“Rich Dad Poor Dad” Author Robert Kiyosaki Claims He’s In $1.2 Billion In Debt
Best-selling Rich Dad Poor Dad author Robert Kiyosaki said he owes a whopping $1.2 billion tied to his extensive real estate holdings, the New York Post reported.
Kiyosaki made the admission during a wide-ranging interview on the “Get Rich Education” podcast.
“So, I’m a billion two in debt,” he said. “But I studied it since 1974… If you’re going to learn to use debt, you’d better take some education.”
However, Kim Kiyosaki, the financial self-help guru’s former wife, told Vanity Fair the figure was blown out of proportion.
“We have a lot of apartment houses with our partners,” Kim Kiyosaki said. “So technically, yes, we have all this debt.”
“He loves to say things that shock,” she added.
Vanity Fair reported that the pair’s individual investments are held in separate limited liability companies, insulating them from one another if one runs into trouble.
Robert Kiyosaki told the magazine the same structure is used to keep those investments apart.
“If it all comes to hell, you can talk to my attorney,” he said. “Firewalls – that’s the way the rich play the game.”
John Poole, who runs JPTD Partners, an acquisition consulting firm, told the Post that Kiyosaki’s strategy is far more risky than the best-selling author is leading on.
“I think there’s good debt and there’s bad debt, and then there’s $1.2 billion of debt, which you better know exactly what in the world you’re doing,” Poole explained. “Leverage works beautifully on the way up, and if it’s not continuing on that way up, then it’s like a chainsaw financially coming down.”
“It doesn’t go on forever. There has to be a payday, and be prepared for that payday, irrespective of the size,” he added. “[Kiyosaki] may call this the ‘Rich Dad debt,’ but for the average investor, it could turn out to be ‘Poor Dad bankruptcy’ really quickly.”
Solar power has just become the single largest electricity capacity source in China, toppling coal in a landmark achievement of the Chinese renewable energy rollout.
Solar power capacity in China stood at 1,286 gigawatts (GW) at the end of July, Chinese media cited the country’s National Energy Administration as saying on Tuesday.
Thus, solar capacity accounted for 31.5% of total installed power generation in China as of July 31.
In July, Chinese authorities said that China would have more installed solar power capacity than coal-fired generation capacity as early as this quarter.
As of the end of June, solar power capacity stood at 1,274 GW, just below the total coal-fired installed capacity of 1,275 GW.
The solar capacity has now risen to 1,286 GW, exceeding coal as the single biggest electricity capacity.
Official Chinese data showed earlier in July that the share of coal in China’s electricity output fell in the first half of 2026 to below 50% for the first time on record, in a landmark achievement of the Chinese policy to boost non-fossil power sources.
The share of coal averaged 49.7% of China’s total electricity output in the first half of this year, official data showed.
As the share of coal slipped, electricity generation from renewable energy rose by about 9% from a year earlier, according to the data from China’s National Energy Administration (NEA).
Renewable energy accounted for 41.2% of China’s total electricity generation in the first half of 2026, with wind and solar combined generating almost 25% of the total power output.
Despite the milestone of reducing coal power output to below 50% of total generation for the first time ever, China continues to rely on coal for power for industry and to maintain the reliability of the power grids.
Moreover, the renewable energy boom has slowed in recent months amid policy changes, while grid constraints and rising coal-fired generation have led to soaring curtailment rates of solar and wind power generation.
‘Daddy’s Savings Account’: Two More NYC-DSA Leaders Caught Living The Capitalist Dream
A pair of New York City’s leading Democratic Socialists live in Brooklyn apartments that would be pure fantasy for the working-class Americans they claim to champion, according to the New York Post, the latest installment in a running audit of the personal real estate of the organization that put Zohran Mamdani in Gracie Mansion.
The report lands less than two weeks after the Post revealed that NYC-DSA co-chair Gustavo Gordillo, a Yale-trained sculptor who has billed himself as a “union electrician,” lives in a $1.5 million Bed-Stuy townhouse bought and renovated by his parents’ LLC, a disclosure that has since earned the property a Department of Buildings stop-work order and a $2,500 fine for permitless renovations. That makes it three for three among the group’s top brass.
First is Julie Swoope, who chairs the far-left group’s steering committee and in 2021 purchased a one-bedroom co-op outright, just blocks from Prospect Park, for $510,000. The listing touted skyline views and “great closet space.”
Swoope’s family background does little to reinforce a working-class narrative. Her mother, artist Gail Cunningham Swoope, spent three years traveling aboard a live-aboard sailboat and belonged to the New Smyrna Beach Boat and Ski Club, according to an obituary reviewed by the Post.
Next up is Olivia Gonzalez Killingsworth, the group’s labor coordinator, elected in 2025, who runs her own bookkeeping business and is also an actor and singer, according to her website. Killingsworth sold an Upper West Side triplex in a brownstone building on September 12, 2022, for $2.4 million. The two-bedroom, three-bathroom unit sits a block from Central Park.
Killingsworth did not buy that property on the open market. Akin to many champagne socialists, she inherited the unit from her aunt Elizabeth, who died in 2018, and sold it alongside relatives.
