Travel the globe

Friday, 9 May 2025

DOLLAR MILKSHAKE

No comments


Dollar Milkshake – The Theory

The Dollar Milkshake Theory, coined by Brent Johnson, suggests that the U.S. dollar will strengthen significantly as global economies grapple with mounting debt.


1. Introduction: A New Monetary World Order?

Something big is shifting in global finance. Currencies face fresh pressures, debt is piling up, and central banks seem to be tearing up old rulebooks.

Enter Brent Johnson’s Dollar Milkshake Theory, a framework through which we can examine:

  • Why the US dollar remains dominant

  • How it causes global imbalances

  • What might happen when those imbalances become too big to ignore

We’ll unpack the mechanics and risks, reflect on long-term investment lessons, and list macro thinkers worth following.

2. How the Current System Works: The Dollar at the Core

  • Reserve Currency Status
    Most global trade and financial transactions still revolve around the US dollar.

  • Borrowed Dollars Everywhere
    Many non-US countries and companies take out loans in dollars, which they must repay regardless of their local currency’s strength.

  • Fed’s Unique Power
    Only the US Federal Reserve can “print” base money. In global crises, dollar liquidity dries up quickly as everyone scrambles for the greenback.

  • Crisis Example
    During events like pandemics or financial meltdowns, the Fed steps in with “swap lines” or direct lending, temporarily unclogging the system.

Why It Matters:
This US-centric setup creates a powerful but risky cycle. The world needs dollars - the US provides them. But other nations rely on a currency they don’t control.

3. Why This Creates a Structural Imbalance

  • Short-Term vs. Long-Term
    Fed crisis support relieves short-term pain but creates long-term dollar debt in foreign economies.

  • Unpayable Debts
    Over time, countries may struggle to earn enough dollars (through exports, tourism, etc.) to repay what they owe.

  • Future Crisis Seeds
    Each bailout fixes today’s issues but sows tomorrow’s problems.

  • Fed’s Monopoly
    Only the Fed can inject real dollar liquidity. Not China. Not the ECB. Not the IMF.

4. Why Gold and Alternative Currencies Are Back in Focus

  • BRICS and Gold Reserves
    Nations like China and Russia are quietly stockpiling gold to reduce dollar dependence.

  • Gold-Backed or Commodity-Linked Currencies
    These can shield a nation from dollar hegemony, but require trust and stable reserves.

  • The Trade-Off
    Linking a currency to gold boosts stability but limits a central bank’s ability to manage its economy - it cannot, for example, expand the money supply since each note or coin can be handed in exchange for gold, thus, it cannot control credit.

5. What Happens When Debts Can’t Be Repaid?

  • Emerging Market Defaults
    Dollar-denominated debt plus a weakening local currency leads to default, capital flight, and often hyperinflation.

  • Fed and IMF Intervention
    Emergency loans may be offered, but with political strings attached.

  • Confidence Shock
    Every bailout reveals cracks in the system, and erodes trust in the “neutrality” of the dollar.

6. What Happens If the System Breaks for Good?

  • Abandoning the Dollar
    In a worst-case scenario, some countries may ditch the greenback altogether.

  • China’s Yuan or a Commodity Currency
    A synthetic or gold-backed currency could emerge, but it’s messy and slow.

  • Geopolitical Tensions
    Currency upheaval often leads to trade chaos, supply disruptions, even conflict.

  • Far-Reaching Fallout
    Collapse of dollar dominance would redraw global trade and finance, with winners and losers.

7. What to Watch: Signals of an Approaching Shift

  1. Central bank gold buying (especially by BRICS)

  2. Bilateral trade deals using non-dollar currencies

  3. Gold or oil settlements between sanctioned states

  4. CBDC development bypassing SWIFT and Western banks

  5. Alternatives to US systems (e.g., China’s CIPS, ASEAN's QRIS)

8. Long-Term Investor Strategies

(A) Core Protection

  • Physical gold & silver

  • ETFs like SGLN or GDX

  • Safe-haven currencies (CHF, SGD, NOK)

  • Inflation-linked bonds (e.g., TIPS)

(B) Asymmetric Bets

  • Gold miners eg GDXJ and commodity producers

  • Resilient emerging markets:
    Chile (copper/lithium),
    Indonesia (nickel),
    UAE (oil),
    Brazil (soy/iron ore),
    Singapore (finance hub)

(C) Diversify Jurisdictions

  • Multi-currency strategies

  • Own assets in multiple countries to avoid capital controls or confiscation

9. Caveats and Risks

  • Dollar Liquidity Still King
    Despite the talk, the dollar still powers the global system.

  • Gold Peg = Policy Handcuffs
    In a recession, gold-linked currencies can be dangerously inflexible.

  • Transition Turbulence
    System shifts tend to be bumpy - think wars, sanctions, controls, tarrifs, asset seizures.

10. Conclusion: The Road Ahead

Brent Johnson’s Dollar Milkshake Theory is not a prediction, rather it is a framework.

Each crisis deepens the world’s dependence on dollars. Eventually, the need for an alternative system may trigger action such as possibly gold-backed, or multi-polar.

But building that system will demand coordination and trust, two scarce resources.

Investor takeaway:
Stay alert. Diversify. Hold real assets. Remain agile.

Warning:

Recent experience since "Liberation Day" suggests that although interest rates may rise, the US dollar is weakening, suggesting that investors are pulling out of the dollar rather than piling in.

But listen to this first

Is the dollar crash finally here


REFERENCES & MACROECONOMISTS TO FOLLOW

  • Brent Johnson - Dollar Milkshake Theory

  • Luke Gromen - forestfortrees.substack.com

  • Zoltan Pozsar - Post-dollar architecture

  • Joseph Wang - “Fed Guy”

  • James Rickards - Currency wars & sanctions

  • Lyn Alden - Monetary macro strategy

  • Russell Napier - Capital controls & repression



Read More

THE OPPORTUNITY COSTS OF ASYLUM ACCOMMODATION SPENDING IN THE UK

No comments

9 May 2025

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/05/07/true-cost-of-asylum-hotels-migration-channel-labour/ 



A government minister thwarted by the obligation to house asylum seekers and migrants, arising from domestic UK law, international treaties, and human rights frameworks. "More fool us" is the public response - and they vote in "populist" candidates in consequence, radicalising the politics of the country in ways this Minister does not appreciate and complains about. This major government program is undertaken without parliamentary approval of even scrutiny - and when the Supreme Court gets a hold of this subject, could it lead to civil war... causa belli civilis?

