Authored by Egon von Greyerz via VonGreyerz.gold,

At the end of a monetary era a number of dominoes will keep falling, initially gradually and then suddenly as Hemingway explained when asked how you go bankrupt.

Some of the important dominoes the world will see falling are: Political, Geopolitical, Currency, Debt and Investment Assets.

The consequences will be unthinkable – Social Unrest, War, Hyperinflation, Deflationary Implosion of Assets, Debt Defaults and much more.

But when things settle down, there will also be offsetting forces such as the emergence of powerful BRICS nations often backed by commodities.

Gold will play a major role during this process. Both central banks, sovereign wealth funds and investors will turn to gold as the most stable part of a crumbling system. This will lead to a fundamental revaluation of gold. As more gold cannot be produced, increased demand can only be satisfied by higher prices.

The likely result will be a revaluation of gold by multiples.

FALL OF THE LEADERSHIP DOMINO

Inept leaders and lack of statesmen are the typical prerequisites for these periods and thus one of the falling dominoes.

I have always argued that a country gets the leaders it deserves.

As we get to the end of one of the worst periods in history, both financially and morally, weak leadership exists in most major Western economies.

So, let’s look at the motley crew of world leaders and their unpopularity.

Political leaders will not only be thrown out at elections but also before their period is finished.

The recent European election is a typical example of a failed system. Most ruling parties are being rejected and in many cases parties on the right gain popularity.

Just look at the picture above from the recent G7 meeting in Italy. With the exception of Italy’s Meloni, the remaining G7 leaders have disapproval ratings of 57% to 72%.

With elections in the UK & France this year, the ruling parties are guaranteed to lose. The French Presidential election is not until 2027 so Macron could be a lame duck for 3 more years. The French people are unlikely to accept that and might force him out before then.

Whoever is elected in France, the powerful trade unions are likely to bring the country to a halt.

UK’s Sunak is one of Britain’s most ineffective leaders in history. But the new Labour Prime Minister, Kier Starmer was not even seen to stand a chance 2-3 years ago. He will not be voted in, but Sunak will be voted out by the people. Next will be a very dark period in UK history with high taxes, high debt, poor leadership and political instability and hard times.

The US situation today is even worse, with a president who seems incapable of taking any decisions. Instead, the US is led by an unelected and unaccountable group of neocons who tell the president what to say and what to do. But even that is difficult for Biden to execute. Just his recent appearance in Italy at the G7 meeting confirms that.

He can obviously not be blamed for being senile. But he should no longer have the ultimate power.

The US election is likely to be a disaster. Looking at the poor health of Biden, it is unlikely that he will stand for re-election in November. Kamala Harris will clearly not stand for election. It would not be surprising to see Hillary Clinton ushered in as the Democratic candidate. Although Trump is loved by around half of the people, he is hated by the other half and thus a very divisive choice. And a rerun of the Clinton – Trump election could easily lead to trouble or insurgence in the US whoever wins. 

Germany’s Scholz’ coalition might not make it to the 2025 election due to its unpopularity and the decline of the German economy.

In summary, the political stage will be a total mess in coming years and lack of strong leadership will not only bring political unrest but also social unrest.

FALL OF THE CURRENCY & DEBT DOMINOES

The currency domino has been falling ever since Nixon closed the gold window in 1971.

With high spending and deficits on top of Debt to GDP above 100% in many nations, the West in particular is facing a very dark period with galloping debt growth and collapsing currencies.

This will lead to debt defaults, bank defaults, more printing, higher interest rates and still higher deficits.

All currencies will accelerate their debasement process.

In such a scenario, there will be no winner. It is possible that the dollar due to demand will be slightly stronger than other Western currencies at least for a period.

But a temporary relative strength of the dollar should be totally ignored. There is no prize for coming 2nd or 3rd to the bottom. All currencies will lose dramatically in real terms which means against gold.

We must remember that we are now in the final collapse of the current monetary system. Since 1971 all currencies have lost 97-99% in real terms which means GOLD!

The final 1-3% fall (100% from now) will take place in the next 3-8 years. So, yet another currency system will be laid to rest.

This one lasted since 1913 so a bit over a century. Its demise was predestined the day it was born. It was only a matter of time. As always in history, the consequences will be much more far reaching than just the death of Money.

Debt and currency collapses happen hand in hand. They are partners in crime and are the inevitable consequence of sustained government deficit spending.

After a period of unlimited currency printing, the financial system will fail partly or totally.

Political and social unrest also follows, possibly civil war.

Governments under economic pressure normally start a war or escalate an existing one to divert the attention from domestic problems. A war is also a good excuse for printing more money.

FALL OF THE ASSET DOMINO

Initially there will be high inflation, possibly hyperinflation and high interest rates. Thereafter as the system implodes, inflated asset prices in stocks, bonds, property etc will crash by 50-100% in real terms.

Most sovereign bonds (if they are printed) will serve best as wallpaper.

I rate the chances of this chain of events taking place as very high, especially in the West.

Financial, economic, political and social collapses of this kind are nothing new as they have happened throughout history, albeit not on a scale of this magnitude.
 

FALL OF THE NUCLEAR WAR DOMINO

Will we have a nuclear war?

We obviously don’t need to worry about this option since if we have a global nuclear war, there will be very few, if any, people left on earth.

As the world potentially moves as close to a nuclear war as it can without starting one, we must ask ourselves, WHO IS RUNNING THE WORLD?

