Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Economia e Produzione Industriale, Stati Uniti, Trump

Trump. Il piano infrastrutturale da 1,500 mld Usd.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-02-18.

2018-02-13__Trump__001

«This will be a big week for Infrastructure. After so stupidly spending $7 trillion in the Middle East, it is now time to start investing in OUR Country!» [Mr. Trumptweeted.]

*

«One of the president’s major campaign promises was a renewed commitment to infrastructure, but the plan has been delayed as health cares and tax reform took precedent in the administration’s first year. Mr. Trump is set to reveal his plan in full later Monday, but a preview of the rollout shows $1.5 trillion investment to improve roads and airports as well as an overhaul of the federal permit process»

*

Si dovrebbe dare atto al Presidente Trump di aver portato alla White House una ventata di sano buon senso.

Come spesso abbiamo ripetuto, Mr Trump è un pragmatico, non vincolato da orpelli ideologici, motivo per il quale si sente libero nel scegliere le azioni che più ritenesse essere opportune.

L’obiettivo finale è semplicemente quello di far lavorare e guadagnare di più il popolo americano. Ma per Mr Trump il ‘popolo americano‘ non corrisponde per nulla alla ristretta cerchia liberal: sono la povera gente che tira avanti la baracca a mala pena, che deve far quadrare il pranzo con la cena, ma anche gente che vota.

Lasciare che il popolo possa lavorare in santa pace e tenersi in tasca il frutto del duro lavoro è la massima cardine di Mr Trump.

Si tenga conto che il pil procapite mediano negli Stati Uniti è 17,593.00 Usd. Si ricordi come il valore mediano sia quello al di sotto del quale vive la metà della popolazione. La realtà americana è ben diversa da quella di lustrini e paillettes che i media liberal vorrebbero propinarci.

Infine: la migliora propaganda elettorale e lasciare lavorare e guadagnare la gente.

Trump il Grande. Riducendo le tasse aumentano stipendi, pensioni ed investimenti. 2,800 miliardi.

Con il drastico taglio delle tasse stanno rientrando negli Stati Uniti ingenti quantità di fondi prima allocati all’estero e le società ripartiscono questo surplus aumentando i dividendi e gli stipendi, nonché gli investimenti. Certo. gli effetti benefici si dispiegheranno lentamente nel tempo, ma l’effetto finale è assicurato.

Adesso, la seconda manche.

«President Trump will roll out Monday a long-awaited $1.5 trillion infrastructure plan that sticks to his “on time and under budget” mantra by seeking to speed up and cut costs of construction projects via a major overhaul of the federal permit process»

*

«They said the plan would budget $200 billion over 10 years to leverage the bigger investment by state and local governments, with the $200 billion of new spending offset with unspecified cuts elsewhere in the president’s 2019 budget, which also is being released Monday»

*

«The plan outlined by the White House sets four goals:

–  Stimulate $1.5 trillion of new investment in infrastructure.

– Shorten the permitting process to two years.

– Target invest in rural infrastructure such as broadband internet service with $50 billion in block grants to states.

– Improve workforce training, including expanding Pell Grant eligibility to students pursuing certification or credentials for in-demand fields»

*

Gli investimenti sono cospicui, ma il cuore del provvedimento è ben altro.

«a major overhaul of the federal permit process»

*

«Shorten the permitting process to two years»

*

Deburocratizzare.

Questa è la parola magica di cui l’Occidente aveva bisogno come l’aria da respirare in un mondo di persone pratiche, quali i cinesi, gli indiani ed i russi.

Riduzione delle tasse ed investimenti nel comparto produttivo: ecco la vera risposta alle sfide mondiali.

Tutto il resto è aria fritta.

Lasciamo pure che i liberals si occupino a tempo pieno dei sexual harassment, dei loro problemi sessuali e così via.

Parlino pure tra di loro in termini politicamente corretti: tanto gli Elettori non se ne fanno mica più nulla.

Il loro silenzio in materia di provvedimenti economici suona coma la loro condanna.


The Washington Times. 2018-02-12. Trump to release $1.5 trillion infrastructure plan on Monday

President Trump will roll out Monday a long-awaited $1.5 trillion infrastructure plan that sticks to his “on time and under budget” mantra by seeking to speed up and cut costs of construction projects via a major overhaul of the federal permit process.

Mr. Trump wants to repair not just roads and airports but also a federal system for building and maintaining infrastructure that is “fundamentally broken,” said senior White House advisers who gave reporters a preview of the plan.

“It’s broken in two different ways: We are under-investing in our infrastructure, and we have a permitting process that takes so long that even when funds are adequate, it can take a decade to build critical infrastructure,” said one official.

They said the plan would budget $200 billion over 10 years to leverage the bigger investment by state and local governments, with the $200 billion of new spending offset with unspecified cuts elsewhere in the president’s 2019 budget, which also is being released Monday.

The plan outlined by the White House sets four goals:

–  Stimulate $1.5 trillion of new investment in infrastructure.

– Shorten the permitting process to two years.

– Target invest in rural infrastructure such as broadband internet service with $50 billion in block grants to states.

– Improve workforce training, including expanding Pell Grant eligibility to students pursuing certification or credentials for in-demand fields.

The White House hopes the popularity of rebuilding America’s highways, bridges, railroads and seaports will be enough to attract rare bipartisan support in Congress.

A team of White House officials have spent a year on Capitol Hill developing the plan, but stiff resistance is still expected, especially from Democrats who recoil from changes to environmental regulations and demand at least $1 trillion in direct federal spending on infrastructure.

The president plans to travel the country to drum up popular support of his plan. He will highlight desperately needed infrastructure across the country and visit places where state and local governments have taken innovative steps to finance construction, showing the types of projects he wants to enable, officials said.

Mr. Trump made the same pitch in the State of the Union address: “I am asking both parties to come together to give us the safe, fast, reliable, and modern infrastructure our economy needs and our people deserve. Together, we can reclaim our building heritage. We will build gleaming new roads, bridges, highways, railways, and waterways across our land. And we will do it with American heart, American hands, and American grit.”

Only a handful of Democrats in the House chamber stood to applaud.

The Center for American Progress, a liberal Washington think tank, warned the plan would be a “scam” paid for by slashing social programs, shifting billions of dollars in costs to states and cities, and sidestepping public health and environmental protections.

Still, White House officials insist they are encouraged that there is broad agreement about the goal of infrastructure improvement and welcomes the debate on the method to accomplish it.

“This in no way, shape, or form should be considering a take-it-or-leave-it proposal,” said a White House official. “This is the start of a negotiation — bicameral bipartisan negotiation — to find the best solution for infrastructure in the U.S.”

The White House got a more enthusiastic response than expected from state governments, prompting Mr. Trump to up the goal from the original $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion from the same $200 billion federal payout.

The $200 billion would be divvied out in five categories:

–  An incentive program would use $100 billion for matching state and local government spending on projects, dealing filling in the final gaps in funding.

– Rural infrastructure grants get $50 billion.

– A $20 billion expansion in loan program and private activity bonds to finance projects.

– Another $20 billion for what the White House called “transformative programs” for visionary projects that prepare the U.S. for the future.

– And $10 billion for a capital financing to fund the federal governments’ office building projects.

An official described transformative projects as ones that “lift the American spirit” as opposed to just rebuilding what’s already there.

Jay Timmons, president of the National Association of Manufacturers, cheered the plan.

“President Trump is providing the leadership we have desperately needed to reclaim our rightful place as global leader on true 21st century infrastructure,” he said. “There is no excuse for inaction, and manufacturers are committed to ensuring that America seizes this opportunity.”

The hallmark of the plan is the effort to streamline the Byzantine federal approval process, but officials stressed that they were not rolling back public health and environmental protections.

“We want to shorten the process but, at the same time, preserve all of the environmental protections that current law has,” said an official.

Under the plan, the government would adopt a “One Agency, One Decision” structure, eliminating multi-agency reviews and approvals that slow the process.

It would remove the current series of duplicative requirements that are in law, where often a decision by one federal agency is second-guessed by another, creating turf wars and inevitable delays.

Mr. Trump’s idea is that for every decision that needs to be made, find the agency that has the best expertise and give them the authority to make that decision. Other agencies would then partner with the lead agency to execute the decision.


The Washington Times. 2018-02-12. Trump: Big week for infrastructure with new plan unveiled

President Trump declared Monday that the long-awaited infrastructure week finally arrived.

“This will be a big week for Infrastructure. After so stupidly spending $7 trillion in the Middle East, it is now time to start investing in OUR Country!” Mr. Trumptweeted.

One of the president’s major campaign promises was a renewed commitment to infrastructure, but the plan has been delayed as health cares and tax reform took precedent in the administration’s first year. Mr. Trump is set to reveal his plan in full later Monday, but a preview of the rollout shows $1.5 trillion investment to improve roads and airports as well as an overhaul of the federal permit process.

The plan is one that the White House hopes will gain bipartisan support as Democrats have been pushing for a similar proposal.

Annunci
Pubblicato in: Amministrazione, Stati Uniti, Trump

Trump. Sondaggio fatto su oltre 600,000 elettori.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-02-17.

Champagne__

Gli usuali sondaggi elettorali sono eseguiti su di un campione di grandezza variabile dai 500 ai 2,000 elettori intervistati.