Just two days later, on September 14, 2022, Killingsworth closed on a one-bedroom apartment in Brooklyn for $521,000, completing a sequence in which an inherited brownstone near Central Park was liquidated for millions and replaced, almost immediately, with another New York apartment.
“Once again we’re finding out why DSA actually stands for Daddy’s Savings Account. Selling a multimillion-dollar Manhattan Triplex to go play pretend bohemian with your rich comrades in Brooklyn is a luxury working-class New Yorkers will never have,” New York City Councilwoman Vickie Paladino (R-Queens) said in a statement to the Post.
Iranian state media is saying that the military retaliation is ongoing, with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force announcing that it launched a heavy ballistic missile attack targeting the US Marine barracks at Camp Titin, located near the Gulf of Aqaba in Jordan – which is at a significant distance, in the country’s far southwest corner. State media sources further detail:
According to the IRGC, the strike destroyed multiple military installations and attack helicopters, inflicting heavy casualties on U.S. forces. The operation was executed as the second wave of retaliatory actions under the code name “Ya Rasul Allah.”
And more via state WANA News Agency: “The IRGC stated that the action was carried out in retaliation for a U.S. strike on a residential home during a wedding ceremony in Sirik, which resulted in nearly 50 civilians killed or injured, including children.”
Iranian claims of US casualties will as usual be hard to verify, and the Pentagon has yet to give any confirmation or assessment.
In the wake of the US CENTCOM campaign, which may still be ongoing, Iran’s Hormozgan grid is under blackout. Further damage is likely to be assessed and publicized in the coming hours.
Initial unconfirmed footage now widely circulating of alleged IRGC attack on Jordan base…
Footage of an Iranian medium-range ballistic missile hitting a target near Aqaba, Jordan moments ago. pic.twitter.com/OTRmWBiuXL
Iran is already hitting back, according to some early reports of what looks to be their latest retaliation, despite President Trump having earlier warned the Islamic Republic will be hit harder if it responds.
“If the failed Nation of Iran retaliates for this very justified attack, they will be hit again at a much harder and higher level, but it will not be the biggest attack of them all, that is waiting in the wings and, when it is over, there will be very little left of the Islamic Republic of Iran!” he stated earlier.
The White House indicated it is focused on taking out IRGC targets. But this has triggered the expected reaction:
Fars: Some Arab sources report that an explosion was heard in Jordan; several explosions were heard from American bases in Jordan
IRGC says US attacks will tighten the lock on the Strait of Hormuz
Explosion heard in Erbil, Iraq, reports Fars
The last tit-for-tat instances also saw US bases in Jordan targeted.
One Atlantic Council analyst points out the obvious – today’s action is yet another indication that the administration still does not understand how the Iranian government and leadership thinks (unless the intent is actual runaway escalation). Danny Citrinowicz writes:
Threatening Tehran with even more devastating strikes if it retaliates is unlikely to prevent an Iranian response. In fact, it may do the opposite. From Tehran’s perspective, failing to respond to a direct U.S. attack would undermine the very deterrence equation Iran has spent months trying to establish. The Iranian leadership believes it must demonstrate that American military action carries a price. That means Iran is likely to retaliate and it may even conclude that a broader or more painful response is necessary precisely to rebuild deterrence against future U.S. attacks.
This is the fundamental problem with Washington’s approach: it assumes that sufficiently strong threats will convince Iran to back down. But Tehran may draw exactly the opposite conclusion, meaning that backing down under threat would invite additional American strikes. Threats will not solve this problem. If Washington wants to prevent another cycle of retaliation and counter-retaliation, it needs a political strategy for ending the confrontation. Otherwise, each side will continue using force to restore deterrence after the previous round — creating an escalation cycle that becomes increasingly difficult to control.
The latest Pentagon leaks to the Washington Post happened days ago, and now this:
Looks like the high-level Pentagon leaks and resignations of the past week were meant to forestall or prevent exactly what’s happening now. Didn’t work of course. There are no checks on power, unless Israel gets upset. We don’t even have an opposition party to speak of. https://t.co/5m1DaLirOg
The United States military says it is striking targets in Iran over attempted attacks on shipping as Iranian media reports explosions in Asaluyeh, Jiroft, Bandar Abbas, Qeshm Island, Konarak, Chabahar, Jask, Sirik and Lavan.
Iran’s army and IRGC promise the US will regret and face “severe punishment” for the aggression.
US President Donald Trump says “if the failed Nation of Iran retaliates for this very justified attack, they will be hit again at a much harder and higher level”.
Trump: ‘Large & Powerful Strikes’ in ‘Retaliation’ For Mining Hormuz Strait
Confirmation from the President, describing these new airstrikes as ongoing and “large and powerful”… He added that this is retaliation for the Iranians mining the Strait of Hormuz. The full Truth Social post:
Notably he is warning the Iranians will get hit again “much harder” if they don’t cooperate with Washington demands.
