Why Boobus americanus is for more socialism… Doug Casey – A “white male privilege tax” is on the way… In the mailbag: “You must look at politics if you want to protect your family and your wealth”…

It’s a hot-button topic these days…

It’s also one of the main themes we’ve been tracking here at The Daily Cut – the rise of socialism and what it means for your wealth.

And judging by the back and forth in recent mailbags, it’s something readers have been thinking about, too.

The way it’s framed in the mainstream press is that socialism was once defeated… and is now making a comeback.

But as we’ve been showing you, it’s not as neat today as that. In fact, socialism has deep roots in the U.S. going back 100 years.

Doug Casey prefers the term “welfare state”…

He says what we now call welfare states replaced socialist states. But the core elements remain the same.

Here’s how he explained it in last month’s issue of our Crisis Investing advisory (Crisis Investing subscribers can catch up in full here)…

Forgetting about North Korea and Cuba, there are no socialist states anywhere in the world. What we have instead are welfare states – where the government provides some degree of free schooling, free medical care, free housing, free food, and so forth. If not free, then subsidized. The next step is a guaranteed annual income [a regular income from the government for every citizen].

The word “socialism” today is actually just shorthand for a welfare state, which is what Boobus americanus, the hoi polloi, really want. They don’t really care who owns the factories, the fields, and the mines. What they care about is that somebody gives them a soft life.

And when you give people the ability to vote themselves free stuff at somebody else’s expense they’ll do it.

There are still some remnants of free markets left in America. But Doug says there’s no question the U.S. is headed toward a full-fledged welfare state. It’s just a matter of time.

If you think Doug is crazy, just look at the polls…

According to Gallup, 51% of Americans aged between 18 and 29 have a positive view of socialism. By contrast, just 45% have a positive view of capitalism – down from 68% in 2010.

And a Reuters-Ipsos poll last summer revealed that 70% of Americans supported a central plank of democratic socialism – “Medicare for All,” aka universal healthcare financed by taxes.

That includes the majority of Republicans – 52% of whom said they wanted Medicare for All.

And the leading lights of the Republican Party can feel the winds of change from the base.

Take conservative Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson…

You know just how strong the winds of change are blowing when Carlson – a GOP stalwart – starts blasting at free markets with both barrels.

In an opening monologue that went viral last week, he claimed America’s “ruling class” were the “mercenaries” behind the failures of the middle class and “the ugliest parts of our financial system.”

He also said that, thanks to the supply-side economics favored by Republicans for decades, “an American who works for a salary pays about twice the tax rate as someone who’s living off inherited money.”

Carlson even warned his viewers that humans do not exist to “serve markets”… and that we are endangering ourselves by putting free markets on an altar.

Carlson isn’t the only free-market critic on the right…

Ann Coulter – another right-wing pundit – said she supports Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s proposal of a 70% income tax on personal earnings above $10 million. (The current rate is 37%.)

In fact, Coulter said she’d take it even further than AOC. Here’s a tweet she posted in January…


She was referring to Charles and David Koch – billionaire libertarian supporters of the Republican Party.

It’s why Doug says a “white male privilege tax” is on the way…

With the GOP down and out as a defender of free markets and personal liberty, there’s nothing to stop the “eat the rich” crowd.

Doug reckons white males will be the first to be put in front of the firing line…

That’s partly because they still have most of the money. And partly because it’s become fashionable to hate white males in particular. It’s natural to want to hurt people that they think are the problem – what Marxists would say are the “class enemy.”

We’re going to see much higher taxes, among other unsavory things. There’s no other way to pay for welfare state programs, except sell more debt to the Fed – which they’ll also do, by necessity. Inflation will get out of control as a result.

It’s just another reason you want to take our advice and hold plenty of gold.

If Doug is even half right about what’s coming, it’s going to be a critical way to protect your wealth. Remember, gold can’t be inflated like government fiat currencies can. So it’s a great asset to own when inflation is rising.

For more on that, make sure to catch up on our recent issues with one of our go-to gold investing experts here at Legacy Research – E.B. Tucker…

In the mailbag: Can we understand money without first understanding politics?

The debate continues, after one of your fellow readers urged us to stay out of politics at the Cut

I agree with many of your readers who insist you must look at politics if you want to protect your family and your wealth. Those who don’t will be led like sheep to the slaughter.

The question can also be turned around. Can we understand politics without first understanding money? I firmly believe that both propositions have to be embraced. A bit like the chicken and the egg (which came first?) conundrum.

Our best intelligence comes about by advancing both at the same time as best we can. This can only happen with open and robust discussion.

– Ken L.

Meanwhile, readers continue to weigh in on stock buybacks and whether they should be banned, as some on Capitol Hill are suggesting…

Being somewhat of a cynic, I’m quite certain that in many cases the buybacks take place when they are most favorable for management, especially one which has such a small share position in the company that their interests don’t coincide with mine – and, in fact, directly opposed in those instances when shares are bought back at insanely high valuations.

While I’m no fan of government interference, I’m even less a fan of being used by an unscrupulous management to line their wallets. So I’d not oppose a ban on buybacks.

– Al R.

What’s your take on today’s essay? Is more socialism inevitable in America? Will it lead to an eat-the-rich movement? Tell us your thoughts at [email protected].



Chris Lowe
March 4, 2019
Barcelona, Spain