Dovrebbe essere intuitivo come tale campione sia numericamente insufficiente a descrivere in modo proprio il comportamento di uno stato da 312 milioni di persone.

Per questo motivo Newsmax, una testata indipendente, ha commissionato un sondaggio su di un campione realmente esaustivo: oltre 600,000 persone.

Questi sono i risultati, che riportiamo in fotocopia.

Questi sembrerebbero essere risultati confortanti per l’inquilino della White House.

Nota.

Siamo perfettamente consci che ogni prospezione, ancorché fatta in perfetta buona fede, sia affetta da problemi metodologici ed i risultati siano affetti da un errore spesso non indifferente. Siamo altresì consci di quanto le prospezioni elettorali siano inquinabili, ed inquinate, da fattori politici. Riportiamo questi dati numerici senza indulgere in commenti: che sia il Lettore a trarne argomentazioni e, nel caso, conseguenze.

2018-02-12__Trump__Sondaggio__001

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti, Trump

Trump. Cnn. Il commercio non solo non collassa, bensì cresce.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-02-13.

1475-1541_(1537-41)__Michelangelo__Cappella_Sistina__Giudizio_Universale__Un_Demone_001

Decisamente il fronte liberal democratico inizia a far vedere vistose crepe.

Poche settimane or sono era stato il The Washington Post a prendere in contropiede i liberal incancreniti. Aveva persino rinunziato alla sua congenita tendenza a dire solo cose false:

Trump. Washington Post impazzito. Fa gli elogi di Trump.

«Il The Washington Post è da sempre la Linea Maginot dei liberal democratici, il loro Vallo Atlantico. Per i liberal quel giornale equivale ad Alamūt per i Nizariti oppure Masada per per gli Ebrei.

È fucina di idee, elaborazioni concettuali, corifeo del credo ideologico liberal.

Tempio solenne della più moderna disinformacija, ove neppure la data ed il nome della testata sono vere: è il mausoleo alle mezze verità. Posto ove la calunnia da mezzo è diventata fine: scopo di vita.

*

Ne parliamo così bene ed in modo così laudativo perché il cinque gennaio il The Washington Post ha pubblicato una notizia vera, controllata e controllabile.»

*

«Under Trump, there were 1.8 million more people working in December than in January. Under Obama, 4.3 million fewer»

*

«Between January and December of last year, the country added 184,000 manufacturing jobs, the third-most of the presidents for whom data is available after Carter and John Kennedy»

*

«But we’re comparing first years here, and on that metric Trump consistently outperforms Obama»

*

«Unemployment is at a near two-decade low»

È una inversione di rotta a centottanta gradi, come se il Papa si affacciasse al balcone e proclamasse che Dio non esiste.

* * * * * * *

Adesso è il turno della Cnn, da sempre ricettacolo di ogni tipologia di alteramente senzienti e pensanti, statolatri adoratori delle statue di Hillary e Bill Clinton, e questo a voler essere davvero benevoli. Anche loro infradiciati nella menzogna a tal punto da credersi persino che fosse vero quello che scrivevano. Rivaleggiano con il The Washington Post a chi le raccontasse meno credibili.

Procediamo con ordine, per meglio poter comprendere. Iniziamo da un precedente di non poco conto, anche perché successo sotto una delle più famose presidenze liberal democratiche.

*


United States House of Representatives. 1934-03-29. The Reciprocal Trade Agreement Act of 1934. H.R. 8687.

«After hours of debate, the House initially passed the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Act by a vote of 274 to 111 (with 47 Members not voting)—for the first time granting the President its traditional power to levy tariffs. The act not only gave President Franklin D. Roosevelt the authority to adjust tariff rates, but also the power to negotiate bilateral trade agreements without receiving prior congressional approval. Advocates believed that granting these powers to the Roosevelt White House would help the administration quickly conclude agricultural trade agreements to speed recovery of the Depression-ravaged economy. Critics believed Congress had abdicated a key oversight function. Representative Allen Treadway of Massachusetts, Ranking Republican on the Ways and Means Committee, objected that “it would surrender the taxing power of Congress to the President and his subordinates in violation of both the letter and spirit of the Constitution.” Others thought the law might enable the President to forgive or postpone debt owed by a foreign country and undermine American industry. To assuage such concerns, the bill was amended with a three-year expiration date on all trade agreements»

Orbene, se gli accordi bilaterale andavano bene per il liberal democratico Mr Franklin D. Roosevelt non si potrebbe trovare ragione per cui siano disdicevoli per il repubblicano Mr Donald Trump.

«On Tuesday, the Commerce Department announced that the US trade deficit had actually increased in 2017. During Donald Trump’s first year as President, the US imported $566 billion more in goods and services than it exported — higher than any year since 2008.»

* * * * * * *

Ecco ciò che dice Cnn.

«This flies in the face of the theory that, with the election of Donald Trump, US markets would suddenly become closed to global trade. Indeed, when considering President Trump’s “America First” trade policy, it is important to keep in mind two related points. First, it is unlikely that Trump is planning to launch a new era of American protectionism. As Trump has said, most recently at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, “‘America First’ does not mean ‘America Alone.'”»

*

«Second, Trump’s trade policy does not represent a major break with our past. He is not looking to prevent trade but is seeking what he describes as reciprocity»

*

«Reciprocity in trade implies that as we grant access to our markets, we gain access to foreign markets. It is worth recalling that, when the United States turned away from protectionism in reaction to the disastrous Smoot-Hawley tariffs, Congress’s first major trade bill was named “The Reciprocal Trade Agreement Act of 1934.”»

*

«Rather than argue for a radical departure from past US practice, this seems more like a continuation of the mixed trade messages that Washington has been sending the world for the last few decades.»

*

«A poll taken just prior to the 2016 election found that, among those who had heard of the TPP, 63% opposed the agreement. Curiously enough, only 29% of those polled had even heard of the agreement. Why, then, did both major party candidates feel the need to reject the TPP? I suspect that what appears to be a consensus on trade is tied to a larger rejection of the globalist worldview.»

*

«So, for those looking for signs of where America is headed in the future, it is important to understand just how much Trump’s “America First” idea resonates, not just with working class voters, but with the US electorate in general (and maybe, after the Brexit vote, not just American voters).»

*

Like most Americans, Trump approaches trade from the perspective that a president should only, can only, represent the views of citizens of his own country.

* * * * * * * *

L’America produce di più, consuma di più. e di conseguenza importa di più: elementare.

Che i liberal democratici abbiano abiurato all’odio viscerale verso il Presidente Trump sembrerebbe chiedere troppo a delle persone ideologizzate.

Verosimilmente, le menti meno coatte all’idea dominante potrebbero aver iniziato a meditare sulla impressionante serie di sconfitte riportate dai liberal nell’ultimo anno.

Ma quello che potrebbe essere elemento decisivo potrebbe essere il vistoso calo dei lettori unito alle ultime previsioni elettorali sulle elezioni di midterm.


Cnn. 2018-02-09. Surprise: Trade didn’t collapse in Trump’s first year, it flourished

On Tuesday, the Commerce Department announced that the US trade deficit had actually increased in 2017.

During Donald Trump’s first year as President, the US imported $566 billion more in goods and services than it exported — higher than any year since 2008.

This flies in the face of the theory that, with the election of Donald Trump, US markets would suddenly become closed to global trade. Indeed, when considering President Trump’s “America First” trade policy, it is important to keep in mind two related points. First, it is unlikely that Trump is planning to launch a new era of American protectionism. As Trump has said, most recently at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, “‘America First’ does not mean ‘America Alone.'”

Second, Trump’s trade policy does not represent a major break with our past. He is not looking to prevent trade but is seeking what he describes as reciprocity.

Reciprocity in trade implies that as we grant access to our markets, we gain access to foreign markets. It is worth recalling that, when the United States turned away from protectionism in reaction to the disastrous Smoot-Hawley tariffs, Congress’s first major trade bill was named “The Reciprocal Trade Agreement Act of 1934.”

The Trump administration’s recent decision to impose hefty tariffs on imported solar panels and washing machines, alongside ongoing negotiations over changes to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), has led some to conclude that there has been a major shift in US trade policy, perhaps leading to a trade war with dire consequences for the world economy.

The decision on solar panels and washing machines, however, followed a recommendation from the US International Trade Commission, which, right now, consists of three Obama appointees and one George W. Bush appointee. This same panel recently unanimously voted against approving tariffs against the Canadian airplane manufacturer Bombardier in response to a complaint from the Boeing corporation that the Canadian company had dumped underpriced, subsidized planes on the US market. Rather than argue for a radical departure from past US practice, this seems more like a continuation of the mixed trade messages that Washington has been sending the world for the last few decades.

Even President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), though contrary to the Obama administration’s position, is also not entirely original. During a panel at the recent Davos forum, Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross pushed back at the accusation that the United States’ withdrawal from the TPP should be blamed on Trump. He argued, accurately, that “there was no political appetite in the United States in either party for TPP,” citing Hillary Clinton’s abandonment of TPP during her campaign.

It is obviously true that Trump’s rhetoric on trade is different from what we have come to expect, not only from US politicians but from world leaders in general. When President Trump visited Davos, for example, he was surrounded by people who believe firmly in not only the existence but the fundamental importance of something called the “global community.”

