There are too many variables involved to make a determination like this.
We don't know they exact type of grenade or where it ended up before detonation. Grenade sumps work and are not exactly complicated. If the grenade ends up under behind something of the right shape an enormous amount of the damage can be directed away from people.
...more resembles a changing of the guard from US-dominated global institutions to something multi-polar, perhaps a commodity backed currency pushed by BRICS.
Possible but I suspect that BRICS will end up pushing it's own entirely gameable currency and that goes one of two ways: the way gold did for the US due to French gaming or it just devolves into fiat 2.0.
At that point, given the time required to unwind the derivatives currently traded in $USD, why would people move to the new currency? Mostly they wouldn't. A "we don't like the USD" platform doesn't sell a new, alternative currency for global trade.
The derivatives issue is the main reason I don't see fiat dying off soon. Too many people have far too much invested and it's not just "the usual players" like the Fed.
Not that anyone really likes the system but convincing people to jump platforms is notoriously difficult until you have an objectively and obviously better thing to jump to.
I do expect BRICS to try some sort of currency though. I also expect it to faceplant in the attempt. Simply put, the only "adult" country in BRICS is Russia and they're not interested in actually propping up the entire economy of a place like Brazil or South Africa when those countries are shitholes. The Russians are not stupid, they do things that benefit Russia. Carrying BRICS doesn't benefit Russia.
Crypto has issues, but I think it does offer excellence in certain categories...
I agree with your analysis here but I don't see major crypto adoption being a major currency thing (aside from maybe some forced CBDCs) in the next 10 years.
Not to throw shade here, but objectively speaking old people HATE crypto and will probably resist it. Other than a CBDC paying them off to get on board, I don't see them making the hop. On top of that for most of the world, wealth is heavily concentrated in the older cohorts, much more so than at most other times in history making a serious competition difficult to have.
On the one hand, that might be shitty, OTOH it provides certain opportunities for crypto to advance, possibly to the point that it does become the better thing that the USD and people jump because it's worth it.
For now, I think we're in an odd situation where the ship is definitely sinking but the lifeboats require it to sink more before we can launch them. That means we just kinda have to wait around, knowing what's happening and unable to address it until the problem gets worse.
I have to be a bit careful here due to ongoing legal actions but I can say this:
After being advised by numerous medical professionals, including doctors, nurses and administrators to sue a certain entity that fucked over my parents in NM we explored the options.
Thousands of pages of documents in hand we had them dead to rights.
But no lawyer located in NM would take the case. They'd always come back within 24 hours and say they were not interested.
By the 8th time this happened I finally asked WTF was going on to the paralegal who called us. She said it was a sensitive topic but that I should look at the list of the board of directors for the medical system in question and cross reference that with in-laws in state office and I might understand why people who require a law license in the state don't wamt to touch the case.
About five minutes with Google turns up the amswer. An in-law of the current governor sits on that board of directors. The governor is a from a powerful family.
So, apparently the assumption is that if you sue this hospital, you're going to lose your law license in retaliation.
Yeah, BTC is declared deceased a lot but I don't even care about that.
Waaaay too many financial publications focus on very short timelines and will talk about "lows not seen since" some stupidly short timeframe like <1 year.
Like, yeah... equities fluctuate and water is wet. The fuck is this, your first day of investing?
This article exemplifies one of the underlying problems IMHO. A daytrading mentality.
Those who have it spread that kind of thinking to everything they do.
...touching lows not seen since October 2024...
Like this. Does anyone else remember when "not seen since" was a phrase reserved for historical periods of time that amounted to not less than a large percentage of a human life time?
They care about forcing every account on every service to be tied to an actual identity in case you say something naughty, like criticizing EU or an EU country's policy stances.
The question is not "are monetary metals the perfect currency", but rather "do you expect monetary metals to protect you from the fallout of what appears to be an impending fiat disaster".
The question there is if you understand that they're a commodity hedge and the limits of a commodity hedge. The real issue that I see with some "gold bugs" or "silver bugs" is that they think metal in hand is apocalypse-proof. Its not for a variety of reasons. The actual use-case where you make out fairly well in a disaster is much narrower band that some of these people seem to think.
I also don't see fiat going away any time soon. I agree it's been pushed to the logical limit but the problem is that there's nothing to move to at this time, this is what keeps it going. If we're honest, it's fair to suspect that this is what has kept it going for some time, the lack of a viable alternative.
Going backwards "to metal" would be a historic first and would bring back all the problems fiat was trying to solve. The net effect from a "stackers" perspective would be that the value of that person's stack would probably drop when most of what we consider modern economic activity stopped.
Many would suggest that "going forward" would be crypto, and there I have my doubts as well. A CBDC is just digifiat that introduces more problems rather than solving any while the currently available "private crypto" (by which I mean privately created, BTC, ETH etc, I'm not talking about "privacy") is just a digital interpretation of a commodity market. As such it brings forth the worst aspects of metals along with the worst aspects of digital currency and the worst aspects of speculative trading.
Now, that said, I think this is why metal has attractive qualities at this point in time.
