made to pull extraordinary amounts of money out of the developed world and shift it into investment, whether in the black budget or the emerging markets.
And that process of the financial coup d'etat required a pump and dump of the housing market, a huge mortgage bubble.
And there was no way you could run the mortgage markets dirty with the kind of disclosure that I was promoting.
And so, I think they needed to shut down the promotion of transparency in the mortgage market.
And giving local people access to the transparency they needed to see that the mortgage market was either run clean or they could make more money on cleaning it up.
There was fantastic profits for local business if you ran the mortgage market clean.
So I think it was a time when they just didn't want the mortgage markets run clean.
Now that the coup is over, my question has always been okay, now that you've sucked everything out, where's the next play?
And of course, the next play is you re engineer the government investment.
You optimize the economy, you run the mortgage markets relatively clean, and there's your next play.
And if you look at everybody who's lining up to do that play, they're now ready to make the switch.
I see.
So they weren't ready to make the switch then.
Now they see the opportunity.
And part of this opportunity relates to new technology, particularly new energy technology, because when you bring in new technology, you dramatically lower costs and all the activities within a local area.
Okay.
So if you just look, you know, whether it's the small businesses or the corporations, you bring in that technology.
The question, how do you get the pop on that?
In other words, where do you get the increase in equity value on that?
And believe it or not, I think the biggest pop is on the real estate.
So it's not an accident that suddenly Warren Buffett owns real estate brokers all over the country.
Oh, right.
He made the move.
Right.
He's got manufactured housing, he's got real estate brokers.
He's ready.
Oh, yeah.
Right.
He's wound up and really ready to go.
Right.
Well, you know, this reminds me of a conversation that we had last spring, and it's in the UFO Economy episode, where you said that you were looking at an economic trend that was brewing, potentially a bubble, and that it could dwarf the housing bubble crisis.
Now, you weren't really ready to discuss it at the time, but I wanted to check in and find out where you see the trends going now.
Well, here's what I do see.
If you look at where this is going, In terms of the implementation of the new technology.
And if you look at the monetary policies being practiced around the world, if they continue to debase currencies at the current speed, in theory, you could be talking about a crash up in the equity markets and real assets that's absolutely extraordinary.
Now, the new technology can be very deflating, so there's cross currents here.
And the globalization of labor can be very deflating.
So there are many, many cross currents.
In theory, whether it's the place based optimization or the debasement of the currencies or the implementation of new technology, the potential for, I wouldn't necessarily call it a bubble, but a crash up in the equity markets is very, very real.
Now, given the fighting that's going on, there's nothing that shuts down the financial markets like fighting.
We may kill each other yet in fighting over this opportunity.
Right, right, right.
Well, Catherine, what's the best definition of a crash up?
I'm going to grossly oversimplify.
If you look at the wrap up, you read we had the big theme for the wrap up this year was planet equity.
And I was talking about some of the issues involved in the planet equity question.
So let me give a framework.
In the beginning of the 90s, the global equity markets had a market capitalization of about $11 trillion, and today that's about $70 trillion.
So it's gone up about a multiple of six times.
Okay.
Right.
What we're talking about is a process where within 10 to 15 years, we could go to global equity markets of 150 trillion, is my back of the envelope, you know, pick out of the sky number.
Okay.
So we're on a trajectory to grow that.
Now, that's several phenomena happening at once.
One is you've created, you know, when the Soviet Union, when the wall came down and we saw the communist countries come into the global market economy.
We're seeing stock exchanges develop all over the world.
And we're going through a process, Daniel, a once in a lifetime process where the percentage of the income flow and assets in many different economies that is securitized is growing.
So, more and more of the economic activity within a country like Brazil or Chile is represented in global equity markets that you and I can access either directly through an ADR or through an exchange traded fund.
Okay, so.
You know, when I was on Wall Street, I couldn't open up my browser and buy Singapore and short Hong Kong, but now I can.
Okay.
Yeah.
So that's given.
So you're going through a process of securitizing more and more stuff.
The second thing you're doing is all around the world, the way we're dealing with too much debt is we're debasing currencies.
Right.
So we've seen the developed world basically suck enormous amounts of capital out of their economies.
Reinvested in the emerging markets and the growing economies.
As they've done that, they've layered on tremendous amounts of debt, in many cases, more debt than they can afford to pay back.
Now, imagine the planet is a house.
We all own a house.
Many of us have mortgages.
So you have a house, and let's say your house is worth $1,000, and now your mortgage is $2,000.
One of the things you can do is you can default on your mortgage and write the mortgage down to You know, $1,000 or less.
But the other thing you can do is do something that just makes the equity go up, And let's say you do something that makes the equity go up to $10,000.
Right.
And your mortgage is still $2,000, but now you can, in theory, afford the mortgage.
Well, if you keep debasing the money supply and the value of currency, what's going to happen?
The value.
So here's the question Is the stock market going up or is the value of the currency it's denominated in going down?
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, right.
Yeah.
Well, that does seem very unusual with that example because, you know, we're looking at record breaking stock market activity.
I mean, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is over 18,000, and that does not seem to be spilling down to the average American's bank balance.
So there's some kind of unnerving disconnect that's going on there.
Well, it's spilling down to the day to day person in some respects and not in others.
The reality, you know, it's a complex phenomena as to where it spills down and how.
The reality is the better the stock market does, the more resources corporations have to pit labor against labor globally.
Right.
Okay.
So, in that sense, it's, you know, what we've seen here in the middle class is the middle class getting squeezed.
That's not over because we're about to go through a process of outsourcing, you know, the executive layer of the corporation.
Corporation much more than we've done.
You know, we've hit manual labor and then we hit the middle guys and now we're going after the big guys.
What's interesting though, Daniel, is if on corporate re engineering, you could see if you re engineer the government money, a lot of those jobs could come back because if you go through the government budget, we're paying somebody here not to work at the same time we're outsourcing a job to Asia.
Right.
And that means we're paying twice.
So if I pay you not to work and I pay somebody to do that job in Asia, With a markup to JPMorgan Chase, that's way more expensive than just you doing the job.
Absolutely.
Well, you have that great example about a customer service person in India who's handling a food stamp transaction call with an American who's on food stamps but could be doing their job.
So it's that absurd loop.
One of the things you'll find the federal government has been very clever about not making government contract budgets accessible, which is outrageous if you understand financial disclosure law.
And so it is impossible, as a practical matter, for you and I to sort of.
As a citizen, find out, okay, how many of the jobs in my county or my state are being, you know, funded through government contracts at the corporate level when unemployed people here could be doing those jobs?
Yeah.
You know, and that's an enormous arbitrage for small business because in most communities, my bet is you still have lots of opportunities for small businesses to compete and do those jobs at a lower price for the federal government.
In a way that would create employment locally.
So, to me, the big eye, you know, anyway, but to get back to the possibility of a crash up, some of the biggest numbers, if you look at the technological advancements that are both in the labs or some of the ones that are coming out of the lab, you know, it's always a very political line what makes it out and what doesn't.
But if you look at the technology coming out of the lab, you know, you're talking about things that could bring company expenses down significantly.
Not only that, make it possible for U.S. companies to compete and in source much more, it makes it much more attractive to do things here locally.
So, when you give a company the opportunity over the next 20 years through technology to dramatically cut their expenses 10, 20, 30, 40, 50%, it's pretty extraordinary what can happen in the equity market.
So, let me give you a gruesome example.
There is one company out in Silicon Valley that's made a robot that will make and package a hamburger.
And the company announced, you know, I don't know how, well, I don't eat fast food anyway, but in their announcement, they said that they could save the fast food industry $16 billion a year.
Now, that's, you know, let's say once you've amortized the investment in the robots, that's $16 billion that will drop to the bottom line.
If your stock is trading at 10 times earnings, that's $160 billion.
If it's trading, you know, at 20 times earnings, that's $320 billion value to your stock investors.
Imagine what that would do to, you know, and that's just one industry.
Oh, yeah.
So, yeah.
So, you're talking now.
Part of Obamacare is, you know, the federal government, both Obamacare and with various forms of regulation, is trying to get all healthcare records digitized.
Yeah.
Why are they doing that?
One of the reasons they're doing that is to facilitate re engineering of expenses.
So, for example, now with your smartphone, you can do your heart monitor test, you can do your diabetes test, you can take a variety of different tests and never leave your office.
Enormous savings, both in transportation costs and in healthcare costs.
I'll never forget one guy saying, you know, we can re engineer $1.6 trillion out of healthcare expenses.
Well, what is that $1.6 trillion?
If you look at the last 20 years, one of the few generators of employment in local communities is.
Healthcare.
Sure.
So now you're talking about re engineering, you know, Silicon Valley re engineering those costs out of healthcare.
Well, big, big boon to the healthcare stocks.
Controlling Mortgage Files00:15:15
What's the number one driver of the strong U.S. equity markets over the last three years?
Healthcare.
It's the number one performing sector.
So don't say Obamacare hasn't been successful.
It's been very successful.
Right.
They got what they were looking for.
Yes, for generating political contributions.
Anyway, so again, you're talking about a process that's going to push the equity market up.
So it's a complex phenomenon.
I don't think it's just a bubble, but it's a.
It's a strategy of dealing with too much debt.
When you have lots of commentators saying, oh, the American economy is going to collapse, we're bankrupt.
Well, it depends.
Yes, you can write down the debt, but you can also crash up the equity.
And it looks to me like the plan underway is to crash up the equity.
Oh, fascinating.
Yeah.
Well, along this line, you did a Solari report fairly recently that was about how the slow burn is fraying.
Oh, it was probably a money market segment.
Yes, exactly.
Well, you know, something, let's go back to where we started off.
You know, whatever the story was with Kill the Messenger or Brian Williams, we're talking about, you know, really dirty, mean fighting.
Yeah.
We're talking about a very uncivil society.
And, you know, for example, I think the Ebola stuff during the election was extremely uncivil in tone and it was played out.