Early reports of US Strikes on Southern Iran Send Oil Soaring
Rare US strikes against Iran in the middle of US trading hours? Bold move if so. Some breaking headlines:
REPORTS OF BLASTS ACROSS IRAN’S SOUTHERN REGIONS: STATE TV
PENTAGON UNLEASHES FRESH ATTACKS On SOUTHERN IRAN
Al Arabiya: ‘DEFENSIVE’ BOMBING — source to Faytuks
EXPLOSIONS REPORTED IN KONARAK IN SOUTHEASTERN IRAN: FARS
US FORCES BEGAN STRIKING IRGC TARGETS IN IRAN AT 12PM ET TODAY
And from Al Hadath: “Explosions heard east of Bandar Abbas and Qeshm Island; Five explosions heard in Qeshm and four near the Strait of Hormuz.” CENTCOM has confirmed:
Today at 12 p.m. ET, U.S. forces began striking Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) targets in Iran. The strikes follow recent attempted attacks by the IRGC against commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and against American service members deployed to the region.
Confirmation of the attacks also from the Iranians:
The Deputy Governor for Security and Law Enforcement of Sistan and Baluchestan Province says four projectiles hit the counties of Chabahar and Konarak, Iranian news agency, IRNA, reports.
General Ali Khalil Abadi confirmed the attacks stating: “Expert investigations are underway to determine the details of the incident, potential damages, and further information.”
Oil prices shooting up on the new apparent ‘shoot-up’, which has been previewed in various reports this week. Trump is now pulling the trigger on Hegseth’s plan, it seems:
WTI nears $90…
US attacks on Iran have almost always come in nighttime and overnight hours – and typically only after US market hours close, so a daytime attack is very rare indeed…
Trump is so confident that Bessent can continue suppressing crude oil prices that now is attacking Iran in the middle of US trading hours – bad mistake, very bad
Bessent Says Hormuz Will Be “Worthless Piece of Water” In Two Years
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told the audience at the Group of 20 finance ministers’ meeting in Asheville, North Carolina, that Iran’s ability to weaponize the Strait of Hormuz will be reduced to zero because “oil will be going through pipelines across the land.”
“Iranians are trying to use the Strait of Hormuz as a chokepoint. It’s not a chokepoint for the US, but it is for many other countries. That will be bypassed in 2 years. In 2 years, the Strait of Hormuz will be a worthless piece of water. The oil will be going through pipelines across the land,” Bessent said.
Bessent on Iran:
Iranians are trying to use the Strait of Hormuz as a chokepoint.
It’s not a chokepoint for the US, but it is for many other countries.
That will be bypassed in 2 years. In 2 years, the Strait of Hormuz will be a worthless piece of water.
Bessent’s comments this morning should come as no surprise to readers, since we’ve detailed the existing pipelines that bypass Hormuz and the new pipeline projects planned by allied Gulf producers.
However, these new ‘alternative energy route’ initiatives are wrought with an array of unknowns – especially in terms of security and infrastructure/construction protection in an obviously volatile region, cooperation among transit states (in overland routes), as well as immense cost notwithstanding. For but one recent headline example:
And with both these named countries coming out of recent decades-long ‘forever wars’, and with especially Syria still being largely destroyed and fragmented, efforts to bring to fruition Bessent’s anticipated bypass system “across the land” – as he says – will more likely be something that drags on far longer than the Trump administration itself is in power.
Also read Goldman’s latest energy flow data through the Hormuz (here).
Pezeshkian: We’ll Return to Ceasefire if US Does
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Tuesday reiterated his country’s willingness to return to talks with the US, but made clear that Washington must return to its prior commitments made.
“I state explicitly that if the United States returns to its commitments under the … memorandum of understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran will immediately take reciprocal action,” Pezeshkian said on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.
It is significant that he’s there at the Kyrgyzstan-hosted summit in person, receiving a welcome from the likes of Putin, Xi, Erdogan, the UN’s Guterres, and others.
Pezeshkian still blasted the US for “reneging on its commitments” under the agreement, which unraveled in June – leading to various weeks of sporadic tit-for-tat attacks – the latest which occurred just at the start of this week.
President Trump yesterday told reporters in the Oval Office that there will be a “response” to the Iranian attacks, but also cautioned that this would not mean a return to full-scale war.
US officials have talked about “mowing the grass” with a series of indefinite strikes, while ironically having an aversion to anyone applying the label “forever war”.
Two oil supertankers were struck by unknown projectiles while transiting the Strait of Hormuz early Tuesday, signaling yet another sharp escalation in hostilities along the world’s most critical energy chokepoint.
The attacks follow President Trump’s warning Monday that additional strikes against Iran remain possible. Traders are pricing in a further war risk premium, pushing Brent crude futures above $92 a barrel, while US diesel crack spreads have breached the critical $100-a-barrel threshold.
Maritime security consultant Marisks reports that Saudi shipping giant Bahri’s VLCC Sidr was hit northeast of Khasab, Oman. The Sinokor-operated Senegal Prosperity was reportedly struck by three projectiles farther east. Both tankers were exiting the maritime chokepoint.
UK Maritime Trade Operations separately confirmed that a tanker completing an outbound transit of Hormuz reported three projectile strikes but did not identify the vessel.
Brent crude futures ripped higher during Asian and European trading on the news, with the benchmark firmly above $92 as of 0600 ET.
More US Strikes on Table, Trump Warns
“President Donald Trump warned Monday that further strikes are possible, pushing Brent back above $91/bbl and driving another bear-steepening move across global bond markets,” UBS analyst George Redman wrote earlier.
