The Kremlin has issued yet more warnings following reports that the Biden administration could soon greenlight long-range attacks by Kiev forces on Russian territory using US-supplied arms.

Both the UK and Canada are on board, we reported earlier, and British Prime Minister Ken Starmer is visiting Washington where he’s directly lobbying Biden to jump on board and grant Zelensky’s urgent request to lift all restrictions on Western weaponry.

However, The New York Times suggests that saner minds are prevailing at this point. “President Biden’s deliberations with Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain about whether to allow Ukraine to attack Russia with long-range Western weapons were fresh evidence that the president remains deeply fearful of setting off a dangerous, wider conflict,” the publication writes.

Let’s hope this is the case, given this is arguably the most dangerous moment and decision-point of the war to date. Pentagon leadership has recently stressed that granting the permission for long-range strikes will do little strategically to change the battlefield, where Russian momentum has continually gained in eastern Ukraine.

Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov on Friday added to prior Kremlin warnings, telling Rossiya 24 channel that he fears American leadership and the people are under “illusion”.

He said they seem to think that “if there is a conflict, it will not spread to the territory of the United States of America.”

Antonov continued by stressing that Americans can’t hide from nuclear war if this unthinkable happens. “I am constantly trying to convey to them one thesis that the Americans will not be able to sit it out behind the waters of this ocean. This war will affect everyone, so we constantly say – do not play with this rhetoric,” Antonov stated according to state media translation. 

As for UK PM Starmer’s visit to Washington, The Wall Street Journal had earlier previewed that “While the final decision on Storm Shadow will be made by the U.K. government, British officials will ask for the Biden administration to weigh in because some components of the missiles are made in the U.S.”

But based on NSC spokesman John Kirby’s words as of Friday afternoon, Washington’s policy has not changed and no permission has yet been given to Ukraine.

Russian Ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov:

“We have said a hundred times that there can be no nuclear war between nuclear states, especially between the United States and Russia. And there will be no winners. But there is some kind of illusion here that if there is a… pic.twitter.com/fmeC6rCQPH

— Victor vicktop55 (@vicktop55) September 14, 2024

So far, Ukraine forces have pummeled sights across Russia with drones, but unleashing missiles in the area of Moscow oblast for example would take the war to a whole new level.

President Putin has warned that Russia would make no distinction between Ukraine forces and their NATO suppliers at that point. It won’t matter which pulled the trigger.

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Former President Donald Trump has said he plans to end taxes on overtime wages for individuals who work more than 40 hours a week if he is elected to the White House again.

Trump made the comments during a campaign rally in Tucson, Arizona on Sept. 12, telling the crowd that working class Americans deserve to “catch a break.”

“Today, I’m also announcing that as part of our additional tax cuts, we will end all taxes on overtime. You know what that means? Think of that,” the Republican said. “That gives people more of an incentive to work, it gives the companies a lot, it’s a lot easier to get the people.”

Trump said ending taxes on overtime wages would potentially generate a “whole new workforce” in the United States.

He went on to praise the hard work of police officers, nurses, factory workers, construction workers, truck drivers, and machine operators.

“The people who work overtime are among the hardest working citizens in our country, and for too long no one in Washington has been looking out for them,” he continued.

Trump did not provide further details as to how the tax policy would work.

Currently, overtime income—which is defined as nonexempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act—is taxed at the same rate as standard income, and any change to the tax law requires an act of Congress.

Elsewhere during the rally in Tucson, Trump repeated his promise to end taxes on tipped wages and eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits.

The Republican has said on multiple occasions that he plans to scrap both taxes immediately after taking office if he were to win the presidential election in November.

Impact of Harris, Trump Tax Policies

Under current law, tips are considered normal income and subject to standard income tax law.

Meanwhile, around 40 percent of Americans who receive Social Security payments have to pay federal income taxes on those benefits, according to the Social Security Administration.

This typically happens for Americans who have “other substantial income” in addition to their monthly benefits, including wages, earnings from self-employment, interest, dividends, and other taxable income, according to the agency.

Currently, under federal law, retired individuals who earn less than $25,000 per year, or $32,000 for married couples, pay no taxes on their Social Security payments.

Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for president, has also called for similar proposals such as scrapping taxes on tips and Social Security benefits in recent months.

According to a Sept. 10 analysis from the Tax Foundation, Harris’s tax policies would raise $2.2 trillion of tax revenue from corporations and $1.2 trillion from individuals from 2025 through 2034.

The “economic harm from Harris’s tax hikes would also greatly reduce the ability to address an emerging debt crisis,” according to the Tax Foundation.

The same foundation noted that Trump is yet to release a fully detailed plan regarding his tax proposals but has “floated several tax policy ideas.”

His proposed tax cuts would decrease federal tax revenue over the 10-year budget window by $6.1 trillion on a conventional basis and by $5.3 trillion on a dynamic basis, according to the non-profit.

“Overall, Trump’s policies would reduce distortions in one part of the tax system, namely income taxes, only to replace them with new distortions in another part of the tax system, namely tariffs,” the foundation wrote. “The combination of policies under consideration risks shrinking the economy and growing the debt.”

Jack Phillips contributed to this report.

Authored by MN Gordon via EconomicPrism.com,

“The wavelike movement affecting the economic system, the recurrence of periods of boom which are followed by periods of depression, is the unavoidable outcome of the attempts, repeated again and again, to lower the gross market rate of interest by means of credit expansion.  There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion.  The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved.”

– Ludwig von Mises, Human Action

Crank Up the Printing Press

Fed rate cuts are coming.  If you believe this will levitate your stock portfolio, you are in for a big disappointment.

The forthcoming collapse on Wall Street can be seen a country mile away.  But only by those with their eyes open.

Extreme stock market valuations.  Sky high prices.  An AI bubble that is running out of greater fools.  All the while, the economy is slipping into recession.

These factors, coupled with a behemoth government debt problem, are aligning for something much more than a run-of-the-mill bear market.  By our estimation a 50 percent top to bottom decline in the S&P 500 will be the minimum.  Practically speaking, if the stock market goes down by 50 percent, then up by 50 percent, you have not broken even.

When the economy contracts in earnest and stocks slip and slide, the Treasury, in concert with the Federal Reserve, will once again crank up the printing press.  In fact, the Fed is already oiling the gears in preparation for a 25-basis point rate cut later this month.