I mean, it was mean.
And sensationalized.
And it was on the, you know, it was there every day, it was just in your face.
Well, here's the thing.
Normally, the business press has been relatively protected from that stuff.
So that's in the tabloids, but you're not seeing it in Bloomberg and in the Wall Street Journal.
It was top headline, Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, every day or almost every day.
And you couldn't, literally, Daniel, if you're like me, you're an investment advisor, you're just trying to dig out the news on what's going on.
It was impossible to get to the news because the shriek a meter was so.
Ubiquitous and loud.
It was like, shut off the sharika meter.
I need just, you know, I was like Bruce Willis, just where are the facts?
Where are the facts?
Right.
And it was, it was deep, you know, it was very time wasting.
And meantime, the serious business networks were putting out the message, ignore Ebola.
It's an Africa issue.
You know, it's not, you know, after the election, it's over.
And literally the day after the election, Wall Street Journal, page seven, it was just, it was gone.
You know, it was, they hit the switch.
Unbelievable.
Not to say they might not bring it back, but.
But I would say the meanness is becoming, you know, is reaching intolerable levels.
And I think it's far from over.
So now, why do I say that?
You know how the Department of Homeland Security has different colors and you go to Orange Alert?
Yeah.
You know, when you see stuff like that, that's when I turn on the Orange Alert.
And I'll tell you when I really turn on the Orange Alert is whenever the Brits and the Americans start dishing out dirt on pedophilia, I say, okay, slow burn on Orange Alert because that's the meanest.
Yeah.
You know, that's the fight that nobody can afford that turns mean, is hard to control, and gets really, really dirty.
Yeah.
So when the BBC dishes out a new one on Jimmy Seville, I go, Slow Burn is Frang.
Isn't that interesting?
Well, what do you think is behind that?
Well, you mean the Slow Burn Frang?
Yeah.
Well, just in terms of, for example, you know, they're bringing out the dirtiest weapons, like the pedophilia scandals.
So they're attacking each other, but why are they doing this now?
Well, I.
I think there are two things that are behind it.
One is knowledge management, and the other is enforcing obedience.
So, for example, I talked a lot about this on the Solari report last night.
We had three JP Morgan bankers killed in the last week.
Yeah, oh, yeah.
And if you look at how they died, you know, I'll bet you a dollar, those were ops, those were not accidents or suicides.
So, now, what do I think is happening there?
I think you're basically deleting databases.
You know, I think those, you need one, you need two or three of those people.
You know, they know too much, they're concerned, they're talking to their wife about, you know, I saw the strangest thing today, something's wrong, you know, whatever.
But basically, that's knowledge management, if you will.
Okay.
You know, I always said the blowing up of the Murrow building, coming into the Murrow building explosion in Oklahoma City, we were about to go in and get the mortgage documents on defaulted mortgages that had been in Region 6.
Which was both the Clintons and the Bushes.
And I kept saying, coming into it, you know, because the rumors about the fraud were just off the charts.
I mean, it was a huge swath of black budget fraud.
And I kept saying, I don't, you know, this is making me uncomfortable.
You know, this is, we might be stepping into it.
And then shortly before we're going to go in and get the documents, the building blew up.
Right, right, yeah.
So that was, you know, that was like deleting a database.
Okay, so let's focus on these banker desks for a moment.
So, what might be happening here is we're watching potential witnesses being eliminated before their court cases have even started.
I think they're getting rid of criminal liability.
So, during the housing bubble burst in the 90s, we auctioned off all the mortgages, including the files.
And if you look at who bid and how they priced it, I think, and this happened to us when we were auctioning off mortgages, my company was auctioning off mortgages at FHA, I think a lot of the bidders were trying to control the files because the files had criminal liability.
So, you had.
You know, we can get into this if you want.
It's a very interesting story, but it gets very technical.
Sure.
I think you had, you know, mortgage databases and mortgage files where the mortgages, you know, you had 10 mortgages on one house.
And the last thing you could afford was for a variety of different parties who weren't part of the game to win those files because then you had some explaining to do, as Lucy and Ricky used to say.
Lucy, let me explain you something.
I think the other thing, so part of it is knowledge management.
I think the thing you're watching with the pedophilia scandals is.
You're trying to enforce discipline among a lot of different legislators and government leaders, and trying to get everybody to stick with the party line and do what they're told is very difficult.
Yeah.
And so, you know, and there's, you know, but there's also squabbling about a variety of different things from, you know, who gets the pork to what the policies will be.
And when those fights get bad, people start dishing dirt out on each other.
And if you can't get people to toe the line, You know, this is a way of warning them because remember, the pro, you know, the big problem for a government official is not that they, you know, yes, they may have a control file with dirty pictures in it, but the other thing is they may be clean as a whistle, but they're not like me.
They're not willing to spend 11 years and $6 million to prove they're clean.
Right.
So when one of those scandals is going down, just the intimation that you're being investigated, even, you know, you're clean, but they're floating the intimation to threaten you.
You could lose an election, you could lose your family, you could lose, you know, so people get unbelievably.
You know, I've seen government officials under threat of blackmail for dirty pictures.
Oh, yeah.
And there's nothing more scared than a government official.
Fascinating.
Well, you know, I'm going to mention something as a side note here that you'll find interesting, which is the governor of Arizona in the late 90s, Fife Symington.
He was the guy who was the governor during the Phoenix Lights flap in 1997.
And he, at the end of 97, now we know he came out, you know, originally and was like, you know, this is a joke, you know, don't pay attention.
But then later he came out and talked about it and how it was real and how he actually saw it.
Well, right, he popped us for his behavior.
He did.
He did, yeah.
And I have to say, he's done a lot of good since then about it.
But what I didn't know, what I found out recently, is that he was indicted for bank fraud and other things at the end of 97.
And then in 99, they dropped the case and was like, oh, that's okay.
Let him go.
But isn't that interesting?
So that works right in with what you're talking about.
Yeah.
So they're just, you know, they raise the very suspicion you're under the spotlight for two years.
You can't do anything politically.
You know, you're out of there.
So obviously, he was thinking of doing the wrong thing.
It was really funny when I worked in the Bush administration.
One guy who was always trying to give me a hard time used to say, Look, I'm looking for the dirty pictures and I'm going to get it.
You're not going to get them.
It's not going to work.
And they found a really dear friend of mine who worked as campaign manager for Jesse Jackson in 88.
And I'd given money to the Jackson campaign.
So they found that and they thought that was going to be a big scandal.
So they dished that out.
And I forget who it was, but somebody wrote the story, you know.
Assistant Secretary Fitz, you know, giving money to Jesse Jackson.
Now, you know, the way the campaign ended up in New York, Jonathan Bush, who was running the Bush, raising money for the Bush campaign in New York, was he and Carl were friends.
You know, everybody's friends.
Oh, yeah.
It's politics.
So it wasn't a problem.
But what happened was they dished it out, and suddenly all the African American employees started trusting me.
Oh, that's great.
So it worked in reverse.
Yeah.
Well, it worked in reverse, and they all got even more mad at me.
Because it made me enormously popular at HUD and particularly in the Democratic quarters.
So I was, but it was funny.
But that's the game.
That's how you fight.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Well, it's interesting because HUD is in the news recently.
There's a scandal going on there where someone in a key position was actually lobbying.
She was a lobbyist, actually, and she got in a key position and she was using her weight at HUD to get all these deals for her friends, basically.
And that's just popped up in the past few weeks.
And I instantly thought of your time there and the quote that you had from Oliver North, which was that HUD was basically like the candy store for black ops.
It's really, I'll tell you a very funny story.
Well, I finally, my attorneys finally had me record the history of all my stories at HUD.
Except for the most sort of dirty, I left a couple of the really dirty ones, which I later published on the blog out.
But I recorded them, and it's called the chem tapes.
And I did it for the attorneys.
And someone in my office said, You know, would you mind if I listen to that?
I thought, Oh, why would you want to listen to that?
And it's like six 90 minute tapes.
And he came back and he said, That's absolutely fascinating.
And one thing led to another.
And we made, I don't know, we made about 100 copies over the years because it developed a real camp following.
And I finally said, This is too expensive.
And we put it up.
It's now sitting up on the internet.
It's on our server, so you can listen to it.
Oh, they're just awesome.
It was called the Chem Tapes.
But there was one story when I first got to Washington, the There was something going on called the HUD scandal, and we were under orders from the secretary to run things absolutely clean.
He said, Don't.
Anyway, so the position of, there were five positions underneath me that needed to be filled.
One was the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Housing.
And I had put up for recommendation a guy who I knew through the Wharton Networks, a guy named Ronnie Rosenfeld, who I think did a terrific job, was a very successful attorney, home builder, and investment guy, and was one of those people, you know, his family had come to the country.
Had done really well.
He wanted to give back.
He really wanted to, you know, he was just an independently wealthy guy who really wanted to serve.
He was the real thing.
Anyway, so I put up Ronnie.
I get a call from the home builders, and the president of the home builder says, How dare you, you know, how dare you recommend someone for this position other than our candidate?
And I said, Well, you know, I think I'm the assistant secretary of housing, and I think the secretary, it's his job to choose, you know, and the president, not you.
Yeah.
And So she and the executive director of the home builders came in, and she literally was pointing her finger, you know, this far from my nose, using the F word.
Wow.
Telling me it was her position to appoint.
And she was processing deals, you know, and getting inside deals for herself and her friends from the last administration.
And presumably that's what would happen if we put her in.
And I picked up the phone, Daniel, and I called the security and I said, I need a security guard in my office.
I want to have somebody physically thrown out of the building.
Excellent.
Now, for the FHA commissioner to throw the president and executive director out of the building, I mean, that is just, you know, you just don't say or do that.
And she looked at me and she said, I'm going to have you fired.
And I said, I bet you can have me fired, but it's going to take you at least a year or two.