As a corollary, they also hold that this global community has interests and values that must be promoted by multinational institutions. At the same time, the community must be led, and if the United States does not lead, then some other country will. Trump clearly does not share this vision. But in rejecting “the world according to Davos,” is the President really so out of sync with most Americans?

A poll taken just prior to the 2016 election found that, among those who had heard of the TPP, 63% opposed the agreement. Curiously enough, only 29% of those polled had even heard of the agreement. Why, then, did both major party candidates feel the need to reject the TPP? I suspect that what appears to be a consensus on trade is tied to a larger rejection of the globalist worldview.

Like most Americans, Trump approaches trade from the perspective that a president should only, can only, represent the views of citizens of his own country. I suspect that this is why Trump is inclined to prefer bilateral to multilateral trade agreements.

On a practical level, in any one-on-one negotiation, the United States is likely to have a significant bargaining advantage. For instance, using World Bank data on GDP as a measure of economic clout, Japan, the largest economy in the TPP, has a GDP that is roughly 27% that of the United States. Combined, however, the GDP of all of the countries currently in the TPP is twice as large, totaling about 55% of America’s GDP.

Now that the 11 remaining TPP members have decided to move forward together, of course, the equation changes. Perhaps this is what has led the President to seemingly reconsider his decision on TPP. Trump’s trade representatives are bringing this same perspective to the current NAFTA negotiations, relying on the overall size of the US market to leverage a revised agreement that is more favorable to US domestic businesses. So far, however, Trump has not triggered the withdrawal provisions available under existing NAFTA provisions.

So, for those looking for signs of where America is headed in the future, it is important to understand just how much Trump’s “America First” idea resonates, not just with working class voters, but with the US electorate in general (and maybe, after the Brexit vote, not just American voters).

It is therefore likely that Trump’s basic orientation, if not his rhetoric, will remain part of US policy long after the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue returns to his tower in New York. Those who worry about what this means for the global economy, however, can find some comfort in the fact that the more things seem to change in US trade policy, the more they remain the same.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti, Trump

Midterm. Qualche previsione elettorale. Cnn e Nyt.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-02-11.

Pelosi_Nancy__Congress_22488.jpg-1bf06_s878x558

Le elezioni di midterm sono un evento molto complesso. Si rinnovano i deputati al Congresso e 34 senatori, oltre a molti governatori ed a parlamenti di un buon numero di stati.

Le previsioni elettorali sono difficili, come si è potuto constatare nelle elezioni presidenziali del 2016. Molti i motivi.

Il primo motivo è legato al fatto che, per quanto ben assemblato, un campione di un migliaio di persone ben difficilmente rappresenta 312 milioni di persone. L’errore previsionale è severo.

Il secondo motivo è legato al fatto che non sono elezioni i risultati delle quali confluiscono in un sistema meramente proporzionale. Si vota principalmente per collegi, e quasi di norma sono in gioco anche componenti locali di non trascurabile importanza.

Come conseguenza, le previsioni che riportano soltanto percentuali di espressione di intenzioni di voto possono essere forvianti: ciò che conta è la conquista dei collegi o, più in generale, degli stati. E per il senato la California con 38 milioni di abitanti esprime due senatori esattamente così come l’Alaska con soli 736mila abitanti.

*

Da queste semplici argomentazioni si dovrebbe concludere come i risultati dei sondaggi dovrebbero essere letti con un grande buon senso, senza enfasi alcuna. Questi aspetti sono già stati ampiamente dettagliati altrove.

Trump. Elezioni di midterm. Primi i dati previsionali.

* * * * * * *

Negli ultimi tempi sono avvenuti molti fatti nuovi che potrebbero influire sul voto di midterm.

Il principale, a nostro sommesso parere, è stato la riforma fiscale.

Trump il Grande. La riducendo le tasse aumentano stipendi, pensioni ed investimenti. 2,800 miliardi.

Trump. Discorso Stato dell’Unione. Testo ed indici gradimento.

La riduzione delle tasse è un argomento molto forte anche ai fini di una corretta propaganda elettorale: sicuramente l’aspetto economico non è l’unico in gioco, ma nessuno potrebbe metterne in dubbio la grande portata.

Non a caso gli indici di gradimento del Presidente Trump sono schizzati verso l’alto.

*

Riportiamo qui alcuni sondaggi effettuati dai media di risonanza mondiale.

CNN Poll: Democratic advantage narrows in 2018

«As the midterm election year begins, a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS finds the Democratic advantage on a generic congressional ballot has tightened to a narrow 5 points among registered voters, but those voters who say they are most enthusiastic about turning out to vote this fall favor Democrats by a wide 15-point margin.

The new poll’s 49% Democrat to 44% Republican margin among registered voters is almost identical to Democrats’ standing in January of 2006, the last midterm election year in which they made significant gains in the House of Representatives.

But it represents a large shift from CNN polls conducted in the past three months, in which Democrats held double-digit advantages over the Republicans. Preferences among all adults have shifted less dramatically, but are also tighter than last fall, with Democrats currently 10 points ahead of Republicans among all Americans.»

*

The Last Two Weeks of Polls Have Been Great for Republicans. Do They Signal a Shift? [The New York Times]

«Last month it seemed that Democrats might ride a giant tsunami to control of the House and Senate. Now, some are wondering whether there’s a Democratic wave at all.

The Democratic advantage on the generic congressional ballot, which asks people whether they’ll vote for Democrats or Republicans for Congress, has dwindled since the heart of the tax debate in December. Then, nearly all surveys put Republicans behind by double digits. Now, poll averages put the Democratic lead at only around six or seven percentage points.

The question isn’t really whether Republican standing has improved recently. It has. The question is whether anyone should care: Is it just one of many blips and bumps along the road, or does it say something meaningful about the midterm elections?»

Likely Millennial Voters Up-for-Grabs in Upcoming Midterm Elections, Harvard Youth Poll Finds

«In Contrast to Four Years Ago, Half of “Likely” Young Voters Prefer a Republican-controlled Congress.

While more 18- to 29- year-olds (50%-43%) surveyed in the IOP’s fall 2014 poll would prefer that Congress be controlled by Democrats instead of Republicans, the numbers improve dramatically for the GOP when only young people who say they will “definitely vote” are studied»

* * * * * * *

Ricapitolando, e con tutta la prudenza del caso, i dati sembrerebbero suggerire che nonostante un anno di pressante propaganda democratica avverso il Presidente Trump, i risultati delle elezioni di midterm siano ancora aperti.

Sembrerebbe quindi lecito domandarsi se alla fine sia o meno stata proficua.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti, Trump, Unione Europea

Trump attacca frontalmente Mr Soros come un toro infuriato.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-02-07.

Soros George 002

Il The Washington Times è giornale molto vicino al Presidente Trump. Molto posato ed obbiettivo, ma schierato.

Questo articolo, verosimilmente il primo di una lunga serie, non dice nulla di ignoto, ma lo dice da fonte ufficiale.

È una dichiarazione di guerra molto difficilmente non autorizzata direttamente dal vertice.

«How is it that highly organized protests against President Trump keep popping up across the country?»

*

«Why is it that the traditional definition of marriage was suddenly discarded after years of citizens voting for it to be preserved?»

*

«How are illegal immigrants organized so quickly and young voters corralled overnight to demand open borders? »

*

«Where did the saturation of transgender and pansexual ideology come from?»

*

«Follow the money — the George Soros money through his Open Society Foundation»

*

«Research shows that the billionaire Mr. Soros is spending millions to finance a huge grievance and anarchy industry that pretends to be grass-roots justice protests»

*

«vulnerable college kids who need extra money can earn cash by creating disruptive events»

*

«Why destroy the family unit, you ask? Because Mr. Soros knows that the nuclear family has been the basis upon which every single stable civil society has been built since the beginning of time. It’s why Marxist ideology also sought the demise of families composed of a mom and a dad»

*

«drug legalization, laws enabling “the sex worker industry,” pansexuality, abortion and gender identity politics»

*

«What’s their end goal of all the disruption? It’s about power. And America and freedom-loving people around the world are suffering the consequences»

* * * * * * * *

Al momento si preferirebbe non commentare.

Di certo, è un attacco che sembrerebbe preludere un duello all’ultimo sangue.


The Washington Times. 2018-02-06. Disruption at home and abroad — follow the money: Part 1

How is it that highly organized protests against President Trump keep popping up across the country?

Follow the money.

Why is it that the traditional definition of marriage was suddenly discarded after years of citizens voting for it to be preserved?

Follow the money.

How are illegal immigrants organized so quickly and young voters corralled overnight to demand open borders? Where did the saturation of transgender and pansexual ideology come from? How is it possible that Black Lives Matter seems to be everywhere? Or that the call for pot legalization is sweeping the nation? Or that there is an international movement for globalization simultaneously occurring in countries around the world?

Follow the money — the George Soros money through his Open Society Foundation.

In this long season of cultural and political tension, Americans need to know the truth about the source of the conflicts, about why communities and our nation are being ripped apart.

Mr. Soros’ Open Society Foundation also is busy abroad in a well-financed attempt to strip America and other nations of our sovereignty and make us beholden to an international government.

