Individual Economists

After The Iran Attack, Is Bitcoin Giving A "Green Light" Ahead Of Monday's Market Open

Zero Hedge -

After The Iran Attack, Is Bitcoin Giving A "Green Light" Ahead Of Monday's Market Open

The first time Iran found itself in a major regional war with Donald Trump about to enter the White House, was April 13, 2024 when as part of escalating tensions with Israel, "Iran began an attack on Israel by launching dozens of suicide drones" on April 13, 2024. That said, it is s stretch to call that particular weapons exchange war, as both sides just wanted some theatrical appreciation rather than rearranging the borders of the middle East. What is more notable, is that the war started in the deep dark of a Saturday morning (April 13, 2024) when global markets were closed, and the only traded asset was crypto in general, and bitcoin in particular. The kneejerk reaction was sharply lower. 

The second time Iran found itself in a major regional war with Donald Trump (already in) the White House, was a little over a year later, on June 21-22, when in a much more serious and aggressive attack, Operation Midnight Hammer saw airstrikes, cruise missile attacks and B-2 bombers drop Massive Ordnance Penetrators on three key Iranian nuclear sites: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, all of which were quickly destroyed As a result, Iran's nuclear enrichment process was effectively (and literally) buried under a mountain, and then the major regional conflict was again promptly forgotten. What is most notable, is that that war, too, started in the deep dark of a Saturday morning (June 21, 2025) when global markets were closed, and the only traded asset was crypto in general, and bitcoin in particular. The kneejerk reaction this time too, was sharply lower. 

Fast forward to today, when in the most serious war between Iran and a coalition of US and Israel forces in decades, Iran was promptly "decapitated" as all of its top generals and IRGC personnel were killed, while also losing its spiritual head, the Ayatollah, who had led the country ever since those fateful days in 1978 when Shah Mohammed Reza-Pahlavi was replaced with Ruhollah Ayatollah, and an American embassy and its occupants were taken hostage. This conflict started shortly after the sun rose, as the attacking generals thought a night attack which everyone - and especially Iran - would expect as it is "meant" to be surprise would have little impact. They were right, and Ayatollah Khomeini was promptly vaporized. Where there was similarity to previous conflicts is that this one too started early on Saturday, when global markets were closed. Well, not all: bitcoin was trading. And, like the previous two most recent regional wars, Bitcoin's kneejerk reaction this time too, was sharply lower... but not for long, and shortly after it emerged that Ayatollah Khameini was dead and most of the army leaders had been killed, bitcoin - that weekend trading risk barometer - staged a remarkable rebound and was actually trading well above where it was before the currency sold off shortly after midnight on Saturday East Coast time.

Which begs the question: is the conflict now effectively over and is Wall Street getting the all-green signals? 

This is also the question asked by Academy Securities strategist Peter Tchir, who in a late Saturday note - when most of the latest development were already known -  wrote that he remains comfortable buying the market.

He explains why below: 

A lot was priced in. Brent has gone for $60 late December to $72 on Friday. Some of that move in energy prices likely tied to cold winter in America, etc, but away from the risk of conflict, the market was positioned for selling off. So far the "bad" news on the oil front should have been largely priced in.

  • Insurance for shipping in region cancelled.  pretty standard
  • Limited or no transit in the Strait of Hormuz. Should be expected

The "good" news on the oil front is that nothing has happened that would prevent transit if there is an off ramp. 

China supposedly has large stockpiles of crude and the U.S. in good shape, so a short disruption (a week or so) should have minimal impact. Spot oil contracts might go as high as $80 but am not expecting a big move out the curve

Furthermore, while it is early, so far intelligence and military in action have delivered at high levels for the US and Israel. Not so much for Iran.  Maybe they have another round up their sleeve, but according to Tchir, :"their calculus should be adjusted - to seek off ramp"

With confirmations stating that the leadership has been hit hard, what is the thought process of those assuming command:

You know that Isreal and the U.S. probably know who you are and possibly where you will be. That cannot be comforting.

Their weapon systems have performed as advertised (or maybe even better than expected).

Your weapons, like in prior attacks, and like Russia has experience, have not been as good as expected.

Which brings us to Bitcoin, which Tchir - and anyone else - views as a risk-on type of asset in this situation, has now recovered from small early loss to slightly highere. 

Putting it all together, Tchir - looking through the fog of war - says that he is optimistic for a "risk on" start to the week, while may sound a little bit callous, which is also why the Academy Strategist notes that "we can only hope that the events in the Middle East lead to a peaceful resolution, putting the Iranian people on a better path to prosperity and freedom, while minimizing the loss of life for everyone in the region."

Tyler Durden Sun, 03/01/2026 - 00:19

What A Taiwan Invasion Would Cost China

Zero Hedge -

What A Taiwan Invasion Would Cost China

Authored by Antonio Graceffo via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Shortly after meeting with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping in late October, President Donald Trump said China would never attack Taiwan while he is president because Chinese officials “know the consequences.” While support from the United States is welcome news for Taiwan, Trump’s words raise a real question: Does Xi actually know the cost of invading Taiwan?

A U.S.-made F-16V fighter jet taxis on the runway at an airforce base during the annual Han Kuang military drills in Hualien, Taiwan, on July 23, 2024. Sam Yeh/AFP via Getty Images

Much of the analysis of a potential Beijing attempt to seize Taiwan by force has centered on the Chinese military’s capabilities and Taiwan’s defenses, especially if supported by the United States. Many assessments conclude that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is not currently capable of defeating the U.S. military in a direct conflict.

However, analysts still warn of a worst-case scenario in which Xi, seeking to cement his legacy, launches a premature strike. Xi has tied his legitimacy to the “China Dream” of national rejuvenation by 2049 and has framed unifying Taiwan with the mainland as essential to achieving that goal.

The recent wave of purges, particularly of senior leaders such as former Central Military Commission (CMC) Vice Chairman General Zhang Youxia, has intensified speculation. With most of the commission allegedly removed and the CMC now effectively consisting of Xi and loyalist Vice Chairman Zhang Shengmin, some analysts argue that Xi has eliminated voices that could have dissuaded him from attacking Taiwan. Even if that was not his intent, the practical result may be similar. With little meaningful pushback inside the system, Xi could face fewer internal constraints if he chooses to act.

The German Marshall Fund and the Rhodium Group recently published “If China Attacks Taiwan,” a report examining the potential costs to Beijing of a prolonged war. The authors note they were not asked to adopt Xi’s personal perspective and acknowledge that Chinese authorities could misjudge the likely consequences.

Even when costs are high, national leaders sometimes proceed if perceived benefits or political pressures outweigh the risks. Xi could conclude that failing to act—particularly if he believes Taipei is moving toward permanent separation with U.S. backing—would damage his authority more than launching a risky military operation.

The study examines how a conflict would affect China’s economy, military capabilities, social stability, and international position. It warns that war could produce massive economic disruption, catastrophic military losses, serious social unrest, and severe sanctions. This brings the analysis back to three critical questions: What would the price of a Taiwan invasion be? Is Xi fully aware of that price? And does he care? The latter two only Xi can answer, but the first is measurable, and the potential impact on the CCP would be staggering.