It took her 18 months, or it took them 18 months, but I said, it's going to take you a while to get me fired.
And interestingly enough, it was my recommendation.
The secretary's office interviewed Ronnie Rosenfeld and they chose Ronnie Rosenfeld.
Great.
But it was when I tell you that there is no government, in other words, the government I used to regularly ask, you know, HUD was run by, not by government employees, it was run by defense contractors.
And I would regularly ask for data from the defense contractors and they wouldn't give it to me and I couldn't make them.
Wow.
I know.
It was my favorite story though, was when.
I'm very big on the law.
So, before I came into the office, I sat down and I read the law to understand what is my scope of work.
And then I drilled down into regulation.
What does the law and regulation say I'm responsible for?
What am I responsible to do?
And one of the things it said is that I had sole fiduciary responsibility for the FHA funds, and we were required to run the single family fund, which is the big fund, the one that Ronnie ran, on a self supporting basis.
So, you're Your mortgage premiums have to cover your costs for foreclosures and expenses.
So I get in the first day and I call on the budget officer and I said, I need to see the financial statements.
And they said, We don't have financial statements.
Covert Space Structures00:16:04
Wow.
I said, We don't have financial statements.
They said, No, we have a budget.
I said, Well, let me, you know, the budget is what you write you're going to do.
And the financial statements show whether you did it or not.
And I said, Well, aren't we, don't we have an audit?
And they said, Well, GA audits every couple of years, but not annually.
I said, oh, this is not good.
So I get the budget, and the budget literally, if you put it on the floor, it would go two thirds of the way to the ceiling with the budget justifications.
I called them back in after the weekend.
I'm a speed reader, I read it four times.
I called back in and I said, Nowhere in here does it say if we're making or losing money.
And they said, Well, that's not in the budget.
So I said, How am I supposed to make sure that we're complying with the law if it's a mystery whether or not we are?
And I said, Well, I need to talk to the accountants.
Where are the accountants?
And they said, The accountants report to another assistant secretary.
You're not allowed to talk to them.
Compartmentalized.
Yeah.
Matrix structure.
So to make a long story short, I always tell people, I. Raised a lot of money for George H.W. Bush.
And what I got were presidential cufflinks, and the accounts moved over to report to me.
Anyway, it took a couple months, but I got them to report to me.
And the first day they walked in, and it turned out we were losing $11 million a day in the single family fund.
And what was interesting was we were able very quickly to put together enough disclosure on where the losses were and what was going on that literally the field offices, just with that knowledge, could move and do whatever they needed to stem the.
You know, to get back into a self supporting basis.
But needless to say, you know, there were a lot of people who weren't happy about that.
Number one, I think, was probably the black budget.
Wow, that's incredible that you had this first hand experience of witnessing the clandestine maneuvers of these agencies.
Of course, you know, you hear people talk about this all the time, but to actually be there and see it is a totally different thing.
What a great experience.
I guess the logical question here is where do you think this secret black budget finance may be going?
Well, if I could recommend one thing up on our website and up on their website, we did a conference called the Secret Space Program Conference last June.
Oh, yeah.
And there was a series of presentations.
You had Dr. Joseph Farrell give one and Mark McLandish give one, and then I gave one, and then Richard Dolan and then Farrell gave a second.
And you can, if you subscribe to the Solari Report, they're up on my blog or they're up on the Secret Space Program website as well.
You have to pay for them.
Yeah.
And I would really recommend those because what I did was I basically said, look, there's a balance sheet of the US economy.
And here's on the asset side, here's the overt side.
And here's this big question mark.
You know, what's financing all of this?
And I'm just going to walk you up and down the financial side and show you the extraordinary extent of the money that's disappearing into this question mark.
You know, I'll let Dolan Farrell McAmlish talk about that.
I'm not going to talk about that because I don't know a lot about that.
I'm just going to talk about the giant.
You know, suction sound of money going into this big question mark.
And so I just was free to describe the financial side of the balance sheet and leave, you know, and leave the sort of the other part, you know, the Area 51 part to Dolan, et cetera.
Great idea.
Right.
And so what I did was I go through a lot of these stories and how it is that this much money is disappearing from the federal infrastructure and the federal financing without anybody really talking about it.
I also have an article up on the blog.
Called Coming Clean Over the Fiscal Cliff, where I talk about why Congress can't re engineer the federal budget.
It's all stuck behind the black budget issues.
I see.
And, you know, go through the different parts of the budget and what some of those challenges are.
Because this is the thing that's got to be faced and talked about.
You know, and you know, you've heard me say this before.
If a bunch of soccer moms can't move Tony Soprano out of the neighborhood because he's financing James Bond, we're all stuck behind that.
Right.
Yeah.
And so that's the.
Transparency we need.
Yeah.
And I think what's very compelling and brave about your approach on this is that you do go into the space aspect and you talk about how a lot of this money is probably disappearing into a large covert space structure that the public has no idea even exists.
Right.
And it's not just a space infrastructure, it's an underground base infrastructure.
Right.
In other words, you know, whatever the truth is on the underground basis, there are clearly a lot of them, they're clearly very expensive to not only build, but to maintain.
So, there's a lot going on underneath the ground and a lot going on in the skies.
And whatever it is, it's very expensive.
Yeah.
So, one of the things you've pointed out is that there's so much money that's disappeared that it's not just people buying Ferraris and mansions, it goes much deeper.
Right.
That's what was so frustrating during the bailouts because we're talking about lending or gifting to the banks enough money to pay off all the mortgages in the country three times over.
That's how much money that was.
So imagine that you paid off all the mortgages, all the student loans, all the consumer debt.
You could have paid off all the government debt too, right?
So we're talking about an extraordinary amount of money, and we're seeing all sorts of corporate media implying that this is because Goldman Sachs partners are making too much money.
We're talking about money on a whole different scale.
We're talking about the kind of money it takes to create an endowment.
To finance the government on a private basis forever.
That is so interesting.
Yeah, it's just too much money to attribute to everyday Wall Street greed.
And you mentioned this also, where the corporate media likes that divide and rule paradigm.
So, a rich, poor, black, white, man, woman, they're always looking for that split, you know, 99 versus the 1% and all that.
And with these divisions, we miss the real action that's going on.
So, when we come back, let's talk about what you see going on globally.
And we'll be back with more Catherine Austin Fitz.
Dark journalist.
The truth is never easy.
Top guests like investigative reporter Linda Moulton Howe.
People are serving the government.
That's the truth.
Former defense minister Paul Hellier.
The president and Congress haven't run the United States for generations.
Historian Richard Dolan.
I hope listeners realize that this is not a run of the mill interview that I did.
Scholar Joseph P. Farrell.
If you don't consider the black budget, then you're missing over half of the financial picture.
Interviews like you've never heard before.
You know, we need dark journalists, so just keep doing what you're doing.
Visit darkjournalist.com.
And here we go.
This is Dark Journalist, continuing with former Assistant Secretary of Housing, Catherine Austin Fitz.
Now, Catherine, I wanted to break down this term you've been using, Global 3.0.
Now, what's the basic definition for someone to understand what you mean by that?
Global 2.0 is an industrial economy, Global 3.0 is really an information economy.
It's based on information technology.
And obviously, there's a lot more happening with technology, but it's one where the fundamental relationship between natural resources and the economy is changed dramatically by technology.
Okay.
So, and it works, the dynamics are very, very different.
And that's part of the pressure to move to a win win, a very different model.
I always tell that have you ever heard my story about the difference between.
Well, let me give it to you this way.
All right.
If you have an oil well and I have money and I want your oil well and you want my money, you know, I can give you my money and I get the oil well.
But of course, if you take your army and kill me and get the oil well back, you're better off.
Right.
Right.
So crime pays.
Right.
Yeah.
But if you have a software company and I want your database technology and I pay you money for your database technology, if you kill me and take back your database, are you better off?
Not necessarily.
No.
In fact, if I stay alive and do more deals and joint ventures and need more things from you, so, so, You know, the more activity I have and the more, the longer I stay alive, the more money you make, right?
I see.
So it's very different.
You know, when you're working with intellectual capital, it's a very different economic model.
And if you, it's funny, when I was in the 90s, I ran into real personnel problems in my company and I couldn't understand what was happening.
And I got a wonderful cassette from a partner of mine who'd heard Jennifer James, an anthropologist from Seattle, talk.
And that talk literally saved my company, Daniel, because here's what she said.
She said, if you analyze the leaders, and these are the leaders that we're still dealing with in our, you know, both in our business and our government leadership.
Yeah.
She said, their number one mythological hero is the Lone Ranger.
Uh huh.
You know, he rides into town, he saves everybody, he's alone, he has a mask, he doesn't show emotion.
She said, if you take that man's son or grandson, In the workforce, his mythological hero is the Ninja Turtle.
You know, they work together, they share everything.
And what I realized looking at the people I had working for me is, you know, the very experienced real estate and securities people were Lone Rangers.
The information technology people were literally Ninja Turtles.
And there was a serious cultural clash.
And part of it was the Ninja Turtles were working.
In the model where you made more money by sharing and collaborating than in killing.
Yeah.
So, very profoundly.
And one of the things we're watching globally in the economy is we're struggling between the parts of the economy where you make more by warfare and the parts of the economy where you make more by collaborating.
And one of the things that are driving the BRICS crazy is they're trying to share and collaborate and just trade.
And meantime, the U.S. is using the The whole Bretton Woods system and the financial system to extract and harvest value.
So you're trying to cooperate and compete through the same financial mechanisms that's driving everybody crazy.
Oh, yeah.
And the older generation is being Lone Rangers, and the younger generations are Ninja Turtles and they hate each other.
So, I mean, look, it's very interesting.
If you look, I talked in the Salaria report this week about the fact that if you look at what's happened with Apple stock, you know, with another 8% increase in Apple stock, we'll be able to sell Apple and buy the entire Brazilian stock market.
Unbelievable.
