Authored by Michael Shellenberger via substack,

The same news media that mischaracterized psychosis as fanaticism in the alleged plot to kill Pelosi also downplayed the assassination plot against Kavanaugh by an abortion rights fanatic…

Journalists have described the alleged assassination attempt against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi by a delusional psychotic man in explicitly political terms, but largely dismissed the overtly political motivations of the suspect in the murder plot against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

David DePape, the suspect in an alleged assassination attempt against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, wrote a series of right-wing blog posts in recent weeks. “Many of the posts were filled with screeds against Jews, Black people, Democrats, the media and transgender people,” notes The Washington Post. “In one post, written on Oct. 19, the author urged former President Donald J. Trump to choose Tulsi Gabbard, the former Democratic congresswoman from Hawaii, as his vice-presidential candidate in 2024,” reports The New York Times. “In another,” wrote The Los Angeles Times, “he called ‘equity’ a leftist dog whistle ‘for the systematic oppression of white people’ and ‘diversity’ a ‘dog whistle for the genocide of the white race.’”

But the blog posts confirm my original reporting yesterday that DePape has been, for at least a decade, in the grip of a psychosis caused by mental illness and/or drug use. The Washington Post, to its credit, reports in the first paragraph that DePape’s blog was filled with “delusional thoughts, including that an invisible fairy attacked an acquaintance and sometimes appeared to him in the form of a bird” and that, as each post loaded, “a reader briefly glimpses an image of a person wearing a giant inflatable unicorn costume.” The New York Times acknowledged that, “mixed in with those posts were others about religion, the occult and images of fairies that the user said he had produced using an artificial intelligence imaging system,” albeit not until the 22nd paragraph.

And now the mother of DePape’s two children, Gypsy Taub, has publicly confirmed that DePape has experienced psychotic episodes. “He is mentally ill,” she told ABC7, “He has been mentally ill for a long time.” Taub said DePape disappeared for almost a year and “came back in very bad shape. He thought he was Jesus. He was constantly paranoid, thinking people were after him. And it took a good year or two to get back to, you know, being halfway normal.” However, it is not clear whether DePape’s psychosis is a result of an underlying mental illness, like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, or from the long-term use of drugs, particularly meth, which can result in psychosis and permanent changes to brain functioning. Taub’s neighbors, as I reported yesterday, said Taub herself suffered frequent bouts of paranoid psychosis and had repeatedly lied about them to the police.

Many people responded to my reporting yesterday by noting that DePape may have been psychotic but that the real problem lay with right-wing conspiracy theories. “But even if you believe he’s psychotic (which seems plausible),” wrote former New Yorker reporter James Surowiecki in response to my article, “why did his paranoid psychosis take as its object Nancy Pelosi? Because of the ubiquity of right-wing conspiracy theories and the demonization of Pelosi by right-wing media… We can certainly get rid of conspiracy theories being mainstreamed on cable TV and social media by high-profile pundits.”

But we can’t get rid of discussions of conspiracy theories because doing so would violate the First Amendment and, as I noted yesterday, psychotic people construct their delusions from whatever is in popular culture at the time to invent justifications for their actions. In 1981, a psychotic man named John Hinkley, Jr. shot President Ronald Reagan because, Hinkley said, he wanted to impress the actress Jodie Foster. Earlier this month, a man in Washington state shot two 40-something innkeepers because, he said, he heard the voice of Pope Gregory and John Paul say to him, “Are you going to let Bonny and Clyde do that to our family?”

Law enforcement officers stand guard as protesters march past Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home on June 8, 2022 in Chevy Chase, Maryland. An armed man was arrested near Kavanaugh’s home that morning. [Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images]

And if mainstream news journalists are so concerned that political extremism is resulting in more violence against public officials, why did they, en masse, downplay the assassination attempt against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in June? Where The New York Times has put the alleged Pelosi assassination attempt on its front page for two days in a row, it buried the story of the Kavanaugh murder plot on page A20. Three days later, none of the Sunday morning political shows, such as NBC’s “Meet the Press,” even mentioned the assassination attempt.

Today, “Meet the Press,” focused on the Pelosi plot and framed it as overly political, making no mention whatsoever of DePape’s psychotic delusions. “The chilling and violent attack on Paul Pelosi — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s 82-year-old husband — is raising fears of more political violence,” said its host, Chuck Todd.

The double standard in news media coverage is brought into sharper relief when one considers that the suspect in the murder plot against Kavanaugh, Nicholas John Roske, 26, has, unlike DePape, shown no sign of psychosis. Rather, he appears to be motivated by the same kind of political fanaticism that has gripped climate activists around the world.