Yet dollar debasement can only go so far.  According to the Bureau of Labor Statics own inflation calculator, $1 today has the purchasing power that $0.03 had in 1913 – the year the Federal Reserve came into existence.  The dollar’s value has almost been completely destroyed over the last 111 years.  Workers and savers have been on the hook for this via the inflation tax.

Thus, the looming recession and stock market decline could be followed by a debt crisis and dollar crisis.  At that point, inflation will run amok – debasing both the dollar and society as a whole.

Money Supply Inflation

This is a tale that is repeated from time to time.  Overindebted governments, relying on over issuances of money and credit, destroy their currency and economy.  Revolutionary France.  Weimar Germany.  21st Century Zimbabwe.  And everything in between.

Intense money printing ruins the currency, which forces relative prices higher.  Ultimately the inflation turns hyper, where monthly inflation rates exceed 50 percent.  Societal chaos and human suffering then follow a similar trajectory.

The U.S., regrettably, is traversing a similar path as that which has resulted in disaster for other countries.  Out of control spending.  Authoritarian government.  Extreme wealth disparity.  Burgeoning social discord and discontent.  The U.S. isn’t somehow immune to a similar inflation disaster; it won’t be different, this time.

Some aspects, of course, will be different.  Rather than issuing higher and higher denominations of paper notes as has occurred during past episodes of hyperinflation, the Treasury and the Fed will merely flood the system with cheap credit.  The devaluation will make carrying cash impractical – it already has.

Zeroes will be added to the back of both consumer prices and credit card limits.  Then, as a solution to the inflation of its own making, the Fed will roll out a digital federal reserve note.  And from then on, all private transactions will be subject to government oversight.

For American’s trying to work, save, invest, and improve the lives and security of their families, we’ve entered a dangerous territory.  To head off the fate of inflationary madness, Congress needs to simply do one thing.  Stop spending, balance the budget, run a surplus, pay down the debt, and suffer the consequences of a multi-decade depression, as the debt is paid down or written off.

We don’t believe there’s a snowball’s chance in hell this will happen.  The track record of the U.S. government since the close of the Great Depression has been one of money supply inflation.  The consequences of this will come to a head during the next presidency.

Germany’s Evil Genius

Hyperinflation, in the simplest sense, causes the currency to become effectively worthless.  For example, in Weimar Germany most people were utterly destroyed by the hyperinflation.  Responsible people were punished for saving money.

Wage earners received worthless notes for their labor.  Before the hyperinflation was over the only redeeming value of stacks of money was its use as fire kindling.

But not everyone was destroyed by the Weimar hyperinflation.  Some people prospered to the extreme.

One of those people was a man named Hugo Stinnes.  

What’s interesting about Hugo Stinnes is that while most people were wiped out by the hyperinflation, his wealth grew and grew.  It grew so much that he became the richest man in Germany and earned the moniker the ‘inflation king.’ 

He was also called Germany’s evil genius.

The important thing to understand about Stinnes’ enormous wealth is that it wasn’t so much the result of what he did during the hyperinflation.  But what he did just prior.

Stinnes was born in Germany in 1870.  He was already rich long before 1920.  His family owned a coal mine and other industrial interests.

Still, Stinnes was a shrewd economic observer and experienced with international trade.  Seeing the excesses of Reichsbank president, Rudolf von Havenstein’s money printing already working its way through the economy following World War I, he loaded up on steel, shipping, railroad, and cargo lines.  What’s more, he borrowed heavily to pay for everything.

While the value of the Papermark gradually eroded following WWI.  It didn’t really start to lose value until 1921.  After that, its loss of value got exponentially worse.  Stinnes used the gradual period to prepare.

Lessons from the Past

Overall, Stinnes’ hyperinflation playbook was generally straight forward.  He used debt to load up on hard assets prior to the hyperinflation.  Then, after the hyperinflation, his hard assets retained their value, in real terms, while their price shot through the roof in nominal terms (relative to the currency).

What this meant is that the debts he owed in terms of the Papermark he borrowed in dropped to the point of being insignificant.  Hence, he was able to pay off his debts for practically nothing while retaining his hard assets and becoming filthy rich.

When the hyperinflation hit, the value of the Papermark money he borrowed was worth less and less and the hard assets he owned all increased in value, relative to the declining German currency.  The important lesson is that hard assets don’t lose their value during hyperinflation the same way that the currency does.

On the one hand, Stinnes’ hard assets were increasing in value relative to the Papermark while producing output of real value.  Simultaneously, the hyperinflation of the Papermark was decreasing the value of his Papermark debts.

By 1924, Stinnes was able to pay off his debt with worthless Papermarks.  At the same time, his assets had ballooned in value relative to the Papermark.  Thus, making Stinnes the richest man in Germany.

Then, as fate would have it, Stinnes abruptly died in Berlin on April 10, 1924, as a result of a gall bladder operation.

Here in the USA, in September 2024, we see signs of government induced hyperinflation on the horizon.  But, in between, are dark clouds.

What Would Hugo Do?

The Fed, after hiking and holding the federal funds rates at a range of 5.25 to 5.5 percent since July 27, 2023, has temporarily taken its monetary gas out of the economy.  The lag in the policy adjustments to when they filter through the economy are finally being realized – the economy is slowing.

While rate cuts will come later this month, there will, again, be a lag before their inflationary effects manifest.  This lag will be in the form of a recession and a declining stock market.  With this backdrop, if Hugo Stinnes were alive today, what would he do?

We suppose he would do what billionaire investor Warren Buffett is doing.

Buffett, like Stinnes, owns railroads and other businesses that offer high return on tangible capital.  But unlike Stinnes, Buffett is not loaded up with debt.

On the contrary, Buffett, through his company Berkshire Hathaway, has been selling stocks and building cash all year.  As of June 30, the most recent period reported, Buffett is sitting on a $277 billion pile of cash.

This contrast illustrates the difference between Fed Chair Jerome Powell today and Reichsbank president Rudolf von Havenstein circa 1921.  Powell understands the need for the economy to stall out before resuming the next great wave of money printing where Havenstein didn’t.

Extreme inflation may be coming to the USA.  But investors and speculators who wish to game it like Stinnes did over 100 years ago, by borrowing money to buy assets, are asking for trouble.  Like Buffett, we anticipate there will first be a shakeout.

