Stephen Stanton

This will be an important theme in this election, and in the years ahead. https://lnkd.in/ewzHu2pn 🔎 IMO, the U. S. needs to fortify an increasingly meak defense budget More on this: U.S. Military Spending: Current Trends vs. Post-WWII Era **Post-WWII Era** After World War II, the United States maintained high military spending levels to support its new role as a global superpower and to counter the Soviet threat during the Cold War. In 1945, U.S. military spending was approximately $10.5 billion, accounting for 41% of the federal budget - This figure rose significantly with the onset of the Korean War in 1950, reaching $14.4 billion, which was 15% of the federal budget. **Cold War to the Early 2000s** During the Cold War, military spending remained a substantial part of the U.S. budget. Peaks were seen during the Korean and Vietnam Wars, and again during the Reagan administration's defense buildup in the 1980s. After the Cold War ended, there was a reduction in military expenditure during the 1990s. **Current Military Spending** In recent years, U.S. military spending has seen substantial fluctuations. The defense budget for FY 2024 is set at approximately $841.4 billion 🪙includes substantial allocations for various branches: 🛩️ $216.1 billion for the Air Force, 🛳️ $202.6 billion for the Navy, 💪165.6 billion for the Army, ⚜️$53.2 billion for the Marine Corps, and 🌖 $30.1 billion for the Space Force. …. Modern defense spending now represents about 13.3% of the federal budget, a decrease in proportion compared to the post-WWII era, but an increase in absolute terms due to inflation and the expanded scope of military operations and technology investments. ### Comparative Analysis **As a Share of GDP** Post-WWII, military spending was a significant portion of the GDP, at times exceeding 40% during WWII itself. Today, military spending is a smaller share of GDP, around 3.5%. **Inflation-Adjusted Comparisons** ….. today's military spending is considerably higher than in the immediate post-WWII years. However, while the absolute dollar amount has increased significantly, its impact has waned. 🌍 the next decade will be a test for Pax-Americana (as it was for the Roman’s Pax-Romana, a hallmark of Roman history, until the death of Marcus Aurelius 180CE, marking a time of unparalleled peace and prosperity in the Roman Empire).

4

A Significant Nuclear Threat, Right Under our Noses   From the ABM Treaty to SDI, and from the Iron Dome in Israel to a New Star Wars   By Antonio John Soave April 24, 2024   I’m not sure how or why, but most major media sources seem to be ignoring the very real nuclear threat that we are facing at this juncture. The more intense the scenario becomes between Russia and Ukraine, and the more we in the U.S. and NATO become entangled in that conflict with everything from funding to military intelligence, the more we risk a direct confrontation between Russia and the United States. We were reminded of this just last week when Iran and Israel exchanged significant firepower on one another. Gone were the proxy confrontations in places such as Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq, and present was the very real threat posed between two countries. This sort of country-to-country showdown is something that we—in the U.S. and NATO—should try to avoid at just about any cost.   Granted, the nuclear threat has been something that we have faced for almost a century, beginning with Japan in World War II and extending into a most prolonged Cold War between the former Soviet Union and the United States. As a bright-eyed bushy-tailed intern under President Ronald Reagan in The White House in 1987, I not only recall the summits with Mikhail Gorbachev at the time, but I remember working on some monumental documents revolving around the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (“ABM”). In short, this is how the Arms Control Association describes it:   Negotiated between the United States and the Soviet Union as part of the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks, the now-defunct Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty was signed on May 26, 1972, and entered into force on October 3, 1972.   The treaty, from which the United States withdrew on June 13, 2002, barred Washington and Moscow from deploying nationwide defenses against strategic ballistic missiles. In the treaty preamble, the two sides asserted that effective limits on anti-missile systems would be a "substantial factor in curbing the race in strategic offensive arms."           Source: Arms Control Association online.   As strange as it is, the one name that keeps “popping up” in my mind from the time that I was able to officially work on aspects of the public diplomacy aspects of the ABM Treaty is Judge Abraham Sofaer. But I needed to remind myself of the reason that Judge Sofaer was “front and center” in the ordeal, and why The White House kept quoting him with respect to ABM and other arms treaties.    To begin with, that was a time when the United States—under Ronald Reagan—was trying to advance the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Critics dubbed it as “Star Wars,” a nod to a fictional technology that had little to no chance of ever working. As a result, on October 6, 1985 ...   MORE ... PLEASE CONTACT ME FOR THE FULL ARTICLE. #nucleardefense #militarydefense