US diesel crack spreads were above $100 as of 0600 ET.
As we’ve extensively detailed, the energy crisis is not necessarily in crude itself but in refined products. Gulf diesel and gasoline shipments have declined amid disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, while damage to Russian energy infrastructure from Ukrainian one-way attack drones has created a perfect storm in global refining markets in late summer.
“Rising strikes on refineries in the Middle East and Russia have further constrained already-stretched global refining capacity, pushing refined-products margins to new highs,” Struyven and Yulia Zhestkova Grigsby wrote in the note, adding, “Diesel remains at the epicenter of the rally.”
Struyven and his team estimate that global refinery runs are down 7 million barrels per day from last year and have averaged nearly 6 million barrels per day below seasonal norms since March, around the time the US launched Operation Epic Fury and Ukraine ramped up one-way drone attacks against Russia’s energy infrastructure.
Meanwhile, there may be some diplomatic traction in the Gulf area, with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian saying on state TV: “I state unequivocally that should the US return to its commitments under the aforementioned Memorandum of Understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran will also take reciprocal action immediately.”
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s “Operation Economic Outcast” is also ramping up as the Trump administration deploys sanctions to pressure Tehran into submission.
More Latest Developments
via Newsquawk…
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Baghaei said Europe cannot claim strategic autonomy while following Washington’s orders, stressing that true autonomy means making independent decisions.
Pakistan’s Deputy PM and Foreign Minister met with Iran’s Foreign Minister Araghchi in an informal manner in Bishek at the holding room of the SCO Council of Head of States, according to journalist Anas Mallick.
Gulf Corporation Council condemned Iran’s attacks on Jordan, saying they pose a direct threat to the security and stability of the region, according to Al Jazeera.
Yemeni armed forces targeted early on Tuesday the bases of Saudi and Emirati mercenaries in Al Makha and Al Khuwakh located in the southwest of the country, according to IRIB.
Hapag-Lloyd’s (HLAG GY) CEO said it is reasonable to expect the Strait of Hormuz will remain blocked for the foreseeable future.
The U.S. military has no plans to send troops or other personnel to polling places during November’s midterm elections, the top U.S. general has said.
Gen. Dan Caine, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was responding to Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), who had asked him and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth in an Aug. 18 letter to confirm they won’t send troops to polls.
Caine wrote in response that state and local officials retain responsibility for overseeing election administration and security.
“The Joint Force has no plans to send Federal military personnel or Federalized members of the National Guard to polling places during the 2026 elections,” Caine wrote.
“Likewise, the Joint Force has no plans to use such personnel to seize ballots, voting machines, or other election-related material.”
Caine also said that he had not received, nor did he expect to receive, “any unlawful order” concerning the role of the Joint Force in the November midterm elections.
In 2020, Gen. Mark Milley, then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, responded to a similar letter from Slotkin, then a congresswoman.
“I believe deeply in the principle of an apolitical U.S. military,” Milley wrote. “In the event of a dispute over some aspect of the elections, by law U.S. courts and the U.S. Congress are required to resolve any disputes, not the U.S. military.”
The United States is set to hold midterm elections in November, which will decide which party controls Congress for the next two years, with all 435 House seats and one-third of Senate seats up for election.
Earlier this year, then-White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said President Donald Trump had not discussed any “formal plans” to deploy Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents at polling places during the midterm elections, but declined to rule out the presence of federal agents near voting sites.
Federal law prohibits the government from deploying troops at locations holding general or special elections “unless such force be necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States,” according to 18 U.S. Code § 592, and bars any sort of interference in elections by armed forces. ICE agents are civilian law-enforcement officers and are not covered by the same prohibitions that apply to the armed forces, although other laws still limit intimidation or interference at polling places.
“I can’t guarantee that an ICE agent won’t be around a polling location in November,” Leavitt told reporters on Feb. 5. “But what I can tell you is I haven’t heard the president discuss any formal plans to put ICE outside of polling locations. It’s a disingenuous question.”
Leavitt stepped down from her role in late August, citing the need to focus on her family following the birth of her second child.
Slotkin introduced legislation on June 18 to prevent the deployment of military forces and federal agents at polling places during the midterm elections.
The bill would require the president to provide Congress with “intel, legal justification, and evidence” showing that state or local authorities are not capable of handling a threat on their own at least 48 hours before sending federal forces to polling sites, according to a statement from Slotkin’s office.
Trump Admin Urges SCOTUS To Step In On Military Trans Ban
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to uphold its ban on transgender troops serving in the military, appealing a lower court ruling that has, for now, blocked enforcement against service members already in uniform.
The petition targets a June decision by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals finding the ban probably violates the constitutional rights of transgender troops already serving. The decision claimed that the ban “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender.” That ruling barred the Pentagon from enforcing the policy against those specific plaintiffs while their case works through the courts. The administration maintains the policy regulates a medical condition – gender dysphoria – rather than transgender status, and therefore needs only a rational connection to military readiness to survive review.