Now is not the time to buy stocks on margin.  You’ll get wiped out.

Instead, as a little guy investor looking to protect his hard-earned grubstake, you want to own hard assets and shares of good businesses with a high return on tangible capital.

You also want to hold some cash and prepare yourself psychologically, so you have the gumption to deploy it when there’s blood in the streets.

*  *  *

[Have you ever heard of Henry Ford’s dream city of the South?  Chances are you haven’t.  That’s why I’ve recently published an important special report called, “Utility Payment Wealth – Profit from Henry Ford’s Dream City Business Model.”  If discovering how this little-known aspect of American history can make you rich is of interest to you, then I encourage you to pick up a copy.  It will cost you less than a penny.]

The first job after graduation is an essential stepping stone that can often define one’s future career path and opportunities. While today’s new grads are entering one of the strongest job markets in decades, the U.S. labor market has become increasingly competitive in the past couple of years post-pandemic.

While the pandemic boom led the unemployment rate to fall as low as 3.4%, it now stands at 4.3% as of July, which is still low by historical standards. Additionally, the ratio of job openings to unemployed individuals has dropped to 1.2, down from a peak of more than two in 2022.

With U.S. college graduates hunting for their first foray into America’s workforce, the graphic below, via Visual Capitalist’s Dorothy Neufeld, shows the best companies to work for according to new grads using data from Forbes.

Methodology of the Best Employers for New U.S. Grads

For the rankings, companies were assessed based on three years of survey results from more than 100,000 young professionals with under 10 years of work experience.

Organizations with 1,000 or more employees were rated based on the following criteria. In addition, respondents were asked if they would recommend working for their employer.

• Compensation

• Benefits

• Flexibility

• Working conditions

• Company image

• Inclusion

• Opportunities for advancement

The Best Companies for New Grads in 2024

Below, we show the best employers for new grads across 400 organizations analyzed:

Ranking first overall is Delta Air Lines, rated highly for its inclusion practices and corporate reputation.

As America’s most reliable airline, Delta provides a number of employee benefits such as 401(k) matching, family care benefits, flight discounts, and professional development initiatives. In addition, the company distributed $1.4 billion through profit sharing in early 2024, where employees are paid up to $1,200 per year by reaching operational goals.

In-N-Out Burger takes second spot, driven largely by its competitive compensation and career growth opportunities. On average, store managers at the iconic California chain make $180,000 in salary, roughly three times the industry average. Like Delta, the company offers profit-sharing plans.

American Express, ranked third, received high ratings in opportunities for advancement. The company is known for an enterprise career growth model that encourages employees to take ownership of their professional development. As part of this model, the company offers a wide range of training programs designed to strengthen leadership skills.

Ranking in eighth is Google, the top-ranking tech firm on the list. From cloud technical residencies to digital marketing programs, the company offers a number of initiatives for recent university graduates. Microsoft ranks in 12th, providing a two-year career development experience for new grads across roles ranging from technical sales to operations management.

To learn more about the best companies to work for in the U.S., check out this graphic ranking America’s best places to work at from 2020 to 2024.

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

In July of 1944, a year and some months before the official end to the Second World War, allied powers gathered at the Bretton Woods Hotel in New Hampshire to hammer out a new economic order that would dominate the world at war’s end.

The meeting alone expressed great confidence in a coming victory. They were not wrong.

As part of the new plan for the world, a new monetary system would take shape. It would be based in gold, with the dollar convertibility guaranteed at 1/35 an ounce. The right to convert would not be available to average people. It was something guaranteed by nation states and central banks alone, at least those allowed to participate.

In the early days of the conference, the New York Times (NYT) editorialized against the scheme. The pen behind the unsigned editorials was the great economist Henry Hazlitt, who would later gain fame for his book “Economics In One Lesson,” which became one of the best-selling economics books of the century. In fact, it still sells well today.

Hazlitt criticized the proposed new monetary system. He said that by making the dollar the world reserve currency, and guaranteeing convertibility into gold only by large trading nations, the new system could not last. This is because there was no mechanism to police nations’ fiscal and monetary policies. The new system would enable endless expansion of money and credit abroad without consequence. The United States would experience, eventually, a devastating gold outflow. At some point in the future, he predicted, the United States would have to suspend convertibility.

This is precisely what happened, not right away but eventually. In 1971, Richard Nixon stopped the system whereby the United States shipped out gold. He did so to save the system, and bring about a new one. The expectation was that gold would fall in price. The opposite happened. Eight years later, the price had reached $850. The people who bet against the monetary elites were the winners.

There is a backstory to Hazlitt’s writing at the NYT. His brilliant editorials against the Bretton Woods system appeared weekly, and were later collected in a book called “From Bretton Woods to World Inflation.” The publisher of the NYT at some point in 1944, just before the system was ratified, came to Hazlitt and said that the paper would change its editorial stance. It would need to favor and not oppose the new system. At that point, Hazlitt realized that his 10-year tenure at the paper was at an end. He packed up, went home, and started working on a new book that became “Economics in One Lesson.” Writing it took not even two weeks.

I’ve been visiting Hazlitt’s writing from this period as a way to understand the present moment. It’s clear that the elites in those days were setting up a new global machinery. In designing such a system—John Maynard Keynes from the UK was the primary influence—there were several moving parts. There was the monetary system as described above. There was to be a transaction clearing system administered by a new World Bank, the remnants of which survive in the Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) today. There was a financing system in the form of the International Monetary Fund. And there was a new trade system called the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which later became the World Trade Organization.

These four moving parts—money, clearing, lending, and trading—were designed to work together as if this entire world economy was a machine to be managed, which is precisely how Keynes thought of it. Hazlitt’s objection was that the system was too clever by half, because it could not account for market and political exigencies. It’s one thing for something to work on paper; it’s something else for it to work in reality.

He saw through the problem that the new system did nothing to discipline governments that were party to the deal. He predicted that all governments would take advantage of the opportunity to exchange in reckless fiscal and monetary policies while free riding against the rich nations that were guaranteeing the system against failure.

He was right about this eventually but, in the meantime, the world economy did take a new direction toward what was later called neoliberalism, a managed system that exalted freedom in international trade and fiscal and monetary liquidity above all else.