The Opportunity Costs of Asylum Accommodation Spending

As the government continues to spend over £5.5 million per day housing asylum seekers in UK hotels, it’s time to look beyond the headline figures and ask: what else could that money have done?

There are direct opportunity costs - what public services and investments were assigned lower priority below asylum seeker support - and also indirect opportunity costs, like distortions in the hotel market caused by block-booking rooms for migrant accommodation.

This isn’t about blaming the individuals seeking refuge. It’s about questioning the efficiency, fairness, and long-term consequences of the current policy. Ultimately, only a Publilc Inquiry will establish truth and permit justice and fairness.

1. Direct Opportunity Costs

Healthcare
Funds allocated to asylum accommodation could have gone to the NHS, reducing waiting times, improving patient care, and easing the burden on overworked staff.

Education
Resources could have supported schools: hiring more teachers, reducing class sizes, and fixing buildings in disrepair.

Universal Credit
With £5 billion in benefit cuts on the table, that same money allocated to asylum seekers, could support vulnerable British families instead.

Pensioners
Winter Fuel Allowance cuts could have been avoided, ensuring older citizens don’t have to choose between heating and eating.

Affordable Housing
Investment in social housing would help ease the housing crisis, giving more families a secure roof over their heads, especially the local homeless with residency qualifications of, say, five years or more.

Local Infrastructure
From potholes to public transport, basic services in many communities are underfunded while hotel bills rack up.

Job Creation & Small Businesses
That £15 billion over 10 years could have seeded local job schemes or supported SMEs to grow and hire.

2. Indirect Opportunity Costs

Hotel Rack Rates
The government’s large-scale block booking of hotel rooms has tightened supply, especially in budget and mid-range segments. With supply constrained and little incentive for the private sector to invest in building a temporary stock, prices for ordinary travellers have risen. Ordinary travellers means tourists, business and personal.

Availability Pressure
UK residents, including families booking domestic holidays or workers needing temporary stays, now face reduced availability and higher prices - this is another hidden cost.

Distorted Market Signals
Hotel owners may be adapting to government contracts instead of market demand, potentially warping local tourism and hospitality development over the longer term.

Conclusion

When we talk about the cost of asylum accommodation, it’s not just a figure in a Treasury spreadsheet. It’s classrooms unfunded, nurses un-hired, pensioners unprotected - and yes, a rising cost to everyone who needs a hotel room.

This appears to be another amoral policy of dither and can-kicking, it is not only unsustainable, but makes no sense economically. We need a better way, one that respects justice and fairness, delivers value for money, honours our obligations, and doesn’t punish the people who are in reality footing the bill.

A Public Inquiry is needed.


3. Why the UK’s Asylum Hotel Policy Deserves a Public Inquiry

The UK is currently spending £5.5 million per day housing asylum seekers in hotels. Over a decade, this may cost £15 billion — and yet, there’s been no public inquiry into how this policy was designed, whether it is efficient, and what its long-term consequences might be.

Here’s why that needs to change.

 

3a. The Sheer Scale of Spending

This is one of the largest unplanned public expenditure programs in peacetime Britain, and more than many entire government departments. Yet it’s been rolled out with minimal scrutiny.

A public inquiry is needed to examine whether this spending represents value for money, or whether it's a case of policy panic and fire-fighting without a plan.

3b. Secrecy Around Contracts

Government deals with hotel chains and outsourcing giants are opaque. Rates paid per room, contract durations, and performance clauses are not disclosed.

There are increasing concerns about cronyism, sweetheart deals, and a lack of competitive bidding. A public inquiry will bring transparency to exactly where public money is going and why.

3c. Hidden Economic Side Effects

The government’s bulk hotel bookings have had knock-on effects on the rest of the economy:

  • Hotel rack rates have risen

  • Supply of affordable short-term accommodation has tightened

  • The tourism, business travel and personal events sectors are being distorted.

These indirect opportunity costs are rarely mentioned, yet they affect the public just as much. A public inquiry will explore this neglected dimension.

3d. No Local Consultation

Local authorities and communities are often excluded from decision-making. Hotels are block-booked in towns with no input from councillors or residents.

This has led to resentment, public protests, accusations of non-accountability, and a inevitably cynicism, breakdown in trust and a widening gulf between electors and the elected. A public inquiry will assess how the policy affects local social cohesion and citizens' well-being, and how it is that decisions could be made without democratic oversight.

3e. Signs of Mismanagement

Reports from the National Audit Office, whistleblowers, and the press describe:

  • No long-term housing plan

  • Ballooning costs and profiteering

  • Poor or unsafe conditions for asylum seekers

  • Lack of progress on case processing.

A public inquiry is the only forum with the scope and independence to determine whether this is mismanagement or simply fatal inevitable consequence.

3f. There Is Precedent

Public inquiries have been launched into:

  • Grenfell Tower (a housing safety failure)

  • The Iraq War (foreign policy decision-making)

  • The COVID-19 response (public health planning).

All involved less money, and arguably no greater chaos. The asylum hotel policy clearly meets or exceeds that threshold test.

3g. Final Conclusion

When billions are spent behind closed doors, with real knock-on consequences for downgraded public services, housing, and community cohesion, the public has a right to answers.

This isn’t about demonising asylum seekers. It’s about demanding honest governance, value for money, and long-term solutions over short-term dithering, obfuscation, can-kicking and panic.

A public inquiry is not just justified. A public inquiry is overdue.

Read More

Wednesday, 7 May 2025

THE FOURTH TURNING

No comments

7 May 2025



Neil Howe’s theory of the Fourth Turning is about a cyclical pattern of history where every 80-100 years, societies undergo a major crisis that reshapes institutions and values. 

According to Howe, we’re currently in the Fourth Turning, a period of upheaval that began around 2008, following periods of growth, awakening, and unraveling.

How We Got Here

The Fourth Turning is the result of the failures and unresolved tensions from the previous "turnings":

First Turning (High): After World War II, the post-war boom brought stability and strong institutions, a time of collective unity and confidence.

Second Turning (Awakening): The 1960s-70s saw a rise in individualism, social revolutions, and a challenge to authority, weakening institutions and creating societal divisions.

Third Turning (Unraveling): From the 1980s to early 2000s, institutions lost further trust, and society became more polarised and fragmented, setting the stage for the Fourth Turning.