Well, no one individual of course. But the US leadership is probably the main contender when it comes to dictating, at their whim, to any country in the world.

This can be starting wars in a country which is no threat to the US. It can be controlling the global financial system through the dollar or regulating the banking system via edicts like FATCA requiring the world to report any dollar transaction to the US authorities. It can also involve coups in countries which the US leadership finds unacceptable or even eliminating enemies.

It can be sanctions or freezing of assets against countries whose actions the US leadership disapprove. The list is endless.

What is interesting is that the US people never has a say in any of these decisions. All the actions above and many more are taken by the US president and his advisors with zero accountability to the people.

None of that would be possible in for example Switzerland where people power rules through direct democracy.

What the world should ask itself is: How does it solve the extremely serious situation the world is in?

I am not talking about the Ukrainian war which, as Trump has indicated, could be stopped within a few days if the US stopped sending weapons and money to Ukraine.

Putin recently made it clear that what Russia wants is to keep the Russian speaking areas of Eastern Ukraine and no NATO membership for Ukraine. But no one is interested in exploring this.

Instead, there has just been a peace conference in Switzerland where neither Russia nor China was present. Such a conference is a total waste of time and money.

Without two of the mightiest military and economic powers on earth, one of which (Russia) is directly involved in the war, this conference will achieve absolutely nothing.

This is just posing for the cameras with a bland meaningless statement at the end.

So instead of these useless conferences, the leaders of China, Russia and the USA should get together to end the Ukraine war and then tackle the real problems facing the world like poverty, famine, crime, drugs, debt etc, etc.

Imagine what the combined brain power and resources of these countries could achieve assisted by many more nations.

But sadly, that is a dream that is unlikely to be realised.

Much easier to print money and start a war rather than to find REAL and sustainable solutions to the major global problems that the world is facing.

So, world leaders have a choice – pick up the phone and talk to your fellow leaders or start a war.

What sane leader would choose nuclear war before a small loss of ego and peace?

WEALTH PRESERVATION FOR FINANCIAL SURVIVAL

So, what can investors do to protect themselves?

Some DONT’S are obvious, like:

Don’t keep most of your wealth in a fragile banking system whether in cash or in securities –

With many banks likely to default, it might take too long before your assets are released, if ever!

Bail ins or forced investments are likely in government securities at low interest rates and for extended periods like 10 years or more.

Don’t hold sovereign bonds –

Many governments will default.

Don’t bet on inflation reducing your debt –

High interest rates or indexation of loans might make it impossible to repay borrowings.

Don’t forget that stocks have been inflated by massive credit expansion which will end.

The list of don’ts in the biggest global debt and asset bubble in history and is of course endless.

So, some DOs could be more useful –

Do hold a lot of physical gold and some physical silver in safe jurisdictions like Switzerland and possibly Singapore outside the banking systems –

Precious metals must be held in very safe non-bank vaults, in your name with direct access to the metals.

To minimise confiscation or freezing of your metals, best to keep them outside your country of residence.

Hold a meaningful amount of physical gold and silver –

Most of our clients who are HNW wealth preservation investors have more than 20% of their investment assets in gold and with a smaller percentage in silver due to its volatility.

Gold is up 9-10x in this century in most currencies, still.

THE REAL MOVE IN GOLD AND SILVER HASN’T STARTED YET

The move away from the dollar as the global trading currency is likely to accelerate over the next few years.

BRICS countries are whenever possible settling bilateral trading in their local currencies with gold as the ultimate settlement money. This will be a gradual move away from the dollar. At some point the move will accelerate as the need for trading via another nation’s currency will be seem superfluous, especially since final settlement can be in gold.

As I have made clear many times, the US confiscation of Russian assets will lead to central banks no longer holding dollar reserves but instead gold will be the only acceptable reserve asset.

The move by Central Banks to gold as a reserve asset will lead to a fundamental revaluation of gold over the next few years to a price which will be multiples of the current price.

The major increase in demand can only be satisfied by higher prices and not by more gold since the world cannot produce more than the current 3,000 tonnes p.a.

In my 55-year working life I have experienced 2 major bull markets in Gold.

The first one was from 1971 to 1980 with gold up 25X from $35 to $850.

The second one started in 2001 at $250 and has only started a move which will reach multiples of the current price.

But my 55 years of gold history is just over 1% of the long-term bull market in gold.

Since the emergence of the fiat money system, the gold bull market is sadly more a reflection of governments’ mismanagement of the economy leading to ever growing deficits and debts. In such a system, the price of gold mainly reflects the chronic debasement of paper money.

Governments and central banks are gold’s best friend.

They have without fail always destroyed the value of fiat money, by debasing the currency through deficit spending and debt creation.

For example, in the Roman Empire around 180 to 280 AD the Denarius Silver coin went from almost 100% silver content to 0%, replacing the silver with cheaper metals.

This obviously leads to the question, why should anyone hold fiat or paper money?

Well, in a sound economy with no deficits, virtually no inflation and a balanced government budget, holding cash that yields an interest return is absolutely fine.

But the world has not experienced such Shangri-La times since 1971 when Nixon closed the gold window.

Still, even at $2,320 today, gold in relation to money supply is as cheap as in 1970 when it was $35 or in 2000 when the gold price was $300.

WEALTH PRESERVATION AND LIFE’S PRIORITIES

With the falling of the dominoes outlined above, most people in the world will experience a lot more hardship than currently.