Why was the system set up this way? The reason is that an entire generation of what were known as enlightened diplomats had become convinced that depression and war (1930s and 1940s) stemmed from trade protectionism and too many monetary guardrails that prevented states from flooding the system in times of crisis.

In other words, the system of 1944 was established mainly to backwards fix what its architects saw as the main problems of the previous two decades. This is human nature. If you live through a house fire caused by an electrical spark, you are going to be extra careful about the soundness of wiring in the future. If your health has failed you for reasons of a bad diet, you are going to be more careful in the future to eat right. And so on. They were more focused on fixing old problems than anticipating new ones.

Thus did the world of the 1950s and 1960s proceed with these fixes in place. The results were spectacular by any historical standard, especially for the United States. But remember Hazlitt’s prediction that the new system would not provide discipline to states in the matter of fiscal and monetary policy. As it turned out, the leading offender in this regard was the United States, which embarked on the Vietnam War at the same time it blew out its provisions in the welfare state. That led to unsustainable economic tensions.

Meanwhile, the trading system that depended entirely on a gold-based settlement system started to flow only one way, which was out. That system broke down as the welfare-warfare state blew up, and finally Nixon put an end to it. In making that decision, he also made a choice to preserve the low-tariff global trading order over the monetary shackles that had hemmed in some element of monetary discipline.

With all limits now removed, inflation took its toll, exactly as Hazlitt predicted. The United States experienced three successive waves in the 1970s, each worse than the last. That excess was finally stopped with the reign of Paul Volcker at the Fed and the presidency of Ronald Reagan, who had promised to control the fiscal side. And yet: there was a Cold War to win, and the Reagan administration too had to make a choice between a balanced budget and its foreign-policy priorities.

Without marching through the policy errors of the following three decades, let us jump ahead to 2016 during a time when (as could have been predicted) the United States has lost vast amounts of its manufacturing sector to foreign competition due to the very system set up in the Nixon era, not to mention victory in the Cold War which opened up a new swath of the world to productive competition with the United States. The new president Donald Trump swore to end the problem, and how? By blowing up the GATT which had been newly labeled the World Trade Organization.

In other words, Trump took a different tact from Nixon: he sought to patch a trade problem with a very old-fashioned system that had been wholly rejected back in 1944. Again, Hazlitt predicted something exactly like this in his writings, as he explained that nations with undisciplined fiscal and monetary problems, operating in a world without domestic convertibility, are bound to suffer monetary outflows and a deprecation of their production base due to foreign competition.

As a result of Trump’s efforts, which were not reversed by the Biden administration, the system of 1944 now lies in ruins with governments around the world newly experimenting with regional trading systems, tariff policies, and even new systems of settlement that could someday unseat the dollar as the world-reserve currency.

In the meantime, the United States has a major problem. Without dramatic domestic reform, it simply cannot compete on the world stage. This is because the U.S. debt avalanche has assisted in boosting the industrial buildup around the world even as the high-value international dollar makes imports cheap and exports expensive with no settlement system in place. This not only leads to perpetual trade deficits but massively subsidizes imports over domestic goods.

In the last four years of inflation, the U.S. dollar has maintained its strength internationally while decaying domestically. As a result, imports have not suffered nearly as much in inflation as domestic goods, which only entrenches the problem.

(Data: Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED), St. Louis Fed; Chart: Jeffrey A. Tucker)

What we are watching now is the final unraveling of the system of 1944 in all its parts, including the tweak of 1971, which introduces grave dangers to the world of both depression and war. The way out of this predicament is not another cockamamie world order constructed by another globalist economic guru like Keynes.

We need a simple return to fiscal and monetary soundness. Above all else, the United States must get its own house in order, with balanced budgets and sound money, even if that means letting go of its imperial ambitions abroad. That is the best and probably only path to restarting the beautiful ambition of a free-trade world.

“Shock to the system,” Scottish meteorologist Scott Duncan wrote on X, adding, “Unusually strong cold is pouring south out of the Arctic into Europe right now. This is an ideal setup for deep fresh snow accumulations in the Alps and flooding in Central Europe.” 

Shock to the system 🥶

Unusually strong cold is pouring south out of the Arctic into Europe right now. This is an ideal setup for deep fresh snow accumulations in the Alps and flooding in Central Europe.

This is about as cold as it gets this early in September. pic.twitter.com/X8G5xSRADg

— Scott Duncan (@ScottDuncanWX) September 12, 2024

According to Bloomberg data, average temperatures across Austria reached nearly 80°F at the beginning of the month, with a sharp drop over the last two weeks, with temps expected to plunge into the mid-40s this weekend. 

Snow is disrupting travel across the Alps at higher altitudes. At lower altitudes, heavy rain is falling across Germany, Austria, and the Czech Republic. 

Here’s more from Bloomberg: 

Austrian railways halted trains between Salzburg and Klagenfurt due to snow, and issued a nationwide appeal to postpone travel. Snow is falling as low as 700 meters (2,300 feet), with as much as 200 centimeters (79 inches) forecast at high altitudes in the four days through Monday.

Less than a week after parts of Switzerland were baking in late-summer heat, up to 45 centimeters of snow is forecast for eastern regions above 1,600 meters. At the Aiguille du Midi, reached by France’s highest cable car in the resort of Chamonix, the temperature dropped to -16C (3.2F) on Friday.

Skier magazine Powder published snowy webcam footage from Zugspitze, Germany. 

More of the same in Kitzbühel, Austria. 

Meanwhile, in Italy…

Snow in Italy on September 12th! Climate can’t be reduced to CO2. Those who do that are the scientific fools of our era. pic.twitter.com/Pi34HKIk22

— Robin Monotti (@robinmonotti) September 13, 2024

🚨 Snow today at Passo Gardena, Dolomites – Italy 🇮🇹

A spectacular and unexpected September snowfall, considering that we are technically still in summer ❄️pic.twitter.com/5ub1MucHKD

— Mambo Italiano (@mamboitaliano__) September 12, 2024

Snow is falling locally below 700m in NE Italy, historic event not remembered in memory life this time of the year.
Let’s expect even full monthly records low to fall.
In the meanwhile temperatures will rise again >27C in the Arctic Circle in Russia and break records. pic.twitter.com/lUDVRucUJt

— Extreme Temperatures Around The World (@extremetemps) September 13, 2024

Climate alarmists will somehow blame cow farts and Taylor Swift’s private jet on cold and snow in Europe.  