Isn't that unbelievable?
Well, Brazil's down and Apple's up.
But if you look, if you underwrite the Brazilian equity market, one of the things that's interesting is they have very high quality boards and they're remarkably young average age.
They're 20 years younger often than the average American board.
So they're Ninja Turtles.
They're not Lone Rangers.
And it's going to be very interesting if you go throughout the BRICS, you have a much younger age group in the leadership.
And I'm sure they're, you know, they're.
They're getting very frustrated.
I think that's why initially Obama was so important because the powers that be here said, you know, for God's sakes, get a Ninja Turtle and make him president.
We can't afford everything to look like Henry Kissinger.
Uh huh.
Yeah, it's an excellent point.
They really need this kind of hip face to put on all this.
And it's a really fascinating dynamic.
You know, as I think about Global 3.0, if its leading edge is information technology, and one of the biggest problems you've identified is this covert world that's underneath the public state and what's going on.
Under there.
So the information tech really increases their ability to beef up that split between the two worlds.
So, with all this digital surveillance in mind, is Global 3.0 maybe the most challenging model for us?
Because, you know, we're in this kind of situation where the covert side is growing and it's harder and harder to see what's happening below the surface.
I think Global 3.0, you know, sometimes I make Global 3.0 sound like it's exciting and fascinating.
You know, it's got a very ugly dark side of it.
Okay.
Because, you know, in the industrial model and global 2.0, you know, physical force was a much more important part of control.
Now we've got much more invasive, invisible forms of control.
And so one of my favorite authors, Andrew Vox, says that the internet is the ultimate op.
Oh, yeah.
You're using digital technology to literally collect and monitor and harvest.
People and their intelligence in real time that is quite phenomenal.
At the same time, it creates a platform for all sorts of communication and disclosure.
And the interesting thing is, if you look at the global population, you know, they're more of us.
It's what the British poet said, you know, ye are many, they are few.
So, you know, we're seeing transparency used in wonderful and powerful ways at the same time that we're seeing this invasive technology being used for more and more control.
And there's a comp, you know, the competition between good and evil continues on the digital platform, and which way it goes is anybody's guess.
You know, I'm inherently an optimist, so I believe that it'll go well.
If you read, there's a wonderful book, if you haven't read, I would recommend Tim Wu, who ran for lieutenant governor in New York, is a Columbia professor and has a book called The Master Switch.
And what he does is he goes back through the history of information technology.
And talks about a new technology comes out.
There's a wonderful period of renaissance when everybody loves it and sees what it can do.
And then suddenly it consolidates and gives more central control.
And you keep stepping through these progressive periods of innovation, more central control, innovation, more central control.
It's very well written.
It's a fun book to read, but I think his thesis is very dead on.
And that's the course of the concern.
It's interesting, the CPA Association just came out with a new survey of companies.
They say their number one concern is.
Regulatory problems and regulatory expense and uncertainty.
But I think number two or number three is now cyber hacking.
Oh, yeah.
Because war has simply moved out of the physical realm into the digital realm.
And, you know, we've all become deeply dependent on these systems, which are driving us all crazy.
Absolutely.
They drive me crazy.
Yes.
Well, Catherine, if you had to size things up right now, Would you say that the centralization team was winning at this point?
And is the decentralization team in trouble?
The centralization team won the financial coup d'etat.
Okay.
They stole $4 trillion, or they wouldn't think of it as stealing.
Centralization vs Decentralization00:05:32
But Mr. Global, in one sense, has never been more powerful.
At the same time, Mr. Global, my read of Mr. Global is he's very afraid.
Of what?
Well, that's the $64,000 question.
Mr. Global is behaving in a way that's very insecure.
And I think, first of all, when you unleash the rebalancing of the global economy, you're creating a massive organic Process that's going to dramatically increase the economic power of billions of people.
That means he's created his own headache.
You know, he's got more people creating more wealth to be harvested.
At the same time, you've got more people with a higher learning speed.
It's a more organic, bigger, more powerful thing to manage.
Sure.
So I think that's one.
But then I think the question is what's going on geophysically with the planet and what's going on with forces, you know, that are whatever is going on in space, what is that and how does it relate to what's going on in the Planet.
You know, there's a reason Mr. Global is building underground bases right and left.
You know, and it's whatever it is, it's not good for the rest of us.
It's interesting.
When the guy said, you know, I had a lovely guy, I was on a board, and the chairman of the board gave me this very glossy book on the Council of Foreign Relations.
He said, it's time for you to join.
And I said, you know, I really just don't want to do that.
He wanted me to ask Nick Brady for a letter to sponsor or to nominate, to sponsor.
And I didn't want to ask Nick Brady for anything.
So, you know, I said, I really don't want to go there.
And he said, really, with a look of terror on his face, if you don't, you'll be out forever.
And I suddenly had this image of them taking my name off the locker in the underground base.
Yeah, right.
They probably did.
And I had, you know, I sort of had a flash where I said, you know, well, I'll take my chances up on the surface with a hoy pol hoy.
Yeah.
Because I don't want to get.
I do not want to get stuck in an underground base with those guys.
I just, you know.
Well, an interesting aside to that, I recall that you were doing a report about driving around and listening to the study of the effects of nuclear testing in the atmosphere.
And it occurred to you that perhaps one of the reasons for all these hidden bases and a secret space program was due to the fact that they may have determined the damage to the world was much more severe.
Well, yes, it was.
Book on Area 51 that went into a lot of the nuclear testing.
And one of the things discussed was had our above atmosphere testing hurt the ionosphere and was that what the global spraying was about?
Again, I don't know.
But I think, you know, and you've certainly seen an acceleration of the pressure to start a colony on Mars, to become a multiple planet civilization, which I think is a very good thing.
You know, as a risk manager, I just think that's a great idea.
So I encourage all of it, I applaud all of it.
But It makes you wonder what they are worried about.
So, I just see Mr. Global as being coming from a place of insecurity.
And I think the more we can come up with solutions that increase total wealth, because that makes, you know, it's always easier to manage the global population when you're handing out more goodies as opposed to taking them back.
So, I think we have to come up with solutions that create more wealth and which reduce risk for Mr. Global.
Because, you know, think of it this way the biggest problem on this planet is not.
You know, the alignment between you and I and Mr. Global.
The biggest problem on this planet is the alignment between the human race and the physical planet.
Yes.
And I'm a lot more worried about getting the human race into alignment with the physical planet and with each other than I am about getting us into alignment with Mr. Global.
So anything I can do to align with Mr. Global to help do that, I'm happy to do that.
I see.
I see.
Right.
So you're.
Question of.
Yeah, right.
You're willing to go where the solutions are.
I know what you mean.
Right.
But the question is who's Mr. Global?
Ah.
Big question.
You know, that's what I've always wanted to know because if you look.
It's very interesting when I first started to litigate with the Department of Justice.
I entered a process of meeting all these different worlds of activists.
And what I discovered is they were all trapped in their little pigeonhole.
You know, they're against nuclear testing or they're against environmental damage or they're against financial fraud or they're against narcotics trafficking.
And I kind of said to them, why don't you just sit down and agree that your problem is a group of people that are doing all of these things?
Instead of identifying or defining your problem as a what problem, why don't you define your problem as a who problem?
You know, this is a very centralized situation.
And it seems to me that you've got a centralized model, and the model is doing everything.
It's a very small number of people who are ultimately on the committee to run the planet.
You know, why don't you ask the question, who's doing this?
Yeah.
And of course, there was terrible fear.
And it's like, no, no, we don't want to ask that question because it's, You know, we might have happened to us what happens to you.
Right, exactly.
Institutionalizing the Business00:03:46
And that reminds me.
Right, so.
I'm sorry, go ahead.
No, you go.
Oh, I was just going to say you had this funny blog entry on Solari a little while ago where you said that at a certain time you were tired of being ignored on these issues.
And then you realized that the people you were trying to wake up weren't ignoring you.
They had actually absorbed the information, but they didn't want to deal with it.
Oh, well, actually, I don't feel ignored at all because, you know, it's really amazing.
I say something.
And a week later, all the corporate media are saying, Oh, yeah.
I feel like E.F. Hutton.
I always tell the story of being in the airport and turning on a financial show, and the commentators, a very famous financial show, is using whole sentences and paragraphs from my latest stuff.
Oh, yeah.
And it's funny, I still do, I still do, have these market share, market research firms that subscribe to the Solari report.
And there was this one market research firm, they would come on.
And literally a week later, one of the most famous financial commentators would write something using my thing.
No question.
And I thought, well, you know, there's no doubt about it.
Well, no, I've seen that.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I'm sure you've seen it happen to you.
Oh, sure.
Hasn't it happened?
Well, I've really seen it happen with your stuff continuously, especially they have a way of picking up on your terms, your vocabulary, you know, even if they change the meaning a little bit.
The slow burn, for example, I've tracked a number of network commentators now who are using that.
And I also see you plagiarized on a regular basis.
Interesting if you analyze it, but they never credit the source.
You know, I suspect they don't want to give Solari a mainstream platform, but they're happy to use your stuff.
Well, but this is, you know, what's interesting is if you look at the journey I'm on, my interest, you know, my passion, my dream is to see us evolve the investment model to something that is, you know, much more of a Ninja Turtle model.
So I'm looking, you know, I get my kicks out of creating real wealth.
You know, and one way you can do that is to reduce risk.
And so I'm very much, that's how I got going on this journey coming out of the Bush administration.
I said, you know, I don't want to live in a totalitarian state.
So, how do we build an economy where peace pays and Mr. Global, you know, makes a lot of money and calms down and gets happy?
So, where's the win win here?
How do I achieve this?
And sometimes I think the way I help everybody get there is by creating something and letting them steal it from me.
You know, it was very interesting.
When I was on Wall Street, we sold the firm in 1986, and then I made a commitment that I would stay.
And I knew I was going to leave when Brady left and went into government, or when he left, I knew I was going to leave the firm.