For anyone with savings, whether it is $100 or $100 million, wealth preservation should be a top priority. Gold and some silver in physical form safely stored outside the banking system should be an absolute priority.

As we encounter difficult times, helping family and friends is more important than anything else. This will be extremely important in order to deal with the trials which we will all encounter.

And please don’t forget that in addition to family and friends, some of the best things in life are free such as nature, books, music and hobbies.

Just two weeks after Craft Ventures co-founder David Sacks hosted a high-profile fundraiser for former President Trump at his Silicon Valley mansion, filled with venture capitalists and tech elites, Trump made an appearance on Sacks’ podcast on Thursday, covering a wide range of topics from taxes and tariffs to energy to artificial intelligence to foreign policy decisions to Ukraine to China to Covid to immigration and many other issues the Biden administration seems to be failing on. 

The podcast features Sacks, entrepreneurs Chamath Palihapitiya, Jason Calacanis, and David Friedberg, who spoke with Trump for about 50 minutes – asking intelligent and clear questions. There were no ‘gotchas’ like you see with corporate media activists.

Sacks began the interview by explaining how business leaders at his fundraiser expressed tremendous difficulty in today’s economy under the Biden administration. 

“You got the crypto guys who just want a framework. They just want the government to tell them how to operate – and they can’t get that. You have no M&A happening right now in tech. The real estate guys can’t get loans because interest rates are through the roof, and there’s a credit crunch. So I think one of the common themes we just heard across that dinner was that it was just so hard to do business right now,” Sacks said.

He then asked the former president: “What are the three things that you would do to kind of get things moving again, you know if you’re reelected?” 

Trump responded: “Regulation Regulation and Taxes – Okay. I gave the biggest tax cut in the history of our country a lot to the business,” adding, “As you know, companies were paying 40% 45% including state and city taxes in many cases, and we got it down to 21% – would like to get it down lower.” 

Trump defended his tariff proposals against criticism that they would spark more inflation, asserting the policy was essential for maintaining the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency. He stated he would penalize countries that abandoned their peg to the dollar by slapping them with tariffs on their products coming in the US, adding, “With tariffs, it gives you a tremendous power.” 

Trump on Economic Boom: ‘My Tax Cuts and Deregulation Brought Billions Back to the U.S.’ WATCH pic.twitter.com/HE5VgZApJA

— Simon Ateba (@simonateba) June 21, 2024

Trump then pivoted to energy, in which he said, “We have more liquid gold under our feet,” referring to fossil fuels. He focused on energy independence and the need for reliable power, not necessarily overloading the nation’s power grid with unreliable wind and solar. 

The former president appears to have been sold on ‘The Next AI’ trade and the importance of powering up America for the digital age. 

“To be a leader in AI, the amount of electricity that is like double what we have right now and even triple what we have right now,” he said, adding that “a windmill turning with its blade knocking out the birds and everything else is not going to be able to make us competitive.” 

Trump also said, “Nuclear is okay with me … and you have to do it in a way that makes sense,” explaining that the future of America’s nuclear power plant revival is likely to be based on small, advanced reactors instead of massive plants. 

AI
Energy

I wish he didn’t cut President Trump off right when he was getting into AI & China pic.twitter.com/q7wo9ViKPT

— Unapologetic Christian (@simpletruthND) June 21, 2024

Sacks then shifts the conversation to foreign policy, asking Trump, “Can you guarantee that no matter what, you’re not going to put American boots on the ground in Ukraine?” 

Trump responded: “I wouldn’t do it. It’s different for France. You know they’re neighbors, and more or less, we have an ocean in between. It’s different for Germany, although Germany’s much less involved than it should be, and other countries, but uh, you know, we have a big ocean in between.” 

“Ukraine would’ve never happened, the Israeli attack would’ve never happened, and inflation would’ve never happened – those are three big things,” Trump continued. 

In his interview with @theallinpod, President Trump made a number of important comments on Ukraine.

First, Trump guaranteed that if he becomes the next commander-in-chief, he will not put American boots on the ground in Ukraine. If France were to do so, as French President… pic.twitter.com/gk66ad1ymB

— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) June 20, 2024

When asked if he would support a national abortion ban, Trump stated that he doesn’t need one because the issue is now up to the states.

On Covid, Trump emphasized that Dr. Fauci played a larger role in the Biden Administration than in his own, as he didn’t rely on or trust Fauci much. 

🚨🇺🇸TRUMP: I DIDN’T RELY ON FAUCI BECAUSE I DIDN’T TRUST HIM

Trump:

“Stopping travel from China saved hundreds of thousands, maybe millions.”

All-In Podcast:

“Did Fauci lie about COVID’s origin?”

Trump:

“COVID came from the Wuhan lab. The bats story is false. It should be… https://t.co/nqd78EXi5r pic.twitter.com/rXEQggEaQO

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) June 21, 2024

Around the 40-minute mark, Sacks brings up the immigration crisis. He asked the former president, “A lot of tech CEOs say, uh, if we fix the Border, can we get more H-1Bs for Tech workers?” 

Trump responded: “What I want to do and what I will do is you graduate from a college. I think you should get automatically as part of your diploma a green card to be able to stay in this country, and that includes junior colleges.” 

Trump tells @theallinpod that if you graduate from a US college, you should automatically get a green card with your diploma.

“We need brilliant people”

🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/PKDklsBG0l

— Max Meyer (@mualphaxi) June 20, 2024

At the end of the discussion, Chamath asks Trump about releasing the JFK files. Trump says he will release the files the moment he gets into office. 