4

Are you a Jew? If so I have some questions for you. Do you intend to vote for another "Democrat" president? Do think Biden was actually calling the shots in the White House or is now? If not who do you think was and is his handler-in-chief? Who? Got a name? How about Obama? Do you know how many Obama staffers are running this administration? Do you care? Do you have ANY curiosity? When you go out in pubic do you wear anything that makes it obvious that you are Jewish, or do you avoid trouble by not making it obvious that you are Jewish? How safe do you think it will be for you if the "Democrats" win another term in the White House? I submit to you that Obama is Biden's hander-in-chief, and that he chose Harris for Biden's VP. If you are at all influenced by the opinion of Alan Dershowitz, if you ask yourself did Obama have to make a deal to give Iran nuclear weapons then I encourage you to ask yourself some hard questions before you vote for Harris. Under President Trump's first term the middle east was getting safer with the Abraham Accords, Russia did not invade Ukraine and China was far less aggressive in attempting to intimidate Taiwan. Iran's proxies did not invade Israel killing the equivalent of 40,000 Americans (when scaled up by population). President Trump did none of the things the "Democrats" say he will do if elected. I encourage you to check out jns.org to get some truth about the "Democrats" and Israel.

13

4 Comments

7/18/2024, Plainfield, NJ Lost Decade: The US Pivot to Asia and the Rise of Chinese Power by Robert D. Blackwill (Author) https://lnkd.in/e4MyTS8d Council on Foreign Relations Richard Fontaine https://lnkd.in/esM5r-pn Center for a New American Security (CNAS) 480 pages Oxford University Press $23.98 https://a.co/d/ecY7m2H "Lost Decade: The US Pivot to Asia and the Rise of Chinese Power" by Robert D. Blackwill and Richard Fontaine offers a critical examination of the United States' foreign policy shift towards Asia, initiated during the Obama administration in 2011. The authors argue that while the strategic logic behind the "Pivot to Asia" was sound, its implementation fell short of expectations, resulting in few tangible successes. The book posits that the period from 2011 to 2021 represents a "lost decade" in U.S. foreign policy. During this time, the United States failed to fully capitalize on the opportunity to strengthen its position in Asia, while China made significant strides in expanding its influence in the region. Blackwill and Fontaine contend that by 2021, the U.S. was in a much weaker position in Asia compared to 2011, partly due to its failure to respond effectively to China's actions, such as the militarization of artificial islands in the South China Sea. The authors identify several key factors that contributed to the failure of the Pivot to Asia: 1. Underestimation of the China challenge: For too long, Washington believed that a combination of incentives and discouragements would induce Beijing to support rather than undermine the international order. 2. Competing priorities: Crises in other regions, such as wars in the Middle East and Russia's invasions of Ukraine, diverted attention and resources from Asia. 3. Lack of urgency: The absence of a cataclysmic event to force a reassessment made it difficult to implement such a significant shift in foreign policy. 4. Implementation challenges: Moving military assets, overcoming domestic opposition to trade agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and sustaining intense diplomacy in the Indo-Pacific proved more difficult than anticipated. Meanwhile, China benefited from this lost decade by increasing its military capabilities, expanding its economic influence through trade agreements, and intensifying its diplomatic engagement in the Indo-Pacific and Global South. Blackwill and Fontaine argue that the failure to pivot was one of the three greatest U.S. foreign policy mistakes since World War II, alongside the escalation of the Vietnam War and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. They stress the urgent need for a more coherent approach to the Indo-Pacific region, emphasizing that effective policy in this area is crucial for preserving American security, prosperity, and democratic values. #Lost_Decade #PlainfieldNJ Lost Decade: The U.S. Pivot to Asia and the Rise of Chinese Power https://lnkd.in/esFTdVwX