And I had promised him that I would institutionalize my business.
And I soon discovered that the partner that I was working with basically what he wanted to do was steal all the business from me.
So if I tried to collaborate with him to help institutionalize the business, he wouldn't work with me.
But if I could engineer it so he could steal it, Then I could keep my commitments to Brady and the partnership.
Oh, that's great.
So I just organized everything so he could steal it and then he could brag about how he stole it from me.
You know, and that was so that was how I was able to.
You're once again.
So I feel like, right, I'm, you know, it's kind of the, it's a very girly thing to do.
What can I tell you?
But Ronald Reagan, one of my favorite quotes from Ronald Reagan, he says, you know, he says, if you're willing to give away the credit, you can get anything you want done in Washington.
GMOs and Foreign Opposition00:07:15
Absolutely.
So.
Yeah, it's a really true quote.
Well, you know, I want to cover a couple of odd things that have been popping up on the radar recently.
Okay.
I'm interested in as the year started, these offbeat stories got going, like this mini measles outbreak.
I will bet you dollars by, I have no knowledge about it.
But if you look at the timing coincident with this major campaign to mandate vaccines, you know, they're banging on Ron Paul, you know, about vaccines, and then just suddenly, woo!
We just happen to have the Disney, you know, I hate to say it, I need to buy a warfare.
Yeah, that's really obvious.
And it seems like the Ebola push was an early dress rehearsal.
And then the storyline of Disney and vaccines, it's like the fluffy version of the whole thing.
Well, interestingly enough, you know, Bob Simon, CBS reporter just killed in a car crash, was working on a story for Ebola on 60 Minutes.
Did you know that?
Well, that's very interesting.
Now, given what's going on with the vaccine, You know, I've never seen the pressure for mandating vaccines hot and heavier than it is now.
And it's very ugly.
I don't know if you remember when they, I think Massachusetts either passed or almost passed during the swine flu stuff, legislation for mandated vaccines.
But it was, you know, it's that kind of level of pressure.
And it's very, very ugly.
And it kind of makes you wonder what they're building up to.
Really deeply concerning.
We have a new legislation entered in California.
Apparently, I haven't read the legislation, but that is going to try to pull the religious exemption on kids being vaccinated before they get to school.
Now, when you try and pull the religious exemption, that's bad.
And so the question is why?
What's this about?
So they're crossing boundaries that before they knew enough to tolerate.
And that's a bad trend.
The religious exemption is not a boundary you want to cross.
And you're creating a fight that's a fight.
If I were Mr. Global, I would not take this fight on at this time.
I think it is a huge mistake.
Yes, yes, it's definitely a clumsy and unpredictable course of action.
I totally agree with that.
Church state is something we've battled out for many centuries, and it's, you know, we ended a lot of killing by negotiating that truce.
And it's, you don't want to mess with that truce because it gets into everything.
Excellent point, yeah.
Well, some of the news on the GMO Monsanto front is interesting.
They do seem to be faltering over the last year or so.
You know, it really feels like they're losing the argument that GMOs are safe.
And it feels like they've been exposed in a way.
And that's a good thing.
And it looks like they're going to have to find some new approach because people just don't trust the frankenfood.
Right.
Now, Monsanto is so advanced on the domination of the agricultural landscape already, but they've stalled out recently.
How do you see the GMO battle that's been heating up?
You know, one of the biggest challenges that Monsanto has.
Is that the organic food business is growing leaps and bounds.
There are so few parts of the economy that are growing with unbelievable margins and just broad based, deep demand.
And the numbers on the organic food growth are just off the charts.
And that's creating a constituency for, you know, so the alternative can make so much money.
And the other thing that's happened is, and I think it's very much because of the foreign opposition.
So, you have opposition to terminal seeds and GMO all around the world that's very effective.
You know, Putin's used it very effectively.
And that foreign opposition has really stopped the WTO dead in its tracks in many respects or contributed to its being stopped dead in its tracks.
But it's also gotten enough of the American population to the point where they realize, you know, when I first moved to Tennessee and I tried to warn people about what, What was happening with GMO food?
They just said, Look, there's no way the government and my congressmen would allow that to happen.
There's just no way they would.
Now you have an enormous switch that's as a result of the bailouts, with people saying, You know, my government and the business leadership would absolutely do something to destroy me and my family for a small amount of profit.
Wow.
So you have a fundamental change in the paradigm of what the American people can fathom.
And I think that.
Is really hurting the Monsanto effort.
Now, if you look at the force that's been applied, both economically and just even down to physical force, anybody who can bring that force to bear, it's far from over.
I mean, if you've read Jeffrey Smith's book, you know basically the president of the United States picked up the phone and got a British researcher fired and destroyed because he, Wrote something truthful about GMO food.
Right.
You know, that's some pretty mighty.
When the White House is willing to get you fired, you know, across the oceans, that's pretty major force.
My question has always been why do you want to be able to control the seed supply through intellectual property laws?
And I've always believed, Daniel, that the logical reason is the dollar can't stay in the oil standard forever.
Technology is going to shift that line.
And so, where's the.
Whereas the asset that you can control globally that will replace an oil standard, and I always thought a seed and food one was the candidate, and that's ultimately why so much firepower was behind Monsanto and the effort.
Well, that's very intriguing.
Actually, it makes a lot of sense because it can become the new petrol dollar, this new GMO dollar.
But the GMO science, and I saw you mention this in your yearly wrap up for last year.
You mentioned some research where the GMOs are actually changing our DNA and some of the studies that are coming out about this, which would seriously give it a kind of deeper purpose, maybe even an attempt to control the biological entity.
Well, that's, you know, I mentioned in the wrap up transhumanism.
And I think transhumanism is a real issue, whether it's what's in the global spring or what the food is doing in changing TNA.
If you read Jeffrey Smith's work, who's the person I most read on GMOs, what he describes are studies that indicate that if you eat GMO food, the next one or two generations are sterile, or you have a much lower fertility rate.
Adding Value to the System00:08:35
And so, one possibility here is we're looking at long term.
Efforts to reduce global population.
Okay.
We've certainly seen the fertility rate come down, as far as I know.
So I think, you know, who knows?
This gets back to the question of who's really in control and what are they afraid of.
Right.
Right.
Absolutely.
And I like your term, Mr. Global.
You know, I've decided it's one of the better names for this group out there.
Yeah.
If you start to use Mr. Global, CBS will be using it in two years.
You watch.
No doubt about it.
Now, Catherine, if you had to size up 2015, what is your outlook for this year now that we're a few months in here?
Change is accelerating.
Change is accelerating dramatically.
And if you look at the surprises that are going to keep coming out of the, you know, across from the laboratories, they're going to just be amazing.
And it's, you know, I think certainly in North America, you've had a lot of the population, you know, saying, okay, we're going through a bad period.
It's going to get back to normal.
Well, it's not, you know, the change.
The change we've had over the last 10 or 20 years is nothing compared to the next 10 years.
So I think 2015 is the year when everybody realizes, you know, oh my God.
Yeah, yeah.
This is the future.
People keep saying, well, you know, these things are going to happen.
No, it's now.
Here it is.
Get ready.
So I just think that the big thing is change is going to accelerate and we need to stay coherent.
You need to be really open.
And willing to adjust your life in anticipation of where things are going.
One of my favorite quotes is from Wayne Gretzky.
You know, you're up in the Northeast, so you should be a Wayne Gretzky.
Wayne Gretzky, somebody once asked him why he was such a great skater because he was so short.
He said, I skate to where the puck will be.
Yeah.
And I think it's time to take a deep breath and say, Look, I'm sorry the bad guys won the financial coup d'etat, but it is what it is.
Where is this all going, and how can I skate to where the puck will be?
And we have to be ready for some.
Pretty big surprises.
I think it's going to be a very organic process.
And that's why we put so much investment into the wrap up and we're publishing it in book form.
I'm going to send it to you up in Cambridge next week because you really need a framework.
There's so much noise flowing out that you really need a framework to help you understand sort of what the big trends are and to see where it's going because there's tremendous opportunity, but we can't, you know, you can't stay back saying, well, well, well, I don't like it.
Because globalization is just going to accelerate.
I pointed out in the wrap up, if India has a per capita income GDP, a per capita GDP of $4,000 to $5,000 a year, and we have a per capita GDP of $52,000, and thousands of businesses and entrepreneurs can make money by bringing that into parity, one way or another, it's going to come into parity.
Now, hopefully, they come up to $52,000.
If the crash up happens, we'll all go up to $100,000, but it's possible we can go down to $4,000.
Yeah, yeah.
So, the question is that's a very scary reality, but it is what it is.
So, how do we convert to functioning in that kind of global economy?
Right, exactly.
Well, it's like we need a new attitude to deal with these new realities.
And what's amazing about this is that you've summed it up so well many times before.
It's really that our attitude can't be one of victimization, victimhood.
I've been victimized by this larger thing over there.
Because it's actually a dangerous frame of mind and highly ineffective.
Because, you know, I think some of the hidden forces count on people feeling overwhelmed at the terror of the situation and probably count on that response to actually make real victims out of them.
So that's definitely a bad track.
Right.
Now, this reminds me of a good friend who works at a large financial firm.
And she just happened to run across some of my shows with you, and she'd never heard them until recently.
And she didn't know much about the kind of Solari informed worldview.
So she really got into it and she heard all the episodes.
And then a few weeks later, she came back to me and she said, You know, I can't believe it.
I'm stuck working with these people who have no scruples.
They're making millions.
And I'm like, Well, here's the thing if you take this knowledge, it gives you the power to get in the game.
Right.
You know, she now has the knowledge.
And one of the reasons I spend as much time trying to understand what's going on is I'm an investment advisor.
You know, I want to know where the puck is going because I want my clients, you know, I want them, you know, not drowning in 2.0.
I want them doing well in 3.0.
So I need to know where it's going.