When asked if he believes Biden is in cognitive decline, Trump avoided a direct answer, stating he doesn’t think Biden is doing well and has never thought of him as smart. 

In the post-interview recap, the hosts share their thoughts on Trump’s comments made around the 50-minute mark.

Here’s the full breakdown of the interview:

(0:00) bestie intros: big house talk!

(1:37) economy: regulation, taxes, tariffs, taming inflation, de-dollarization

(12:02) federal debt: growth, spend control, where to cut, role of energy, nuclear

(20:22) foreign policy: ukraine/russia

(25:05) foreign policy: israel/palestine

(28:13) abortion: stance on a national ban

(31:09) foreign policy: china

(32:33) covid: origins, fauci relationship, deep state, bad deals

(39:39) border: wall, immigration, h-1bs, recruiting global talent

(46:07) jfk files: full release, importance of transparency

(48:06) debate prediction

(50:15) post-interview debrief

Watch the full interview below:

E184: in conversation with @realDonaldTrump, live on @X

(0:00) bestie intros: big house talk!

(1:37) economy: regulation, taxes, tariffs, taming inflation, de-dollarization

(12:02) federal debt: growth, spend control, where to cut, role of energy, nuclear

(20:22) foreign… pic.twitter.com/Z7JF7FRQYU

— The All-In Podcast (@theallinpod) June 20, 2024

“You know MSM is dead when political candidates really begin to hit the podcast circuit,” one X user said. 

X users asked All-In to now interview Biden. 

Authored by Thi Thuy Van Dinh via The Brownstone Institute

On 15th June 2024, the BBC Climate disinformation reporter Marco Silva published a hit piece on the Kenyan farmer Jusper Machogu, entitled “How a Kenyan farmer became a champion of climate change denial.” The reporter claims that Mr Machogu, a 29-year-old farmer with many thousands of followers on X for his campaign “Fossil Fuels for Africa,” holds dangerous views denying climate change. 

I don’t personally know Mr Machogu, and I am certain that he doesn’t need defense. I grew up without electricity and I recently explained how I questioned the official climate narrative. I do find it extremely disgusting that a senior journalist sitting in Greater London, using daily modern technologies powered by fossil fuels, in a country that became rich thanks to fossil fuels (and loot from Kenya), should write such a disdainful piece on one of the biggest media outlets on earth about a young man who appears to have knowledge, hard work, and passion to serve his community and people. I also find this piece below the BBC’s editorial standards which include values such as truth, fairness, accuracy, and impartiality.

The reporter chose to make ad hominem attacks on Mr Machogu throughout the piece. It is stupid for a journalist of a global broadcasting company based in one of the richest places on earth to write statements like these:

“On social media, he (Mr Machogu) has become known as flag bearer for fossil fuels in Africa, but there is more to his campaign that meets the eye,”

“Mr Machogu’s new-found popularity,”

and “Mr Machogu began tweeting false and misleading claims about climate change in late 2021, after carrying out his “own research” into the topic.”

Clearly, the reporter doesn’t seem to think that Mr Machogu has the right to carry out his own research and make tweets about that. I don’t understand why a BBC journalist can have freedom of expression but a Kenyan farmer cannot.

What is wrong with Mr Machogu’s posting about “farmer content” like “weeding his land, planting garlic or picking avocados” in rural Kisii (southwest Kenya)? Aren’t we in the era of social media influencers, of those many who make videos about their lives, their workouts, their gardening, their pets, or their exotic vacations and conferences? 

What is wrong with using “the hashtag #ClimateScam” hundreds of times? Does the BBC believe that they should approve hashtags? What is wrong with posts on “There is no climate crisis?” Had the reporter applied a little bit more impartiality, he could have led his audiences to the global Declaration on “There is no climate emergency” signed by almost 2,000 scientists and professionals (myself also), including two Nobel laureates (John F. Clauser, Ivar Giaever) and top-notch scholars (Guus Berkhout, Richard Lindzen, Patrick Moore, Ian Plimer, etc.). 

The reporter could even have acknowledged that Mr Machogu’s clear aim is to reduce poverty in his chronically energy-starved country, as was seen in the excellent film Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth), made by the UK director Martin Durkin and available in 30 languages thanks to volunteers. Instead, he did not provide the link to the film and described it as “a film crew from the UK travelled to Kisii to interview him (Mr Machogu) for a new documentary that described climate change as an “eccentric environmental scare.”  

Besides the quotes issued from Mr Machogu’s tweets, it was reported that Mr Machogu did not have a problem with raising some money to improve his conditions and help some people around him. The donations seem to be voluntary, like the way we do regularly to charities, groups, and churches, modest (more than $9,000) and well spent. Perhaps a comparison to the earnings of a climate disinformation reporter would have provided useful context.

It is very strange that the BBC is concerned about a small amount allegedly from “individuals with links to the fossil fuel industry and to groups known for promoting climate change denial.” Should the BBC be transparent about the huge amounts it has received outside the UK, for example from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, run by a person with major investments in technologies that benefit from climate alarmism? A quick search on the Gates Foundation website shows millions over the last decade. 

Do you know why these individuals are the problem?

We learn in the piece that Mr Machogu interacts online with those who “promote conspiracy theories online – not just about climate change, but also about vaccines, Covid-19, or the war in Ukraine.”

All things, apparently, where disagreement with an official British government line is to be shunned and suppressed, however false those positions are found to be. 

