2013 Annual Wrap Up

Break Away in 2014

“The bigger the breakdown, the bigger the breakthrough.”
~ Thomas Hupp

By Catherine Austin Fitts

In 2013, despite calls for volatility and even dollar collapse, US equity market prices were WAY up with relatively little volatility, while bonds and emerging markets equity prices fell and commodity prices fell sharply.

America became a net exporter of energy (largely due to fracking) and US manufacturers benefited from the lowest natural gas prices in the world. Not coincidentally, war in the Middle East was averted while the US military began a pivot to the Asia-Pacific region and the squabble over the East China Sea grew.

Domestically, Americans’ right to defend themselves was reasserted despite a fierce campaign to restrict those rights. The launch of Obamacare in the fourth quarter was a chilling reminder as to why these rights were so hard fought.

As we have pointed out previously, space-mining and other space-related ventures are rapidly gaining momentum. Consider the following quote from uber-success, Elon Musk:

“Given that this is the first time in 4.5 billion years where it’s been possible for humanity to extend life beyond Earth, it seems like we’d be wise to act while the window was open and not count on the fact it will be open a long time.”

In this week’s Solari Report, we will be looking back at 2013 in our year-end wrap-up. I’ll also cover my top trends and **wildcards** for 2014:

  • The shift in the bond market: what if interest rates continue to rise?
  • Why limiting the NSA’s powers could make things worse
  • What is driving the rennassaince in North American manufacturing?

I hope you’ll join us on the Solari Report. Learn more here…


  1. The return of US mfg. is an interesting possibility. However, will there not have to be a global shunning of the $FRN before FedGov.Inc is forced to open the flood gates of mfg prosperity and kill the “Slow Burn”? Or will the new bull market be more selective like a desert drip irrigation system? Is it probable that new US Mfg bubble could be selectively granted as a boon to those States / Cities that roll over to more intrusive Big Brother edicts?? Let’s face it, we’ve been in a slow motion strangle hold since Bush I. Plus, the only prosperity I’ve seen of late are in MIC enclaves i.e. Dallas, Albuquerque and off course the “Oil Patch”.. Too much time and effort has been spent keeping the Lower Upper, Middle and Lower Classes financially on the ropes and medicated. FedGov.Inc can’t afford the wave of retiring Boomers and all the wounded Vets. So, why let those besieged and abused population segments off the mat? When they are so close to choking us out? What price will they demand before prosperity is allowed to return?


  2. Catherine,

    Although I know this is far fetched, what would it look like if we were to tie federal and state monies given to colleges and universities to the default rate of student loans of those students who graduated? In other words, if your students cannot get jobs and pay their student loans after receiving a degree, then why should the tax payers continue shoveling money into those dens of higher education? Why not hold those universities and colleges accountable for the product they are selling?

    Just a thought,

  3. Catherine,
    It seems we are discussing less “Tapeworm Economics” (government corruption) and moving towards Breakaway Civilization funding. You are suggesting that the “tapeworm” is merely the financing arm of the breakaway civilization? If so, how does this relate to Global 3.0? If the breakaway civilization is fully capitalized, are we to expect another “pump and dump” scheme? Are the new technologies expected to benefit the public or only the breakaway civ? Do we invest into these startup companies and participate in “crowdfunding?”or do we still need to be wary and continue protecting ourselves by investing in the real?


  4. James:

    Good question! I will discuss more on Ask Catherine this week.

    I am suggesting that the shift is on, right or wrong and that the acceleration of change is significant.

    What I intend to do is to focus on my purpose – trying to do things that have a positive total economic return for the whole that have a positive return for the Solari networks and team. Whether 2.0 or 3.0, that is always an imperfect pathway as we all function within the matrix. I simply try to do my best.

    Whatever is going on around you and whomever is doing it, simply ask yourself if the people involved are ethical and competent and the activity has a total economic return for the whole, and a positive return on your investment of time and resources – call it +/+.

    Those are my criteria – I am looking to optimize my time, energy and assets and contribution to the whole.

    The money is going to be flowing every which way within 3.0, including pump and dumps. As the Roman Emporer once said, “Money has no smell.”

  5. Catherine

    Thank you for this critical report with so much valuable information. Regarding Bitcoins, how can you get in trouble if all you are doing is “mining” Bitcoins? As I see it, you don’t have any investment and if you luck out and create about 10 Bitcoins at around $800 you have a gain.


  6. Kelly:

    I am a skeptic. No name. No history. No transparency about who is funding.

    Yes, good ideas on the list. Some bad ones too. But it could also be generating a lot of energy into something that tries to crowdfund new constitution.

    So I would avoid and focus on people who know whose financing and incentives are fully disclosed.


  7. Matt:

    A great idea – because you align incentives. The universities have to achieve performance. They only benefit if the student benefits. Real economics are engaged.

    The reason the incentive system is engaged differently, is because the system is designed to serve a different purpose than optimizing the success of students.


  8. I am curious about applying Economy 2.0 shift to Economy 3.0 framework to understanding the significant shifts we are seeing in the International Health and Development Space.

    The shift from International Public Health and Development 2.0 to Global Health 3.0. International Health 2.0 primarily focused on basic public health sanitation and infrastructure financed largely by the World Bank, World Health Organization, and bilateral G7 donors. We see now Global Health 3.0 with new players such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation co-financed by Warren Buffet with an emphasis on public-private partnerships in new health technologies, biotech, drug therapies vaccination, pharmaceuticals, and digital health. Big pharma (GSK, Merck, etc.) is a major player in Global Health. Public health, historically, as we have known it for over 100 years, is being transformed into something else. Allison

    Interesting Journey.

Leave a Reply