Subscribers to Michael Shellenberger can read more here…

In this brief yet engaging discussion with Jim Lewis and Ivan Bayoukhi of Wall Street Silver, Matterhorn Asset Management principal, Matthew Piepenburg, addresses further evidence of the U.S. Fed’s undeniable distortion of basic capitalism, social equality and global currencies.

Matthew opens with a disturbing chart of the ignored yet undeniable wealth inequality (and transfer) created by years—as well as trillions—of misallocated mouse-click money to support a financial system openly rigged to favor a select minority rather than a national majority/economy. This misallocation, as warned by Thomas Jefferson to Andrew Jackson, has direct consequences not only for the financial stability of a nation, but its social and economic health as well. The evidence of such fracturing, of course, is now everywhere to be seen. As Matthew discusses, current economic and political leadership out of DC is but a shadow of its former self and founding principles. In many ways, the U.S. is becoming unrecognizable and one is forced to ask if the modern policy makers are innocently stupid or deliberately destructive?

Equally important are the global ripple effects of the US Fed’s increasingly desperate and distorted actions. The strong USD policies intentionally and currently used by the Powell Fed have had a crippling and destabilizing impact on global currencies, from developed to developing, as the rest of the world has been forced to import US inflation and debase their own currencies to settle trillions in imposed USD transactions. In short, as the USD rises, the rest of the world’s currencies (and hence economies), friend and foe alike, are forced to suffer. As Matthew quips: “With financial and political allies like the U.S., who needs enemies?”

Of course, the Fed’s current policy of a strong USD (and rocketing DXY) is as unsustainable as its is globally and nationally toxic/reckless. At some point the financial system from Tokyo to Athens cracks under the weight of a weaponized USD as more and more nations (i.e., the BRICS) look increasingly east toward new financial partners and alternative currencies to settle trades. Furthermore, with a recession looming (or denied), the Fed will eventually be required to weaken the Dollar and lower rates if it has any honest intention of fighting a recession. At that point, precious metals as measured by the USD, will surpass prior highs.

Watch the full interview below (via Gold Switzerland),

By Michael Wilson, chief US equity strategist at Morgan Stanley

Two weeks ago, we turned tactically bullish on US equities. Some investors felt this call came out of left field, given our well-established bearish view on the fundamentals. To be clear, this call is based almost entirely on technicals rather than fundamentals, which remain unsupportive of many equity prices and the S&P 500 [ZH; similar to what Goldman said on Saturday]. The technical picture became more supportive, in our view, after the historic reversal two weeks ago on another higher-than-expected CPI reading for September. More specifically, the S&P 500 gapped lower that Thursday morning, only to reverse 6% and close at the highs. Then, on Friday, stocks had a terrible day, with the S&P 500 trading down 2.4% and closing on the lows. When we studied this price action over the following weekend, we found that Friday’s pullback was a 61.8% Fibonacci retracement of Thursday’s rally that stopped right at the 200-week moving average. The combination of these technical oddities was too much to ignore. Hence, our tactical/technical rally call.

From a fundamental standpoint there are some supportive factors too.

First, CPI is coming down. Granted, it is one of the most backward-looking data series; it says very little about the future and can be misleading about present conditions. Think back to what CPI was telling us at the end of March 2021. The index sat at 2.6%Y after the government had delivered more than $3 trillion in fiscal stimulus during 1Q21. As a result, the money supply (M2) was growing by 27%Y. Never in the history of these data (70+ years) had M2 grown at even half that rate. Given that inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon, it was crystal clear that 2.6%Y inflation was likely to explode higher. Fast forward to today and CPI stands at 8.2%Y, a 40-year high and marginally below its peak of 9.1%Y in June. However, M2 is now growing at just 2.5%Y and falling fast. Given the leading properties of M2 for inflation, the seeds have been sown for a sharp fall next year. The implied fall in CPI outlined in Exhibit 1 would be highly out of consensus, and while it won’t necessarily play out exactly as in our chart, we believe it’s directionally correct. This has implications for Fed policy and rates. Indeed, part of our call for a rally assumes we are closer to a pause/pivot in the Fed’s tightening campaign, and while we don’t expect to see a dramatic shift at next week’s meeting, the markets have a way of getting in front of Fed shifts. In short, investors may be as offside on inflation today as they were in March 2021, just in the opposite direction. One of the reasons why we did not try to trade the summer rally was that we felt it was much too early to be thinking about a Fed pivot. We turned out to be right as the Fed shift proved to be too far in the future to make the summer rally last. We’re closer today because M2 growth is fast approaching zero and the 3-month-10-year yield curve finally inverted last week, something Chair Powell has noted is important in determining if the Fed has done enough.