It's a hard asset that can be traded back for devalued fiat in the future. It may not make a "profit" per se after inflation but it will hold value to a large degree, so having part of your portfolio in physical makes sense.
I'm going to point out some things that basically no one wants to hear.
1. Ultra simple solutions are not solutions, they're at best mediocre ideas and often a grift on the part of those selling them.
2. The critics of fiat are not incorrect in what they say about it in terms of shortcomings. Fiat has the problems those people love to talk about. The issue is that the critics of fiat have the same problem that the fans of fiat have: they have no solution to those problems intrinsic to fiat currency.
3. The same basic problem is at play with the fans of "monetary metals".
Metals as money produce problems that are, essentially, impossible to solve without deciding you don't need international trade any longer. This is not new. It was known in the 1500's what the shortfalls of metallic currency were (it was also endlessly expounded upon). That's why Bills of Exchange became a big thing for every major country that was involved in serious trade, save one. The one state that decided not to go with Bills of Exchange and stick with metal lost, badly and did so in large part because of the intrinsic drawbacks of metal as money. It's slow, it's cumbersome and large scale trade creates vessels that are juicy targets for piracy which then demand enormous resources to guard.
It's all well and good to talk about "no counter party risk" unless you realize that there is one: they have to be willing to take your metal and at the value you want them to. This has been a problem for a long time.
4. Typical of people we've tried to split the difference with "metal backed" currency. The issue there is that you get the worst of both worlds rather than the best. "Metals based" paper systems create a system that is gameable in the same way as fiat and can only remedy this by going back to the major problems posed by metals in the first place. The gameability of this system, exemplified by the French in Nixon's case, can be seen in the closing of the gold window. Such gaming is why it was closed, no other known solution exists.
The reality is that there's a tension in the base concept of a currency, one which most people fail to acknowledge. That tension is that the currency can't be gameable like fiat, that is something you can print into oblivion, but it also must scale with economic growth.
A failure to scale, which is an issue with something rare like gold, means that the currency becomes more valuable as economic activity grows or becomes more efficient. You simply cannot add gold to the system fast enough to cover deflation.
The real truth that no one wants to admit is that there is no perfect currency and probably never will be.
Recent Comments
Filling a job slot with an H1B somehow leaves that same slot open for an American?
The fuck?
There are too many variables involved to make a determination like this.
We don't know they exact type of grenade or where it ended up before detonation. Grenade sumps work and are not exactly complicated. If the grenade ends up under behind something of the right shape an enormous amount of the damage can be directed away from people.
An IDF guy who barely understands a hand grenade.
Sure, bud.
The solution is clear.
I can't say I'm shocked to find out this is more widespread than just one area.
Sorry for your troubles, I hope you find a way to navigate them.
Possible but I suspect that BRICS will end up pushing it's own entirely gameable currency and that goes one of two ways: the way gold did for the US due to French gaming or it just devolves into fiat 2.0.
At that point, given the time required to unwind the derivatives currently traded in $USD, why would people move to the new currency? Mostly they wouldn't. A "we don't like the USD" platform doesn't sell a new, alternative currency for global trade.
The derivatives issue is the main reason I don't see fiat dying off soon. Too many people have far too much invested and it's not just "the usual players" like the Fed.
Not that anyone really likes the system but convincing people to jump platforms is notoriously difficult until you have an objectively and obviously better thing to jump to.
I do expect BRICS to try some sort of currency though. I also expect it to faceplant in the attempt. Simply put, the only "adult" country in BRICS is Russia and they're not interested in actually propping up the entire economy of a place like Brazil or South Africa when those countries are shitholes. The Russians are not stupid, they do things that benefit Russia. Carrying BRICS doesn't benefit Russia.
I agree with your analysis here but I don't see major crypto adoption being a major currency thing (aside from maybe some forced CBDCs) in the next 10 years.
Not to throw shade here, but objectively speaking old people HATE crypto and will probably resist it. Other than a CBDC paying them off to get on board, I don't see them making the hop. On top of that for most of the world, wealth is heavily concentrated in the older cohorts, much more so than at most other times in history making a serious competition difficult to have.
On the one hand, that might be shitty, OTOH it provides certain opportunities for crypto to advance, possibly to the point that it does become the better thing that the USD and people jump because it's worth it.
For now, I think we're in an odd situation where the ship is definitely sinking but the lifeboats require it to sink more before we can launch them. That means we just kinda have to wait around, knowing what's happening and unable to address it until the problem gets worse.
Medical fraud is a major industry.
I have to be a bit careful here due to ongoing legal actions but I can say this:
After being advised by numerous medical professionals, including doctors, nurses and administrators to sue a certain entity that fucked over my parents in NM we explored the options.
Thousands of pages of documents in hand we had them dead to rights.
But no lawyer located in NM would take the case. They'd always come back within 24 hours and say they were not interested.
By the 8th time this happened I finally asked WTF was going on to the paralegal who called us. She said it was a sensitive topic but that I should look at the list of the board of directors for the medical system in question and cross reference that with in-laws in state office and I might understand why people who require a law license in the state don't wamt to touch the case.