Mr. Soros funds so many of these hateful, disruptive (even violent) efforts here at home and abroad that it’s hard to keep track.

But, finally, an ad-hoc group of pro-freedom Americans is doing just that.

For an up-to-date list of all of the organizations that George Soros has started or is funding, take a peek at DiscoverTheNetworks.org. It will make you sick at first glance to see how all of these groups are connected.

However, that sick, disgusted feeling should quickly turn into relief in knowing that neighbor isn’t confronting neighbor from some deep-seeded hatred. It’s all about one man and his friends paying the (largely) unemployed to cause trouble.

Research shows that the billionaire Mr. Soros is spending millions to finance a huge grievance and anarchy industry that pretends to be grass-roots justice protests.

You can see the recruitment efforts at one of the hiring portals OrganizersForAmerica.org, where, for example, vulnerable college kids who need extra money can earn cash by creating disruptive events for new groups like BadAssWomen and Green Corps as well as the ACLU. Other “opportunities” involve getting paid to stage or attend protests in various states to demand a mandatory minimum wage or to just hassle Mr. Trump in an attempt to delegitimize him.

Just take a look at Mr. Soros’ IRS 990s (of his $20 billion Open Society Foundation), and you can see the scale of the funding efforts to defeat everything from the free market system to the structure of the timeless nuclear family.

Why destroy the family unit, you ask? Because Mr. Soros knows that the nuclear family has been the basis upon which every single stable civil society has been built since the beginning of time. It’s why Marxist ideology also sought the demise of families composed of a mom and a dad.

The list of tawdry, destabilizing and dehumanizing projects funded by Mr. Soros goes on and on: drug legalization, laws enabling “the sex worker industry,” pansexuality, abortion and gender identity politics. In addition, Black Lives Matter groups around the country and groups called Resist, DisruptJ20 Indivisible and Women’s March — all are designed to weaken Donald Trump and pro-freedom policies.

Then there are the “rented ministers” in various churches who are being paid to advocate for anti-Christian “progressive” causes.

And elitists in media and entertainment outlets are all too happy to broadcast leftist street theater as our national narratives.

Even Fox News regularly allows guests from Soros-backed organizations like Center for American Progress, La Raza, National Immigration Forum, Sojourners, Faith in Public Life, the ACLU and more to appear on its shows without ever identifying that George Soros backs and strategies with all of them.

Kudos to hosts like Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham, who battle the leftists every day. Fox needs to start identifying, in every single interview, who ties all of these groups together with a solid money chain.

What’s their end goal of all the disruption? It’s about power. And America and freedom-loving people around the world are suffering the consequences.

Thank God there is a growing awareness and people are beginning to shine light on the madness.

One of the concerned leaders is Kelly Monroe Kullberg, co-author and editor of the book “Finding God at Harvard” and a leader of the new coalition, the American Association of Evangelicals (see research there). In 2016, Mrs. Kullberg and over 100 Christian leaders including Alveda King, Eric Metaxas and George Barna asked Americans to consider the funding of radical groups and “rented” evangelicals and Catholics.

Mrs. Kullberg sums up the clarion call for all of us: “As ‘progressive’ billionaires weaken sovereign and historically Christian cultures and nations, their global power grows. This is regress, not progress. It is unjust and unloving. The decline of America and Europe is not inevitable; it’s purchased. And millions suffer.

“As Americans discover and reject this influence and agenda, we will experience what we most need, renewal and revival. And our moral compass and strength will return. For our children and their futures. I urge people to explore the information at DiscoverTheNetworks.org, InfluenceWatch.org and AmericanEvangelicals.com.”

Pubblicato in: Banche Centrali, Devoluzione socialismo, Trump, Unione Europea

Ecb. Effetto tsunami della riduzione delle tasse americane. Testo.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-02-06.

Cranach Lucas der Ältere. Die Bezahlung. Nationalmuseum Stockholm. 1532.

Cranach Lucas der Ältere. Die Bezahlung. Nationalmuseum Stockholm. 1532.


La Banca Centrale Europea ha rilasciato il 5 febbraio il Report:

The macroeconomic impact of the US tax reform

La sua lettura in extenso sarebbe auspicabile.

European Parliament plenary debate on the ECB

Questo è l’intervento del Governatore Draghi al Parlamento Europeo.

*

«In a major legislative achievement, US President Donald Trump signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on 22 December 2017. This tax reform, which took effect on 1 January 2018, entails a major overhaul of the US tax system. The reform involves a large number of changes, with some of its main provisions being:1 (i) a permanent reduction in the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, while allowing the full deduction of investment from the corporate tax base for five years, after which this will be phased out; (ii) a temporary simplification of and reduction in individual income taxes, as well as an increase in the child tax credit; (iii) lower income taxation for small business owners; and (iv) elimination of the taxation of most foreign corporate income of US corporate shareholders, implying a move to a “hybrid” territorial system with a one-time transition tax on untaxed profits of 15.5% on liquid and 8% on non-liquid assets. The territorial system is complemented by base erosion measures and a minimum tax on some of the foreign operations of US companies.»

*

«The tax burden on US corporate income will fall significantly to a level close to that in a number of euro area economies. Chart A shows the corporate tax rate (combined for central and sub-central governments) of the United States before and after the reform as compared to the large euro area economies. Prior to the reform, the US corporate tax rate stood above the rates of all large euro area countries, while, after the reform, it is closer to the lower end of rates in those countries.»

*

«The reform is expected to boost US domestic demand and raise US real GDP in the near term. Lower individual income tax rates will raise household disposable income and boost consumption, especially among liquidity-constrained households. Part of the increase in after-tax income will also raise savings, in particular for wealthier individuals. In addition, lower corporate taxes should boost household wealth via higher asset prices and dividends, thereby also raising consumption and savings. Higher corporate profits may also lead to higher wages as workers bargain for a share of the increased profits,2 which will in turn raise consumption. Finally, cuts in corporate taxes and the full deductibility of investment for five years will lower the after-tax cost of investment, thereby raising demand as a result of increased incentives to invest.»

*

«In addition, some positive impact on the economy’s production capacity can be expected. Income tax cuts for individuals increase the after-tax rate of return on labour, which may strengthen incentives for workers to increase their participation in the labour market.3 Moreover, by increasing the after-tax rate of return on capital, lower corporate taxes and the full deductibility of investment should increase investment and the economy’s capital stock. A higher capital stock should, in turn, increase the economy’s potential output and boost labour productivity. Some simplification of the tax code and the elimination of tax distortions for different corporates’ financing strategies might also raise productivity by reallocating capital to more efficient sectors.»

*

«The euro area will also be affected by the changes in the international tax landscape, the consequences of which are highly uncertain and complex. First, lower US corporate taxes raise the tax attractiveness of the United States relative to other countries, which will influence corporations’ incentives to invest. A study by the Centre for European Economic Research (Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung – ZEW)8 finds that the tax reform will lead to a rise in inbound foreign direct investment (FDI) into the United States originating from the European Union which outweighs an increase in US outbound FDI into the EU. Second, the reform will affect tax planning strategies of multinational enterprises. In particular, through the US move to a territorial system and through the differences in tax rates between the United States and some high-tax EU countries after the reform, the incentives for profit shifting are changed. Some aspects of the reform also provide incentives to relocate intellectual property to the United States. More generally, the reform risks intensifying tax competition worldwide, entailing a possible erosion of tax bases in EU countries. Third, it has been pointed out that some of the international provisions of the US tax reform may not be in accordance with World Trade Organization rules and double taxation treaties.»

* * * * * * * *

Ecb si è espressa in modo particolarmente chiaro.

– Questa riforma fiscale determinerà una forte espansione dell’economica americana, aumenterà la liquidità disponibile ai cittadini, gli elevati risparmi delle società condurranno ad aumenti salariali ed ad aumento degli investimenti.

Molte società a sede legale negli Stati Uniti ed attività nel resto dl mondo troveranno vantaggio a ritornare negli States.

«The euro area will also be affected by the changes in the international tax landscape, the consequences of which are highly uncertain and complex»

*

«lower US corporate taxes raise the tax attractiveness of the United States relative to other countries»

*

«the tax reform will lead to a rise in inbound foreign direct investment (FDI) into the United States originating from the European Union»

*

L’Eurozona adesso è messa con le spalle al muro.

A fine anno l’Ecb dovrà interrompere i QE, e per molti stati, specie poi quelli meridionali, saranno dolori severi.

Se l’Europa mantenesse un’alta tassazione potrebbe ancora per qualche tempo finanziare il welfare. Ma per poco.

In tale evenienza tutti i capitali fuggirebbero veloci come leprotti negli Stati Uniti, ove, tra l’altro, i tassi di interesse sono in ascesa. Sempre poi che già non lo stiano facendo.

Ma abbassare le tasse proprio nel momento in cui cessano i QE imporrà di fatto tagli disumani al welfare. Lo statalismo è destinato a crollare perché illogico.

L’Unione Europea si sta mestamente avviando allo stato minimo: ciò che non si fa con le buone, lo si fa sempre a calci nei denti.


La Stampa. 2018-02-05. Il fisco di Trump sfida l’Europa

La Bce: “Può scatenare la concorrenza sulle tasse ed erodere la base imponibile degli Stati”. Ma per decenni si è predicato che così si deve fare.