What the Future Holds

In the Fourth Turning, societies face a crisis that could either lead to total collapse or the creation of a new order. Historically, these crises are resolved through decisive action - often conflict, revolution, or war. 

In today's context, this could manifests itself in global geopolitical conflicts, major economic instabilities and / or restructuring, or societal transformation, the kind of conflicts we're seeing in capitol cities across the West. 

Leaders and societies will be forced to make tough choices that will define a post-crisis world.

The outcome could bring renewal, where stronger institutions and a new social contract emerge, or, if mismanaged, deeper chaos and major decline.
 

 


Read More

HOW TO AVOID RECESSION AND A CATASTROPHE FOR THE WORLD'S RESERVE CURRENCY

No comments
7 May 2025

The United States, already running a 7% fiscal deficit, risks spiralling into a full-blown debt crisis if hit by even a mild recession. As tax revenues collapse and government spending surges, the deficit could expand to 18% of a shrinking GDP—an unsustainable level that would force massive borrowing, trigger bond market turmoil, and unleash inflation that erodes savings, wages, and financial stability for ordinary Americans.

https://youtu.be/9o7OQXSzrqs?si=henhdbIw-xPgKq-8



The Fiscal Perils of a US Recession
How even a mild downturn could trigger a debt crisis

1. Introduction

The United States is already running a fiscal deficit of 7% of GDP in peacetime. Even a mild recession could tip this fragile position into crisis. Historically, debt and interest payments have outpaced economic growth for decades. This post lays out the fiscal mechanics behind why the US can no longer afford even a “garden variety” recession - and how the outcome could be a full-blown debt spiral.

2. Government Expenditures and Revenues

Expenditures:
Federal spending has grown in a near-parabolic fashion since the postwar era, and most dramatically during the 2000 dot-com crash, the 2008 financial crisis, and the 2020 pandemic. In each recession, spending jumped by 9–13%. This is due to automatic stabilisers like unemployment insurance and stimulus programmes.

Revenues:
Revenues fall sharply in recessions. Tax receipts dropped 24% in the 2001 recession and 32% in 2008. Capital gains taxes - tied to stock market performance - form a significant chunk of US federal income, which links government income directly to the boom-bust cycle of financial markets.

3. Debt Dynamics

Since the 1971 end of the gold standard, US federal debt has grown by 8,500%. By contrast, GDP has increased by only 2,300%. The cost of servicing this debt (interest expense) has grown by 5,500%.

Debt is growing far faster than the income needed to service it. This trend is long-standing and non-partisan, having accelerated under both Democrat and Republican administrations. The productivity of new debt is declining - each additional dollar of debt now generates less and less economic output.

4. Fiscal Deficit and Debt-to-GDP Risk

The deficit is currently $2 trillion, or 7% of GDP. If GDP falls 7% in a recession, government revenues will drop (by around 28% on average), while spending increases (by around 11%). This would push the deficit to $4 trillion—about 18% of a shrunken GDP.

Such a figure is extreme. Outside of World War II or the COVID shock, the US has never seen deficits of this size. Yet it is now within reach due to structural imbalances baked into the system.

5. The Debt Spiral and Bond Market Repricing

A deficit of 18–20% of GDP would require massive new borrowing. But during a recession, demand for US Treasury bonds would likely fall, not rise, because investors would fear runaway money printing. ( This is not what the dollar milkshake theory says, but we'll leave that for another time...)

The bond market is already repricing. Real yields on US Treasuries are rising. As more bonds are issued into a shrinking economy, interest rates must rise to attract buyers. This raises the government’s interest expense, which must then be covered with even more debt... fuel for a classic debt spiral.

6. Inflation: The Endgame

To finance such deficits, the government would likely resort to "financial repression". This uses interest rates, QE Infinity and yield curve control, to create negative real interest rates ie., yields are kept below inflation, guaranteeing a loss in real (inflation-adjusted) terms to investors, but burning off the debt for the government. (And yes, investors are ready to accept a loss of a couple of percentage points because the alternative might be twenty percent in the markets.)

Money printing under tight yield control (= loads of cheap money) would allow the Treasury to control interest payments, but would also drive inflation far beyond current levels. The last inflation wave (2021–23) could pale in comparison. Double-digit inflation, sustained over time, would erode savings, wages, and destroy the purchasing power of the US dollar in what's called currency destruction.

7. Conclusion

The United States is already at the edge of a fiscal cliff. The maths is: revenues fall, expenditures rise, debt grows, interest compounds, and GDP stagnates. In such a system, even a modest recession becomes a trigger event, exposing the fragile architecture of a government addicted to deficit spending.

Unless policymakers radically change course, the next downturn will not be a cyclical adjustment, with a reversion to the norm, but will be a sovereign debt crisis with a structural change in the world economic system.

It is to avoid this, many believe trump will have to call a Mar-a-Lago Accord.

8. Looking Forward

Without a coordinated accord i.e. something in the spirit of Plaza or what we’ve called here the Mar-a-Lago Accord, the trajectory looks dire. 

Debt-fuelled deficits will overwhelm markets. Inflation will rage. Currencies will unravel. Safe-haven panic will set in and gold will go to the moon. 

But if, somehow, agreement is forged - if the major players can be persuaded by stick and carrot to recalibrate the terms of trade, the value of money, and the path of debt - then the storm might just pass. 

Markets would stabilise. Currencies could hold. And gold, no longer needed as a last refuge, would fall back toward its long-term mean. The whole system would breathe again... not saved, but given a stay of execution....


Glossary of Technical Terms

Deficit (Fiscal Deficit)

The shortfall between what a government spends and what it earns in a given year.

Debt

The cumulative amount of money the government owes from past deficits.

GDP (Gross Domestic Product)

The total value of all goods and services produced in a country. It is calculated as:

GDP = Consumption + Investment + Government Spending + Exports – Imports

Debt-to-GDP Ratio

This is a key measure of a country's fiscal health. It compares the total public debt of a government to its gross domestic product (GDP).

It shows how much a country owes relative to what it produces. A higher ratio - say, over 100% - implies greater difficulty in repaying debts without incurring more debt. Maastricht 1992 recommended a tops 60% debt-to-GDP and a tops 3% fiscal deficit, as fiscal convergence criteria, for countries wanting to adopt the Euro. (That was indeed a long time ago, wasn't it.)

Debt monetisation

When a Treasury repays debt not from reserves, but by borrowing more - aka a Ponzi scheme. Monetisation is an alternative to restructuring or defaulting on the debt.