1

6/30/2024 Plainfield, NJ Nuclear War: A Scenario Hardcover – March 26, 2024 by Annie Jacobsen (Author) https://anniejacobsen.com/ $30.00 400 pages Penguin Random House Sarah Thegeby Jamie McDonald Knapp https://a.co/d/0gDHT81j Annie Jacobsen's "Nuclear War: A Scenario" offers a chilling and meticulously detailed account of a hypothetical nuclear conflict, serving as a stark reminder of the catastrophic consequences of nuclear warfare. The book presents a ticking-clock scenario that begins with an unexpected North Korean missile strike on the United States, targeting Washington D.C. and a nuclear power station in California. Jacobsen's narrative unfolds in a minute-by-minute, hour-by-hour format, exploring the chaos and devastation that would ensue following a nuclear attack. She delves into the complex systems and protocols involved in tracking incoming missiles, attempting interception, and coordinating the government's response. The author draws from extensive interviews with military and civilian experts who have intimate knowledge of nuclear weapons and response plans. While the book has been praised for its vivid portrayal of the horrors of nuclear war, some critics have pointed out potential flaws in the scenario's plausibility. The premise of North Korea launching an unprovoked attack without prior escalation or crisis has been questioned by some readers familiar with nuclear strategy. Despite these criticisms, "Nuclear War: A Scenario" succeeds in its primary goal of emphasizing the dire consequences of nuclear conflict and the fragility of our modern world in the face of such devastation. Jacobsen's work serves as a sobering wake-up call, urging readers to consider the very real dangers posed by nuclear arsenals and the importance of preventing such a catastrophic event. The book's strength lies in its ability to make the abstract concept of nuclear war feel tangible and immediate. By presenting a detailed, speculative scenario, Jacobsen forces readers to confront the horrifying reality of what a nuclear exchange would mean for humanity. "Nuclear War: A Scenario" is a thought-provoking and unsettling read that underscores the continued relevance of nuclear disarmament efforts and the need for careful stewardship of nuclear arsenals. While it may not provide a perfect blueprint for how a nuclear conflict might unfold, it succeeds in reigniting important conversations about the existential threat posed by these weapons. #Nuclear_War #PlainfieldNJ Annie Jacobsen — Nuclear War: A Scenario - with Lt. Gen. Charlie Moore and Jon Wolfsthal https://lnkd.in/eD2e5x3P Dr. Strangelove (7/8) Movie CLIP - Kong Rides the Bomb (1964) HD https://lnkd.in/e7JRgg8J

1

Ukraine Resuming Debt Payments to Private Creditors? My first reaction to today's WSJ story was a thought that there must be a competition for the "Tone-death of the Month" award. https://lnkd.in/gPksVsuB The IMF optimistically estimates a financing gap of north of $120 billion over the next 3 years, ALL of which is to be provided by official creditors and private sector restructuring. Given that background, how can one think a resumption of debt service is realistic after the bondholder payment holiday expires in August, never mind the recent negative news from the battlefront? It turns out the article is more nuanced than the headline, and the real reason for skepticism is buried way deep toward the end of the piece: Official creditors will (ever reluctantly it appears) provide fresh funds on top of their debt service holiday through 2027 and won't be eager to see bondholders take out a cut of those. Indeed such payments to private creditors would likely trigger the most bipartisan and cross-country blowback imaginable. Investors should value these bonds accordingly.

4

This is brief but so powerful

6

We analyzed 54 non-dual class proxy votes at US large caps this week so you won't have to. On the Proxy Countdown, we covered more than 800 directors and picked a (non-aggressive) 1.8% to vote against - these are outlier companies and directors. We followed simple rules: boards SHOULD represent investors, not themselves or management; boards SHOULD have necessary skills represented; boards SHOULD have a minimum expectation of performance or no red flags. That's it. In the end, you can read the full script at https://lnkd.in/gq5xArbS or get the show on Spotify or Apple or wherever, but here are the simple results: 6 companies had ALL THREE rules broken. Some of the most egregious: does Colgate need not one, but two EX lead independent directors on the board? Are you still "independent" after thirty years on the board? Is ranking in the bottom 10 percent for TSR across multiple boards OK? Is returning NEGATIVE cap value in your tenure OK? How any connections back to the board are too many? Here are the short recs when you just use the data to find outliers: Vote AGAINST… Bill Bax, Arthur Gallagher David Johnson, Arthur Gallagher Ron Sugar, Uber Ed Garden, GE Steve Sadove, Colgate John Cahill, Colgate Zan Vautrinaut, CSX Gale Klappa, WEC Ulice Payne, WEC Mike Smith, Zebra Technologies Leo Coleman, Omnicom David Presier, NVR Peter Wilver, Baxter Norman Wright, First Solar Alex Cutler, Keycorp Melanie Healy, Verizon

