economic freedom

Headline from 2017 which is relevant again today: Credit Suisse under investigation. Again. For money laundering. Again.

With Credit Suisse expected to get swallowed up into UBS today and thus disappear as an independent entity, I thought it would be a fine time to reprint this article which describes the bank’s legacy.

Pay particular attention to comments at then of the post – – Credit Suisse has a subsidiary whose sole purpose in life is to launder money for clients. They have been laundering money since 1910. Yes, 1910.

(This discussion is cross-posted from my other blog, Attestation Update, because the flagrantly immoral behavior by a major international bank is an attack on the economic freedom of all. As a second order effect, this appallingly bad behavior, which has been an ongoing practice of Credit Suisse for over a hundred years, is a convenient excuse for national regulators in the U.S. and around the world to strip away more of our freedoms.)

Previously posted at Attestation Update on 2/24/17:

A different type of money laundering. Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.
A different type of money laundering. Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

Looks like Credit Suisse is in trouble again. The feds and NYDFS have opened another money laundering investigation.

Check out the report on 2/23/17 at Wall Street Journal – Credit Suisse Probe Opens Old Wounds for the following info.

(more…)
By Jim Ulvog, ago

A few notes on the banking crisis. Trying to keep track of the evolving story.

Whether considering assets, net income, market capitalization, or liquidity, some variation of above graph could be used when discussing Credit Suisse. Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

To keep track of the spreading banking crisis, I’m going to staring making notes here on the blog.  This will not be full coverage. Instead, this will highlight some parts of the story as it emerges.  This will help me track of developments.

(Cross posted from my other blog, Attestation Update, because the banking crisis is a threat to the economic freedom of us all.)

Previous discussions:

Update to late Sunday afternoon, 3/19/23 (yeah, it is necessary to time stamp blog posts that closely):

3/16/23 – Wall Street Journal –Eleven Banks Deposit $30 Billion in First Republic Bank – $30 billion of uninsured deposits went into First Republic Bank. Five billion each from J.P. Morgan, Citigroup, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo. 2.5 billion from Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs. Five others deposited 1 billion each. Purpose is to shore up liquidity.

Article indicates a large portion, if not most, of the funds are from money that regional banks have moved into the super big banks. They are recycling some of it back to the regional banks. These are uninsured deposits…well…conceptually they are uninsured, but after the bailout that wasn’t a bailout of Silicon Valley Bank, those are essentially insured.

The shoring-up started about four days earlier with money from Morgan.

3/16/23 – Wall Street Journal –Credit Suisse Will Borrow Up to $53.7 Billion – For several days there have been rumors Credit Suisse has been teetering on the edge of collapse. They announced borrowing $50 billion Swiss francs, which is US$53.7 billion, from Swiss National Bank, the nation’s central bank.

(more…)
By Jim Ulvog, ago

Stuff you can now safely say about COVID: the virus came from a lab leak.

Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

There are many things you could not say in public two or three years ago, all of which are now safe to say. Here is a starting point of the list of things you can now talk about in the open:

  • The virus came from a lab leak.

As I find articles to further develop the issues now say to say, I will have further discussion.

The virus came from a lab leak.

This was crazy talk three years ago but is slowly becoming accepted: the most likely place the COVID-19 virus came from was a Chinese research laboratory. Oh, by the way, said lab was funded in part by Dr. Fauci’s department.

(more…)
By Jim Ulvog, ago

Stuff you can now safely say about COVID: natural immunity works.

Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

There are many things you could not say in public two or three years ago, all of which are now safe to say. Here is a starting point of the list of things you can now talk about in the open:

A slow trickle of news reports are showing that lots of the crazy, coo-coo bird, nutzo, conspiracy theory wackiness you heard from your friends two or three years ago were actually correct. My friends deemed nuts by society who were saying these things were right.

Natural immunity works.

2/27/23 – Wall Street Journal – Three Years Late, the Lancet Recognizes Natural Immunity

Research report by Lancet has one surprise and two not-at-all-surprises. 

(more…)
By Jim Ulvog, ago

Stuff you can now safely say about COVID: masks don’t work.

Of the above five preventions, we have long known that #2 was not needed. We now know #1, #3, and #4 also had no value. Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

There are many things you could not say in public two or three years ago, all of which are now safe to say. Here is a starting point of the list of things you can now talk about in the open:

  • Masks don’t work.
  • Natural immunity works. (next post)
  • The virus came from a lab leak. (upcoming post)

There is a disturbing pattern emerging, which further corrodes credibility of the entire public health sector.

A slow trickle of news reports are showing that lots of the crazy, coo-coo bird, nutzo, conspiracy theory wackiness from two or three years ago was actually correct. Turns out my wacko friends who were saying these things were right.

Masks don’t work.

Previously discussed this study as covered by a couple of other reports:

From the New York Times (!), an opinion piece from Brett Stevens:

2/21/23 – Brett Stevens opinion in The New York Times – The Mask Mandates Did Nothing. Will Any Lessons Be Learned?

Article cites a study which analyzed 78 research reports, all of which were randomized control trials. Researchers say those little paper masks we were wearing for so long made little or no difference. They can find no evidence for positive impact.

How about those expensive N-95 masks? Same thing. No impact.

What about those studies which did show masks made a difference which were cited as proof positive that anyone who disagreed mask efficacy was a Neanderthal?

(more…)
By Jim Ulvog, ago

Excess deaths – More people are dying that expected based on historical average. Why?

Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

Reports are now surfacing there are far more people dying then we would expect now the pandemic is mostly behind us. This discussion will bring up merely two articles calling attention to this issue.

First article points out there are excess deaths after the pandemic has wound down. Second article points out there were excess deaths in California during the pandemic.

I suggest we need to look at government policies during the pandemic as the driving force behind the excess deaths.

Normally, one can look at the five-year average of deaths and make an estimate of the number of people who will die this year.  It is called “excess deaths” when the actual deaths are above the five-year average.

Three years after the start of the pandemic there are significant excess deaths in countries with believable statistics available.

9/2/22 – Next Big Future – Unknown Cause of 1 Million Excess Deaths per Year – Article from last September points out there are widespread excess deaths, even after allowing for Covid deaths.

Article says there were 18% excess deaths in the first two years of the pandemic. Now that the deaths from Covid have dropped, the overall death rate should be back to the historical average.

Yet that is not what is happening.

Author points out that England and Wales were showing 1000 excess deaths weekly in 14 of the previous 15 weeks. None of those are from Covid.

Excess deaths are running in the 10% up to 20% level around the world.

Excess death rates are 8% in the US and 20% in Brazil.

(more…)
By Jim Ulvog, ago

Research shows no identifiable benefit from wearing masks.

Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.

There is a surge of articles denouncing pandemic policy along with emerging research showing the destruction caused by intentional government policy.

I have made note of many of these articles and hope to start discussing them.

In this post:

  • Metastudy of 78 randomized control experiments finds masks have no benefit.
  • Pro-mask is anti-science. Anti-mask is pro-science. (Pro-mask is actually a religion.)

Our political, public health, educational, and religious leaders have much to answer for.

2/10/23 – The Spectator – I’m pro science. That’s why I’m anti-mask – The former brand president at Levi Strauss was hounded out of her job because she had the audacity to ask, in a company that presumably doesn’t actually hire any toddlers, whether a mandatory mask for toddlers was harmful.

She was accused of being “anti-science.” Oh the horror! Off with her head!!

Research from the Cochran study, which will be discussed more later, analyzed 78 studies covering 1 million people. The conclusion?

(more…)
By Jim Ulvog, ago