In the report’s major war scenario, an invasion lasts several months and draws in the United States and its allies. The conflict begins with an amphibious assault and missile strikes on Taiwan as well as on U.S. forces in Japan and Guam. Although Chinese forces land on Taiwan, sustained Taiwanese and U.S. strikes disrupt resupply across the Taiwan Strait. After months of heavy fighting, the PLA withdraws to the mainland, having lost roughly 100,000 personnel. Taiwan suffers approximately 50,000 military and 50,000 civilian casualties. The United States loses 5,000 military personnel and 1,000 civilians, Japan loses 1,000 military personnel and 500 civilians, and the PLA retains control only of Kinmen and Matsu.

An aerial view of vehicles awaiting their export at a port in Nanjing, eastern Jiangsu Province, China, on Dec. 9, 2025. AFP via Getty Images

The report argues that a failed Chinese attack would impose severe economic, military, social, and international costs, and that it would be a mistake to assume Beijing would necessarily prevail. Even a limited military engagement could result in trillions of dollars in losses.

A 2022 Rhodium study estimated economic damage of at least $2 trillion to $3 trillion under conservative assumptions, while Bloomberg analysts projected costs closer to $10 trillion. In a prolonged war ending with Chinese withdrawal, the economic impact would extend beyond market disruption to systemic breakdown.

China is uniquely exposed because roughly 20 percent of its GDP and about 13 percent of its employment depend on exports, double the U.S. share. A major conflict would likely trigger a near-total embargo by G7 nations. After years of doubling down on high-tech manufacturing such as electric vehicles, semiconductors, and green technology instead of strengthening domestic consumption, China would have few alternative markets for its surplus output. Without export demand, large portions of its industrial base would idle, leading to a contraction in GDP potentially worse than during the COVID-19 pandemic period.

[ZH: And where, pray-tell, does the west get all of the 'shit' made during this embargo?]

Financial decoupling would compound the shock. The report anticipates the freezing of China’s roughly $3.39 trillion in foreign exchange reserves and places its $3.6 trillion in foreign direct investment at risk. Even if Beijing achieved military objectives, the global financial system could treat China as permanently uninvestable, effectively ending its role as a global financial hub. Hong Kong would likely lose its status as the primary gateway for international capital into the mainland.

Energy and food security add further strain. A months-long war could allow the United States and its allies to impose a distant blockade, cutting off 70 percent to 90 percent of the oil and roughly 40 percent of the natural gas that China imports by sea. Severe energy and food rationing could follow, increasing the risk of domestic unrest. With domestic demand already weakening, sanctions or a blockade would strike at one of China’s remaining growth engines.

The CCP’s legitimacy depends heavily on economic stability. A failed war that produces mass unemployment, shortages, a financial crisis, and long-term technological isolation could fracture the global economy into rival blocs, leaving China isolated for decades. Although the PLA has grown stronger, its economic vulnerabilities mean that the cost of a failed invasion could pose an existential challenge to the CCP itself.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 23:40

The Transatlantic Divide In Language Learning

Zero Hedge -

The Transatlantic Divide In Language Learning

The benefits of learning a foreign language are extensive and go way beyond the ability to converse with people from other countries.

Speaking a second language broadens the horizon, takes the guesswork out of restaurant orders on vacation and even makes the Super Bowl Halftime Show more enjoyable.

It has professional benefits as well, as multilingualism is a much sought-after skill in today's globalized world. Even though you can get by pretty well speaking only English, learning a second, or third, language is always going to be worth it.

While learning foreign languages is ubiquitous in Europe, where most students start learning English as early as primary school, the story in the U.S. is completely different. Most European countries have a national-level mandate for studying languages at school but such standards are non-existent on the other side of the Atlantic where such legislation only exists at school district or state-level, if at all.

As Statista'a Felix Richter reports, according to the National K-12 Foreign Language Enrollment Survey conducted by the Americans Councils for International Education, less than 20 percent of K-12 students in the U.S. were enrolled in foreign language classes in 2014/15, the latest available data.

The Transatlantic Divide in Language Learning | Statista

You will find more infographics at Statista

This is a far cry from the enrollment rates seen across Europe, as Eurostat data shows.

Many European countries have enrollment rates close to 100 percent, with an average of 91 percent of primary and secondary school students learning at least one foreign language across the European Union.

More than one in three students in the EU even study two or more foreign languages, showing that many student learn more than "just" English.

While English is by far the most widely taught foreign language across Europe, Spanish is the most popular second language in the U.S.

Of the 10.6 million students enrolled in a foreign language class in 2014/2015, 7.4 million studied Spanish and 1.3 million learned French.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 23:00

Fed Plans To Release Sweeping Bank‑Capital Rule By Late March: Top Regulator

Zero Hedge -

Fed Plans To Release Sweeping Bank‑Capital Rule By Late March: Top Regulator

Authored by Andrew Moran via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Long-awaited banking regulation—also known as the Basel III Endgame framework—will be released next month, said the Federal Reserve’s top banking regulator.

Michelle Bowman, vice chair for supervision of the Federal Reserve Board, in Washington on July 22, 2025. Ken Cedeno/Reuters

Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman, appearing at a Senate Banking Committee hearing on Feb. 26, confirmed that regulators are expected to release an updated Basel III proposal at the end of March.

But while this is the chief goal, Bowman hinted that the deadline might need to be extended.

She told lawmakers that officials at the Fed, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation have reached a consensus on the reproposal.

Basel III is a regulatory blueprint crafted in the fallout of the global financial crisis of 2008. It features a number of capital reforms and tighter requirements for how large U.S. banks measure credit, market, and operational risk.

In recent months, Bowman has teased that Basel III has retooled capital requirements, a move that could bolster lending by traditional lenders, particularly in the mortgage market.

“We’re very focused, as we were thinking about the Basel approach, in ways that we could right-size and recalibrate the approach for residential mortgage lending so that we could encourage the banks to get back into the mortgage business,” Bowman told senators.

“We’re refocusing our supervision in a laser focus on material financial risks.”

This comes shortly after Bowman suggested new mortgage capital rules for U.S. banks would be integral to the Basel III proposal.

Appearing at an American Bankers Association event on Feb. 16, Bowman stated that one change could tie a mortgage’s risk weight to its loan-to-value-ratio, effectively removing the one-size-fits-all approach. Another update could remove a provision requiring that banks deduct mortgage‑servicing assets from regulatory capital.

For years, critics have argued that the original Basel III proposal would have reduced lending due to higher capital mandates and would have led to higher funding costs for borrowers.

Proponents say higher capital requirements are necessary to prevent a similar financial crisis in the future.

But while the focus has been on Basel, Bowman argued that other issues also need to be addressed, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s stringent requirements and the sizable penalties banks face if they make mistakes on mortgage applications.

“I think it’s important that we think about this in a broader manner and holistically as we approach thinking about banks getting back into the mortgage space,” Bowman said.

Support for Homeownership

Overall, Bowman noted, the upcoming reproposal could spark affordable homeownership, ensure banks of all sizes come off the sidelines, and support market liquidity.

“My approach is to calibrate the new framework from the bottom up, rather than reverse engineer changes to achieve predetermined or preconceived outcomes to capital requirements,” she stated.

This comes as a group of eight major banking and housing associations urged regulators to ease mortgage capital requirements.

In a letter to the Fed, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the organizations stated that today’s regulatory environment discourages bank participation in mortgage markets, exacerbating housing affordability challenges.