The June ruling was 2-1 and split the baby: it blocked the Pentagon from discharging the currently serving plaintiffs while leaving the ban on new transgender recruits fully in place. Judges Robert Wilkins (an Obama appointee) and Judith Rogers (a Clinton appointee) formed the majority. Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee and the panel’s lone Republican nominee, dissented: “because the plaintiffs are service members not civilians, and because we are judges not generals, I respectfully dissent.” The Constitution, Walker wrote, assigns that authority to Congress and the Commander in Chief. Notably, a different D.C. Circuit motions panel had ruled the opposite way in December – letting the Pentagon enforce the ban, 2-1 – meaning the same courthouse has now gone both directions depending on which three judges drew the case. Hegseth’s response to the June loss was four words: “See you at SCOTUS.”
The administration wants the justices to take the case now, before trial – its petition calls the June ruling “gravely erroneous” – rather than let a preliminary injunction, in place in some form since March 2025, run all the way to a two-week trial set for January. That posture has become familiar this year, with the Department of War repeatedly asking the high court to let its personnel decisions stand while litigation over their legality plays out.
The Justice Department’s Supreme Court filing describes the Pentagon’s authority to decide who serves as a “matter of exceptional importance,” language that puts military judgment, not the lower courts’ read of the evidence, at the center of the case.
Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, claimed the administration “wants the Supreme Court to rush in and bless the expulsion of proven, decorated soldiers before a single court has issued a final judgment.”
The policy traces back to an executive order Trump signed shortly after taking office. It states that “adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual’s sex conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle.”
“We will get transgender ideology the hell out of our military. It’s going to be gone,” Trump told House Republicans the day he signed the executive order during a retreat at his Doral golf resort in Miami.
Pete Hegseth turned that order into policy in February 2025.
Hegseth’s memo reasoned that troops who experience symptoms of gender dysphoria “cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for Military Service.” He has since folded the ban into a broader push to strip “woke” policy out of the armed forces.
The population at issue is small but not trivial: the Pentagon’s own estimate put roughly 4,240 troops with a gender dysphoria diagnosis among a force of about two million, and around 1,000 self-identified for voluntary separation when Hegseth’s 2025 deadline hit.
NCLR and GLAD Law filed the underlying case, Talbott v. United States, in January 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, arguing that the Department of War’s transgender policy violates the Constitution and discriminates against transgender troops.
The court has scheduled a trial for January 2027, but the Department of War wants the ban enforced against the plaintiffs before then. The justices already weighed in on this policy once before. They allowed the ban to take effect last year in a separate challenge, while that earlier litigation proceeded, a result that suggests a majority already leans toward giving the Pentagon the ability to set its own military readiness standards.
The ruling under appeal covers narrower ground – for now. It protects only the troops who brought this specific suit. But on June 30, District Judge Ana Reyes – whose original injunction called the ban “soaked with animus and dripping with pretext” – certified the case as a class action covering every transgender person serving or seeking to enlist since January 2025, a maneuver designed to route around the Supreme Court’s ruling last year curtailing nationwide injunctions. Two months later, the administration was at the high court’s door. If the plaintiffs win at the January trial, the remedy no longer stops at 29 names.
“Joe Biden allowed trans insanity to run rampant in our military,” White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales said in a statement. “President Trump restored lethality and readiness to our warfighters.” She added, “The United States military is the greatest in the world, and President Trump is keeping it that way by focusing on elite readiness standards – not DEI or woke gender ideology.”
Whether the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case will determine how long the lower courts’ preliminary read of the Constitution can override the Pentagon’s own judgment about who meets its strict standards of military readiness.
The word capitalism was coined in the 1700s. The definition was vague. It generally meant “private property traded freely” or “free markets.” However, most non-totalitarian countries had free markets, and these countries in Europe and elsewhere were not particularly wealthy. Their rural people were paupers living off the land, even in England, France, and the U.S. at our founding.
We generally regard capitalism as creating wealth, but free markets are not what created the enormous wealth that occurred in the United States. I knew that and studied our economic history to find out: If it was not free markets, what was it? What specifically were the mechanics of “our capitalism” that created such wealth?
I found the answer. However, I also learned that capitalism cannot be taught without properly defining wealth.
Wealth of a nation is its amount of usable goods. I use the term usable goods to exclude paintings and other speculative items. Poverty is a lack of usable goods, such as clothes or food. A large supply of usable goods brings prices down and reduces poverty. We became wealthy because we produced an enormous amount of usable goods. But how did that happen?
Usable goods are created by factories. It is not the amount we pay factory workers that is important; it is the millions of hammers, shoes, and vehicles they produce that create wealth. Farmers and utility workers can be included with factory workers who produce usable goods for millions of people.
Cyrus McCormick’s reaper would supply a large amount of food, but sales were difficult and slow. The reaper would break down on farms far away. McCormick had difficulty traversing the country making repairs and sales. He solved these problems by inventing a unique idea of setting up distributors. He shared significant profit with the distributors. They stocked the product locally, performed repairs, and made sales. Sales grew rapidly, and McCormick Reapers were supplied throughout the country. The United States became an exporter of food.
Here is the key to capitalism’s success: When farmers tried to buy direct from McCormick, he refused and made them buy from their respective distributor.
Other manufactures, of home goods, saw McCormick’s success and not only set up distributors, but added another discount to include retailers. Again, customers were sent back to the retailers. Retailing became a very profitable business. In the 1850s, general stores appeared in nearly every town.