I need to be able to watch that day to day today because you need to understand the fundamentals.
You know, if all sorts of financial commentators are saying the economy is entirely manipulated, you know, the fundamentals don't matter, well, that's because they don't understand the fundamentals.
I see.
You know, what I'm talking about.
Let's talk about the real fundamentals.
Right, right.
You know, is that mining company making money on gold or is it making money on drilling, you know, rocks for underground bases?
Let's talk about where the real fundamentals are.
So she now has the knowledge to get into the game.
And the reality is, if you face it, the benefit of facing it, you got to face it with a sense of humor.
The benefit of facing it is it gives you the knowledge to get in the game and to not be victimized.
Now, I will say this I have never once.
You know, when I was litigated for 11 years and literally had to go down to peanut butter and jelly, but my entire staff and all my legal staff were, all the lawyers who worked for me were under strict orders they may never use the V word.
That's what we called the V word.
Because I was trained to believe as soon as you use the V word, you basically define yourself as somebody who's out of the game.
I see.
In other words, and promoting victim mentality.
Is one of the tactics used to encourage people to give up and let go so you're free to run things yourself.
So it's a way of marginalizing people, and if you fall into it, you lose.
Do you know what I mean?
So, it's a tactic, and you know, it's a very clever tactic.
And if you buy into it, that's it, you're dead.
So, you know, it's really funny because I remember one paper wrote a great story about us, but they used the V word.
And my attorney called me up hysterically and said, Oh my God, they're going to use the V word in the headline.
What should I do?
To get that headline, we'll live with it.
You know, we'll live with it.
You know, but that's how they play it.
Yeah.
And it's a way of marginalizing you.
You know, and I wasn't a victim.
I knew what I was trying to do was politically sensitive.
Now, I never thought my own Wall Street partners would try and falsify evidence and frame me, but who knew?
Well, if anything, you're just an incredible example of turning that type of thing around by not adopting this victim mentality.
Well, but here's the interesting thing.
Because I'm a Christian, I look at everything spiritually.
I asked God, I said, you know, I want to get out.
I don't want to be a part of this.
I want out.
But to me, you have to get out in a way that adds value to the system.
You have to build wealth.
The pathway out has to be a wealth building one.
It's just that's my training.
That's what I believe.
And when you look back at it, Daniel, I got what I asked for.
I got out.
It's kind of a miracle because whoever thought you could get out and survive?
So I forgot to say, God, I want to get out.
I want it to be very profitable and pleasurable and short.
Painless.
So, you know, but I did.
That's why one of my favorite preachers is never pray for patience because God will send trouble to teach you patience.
Building Wealth Pathways00:13:21
Wow.
So, never pray for patience.
So, I prayed to get out and I got out.
So, I got what I asked for.
And now Solari is thriving and all these people are benefiting from your experience doing that and all this wisdom you've shared.
Yeah.
And it's fun because, you know, I tell everybody my subscribers are the most wonderful people in the world.
First of all, they all love fresh food.
So, you know, going to have lunch is always amazing.
But the other thing is, they're very hardworking, very intelligent, a lot of very successful people.
And they really want to make a positive difference in this world.
And they're a very ethical, moral bunch.
Anyway, they're fabulous people.
And I always tell them, look, I used to work for people I thought were criminals and scallywags, and now I work for people I really like.
So it's a good lesson.
Isn't that interesting?
Well, I know subscribers enjoy your movie pics.
So, what are you watching lately?
Oh, my latest one?
Yes.
You know, this week on the Solari report, we just did this again.
I rarely ask people to watch a movie twice, but this one is Terms and Conditions May Apply, and I'm doing it twice because I'm really trying to get them to watch it.
Have you seen it?
It's a documentary, right?
It's a documentary about what we all agree to when we click yes to the terms and conditions.
Right.
I think one of their estimates, they sat down and really did an analysis.
If we all truly read the terms and conditions that we agree to in the average year, We would spend three months of the year just reading terms and conditions.
That's amazing.
But it's about all the terms and conditions you agree to and what can happen to you from agreeing to all those terms and conditions.
It's pretty, you know, it gets back to your question of, you know, is all this technology being used to control in gruesome ways?
And it's very, it's a very sobering documentary.
It's extremely well done, very entertaining.
Okay.
So that was the movie.
When we published the wrap up, and you'll get it when I send it to you, we finally, we get so many requests for our lists of movies that we had a.
Section in the back, which is a list of all the movies we've recommended.
And one of the reasons I do this, you know, my way of explaining the economy to most people is with movies because I find most people, they're like your friend.
They're busy.
They're, you know, and it can be depressing.
Yeah.
So, you know, and as I've always said in America, fact is fiction is fiction is fact.
So if you want to understand the economy, it's, you know, Hollywood has told everything.
They tell all.
Right.
So if you get that list and you watch everything, you'll.
Well, I'm like you.
I watch a lot of movies.
Yeah.
Yeah, I'm into it.
I like finding things out that way.
It's all there.
It's all there.
Definitely.
It's like a steam valve.
They let pressure.
Exactly.
This is why I feel so sorry for Brian Williams because basically any anchor for a nightly news program is paid to lie.
Yes.
So for years you're being paid to lie and then suddenly you get dished out because you're lying.
It's like, well, where have you been?
Right.
Well, hopefully they'll take Bill O'Reilly too.
But anyway, but if you look at those movies, you know, there's an awful lot of truth in them.
There's an awful lot of truth.
So, and it's funny that, you know, for example, if you watch the JP Morgan, the two bankers who got killed in the train crash, and you watch if, you know, sort of how it worked and why I say I think it's an op or I think there's a very good chance it's an op.
You know, if you watch the Bourne Identity series and you watch Telephone with Charles Bronson, you know, and what was the other one?
The Gina Davis one, long kiss goodnight, I think.
Yes.
So if you watch Telephone, The Bourne series and Long Kiss Goodnight, then you can understand exactly what happened.
Absolutely.
And one of the things you're great at pointing out is if you know someone and they want to pretend the official reality is true, then that's fine.
Good luck to them.
But the truth is accessible for someone who's willing to look and apply the time and attention to it and is willing to accept the implications of it all.
So it's a matter of choice, really.
Some people will deaden themselves to the actual reality, even with facts in hand.
Because it's easy.
Right.
And I'm somebody, I pretend the official reality is true all the time.
You know, so I'll go to a cocktail party or a meeting and no one wants to discuss anything other than the official reality.
You know, I'm a great believer.
I have an ethical obligation to give and get energy in my interactions with people.
It's all part of the Ninja Turtle model.
So, you know, if I walk into, let's say I'm at a cocktail party or a dinner and everybody wants reality because let's face it, there's a risk for them and going, you know, I'm happy to, you know, there's a lot going on in the official reality.
I'm happy to stay there.
So I don't go there, you know.
Now, at the same time, if the waiter walks in and is clearly a hitman from the mafia, then I want to excuse myself from the dinner.
So I like knowing how to do that.
Do you know what I mean?
Or if the food is poisoned, I like knowing how to see those, you know, because I find, you know, whether it's in managing money or in just managing my life, you know, I will see anomalies and then identify risk and get out, you know.
Let's not.
Go there.
Let's not, you know.
Right.
So you understand how the covert world works, and that's enough.
You want to know how to avoid that risk.
So I think, you know, if you want to navigate the economy, you've got to be savvy.
You've got to be willing to put on your, you know, official reality hat and be charming and be productive within society.
But you've also, you know, you want to use your covert understanding to make sure that the decisions you make in your overt life are help you go to where you want to go and you don't take on risk you don't want to take.
Right, absolutely.
So, we're not going to see you at one of these dinner parties trying to convince someone madly about how there's Mr. Global and all that.
Not at all.
No, not absolutely not.
You know, my knowledge is there to contribute to you in whatever way you want.
I'm not going to try and.
Now, if you want to know something, it's really funny.
I gave a speech once at a church in Memphis, and this absolutely beautiful, aristocratic, very well turned out woman came up to me and she said, How can I learn your material?
And I said, Well, what exactly do you want to know?
And she looked me dead in the eye and she said, I want to know everything you know.
Love people like that because she wanted power.
She, you know, she wanted to, you know, this was a southern magnolia, so she wasn't going to share it at the dinner party either.
She was going to use it to protect her family.
Right.
And so you absolutely run into those people all the time.
But other people just don't want to go there because they perceive it, you know, as being risky for them in a variety of ways or they find the information depressing.
I once had one dear friend who walked into the house in Tennessee once, threw open the door and she said, I've got it.
I can understand how we relate to each other.
She said, I told my husband last night, I said, she always knows what's going to happen before it happens.
And so here's how we're going to do this you're going to tell me what to do, but you're not going to tell me why I'm doing it.
And so tell me what to do and tell me.
And I know that it doesn't always work.
I know it only works 80% of the time.
So I'll forgive you for the 20% it doesn't work.
But just tell me what I need to do, but I don't want to know.
Why I'm doing it, and I don't want to know what it is you know.
So I don't want any of the background.
I just tell me what to do, and now I understand.
I just know to do it.
I said, okay, you know, that's how we'll relate.
She didn't want to know.
So fascinating.
So everybody's, you know, everybody, if you look at most people in the economy, they have a fiduciary obligation to their family and friends, and they're trying to navigate.
And each one of us has to use our knowledge to help them navigate more successfully.
But they have to decide how that is and how it works for them.
Do you know what I mean?
Yeah.
And we each, part of what every human being needs is they need to be able to remain coherent.
And so, whatever way we collaborate and support each other, I have to collaborate with you in a way that increases your coherence.
And you have to do the same for me.
I see.
And because people are different, and because, frankly, many people in the society are very, very afraid.
Now, I'm in a very lucky position, you know, for a variety of reasons.
I'm not afraid.
And part of it is I got kicked out.
Thank God.
Well, you face the danger.
Right.
And I've spent many, many years developing a constituency of people who want to know.