The groups said they support current efforts to alter the Basel III Endgame rule, casting the process as an opportunity to strengthen mortgage‑market stability and create space for banks to play a larger role in home lending.

Homes for sale in Maryland on Nov. 12, 2023. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

“Adequate capital reduces the likelihood of bank failures that threaten broader financial stability, which can prove costly for households, financial institutions, and taxpayers,” the letter stated. “However, excessive capital requirements that are misaligned with empirically derived risk assessments can negatively affect the cost of and access to credit.”

Revitalizing the mortgage market has been one of the current administration’s objectives to ensure more households have an opportunity to become homeowners.

In his record-length State of the Union address, President Donald Trump noted that his economic agenda balances the needs of current homeowners and homebuyers.

“Low interest rates will help reduce the Biden‑created housing affordability crunch,” Trump said. “We want to protect those values. We want to keep those values up. We’re going to do both.”

As of Feb. 26, the average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage is 5.98 percent, according to Freddie Mac’s Primary Mortgage Market Survey.

A recent National Association of Realtors poll found that 85 percent of U.S. voters believe homeownership is central to the American dream.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 22:20

Epstein Had More Female Accomplices: Some Were Masquerading As Victims

Zero Hedge -

Epstein Had More Female Accomplices: Some Were Masquerading As Victims

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

New revelations from Rep. Anna Paulina Luna expose Jeffrey Epstein’s network as a sophisticated honeypot operation likely tied to foreign intelligence, designed to compromise powerful figures through sex trafficking and blackmail.

Luna, leading the congressional probe, asserts the scandal runs deeper than previously known, with inconsistencies in plea deals for key female accomplices fueling suspicions of a cover-up to protect the elite.

Based on evidence reviewed in the investigation, Luna stated that Jeffrey Epstein was running an intelligence-gathering operation, stating “In my professional opinion, I do believe it was a honeypot operation.”

“It has become very evident…that Jeffrey Epstein was running an intelligence gathering operation,” Luna continued, noting “We might be able to get justice.”

She elaborated, “I do believe that Jeffrey Epstein was targeting many politicians, many influential people, especially in regards to economic policy. I do believe that it was possible that not just (Bill Clinton), but Secretary Clinton as well as a number of other people were targeted.”

Luna called for subpoenas on four women identified as co-conspirators: Sarah Kellen, Nadia Marcinkova, Adriana Ross, and Lesley Groff.

These individuals received immunity under Epstein’s 2008 non-prosecution agreement, despite allegations of scheduling abuse, recruiting victims, and participating in acts.

Luna also highlighted other discrepancies, such as Susan Hamblin sending an email in which she told Epstein his “littlest girl was naughty,” yet receiving victim status and a plea deal.

The Congresswoman also pointed to Nadia Marcinkova, who sent explicit emails as an adult co-conspirator but was granted victim status.

Luna demanded, “The DOJ NEEDS to re-open these cases, adding that the “Previous DOJ let them off.”

She added, “Why were a number of Epstein’s co-conspirators given plea deals for trafficking minors? Child sex traffickers do not deserve plea deals or immunity. EVER.”

Barry Levine, author of “The Spider,” reinforced on Jesse Watters’ show that female co-conspirators received plea deals for trafficking.

Levine noted models from around the world were involved, echoing Luna’s foreign ties concerns.

Jesse Watters highlighted, “Hillary did seem perceptive to the idea.”

In another major development in the case, former President Bill Clinton testified under oath that President Trump was not involved at all with Epstein to his knowledge.

Clinton stated, “Trump has never said anything to me to make me think he was involved [with Epstein].”

Luna confirmed, “President Trump has been exonerated. He is not considered a person of interest in our Congressional investigation.”

She accused Democrats of smearing Trump, saying, “Democrats continue to insist otherwise to smear him and sabotage his presidency. It’s a political game to them.”

“We had cooperation, we asked the victims directly and he was exonerated,” Luna said.

Fresh documents from the mass file release have also revealed a shocking intrusion into the FBI’s NYC office on Super Bowl Sunday in 2023, resulting in the loss of approximately 100TB of evidence.

FBI Special Agent Aaron Spivack detailed the breach in a declaration, stating, “500 terabytes of data was gone as a result of the intrusion. I was able to recover about 400 terabytes of that data, however. I was told to Google how to recover the data. No one else tried to help us.”

Spivack described discovering unusual activity: “Around 3:30pm or so we located the log files and began combing through, which is when we noticed strange IP activity that took place yesterday from two IP addresses. The activity included combing through certain files pertaining to the Epstein investigation.”

He continued, “I reached out to one of the case agents to see if they were in the office yesterday, thinking that maybe they inadvertently changed a setting on the NAS or if they noticed anything strange about them.”

Further investigation revealed, “Around 4/4:30pm we dove into the IPs and checked all of our computers to see which had the IPs in question. One computer, our discovery computer, matched one of them and is located in a room next to the lab. The other IP is one we don’t recognize, but it is the same address as the IP on our network, leading us to believe it was a computer that accessed our network somehow.”

Spivack concluded, “We were not able to identify the computer, but it had to have accessed our network either by being plugged into the network, or possibly by telnetting in virtually.”

This breach raises serious questions about security lapses and potential efforts to suppress evidence in the Epstein case.

These disclosures build on anomalies detailed in our prior reports, where DOJ documents referenced Epstein’s death as a “MURDER” and highlighted red flags like mismatched autopsy details and missing footage.

The inconsistencies point to elite protection of the operation. 

Theories that both Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were intelligence operatives linked to Mossad, other foreign entities and a “supra government” shielding elites have exploded online.

As demands for the full client list grow, these revelations expose a web of elite impunity. The public deserves unredacted truth to dismantle any remaining deep state shields.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 21:00

If You're Freaking Out About A Future Jobless AI Dystopia...

Zero Hedge -

If You're Freaking Out About A Future Jobless AI Dystopia...

Amid an armada of dystopian futurists, projecting linear thoughts into a future of 'AI uber alles', Marc Andreessen stands as a beacon of potential utopian light, seeing a future that looks very different and very positive for young and old alike.

In a brief few minutes, the co-founder of Netscape and VC firm Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) believes instead that we are living through a unique (and most incredible) time in history with the rise of AI coming right as human civilization needs it...

"we're going to have AI and robots precisely when we actually need them [with populations shrinking] to keep the economy from actually shrinking."

Simply put, Andreessen says that fears of AI-driven mass job loss are overly simplistic.

After decades of unusually slow technological change and low job churn, AI could restore historical productivity levels (exemplified by the period from 1870-1930), sparking opportunity, innovation, and net job growth rather than displacement. 

Declining populations and reduced immigration will make human labor increasingly valuable. AI's timing is "miraculous", Andreessen exclaims, preventing economic shrinkage from depopulation.

In even radical scenarios, explosive productivity leads to output gluts, collapsing prices, and massive real-wealth gains - equivalent to "giant raises" for everyone - while making safety-nets more affordable. 

Whether incremental or transformative, Andreessen sees the outcome as fundamentally positive economic news.

"...there's all this concern among young people that their jobs are not going to be there for them. AI is replacing them..."