*

La riforma fiscale avviata dal presidente Donald Trump negli Stati Uniti «rischia di intensificare la competizione fiscale globale, comportando una possibile erosione delle basi imponibili nei Paesi dell’Unione europea». Lo segnala la Bce in un focus su «L’impatto economico della riforma fiscale statunitense» pubblicato oggi sul sito istituzionale. Se nel complesso la riforma «fornirà un significativo stimolo fiscale all’economia statunitense nel prossimo decennio», segnala la Banca centrale europea nel documento, «spingendo la domanda interna e facendo salire il Pil reale nel breve termine, le conseguenze che tutto ciò avrà sull’area euro rimangono altamente incerte e complesse». 

La concorrenza fiscale fra Stati, purché non spinta fino alla creazione di «paradisi», è stata lodata per decenni dagli apologeti del libero mercato come via da seguire, anche in Europa dove si trovano il Lussemburgo, le isole Jersey e Guernsey, l’Irlanda e altri Stati o staterelli che offrono fiscalità di vantaggio ai capitali stranieri. Durante gli stessi decenni si è detto da parte dei liberisti (ma anche degli europeisti senza etichetta) che questa concorrenza fiscale è cosa buona e giusta e che quando si scatena è tanto peggio chi non è capace di adeguarvisi. In tutti questi decenni i costi dell’elusione fiscale per gli Stati europei e per i singoli cittadini sono stati pesantissimi, senza bisogno di Trump. La situazione è stata esaltata per decenni dagli economisti iper-liberisti e (di volta in volta) benedetta oppure ignorata dai trattati europei e dalle istituzioni di Bruxelles e di Francoforte. Adesso che gli Usa fanno passi nella stessa direzione l’Europa è a corto di argomenti per polemizzare. 

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Sistemi Economici, Stati Uniti, Trump

USA. Effetto Trump sull’economia. Un anno di soddisfazioni.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-02-04.

2018-02-05__TrumP__Economy__001

Per un uomo politico la più efficiente propaganda elettorale è il lasciar guadagnare la gente, che vuole solo lavorare onestamente senza interferenze statali. Senza dover essere iugulato da tasse massacranti che poi si perdono in rivoli inconsistenti.

Significativi i risultati del questionario Gravis Marketing in Pannsylvania, ove si voterà il 14 marzo. Lì si conteranno i riusultati delle urne.

Per l’uomo della strada, il bilancio del primo anno di Presidenza Trump è più che soddisfacente, anche tenendo conto che gli effetti del calo delle tasse si attueranno nel tempo.

Trump il Grande. La riducendo le tasse aumentano stipendi, pensioni ed investimenti. 2,800 miliardi.

Le società infatti utilizzeranno il surplus ottenuto dalla riduzione della pressione fiscale per remunerare meglio azionisti e dipendenti, incrementando gli investimenti produttivi.

*

«U.S. job growth surged in January and wages increased further, recording their largest annual gain in more than 8-1/2 years»

*

«Nonfarm payrolls jumped by 200,000 jobs last month after rising 160,000 in December»

*

«The unemployment rate was unchanged at a 17-year low of 4.1 percent. Average hourly earnings rose 0.3 percent in January to $26.74, building on December’s solid 0.4 percent gain»

*

«That boosted the year-on-year increase in average hourly earnings to 2.9 percent, the largest rise since June 2009, from 2.7 percent in December»

*

«The acceleration in average hourly earnings growth punches a hole in the narrative that wage growth remains lackluster»

*

«The unemployment rate dropped seven-tenths of a percentage point in 2017 and economists expect it to hit 3.5 percent by the end of the year»

*

«President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans have cast the fiscal stimulus, which includes a reduction in the corporate income tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent, as creating jobs and boosting economic growth»

*

«Wages probably also got a lift from the tax cut. Companies like Starbucks Corp and FedEx Corp have said they will use some of the savings from lower taxes to boost wages for workers»

*

«Further gains are expected in February when Walmart raises entry-level wages for hourly employees at its U.S. stores»

*

«Annual wage growth is now close to the 3 percent»

*

«The unemployment rate for African Americans shot up to 7.7 percent from 6.8 percent and is more than double that of whites»

*

«A weak dollar is also providing a boost to manufacturing by making U.S.-made goods more competitive on the international market»

* * * * * * * *

Una precisazione sulla disoccupazione degli afroamericani. Reuters sbaglia.

Black unemployment is at a record low. But there’s a lot more to the story. [Cnn]

«The unemployment rate for African American workers has never been lower — another sign of the strength of the economy.

Still, at 6.8%, black unemployment remains well above the rate for white people, at 3.7%. That disparity is deeply rooted and a continuing cause of concern for economists and advocates.

Take Columbia, Missouri. It has long had one of the lowest overall unemployment rates in the country. It’s now down to 2.5%, but black unemployment is far higher. In 2016, the last year for which such Census Bureau data is available, African American unemployment locally stood at 8%.»

*

Bureau of Labor Statistics. Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey. Black or African American.

Il tasso di disoccupazione era 7.9% a fine 2016, mentre è del 7.7% al gennaio 2018, dopo aver registrato un 6.8% a fine dicembre 2017.

È in discesa se considerato contro il suo valore un anno fa, in salita se considerato sul mese precedente.

*

«The unemployment rate for African Americans shot up to 7.7 percent from 6.8»

Reuters riporta in modo tendenzioso l’informazione. Essendo tutti i dati riportati anno su anno, non segnala come quello sui disoccupati negri sia confrontato mese su mese: una scorrettezza non da poco.

È diventato il motto di Reuters: una menzogna al giorno toglie Mr Trump di intorno….


Reuters. 2018-02-02. U.S. hiring accelerates; annual wage growth strongest since 2009

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. job growth surged in January and wages increased further, recording their largest annual gain in more than 8-1/2 years, bolstering expectations that inflation will push higher this year as the labor market hits full employment.

Nonfarm payrolls jumped by 200,000 jobs last month after rising 160,000 in December, the Labor Department said on Friday.

The unemployment rate was unchanged at a 17-year low of 4.1 percent. Average hourly earnings rose 0.3 percent in January to $26.74, building on December’s solid 0.4 percent gain.

That boosted the year-on-year increase in average hourly earnings to 2.9 percent, the largest rise since June 2009, from 2.7 percent in December. Workers, however, put in fewer hours last month likely because of bitterly cold weather.

The average workweek fell to 34.3 hours, the shortest in four months, from 34.5 hours in December.

The robust employment report underscored the strong momentum in the economy, raising the possibility that the Federal Reserve could be a bit more aggressive in raising interest rates this year. The U.S. central bank has forecast three rate increases this year after raising borrowing costs three times in 2017.

“The acceleration in average hourly earnings growth punches a hole in the narrative that wage growth remains lackluster,” said Scott Anderson, chief economist at Bank of the West in San Francisco. “The Goldilocks view of inflation is being sorely challenged right now.”

Fed officials on Wednesday expressed optimism that inflation will rise toward the central bank’s target this year. Policymakers, who voted to keep interest rates unchanged, described the labor market as having “continued to strengthen,” and economic activity as “rising at a solid rate.”

U.S. financial markets have priced in a rate hike in March. Prices for U.S. Treasuries fell, with the yield on the benchmark 10-year note hitting a four-year high as investors worried about high inflation. The dollar rose against a basket of currencies on the data while U.S. stocks were trading lower.

The unemployment rate dropped seven-tenths of a percentage point in 2017 and economists expect it to hit 3.5 percent by the end of the year. Economists say job gains are being driven by buoyant domestic and global demand.

Some worry that the Trump administration’s $1.5 billion tax cut package passed by the Republican-controlled U.S. Congress in December, in the biggest overhaul of the tax code in 30 years, could cause the economy, already operating near full capacity, to overheat.

President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans have cast the fiscal stimulus, which includes a reduction in the corporate income tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent, as creating jobs and boosting economic growth.

“If the labor market is this strong and the tax cuts have yet to kick in, what will it look like when households and businesses actually start spending the money?” said Joel Naroff, chief economist at Naroff Economic Advisors in Holland Pennsylvania. “No good economy goes unpunished and the punishment may already be starting to be meted out.”

(Graphic: Wage growth in the U.S. accelerates – http://reut.rs/2EAEGey)

JOB GROWTH SEEN SLOWING

Economists polled by Reuters had forecast nonfarm payrolls rising by 180,000 jobs last month and the unemployment rate unchanged at 4.1 percent. January’s jobs gains were above the monthly average of 192,000 over the past three months.

The economy needs to create 75,000 to 100,000 jobs per month to keep up with growth in the working-age population.

January marked the first full year of employment data under the Trump administration. Job growth averaged 176,000 per month under the current government, compared to 208,300 during last year of the Obama administration.

Job growth is expected to slow this year as the labor market hits full employment. Companies are already reporting difficulties finding qualified workers, which economists say will force some to significantly raise wages as they compete for scarce labor.

Wage growth last month came as increases in the minimum wage came into effect in 18 states in January. Wages probably also got a lift from the tax cut. Companies like Starbucks Corp (NASDAQ:SBUX) and FedEx Corp (NYSE:FDX) have said they will use some of the savings from lower taxes to boost wages for workers.