By judging “wrong” Mr Machogu’s tweet “Climate change is mostly natural. A warmer climate is good for life,” the reporter shows that he is the one who confuses science with dogma. Climate is influenced by a whole range of natural and anthropogenic factors. By characterizing Mr Machogu’s social media content as “denial of man-made climate change,” the climate disinformation reporter is directly spreading disinformation because Mr Machogu doesn’t deny anthropogenic causes of climate change.

The BBC certainly can do better than this. Instead, it chose to promote and practice advocacy journalism (i.e. propaganda), showing disrespect to its audiences. This BBC reporter should re-study its editorial guidelines, or do something else more useful. 

To Mr Machogu, bravo for your intelligence and courage! Well, you have missed the opportunity of making a career with the climate cult, for example as a United Nations Youth Climate Adviser. The BBC hit piece just showed you how pitiful that path is. May the wealth of your people begin to approach the wealth that their colonizers achieved by digging, drilling, and burning coal and oil in Britain!

The first of Off-Guardian’s short videos marking the 75th anniversary of George Orwell’s 1984 and, they hope, a timely reminder it is much more than the famous memes of Room 101, Big Brother, Doublethink or Newspeak.

Firstly – The Lottery.

“The Lottery, with its weekly pay-out of enormous prizes, was the one public event to which the proles paid serious attention.

It was probable that there were some millions of proles for whom the Lottery was the principal if not the only reason for remaining alive.

It was their delight, their folly, their anodyne, their intellectual stimulant.

Where the Lottery was concerned, even people who could barely read and write seemed capable of intricate calculations and staggering feats of memory.

There was a whole tribe of men who made their living simply by selling systems, forecasts, and lucky amulets.

Winston had nothing to do with the Lottery, which was managed by the Ministry of Plenty, but he was aware (indeed everyone in the party was aware) that the prizes were largely imaginary.

Only small sums were actually paid out, the winners of the big prizes being nonexistent persons.”

Authored by George Citroner via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

An increase in cancer cases is putting pressure on Americans already facing a difficult situation—exorbitant drug prices, a lack of regulation, and a system that seems designed to profit, according to experts.

With medical debt burying patients, the battle against cancer is taking a new financial front that could bankrupt many cancer patients.

Emerging Patterns in Cancer Data

For more than seven decades, cancer has remained among the top two leading causes of death. Well over one-third of the U.S. population will confront a cancer diagnosis during their lifetime, according to National Cancer Institute estimates.

A new study published in JAMA Network Open analyzing cancer data from 3.8 million patients reveals a trend—Generation X, those born between 1965 and 1980, is experiencing a sharper rise in cancer rates across major types than any previous generation dating back to 1908. This trajectory suggests that elevated cancer incidence in the United States could persist for decades to come, representing a looming public health crisis.

The cancer mortality rate in the United States has consistently fallen year over year since 2000, but the rate of newly diagnosed cases is rising. In 2024, over 2 million new cancer cases are projected in the United States, according to data published in A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. This is up from 1,958,310 new cases in 2023.

The incidence rate for six of the top 10 cancers is also increasing. Incidence rose annually by 0.6 percent to 3 percent between 2015 and 2019 for cancers like breast, pancreas, prostate, liver, kidney, and HPV-related oral cancers.

‘Early-Onset Cancer Epidemic’

Research published in 2022 points to an “early-onset cancer epidemic.” Some evidence suggests a 79.1 percent global increase in early-onset cancers from 1990 to 2019 and a nearly 30 percent rise in related deaths.

While the causes are unclear, scientists suggest accelerated aging due to factors like diet, lifestyle, and environmental exposures may play a role.

A 2024 report shows younger adults as the only age group with increased overall cancer incidence from 1995 to 2020, rising 1 percent to 2 percent annually. Breast, prostate, endometrial, colorectal, and cervical cancer rates are also increasing in this population.

Young adults saw a 1 percent to 2 percent annual increase in cervical (ages 30 to 44) and colorectal cancers (under 55) between 2015 and 2019. Colorectal cancer rose from the fourth leading cause of cancer death in the late 1990s to the first in men and second in women under 50.

The Rising Financial Toll

As more cancer diagnoses loom over younger, working-age Americans, those affected face financial problems due to the skyrocketing costs of life-saving treatments.

Many cancer patients and survivors are drowning in medical debt despite having health insurance, according to a recent survey from the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action Network.

Forty-seven percent of over 1,200 cancer patients and survivors surveyed have accrued debt due to their cancer treatment, with 49 percent carrying a burden exceeding $5,000. As many as 69 percent have been grappling with this debt for over a year, and more than a third (35 percent) have been saddled with cancer-related debt for three years or longer.

Almost all (98 percent) of these respondents were insured when the debt was incurred, with high-deductible health plans without a health savings account being the most common coverage (34 percent).

The findings suggest that those burdened with cancer-related medical debt are three times more likely to fall behind on recommended cancer screenings (18 percent versus 5 percent). Twenty-seven percent have gone without adequate food, while another 25 percent have been forced to skip or delay essential care due to the crippling debt.

Drug prices have been increasing, far outpacing inflation, according to a recent report prepared for the American Hospital Association by Healthsperien, a public health consultancy. While inflation was approximately 6.4 percent from January 2022 to 2023, the average price of cancer drugs increased by 15.2 percent in 2023 and 32 percent the year prior.