About five minutes with Google turns up the amswer. An in-law of the current governor sits on that board of directors. The governor is a from a powerful family.
So, apparently the assumption is that if you sue this hospital, you're going to lose your law license in retaliation.
Nice, huh?
Yeah, BTC is declared deceased a lot but I don't even care about that.
Waaaay too many financial publications focus on very short timelines and will talk about "lows not seen since" some stupidly short timeframe like <1 year.
Like, yeah... equities fluctuate and water is wet. The fuck is this, your first day of investing?
This article exemplifies one of the underlying problems IMHO. A daytrading mentality.
Those who have it spread that kind of thinking to everything they do.
Like this. Does anyone else remember when "not seen since" was a phrase reserved for historical periods of time that amounted to not less than a large percentage of a human life time?
I do. What is this <2 years bullshit?
They don't GAF about the kids.
They care about forcing every account on every service to be tied to an actual identity in case you say something naughty, like criticizing EU or an EU country's policy stances.
Gotta get the kids used to needing a digital ID, I guess.
There is nothing remotely surprising about this unless you just woke up from a 30+ years coma.
Someone actually read some history instead of listening to advertising slop.
The question there is if you understand that they're a commodity hedge and the limits of a commodity hedge. The real issue that I see with some "gold bugs" or "silver bugs" is that they think metal in hand is apocalypse-proof. Its not for a variety of reasons. The actual use-case where you make out fairly well in a disaster is much narrower band that some of these people seem to think.
I also don't see fiat going away any time soon. I agree it's been pushed to the logical limit but the problem is that there's nothing to move to at this time, this is what keeps it going. If we're honest, it's fair to suspect that this is what has kept it going for some time, the lack of a viable alternative.
Going backwards "to metal" would be a historic first and would bring back all the problems fiat was trying to solve. The net effect from a "stackers" perspective would be that the value of that person's stack would probably drop when most of what we consider modern economic activity stopped.
Many would suggest that "going forward" would be crypto, and there I have my doubts as well. A CBDC is just digifiat that introduces more problems rather than solving any while the currently available "private crypto" (by which I mean privately created, BTC, ETH etc, I'm not talking about "privacy") is just a digital interpretation of a commodity market. As such it brings forth the worst aspects of metals along with the worst aspects of digital currency and the worst aspects of speculative trading.
Now, that said, I think this is why metal has attractive qualities at this point in time.
It's a hard asset that can be traded back for devalued fiat in the future. It may not make a "profit" per se after inflation but it will hold value to a large degree, so having part of your portfolio in physical makes sense.
No problem.
I found it a bit odd that they picked meme images of both men.
Commodity trading is that one area of financial fun where you can piss off literally everyone who isn't in your specific trade with you.
I'm going to point out some things that basically no one wants to hear.
1. Ultra simple solutions are not solutions, they're at best mediocre ideas and often a grift on the part of those selling them.
2. The critics of fiat are not incorrect in what they say about it in terms of shortcomings. Fiat has the problems those people love to talk about. The issue is that the critics of fiat have the same problem that the fans of fiat have: they have no solution to those problems intrinsic to fiat currency.
3. The same basic problem is at play with the fans of "monetary metals".
Metals as money produce problems that are, essentially, impossible to solve without deciding you don't need international trade any longer. This is not new. It was known in the 1500's what the shortfalls of metallic currency were (it was also endlessly expounded upon). That's why Bills of Exchange became a big thing for every major country that was involved in serious trade, save one. The one state that decided not to go with Bills of Exchange and stick with metal lost, badly and did so in large part because of the intrinsic drawbacks of metal as money. It's slow, it's cumbersome and large scale trade creates vessels that are juicy targets for piracy which then demand enormous resources to guard.
It's all well and good to talk about "no counter party risk" unless you realize that there is one: they have to be willing to take your metal and at the value you want them to. This has been a problem for a long time.
4. Typical of people we've tried to split the difference with "metal backed" currency. The issue there is that you get the worst of both worlds rather than the best. "Metals based" paper systems create a system that is gameable in the same way as fiat and can only remedy this by going back to the major problems posed by metals in the first place. The gameability of this system, exemplified by the French in Nixon's case, can be seen in the closing of the gold window. Such gaming is why it was closed, no other known solution exists.
The reality is that there's a tension in the base concept of a currency, one which most people fail to acknowledge. That tension is that the currency can't be gameable like fiat, that is something you can print into oblivion, but it also must scale with economic growth.
A failure to scale, which is an issue with something rare like gold, means that the currency becomes more valuable as economic activity grows or becomes more efficient. You simply cannot add gold to the system fast enough to cover deflation.
The real truth that no one wants to admit is that there is no perfect currency and probably never will be.
The term for the behavior of the "protestors" (such as doxxing, stalking etc) is "mid level violence".
It's a Leftist political term and tactical, both documented in their own published works.
It's also a term everyone should get familiar with since it's almost always the opening volley in a no-shit insurgency.
Vance (Left) and Gavin Newsom (right).
I'm including the states... On the one hand that might dilute the percentage.
OTOH, it might make it far worse.