It was not greed that made capitalism successful; it was nearly the opposite. It was the sharing of profits with all who sold the product.
Prior to this, women made their own soap, household goods, and clothes and tended their own crops. Men planted crops, hand-forged steel tools, and built what they needed. Rather than make their own goods, people began to buy them at a local store. Rural couples were unshackled from the centuries-old life of paupers.
Rural couples had been purchasing limited goods from peddlers who occasionally passed through their valley. Or they bought goods from catalogues. Returns of goods was an enormous problem, and single sales limited mass production at the factories, which kept prices high.
When couples found they could buy any goods they wanted at a general store, demand for home goods exploded. Prices for household goods and farm equipment fell due to the resulting mass production. Farm families soon found buyers for their excess farm produce, and those profits were spent on fast-declining prices of home goods. Men could afford farm equipment, and women bought dresses rather than made them. Rural people and the merchants became wealthy. America soon became known as the “land of opportunity.”
Incomes were rising while prices steadily fell for decades, up to and including the Roaring Twenties. Introduction of the income tax reversed the trend. In the 1930s, the lowest income tax bracket was raised to 24 percent and the highest income bracket to 94 percent.
Capitalism is not simply free markets. We are not free to bargain for the price of milk in a store. We are not free to bargain with the factory. The epitome of free markets are barter societies in the Middle East. They are free to bargain with the retailer and the factory. High-volume factories cannot survive in a barter society, and those societies are mired in poverty as a result.
Capitalism is a self-perpetuating economic system designed to increase sales using a structure of profits for all who sell the product, and those profits are protected by the factories. That is what created millions of usable goods, reduced prices, reduced poverty, and created our great wealth.
As Diesel Crack Explodes Higher, DNB Warns Beijing Has “Little Reason” To Rescue The West
Bloomberg’s NYMEX one-month heating-oil/crude spread, tracked on the Terminal as the HOCL1 Index, breached $100 per barrel early Tuesday before surging to nearly $106 by late morning.
The historic blowout is a major warning that refinery outages in Russia (read Goldman’s latest diesel warning), restrictions on industrial fuel exports, and continued disruptions through the Strait of Hormuz are deepening a crisis concentrated in finished fuels rather than in crude availability.
The latest snapshot of the worldwide refined-products squeeze came Tuesday morning from Kelly Chen, a senior economist at DNB Carnegie specializing in China, emerging markets, and energy markets.
Chen noted that China is one of the few countries with enough spare refining capacity to provide meaningful relief to the increasingly strained global market.
However, Chen pointed out that Beijing appears to have little economic or strategic incentive to rescue Western fuel markets.
“Some clients ask us if China can be a potential source of relief for the product markets,” the senior economist wrote in the note.
She continued, “As product exports through the Strait of Hormuz remain heavily disrupted and Ukrainian attacks have constrained Russian refining, China is one of the few regions with room to materially raise refinery throughput and exports quickly.”
“Beijing did increase its refined product export quotas in July, but they remain well below 2025 levels. The question is whether the authorities have an incentive to raise product exports further,” she said.
Chen argued that China is unlikely to rescue global diesel markets, writing, “If US pressure forces China to reduce or halt purchases of Iranian oil, China would have to either compete more aggressively for scarce crude oil barrels or draw further on its own strategic inventories. Either option would weaken China’s own energy security to ease a shortage elsewhere. China has already tapped its own buffers to absorb the disruption to crude oil and may not have appetite to do much more. Furthermore, high road-fuel prices could boost global demand for Chinese electric vehicles/energy technologies. Thus, until crude oil supplies become less disrupted, we suspect Chinese authorities have little reason to significantly raise product exports.”
Republican committees have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to allow them access to lowest-rate television ads before the November midterms after a federal appeals court ruled that only candidates are entitled to the special campaign rate required by law.
The emergency application by the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), which was docketed on Aug. 31, has been presented to Chief Justice John Roberts. Roberts may act on it by himself, or he may refer it to the full court.
Roberts has directed the respondents – former Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio); Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.); former North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat; and Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet (D-Mich.) – to file a response to the application by midday on Sept. 3. Brown, Ossoff, and Cooper are currently running for the Senate; Rivet is seeking reelection to the House.
The NRCC and NRSC view the matter as urgent because Sept. 4 is the first day of the 60-day period before the Nov. 3 midterm elections, when federal law requires broadcasters to sell candidates airtime at their cheapest rate. They are asking the Supreme Court to put the appeals court ruling on hold before that window opens. If the high court does not do so, they say they will have to pay full freight for the rest of the campaign cycle, and that stations have already begun to cancel the cheaper reservations they previously made.
The federal Communications Act provides that in the 45 days before a primary election and 60 days before a general election, broadcasters must charge legally qualified candidates no more than the lowest rate offered to their most favored customers. This is known as the Lowest Unit Rate rule. The rule does not apply to streaming and social media ads.
In March of this year, the staff of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) Media Bureau issued an interpretive guidance reminding both television and radio broadcasters about the rule. The public notice reiterated that favorable rates must be provided to “authorized committees that engage in joint fundraising with legally qualified candidates” and to “advertisements that qualify as coordinated expenditures.”