The median price for treatment for oncology drugs averages $257,000 per year—3.7 times higher than that of non-oncology drugs. Compounding the issue, the average inflation-adjusted launch price for oral cancer drugs increased by over 25 percent between 2017 and 2022.

If these trends persist, the average new self-administered cancer medication could potentially cost over $300,000 per year by 2025, exacerbating the financial burden on patients and straining health care resources, according to the report.

Health Care System’s Role in Drug Pricing

The overall health care system is to blame for exorbitant drug prices, Pavani Rangachari, a professor of health care administration and public health at the University of New Haven, told The Epoch Times.

The lack of price regulation and negotiations in the U.S. system allows pharmaceutical companies to enjoy “free rein” in setting prices, even for drugs with minimal benefits in prolonging life, such as those extending survival by only three or four months, she added. Patients could accumulate over $150,000 in costs for certain cancer drugs within that short timeframe, Ms. Rangachari noted.

While the high costs associated with drug development from “bench to bedside” contribute to the problem, pharmaceutical companies essentially hold monopolies due to patent protection, enabling them to maximize profits, she added.

The companies can also partner with providers and physicians and incentivize them to continue prescribing expensive drugs, Ms. Rangachari said.

Adding to the problem is the nature of cancer treatment itself, where patients often require multiple sequential drugs, and the burden of medical debt persists even as they transition to new medications.

A Medical System in Need of Reform

The problem with expensive cancer drugs is a systemic issue that demands government intervention through value-based purchasing models, Ms. Rangachari said.

These alternative payment systems allow states to negotiate lower drug costs with manufacturers, who should also be required to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of their cancer treatments, as is the practice in other developed nations through value-based pricing tied to health outcomes and quality-adjusted life years.

However, the burden does not solely rest on pharmaceutical companies. All stakeholders, including cancer centers, must increase transparency for cancer patients, as the financial hardship for them extends beyond just medical costs to indirect factors like lost productivity.

Despite the current system’s flaws, some cancer centers have begun screening for financial distress among patients and offering services to help them. “That can make a big difference,” Ms. Rangachari said. Insurers can alleviate the strain on patients by reducing prior authorization requirements, considering off-label drug uses, minimizing coverage restrictions, and lowering out-of-pocket maximums, she added.

Ms. Rangachari emphasized the unsustainability of the current system, with insurers potentially being the biggest losers due to premium pricing issues stemming from the high variability in drug costs. She questioned how insurers could set premiums amidst pharmaceuticals’ unpredictable pricing, highlighting the risk of high expenses burdening patients unfairly.

There will likely be pushback from powerful entities as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) implements value-based pricing, Ms. Rangachari noted. “So the government has to gear up for a big fight.”

Most of our readers know the left can’t meme, as memes require an understanding of both universal human truths and a minimal grasp on humor.

For example:

Or this:

Or this hot garbage:

Sometimes they don’t even realize what they’ve done…

These people are genuinely operating in their own reality:

Every time the Left tries to meme Trump they just end up making him look cooler https://t.co/MKardQ6aD3

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) April 14, 2023

Sorry about that, but the uninitiated needed to see how bad the situation is. Their jokes are obvious. Reductive. Anti-intellectual if you will. These are the same people who think gender is a state of mind, and these peeks under the hood can be constructive.

It seems that Biden’s allies are aware of their shortcomings, however – as the president’s main re-election SuperPAC, Future Forward USA Action, is raising $10 million to learn how to meme, or as Reuters puts it, ‘compete with Republican Donald Trump’s social media machine that spits out a wall of viral videos.’

We guarantee whoever wrote that sentence does not know how to meme.

The previously unreported effort by the highly-secretive Future Forward USA Action underscores broad concerns among Democrats and Biden donors that he and his campaign are losing a viral-video war with the Republican Party, which relentlessly portrays him as too old and out of touch.

Democrats say they are playing catch-up in a battlefield with few rules or ways to police manipulated or misleading content before it reaches tens of millions of Americans on their smartphones.

The Palo-Alto-based SuperPAC, backed by tech giants like Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz and LinkedIn founder Reed [sic] Hoffman, is raising at least $10 million to help better understand the algorithms that help Trump and his allies dominate vertical video platforms.

The group will also “collaborate with left-leaning influencers to help generate and disseminate new content,” according to the report.

How are they going to do that when the most ‘successful’ lefty ‘influencers’ are the perpetually-shat-upon Krassenstein brothers and this guy…

Speaking of TikTok, Future Forward has given up on Twitter, and is hoping to appeal to short attention-spans, with TikTok’s short, vertical videos.

“Future Forward is around to help solve problems, and TikTok is a problem and the group is reasonably trying to solve that problem,” a Democratic source told Reuters.

In short, the left is now incinerating millions of dollars trying to learn how to be cool.

Good luck, Reid… We can only explain it to you. We can’t make you understand it.

Authored by Nik Hoffman via Bitcoin Magazine,

Today, Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: MARA), a leader in Bitcoin mining, has launched an innovative pilot project to recycle heat generated from Bitcoin mining to warm a community in Finland.

JUST IN: Marathon is now warming a town of over 11,000 in Finland using heat from #Bitcoin mining 🤯 🇫🇮

pic.twitter.com/BUEzj7zqOi

— Bitcoin Magazine (@BitcoinMagazine) June 20, 2024

The 2-megawatt data center, energized at the end of May, is located in the Satakunta region, home to 11,000 residents.