So I have a broad based support of people who want to know.
And that's a business that supports me.
I'm lucky.
Would you say that over the last five years, the public awareness is growing and in a better place?
Or is the manipulation still too strong?
I think people are getting much smarter and more knowledgeable.
And many of them are doing it very quietly.
They're not admitting that they know.
But I think the deterioration of faith in the leadership, both business and government, is tremendous.
And the bailouts did that.
Now, I also think that as that's happened, sort of the terror tactics and the entrainment and subliminal.
Programming and other mind control that's gotten layered on is heavier and heavier.
So, as the awareness goes up, the mind control and the violence gets heavier and heavier.
And the thing that's going to make 2015 so difficult is the acceleration of both.
That is going to be, I find that very unpleasant.
And it's important that you mention mind control there.
That is one of those terms that people will sometimes tune out.
But in your work, it's crucial that we understand it.
The one Celia report I try and get every subscriber.
To listen to is the one on entrainment technology and subliminal programming and how it's applied to financial applications.
Because my biggest concern as an investment advisor is I run into situations where entrainment has been used, entrainment and subliminal programming have been used to talk people into investments which are money losers.
Yeah.
So it's very important when you make an investment that your mind is clear.
You know, and, you know, what we all struggle with is how not to let our emotions rule us when we're making investment decisions.
One of my favorite investment books is.
Behavioral analysis by Montier, which is all about how not to let your emotions rule your investment process.
So, you apply entrainment technology and subliminal programming to someone when they don't know that such a thing exists, and then you get a real mess.
So, to me, it's extremely important from a financial standpoint that we know this stuff exists and are prepared to navigate a world where we need to protect our own minds and our own investment decisions from it.
Yeah.
Well, again, this is the real story.
Right.
Catherine, what's coming up for Solari in 2015?
Are you doing any conferences?
I know last year you did the Secret Space Conference.
What kind of events are you looking at for this year?
And what special stuff do you have coming up?
Well, we're going to do more lunches or one day sort of extend the lunch to more of a discussion to do sort of a one day, you know, 10 to 4 kind of thing with subscribers as I travel around the country.
And I'm hoping I'm going to be in.
My current plan is to be in Australia in May and New Zealand, and then Europe, probably Italy, Switzerland, and Amsterdam in the Netherlands in the fall.
I'm going to be up on the East Coast in April.
So, as I'm traveling, I want to do more sort of things with people, but those are small groups, mostly subscribers.
The folks who put on the Secret Space Program are going to do a conference, I think, in Colorado on transhumanism, and if they do, I'll go ahead and attend.
You know, it depends on what they do.
Right.
Well, that would be excellent if it comes together.
And of course, that's the amazing thing about Solari.
You have this ability to break down some of the trends in society and apply it to investment, for example.
That's pretty unique.
And people may wonder sometimes, you know, why does this financial expert focus on these esoteric subjects?
And you do an exceptional job of weaving these things together.
I have a lot of people say to me, well, I have no money.
Why would I care to learn about investment?
Well, the reason you care about learning about investment is that's how you learn how to build wealth.
You know, when I was on Wall Street, everybody made money because they had knowledge about how money works, not because they had money, they used other people's money.
Global 2.0 Struggling00:11:04
Right.
But they had the technology of how money works and how you could organize money in a way that would make money.
So I think learning that, if you say you have no money, well, great, you need to get in there and learn about money because that's how you will, you know, develop the knowledge you need to attract and grow money.
That's number one.
But number two, if you want to be able to look at the world from Mr. Global's point of view, you want to follow price.
Right.
You know, price is the ultimate incentive system on this planet.
And when you watch where the price is going and where the flow of money is going, you are watching Mr. Global manage the economy.
That just makes me think the low gas prices we're seeing.
Fascinating, right?
Once in a while, they do something and they benefit from it.
Well, I think what they were doing was they were lowering Mr. Putin's revenues.
Yeah.
Well, that's what they did to Russia before, back in the 1980s.
That's how they crashed the Soviet Union.
Yes.
Yeah.
One of my favorite series on the Solarium.
Report is Jim Norman.
We have four or five interviews with Jim Norman on the oil card.
So I think the driver here is the oil card and the U.S. consumer is the beneficiary.
You notice prices are sneaking up now.
Yes.
Yes, we have a truce in the Ukraine.
They're reaching for a settlement and prices are sneaking up.
Well, did you hear about that strange story that Pravda put out last month about how they had information and some satellite imagery that was going to show how 9 11 actually happened?
I don't buy all.
I think the Russians have very good intelligence on 9 11.
But the reality is, the only time Putin's ever going to dish that out is when Mr. Global tells him to.
Do you know what I mean?
Yeah.
So I don't.
Yeah.
That was sort of like a paper tiger.
I don't know.
To me, that one looked like disinformation.
Okay.
I mean, I'm sure the Russians have the complete 411 on what really happened.
But I think if you look at how that, if Putin was going to use transparency as a weapon, it would be done much more quietly than that.
And, you know, I just see that one as being sort of a mess.
Absolutely.
I can definitely appreciate that.
And you're right that once in a while something pops up on the radar that sounds just too good, you know.
Although I should take this opportunity to ask you how you feel about Putin and Russia and how they're doing on the world stage.
Well, what Putin has done that's very clever is he's used GMOs.
And other sort of disclosure about the US leadership, which really speaks to an enormous amount of the US population.
You know, occasionally you'll see bumper stickers that say Putin for president.
Yeah.
And yeah, so he's been very clever about trying to win local, you know, sort of on the ground popularity in the United States.
And I think the way they've started RT and used RT has been very effective because, you know, to me, The U.S. has a very serious problem right now.
And let me describe what it is.
And I shouldn't take credit for this insight.
I have to give credit to Dr. Joseph Farrell.
Oh, yeah.
We had a workshop in Menlo Park in California in November, and he gave this insight.
It was very brilliant.
He said, You know, Bach wrote his music on a 28 track composition.
So when he wrote, he had 28 tracks going at the same time.
If you listen to popular music in America, it's one track, it's the drumbeat.
And if you look at the corporate media, everything is oversimplified into concepts which are just used to spin but bear no resemblance to the 28 track reality.
Okay.
If you look at what's been going on in Europe and the Ukraine, the European leaders are on the ground.
They're dealing with 28 tracks.
This is wrecking havoc in their economy.
The sanctions are tough on them.
They're dependent.
The Germans get a huge amount of their gas from Russia.
They're dealing with the 28 tracks.
Merkel is a physicist by training.
She's perfectly capable of dealing with the 28 tracks.
And they have gotten fed up with dealing with the U.S. that's trying to play a one track game.
The U.S. was part of raping Eastern Europe and Russia in the 90s.
You have a lot of those financial interests thinking they can play the same game.
They can't.
When the 28-track people are saying, hey, we all have smartphones, grow up, that game, the Lone Ranger game, the shock doctrine game, doesn't work.
It doesn't play.
And you can't just come in, you can't create an implosion where a million people lose their home and think the IMF is now going to write the checks after the ballot.
And the IMF has said they're going to put in another 17 billion, but.
If you look at the implosion that's going on, it's going to cost a lot more than 17 billion when you create that kind of damage.
So I think you're seeing a 28 track world say back to the US, you know, we're sick of your drumbeat.
You know, you sit there in La La Land with your one track protected by these two huge oceans.
We're on the ground dealing with a 28 track world.
And I think you're seeing a huge psychological foot, you know, pushback.
Europe is being inundated with refugees from all the violence and chaos that the US is.
Created after 9 11.
Now, the US is trying very hard to bring Europe into a global trade, two global trade deals, and really grow closer to Europe, you know, at the same time that Europe is really bearing the pain of enormous, I would say, unsavvy behavior by the United States.
Oh, yeah.
It's an ugly picture, and both foreign and domestic, and I think it's because this one track drumbeat.
Isn't working.
And you include this ISIS group in that, and they look like they have all the trappings of someone's intelligence operation.
You really couldn't dream up a better group for us to fight against, let's face it.
If you look at the financing for ISIS and the speed at which they've grown, there's no way that finance is happening without Mr. Global wanting it to.
So the question is who is ISIS?
And I'm deeply suspicious.
Absolutely.
You know, the polls were very much against us putting boots on the ground in the Middle East, and suddenly, you know, with enough beheadings and burnings, you know, there's popular support for putting boots on the ground.
I just think it doesn't look very good.
It feels partly like a psychological op.
It feels like a very expensive operation, and anything that expensive has major financing.
And major financing that happens to inspire Big increases in US military spending, which then inspires big political contributions.
It's just more money circulating around the pro centralization team.
So I follow the money, and the money says to me that this is part of what I call global 2.0 struggling.
And here's the challenge the US is trying to assert control across the Silk Road.
You know, this is more effort to assert that control.
You know, so this is the empire being the empire and trying to make sure they control the southern route of the Silk Road.
You know, so more boots on the ground and more money for the people who will make that happen.
Exactly.
Well, it's interesting to point out here how fast the situation grew up just as soon as we were frustrated in our efforts to take down Syria.
Right.
Yeah, so I definitely see that the two are connected somehow.
Right.
And of course, now Europe has this major Muslim problem.
Right.
And the timing there is pretty sudden, also.
Just in an interview with John Lachlan on the Soleri Report, who's one of my favorite.
He's based in Paris, and I think he's one of the smartest guys about what's going on in Europe right now.
He's the person I always check in with.
And I forget what the number was.
He said, you know, two years ago in Germany, it was 20,000 a month of Muslim refugees.
Now you're talking about 600,000.
I think the number he used was 600,000.
It was enormous.
Maybe it was 60,000.
I don't know.
But it was a number that a country of that size would just find overwhelming.
Sure.
You know, it's pretty, you know, the United States is bringing incoherence into many places around the world.
And I think we sit here protected by, you know, two oceans and protected by a huge investment in Navy and 10 aircraft carriers.