Further gains are expected in February when Walmart (NYSE:WMT) raises entry-level wages for hourly employees at its U.S. stores. Annual wage growth is now close to the 3 percent that economists say is needed to push inflation towards the Fed’s 2 percent target.

But the road to faster wage growth remains long. The year-on-year rise in average hourly earnings for production and non-supervisory workers was stuck at 2.4 percent in January.

A broader measure of unemployment, which includes people who want to work but have given up searching and those working part time because they cannot find full-time employment, rose one-tenth of a percentage point to 8.2 percent in January.

The unemployment rate for African Americans shot up to 7.7 percent from 6.8 percent and is more than double that of whites.

Manufacturing payrolls increased by 15,000 last month after rising 21,000 in December. The sector is being supported by strong domestic and international demand. A weak dollar is also providing a boost to manufacturing by making U.S.-made goods more competitive on the international market.

Hiring at construction sites picked up last month despite unseasonably cold weather. Construction payrolls increased by 36,000 jobs, adding to December’s 33,000 gain.

Retail employment rebounded and the government added jobs following two straight months of declines.

There were also increases in payrolls for professional and business services, leisure and hospitality as well as healthcare and social assistance.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti, Trump

Usa. Memo. Clinton e dirigenza dem incriminabili di tradimento.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-02-02.

2018-02-02__Clinton__001

The House Intelligence Committee released the memo on Friday afternoon about alleged abuses involving FISA, or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, during the 2016 election.

*


The White House. 2018-02-02.

The Honorable Devin Nunes

Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

United States Capitol

Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

On January 29, 2018, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (hereinafter “the Committee”) voted to disclose publicly a memorandum containing classified information provided to the Committee in connection with its oversight activities (the “Memorandum,” which is attached to this letter). As provided by clause 11(g) of Rule X of the House of Representatives, the Committee has forwarded this Memorandum to the President based on its determination that the release of the Memorandum would serve the public interest.

The Constitution vests the President with the authority to protect national security secrets from disclosure. As the Supreme Court has recognized, it is the President’s responsibility to classify, declassify, and control access to information bearing on our intelligence sources and methods and national defense. See, e.g., Dep ‘t of Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 527 (1988). In order to facilitate appropriate congressional oversight, the Executive Branch may entrust classified information to the appropriate committees of Congress, as it has done in connection with the Committee’s oversight activities here. The Executive Branch does so on the assumption that the Committee will responsibly protect such classified information, consistent with the laws of the United States.

The Committee has now determined that the release of the Memorandum would be appropriate.

The Executive Branch, across Administrations of both parties, has worked to accommodate congressional requests to declassify specific materials in the public interest.1 However, public release of classified information by unilateral action of the Legislative Branch is extremely rare and raises significant separation of powers concerns. Accordingly, the Committee’s request to release the Memorandum is interpreted as a request for declassification pursuant to the President’s authority.


«A memo that shows alleged government surveillance abuse has been released to the public and includes testimony from a high-ranking government official who says the FBI and DOJ would not have sought surveillance warrants to spy on at least one member of the Trump team without the infamous Trump dossier»

*

«The House Intelligence Committee released the memo on Friday afternoon about alleged abuses involving FISA, or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, during the 2016 election»

*

«The dossier, authored by former British spy Christopher Steele and  commissioned by Fusion GPS, was paid by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign through law firm Perkins Coie in an effort to conduct opposition research»

*

«The memo says the committee’s findings “raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions” with the FISA court and “represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process.”»

*

«The unclassified four-page memo says it was written to provide lawmakers information on the FBI and DOJ’s use of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, surveillance during the 2016 presidential election»

* * * * * * * *

«The “dossier” compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application. Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS, to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trunp’s ties to Russia.»

* * * * * * * *

Here’s what the controversial House Intel surveillance memo says

Fox News’ Catherine Herridge details contents of FISA memo.

House Intelligence Committee report on FISA abuses

A lot of people should be ashamed:’ Trump reacts to surveillance memo

Media’s longtime crusade for transparency ends with Nunes memo as ‘The Post’ remains in theaters

TONIGHT AT 6pm ET: Intel committee chairman Devin Nunes discusses FISA memo


Foxnews. 2018-02-02. House memo states disputed dossier was key to FBI’s FISA warrant to surveil members of Team Trump

A memo that shows alleged government surveillance abuse has been released to the public and includes testimony from a high-ranking government official who says the FBI and DOJ would not have sought surveillance warrants to spy on at least one member of the Trump team without the infamous Trump dossier.

The House Intelligence Committee released the memo on Friday afternoon about alleged abuses involving FISA, or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, during the 2016 election.

The dossier, authored by former British spy Christopher Steele and  commissioned by Fusion GPS, was paid by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign through law firm Perkins Coie in an effort to conduct opposition research. 

The memo says the committee’s findings “raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions” with the FISA court and “represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process.”

The memo, which has been at the center of an intense power struggle between congressional Republicans, specifically cites the DOJ and FBI’s surveillance of onetime Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, saying the dossier “formed an essential part” of the application to spy on him.

The memo pointed out that in December 2017, then FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe testified that “no surveillance warrant would have been sought” from the FISA court “without the Steele dossier information.”

The memo, though, shows that Steele was eventually cut off from the FBI for being chatty with the media. It says he was terminated in October 2016 as an FBI source “for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations—an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI.” 

But even after his termination, Steele remained in close contact with Justice Department official—then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr. At the time, Ohr “worked closely” with Yates and later Rosenstein. 

Ohr’s wife Nellie began working for Fusion GPS, the firm behind the dossier, as early as May 2016.

The memo said that while the FISA application “relied” on Steele’s “past record of credible reporting” on other “unrelated matters,” the FISA application process “ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations.

According to the memo, Steele told Ohr that he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” 

“This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files –but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications,” the memo reads.

It also claims the FBI and DOJ used media reporting to lend credibility to the dossier, while the firm behind the dossier, Fusion GPS, briefed major American news outlets to include New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, New Yorker, Yahoo and Mother Jones.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump, who has read the memo, called the contents “a disgrace.”

“A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves,” he said.

The unclassified four-page memo says it was written to provide lawmakers information on the FBI and DOJ’s use of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, surveillance during the 2016 presidential election.

The memo stated that on October 21, 2016, the Justice Department and the FBI “sought and received” a FISA probable cause order authorizing “electronic surveillance” on Page from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. At the time, Page was a volunteer adviser on the Trump campaign. 

The Page warrant application required certification from either then-FBI Director James Comey or then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe. McCabe stepped down from his post at the FBI on Monday. 

According to the memo, the FBI and DOJ obtained “one initial FISA warrant” targeting Page, and three FISA renewals from the FISA court. The statute required that every 90 days, a FISA order on an American citizen “must be renewed.” 

The memo stated that Comey signed three FISA applications for Page and McCabe signed one. Trump’s current Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein also signed at least one FISA application for Page –along with former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and former Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente.

In a statement to Fox News, Page said the memo reveals an “unprecedented abuse of process.”

“The brave and assiduous oversight by Congressional leaders in discovering this unprecedented abuse of process represents a giant, historic leap in the repair of America’s democracy,” Page said.

He added: “Now that a few of the misdeeds against the Trump Movement have been partially revealed, I look forward to updating my pending legal action in opposition to DOJ this weekend in preparation for Monday’s next small step on the long, potholed road toward helping to restore law and order in our great country.”

The memo stated that information on the now-infamous anti-Trump dossier compiled by Steele was “omitted” when seeking a FISA warrant for Page. 

“Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials,” the memo said.

According to the memo, Page’s FISA application “cited extensively” a September 23, 2016 Yahoo News article, which focused on Page’s trip to Moscow. The memo read that the “article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News.” 

“The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News,” the memo said, noting that Steele admitted in British court to meeting with Yahoo News, along with other news outlets in September 2016 to share details in the dossier.

The White House sent a letter to Nunes accompanying the unredacted, declassified memo Friday.

“The president understands that the protection of our national security represents his highest obligation,” White House Counsel to the president Don McGhan wrote in a letter to Nunes Friday.

McGahn said the White House review process included input from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice, along with direction from lawyers and national security staff.

“Consistent with this review and these standards, the president has determined that declassification of the Memorandum is appropriate,” McGahn wrote, clarifying that the memo “reflects the judgement of its congressional authors.

“Though the circumstances leading to the declassification through this process are extraordinary, the Executive Branch stands ready to work with Congress to accommodate oversight requests consistent with applicable standards and processes, including the need to protect intelligence sources and methods,” McGahn wrote.

The release of the four-page memo comes after the House Intelligence Committee voted earlier this week, over Democratic objections, to make the document public. This led to a rare and stunning rebuke from the bureau, which said Wednesday they had “grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.”

In a last-ditch objection, the top Democrat on the House committee claimed overnight that Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., had made “material changes” to the memo that was sent to the White House for review.

But Nunes’ office described the changes as minor and blasted the complaint as a “bizarre distraction from the abuses detailed in the memo.”

The White House has backed the memo’s release, calling for “transparency.”

TRUMP BLASTS ‘POLITICIZED’ FBI, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

Earlier Friday, President Trump unleashed an early-morning tweet at a Justice Department he said has been “politicized” by Democrats.