Second, while we have been vocal bears on growth all year (calling for fire AND ice), that view is no longer out of consensus. In fact, part of the big sell-off in stocks in September reflected growing concern about 3Q earnings. But, as with 2Q results, earnings have been weak but not bad enough to get the kind of drop in 2023 EPS forecasts necessary for the final leg of this bear market. Instead, we think that management teams have/will remain mostly silent on 2023, which means estimates will stay elevated until it becomes obvious just how negative the operating leverage has become and/or companies are forced to discuss 2023 forecasts during 4Q earnings results in January/February. As an aside, falling inflation is the reason why we think margins will disappoint more than investors have modeled. For most of the year we have had pushback against our lower growth call, with investors arguing that higher inflation leads to higher nominal GDP, even in a recession, so earnings can hold up. We disagree because higher inflation leads to higher operating leverage all else equal and operating leverage cuts both ways. As end-price inflation falls faster than costs, operating leverage turns negative. That’s where we are today with PPI above CPI. That means lower lows for the S&P 500 are still ahead after this rally is over.

Bottom line, inflation has peaked and is likely to fall faster than most expect, based on M2 growth. This could provide some relief to stocks in the short term as rates fall in anticipation of the change. Combining this with the compelling technicals, we think the current rally in the S&P 500 has legs to 4000-4150 before reality sets in on how far 2023 EPS estimates need to come down. We realize that going against one’s core view in the short term can be dangerous (and maybe wrong-headed), but that’s part of our job. It’s like a double-breaking putt in golf – hard to make, but you still gotta try.

More in the full note available to pro subs at the usual place.

In news that should come as absolutely zero surprise to anyone who has been paying attention over the last week, the Elon Musk era at Twitter has begun. And, Musk’s first order of business as “Chief Twit” at the company? Layoffs. Lots of them.

After closing on the deal for Twitter on Thursday last week, Musk has wasted no time in starting to cut the fat off the company. After immediately cutting schlep rock CEO Parag Agrawal and head censor Vijaya Gadde from the company, Musk is slated to continue making layoffs this week, according to the New York Times. After arriving at Twitter on Thursday, Musk also fired the company’s CFO.

According to the Times, managers are “being asked to draw up lists of employees to cut” on Musk’s orders. Twitter currently has about 7,500 employees and the scale of cuts in their entirety is not yet known, the report says.

Layoffs are expected to take place before November 1, the report says. This is the date that “employees were scheduled to receive stock grants as part of their compensation”.

Musk can avoid paying out the grants by laying off workers before the end of the month, the report says.

“I was told to expect somewhere around 50 percent of people will be laid off,” Ross Gerber, the chief executive of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth and Investment Management told the New York Times.

Recall, we pointed out on Thursday that media (for example, Bloomberg) was running rife, citing no sources at all, while claiming that advertisers are nervous of the nazi, child porn and hate-speech that will inevitably return to the social media platform now that the richest man in the world is in charge. The Wall Street Journal also warned that “Madison Avenue isn’t sold on the deal,” suggesting advertisers are anxious to be on the Musk-owned platform.

Elon Musk then tweeted a brief letter to advertisers, assuring them that “Twitter obviously cannot become a free-for-all hellscape, where anything can be said with no consequences!”

Authored by Eve Ottenberg via CounterPunch.org,

Tens of thousands protested against the skyrocketing cost of living and against Macron in France October 16, led by left-wing politician Jean Luc Melenchon, but there were few front page or top-of-the hour headlines in the U.S. Huge protests occurred in Rome the same day to demand an end to Italy’s involvement in NATO, but no coverage on the west side of the Atlantic. Thousands protesting in Paris October 22 against NATO, but little notice in North America. Massive protests against NATO and inflation due to sanctions on Russian energy in France, Germany and Austria in September, but little news of it here in the heart of the empire. German police beat citizens protesting energy shortages and record-high inflation, both due to Russia sanctions, the week of October 17, but that was not covered in the USA. Seventy thousand Czechs protested in Prague September 3 against NATO involvement in Ukraine, demanding gas from Russia (before some mysterious imperial somebody with means and motive blew up Nordstream 1 and 2, probably to nip the political effects of those protests in the bud) and ending the war, but that got little coverage in U.S. corporate media.

Ever get the sense there are things our media hides from us? Hmm. Ever wonder why enormous protests against the policies of the Exceptional Empire and its attack dog, NATO, seem, um, to be downplayed? Ever think our corporate news outlets behave more like the propaganda arm of our neoconservative state department and military than a free press? Well, if so, you may be onto something.