The respondents appealed the notice to the full FCC, and when it failed to rule, they argued that it amounted to constructive denial of the appeal and took the matter to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
They argued that the Communications Act requires the cheap airtime rate be given to candidates, not political parties. They also said that when a party buys an ad that a candidate approves, it is the party spending its own money – not the candidate, and if the candidate rate still applied, it would constitute an illegal gift to the candidate’s campaign.
A panel of the appeals court agreed with the respondents, voting 2-1 to vacate the notice.
The panel held that the lowest unit charge applies only to a legally qualified candidate, not to party-coordinated ads and joint fundraising committee ads with non-candidate members. The panel also determined it had jurisdiction, or authority, to hear the case even though the full FCC had not yet completed reviewing the notice.
A dissenting judge said the court should not have reviewed the guidance while it was pending at the FCC and that barring parties from the discount rate restricted political speech on the eve of an election.
The NRCC and NRSC said in the application that the Fourth Circuit erred and that its decision is hurting the two committees.
“In the midst of election season, a divided Fourth Circuit panel just rewrote longstanding rules about preferential broadcast rates for political ads,” at the behest of Democratic candidates “who said those rules favor their electoral opponents,” the Republican committees said.
The panel’s decision violates two jurisdictional principles and splits with multiple federal courts of appeals, while it “restrict[s] political speech in the sensitive period leading up to an election,” they said.
The Fourth Circuit ruling also ignores the Supreme Court’s recent instruction that courts should not treat incomplete agency work as final for purposes of filing an appeal, they added.
The two committees have budgeted tens of millions of dollars for ad purchases based on the rules that were in effect before the panel ruled, “but because of the Fourth Circuit’s decision, broadcast stations are already rescinding those rates,” they said.
The circuit court denied a request to pause its order on Aug. 27 and allowed its ruling to take effect the same day.
The NRCC and NRSC asked the Supreme Court justices to act before Sept. 4. The Trump administration weighed in to support the application.
Justice Department Solicitor General D. John Sauer is arguing that the respondents are appealing prematurely, lack standing to challenge the FCC notice, and have mischaracterized it, according to his brief.
The notice “does not grant favored treatment to one side or the other; instead, the notice’s interpretation offers the same benefit to all sides, including the challengers themselves,” he said.
Trump: ‘Large & Powerful Strikes’ in ‘Retaliation’ For Mining Hormuz Strait
Confirmation from the President, describing these new airstrikes as ongoing and “large and powerful”… He added that this is retaliation for the Iranians mining the Strait of Hormuz. The full Truth Social post:
Notably he is warning the Iranians will get hit again “much harder” if they don’t cooperate with Washington demands.
Early reports of US Strikes on Southern Iran Send Oil Soaring
Rare US strikes against Iran in the middle of US trading hours? Bold move if so. Some breaking headlines:
REPORTS OF BLASTS ACROSS IRAN’S SOUTHERN REGIONS: STATE TV
PENTAGON UNLEASHES FRESH ATTACKS On SOUTHERN IRAN
Al Arabiya: ‘DEFENSIVE’ BOMBING — source to Faytuks
EXPLOSIONS REPORTED IN KONARAK IN SOUTHEASTERN IRAN: FARS
US FORCES BEGAN STRIKING IRGC TARGETS IN IRAN AT 12PM ET TODAY
And from Al Hadath: “Explosions heard east of Bandar Abbas and Qeshm Island; Five explosions heard in Qeshm and four near the Strait of Hormuz.” CENTCOM has confirmed:
Today at 12 p.m. ET, U.S. forces began striking Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) targets in Iran. The strikes follow recent attempted attacks by the IRGC against commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and against American service members deployed to the region.
Confirmation of the attacks also from the Iranians:
The Deputy Governor for Security and Law Enforcement of Sistan and Baluchestan Province says four projectiles hit the counties of Chabahar and Konarak, Iranian news agency, IRNA, reports.
General Ali Khalil Abadi confirmed the attacks stating: “Expert investigations are underway to determine the details of the incident, potential damages, and further information.”
Oil prices shooting up on the new apparent ‘shoot-up’, which has been previewed in various reports this week. Trump is now pulling the trigger on Hegseth’s plan, it seems:
WTI nears $90…
US attacks on Iran have almost always come in nighttime and overnight hours – and typically only after US market hours close, so a daytime attack is very rare indeed…
Trump is so confident that Bessent can continue suppressing crude oil prices that now is attacking Iran in the middle of US trading hours – bad mistake, very bad
Bessent Says Hormuz Will Be “Worthless Piece of Water” In Two Years
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told the audience at the Group of 20 finance ministers’ meeting in Asheville, North Carolina, that Iran’s ability to weaponize the Strait of Hormuz will be reduced to zero because “oil will be going through pipelines across the land.”
“Iranians are trying to use the Strait of Hormuz as a chokepoint. It’s not a chokepoint for the US, but it is for many other countries. That will be bypassed in 2 years. In 2 years, the Strait of Hormuz will be a worthless piece of water. The oil will be going through pipelines across the land,” Bessent said.
Bessent on Iran:
Iranians are trying to use the Strait of Hormuz as a chokepoint.