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

The relationship between Russia, the IMF, and BRICS isn’t what most folks have been led to believe…

IMF Communications Director Julie Kozack confirmed during a press briefing on Thursday that the first Article IV consultations with Russia since 2021 will take place next week. She also praised BRICS expansion. Both of these caught multipolar enthusiasts off guard since they assumed that Russia wouldn’t ever re-engage with the IMF, which they consider to be BRICS’ rival.

What follows are the exact words that she said, which will then be analyzed in the larger context of Russia’s financial grand strategy:

“The IMF and all of our member countries have a mutual obligation to conduct Article IV Consultations. It’s in our articles of agreement. Actually, in the case of Russia, since the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the economic situation has been exceptionally unsettled, which has made it difficult to anchor Article IV Consultations, especially thinking about the outlook and policy frameworks for both the near- and the medium-term.

Now that the economic situation is more settled, Article IV Consultations with Russia are resuming, as I said at the beginning, in line with the obligations of both the Fund and the member country.

As part of the upcoming Article IV Consultation, the team will hold bilateral discussions with the Russian authorities. It will hold both virtual discussions from September 16th, and then the team will travel to the country for in person meetings. As is the case for all Article IV Consultations, the team will meet with a number of different stakeholders to discuss the country’s economic developments, prospects, and policies. And I think that I’ll leave it at that. 

…

With respect to the BRICS or any other groups of countries, our view is that improved and expanding international cooperation and deepening trade and investment ties among groups of countries should be welcomed and encouraged, provided that they aim at reducing fragmentation and reducing trade and investment costs among members. The decision to join such initiatives is a sovereign decision of each member country. And I’ll leave it at that.”

Readers should also be aware that Russia appointed a new Executive Director to the organization earlier this month, Ksenia Yudaeva. She’s an advisor to the Bank of Russia’s chief but also under US sanctions. Kozack declined to comment when asked whether Yudaeva would be allowed to serve at the IMF’s headquarters in DC upon taking over her new role in November. In any case, the importance is that Russia is actively re-engaging with the IMF, and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov recently hinted at why.

He told students earlier this month that “[the G7] are trying to retain their preferential and undeservedly privileged positions at the IMF and the WTO. They stall the reforms of these institutions in order to maintain their domineering influence. But this process cannot be stopped, and it will continue.” Russia believes that reforms at both global bodies are integral to speeding up financial multipolarity processes, with Lavrov implying that Russia should contribute to this inevitable trend instead of self-isolate from it.

Likewise, the IMF also realized that such reforms must be carried out sooner than later so as to not self-isolate from the Global South, ergo Kozack’s praise of BRICS expansion. Observers shouldn’t forget that all BRICS members are also part of the IMF, and as shocking as it sounds, the BRICS Bank confirmed last summer that they comply with Western sanctions against Russia. Readers can learn more “politically inconvenient” facts about BRICS here, which enumerates nearly a dozen associated analyses at the end.  

What’s sufficient for the average reader to know is that BRICS is a network of countries that voluntarily coordinate their financial policies in order to accelerate that dimension of multipolarity. Nearly all of its members with the exception of co-founder Russia and new addition Iran are in direct relationships of complex economic-financial interdependence with the West, especially the US. This limits their freedom of action in this regard and is why financial multipolarity will be a gradual process, not a fast one.

Any sudden systemic shocks, such as coordinating the dollar’s collapse (which is a lot more difficult to achieve than some have made it seem), would deeply affect their own economies due to this interdependence. Even Putin acknowledged during a Q&A earlier this month that “we are not conducting a policy of de-dollarisation. We did not renounce settlements in dollars; they denied us such settlements, and we were simply forced to look for other options; this is it.”

Russia isn’t in a direct relationship of complex economic-financial interdependence with the West anymore after that bloc’s US leader forced the EU to largely “decouple” from it, but he’s well aware of how destabilizing sudden systemic shocks can be for its top trade partners and thus wants to avoid that. Although Russia is self-sufficient in raw materials, it still relies on foreign trade as an important source of revenue and a means of obtaining spare aircraft parts, high-tech products, and other goods.

Inflicting sudden systemic shocks on the West could therefore shock the Chinese and Indian economies too, thus leading to less energy sales to them as well as less high-tech and other product imports. This explains why Russia still accounts for nearly a fifth of the EU’s gas needs despite the bloc’s participation in NATO’s proxy war on it through Ukraine. The same goes for why Russia still sells critical minerals to them and the US too, although Putin just suggested restrictions on this “if this does not harm us”.

That’s a significant caveat since the insight shared in this analysis illustrated the relationship of complex interdependence that Russia has with China, India, and others, who themselves are also in their own such relationships with the West, thus making Russia and the West indirectly dependent on one another. Considering this, completely cutting the West off from all Russian resources would also risk plunging China and India into recessions too, thus provoking their ire and boomeranging back against Russia.

It could also be considered an act of war by NATO and exploited to justify escalating the bloc’s involvement in their proxy war on Russia in Ukraine. If those countries could manage on their own without Russian resources, then they obviously wouldn’t be financing their geopolitical rival to this day. Likewise, Russia wouldn’t be supplying its geopolitical rivals to this day either if it felt comfortable managing the far-reaching systemic shocks brought about by completely cutting them off.

All of this circles back to why Russia is re-engaging with the IMF, namely to play a role in gradually reforming this global body alongside China, India, and others in order to advance their shared goal of accelerating financial multipolarity processes. The IMF praised BRICS expansion precisely because all members apart from Russia and Iran are in direct relationships of complex economic-financial interdependence with the West, thus enabling each to keep the other in check to an extent.

IMF membership and the aforesaid interdependence with the West that it brings impede the pace of BRICS’ financial multipolarity plans, while BRICS works from within the IMF to still keep these plans moving in the desired direction. With the exception of Russia and Iran, BRICS therefore has a symbiotic relationship with the IMF, and this in turn deters Russia from catalyzing a series of sudden systemic shocks against the West by cutting off its resource sales (both critical minerals and energy) to them.