Automatic Stabilisers

Government policies like unemployment insurance that increase spending automatically during downturns.

Interest Expense

The cost of servicing debt - i.e., paying interest on the government’s borrowing.

Bond Yields

The return investors demand to lend money to the government. Higher yields mean higher borrowing costs.

US Treasury Ten Year Yield

It’s not just another number. The 10-year US Treasury yield is the world’s benchmark interest rate. It sets the tone for mortgages, business loans, and even DCF stock valuations. When it rises, borrowing gets more expensive; when it falls, it often signals fear of recession. 

Investors watch it because it reflects inflation expectations, growth prospects, and global confidence in the US economy.

Financial Repression

Economic actions like interest rates below inflation ie negative real returns, are used to reduce the real burden of government debt.

Quantitative Easing (QE)

Central bank policy of buying government bonds to inject money into the economy. With more liquidity available to buy assets, this will increase demand, raise asset prices and push down yields. Great for those who have money ...

Yield Curve Control

The yield curve is the graph of yields, according to the date of maturity. 

Normally, you would expect longer term maturities, with increased risk and opportunity costs, to return greater yields. Yield curve control is a policy in which a central bank targets specific interest rates across different bond maturities to control their yield.

Central banks use YCC to control borrowing costs, stimulate the economy, and manage debt, especially when other tools have run their course. It’s powerful, though not without danger as the bank's credibility is on the line.

Inflation

The general rise in prices, reducing the purchasing power of money.

A Mar-a-Lago Accord

Is a proposed economic plan aimed at addressing the U.S. trade deficit by weakening a dollar severely overvalued by hyper-financialisation, through tariffs and incentives for foreign countries coupled with the threat of withdrawing security (military) arrangements. 

It seeks to restructure the global trading system to benefit U.S. manufacturing and reduce fiscal deficits, without raising taxes or cutting spending.


Read More

BRUSSELS IS USING RUSSIA AND TRUMP TO CENTRALISE POWER

No comments
7 May 2025
 

A clueless EU whose only thought is how to hang on to power and get rich with manipulative stories about forces ranged against Europe.
No positive vision, no realistic solutions. It's classic losers' politics.

SUMMARY

1. Introduction

1.1 Trump as a Useful Enemy


Trump is the boogeyman the EU loves to hate.

He’s used as a cover story to justify just about anything - militarisation, power centralisation, and defeating democracy.

If it’s not Trump, it’s Russia. The narrative writes itself.

1.2 The Distraction Game


Citizens are told the US is no longer reliable - defensively or economically.

The solution? Shift more power to Brussels, slash social spending, and pour billions into weapons and finance.

2. Hypocrisy in EU Strategy

2.1 Talking Independence, Acting Dependency

The EU says it's becoming “independent” from the US.

Yet it:

Continues to buy US arms and energy,

Aligns with US foreign policy goals.

2.2 Brexit Theatre

Even Brexit is being spun as a pro-EU triumph.

London and Brussels now talk of “free and open trade”—including defence cooperation. So much for sovereignty.

3. Militarisation by Decree

3.1 Article 122—The Loophole

The European Commission is using Article 122 emergency powers.

This bypasses normal parliamentary checks.

Only a qualified majority vote is needed—no need for full consensus.

3.2 SAFE: The EU’s New War Fund

March 2025: The Commission unveils “SAFE”—Security Action for Europe.

It’s a €150bn opening shot in a planned €900bn rearmament fund.

Parliament's role? Reduced to mere suggestions and symbolic protest.

4. Who’s Really Opposing This?

4.1 Not the Peoples' Champions

The EU Parliament’s legal committee objected - unanimously.

But this wasn’t about democracy or peace.

It was about dividing the pie - who gets which contracts.

4.2 The Lure of Lobby Money

EU arms industry lobbyists are swarming Brussels.

Opposition revolves around “Buy European” clauses—not peace or public interest.

The current SAFE clause allows 65% of purchases from the EU, Ukraine, or EFTA states.

5. Manufactured Consent

5.1 The Justifications

Russia’s aggression is framed as existential.

The US is seen as retreating.

These are used to justify the €900bn war fund.

5.2 But Are These Threats Real?

Why ignore diplomacy?

Why sabotage Kiev-Moscow peace talks?

Why escalate when Europe benefits more from peace with Russia than war and sanctions and acts of sabotage?

6. The Jazz Band Metaphor

6.1 Carnegie’s Rose-Tinted View

Rosa Balfour (Carnegie Europe) describes the EU’s reaction to Trump as a “jazz band” in creative chaos.

Her metaphor is meant to inspire - but it reveals chaos and improvisation at the top.

6.2 What’s Missing?

Curiosity - a core jazz value - is absent.

No one’s asking the real questions:

Is this the best use of €900bn?

Could peace bring more security than tanks?

Why build a war economy rather than a welfare economy?

7. Economic Fallout for Citizens

7.1 Social Austerity Persists

Sixteen EU states want fiscal leeway, but only for defence, never for healthcare or pensions.

The public is told: this is necessary for competitiveness.

7.2 Declining Living Standards

Expect living standards to keep falling.

But don’t worry as more EU enlargement and defence spending will fix it.

8. Conclusion

8.1 The Real Agenda

Trump is the excuse, not the cause.

Brussels wants centralised power and a permanent war economy.

Parliament and voters just get in the way.

8.2 A Wake-Up Call

Gallagher’s piece is a rebellion against passive acceptance.

He challenges us to ask why the EU elite want war so badly.

And whether democracy is just a performance piece in the Brussels theatre.

9. References and Further Reading

Carnegie Europe – Rosa Balfour: “Europe Tried to Trump-Proof Itself”

EU Commission SAFE Proposal – Official documents on Article 122 and defence funding

ARTICLE


The EU Zombie uses Trump as Cover to Further Feed on Citizens 

Donald Trump is the gift that keeps on giving for the western misleadership class. Any anti-democratic swindle on the EU wish list is now being sold as a remedy to the Orange Man. (And if it’s not Trump, it’s Russia).

The US is no longer a reliable defense partner, they say. We must give more power to Brussels and send untold billions to weapons companies.

The US is no longer a reliable economic partner, they say. We must increase competitiveness by weakening labor and empowering finance.

The UK voters may have opted for Brexit, but London and Brussels are “defying Trump” with a “free and open trade” declaration that includes negotiations ‘on defense and security, fishing and energy, as well as a “common understanding” of which topics will be covered by intensive Brexit reset negotiations this year.’