6

1 Comment

7/3/2024, Plainfield, NJ Money in the Twenty-First Century: Cheap, Mobile, and Digital Hardcover – January 30, 2024 by Prof. Richard Holden (Author) Richard Holden https://richardholden.org/ UNSW Business School 232 pages University of California Press $22.24 https://a.co/d/04JoDtTC Richard Holden's "Money in the Twenty-First Century: Cheap, Mobile, and Digital" offers a timely and insightful examination of how modern forces are reshaping our understanding and use of money. As an economist, Holden delves into three key trends that are transforming the financial landscape: low interest rates, mobile money, and cryptocurrencies. The book weaves together economic analysis with engaging narratives, focusing on three influential figures in the world of modern finance: Janet Yellen, Vitalik Buterin, and Raghuram Rajan. This approach helps ground the complex economic concepts in real-world context, making the material more accessible to readers. Holden's work is particularly relevant given the rapid changes we're seeing in financial technology and monetary policy. He explores how digital transactions are becoming increasingly prevalent, and examines the infrastructure that supports these new forms of exchange. The book also delves into the competition for control over emerging currencies and the potential impacts on international monetary systems. One of the book's strengths is its comprehensive scope. Holden moves seamlessly from micro to macro perspectives, investigating everything from the mechanics of individual digital transactions to broader shifts in global economic policy. This wide-ranging approach helps readers understand the interconnected nature of these financial transformations. A central question the book poses is whether governments can effectively manage the tectonic shifts brought about by cheap money, mobile transactions, and decentralized finance. This exploration of the tension between traditional financial institutions and emerging technologies is particularly thought-provoking. While the book offers a wealth of information and analysis, it's worth noting that the rapidly evolving nature of digital finance means some specifics may become dated quickly. However, the broader principles and trends Holden identifies are likely to remain relevant for years to come. Overall, "Money in the Twenty-First Century" provides a valuable resource for anyone looking to understand the future of finance. Holden's expertise shines through in his ability to explain complex economic concepts in an engaging and accessible manner. Whether you're a finance professional, a policy maker, or simply someone interested in how money is changing in the digital age, this book offers valuable insights into the forces shaping our financial future. #Money_in_the_Twenty_First_Century #PlainfieldNJ Wealth: Cashless Australia by 2020 – Prof Richard Holden at Real Big Things #23 https://lnkd.in/edtqTXN6

1

This news regarding #FIT21 (HR 4763) is helpful to hear, and gives advocates in the #digitalassets space the opportunity to educate the 80% of members of #Congress who aren't fully aware of the value or utility of #blockchain #technology and don't sit on the #financialservices or #banking committees in the House and Senate. While it's clear this bill will pass the House, it's important to see how many moderate Democrats support the bill (especially now that they won't whip votes), and that might give some hope in the Senate that it could go somewhere. We've already seen with #SAB121 that moderate Democrats, including those in leadership, can find a way to support thoughtful #regulatory clarity in the space. This bill provides helpful frameworks for decentralized computer networks to launch, in compliance with the securities laws, and provides a needed framework to provide #investorprotection, rather than the #enforcement led approach we see now. I highly suggest folks pick up the book #ReadWriteOwn by Chris Dixon, as it highlights the challenges with Web 1.0 (open source = good, no funding for innovation = bad), and Web 2.0 (corporate controlled networks = bad, funding for innovation = good), and the prospect of #Web3, (open-source and funding for innovation = good) which seeks to prevent concentration of innovation in #BigTech and provides a funding mechanism (through #crypto) to ensure the next generation of Tech #startups can build on top of stable open-source networks.