And the world looks at us and is getting increasingly frustrated with the incoherence.
Yes, absolutely.
That's fascinating.
And if you had to take a look ahead, Of course, we have 2016 and election year coming up.
Do you think the new administration would just pick up the flag and run the same operations?
You know, I'm guessing you don't see any big changes coming on that front.
I don't know.
You know, it's very much going to depend on what Mr. Global wants.
You know, and I don't think of Mr. Global as being any particular sovereign nation.
But I think what we've watched with the dance between Russia, China, and the United States in the last year that's played in part through the Ukraine.
Is I think what Mr. Global wants is an acceleration of the build out of the global currency and sort of new economic system.
And that's part of getting Putin and the BRICS to really focus on building redundant systems because I think the Americans weren't going fast enough and Mr. Global wants speed.
And which gets me back to the question of what's Mr. Global afraid of.
But he clearly wants a global currency system and global digital systems to happen faster.
And I think that's Apple Pay.
I think the big bets on Apple Pay.
If Apple Pay succeeds, Apple will, in my opinion, go to the trillion dollar company.
Country.
Country is a big company.
Well, think about it.
I mean, I still can't get over 8% more on Apple, and we can sell Apple and buy the entire Brazilian stock market.
And there is that trend again.
So that's some of Global 3.0 right there.
This corporation is powerful and becoming the size of a major country.
Oh, well, that's already happened.
Right.
I mean, that's already happened.
Crowdfunding Ecosystems00:11:04
You know, Jack Ma, as a school teacher, started a company in his living room in essentially 1996, and now he's got a company that's bigger than many countries.
This is Alibaba.
Yeah.
Yeah, which you put at the very top of your news reports for 2014.
Yeah, I think the number one story of 2014 was the Alibaba IPO.
Why?
Because, one, it speaks to the power of planet equity.
And I think if you look at the deals made between the American and Markets and the Chinese, the Chinese opening up their A share market and the Americans opening up their market to Alibaba.
I think that was a very big step forward towards planet equity.
But I think the idea that somebody, a school teacher who's not even a techie, can start a company and aggregate small business people and entrepreneurs into a force that mighty in that fast a time, it speaks to the power of the smartphone revolution and where it's taking us.
And I think it's an amazing story.
And it's amazing to me because.
I'll tell you, one of the most frustrating experiences I had in the 90s was you literally constantly got the pushback from Washington and Wall Street that they had no interest in what average people were thinking about or talking about or doing.
And, you know, I kept saying, look, if you aggregate, you know, hundreds of millions of little people, it's a mighty, mighty force.
But they really weren't interested in it.
And, um, You know, if you look at what Jack Ma has done, he's really interested in making it possible for the little guy to generate an income.
And he's aggregated literally hundreds of millions of people that Wall Street and Washington had no interest in until he aggregated them, you know.
And it shows the power, you know, of basically coming up with a model that says, okay, well, let's look at what the little people are interested in and give it to them.
You know, and to a certain extent, ePay has done that, PayPal has done that.
Um, Amazon has done that, but it's still, you know, if you try and talk to somebody on Wall Street about crowdfunding, they're like, Oh, that's small and little and unimportant, and they don't understand the power of what gets unleashed when you realign the fundamental relationship between the consumer and the producer in whole new ways that dramatically kick up the learning metabolism.
Oh, yeah, you know, they don't see the power of it because they're operating with big overheads and big fees, you know, to a certain extent, they're in 2.0.
And that's why it's going to be very, you know.
So I see Alibaba as sort of a very 3.0 effort to bring the vast majority of the global population who does not, you know, who does not operate in that overhead and fee flow into something, a connection with the equity markets where the micro is economically relevant to the macro.
And the macro and micro are trying to relate to each other in a way that's positive.
So we'll see if it works.
Fascinating.
Wow.
And I know you're a big fan of crowdfunding right from the start.
I'm a big fan.
Because, you know, the market is intelligent.
There is nothing more sobering to an entrepreneur than taking an idea and trying to bring it to market because your customers will make you smart, they will teach you.
And if you look at the great companies that have grown up, one of my favorite online companies is Lehman's Hardware in Ohio.
Have you ever got a layman's catalog?
No.
It was a store that served the Amish.
And so here they have the ultimate Luddite business, right?
Right.
Serving the Amish.
And they get, I guess one of the sons or son in law got them online.
Well, you know, they tapped into first the, what was it?
The, what was it in 2000?
Everybody was worried about the systems crashing.
Oh, Y2K.
Y2K.
So first they tapped into Y2K.
They hit the Y2K thing.
Then they hit the self sufficiency thing, on and on and on.
Well, the thing exploded, you know, and they're doing a gangbuster business, and it's all non electrical goods.
It's goods to run your household without electricity.
And it's a phenomenal catalog.
And they grew, if you look at their history, they grew just by listening to their customer.
Okay.
They listened and they listened and they listened and they listened.
And, you know, same with LLB listen to their customer, listen to the customer.
So, this virtuous cycle between, who was it?
Nick Hanauer did a great TED speech where he said, You know, companies don't create jobs, consumers create jobs.
They create a virtuous cycle between the consumer and the company.
And so, anyway, so the great thing about crowdfunding is it creates an intimate relationship where the consumer can finance the company and you get remarkable feedback and intelligence.
And I think it can make the early entrepreneurial process much smarter.
Throughout the economy, if you look at venture capital, venture capital as a business can only go down to a lower level.
But with crowdfunding or crowdfunding technology, you can create a much more robust.
You know, sort of thing happening at the micro level, and all sorts of entrepreneurs and ideas can get their initial funding and develop that couldn't otherwise.
So, you've got a whole layer of innovation in the economy that can get access to capital and grow in ways that really feed, you know, and think of the business.
You know, one of the ways that you get the housing market going is you feed the first time home buyers.
It's the same with business.
One of the ways you get, you know, new technology integrating and increasing productivity.
Is you feed the early venture stage.
And I just think you've got a whole world of people who can get capital now.
And believe it or not, a lot of them are women.
The statistics on how many women are getting money in crowdfunding versus venture capital is astonishing.
And so it really taps into that audience young people, women, people who normally wouldn't be trained to fit into the venture capital pathway.
So to me, it's just another pathway.
And what's interesting, Daniel, is.
If you haven't read the Kickstarter annual report, it's one of my ones I recommend in the wrap up, it's my favorite things.
But I think you had 22,000 projects financed with almost a billion dollars from countries all over the world.
I mean, it's remarkable the amount of money.
And what's interesting is we've reached a point where the regulations are so restrictive of financial markets operating at the micro level that people would rather gift the money.
Than put it in their brokerage account.
So I'm on Kickstarter giving entrepreneurs money with no return or the return of a gift rather than put it in my brokerage account and buy stock.
Now, that tells you that the arbitrage being created by that regulatory wall is enormous when people would gift billions of dollars rather than put it in their brokerage account.
So it's just to feel effective and actually do something and make something better.
Well, because I know the return is so extraordinary.
I see.
You know, if you look at the crowdfunding projects I've funded, the return is fantastic.
I would rather put the money in and see that return happen, even if I can't get a piece of it.
I see what you're saying.
I see what you're saying.
You know, because the return is so much greater than buying.
If you look at the shares I can buy in most instances, you know, the return is so much more remarkable on a percentage basis in the crowdfunding that I said, okay, I can't get a piece.
I'd still rather do it than put it here.
So, to simplify, it's creativity versus greed in that equation.
Yeah, I think inherently what I find, and I see this in a lot of my clients, I find that people intuitively have a very strong sense of what has a positive return in an economic sense.
And they relate to seeing things happen in the economy that make sense.
It makes them feel good to see the economy grow and work.
I see.
It makes them feel good to see people succeed.
And when they see things that need doing and need to happen not happening, they get frustrated and they have an urge to do it even if it doesn't make them money.
I see.
So they will switch their philanthropy budget from giving to a not for profit to giving to an entrepreneur who's getting something done there.
Wow.
And this reminds me a lot about your ecosystem idea, which is something that gives back to the actual ecosystem as opposed to the financial system.
Well, they're one and the same.
The financial system is part of the ecosystem.
In other words, the economy is a living system that supports another living system called civilization.
Right.
The financial system is just part of it.
But when you look at the economy as an ecosystem, you're just looking at it on the 28 tracks.
Right.
You're not oversimplifying it so it can fit into the Wall Street bucket.
You know what I mean?
Yes.
Yes, exactly right.
But I like this idea that we're not going to do anything that will harm the overall ecosystem just to satisfy this one sort of financial angle.
Well, you're going to try.
You know, once you get down into the mire and muck of investing in things, you know, trying to make money and trying not to harm the economy and trying not to harm your own money, it's a lot easier said than done.
So you try.
I assure you, if you get in the muck and mire, you will.
I mean, I fail all the time.
It's like baseball.
You're trying to get enough hits to get RBI above.
And the interesting thing, if you look at early venture, when I was on Wall Street, an early venture capitalist would tell you out of 30 deals, one or two would succeed, and that would make enough money to make money on the whole portfolio.
Yeah.
So you had to be good at failure because you had to do a lot of failing to get to success.
Isn't that fascinating?
Wow.
Wow.
Amazing stuff.
Predicting a Busy Year00:00:56
Catherine, thank you so much for your innovative analysis and really fascinating ideas.
Nobody can tell it better.
And it is mind bending and just so interesting.
Thank you, Daniel.
Now, I want everybody to visit Solari.com to get the information from your website that they're really going to need.
And I'm going to make a prediction here that 2015 will be the busiest year yet for you and Solari.
Yeah, I think I probably will.
Thanks again for being on the show.
Okay, bye.
Thank you for joining me for this powerful episode on the economic crash up and the black budget goes global with former Assistant Housing Secretary Catherine Austin Fitz.
You can find more special reports, interviews, and documentaries at www.darkjournalist.com.
You can also subscribe to our YouTube channel for the latest videos.