The strange thing about these plans, however, is that they include reliance on US weapons and energy and alignment with US geopolitical and geoeconomic goals.

Let’s focus here on how the EU is pressing ahead with plans to dramatically increase defense spending due to Trump Abandonment Syndrome.

The EU Jazz Band 

Recent commentary by Rosa Balfour, director of Carnegie Europe, perfectly sums up these arguments. In a piece titled “Europe Tried to Trump-Proof Itself. Now It’s Crafting a Plan B” she explains why the EU has no choice but to redirect social spending towards the arms industry.

Balfour’s romantic version of recent history starts on February 28. That’s when “the televised humiliation of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky” took place, and “Europe realized it could no longer rely on its longtime ally, the United States.” And here she is on the jazzy wreckage:

The shocking depth and breadth of this realization cannot be overemphasized. Political leaders in European states, the European Union, and NATO displayed composure and coordination, but behind the scenes, the soundtrack was a frantic free jazz jam session with dramatic thuds and a long pause—the silence at the realization that the European comfort zone was over.

And now, what are these composed and coordinated “political leaders” doing? They announce that Ukraine is Europe’s first line of defense, make grand plans for a “coalition of the willing,” and declare that Ukraine will become a “steel porcupine”

The coalition of the willing has fallen apart. The steel porcupine was ridiculed.  And while those in the Kremlin likely aren’t losing any sleep, Europeans should be. That’s because, as Balfour writes, the European Commission “can play supporting roles by mobilizing financial resources and handling complicated in-house horse trading.”

That’s one way of putting it.

The Commission is inching its way towards invoking emergency powers to push through parts of its rearmament slush fund. It’s getting pushback from the European Parliament, but the fact is Ursula can do it anyways with minimal support from EU governments. She’s likely just waiting for the right moment. Let’s look at the status of the European militarization billions.

On March 19, the Commission introduced a 150 billion euro proposal — a first installment of what’s to be at least $900 billion— for establishing the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) through the reinforcement of European defence industry Instrument.

It wants to move forward with it under Article 122 emergency powers which need only a qualified majority in the Council —as opposed to the usual consensus— which allows Ursula and friends to get around pesky vetoes from member countries. The procedure for 122 is as follows:

1) the Commission proposes a Council measure; following which 2) the Council adopts the measure in line with [qualified majority voting]. No additional elements or participants are envisaged.

This article allows the proposal to bypass parliamentary negotiations and go straight to the Council for negotiation and adoption. The Parliament’s role is reduced to submitting suggestions and requesting debates.

How’s that for your democratic rules-based order?

In an April 23 secret vote, the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affair unanimously backed a legal opinion rejecting the Commission’s attempt to bypass it on a 150 billion euro rearmament fund.

While it is a non-binding vote, it does signal opposition to Ursula’s plan, but it’s not some principled stand for the will of the people or any romantic notion like that.

No, it’s more about dividing up slices of the pie as European weapons industry lobbyists are increasingly active in Brussels and are trying to make sure their clients are rewarded. And so much of the feeble opposition is over getting a stronger “buy European” clause in SAFE (it currently requires 65 percent of war consumables and complex systems to come from within the EU, Ukraine, or EEA/EFTA states, which includes Turkiye and Norway.

Why must Ursula’s commission sideline the Parliament and some member states in order to spend 900 billion on military purchases? They lay it out in their proposal. There’s the usual nonsense about Russia:

The EU and its Member States now face an intensifying Russian aggression against Ukraine and a growing security threat from Russia. It is also now clear that this threat will persist in the foreseeable future, considering that Russia has shifted to a war-time economy enabling a rapid scaleup of its military capabilities and replenishment of its stocks. The European Council therefore underlined, in its conclusions of 6 March 2025, that “Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and its repercussions for European and global security in a changing environment constitute an existential challenge for the European Union”.

There’s also the Trump abandonment syndrome:

At the same time, the United States, traditionally a strong ally, is clear that it believes it is over-committed in Europe and needs to rebalance, reducing its historical role as a primary security guarantor.

One itching question is what happens to this latter selling point now that the Trump administration has tied itself to Ukraine through the so-called minerals deal, but surely if the European powers have made it this far on manufactured crises, they’ll be able to overcome that hurdle by pointing to Trump’s insistence on what they call an unjust peace for Ukraine.

And so “rearmament” by supranational emergency decree it must be—with Balfour from Carnegie and all the other plutocrat court jesters at the transatlantic think tanks cheering this on as a victory against the autocratic hordes outside the garden walls. Here’s Balfour again summarizing the mood among this crowd:

…a trajectory of change has been charted, and it has transformative potential—not just for the European continent, but also for the global reordering of post-American international relations. The jazz band has picked up rhythm, even if the melody is not fully harmonic.

I’m not sure if that’s music Balfour is listening to or the jangle of gold and silver. While it can be difficult to hear anything over the din coming from the elite ‘Spirit of 1914,’ there’s always one chord missing from the militarization genre. Surely Balfour, the jazz aficionado, must know that curiosity was considered one of the essential ingredients to the music. If we apply that to her extended jazz metaphor we might start asking some questions like:

  • Why does the EU need to perform this whole militarization song and dance routine at all?
  • Why can’t there be peace with Russia?
  • Why did European nations help sabotage past Kiev-Moscow peace negotiations?
  • Why did the EU help the US overthrow the government of Ukraine and use the country as a battering ram against Russia?
  • Why does the EU elite so crave war with Russia?
  • Is the EU not more secure and prosperous through friendly ties and trade with Russia?

And why must the EU, which collectively already ranks second in the world in defense expenditures, spend boatloads more? How much will make it safe, competitive, and independent?

These questions are never addressed. It’s simply treated as the natural order of things that Russia is the EU’s enemy and it must get big expensive weapons because Trump bad. The sad thing is, this relentless messaging pumped out of European media is working — at least according to the EU’s own polls. That wouldn’t be entirely surprising considering this message is endlessly pumped out of EU media.

Either way, European governments are running with it. Sixteen countries are asking the EU for fiscal leeway to spend big on defense — requests that are never made during the endless social austerity.

Yes, the citizens of the bloc will continue to see their standard of living fall, but don’t worry, EU enlargement and spending more on militarisation will lead to more “competitiveness.” Can’t you feel it already...