6

2 Comments

Middle East paving the path for strong recovery of US economy...

1

The CFPB has sued SoLo Funds, a fintech whose platform lets consumers lend money to one another, largely over its tipping model. SoLo's founders say they are innovating and helping people who are aren't served by mainstream banks. You can read the details in this American Banker article: https://lnkd.in/e3Aycm84 What do you think: Do regulators need to make allowances for financial products that don't fit the traditional mold?

6

Summary: ·       The exodus, of dissenting talent, from the “Prison of Transient Groupthink”, at the New York Fed, is a strategic institutional governance success for the Federal Reserve. ·       The exodus, of talent, from the New York Fed creates “balance” in the Fed's monetary policymaking process. ·       A “balanced” monetary policymaking framework is consistent with the, observed, “mandate drift” towards a financial stability policymaking “Third Mandate”. ·       “Balanced Third Mandate Drift” lowers the probability of a hard landing and, commensurately, raises the probability of a soft landing. ·       Fed escape, from “Transient Groupthink”, via “Third Mandate Drift”, has an elevated probability of ending in capture by the “Smartest Guys in the Room” rather than Jamie Dimon/JP Morgan. ·       D-Day for “Friends-and-Family Shoring” ended early in the Ungoverned Kingdom (UK). ·       The “ritual cleansing”, on the UK side of the Atlantic, has reached the point at which Britain/the“Butler” (B), and Rishi (R) are being removed from the BRIC threat to G7. ·       Theleme and Louise will be on general (election) release in July. #fed #monetarypolicy #inflation #financialstability #sunak #brics #g7 #macron https://lnkd.in/dnCU-htc

1

🚨 FINRA Fines SoFi Securities $1.1M for $2.5M Fraud Loss 🚨 "The firms approved the opening of approximately 800 accounts that third parties then used to transfer approximately $8.6 million from customers' accounts at other financial institutions without authorization, FINRA’s order states. Approximately $2.5 million of those transfers were subsequently withdrawn by these third parties from the SoFi Money accounts." Key Points💡 ❌ From December 2018 to April 2019, SoFi's account opening process allowed third parties to transfer $8.6 million from other accounts fraudulently. Despite red flags, SoFi failed to adequately respond. 🚩 SoFi ignored identity theft warning signs, including mismatched addresses and flagged Social Security numbers, identified in its Identity Theft Prevention Program. 📉 SoFi Securities neglected to develop and implement a comprehensive Identity Theft Prevention Program. The firm lacked the necessary measures to detect, prevent, and mitigate identity theft. This oversight enabled fraudsters to exploit vulnerabilities within the system, resulting in financial losses of $2.5 million. Learn More 💡 ➡ https://lnkd.in/gpmjePUY ➡ https://lnkd.in/gBU5wAVV #fraud #financialcrime #bankingindustry

158

7 Comments

What 𝗜𝗦 counterparty outreach? Trying to identify banks that "may" be interested in buying 𝘆͟𝗼͟𝘂͟𝗿͟ bank. Sell-side investment bankers are regularly polling buyers to measure their appetite for a possible purchase. Not 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙧 bank at this point, 𝘼𝙉𝙔 bank. With that market intel, the investment bankers will then set out to begin the process on your behalf. The process has four stages that are as follows: 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝟭 - 𝗔𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 Before anything can happen, you need to get the buyer's attention. 🔹Who are you? 🔹Why should they listen? 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝟮 - 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁 Just because you have their attention does not mean they are interested. 🔹What does this have to do with us? 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝟯 - 𝗗𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗿𝗲 This is the stage where you take them from "I like this" to "I want this." 🔹How will this make us better? 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝟰 - 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 This is the stage where you take them from "I want this" to I need this." 🔹How do we get this done? If you weren't familiar with this, it's not your fault. Nobody has ever shown you the way. Until now. I wrote the book "The Art of Selling Your Bank: A Bank CEO's Step-By-Step Guide" to help bank CEO's considering selling the bank to being confident they can: - Master the process - Optimize value - Avoid costly mistakes. You can get your copy here: https://rebrand.ly/l7tv8x2 Today, in my free weekly newsletter "The Savvy Banker" we're going to go a little deeper on the topic of "Do more than Survive, Thrive with 5 Power Value Drivers." Click here to subscribe: https://lnkd.in/gS8ZsFyc Are you a bank CEO, President, CFO or Board Member with questions you have regarding the consideration of selling? DM me here on LinkedIn to ask confidentially and I will get back with you.