It’s not a chokepoint for the US, but it is for many other countries.
That will be bypassed in 2 years. In 2 years, the Strait of Hormuz will be a worthless piece of water.
Bessent’s comments this morning should come as no surprise to readers, since we’ve detailed the existing pipelines that bypass Hormuz and the new pipeline projects planned by allied Gulf producers.
However, these new ‘alternative energy route’ initiatives are wrought with an array of unknowns – especially in terms of security and infrastructure/construction protection in an obviously volatile region, cooperation among transit states (in overland routes), as well as immense cost notwithstanding. For but one recent headline example:
And with both these named countries coming out of recent decades-long ‘forever wars’, and with especially Syria still being largely destroyed and fragmented, efforts to bring to fruition Bessent’s anticipated bypass system “across the land” – as he says – will more likely be something that drags on far longer than the Trump administration itself is in power.
Also read Goldman’s latest energy flow data through the Hormuz (here).
Pezeshkian: We’ll Return to Ceasefire if US Does
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Tuesday reiterated his country’s willingness to return to talks with the US, but made clear that Washington must return to its prior commitments made.
“I state explicitly that if the United States returns to its commitments under the … memorandum of understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran will immediately take reciprocal action,” Pezeshkian said on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.
It is significant that he’s there at the Kyrgyzstan-hosted summit in person, receiving a welcome from the likes of Putin, Xi, Erdogan, the UN’s Guterres, and others.
Pezeshkian still blasted the US for “reneging on its commitments” under the agreement, which unraveled in June – leading to various weeks of sporadic tit-for-tat attacks – the latest which occurred just at the start of this week.
President Trump yesterday told reporters in the Oval Office that there will be a “response” to the Iranian attacks, but also cautioned that this would not mean a return to full-scale war.
US officials have talked about “mowing the grass” with a series of indefinite strikes, while ironically having an aversion to anyone applying the label “forever war”.
Two oil supertankers were struck by unknown projectiles while transiting the Strait of Hormuz early Tuesday, signaling yet another sharp escalation in hostilities along the world’s most critical energy chokepoint.
The attacks follow President Trump’s warning Monday that additional strikes against Iran remain possible. Traders are pricing in a further war risk premium, pushing Brent crude futures above $92 a barrel, while US diesel crack spreads have breached the critical $100-a-barrel threshold.
Maritime security consultant Marisks reports that Saudi shipping giant Bahri’s VLCC Sidr was hit northeast of Khasab, Oman. The Sinokor-operated Senegal Prosperity was reportedly struck by three projectiles farther east. Both tankers were exiting the maritime chokepoint.
UK Maritime Trade Operations separately confirmed that a tanker completing an outbound transit of Hormuz reported three projectile strikes but did not identify the vessel.
Brent crude futures ripped higher during Asian and European trading on the news, with the benchmark firmly above $92 as of 0600 ET.
More US Strikes on Table, Trump Warns
“President Donald Trump warned Monday that further strikes are possible, pushing Brent back above $91/bbl and driving another bear-steepening move across global bond markets,” UBS analyst George Redman wrote earlier.
US diesel crack spreads were above $100 as of 0600 ET.
As we’ve extensively detailed, the energy crisis is not necessarily in crude itself but in refined products. Gulf diesel and gasoline shipments have declined amid disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, while damage to Russian energy infrastructure from Ukrainian one-way attack drones has created a perfect storm in global refining markets in late summer.
“Rising strikes on refineries in the Middle East and Russia have further constrained already-stretched global refining capacity, pushing refined-products margins to new highs,” Struyven and Yulia Zhestkova Grigsby wrote in the note, adding, “Diesel remains at the epicenter of the rally.”
Struyven and his team estimate that global refinery runs are down 7 million barrels per day from last year and have averaged nearly 6 million barrels per day below seasonal norms since March, around the time the US launched Operation Epic Fury and Ukraine ramped up one-way drone attacks against Russia’s energy infrastructure.
Meanwhile, there may be some diplomatic traction in the Gulf area, with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian saying on state TV: “I state unequivocally that should the US return to its commitments under the aforementioned Memorandum of Understanding, the Islamic Republic of Iran will also take reciprocal action immediately.”
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s “Operation Economic Outcast” is also ramping up as the Trump administration deploys sanctions to pressure Tehran into submission.
More Latest Developments
via Newsquawk…
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Baghaei said Europe cannot claim strategic autonomy while following Washington’s orders, stressing that true autonomy means making independent decisions.
Pakistan’s Deputy PM and Foreign Minister met with Iran’s Foreign Minister Araghchi in an informal manner in Bishek at the holding room of the SCO Council of Head of States, according to journalist Anas Mallick.
Gulf Corporation Council condemned Iran’s attacks on Jordan, saying they pose a direct threat to the security and stability of the region, according to Al Jazeera.
Yemeni armed forces targeted early on Tuesday the bases of Saudi and Emirati mercenaries in Al Makha and Al Khuwakh located in the southwest of the country, according to IRIB.
Hapag-Lloyd’s (HLAG GY) CEO said it is reasonable to expect the Strait of Hormuz will remain blocked for the foreseeable future.