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

As a liberty writer and economist I have been working within the alternative media for almost 20 years now. I was there at the inception of what we consider the modern counter-media movement, when a scattering of radio hosts, writers and video bloggers started to come together to create perhaps the greatest unsung information revolution in decades. It was this era in which the mainstream corporate news started to lose their audience by the millions.

This was also the advent of the Ron Paul movement and the return of a more true conservatism that would eventually shake up the Republican Party and the “Uniparty” paradigm. Neo-cons are not conservatives, they are leftists and globalists in disguise. We all know that now, but back then it was an uphill struggle to get the average conservative voter to understand they were being duped.  Today, most Neo-cons are abandoning the Republican Party to vote for Kamala Harris.

The success of Donald Trump is a symptom, a side effect of this burgeoning liberty activism. Trump didn’t start it, he just rode the wave that we created many years ago. It’s important to remember that it existed before him and it will exist after him.  That said, it’s undeniable that Trump has come to symbolize a big middle finger to the establishment on the part of the conservative and even moderate population. His campaigns have indeed helped to bring culture war awareness to the forefront. Furthermore, I would dare say we are winning that war.

The political left used to deny that the culture war existed.  Today, woke ideology is now thoroughly exposed in entertainment, in corporate journalism, in public school curriculum, in the military and within our own government agencies.  The alternative media made this victory possible.

A lot of people also had a “come to Jesus moment” during covid.  The political left grasped so desperately for total authoritarianism during the covid mandates that they rushed ahead and flew too close to the sun.

They went after our basic freedoms, they tried to ban us from public places, they tried to force us to act as guinea pigs for experimental vaccines, they censored our free speech, they threatened to take our jobs away, take our kids away, and throw us in covid camps.  All of this happened only a few years ago and it shocked large numbers of Americans out of apathy.

The covid agenda failed in part because of the tireless efforts of the alternative media spreading scientific facts and evidence that contradicted government propaganda. The mandates were defeated. The vax passport plan was defeated. The CDC was forced to inflate the numbers of people who actually took the first vax and they had to hide the reality that almost no one took the boosters.

What this means, though, is that the globalists will simply try something new; a new disaster with a new enemy and a new agenda to take what’s left of our freedoms away. Algorithmic censorship of the alternative media on search engines and YouTube didn’t work and kicking us off social media helped them little. We found other ways to get the truth out there.

They are coming after us directly next time, and the attacks have already started…

I’m speaking mainly of the Tenet Media controversy in which the Department of Justice has accused alternative journalist Lauren Chen of acting as a middleman (or middlewoman) for Russia Today (a Russian state funded media organization) to feed millions of dollars to unwitting conservatives and pro-Trump personalities like Dave Rubin, Tim Pool and Benny Johnson.

To be clear, the U.S. Justice Department doesn’t allege any wrongdoing by influencers, some of whom it says were given false information about the source of Tenet’s funding. Instead, it has indicted two employees of RT under the Foreign Agents Registration Act for funneling nearly $10 million to the Tennessee-based content creation company in exchange for Russia-friendly content.  However, the DOJ is in my view knowingly giving the corporate media and the DNC ammunition to attack and marginalize the alternative media right before the US elections.

Let’s cut to the core of this situation:

1) The DOJ has offered no evidence so far to substantiate these accusations. Maybe they are real, maybe they’re not, but the establishment has a track record of making up fake Russian conspiracies to derail conservatives (Russiagate). We’ll have to wait and see.

2) Even if these outlets did end up with Russian money, what did it change? Tim Pool and others were already arguing the same positions before Tenet Media offered them cash.

3) By extension, why would Russia pay conservatives millions of dollars to say what they were already saying?

4) This question continues to bother me and I have to wonder if the whole scenario is a psy-op to link the alternative media to Russia by association. You can already see the accusations in the establishment media and on social media:

“How far has Russian influence invaded the right-wing media? Maybe ALL of them are on Putin’s payroll…”

I predicted this EXACT outcome way back in 2014 – That conflict with Russia and the liberty movement’s associations with outlets like RT (whether real or fabricated) would be used to falsely indict all conservative journalists as traitors.

In my article ‘When War Erupts Patriots Will Be Accused Of “Aiding The Enemy”’, published ten years ago in September of 2014, I outlined why I believed a war with Russia (both economic and kinetic) was inevitable along with my concerns over the establishment’s attempts to attach the liberty media to Russia Today and other Kremlin funded platforms. I dissected one such propaganda piece by The Atlantic and noted:

“The fact based reporting of RT, at least when it comes to the Western side of the globalist establishment, mimics the alternative journalism growing in popularity in the U.S.  At bottom, RT is a newcomer to the world of independent news analysis, but it is ultimately NOT independent, and most of what they do amounts to little more than regurgitated content from more original and insightful Western independent media sources…”

“The Atlantic article [cited in the link above], very cleverly, makes it sound as if it is we witless writers in America who are getting all our info and inspiration from RT. And this is where we begin to see the true nature of the psy-op…”

“…Today, conflict with Russia, at the very least on an economic scale, is an inevitability…The narrative that is being constructed is clear – the establishment hopes to rewrite the history and image of the liberty movement by painting us as dupes radicalized by Russian propaganda, rather than being the originators of our own grassroots movement with our own philosophy and methodology. Through this, they take away our ownership of our own cause.”

I also addressed those people in the movement that, at the time, seemed to deny all Russian ties to globalist institutions without question. I warned against this adoration of eastern governments and made the point that they are not our saviors.

“…By blindly supporting Russia or the Russian government without considering their participation in the globalist run crisis, liberty activists help reinforce the soon-to-be manufactured lie that we are nothing but puppets of the Putin regime. If we publicly question the intentions of the Russian government as much as we question our own government, we can help to defuse this lie before it can take hold.”

“…Mark my words, one day our activism will be deemed treason, and our rebellion will be marginalized as a servant satellite astro-turf movement organized by Russian interests.”

I think the majority of my predictions from 2014 have been proven accurate and readers are welcome to read through that article in its entirety for the bigger picture. But what does all this mean?

The Tenet Media situation is just the beginning. Whether it’s really a Russian operation or something else, the narrative clearly only serves one purpose – To discredit alternative media sources. It doesn’t matter if Tim Pool or Dave Rubin or anyone else actually got money from Putin’s own pocket. It also doesn’t matter if they were lied to and they had no idea where the cash was really coming from.