Andreessen replies (emphasis ours): 

So the job-substitution/job-loss thing is very reductive. I think it's an overly simplistic model. And again it goes back to what I said at the very beginning which is we've actually been in a regime for 50 years of very slow technological change in the economy... like at half the rate of the previous era and a third the rate of like 100 years ago.

And so we're coming out of this kind of phase where we've had like almost no technological progress in the economy. We've had remarkably little job churn as a result of that relative to any historical period. And so even if AI triples productivity growth in the economy, which would like be a massively big deal, it would take us back to the same level of job churn that was happening between 1870 and 1930.

And if you go back and you read accounts of 1870 to 1930, people just thought the world was awash with opportunity. Right? At that rate of technological transformation, kids were able to develop new careers into new areas of the economy, building new kinds of products and services. A huge part of everything in our modern world today was kind of invented and proliferated during that period.

And so even if AI triples the pace of economic change in the economy, it's going to translate to a much higher rate of economic growth; it's going to translate to a much higher rate of job growth. And there will be some level of like task level and job level substitution that will take place but that will be swamped by the macro effects of economic growth and innovation that will happen and that then corresponding to that there will be hiring blooms quite honestly I think all over the place

And then again go back to the fact that this is all happening in the face of declining population growth and increasingly population shrinkage. So human workers in many, many, many countries over the next you know 10, 20, 30 years are going to be at more and more of a premium, literally because you're going to have shrinking population levels.

[While] we don't really want to get into you know politics particularly but it does feel like the world broadly is going to reverse course on the rates of immigration that we've had for the last 50 years. it seems to be kind of a broad-based thing happening - rise in nationalism, concerns about the rate of immigration - and immigration historically in countries like the US ha ebbed and flowed over time based on how the national mood shifts.

And so in a country like the US (or any country in Europe), if you combine declining population with less immigration, the remaining human workers are going to be at a premium not at a discount. And so I think that the combination of faster productivity growth, faster economic growth, and then slower population growth and less immigration - actually means there's going to be much less of this kind of dystopian/no-jobs thing. I just think it's probably totally off-base. 

"That is extremely interesting. So, what I'm hearing is you're not super worried about job loss. Is the key here that the timing kind of just works out, this population decrease, you know, like all these kind of have to line up for there not to be this massive job loss with AI?"

Andreessen replies (emphasis ours): 

Yeah.

Well, look, if we didn't have AI, we'd be in a panic right now about what's going to happen to the economy. Right? Because what we what we'd be staring at is a future of depopulation and depopulation without new technology would just mean that the economy shrinks. Right? 

So it would mean that the economy kind of itself kind of shrinks over time, the opportunity diminishes, and there are no new jobs, there are no new fields. There's no new source of consumer demand for spending on things. And so you would be very worried about going into period of severe decline or stagnation.

Essentially you'd be looking at these very dystopian scenarios of like an economy self-euthanizing over time. 

So you'd be very worried about the opposite of what everybody thinks that they're worried about. The only reason we're not worried about that is because we now know that we have the technology that can substitute for the lack of population growth and also for the for the lack of immigration that's likely.

And so, I would say the timing has worked out miraculously well in the sense that we're going to have AI and robots precisely when we actually need them, to keep the economy from actually shrinking. 

And that's just like a fundamentally good news story.

To get to the mass-job-loss thing that people are worried about, you'd have to look at like far, far, far higher rates of productivity growth. You'd have to look at rates of productivity growth that are 10, 20, 30, 50% a year - something like that - which are orders of magnitude higher than we've ever had in any economy in the history of the planet.

It's possible that we get that. I mean, look, I have my utopian temptation along with everybody else.

If AI radically transforms everything overnight, then maybe... let's play out the kind of utopian scenario. 

You get to a much higher level of productivity growth.

You get to a much higher level of technological change.

Corresponding to that you'll have a massive economic boom. 

You'll have massive growth in the economy and then corresponding with that you'll have a collapse in prices. 

And so the price of goods and services that are affected by (or commoditized by) AI will collapse.

There'll be price deflation and then as a consequence of price deflation everything that people are buying today gets a lot cheaper and that's the equivalent of a gigantic increase in wealth right across the society.

This is actually worth talking about because people I think people get kind of sideways on this issue.

So if AI is going to transform the economy as much as the utopians or dystopians (or whatever kind) think that it will, the necessary economic calculation of what happens is massive productivity growth. 

The consequence of massive productivity growth literally means mechanically more output requiring less input, right? 

So you get more economic output for less input, right? So you're substituting in AI for human workers.

And as a consequence, you get like this massive boom in output with much lower input costs. 

The result of that is you get lots of goods and services in all those affected sectors. The result of those gluts is you get collapsing prices, right? 

The collapsing prices mean that the thing today that cost you $100 now cost you $10 and now cost you $1.

That's the equivalent of giving everybody a giant raise, right? 

Because now they have all this additional spending power. 

That additional spending power then translates to economic growth, right? 

The development of new fields. Everybody's materially much better off very quickly. And then by the way, to the extent that you do have unemployment coming out the other side of that, it's now much cheaper to provide the kind of social safety net to prevent people from being immiserated, right? 

Because the prices of all the goods and services that a welfare program has to pay from, they're all collapsing, right? And so the price of healthcare collapses, the price of housing collapses, the price of education collapses, the price of everything else collapses because of the incredible impact that AI is having. 

And so in this kind of utopian/dystopian scenario that people have, there's no scenario in which everybody's just poor. In fact, it's quite the opposite.

Everybody gets a lot richer because prices collapse and then it's actually much easier to pay for the social safety net for the people who, for some reason, can't find a job.

And so, maybe we end up in that scenario. 

I mean, the optimistic part of me says, yeah, maybe AI is that powerful and maybe the rest of the economy can actually change to accommodate that and maybe that'll happen.

But the result of that is going to be a much better news story than people think it's going to be. 

Everything I've just described, by the way, is just a very straightforward extrapolation on very basic economics. I'm not making any like bold predictions in what I just said. This is just a straightforward mechanical process that plays itself out if you have higher rates of productivity growth, which are necessarily the results of higher rates of technological growth.

And so, to be clear, I think we're looking at a world that's not like radically transformed the way that maybe the utopians think that it will be or the dystopians think it will be. 

I think it'll be more incremental.

But I think that incremental shift is overwhelmingly going to be a good news process. And then even if it's much faster, it's also going to be a good news process. It'll just be a good news process in the other way that I described.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 20:20

Iran Says US-Israeli Attack Hit Elementary School, Killing 85+ Girls

Zero Hedge -

Iran Says US-Israeli Attack Hit Elementary School, Killing 85+ Girls

Via Middle East Eye

At least 85 people, almost all of them young girls, have been killed in an air strike on a primary school in southern Iran, the Iranian judiciary said. The attack on Saturday morning hit Shajareh Tayyebeh schoolin the city of Minab, in Hormozgan province, as the United States and Israel began launching strikes on targets across Iran.

The victims were between seven and 12 years old, according to Iran's Tasnim and Fars news agencies. A staff member at the Minab school, who asked not to be named, told Middle East Eye she remains in shock at the intensity of the attack. Iran's foreign minister also featured the attack on social media.

Video posted on pro-government Telegram accounts shows Iranians searching through a destroyed school in Minab, via Telegram

Through tears, she said she used to watch the young girls playing at school every day. After today’s strikes, however, she saw their bodies lying on classroom benches and in different corners of the school.