“This pilot project in Finland is a critical step forward in our strategy to expand globally and innovate sustainably,” said Fred Thiel, Marathon’s chairman and CEO.

“We are not just producing digital assets; we are heating homes and integrating sustainable practices into our business model. We believe that this kind of innovation can drive the advancement of the digital asset compute industry and further strengthen Marathon’s leading position in the field.”

The initiative marks Marathon’s first district heating project and its debut in Europe. District heating involves centrally heating water and distributing it through underground pipes to heat local buildings. Finland, known for its clean energy mix, relies heavily on biomass for district heating. By utilizing heat from digital asset data centers, the project aims to reduce carbon emissions and operating costs.

Marathon’s ASIC Heating Setup

“Europe’s colder climate has given rise to an extensive network of district heating systems that provide warmth to millions of residents,” Marathon stated in its new Heating with Hashes report, published in full below.

“This same climate has attracted a different industry – data centers – which benefit from reduced energy consumption and infrastructure costs associated with the cooler temperatures. The share of electricity consumed by data centers in the EU is at least double the global average, with data centers accounting for around 3% of the EU’s electricity consumption compared, to 1.0-1.5% globally. These energy-intensive facilities generate 3 significant amounts of heat, creating a unique opportunity for strategic partnerships with district heating systems.”

“One industry needs heat, while the other generates plenty of it,” Marathon continued in the report.

“Instead of wasting the abundant heat produced by data centers, it could be recycled to meet heating demand. This innovation transforms an unwanted byproduct of data centers into a valuable resource for district heating systems, reducing costs and waste for everyone involved while reducing the need for inefficient, carbon-emitting heat sources.”

Marathon’s Heating with Hashes Report

The project is part of Marathon’s broader commitment to sustainability, expanding its footprint to twelve sites across four continents. According to Future Market Insights Inc, the district heating market is projected to grow from $198 billion to $340 billion by 2033, offering significant growth opportunities. By recycling heat, Marathon aims to enhance its sustainability portfolio and explore new revenue streams, aligning with its goal of achieving zero-cost power for digital asset computing.

“Following the success of our pilot project in Utah, where we demonstrated that it is both economically viable and environmentally beneficial to use landfill gas for digital asset compute, we have continued to experiment with innovative ways that our operations can add value beyond securing distributed ledgers, like Bitcoin’s,” stated Adam Swick, Marathon’s chief growth officer. 

“This pilot project in Finland is our first attempt to convert the heat that we produce as a byproduct of our operations into a valuable resource for a local community. We look forward to gathering more data from this project as we look for additional ways to leverage digital asset compute to build a more sustainable future.”

For more information about Marathon’s sustainability initiatives, visit their website here.

Those interested in reading Marathon’s full Heating with Hashes report can do so below:

First it was the EU and the US, now it looks like Canada could be next to weigh tariffs on Chinese made electric vehicles. 

Justin Trudeau’s government is considering new tariffs on Chinese-made electric vehicles to align with US and EU actions, according to a new report this week by Bloomberg.

An announcement about public consultations on these tariffs is expected soon, despite the fact that no final decisions have been rendered, the report said, citing people familiar with the matter. 

Bloomberg reported that Trudeau faces growing pressure to follow President Biden’s lead, who in May announced plans to nearly quadruple tariffs on Chinese-made EVs to 102.5%.

Both the US and the EU are worried about China flooding the market with cheap supply of EVs and undermining their domestic industries, with seasoned Chinese EV companies like BYD now aggressively entering global markets.

The report says that on Thursday, Ontario Premier Doug Ford accused China of exploiting low labor standards and dirty energy to produce cheap EVs and urged Trudeau’s government to match Biden’s tariffs.

“Unless we act fast, we risk Ontario and Canadian jobs,” he said on X.

Meanwhile, Chinese EV imports to Canada soared to C$2.2 billion last year from less than C$100 million in 2022, with a fivefold increase in cars arriving at Vancouver after Tesla began shipping Model Y vehicles from Shanghai, the report says. 

The Canadian government’s main concern isn’t Tesla but the potential influx of cheap Chinese-made cars. Trudeau and his ministers have said they are monitoring other countries’ actions but haven’t committed to new tariffs. Trudeau mentioned significant discussions about Chinese production at the recent G7 summit in Italy.

A spokesperson for Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland stated that Canada is “actively considering next steps to counter Chinese oversupply” without specifying if tariffs are planned.

Freeland’s press secretary said: “China has an intentional, state-directed policy of overcapacity. Protecting Canadian jobs, manufacturing, and our free trade relationships is essential.”

Recall we wrote days ago that the tariffs were only expected to slow, but not stop, Chinese EV sales in Europe. Nikkei Asia said that manufacturers like BYD will remain competitive against local producers despite the tariffs. 

Eugene Hsiao, head of China autos at Macquarie Capital, told Nikkei: “BYD’s cost advantage is high enough that they can profitably export even at a 35% tariff.”

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

The US will redirect air defense orders to Ukraine and allow that country to strike Russian forces anywhere across the border that are preparing to cross the frontier in its newest policy evolution. Up until now, the US was still delivering other clients’ air defense orders and had officially limited its authorization of cross-border strikes to only those Russian forces that were entering Kharkov Region. The reason why both approaches changed is because Russia continues to gain the upper hand in this conflict.