GOP-led House investigators believe the FBI used a dubious dossier, initially prepared as campaign opposition research for Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid, to get permission from a secret federal court to eavesdrop on Trump campaign and transition team communications.

“The top Leadership and Investigators of the FBI and the Justice Department have politicized the sacred investigative process in favor of Democrats and against Republicans – something which would have been unthinkable just a short time ago,” Trump wrote. “Rank & File are great people!”

Just more than two weeks, Republican lawmakers first drew attention to the memo, with some calling it “shocking,” “troubling” and “alarming” and one likening the details to KGB activity in Russia. They argued the memo should be immediately made public, leading to a social media #ReleaseTheMemo campaign.

Pubblicato in: Amministrazione, Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti, Trump

Trump il Grande. La riducendo le tasse aumentano stipendi, pensioni ed investimenti. 2,800 miliardi.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-02-02.

Liberal incazzati 001

Chiunque si fosse preso la briga di leggere, ed anche cercare di capire, Adam Smith, non avrebbe avuto nessuna difficoltà a comprendere il fenomeno nella sua reale portata. Poi, economisti del calibro di von Hayek oppure von Mises raffinarono il concetto. Splendide per chiarezza le chiose sull’argomento del Gaxotte.

Qualcuno deve pur detenere la ricchezza della nazione: o sono i privati, o è lo stato, oppure sistemi più o meno misti.

Lo stato può detenere ricchezza sia per diretta proprietà sia tramite leggi, normative e regolamenti.

Il sistema funziona fino a tanto che lo stato si occupa dello stato, tenendo sempre ben presente gli interessi della gente: interni e difesa sono i due classici compiti dello stato.

Per quanto riguarda il così detto welfare, per il cittadino è importante il poterne usufruire, indipendentemente da chi ne disponga. Ci spiegheremo con alcuni esempi.

Poter ricorrere alla necessarie cure sanitarie è un obiettivo da tutti ambito: che lo stato le metta a disposizione a costi ragionevoli utilizzando quanto leva dalle tasse, oppure che il cittadino abbia in tasca il necessario per potersi pagare una assicurazione è solo un differenza di mezzo per ottenere il fine.

Identico discorso per la pensione.

* * * * * * *

In buona sostanza l’ideologia liberal e quella socialista sostengono che lo stato deve intervenire attivamente nei sistemi economici, possedendo e legiferando, mentre quelli che una volta potevano essere definiti “liberali” sostenevano l’esatto contrario. Chiaro esempio la Scuola Austriaca.

Nel corso dell’ultimo secolo la visione ideologica ha prevalso, ed ora sta devolvendo: visti i risultati gli elettori non accordano più il loro consenso.

*

Con una imponente riduzione delle tasse, dell’ordine di 1,500 miliardi, il Presidente Trump si propone di ridurre l’operatività pubblica in economia e di lasciare maggiore ricchezza a disposizione del popolo lavoratore.

Non sarà un processo istantaneo: richiederà tempo. Ma gli inizi si stanno vedendo chiaramente.

Facendo una somma molto, ma molto, grossolana e approssimata per difetto, la grande maggioranza delle imprese utilizza la riduzione del carico fiscale per aumentare i salari, finanziare meglio i fondi pensioni, ed eseguire investimenti produttivi: la somma degli annunci fatti sfiora a tutto ieri i 2,800 miliardi di dollari americani.

Senza alcun bisogno di leggi o normativi, i salari minimi sono si sono innalzati mediamente di tre dollari l’ora, ed i salari sono incrementati di duecento – quattrocento dollari al mese, in busta paga.

Al momento sono interessati a questo fenomeno circa trenta milioni di cittadini, ma il numero è destinato ad ampliarsi. Quanti infatti hanno ricevuto un aumento di stipendio lo spenderanno, aumentando così i consumi interni.

È quanto basta per proporre per Mr Trump il titolo di “Grande“.

Nota.

Trump. Discorso Stato dell’Unione. Testo ed indici gradimento.

Gli ascoltatori del discorso sulla stato della nazione sono stati favorevoli a Mr Trump nella percentuale del 75%. Fare guadagnare la gente è la migliore propaganda elettorale che mai possa essere fatta.

Tutto il resto è aria fritta.

* * * * * * *

«FedEx announced Friday it will commit to more than $3.2 billion in wage increases, bonuses, and American capital investment due to the recently passed Tax Cuts and Jobs Act»

*

«FedEx revealed in its statement that it will spend more than $200 million in increased compensation, about two-thirds of which will go to hourly workers, and the remainder will go to increases in performance-related incentive plans for salaried personnel»

*

«FedEx also suggested it will contribute $1.5 billion to the FedEx pension to ensure that it remains “one of the best-funded retirement programs in the country.”»

*

«Home Depot announced Thursday that its workers can receive a bonus of up to $1,000 as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.»

*

«Well over 100 American companies gave their employees as much as $2,000 in bonuses after President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act»

*

«Several corporations, such as AT&T, Comcast, and Nationwide, also increased their 401(k) match rate, raise their minimum wages, and increased domestic investment because of the Republican tax bill»

* * * * * * *

Walmart’s Bumpy Day: From Wage Increase to Store Closings [The New York Times]

«Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, waded into the bumpy waters of partisan politics on Thursday, announcing that it will use some of its savings under the new tax bill to provide wage increases, bonuses and expanded benefits to its hourly workers.

The giant retailer, which faces stiff competition for qualified workers in a tight labor market and pressure from unions to increase wages, said it would raise its minimum starting wage to $11 an hour, from $9. It will also expand maternity and family leave benefits, and give bonuses of up to $1,000 to eligible employees.»

*

More Businesses Raise Wages, Give Bonuses in Wake of Tax Cuts

«More businesses are announcing bonuses, higher minimum wages, and new benefits for employees after passage by Congress of Republicans’ tax reform bill. 

An email from House Speaker Paul Ryan’s press office highlights 33 businesses—including Aflac, Associated Bank, and PNC Bank—that have announced raises, bonuses, and other improvements for employees.

In moves that may defuse efforts to mandate higher minimum wages across the nation, at least nine of the 33 businesses announced they are boosting their minimum wage for thousands of workers to $15 or more an hour.»

*

«Insurance company Aflac says it will boost U.S. investments by $250 million and increase 401(k) benefits for employees, including a one-time contribution of $500 to every worker’s retirement savings account.»

*

«Associated Bank announced a $500 bonus for nearly all employees and an increase in its minimum wage from $10 per hour to $15 per hour»

*

«PNC Bank is giving a $1,000 bonus to 47,500 workers and a $1,500 boost to workers’ existing pension accounts.»

*

«Southwest Airlines announced a $1,000 cash bonus for all employees, including part-timers, plus $5 million in charitable donations.»

*

«AT&T announced it would give a $1,000 bonus to over 200,000 U.S. employees and invest $1 billion in the economy»

*

«Boeing announced a $300 million investment»

*

«CVS announced it would hire 3,000 new workers »

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Ecco un micro – elenco delle società che a seguito della riduzione delle tasse hanno innalzato gli stipendio o deciso investimenti ed assunzioni.

Aflac: $250 million boost in U.S. investments and increased 401(k) benefits, including one-time contribution of $500 to every employee’s retirement savings account.

American Savings Bank: $1,000 bonus to 1,150 employees, nearly the entire workforce, and increase of minimum wage from $12.21 an hour to $15.15.

Aquesta Financial Holdings: $1,000 bonus to all employees, increase in minimum wage to $15 per hour.

Associated Bank: $500 bonus to nearly all employees and increased minimum wage to $15 per hour, up from $10.

AT&T: $1,000 bonus to all 200,000 U.S. workers and $1 billion boost in U.S. investments.

Bank of America: $1,000 bonus for about 145,000 U.S. employees.

Bank of Hawaii: $1,000 bonus for 2,074 employees, or 95 percent of its workforce, and increase of minimum wage from $12 to $15.

BB&T Corp.: $1,200 bonus for almost three-fourths of associates, or 27,000 employees, and increase in minimum wage from $12 to $15.

Boeing: $300 million boost in investments to employee gift-match programs, workforce development, and workplace improvements.

Central Pacific Bank: $1,000 bonus to all 850 nonexecutive employees and increase in minimum wage from $12 to $15.25.

Comcast NBCUniversal: $1,000 bonus for more than 100,000 employees.

Deleware Supermarkets Inc.: $150 bonus to 1,000 nonmanagement employees and $150,000 in new investment in employee training and development programs.

Express Employment Prc: $2,000 bonus to all nonexecutive employees at Oklahoma City headquarters.

Fifth Third Bancorp: $1,000 bonus for all 13,500 employees and increase of minimum wage to $15 for nearly 3,000 workers.

First Hawaiian Bank: $1,500 bonus for all 2,264 employees and increase in minimum wage to $15.

First Horizon National Corp.: $1,000 bonus to employees who do not participate in company-sponsored bonus plans.

Kansas City Southern: $1,000 bonus to employees of subsidiaries in the U.S. and Mexico.

Melaleuca: $100 bonus for every year an employee has worked for the company—an average of $800 for each of 2,000 workers.

National Bank Holdings Corp.: $1,000 bonus to all noncommissioned associates who earn a base salary under $50,000.