The establishment only has to plant the seed of doubt in the minds of the masses that the former scenario MIGHT be happening.  It’s intended to make the alternative media look corrupt, or, easily fooled, and the average Democrat is dumb enough to believe it.   Let’s not mention the fact that governments, NGOs and globalist think-tanks (the Atlantic Council) have been funding pro-Ukraine propaganda as well as progressive propaganda in the news for years.

And though some people might think this problem will be quickly forgotten, don’t believe for a second that it’s going away for good.  The far-left will run with this story in different iterations right up until the November election and beyond, never relenting. Will it work? Probably not. I don’t see a lot of people outside of the political left that care much, but it depends on a lot of factors. With Kamala Harris in office in 2025 the Russian “influence” accusations will be endless.  It will become the new January 6th.

This incident should also act as a reminder that the alternative media needs to remain skeptical of eastern government agendas as much as we are skeptical of our own government. If there is indeed Russian money chasing conservative platforms, then it is either intended to buy influence or create division within the movement. Neither outcome should be allowed.

The media will accuse us of being Russian pawns regardless of what we do, but we don’t have to help them along.  That said, if instability erupts in the west it will not be because of Putin.  Putin has not been trying to force us into a socialist dystopia for the past several years, leftists and globalists have.  If civil war breaks out, it will be because leftists gave us no other choice.  Russia is irrelevant to the issue.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

Million-dollar homes are becoming more common, with the U.S. having 621 cities where a typical home is worth $1 million or more.

While high interest rates have caused commercial real estate prices to fall, it hasn’t had the same impact on the residential market. Housing inventory has increased, but it still remains below average historical levels. At the same time, while mortgage rates have fallen, U.S. home prices continue to climb, nearing record highs.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Dorothy Neufeld, shows the number of cities in each U.S. state where a typical home costs $1 million or more, based on data from Zillow.

Ranked: The Number of Million-Dollar Cities, by State

Below, we show the number of cities where a typical home (the average home in the 35th to 65th percentile) costs $1 million or more by state:

As of July 31, 2024

California has more million-dollar cities than the next four states combined, with Atherton standing as the most expensive city, where a typical home costs $7.5 million.

Today, a typical home in California costs more than twice as much as a typical U.S. home, with residents paying almost $6,000 on monthly payments for a newly-purchased mid-tier home. These costs include mortgage payments, homeowners insurance, and taxes. Since February 2023, the state has added 20 cities where a typical home costs $1 million or more.

Following next in line is New York, with 76 million-dollar cities. A separate report shows that the price of single family homes jumped by 10.9% annually since the first quarter of 2023, giving the state some of the fastest-rising house prices in America.

Ranking in third is New Jersey, which saw one of the greatest increases in million-dollar cities overall since February 2023.

As we can see, there are 15 states without any million-dollar cities, mainly in the Midwest and South. These states are known for having greater housing affordability, and a lower cost of living, but fewer job prospects amid weak labor market activity.

To learn more about this topic from a U.S. city perspective, check out this graphic on the salary needed to buy a home in 50 U.S. cities in 2024.

Authored by Sheramy Tsai via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Pumping iron at the gym is only half the muscle-building battle. The adage “muscles are built in the kitchen” rings truer than ever.

Foods and supplements you choose can amplify your workouts, turning efforts into visible results. With countless options available on the market, finding the most effective can be overwhelming. This guide cuts through the noise to help you fuel your body for optimal muscle growth.

1. Prioritize Protein

Protein is the foundation of muscle health. It supplies the vital components for muscle tissue and drives muscle protein synthesis, which repairs and strengthens muscles after exercise.

“Protein provides the essential building blocks your muscles need to repair, grow stronger, and get bigger, effectively complementing the hard work you put in during training,” Shawn Arent, professor of exercise science at the University of South Carolina, Arnold School of Public Health, said in an interview with The Epoch Times.

Skeletal muscle constantly repairs and renews itself, with about 1 to 2 percent of myonuclei, the nuclei within muscle fibers, turning over each week. This cycle of breakdown and repair helps muscles grow stronger and larger with consistent exercise.

The National Institutes of Health’s recommended dietary allowance (RDA) for protein is set at 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight per day, equating to about 54 grams daily for a 150-pound adult. However, Arent points out that more is needed to build muscle. “The RDA is meant to meet basic nutritional needs, not to optimize muscle growth,” he said.

This call for higher protein intake is supported by a 2023 study in Nutrients, which suggests increasing protein intake could better support muscle function and overall health.

Arent recommends aiming for 1.6 to 2.2 grams (gm) of protein per kilogram of body weight. An easier way to calculate this is to consume about 0.7 to 1 gm of protein per pound of body weight. For example, if your goal weight is 150 pounds, you should eat approximately 105 to 150 gm of protein daily. He advises older adults to target the higher end of this range due to anabolic resistance, a condition where the body becomes less efficient at converting amino acids into muscle protein. This inefficiency requires more protein to stimulate and maintain muscle growth as we age, he noted.

Best Food Sources of Protein 

Focusing on high-protein foods that deliver the best return on investment is crucial. Arent highlights that animal proteins like chicken breast, turkey, beef, and eggs are particularly effective because they’re rich in essential amino acids, especially leucine, which is critical for stimulating muscle growth.

Fish, such as salmon and tuna, provide high-quality protein and deliver healthy fats like omega-3s, which support overall muscle function. Dairy products like Greek yogurt, cottage cheese, and milk are also excellent choices, offering a mix of fast-digesting whey and slow-digesting casein proteins for sustained amino acid release, according to Arent.

For plant-based proteins, options like lentils, chickpeas, quinoa, and tofu can deliver protein. However, it may be necessary to combine various plant sources to achieve a complete amino acid profile and optimize muscle-building.

While vegetarian and vegan diets can support muscle growth, they may not be as ideal as diets that include animal proteins. Although high-quality proteins containing all essential amino acids are found in both plant and animal sources, they are often less densely packed in plant-based foods.

2. The Power of Protein Timing

While total daily protein intake is crucial for muscle growth, the timing of eating protein can also influence results. Arent emphasizes that consuming protein, especially during workouts, can further enhance muscle recovery and growth.