She said she had stepped out of the school to take care of something when she suddenly heard a horrifying sound. Within seconds, a missile - or something like it - hit the school building. After hearing the blast, she ran back towards the school and was faced with a scene she says she would never forget. 

“I felt like I had gone mute. I couldn’t speak,” the staff member told MEE. “You could hear the sound of children crying and screaming.” When rescue teams arrived, she said, they began to understand the scale of the disaster.

“We still don’t know how many are under the rubble. Some are even saying more than 100. Some of these small children are severely injured. Their parents have come to the school, and this place has turned into a house of mourning.”

The air strike on the school left many inside the building trapped beneath the rubble. There were 170 female students at the school at the time of the attack. So far, at least 45 people have also been reported wounded.

Footage posted by Telegram accounts affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps appeared to show people digging through the rubble.

Smoke could be seen rising from surrounding buildings, while a wrecked car lay in the street. People were heard screaming and wailing; others appeared to be in shock. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi denounced the attack on X and said the deaths of the children would "not go unanswered".

"The destroyed building is a primary school for girls in the south of Iran. It was bombed in broad daylight, when packed with young pupils," he wrote. "Dozens of innocent children have been murdered at this site alone."

Country-wide attacks

US and Israeli strikes on Iran have also heavily targeted Tehran. Explosions echoed across the capital as Iranians set out for work on the first day of the week, before quickly spreading across the country.

Attacks were reported in a range of cities, including the holy city of Qom, as well as Karaj, Isfahan and Kermanshah. An overall death toll has not yet been released, but Reuters reported that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had been moved to a “safe location”.

US President Donald Trump said the joint attacks were aimed at "eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime".

"Short time ago, US military began major combat operation in Iran. Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating threats from the Iranian regime," he said. Trump also made a number of other statements and predictions without offering any concrete evidence, such as Washington's refusal to allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon.

"We are going to annihilate their navy. We are going to ensure that the region’s ‘terrorist’ proxies can no longer destabilise the region or the world. "We will ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. It is a very simple message." 

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 17:00

DOE Announces $171 Million For Geothermal Expansion

Zero Hedge -

DOE Announces $171 Million For Geothermal Expansion

The DOE released a Notice of Funding Opportunity offering up to $171.5 million for next-generation geothermal field tests and resource exploration. 

The program targets field-scale demonstrations of enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) for electricity generation, along with drilling to characterize and confirm hydrothermal and next-gen prospects nationwide.

The funding splits into two initial open topics: up to $100 million for EGS field tests and $71.5 million for exploratory drilling. Letters of intent are due March 27, with full applications due April 30. The move directly supports President Trump’s Executive Order “Unleashing American Energy,” according to the agency.

Geothermal currently supplies roughly 4 GW of U.S. capacity, but represents only about 0.3% of total power generation. DOE estimates the resource base could support 300 GW or more by 2050 with technology improvements, delivering firm, 24/7 baseload power that complements intermittent renewables and meets rising demand from data centers and AI infrastructure.

Recent studies show that some of the best locations in the United States for new geothermal sites are in the western part of the country and some of the southern states. 

Assistant Secretary Kyle Haustveit of the Office of Hydrocarbons and Geothermal Energy stated the initiative will “directly support our commitments to advance energy addition, reduce energy costs for American families and businesses, and unleash American energy dominance and innovation.”

One of the only pure-play publicly traded geothermal companies is Ormat Technologies (ORA), which develops, owns, and operates geothermal power plants primarily in the U.S. and internationally. The company has recently expanded via long-term power purchase agreements with data-center operators (Google), underscoring commercial interest in reliable geothermal supply.

Some Democratic appropriators are pitching a fit, noting the $146.5 million tranche exceeds the $118 million Congress appropriated for geothermal in FY2025 and requesting further review. Proponents counter that successful pilots could unlock far larger private investment and help diversify the grid beyond wind, solar, and gas.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 16:20

"Expect Moderate Disruptions": Oil Tankers Avoid Strait Of Hormuz As Operation Fury Hits Iran

Zero Hedge -

"Expect Moderate Disruptions": Oil Tankers Avoid Strait Of Hormuz As Operation Fury Hits Iran

Automatic Identification System (AIS) vessel-tracking data indicate that multiple tankers abruptly reversed course near the entrance to the critical maritime chokepoint of the Strait of Hormuz early Saturday, following the U.S.-Israeli operation (Operation Epic Fury) targeting Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps command-and-control infrastructure in multiple Iranian cities.

Bloomberg reporter Stephen Stapczynski pulled data from the Terminal that shows shipowners of crude oil, crude products, and LNG tankers are avoiding the strait, even though the waterway remains open and traffic has not stopped entirely.

"A number of oil and LNG tankers are avoiding sailing through the Strait of Hormuz NYK has advised its ships to avoid the waterway," Stapczynski wrote on X.

Stapczynski noted. 

Less than a day before Operation Epic Fury began, Bloomberg macro strategist Michael Ball warned, "US military action on Iran would result in sudden-yet-tradeable risk aversion. The negative markets impulse only sustains if there's material disruption to regional oil production and shipping flows around the Strait of Hormuz."

Map: Strait of Hormuz

Sources told CNN earlier this morning that Operation Epic Fury was the result of "months of joint planning" and will involve several days of attacks. The key question is whether the operation against Iran will spill over into next week. If it does, that would suggest potential disruptions at the critical maritime chokepoint, which handles one-fifth of global seaborne oil and LNG flows.

Rapidan Energy Group analyst Fernando Ferreira commented on the situation, indicating:

Iran understands that threatening traffic through Hormuz is its most credible asymmetric lever. Even limited interference can raise oil prices and impose immediate economic costs on the US and its partners, increasing pressure on Washington to de-escalate.

We expect at least moderate disruptions to Gulf oil flows in the coming days, with the risk tilted toward something more severe if tensions escalate further. 

And here it is:

  • FT: INSURERS TO CANCEL POLICIES FOR SHIPS IN GULF, HORMUZ STRAIT

Goldman analyst Adam Crook provided clients, shortly after the operation began, with an overview of how oil and gold were positioned heading into the weekend:

Tallulah Adams (Commods Sales): “We have seen significant engagement from the franchise in Oil and European Gas upside over previous weeks, being the most directly impacted Commodities in an escalation scenario (20% each of Global Oil and LNG flows transit through the Strait of Hormuz).

Oil remains the most direct and liquid expression as a geopolitical hedge – while a full closure of the Strait of Hormuz remains a tail scenario, even a disruption of flows through the Strait via other means (targeting of ships, insurance issues) poses an upside scenario closer to $100/bbl. Additionally, whilst not our base case, an attack on Iranian Oil infrastructure puts 2mb/d of Iran Crude exports at risk.

Despite a Middle East escalation remaining top of mind, positioning ironically feels cleaner (vs mid-Feb) with franchise flows skewed toward profit taking over the past week. This has kept a lid on call vols despite increasingly hawkish news flow + flat price moving higher in a high spot-vol correlation regime. Front month Brent implied volatility was at 60v on Friday, compared to a high of 90v in June last year. Meanwhile, 1 month 15 delta call skew was at 14 vols, compared to a 27 vol high last June. Net managed money (Brent + WTI combined) is sitting in the 59th percentile vs the previous 3 years. To play for a reprice in front vols and skew, we like owning front wingy outright calls.