Lots of Europeans are unhappy about NATO, the Ukraine war, sanctions on Russia and the wild inflation and deindustrialization – which will result in gargantuan unemployment – those sanctions caused. As their living standards sink like stones, Europeans know who is to blame, namely their supposedly great ally across the Atlantic, and many have soured on their so-called alliance with the hegemon. But Washington doesn’t seem to care. Let the Europeans go broke and protest. The important thing is not reporting this news to the American people, who, if they heard about it, might get a subversive inkling that their government had not behaved in an entirely honorable manner.

Meanwhile lies swarm everywhere. Some unintentional, others not. Most recently we have U.S. joint chiefs of staff chairman Mark Milley claiming that if Ukraine falls, the current world order will collapse. Sadly, this is hogwash. What will collapse are the tumescent egos of U.S. and European politicos and military men. Not surprisingly, they conflate that with the world order. But there are other, far more sinister reasons to make such garishly incendiary pronouncements, namely to prepare the American population for the unthinkable – and it is unthinkable, because if the U.S. attacks Russia with nukes, both the U.S. and Russia will be annihilated. Will Biden and his generals get a nuclear war? Unclear. But what’s clear as day is that Americans travel like lemmings to their doom, thanks to the fibs of their rulers and media.

Somehow all the big news gets blacked out. Like China dumping $100 billion worth of U.S. treasuries and what that means if this becomes a trend (I’ll tell you what it means: we’re $30 trillion in debt and we can’t pay, so when we cart SUVs full of cash to the supermarket, we’ll make those Weimar wheelbarrows look petite). Or how sanctions on Russian energy backfired and caused ruinous inflation in Europe, pretty awful inflation here in the U.S. and pushed the whole west toward recession…or maybe ultimately depression. Or how Biden’s ever more reckless sanctions on China could wind up bankrupting us all. China is, after all the chief U.S. trading partner. Sanction China, as Biden recently did to its chip and semiconductor sector, and prices for everything explode upwards.

But money isn’t everything. What about Biden’s devil-may-care attitude toward continued human life on this planet, which he endangers every time he opens his mouth to bloviate that the U.S. will throw its military into the fray, should Taiwan and China go to war? True, Biden’s bellicose pronunciamentos do make the news – he is, after all, the ruler of one of the most violent empires in human history – but details of their global life-and-death implications, namely that they could kill us all? Not so much.

No, this news is not of interest to the editorial bigwigs who tell us what to think. They’re too busy stuffing our heads with bubble gum for the brain like rubbish about Tik Tok, or celebrity drivel or anything else deeply stupid enough to cretinize viewers and readers, so they won’t notice that their utility bills doubled in recent months, or their grocery bills shot up many percentage points, or the world is closer to being incinerated in a nuclear apocalypse than it has ever been.

But they notice anyway. And even though they may lack the finely tuned mental framework to fit it all together, thanks to their news consumption habits, lots of people have begun to glimpse that Washington’s idiocy could get them blown up tout de suite and meanwhile is bleeding them dry and will very soon be bleeding them drier. Hence the public’s growing reluctance to keep handing Ukraine, the most corrupt country in Europe, blank checks. The GOP even climbed onto the bandwagon and announced it won’t fund this misbegotten war if it regains congress. I, for one, will be astonished if Republicans have the backbone to keep that promise. Anyway, Biden plans to preempt this oath by forking over more billions to Kiev now. This will not, ahem, help the Dems, which is probably what Republicans count on. But then Biden gets to look like he’s a man of principle (the show must go on), while the rest of us go broke and calculate our distance from atomic ground zero. Americans struggle with utility bills, grocery and gas prices, medical and educational debt. They don’t need to fund defense contractors to the tune of billions of dollars so Ukrainians and Russians can kill each other halfway around the world. And they certainly don’t need a war that has humanity teetering on the brink of nuclear Armageddon.

In an unexpected dribble of good news, on October 24 the Washington Post reported that some 30 members of the progressive caucus urged Biden to get diplomacy to end the war rolling. The next day, they sniveled and recanted. This was the first time any Dems had the guts not to cheerlead for more bloodshed and more war on Moscow. What caused this initial sea change, I don’t know. But it was good news. Better late than never, it seemed. It appeared to mean some on the so-called left in Washington had finally come to their senses and just might not behave as disgracefully as so many European socialists did once World War I started, when they abandoned their erstwhile pacifism. For a long time, honestly, it has looked like that was the inheritance Dem progressives wanted to claim, an inheritance not just of shame and mass murder, but, were the Ukraine war to morph into World War III, human extinction.