Research published in Frontiers in Nutrition shows that consuming protein within an hour of a workout improves muscle recovery and performance. While overall daily intake is most important, a post-workout shake or meal delivers essential building blocks during a critical window for muscle repair, according to the study.

Research by Donald Layman, a leading expert in protein synthesis and nutrition at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, underscores the importance of the distribution of protein throughout the day. Meal timing becomes increasingly important with age, particularly after 40, as the body’s ability to use protein efficiently declines, he told The Epoch Times.

“The most sensitive meal is the first meal of the day after the overnight fast, but most Americans eat 60 percent of their daily protein at dinner and virtually nothing at breakfast,” he added. Shifting some protein intake from dinner to the morning can significantly enhance daily muscle protein synthesis, Layman added.

“The first meal for adults should have at least 30 grams of protein. I target 45 grams,” he noted. Consuming 30 to 45 grams of protein at breakfast aids muscle repair and supports functional mobility and metabolic health, according to Layman’s research.

A study in Cell Reports further underscores the value of consuming protein earlier in the day, especially at breakfast, linking a high-protein morning meal rich in branched-chain amino acids to increased muscle mass and strength, particularly in older women. Branched-chain amino acids are special nutrients found in protein that help build and repair muscles, making them crucial for maintaining muscle health as we age.

As we age and adopt more sedentary lifestyles, and/or experience conditions like weight loss or extended bedrest, paying close attention to how we distribute our protein intake throughout the day becomes increasingly important, Layman said.

3. Shake Up Your Protein Routine

Diversifying your protein sources is key to maximizing muscle growth, and protein shakes can be a valuable addition. Arent describes protein powders as another “tool in the toolbox.”

“Protein powders are absorbed faster than whole foods, delivering essential amino acids to your system right after a workout,” Arent said.

For those watching their calorie intake, protein shakes are a convenient way to boost protein without the extra fats or carbs in whole foods.

Research published in Frontiers in Nutrition shows that whey protein is particularly effective for enhancing muscle protein synthesis and recovery after resistance training. It can also help improve performance when consumed post-exercise. On the other hand, casein offers a slower release of amino acids, which is helpful for sustained nourishment.

Whey is the liquid portion that remains after milk has been curdled and strained during cheese production. Whey protein is quickly digested and absorbed. Casein, on the other hand, is the main protein found in the remaining curds that form when milk is coagulated. It is digested more slowly than whey, providing a steady release of amino acids over several hours.

Arent advises choosing a protein powder that fits your dietary needs—whether whey, casein, or plant-based—and opting for third-party tested products to ensure safety and quality.

Dr. Gabrielle Lyon, muscle expert and author of “Forever Strong,” noted in a LinkedIn post that whey is often gentler on sensitive stomachs, whereas casein benefits those who go long periods without eating, like overnight.

4. Carbs Aren’t the Enemy

Carbohydrates often get a bad rap, but they play a vital role in muscle-building and overall performance. Carbs are crucial for fueling intense workouts and providing the energy your muscles need to perform at their best, according to Arent.

“The strongest stimulant for muscle building isn’t protein intake—it’s resistance training,” Arent said. “Carbohydrates fuel those high-intensity workouts, helping you push harder and longer.”

In addition to powering workouts, carbs are essential for replenishing muscle glycogen stores post-exercise. Without adequate carbohydrate intake, the body may start tapping into protein as an energy source, hindering muscle growth.

Incorporating the right amount of carbs into your diet ensures that your body uses protein for what it’s meant to do—building and repairing muscle—rather than as a backup energy source.

5. Don’t Fear the Fats

Healthy fats are often underrated in muscle-building diets, yet they are essential for performance and growth. They provide a rich energy source and help absorb fat-soluble vitamins that aid muscle recovery.

Fats are critical for membrane and cellular integrity, the synthesis of steroid hormones like testosterone, and even neural and cognitive health, Arent said. Testosterone, in particular, stimulates the process of building muscle, making adequate fat intake essential for muscle growth and overall physical performance.

Incorporate healthy fats from sources like nuts, seeds, olive oil, salmon, and avocados to give your body the nutrients it needs for muscle function and overall health.

6. Supplements That Work—And Those That Don’t

While some muscle-building supplements are supported by robust scientific evidence, others fail to live up to their claims. Arent and Lyon provide insights into which supplements are worth your investment—and which are best avoided.

Creatine tops the list as one of the most effective and well-researched supplements for boosting strength and muscle mass. “Creatine should be discussed in the same way we talk about multivitamins,” Arent said. “We’re seeing numerous positive effects, not just for strength and power, but also for brain health and recovery.”

Lyon points out that creatine is naturally found in animal foods, especially in the skeletal muscle of beef, chicken, and fish. Creatine promotes brain health, protects nerve cells, and strengthens the immune system.

Cooking meat reduces its creatine content. She recommends eating one pound of rare or red meat or two pounds of well-done beef or white meat for approximate daily intake.

“You may not need to supplement creatine,” Lyon wrote in a LinkedIn post. However, supplementation can be ideal for older adults, those following plant-based diets, and those with lower meat consumption, as they may have difficulty obtaining enough from food alone.

Creatine helps increase the intensity of workouts, allowing heavier lifting and supporting greater muscle growth. The recommended daily supplement dose is typically around 5 grams, enough to see benefits without unnecessary waste, according to Arent.

In contrast, despite its popularity for joint health, collagen has little to offer in terms of muscle growth. Arent points out that the evidence supporting collagen’s role in building muscle is “negligible to none.”

Amino acids, particularly essential amino acids and branched-chain amino acids are another supplement category with proven benefits. They can support muscle recovery and growth. Arent recommends them for people with dietary gaps or training in a fasted state.

For those looking for a broader supplement strategy, Arent also mentions the potential benefits of fish oil for muscle recovery and reducing inflammation. “Fish oil, especially when high in EPA, may support lean tissue growth and muscle repair,” he added. EPA, or eicosapentaenoic acid, is an omega-3 fatty acid known for its anti-inflammatory properties, which can help reduce muscle soreness and support recovery after exercise.

Incorporating the right supplements—like creatine, high-quality proteins, and possibly fish oil—into your routine can impact your muscle-building journey, said Arent. It’s also important to avoid overhyped products that don’t deliver on their promises, like collagen for muscle growth, and instead focus on what’s proven to work.