Additionally, we have seen a re-engagement in Gold upside as prices have consolidated above $5000/oz and 5 day realised vols have compressed to 27v vs a 100v high. Gold upside flow has migrated from VKO’s/Continuous KO’s to a mix of vanillas/EKO’s/Digis. While ETF holdings have continued to build, the market feels under positioned from the fast-money community - net managed money on Comex is sitting only in the 17th percentile vs the last 3 years and SHFE positioning is on multi-year lows.

A synthetic weekend market via IG has crude oil prices up as much as 8%. 

IG has gold up nearly 3%. 

Related:

Operation Epic Fury coverage:

The key question is whether this operation remains confined to the weekend or spills into next week. If a spillover does occur, it would be unequivocally bullish for Brent crude and gold futures on Sunday evening.

Professional subscribers can read more Iran ​​​​​research on our new Marketdesk.ai portal.

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 12:15

We Didn't Just Get Expensive Electricity. We Built A System That Makes It Inevitable.

Zero Hedge -

We Didn't Just Get Expensive Electricity. We Built A System That Makes It Inevitable.

Authored by William Murray via RealClearEnergy,

Most Americans don’t think about electricity until the monthly bill arrives.

It comes once a month, often quietly, but lately it’s landed like a thud. Heating your home now costs hundreds more a month than it did just a few years ago. You use the same appliances. You flip the same switches. Nothing in your daily life has changed – except the price.

Why?

When one looks inside the electricity system, the experience is less like analyzing an immense machine than being fed into one, resembling the immortal scene in “Modern Times” where Charlie Chaplin’s factory worker is swallowed by the equipment he’s working on.

The American electricity market is not guided by an “invisible hand” of supply and demand, but an accumulation of misaligned rules laid down over decades. Layer upon layer of regulation, subsidy, mandate, and accounting rules to a point where the system became fixed in an upward, inflationary tilt, impervious to efforts to change.

There are at least a half-dozen federal environmental regulations that have more to do with rising electricity prices than tariffs or the data-center buildout, and a good example to start with is called Construction Work in Progress (CWIP).

As a new issue brief makes clear, it helped change who pays for America’s infrastructure.

Chief among these contrivances was the quiet transfer of financial risk from investors to the public. Before the 1970s, utilities had to finish building a power plant before they could charge customers for it. If a company wanted to build something, it had to take the risk. Investors would put up the money. If the project succeeded, they earned a return. If it failed, they paid the price.

But during the inflation crisis of the 1970s, power plants — especially nuclear plants —became vastly more expensive to build. Utilities argued they couldn’t afford to wait years to recover their costs. During a moment of civic weakness, state regulators started allowing utilities to charge customers while the plants were still under construction.

CWIP permanently shifted investment risk away from investors and onto ordinary people. Today, you can open your electric bill and pay for projects that don’t exist yet and may be cancelled in the future.

No banker in his right mind would accept such terms voluntarily. Yet millions of Americans are compelled to do so every month if they’re served by an investor-owned electric company.

This system could have operated below the waterline indefinitely, had it not collided with the renewable energy revolution of the last 15 years. Wind and solar generation increased fourfold between 2011 and 2020, reaching record output by 2024.

These sources have advantages. But they also have a basic limitation: they don’t produce power all the time.

So utilities must build backup systems. Extra transmission lines. Extra capacity.

None of this redundancy is free. Every mile of wire, every idle backup turbine, every overpriced and underutilized battery storage unit will eventually, without fail, appear on a customer’s bill.

And thanks to rules like CWIP, they can charge you while you wait.

Many of these policies came from a sincere place. Beginning in the 1970s and accelerating in the decades that followed, a network of public-interest law firms and environmental advocacy groups gained enormous influence over how infrastructure gets approved.

Their goal was to protect the public.

But over time, something else happened.

They built a system where stopping projects became easier than building them. Where delay became a strategy. Where lawsuits became routine.

Each delay added to costs. Each cost increase justifies charging customers sooner. Each increase made the next one easier to accept.

Even writers like the New York Times’ Ezra Klein — hardly a critic of environmental goals — have begun to acknowledge the problem. He has argued that well-intentioned rules have made it far too hard to build the infrastructure society needs.

People think this is an important admission by Klein and his ilk, but it is not.

These ‘well-intentioned rules’ were simply created by an earlier generation of Ezra Klein “Abundance” types who set up the public interest lawfare firms and NGO indulgences system in the first place.

Klein’s autopsy revealed only that the Left promotes things that make themselves feel better while making the world worse, yet their slobbering idealism protects them from feeling the shame of failed responsibility. There is a Kafkaesque process at work, filled with Orwellian word games that stymie everything. It’s a dirty, soiled, can’t-do spirit masquerading as something more noble and dignified.

Because the issue isn’t whether the goals were noble. Noble intentions don’t matter.

It’s that the results are what matter, and the results are failures.

There is, however, a remedy — not a technological breakthrough, but something far better (albeit rarer) in Washington: legislative clarity.

One promising approach is legislation such as Representative Troy Balderson’s “Affordable, Reliable, Clean Energy Security Act.” The bill seeks to establish clearer definitions of key terms like “affordable,” “reliable,” and “clean,” ensuring that investment risks are limited to cost-effective infrastructure projects only.

By recognizing the role of dispatchable resources such as natural gas and nuclear power, the legislation would also help ensure the grid maintains the reliability necessary to support modern life, all while meeting the standards of the Clean Air Act.

These reforms would not eliminate electricity price increases overnight. But they would begin to address one of the root causes: a system in which incentives increasingly misalign diverge from the interests of customers.

Electricity is not a luxury. It is a necessity that underpins economic growth, public safety, and household stability. Ensuring its affordability requires more than promises. It requires policies that encourage efficient investment, allocate risk appropriately, and maintain reliability.

Most of all, it comes from remembering a basic principle that once guided American growth:

You should pay for things when they work.

Not before.

Until that principle returns, electricity bills will continue their quiet climb upward, and Americans will continue to wonder why modern life feels harder to afford than it used to.

William Murray is a former speechwriter for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the past editor of RealClearEnergy from 2015-2017, and currently the chief speechwriter for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 11:40

MiB: Jeff Chang, President and Co-Founder of Vest

The Big Picture -

 

 

This week, I speak with Jeff Chang, President and Co-Founder of Vest. We discuss his journey into founding Vest and how he developed his views on the benefits of hedging via ETFs. We also talk about the creation of financial products geared towards hedging.

He explains how the largest issuer of structured notes was Lehman Brothers(!) and why Vest created a different firm without that same counterparty risk.

A list of his current reading/favorite books is here; A transcript of our conversation is available here Tuesday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube (video), YouTube (audio), and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our bonus Masters in Business episode this coming week with Bill Gurley of Benchmark Capital. We discuss his career, the current state of the Venture Capital space, and his new book,

 

 

 

 

Current Reading/Favorite Books

 

 

 

 

 

The post MiB: Jeff Chang, President and Co-Founder of Vest appeared first on The Big Picture.

France's Le Pen Says She Will Not Run In 2027 Election If Under House Arrest, Names Successor

Zero Hedge -

France's Le Pen Says She Will Not Run In 2027 Election If Under House Arrest, Names Successor

Via Remix News,

In March 2025,  Le Pen was convicted on charges dating back years ago, in a move that was widely contested and seen as a highly political attempt to keep her from running in next year’s presidential election.