Its military-strategic dynamics are such that Russia has already beat NATO by far in their “race of logistics”/“war of attrition”, so much so that Sky News cited a report last month to inform their audience that Russia is producing three times as many shells as NATO at one-quarter of the price. This sets the stage for a possible Russian breakthrough across the front lines that might in turn trigger a conventional NATO intervention, which risks spiraling out of control into a Cuban-like brinksmanship crisis.

More air defenses for Ukraine and cross-border strikes against Russian forces won’t have any significant effect on changing these dynamics, with their only potential impact being to temporarily delay what might very well be the inevitable. Nevertheless, the media attention that’s been given to the US’ newest policy evolution is intended to reinforce its reliance as an ally after it and Ukraine clinched a security pact this month. That too was over-hyped, but it helped maintain the Western public’s morale.

Therein lies the real reason behind these three latest moves – the US-Ukrainian security pact and the US’ newest policy evolutions of redirecting air defense orders to Ukraine as well as allowing it to strike Russian troops anywhere across the border – since they’re really all about perception management. The Ukrainians know that they’re getting trounced, the Russians know they’re gaining ground, and the West knows that only the scenario of a conventional NATO intervention might change this.

The Western public has wised up to these dynamics, however, so it’s imperative for their elite to make it seem like this proxy war hasn’t been for naught and that there’s still a chance of at least stopping Russia from achieving a military breakthrough despite its strategic defeat now being impossible. Even if this only delays what might soon be to come, it could also buy time for NATO to better prepare for conventionally intervening in Ukraine instead of rushing in out of panic like might otherwise be the case.

At the end of the day, the US’ newest policy evolution was predictable, but it’s being over-hyped just like all of its prior ones were as well for perception management purposes. The only variable that can change this conflict’s military-strategic dynamics is a conventional NATO intervention, though that’s fraught with the risk of sparking World War III by miscalculation, but it’s still being seriously considered. Everything else is just a distraction from this fact.

Authored by Guy Caruso via RealClearEnergy,

The U.S. energy sector finds itself in a precarious position. Increasing geopolitical volatility and strong energy demand forecasts could spell trouble domestically in the future. The U.S. needs to stop hamstringing American energy companies and invest in the nation’s infrastructure, such as pipelines, processing, and production.

If we have learned anything in the last two and a half years, it’s that the U.S.’ energy industry is not free from geopolitical chaos globally. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Houthi’s attacks in Yemen backed by Iran and turmoil in the Middle East have very real repercussions for the average American. We may not be as intensely intertwined with those realities as our European allies, but energy is a global market with implications for domestic prices, supply, and demand. While different events can affect prices at home, there are steps the administration can take to protect our energy sector.

Encouraging oil exploration and production can help offset foreign risk factors. At a Senate hearing in early May, the acting deputy secretary of the Interior, Laura Daniels-Davis, said the department had just started preparing for the 2025 offshore oil and gas lease sales. Those plans often take at least 18 months to complete and often longer.

Similarly, the pause on Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) exports has had a chilling effect on investment in both the facilities, as well as upstream. The country has a plethora of resources under our feet, and we should utilize it. Natural gas significantly lowered U.S. emissions by 32% between 2005 and 2019 as the electricity mix shifts away from coal. The ban should be lifted so that the U.S. can expand its export footprint, thereby contributing to foreign nations’ emissions reduction. The move signals hostility to domestic producers and exporters have helped transition away from dirtier sources of energy. If the administration wants to move towards wind and solar, as well as electrify the economy, natural gas will play a vital role.

Geopolitical uncertainty highlights the importance of insulating our energy security to the best of our ability. Though global oil markets could dictate pain at the pump for consumers, supporting domestic energy production and infrastructure now will pay dividends in the long term and smooth the transition to much lower greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, it seems the infrastructure in the states, such as our electrical grids, transmission lines and pipelines, lag behind growing energy demand. 

A report this year from Grid Strategies titled “The Era of Flat Power Demand is Over,” shines a light on our possibly dark future. The report notes that the nationwide forecasts of electricity demand have shot up from 2.6% to 4.7% over the next five years, per 2023 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) filings. The significant jump is in part due to $630 billion in near-term investment in “large loads” such as industrial, manufacturing and data center facilities that will impact the grid. Increased demand for AI utilization will play an outsized role in electricity demand growth.

The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) recently released its annual Summer Reliability Assessment, which examines and identifies areas of concern the for the North American bulk power system (BPS). This year, NERC found elevated risk in numerous areas, such as the independent system operator in New England, the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) in Louisiana and Arkansas and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), among others. NERC noted in its report that “fuel supply and delivery infrastructure must be capable of meeting the ramp rates of natural-gas-fired generators as they balance the system when wind and solar generation declines.” Prioritizing the transportation of fuel supplies to all regions of the U.S. will help grid operators maintain reliable service when renewables are inefficient due to weather or the time of day.

For example, in the case of New England, Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) recently noted its CEO testified to ISO’s desperate need of pipeline capacity. In 2023, New England residents paid 31% more than the average for natural gas. Expanding pipeline capacity in the region would help decrease these costs sharply.

Couple the significant load growth in the U.S. with increasing geopolitical uncertainty, and it is evident that the U.S. must immediately address our domestic energy sector with tried-and-true solutions. Boosting our exportation of LNG, constructing new pipelines, and encouraging the flow of capital into oil and gas can help insulate the country from foreign chaos and support the administration’s transition toward lower GHG emissions.

Guy Caruso is a former administrator of the U.S. Energy Information Administration and a Center for Strategic and International Studies senior adviser in the Energy Security and Climate Change Program.