Read More

Tuesday, 6 May 2025

WORLD BANK DEFINES POVERTY

No comments

Poverty thresholds

The definition of poverty depends on a country’s income classification. The World Bank applies different daily poverty thresholds according to income level:

  • $2.15/day – for low-income countries
  • $3.65/day – for lower-middle-income countries
  • $6.85/day – for upper-middle-income countries

Upper-middle-income countries like Indonesia are nations with a gross national annual income (GNI) per capita between US$4,046 and US$12,535.

The latest figures are for 2024 and are used in the chart. But the full report, which I’ve read, still uses the lower, out-of-date, threshold of $3.65/day that applied before Indonesia was moved into the upper-middle-income bracket in 2023.

So the chart is saying that 60% of the population live on less than $6.85 a day. That’s approximately 171.9 million Indonesians living on less than US$6.85 per day.

That is the World Bank's official national poverty rate for Indonesia (at the upper-middle-income level).

My Conclusions

  1. Whoever produced that chart has updated it with the correct figures. (The full report on which it is based uses the older, out-of-date threshold.)

  2. But really, the main conclusion from that chart is that although Indonesia has moved into the upper-middle-income bracket, 60% of its population lives below the World Bank's definition of poverty. This says in ordinary-speak that Indonesia is a very corrupt country, or at least strongly unequal, with a very uneven spread of the benefits of the economic growth it’s been enjoying since globalisation.

  3. She Was Poor But She Was Honest

    "It's the same the whole world over
    It's the poor what gets the blame
    It's the rich what gets the pleasure.
    Ain't it a blooming shame?

    ...No matter where you look, the top few percent own almost everything, and the bottom half have only debts.

  4. In summary, the chart speaks to the WEF prediction for 2030 that “you will own nothing and you will be happy.” (Incidentally, it was a prediction — not a policy statement!)


 

Read More

Monday, 5 May 2025

FLOURISHING IN INDONESIA

No comments
5 May 2025

https://fortune.com/2025/05/02/indonesia-flourish-study/

1. Reflections on Flourishing: What Makes a Life Truly Good?

1.1. A Fresh Perspective from the Global Study

A new five-year study by Harvard and Baylor finds that Indonesia tops the global chart for “flourishing”.

That’s not about wealth — it’s about a full, good life: purpose, health, social ties, meaning.

In fact, countries with strong religious and community life beat wealthier, secular nations.

1.2. The UK: Wealth Without Warmth?

Yes, rich nations rank well for financial security.

But the UK example hits home:

Middle class, with income — yet stressed, anxious, cramped, often isolated.

High mobility means people live far from their roots.

Public spaces can feel hostile.

A lack of spirituality or shared cultural rituals leaves people adrift.

Many young people, struggling to find accommodation and start a family, feel the pressure — financial strain is real, even when incomes look decent on paper.

1.3. Indonesia’s Secret: Faith and Fellowship

Indonesia’s top score wasn’t due to GDP — but because three-quarters of people attend religious services weekly.

That’s a stunning level of regular, community-based meaning.

Faith gives rhythm, connection, and purpose — something missing in many Western societies.

1.4. The Age Factor in Flourishing

The study also found that happiness follows a kind of age curve:

Young adults and older people report more flourishing.

Middle-aged working adults often report less.

Makes sense:

Long hours.
Family pressures.
Moving away from your roots for work.
Not much time or space to reflect or connect.

1.5. Faith-Filled Nations Flourish

The top-ranking countries were all high in religiosity.

That may be the real driver behind the numbers:

Faith brings structure, meaning, community.

It also helps people find dignity in hardship — not just comfort in wealth.

2. Final Thought

This study reminds us to ask: what really matters in life?

If the goal is not just to live, but to flourish, then wealth alone won’t get us there.

Perhaps it’s time we in the West rediscovered a bit more faith — in each other, in community, and connect with something higher.



Read More

Saturday, 3 May 2025

HYPER-FINANCIALISATION OF THE AMERICAN ECONOMY - SYMPTOMS, CAUSES, CONSEQUENCES, KEY ISSUES

No comments

Preparation

Worth reading "the balancing mechanism" first to make sense of this article. 

This article gives the symptoms, causes and consequences; and explains why hyper-financialisation is important in the lives of people, rich and poor. It doesn't suggest any remedies, other than recommending we all take to the streets in protest - what better time for a Revolution?. That will be for a future article.

Meanwhile, we will finish on a lively discussion and recap of this article.

Hyperfinancialisation of the American Economy

This post summarises the above Youtube video.

1. The symptoms

This post explores the hyperfinancialisation of the American economy, a condition in which Wall Street's gains have vastly outstripped Main Street's wages. Here are the symptoms - what "hyper-financialisation" means in practical terms.

1. Several metrics are used to illustrate this divergence between Wall St and Main St:

  • The hours of labour required to buy one share of the S&P 500 has increased from 25 hours in the 1960s–1990s to a peak of 200 hours after 2008.

  • A comparison of the S&P 500 to personal income shows capital (the stock market) pulling away from labour (wages), a reversal of the mid-20th century trend.

  • The Buffett Indicator (S&P 500 vs GDP) reflects the same imbalance: GDP has grown 970% since 1980, while the stock market has risen over 5,000%.

  • Meanwhile, wages relative to GDP show that the average worker’s income has stagnated or declined in real terms.

  • The S&P 500 has grown by 6,876% versus 800% for hourly wages over the same timeframe.

  • The Price-to-Earnings ratio has surged, indicating people are paying more for the same future returns.


2. The causes

  • Post-2008 monetary policy: QE, ZIRP, and fiscal deficits inflated asset prices. QE alone involved trillions of dollars created to buy treasuries, corporate debt, and mortgage-backed securities.

  • Trade policy and globalisation: Agreements like NAFTA hollowed out domestic manufacturing and led to persistent trade deficits.

  • International finance mechanics: The trade deficit must be matched by capital inflows — currently ~$130 billion/month — into U.S. assets, pushing up valuations and creating artificial demand.


3. The Consequences

  • A stark wealth divide: The top 1% own 50% of equities; the top 10% own 93%.

  • Labour’s shrinking share of income and declining wage power.

  • Asset unaffordability: Housing has become increasingly out of reach, especially single-family homes.

  • Government dependency on market performance: Capital gains tax (now 9% of revenue) ties fiscal health to asset bubbles.

  • The rise of populism, which stems from this capital–labour divide and contributes to political and social polarisation.