3

2 Comments

I have to say, I like Politico as a news platform, they are usually the quickest to write about topical issues that are driving angst in European politics. The problem is that they toggle back & forth between commenting to validate popular views, and journalism that offers insight into causes of problems, with hope of possibly pushing public sentiment toward solutions. The constant use of the ‘Trump factor’ as short-cut analysis is one of their worst transgressions. This article is a perfect example, and it is co-authored by practically the whole team, so no one is innocent. Instead of focusing on all the MANY things Europe got wrong during the first Trump Presidency, . . its many failures to head warning and adjust to a changed reality on its Eastern Front and elsewhere . . , it pitches the story on threats to Europe deriving from Washington, and therefore it must batten down the hatches in preparation for another Trump storm. Here’s a news flash for you Politico, Trump isn’t the storm. If Europe, on its own cannot see the reasons why the UK would put itself through absolute hell to effect Brexit, that some unknown entity would actually blow-up the Nordstream pipeline, that Finland & Sweden would abandon neutrality and join NATO after 75 years, that India would take a step away from non-alignment to join Indo-Pacific Quad, that SKorea, Japan, Phillipines & Australia would upgrade security alliances . . . then no number of Trumps can help them see the light. The world has changed, and yet, the EU is still exporting like mad to Central Asia to circumvent US sanctions aimed at stopping a kinetic war on its own doorstep, while simultaneously begging Washington for more military aid, and its national leaders still rush off to China to save trade & investment deals, while the US suffers a gigantic trade deficit in the face of closing export markets due to geopolitical shifts. It is not possible to help Europe, or to effectively be its security partner, if Europe refuses to help itself. It is not bureaucracy that inhibits the EU, it is lack of will at all levels. Just as western journalists are want to write, “this is not just Putin’s war, it is the collective responsibility of the Russian people that tolerate his dominance,” the same can be said of Europeans. This is not just the failure of its unruly bureaucracy, it is the collective responsibility of its citizens. Europe’s future has become unsafe not because of Trump, but because of the negligence of its own leadership. #EU #Europe #nato #russiaukrainewar https://lnkd.in/dwZAa_Fi

15

🚀 Diving into the CBO's Stark Federal Debt Forecast 🌟💼 Dr. Robert P. Murphy recently broken down the latest 10-year outlook from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which paints a dire picture of the US's fiscal health. It indicates not just future financial woes but a current crisis in government debt. While the CBO strives for a balanced perspective, their projections reveal a distressing trajectory for federal deficits and public debt, underscoring the urgency of addressing this fiscal quagmire. 📉 🔍 The Analysis: - The report starts with a staggering forecast: a consistent deficit of at least $1.6 trillion annually, marking a new "normal" in federal spending, far removed from past fiscal prudence. - As a proportion of GDP, these deficits reveal an unsustainable fiscal path, with debt projected to hit an unprecedented 116% of GDP by 2034. 💡 Key Takeaways: - This isn't just a future problem; the enormity of current deficits suggests immediate action is required to avert further fiscal deterioration. - The drivers of these deficits are multifaceted, including mandatory spending and net interest surpassing discretionary areas like defense, signifying structural budgetary imbalances. 🔧 Understanding the Dynamics: - The juxtaposition of past crises with today's fiscal policy highlights a shift towards perpetual deficit spending, absent the historical rebound to fiscal normalcy post-crisis. - The alarming growth in federal debt underscores the need for comprehensive policy reform, encompassing potential tax increases, spending cuts, and possibly unconventional monetary interventions. The CBO's report is a clarion call for policymakers and the public to confront the looming fiscal challenges head-on. As we navigate this precarious financial landscape, it's crucial to engage in informed discourse on sustainable fiscal strategies. 🌍 Read the full article here 👉 https://lnkd.in/e-gM64u7

1