Now, she says she has no intention of running if her ban from running is lifted, if it means she must wear an electronic tag, i.e., ankle monitor.

She is also ready to place full trust in Jordan Bardella, current leader of the National Rally (RN).

Le Pen’s comments came during an interview with French television station BFMTV, her first since French prosecutors asked a court to uphold her five-year ban. A ruling on her case is expected on July 7.

“You cannot campaign under these conditions. Can you campaign without going out in the evenings to meet your constituents at rallies?” she asked, referring to the idea of having to campaign while wearing a monitor and under house arrest.

Prosecutors had asked for Le Pen to be sentenced to four years in prison (three of which were suspended) and a fine of €100,000.

In France, shorter prison sentences are often commuted, meaning that if the court follows the prosecutor’s request, Le Pen could spend anywhere from a few months to a year under house arrest, wearing an anklet.

However, Le Pen has said she would not campaign under such circumstances.

Le Pen says she will be present in court on July 7 to hear the Court of Appeal’s decision.

“Of course I will go, as I went every day to the trial in the first instance and on appeal because I respect justice,” she told BFMTV.

Regarding the 2027 election, Le Pen said regarding RN leader Jordan Bardella:

“The best-case scenario is that I am elected president of the Republic and he is my prime minister.”

However, if she cannot run, then “Jordan will find himself a prime minister,” and she will take whatever “role he wants me to have.”

Emphasizing that Bardella will be free to make his own choices, Le Pen told listeners, “If I cannot be a candidate, he will determine at what level he needs my presence, my advice and my experience.”

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/28/2026 - 08:10

Peter Schiff: Printing Money Is Not the Cure for Cononavirus

Financial Armageddon -


Peter Schiff: Printing Money Is Not the Cure for Cononavirus



In his most recent podcast, Peter Schiff talked about coronavirus and the impact that it is having on the markets. Earlier this month, Peter said he thought the virus was just an excuse for stock market woes. At the time he believed the market was poised to fall anyway. But as it turns out, coronavirus has actually helped the US stock market because it has led central banks to pump even more liquidity into the world financial system. All this means more liquidity — central banks easing. In fact, that is exactly what has already happened, except the new easing is taking place, for now, outside the United States, particularly in China.” Although the new money is primarily being created in China, it is flowing into dollars — the dollar index is up — and into US stocks. Last week, US stock markets once again made all-time record highs. In fact, I think but for the coronavirus, the US stock market would still be selling off. But because of the central bank stimulus that has been the result of fears over the coronavirus, that actually benefitted not only the US dollar, but the US stock market.” In the midst of all this, Peter raises a really good question. The primary economic concern is that coronavirus will slow down output and ultimately stunt economic growth. Practically speaking, the world would produce less stuff. If the virus continues to spread, there would be fewer goods and services produced in a market that is hunkered down. Why would the Federal Reserve respond, or why would any central bank respond to that by printing money? How does printing more money solve that problem? It doesn’t. In fact, it actually exacerbates it. But you know, everybody looks at central bankers as if they’ve got the solution to every problem. They don’t. They don’t have the magic wand. They just have a printing press. And all that creates is inflation.” Sometimes the illusion inflation creates can look like a magic wand. Printing money can paper over problems. But none of this is going to fundamentally fix the economy. In fact, if central bankers were really going to do the right thing, the appropriate response would be to drain liquidity from the markets, not supply even more.” Peter explained how the Fed was originally intended to create an “elastic” money supply that would expand or contract along with economic output. Today, the money supply only goes in one direction — that’s up. The economy is strong, print money. The economy is weak, print even more money.” Of course, the asset that’s doing the best right now is gold. The yellow metal pushed above $1,600 yesterday. Gold is up 5.5% on the year in dollar terms and has set record highs in other currencies. Because gold is rising even in an environment where the dollar is strengthening against other fiat currencies, that shows you that there is an underlying weakness in the dollar that is right now not being reflected in the Forex markets, but is being reflected in the gold markets. Because after all, why are people buying gold more aggressively than they’re buying dollars or more aggressively than they’re buying US Treasuries? Because they know that things are not as good for the dollar or the US economy as everybody likes to believe. So, more people are seeking out refuge in a better safe-haven and that is gold.” Peter also talked about the debate between Trump and Obama over who gets credit for the booming economy – which of course, is not booming.