4. Why this is important

These economic imbalances are the “core issues” in U.S. society, driving everything from rising suicide rates and antidepressant use to deepening political dysfunction.

What to do? The bottom 95% of Americans to unite around economic reform — to reject partisan distractions and tackle the deeper forces of hyperfinancialisation, overvalued currency, and hyperglobalism.

The real divide is not left versus right, but the top 1% versus the bottom 95%.


Hyperfinancialisation of the American Economy

5. Listen to a lively discussion 

Aimed at raising awareness of the crisis and human suffering facing ordinary people due to hyper financialisation:


Read More

ACCOUNTING FOR AMERICA'S TWIN DEFICITS

No comments

Why the U.S. Trade Deficit Must Always Be Balanced - And What Happens When It Isn’t

"The balancing principle". Not everyone will be able to stay awake till the end of this article, but everyone is capable of understanding this simple double-entry bookkeeping principle, as applied to international finance, called "the structural mechanism". It is fundamental to understanding "hyper-financialisation", that we shall look at in the next post....

03 May 2025

At the heart of international finance lies a simple accounting principle:

The current account and the capital account must balance.

It’s not ideology. It’s not economic theory. It’s just double-entry bookkeeping on a global scale. You cannot get away from the fact that differences between your income and expenditure are stored away on your balance sheet - your net worth. Same for countries' accounts.

If a country runs a trade deficit (it's called a current account deficit, it means the country is importing more than it exports), it must run a capital account surplus. Why? Because the money that flows out to pay for imports must flow back in somehow to balance the books. That "somehow" is when foreigners invest back into the exconomy they soild to, or when the importer country borrows from the rest-of-the-world ie lending, or the importer country dips into its balance sheet reserves, or, if necessary, meaning if noone wants to lend to it or if interest rates are more than it can afford, by recourse to the printing press - creating new money out of thin air, expanding the money supply.

This is why the U.S. trade deficit is always matched by strong capital inflows (or printing). For decades, the rest of the world was happy to sell the goods it manufactures to the U.S. and then recycle those dollars back into U.S. assets: government bonds (treasuries), corporate debt (lending to private corporations), equities (eg the S&P 500), property (buying up real estate in foreign capitols, but above all into U.S. Treasuries.

This process has often been described, rather vaguely, as a “structural mechanism” of global finance. But let’s call it what it is: a global settlement cycle anchored in the U.S. dollar.

The U.S. runs a current account deficit. Foreigners receive dollars. They return those dollars to the U.S. by buying dollar assets. The loop closes. The books balance.

Diagram showing
trade deficit →
balance of payments deficit→
capital inflow to balance the capital account

But what happens when the world no longer wants to hold U.S. assets? This is where the Federal Reserve steps in.

If foreign central banks or institutions stop recycling their dollars back into U.S. debt — or if they even start selling the US debt they hold — then someone has to plug the gap. That someone is the Fed. It buys the debt via Quantitative Easing (QE), creating dollars out of thin air. In effect, the U.S. borrows from itself (the government borrows from the Fed). The balance still holds, but confidence in the system gives way to fears of inflation and currency debasement.

Foreigners don't want US debt - Fed QE cycle filling gap left by foreign capital

This pressure is amplified by a deeper fiscal dilemma. The U.S. government faces mounting obligations — welfare, pensions, and defence — that it cannot politically cut. As debt rises, so do fears of inflation and currency debasement. Foreign investors begin to demand higher yields to compensate for the risk of holding dollar-denominated assets.

But the U.S. government cannot afford high interest rates. A rising cost of debt would crowd out spending and destabilise public finances. The solution? The Fed prints the money — buying Treasuries to suppress yields and keep government borrowing costs down.

Fiscal loop - overspending → market doubt → Fed printing

This creates a circular dependency: the government spends, the market doubts, the Fed prints. Byspending, the Fed creates demand for US bonds. Result: Bond prices rise. As prices rise, yields fall, but confidence in and demand for the dollar weakens and in this way, the system edges just a little bit closer to a crisis of confidence.

This is the danger Brent Johnson highlights in the Dollar Milkshake Theory - and that Ray Dalio uses to explain why the U.S.-led global order is in its late cycle....fewer and fewer want US debt.

The accounting identity works, but the participants are changing. The Fed is buyer of last resort. And if trust in U.S. assets continues to weaken, we may find that the world's capital account surplus returns not to US Treasuries, but to gold, commodities, and hard assets. It's happening, perhaps provoked by Trump's Tariffs, but that could be just a surface explanation....we have to wait and see, there is so much uncertainty! (Wait on the sidelines?)

If confidene is lost, the books will still balance, but the system will not look the same.

Read More

Friday, 2 May 2025

ARE MIDDLE EAST POLITICS DRIVEN BY ANCIENT APOCALYPTIC NARRATIVES

No comments

2 May 2025

The idea that Netanyahu's vision of a Greater Israel is driven by ancient Jewish apocalyptic texts promising death and destruction before salvation seems a bit mad... is there any evidence? Netanyahu seems bent on creating WW3, but is there any evidence that this threat has roots in eschatological beliefs?

Ancient Roots: Apocalyptic Texts and the Vision of a Greater Israel

The concept of a "Greater Israel" has its origins in biblical promises made to the patriarchs. In Genesis 15:18, God promises Abraham land stretching "from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates", a chant we often hear these days. This expansive vision encompasses territories beyond the (undefined) borders of modern Israel, including parts of modern-day Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq.

While mainstream Jewish thought often views these passages as symbolic or future-oriented, certain religious Zionist groups have taken them more literally, advancing policies that align with this vision of a vastly expanded territory, giving Israel dominance over the entire West Asia.

Netanyahu's Political Alliances and Messianic Influences

Prime Minister Netanyahu's political trajectory these last thirty years has seen alliances with parties that espouse religious nationalist ideologies. Notably, his coalition includes factions like the Religious Zionist Party and Otzma Yehudit, which have roots in movements advocating for Jewish sovereignty over all biblically promised lands. So, a political environment where ancient religious visions decide contemporary policy decisions.

Moreover, Netanyahu's rhetoric is often intertwined with themes in Christian Zionist circles, emphasising Israel's role in fulfilling biblical prophecies. This alignment has bolstered support from evangelical groups, particularly in the United States, who view modern Israel as central to eschatological narratives.

A moot point - is the Israeli tail wagging the American foreign policy dog? Is the Israel lobby and this vision of a Greater Israel controlling America's foreign policy? Or is the American foreign policy establishment instrumentalising Israel to control oil and trade routes in the Middle East (as it has done with Ukraine in its not-so-proxy war with Russia)?