Nelnet: $1,000 bonus for nearly all of 4,100 employees.

Nephron Parmaceuticals: wage increase of 5 percent for its 640 employees.

Nexus: wage increase of 5 percent and plans to hire 200 workers in 2018.

OceanFirst Bank: increase in minimum wage from $13.60 to $15, affecting at least 166 employees.

PNC Bank: $1,000 bonus to 47,500 employees and $1,500 increase to existing pension accounts.

Pinnacle Bank: $1,000 bonus for all full-time employees in Nebraska, Kansas, and Missouri.

Pioneer Credit Recovery: $1,000 bonus to employees.

Rush Enterprises Inc.: $1,000 discretionary bonus to 6,600 U.S. employees.

Sinclair Broadcast: $1,000 bonus to nearly 9,000 employees.

SunTrust: increase of minimum wage to $15, $50 million increase in community grants, 1 percent 401(k) contribution for all employees.

Turning Point Brands, Inc.: $1,000 bonus to 107 employees.

Washington Federal, Inc.: wage increase of 5 percent for employees earning less than $100,000 per year and increased investments in technology infrastructure and community projects.

Wells Fargo: increase in minimum wage from $13.50 to $15, and higher charitable giving by about 40 percent, to $400 million.

Western Alliance: wage increase of 7.5 percent for the lowest-paid 50 percent of employees.


Breitbart. 2018-01-26. FedEx Announces $3.2 Billion in Wage Increases, Bonuses Due to Tax Reform

FedEx announced Friday it will commit to more than $3.2 billion in wage increases, bonuses, and American capital investment due to the recently passed Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

“FedEx believes the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will likely increase GDP and investment in the United States,” FedEx wrote.

FedEx revealed in its statement that it will spend more than $200 million in increased compensation, about two-thirds of which will go to hourly workers, and the remainder will go to increases in performance-related incentive plans for salaried personnel.

FedEx also suggested it will contribute $1.5 billion to the FedEx pension to ensure that it remains “one of the best-funded retirement programs in the country.”

The shipping company also wrote in the statement that it will invest “$1.5 billion to significantly expand the FedEx Express Indianapolis hub over the next seven years. The Memphis SuperHub will also be modernized and enlarged in a major program the details of which will be announced later this spring.”

The American economy continues to thrive under President Donald Trump. Reports suggested that an excess of one million Americans will receive a bonus of up to $3,000, thanks to the tax cut bill.

Home Depot announced Thursday that its workers can receive a bonus of up to $1,000 as a result of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

Craig Menear, Home Depot’s chief executive officer, said in a statement released Thursday, “This incremental investment in our associates was made possible by the new tax reform bill. We are pleased to be able to provide this additional reward to our associates.”

Well over 100 American companies gave their employees as much as $2,000 in bonuses after President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Several corporations, such as AT&T, Comcast, and Nationwide, also increased their 401(k) match rate, raise their minimum wages, and increased domestic investment because of the Republican tax bill.

American unemployment claim benefits remain at a record 17-year low, and American consumer sentiment reached its highest level since 2000.

Meanwhile, former Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairwoman and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz argued on Thursday that $1,000 in bonuses as a result of tax reform do not amount to much help.

Schultz said, “I’m not sure that $1,000 goes very far for anyone.”

Pubblicato in: Banche Centrali, Stati Uniti, Trump, Unione Europea

Trump. Svalutazione del dollaro.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-02-01.

2018-01-30__Usd-Cyn__001

«La parabola di Trump, lato dollaro, ha due volti»

*

«All’inizio del suo mandato (novembre 2016) il biglietto verde ha avuto subito uno scatto nei confronti delle principali valute. Tanto che l’euro da quota 1,12 è scivolato nel dicembre 2016 a 1,04 sfiorando la parità»

*

«Dopodiché il trend è girato. Il dollaro ha iniziato a perdere terreno su scala globale con un’escalation nelle ultime settimane. I fattori scatenanti sono la spinta protezionistica di Trump e l’innalzamento del tetto del debito.»

*

«Il presidente Usa ha delineato una strategia commerciale molto aggressiva, da molti considerata eccessivamente protezionistica, che prevede tra le altre cose l’imposizione di dazi su lavatrici e pannelli solari cinesi»

*

«A conti fatti quindi se Trump voleva un dollaro più debole …. ora può dire di averlo ottenuto»

*

«Analizzando le performance del biglietto verde nei confronti delle 10 principali valute al mondo emerge chiaramente che la valuta Usa non ha fatto eccezioni: si è svalutata nei confronti di tutte. Nei confronti dell’euro ha perso oltre il 15%, così come per la corona danese. Il dollaro si è svalutato anche nei confronti della sterlina (13,9%) che a questo punto non è lontana (manca un 4%) a ritornare ai livelli pre-Brexit. Ci vogliono oggi più dollari anche per acquistare yen e franchi svizzeri (circa il 5% in più), rispetto a novembre 2016»

*

«Ci sono state sempre trade war. Ora la differenza è che l’America sta salendo sulle barricate»

* * * * * * * *

2018-01-28__Trump. Svalutazione del dollaro.__001

Se è vero che alcuni effetti di una svalutazione competitiva siano quasi immediati, sarebbe altrettanto vero che molti altri effetti si dispieghino lentamente nel tempo.

I contratti in essere che avessero fissato il rapporto continuerebbero ad essere onorati, ma dopo tutto dovrebbe essere riconsiderato e rinegoziato.

Se è vero che l’eurozona risulta essere facilitata nell’approvvigionamento di materie prime denominate in dollari, è altrettanto vero che le sue esportazioni verso gli Stati Uniti saranno ostacolate dai rincari. In confronto ad un anno fa, il vino italiano sugli scaffali dei supermercati è aumentato di circa il 30%.

Ma forse il punto di maggiore interesse potrebbe essere nei confronti della Cina, dato stranamente omesso dal Sole 24 Ore.

Il 1° maggio 2017 lo yuan valeva 6.91, ed oggi invece è quotato 6.3316.


Sole 24 Ore. 2018-01-25. La svalutazione che piace a Trump. Ecco quanto ha perso il dollaro sulle 10 principali monete

La parabola di Trump, lato dollaro, ha due volti. All’inizio del suo mandato (novembre 2016) il biglietto verde ha avuto subito uno scatto nei confronti delle principali valute. Tanto che l’euro da quota 1,12 è scivolato nel dicembre 2016 a 1,04 sfiorando la parità. Dopodiché il trend è girato. Il dollaro ha iniziato a perdere terreno su scala globale con un’escalation nelle ultime settimane. I fattori scatenanti sono la spinta protezionistica di Trump e l’innalzamento del tetto del debito.

Il presidente Usa ha delineato una strategia commerciale molto aggressiva, da molti considerata eccessivamente protezionistica, che prevede tra le altre cose l’imposizione di dazi su lavatrici e pannelli solari cinesi. Allo stesso tempo è riuscito a trovare la quadra al Congresso per aumentare la capacità di spesa a deficit.

Più debito equivale, nei manuali di macroeconomia, a una moneta meno forte. A conti fatti quindi se Trump voleva un dollaro più debole – che certamente può far comodo a un Paese chiamato a mantenere elevati e costanti standard di crescita a fronte del percorso di normalizzazione dei tassi avviato – ora può dire di averlo ottenuto. Su tutti e contro tutti.

Analizzando le performance del biglietto verde nei confronti delle 10 principali valute al mondo emerge chiaramente che la valuta Usa non ha fatto eccezioni: si è svalutata nei confronti di tutte. Nei confronti dell’euro ha perso oltre il 15%, così come per la corona danese. Il dollaro si è svalutato anche nei confronti della sterlina (13,9%) che a questo punto non è lontana (manca un 4%) a ritornare ai livelli pre-Brexit. Ci vogliono oggi più dollari anche per acquistare yen e franchi svizzeri (circa il 5% in più), rispetto a novembre 2016.

Ieri il segretario al Tesoro degli Stati Uniti, Steven Mnuchin, ha affermato che un dollaro così debole è un toccasana per l’economia. Parole che hanno messo nuova pressione al ribasso nei confronti della divisa statunitense.

Intanto la situazione – guerra valutaria che fa rima con guerra commerciale – sta alimentando il dibattito in Svizzera, dove è in corso il forum di Davos. Jack Ma, fondatore del colosso cinese dell’e-commerce Alibaba, ha detto che gli scambi commerciali non dovrebbero essere usati come un’arma, in quello che è apparso un attacco neppure troppo velato a Trump. Jack Ma, da Davos, ha detto di essere «spaventato e preoccupato» dalla possibilità di una guerra commerciale.

I suoi timori sembrano trovare fondamento nelle parole del segretario al Commercio americano Wilbur Ross, che, sempre da Davos, ha detto: «Ci sono state sempre trade war. Ora la differenza è che l’America sta salendo sulle barricate». Secondo Ma, invece, il protezionismo non è salutare: «La globalizzazione è una grande cosa» e gli «effetti collaterali» devono essere accettati, perché «è facile dare inizio a una guerra commerciale, ma è difficile fermarla».

Trump al momento al momento non la pensa così. Per continuare con il motto “America first” ora più che mai ha bisogno di un dollaro “fragile”.