Dump the Dollar before Bank Runs start in America -- Economic Collapse 2020

Financial Armageddon -












We are living in crazy times. I have a hard time believing that most of the general public is not awake, but in reality, they are. We've never seen anything like this; I mean not even under Obama during the worst part of the Great Recession." Now the Fed is desperately trying to keep interest rates from rising. The problem is that it's a much bigger debt bubble this time around , and the Fed is going to have to blow a lot more air into it to keep it inflated. The difference is this time it's not going to work." It looks like the Fed did another $104.15 billion of Not Q.E. in a single day. The Fed claims it's only temporary. But that is precisely what Bernanke claimed when the Fed started QE1. Milton Freedman once said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." The same applies to Q.E., or whatever the Fed wants to pretend it's doing. Except this is not QE4, according to Powell. Right. Pumping so much money out, and they are accusing China of currency manipulation ? Wow! Seriously! Amazing! Dump the U.S. dollar while you still have a chance. Welcome to The Atlantis Report. And it is even worse than that, In addition to the $104.15 billion of "Not Q.E." this past Thursday; the FED added another $56.65 billion in liquidity to financial markets the next day on Friday. That's $160.8 billion in two days!!!! in just 48 hours. That is more than 2 TIMES the highest amount the FED has ever injected on a monthly basis under a Q.E. program (which was $80 billion per month) Since this isn't QE....it will be really scary on what they are going to call Q.E. Will it twice, three times, four times, five times what this injection per month ! It is going to be explosive since it takes about 60 to 90 days for prices to react to this, January should see significant inflation as prices soak up the excess liquidity. The question is, where will the inflation occur first . The spike in the repo rate might have a technical explanation: a misjudgment was made in the Fed's money market operations. Even so, two conclusions can be drawn: managing the money markets is becoming harder, and from now on, banks will be studying each other's creditworthiness to a greater degree than before. Those people, who struggle with the minutiae of money markets, and that includes most professionals, should focus on the causes and not the symptoms. Financial markets have recovered from each downturn since 1980 because interest rates have been cut to new lows. Post-2008, they were cut to near zero or below zero in all major economies. In response to a new financial crisis, they cannot go any lower. Central banks will look for new ways to replicate or broaden Q.E. (At some point, governments will simply see repression as an easier option). Then there is the problem of 'risk-free' assets becoming risky assets. Financial markets assume that the probability of major governments such as the U.S. or U.K. defaulting is zero. These governments are entering the next downturn with debt roughly twice the levels proportionate to GDP that was seen in 2008. The belief that the policy worked was completely predicated on the fact that it was temporary and that it was reversible, that the Fed was going to be able to normalize interest rates and shrink its balance sheet back down to pre-crisis levels. Well, when the balance sheet is five-trillion, six-trillion, seven-trillion when we're back at zero, when we're back in a recession, nobody is going to believe it is temporary. Nobody is going to believe that the Fed has this under control, that they can reverse this policy. And the dollar is going to crash. And when the dollar crashes, it's going to take the bond market with it, and we're going to have stagflation. We're going to have a deep recession with rising interest rates, and this whole thing is going to come imploding down. everything is temporary with the fed including remaining off the gold standard temporary in the Fed's eyes could mean at least 50 years This liquidity problem is a signal that trading desks are loaded up on inventory and can't get rid of it. Repo is done out of a need for cash. If you own all of your securities (i.e., a long-only, no leverage mutual fund) you have no need to "repo" your securities - you're earning interest every night so why would you want to 'repo' your securities where you are paying interest for that overnight loan (securities lending is another animal). So, it is those that 'lever-up' and need the cash for settlement purposes on securities they've bought with borrowed money that needs to utilize the repo desk. With this in mind, as we continue to see this need to obtain cash (again, needed to settle other securities purchases), it shows these firms don't have the capital to add more inventory to, what appears to be, a bloated inventory. Now comes the fun part: the Treasury is about to auction 3's, 10's, and 30-year bonds. If I am correct (again, I could be wrong), the Fed realizes securities firms don't have the shelf space to take down a good portion of these auctions. If there isn't enough retail/institutional demand, it will lead to not only a crappy sale but major concerns to the street that there is now no backstop, at all, to any sell-off. At which point, everyone will want to be the first one through the door and sell immediately, but to whom? If there isn't enough liquidity in the repo market to finance their positions, the firms would be unable to increase their inventory. We all saw repo shut down on the 2008 crisis. Wall St runs on money. . OVERNIGHT money. They lever up to inventory securities for trading. If they can't get overnight money, they can't purchase securities. And if they can't unload what they have, it means the buy-side isn't taking on more either. Accounts settle overnight. This includes things like payrolls and bill pay settlements. If a bank doesn't have enough cash to payout what its customers need to pay out, it borrows. At least one and probably more than one banks are insolvent. That's what's going on. First, it can't be one or two banks that are short. They'd simply call around until they found someone to lend. But they did that, and even at markedly elevated rates, still, NO ONE would lend them the money. That tells me that it's not a problem of a couple of borrowers, it's a problem of no lenders. And that means that there's no bank in the world left with any real liquidity. They are ALL maxed out. But as bad as that is, and that alone could be catastrophic, what it really signals is even worse. The lending rates are just the flip side of the coin of the value of the assets lent against. If the rates go up, the value goes down. And with rates spiking to 10%, how far does the value fall? Enormously! And if banks had to actually mark down the value of the assets to reflect 10% interest rates, then my god, every bank in the world is insolvent overnight. Everyone's capital ratios are in the toilet, and they'd have to liquidate. We're talking about the simultaneous insolvency of every bank on the planet. Bank runs. No money in ATMs, Branches closed. Safe deposit boxes confiscated. The whole nine yards, It's actually here. The scenario has tended to guide toward for years and years is actually happening RIGHT NOW! And people are still trying to say it's under control. Every bank in the world is currently insolvent. The only thing keeping it going is printing billions of dollars every day. Financial Armageddon isn't some far off future risk. It's here. Prepare accordingly. This fiat system has reached the end of the line, and it's not correct that fiat currencies fail by design. The problem is corruption and manipulation. It is corruption and cheating that erodes trust and faith until the entire system becomes a gigantic fraud. Banks and governments everywhere ARE the problem and simply have to be removed. They have lost all trust and respect, and all they have left is war and mayhem. As long as we continue to have a majority of braindead asleep imbeciles following orders from these psychopaths, nothing will change. Fiat currency is not just thievery. Fiat currency is SLAVERY. Ultimately the most harmful effect of using debt of undefined value as money (i.e., fiat currencies) is the de facto legalization of a caste system based on voluntary slavery. The bankers have a charter, or the legal *right*, to create money out of nothing. You, you don't. Therefore you and the bankers do not have the same standing before the law. The law of the land says that you will go to jail if you do the same thing (creating money out of thin air) that the banker does in full legality. You and the banker are not equal before the law. ALL the countries of the world; Islamic or secular, Jewish or Arab, democracy or dictatorship; all of them place the bankers ABOVE you. And all of you accept that only whining about fiat money going down in exchange value over time (price inflation which is not the same as monetary inflation). Actually, price inflation itself is mainly due to the greed and stupidity of the bankers who could keep fiat money's exchange value reasonably stable, only if they wanted to. Witness the crash of silver and gold prices which the bankers of the world; Russian, American, Chinese, Jewish, Indian, Arab, all of them collaborated to engineer through the suppression and stagnation of precious metals' prices to levels around the metals' production costs, or what it costs to dig gold and silver out of the ground. The bankers of the world could also collaborate to keep nominal prices steady (as they do in the case of the suppression of precious metals prices). After all, the ability to create fiat money and force its usage is a far more excellent source of power and wealth than that which is afforded simply by stealing it through inflation. The bankers' greed and stupidity blind them to this fact. They want it all, and they want it now. In conclusion, The bankers can create money out of nothing and buy your goods and services with this worthless fiat money, effectively for free. You, you can't. You, you have to lead miserable existences for the most of you and WORK in order to obtain that effectively nonexistent, worthless credit money (whose purchasing/exchange value is not even DEFINED thus rendering all contracts based on the null and void!) that the banker effortlessly creates out of thin air with a few strokes of the computer keyboard, and which he doesn't even bother to print on paper anymore, electing to keep it in its pure quantum uncertain form instead, as electrons whizzing about inside computer chips which will become mute and turn silent refusing to tell you how many fiat dollars or euros there are in which account, in the absence of electricity. No electricity, no fiat, nor crypto money. It would appear that trust is deteriorating as it did when Lehman blew up . Something really big happened that set off this chain reaction in the repo markets. Whatever that something is, we aren't be informed. They're trying to cover it up, paper it over with conjured cash injections, play it cool in front of the cameras while sweating profusely under the 5 thousands dollar suits. I'm guessing that the final high-speed plunge into global economic collapse has begun. All we see here is the ripples and whitewater churning the surface, but beneath the surface, there is an enormous beast thrashing desperately in its death throws. Now is probably the time to start tying up loose ends with the long-running prep projects, just saying. In other words, prepare accordingly, and Get your money out of the banks. I don't care if you don't believe me about Bitcoin. Get your money out of the banks. Don't keep any more money in a bank than you need to pay your bills and can afford to lose.











The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more













The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more

Hillary Clinton's Top Secret Files Revealed Here

Financial Armageddon -

The FBI released a summary of its file from the Hillary Clinton email investigation on Friday, showing details of Clinton's explanation of her use of a private email server to handle classified communications. The release comes nearly two months after FBI Director James Comey announced that although Clinton's handling of classified information was "extremely careless," it did not rise to the level of a prosecutable offense. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the next day that she would not pursue charges in the matter. "We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests," the FBI noted in a statement sent to reporters with links to the documents. The documents include notes from Clinton's July 2 interview with agents, as well as a "factual summary of the FBI's investigation into this matter," according to the FBI release. Throughout her interview with agents, Clinton repeatedly said she relied on the career professionals she worked with to handle classified information correctly. The agents asked about a series of specific emails, and in each case Clinton said she wasn't worried about the particular material being discussed on a nonclassified channel.





Pages