Eschatological Beliefs and Modern Governance

There is evidence for the integration of eschatological beliefs into modern state policy:

  • Settlement Expansion: policies promoting settlements in the West Bank are often justified by religious claims to the land of Judea and Sumeria - this is  Netanyahu's name for the West Bank.

  • Legislative Initiatives: laws and discriminatory practices that prioritise Jewish religious education and values, and exclude Palestinian, reflect a governance model coming out of religious ideology.

  • Judicial Reforms: Moves to alter the judiciary, where Ashkenazi Jews, largely from Europe, hold all but one of the seats, have been interpreted by some as attempts to align state laws more closely with religious principles supported by the strongly idelogical Miserati Jews of Middle Eastern and North African origin. This pushes israel to civil war: deep state in the military and judiciary and civil service v. Miserati, who are the populists.

Conclusion

These policy directions shape contemporary political visions and decisions. This is evidence of an approach to governance where ancient religious narratives and eschatological expectations play the dominant role.

References

Bizarre as it may seem to modern minds, that tend to seek truth in logic and data, we have seen that ancient apocalyptic visions are being used to justify modern political strategies in Israel. We are told that Israeli interests dominate America's foreign policy establishment, but it could be that Israel is being used to further American interests in just the same way as Ukraine is being used in a war against russia

So this extremely cynical interpretation of American foreign policy has to be included in making sense of all the complexities of Middle Eastern geopolitics today.

It's an interesting topic and one of that is explored in some earlier posts:


The Middle East is primed for war. This post shows how we got here, what’s coming, and what you can do about it.


The Four Horsemen are riding again bringing war, collapse, chaos and climate change.

How political ideologies, taken to extremes, can lead to planet-wide destructive outcomes. This post argues for a balanced and rational governance based on national interests and human rights. 


[End]



Read More

DOLLAR MILKSHAKE PART III

No comments

 1 May 2025

 

 

 The business cycle for traders
The business cycle for investors

TA, Gold, and the Last Man Standing

Technical analysis (TA) cannot predict the future, and doesn’t pretend to understand the economy. All it does is track price action, look for repeating patterns and try to spot momentum. You might say it is as useful as astrology. It correlates with the economy, but investors are always ahead, on a parallel wave.


Worth listeing to Chris Vermeulen of TechnicalTraders, who does a short daily market recap. His style is relaxed tailor’s dummy more than showman. He reads the runes in technical charts. While TA has its limits, what Chris does well is to spot the rotations between asset classes. Money seems to be flowing out of stocks, but where is it flow to? Treasuries? Gold? Defensive safe ETFs like XLP (consumer staples) or XLU (utilities)?

His point right now is that money is quietly flowing out of equities. The pro.s are selling into every rally, the smart money is getting out and rotating onto safer ground.

Why into TLT? That’s where the Dollar Milkshake Theory comes in.

Generally speaking, if you expect interest rates to rise, it is best to avoid long-term bonds like those tracked by the TLT, because if that happens, you're locking in a lower interest rate. If you believe interest rates will fall, it makes sense to invest in a long-term bond fund like TLT. TLT tracks the Barclays U.S. 20+ Year Treasury Bond Index.

Most commentators expect the dollar to weaken under the weight of US debt. There will be less and less demand for the dollar as there is more and more dollar-printing. Makes sense, but Brent Johnson disagrees. His theory is that years of global monetary expansion have created a “milkshake” of liquidity. So first of all. let us examine how all this liquidity is created and where it is held.

The "milkshake" in the Dollar Milkshake Theory refers to the vast pool of global dollar liquidity, the dollars that have flooded the world economy since 2008, although not held exclusively in Europe, this pile of US dollars outside the US is called the Eurodollar market.


 

How the milkshake forms (monetary expansion):

  1. Quantitative Easing (QE):
    The Fed created trillions of dollars to buy US Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities — injecting USD into the banking system.

  2. Low interest rates:
    Cheap borrowing made USD attractive to global investors, corporations, and governments.

  3. Global demand for USD:
    The US dollar is the world’s reserve currency. Most international trade, lending, and commodities (like oil) are priced in USD.

  4. Eurodollar system:
    Non-US banks create "dollar credit" outside US regulatory oversight — more dollar-like assets circulate globally than exist inside the US.

Where the milkshake “sits”:

The dollar liquidity is held across:

  • Foreign central banks’ reserves

  • Sovereign wealth funds and pension funds

  • Global trade finance (e.g., letters of credit in USD)

  • Foreign dollar-denominated debt

  • Offshore (Eurodollar) banking systems

  • Dollar-based assets (e.g., US Treasuries held abroad)

The milkshake is not just inside the US — it’s a vast global ocean of dollar obligations and instruments, mostly outside US borders.

 

 

Flow diagram showing how the Fed creates liquidity
and how it flows offshore to become the “milkshake”

  - . When the Fed tightens, it draws that liquidity back in. Investors crowd into the dollar. That strengthens the dollar, sucks capital into the US, and causes immense pressure on foreign economies with dollar-denominated debt as repayments must be made in the now-more-expensive dollar.

In time, the dollar breaks too. Too much demand becomes unsustainable. The US buckles under its own interest burden, foreign trust in fiat evaporates, and the last man standing is gold.

 

Dollar Milkshake Theory schematic – capital flows

Brent Johnson says gold will rise when everything else fails. That’s the idea. It's not just about price movement. It's about trust. Fiat currency is not a promise in which one can have confidence. Gold is.

Chris Vermeulen thinks we could see a 20–30% drop in markets after the next bounce. He’s watching the rotations. Gold might be going retail now. Maybe even bubble territory. Maybe gold will collapse with the main indices. Or he says wait for a correction, maybe to 3145, and could buy in then.

David Lin, meanwhile, is the brisk counterpart. He interviews big names in economics, sometimes sharply. He and Chris recently sat down for a good discussion: negative growth, volatility, distrust in banks, everyone seeking a hedge.

Gold is the refuge. For now.

Gold price trend vs VIX vs SPY

Eventually, though, even gold may sell off in a global fire sale. But you will have sold and will be in mountains of cash, possibly a new currency. The trick then will be to buy the surviving companies from out of the ashes.

If we live that long.

Interview with Chris Vermeulen and David Lin
Dollar Milkshake Theory primer

Read More