For less than a day the sun of reason and goodness shone down. Briefly, the people who consider themselves of the left decided this danger of humanity’s mass execution was worth speaking out about and that diplomacy for peace is the only sane route out of the fiasco. But then, the next day they chickened out of bucking their party’s bloodlust. Even their timid gesture was too much to ask. These people are not leftists. They are cowards. They are a disgrace to the left. If anyone in the progressive caucus ever speaks out for diplomacy again, I’ll be very impressed.

Speaking of being impressed, how about that Washington Post actually playing this story big, about progressives calling for diplomacy, instead of burying it? That was unexpected, to say the least. Because it’s long been sickeningly obvious that our mainstream media show one side of the story: the NATO, Washington, imperial, war-mongering side. And it’s been doing that, shamelessly, for a generation. (It did that earlier too, but with a bit of actual embarrassment, whenever it got called out.) Remember Iraq’s infamous weapons of mass destruction? The editors who hyped that lie for months on end went on to bigger and better things, and so did the politicians – Biden even became president! – while an entire country, Iraq, was bombed to smithereens, based largely on mendacious reporting and political chicanery and now, decades later, has simply swirled down the drain.

And who can forget the frenzy whipped up to justify NATO’s criminal 1999 bombing of Serbia? Nowadays Biden and NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg would have you believe NATO is a “defensive” organization. What it did to Serbia should have tossed that mistake in the trash long ago. Instead, the error persists (not accidentally). When Russia reacted to the chance of Ukraine joining NATO and thus the presence of a hostile bomb-happy axis on its borders, western rulers protested that NATO is “defensive.” So also clamor our media, prevaricating just as they do every time they mention the U.S. defense department, which should ditch that moniker and return to the previous, more honest “war department.”

You know things are bad when absurd chuckleheads like former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi are the ones almost nailing reality on the head. He did that October 20 with his remarks that Ukraine provoked Russia into its invasion. It could be argued that Kiev did so by slaughtering 14,000 Russian-speakers in the Donbass since 2014 and then, last winter, massing huge numbers of troops on that region’s border, in preparation for what Moscow took to be a genocide. But actually, Ukraine’s supposed instigation had lotsa help. It would have been more accurate for Berlusconi to say that Ukraine’s puppet master, the U.S., provoked Moscow with its nonstop incitement by expanding NATO eastward since the Soviet Union’s fall, as numerous American experts and diplomats – from cold war brain-trust luminary George Kennan to former ambassador to the USSR Jack Matlock to CIA chief William Burns to great powers expert John Mearsheimer, and others – had  warned, and more recently egged Moscow to attack with a 2014 Kiev coup and the eight years of violent nonsense that followed, and that Washington did so with premeditation to rupture the economic relationship between Russia and Europe; but nonetheless Berlusconi landed his verbal dart on the board with the bullseye. And when you have to go to Berlusconi for informed commentary, you’re in trouble, because he recently chose his side in the Italian government and it was the fascist one. So now things are so bad that fascists are among the people objecting to imperial propaganda. Fun times.

But we have the same disastrous mess here in the U.S., where the next presidential election could shape up to be a choice between Trump’s fascism or Biden’s nuclear war. Choice? Ho, ho. That’s no choice. That’s death on the installment plan or instant death. Either way it’s disastrous for ordinary people, because Trumpism either ends what civilization we have in America, which has a dire, global because imperial impact, or Bidenism directly ends civilization on earth.

At the start of the Ukraine war, Biden promised not to launch World War III. He broke that promise, by flooding Ukraine with weapons, CIA operatives and some special forces. To call this reckless is an understatement. Biden’s refusal to use his considerable weight to promote peace negotiations killed thousands of Ukrainians and Russians, will likely kill many more, and also endangers the lives of billions of other people, worldwide – 5.3 billion from nuclear-winter-induced starvation, who would suffer a slow, agonizing death. And I’m not talking about the canard that Russia may use a low-yield nuclear device on the battlefield. I’m talking about Moscow and Washington determining that they really are in a hot war and the long-range, high-yield nuclear missiles that could then begin to fly.

Biden’s sole task is to prevent this. His desire to be seen as the new FDR, as a friend of the unions, as some sort of social democrat, mean nothing if he can’t deescalate this war with Moscow. If Biden wants any legacy other than that of earth’s destroyer, leaving humanity a cold, charred, radioactive planet, he will stop his war-mongering garbage at once and throw his definitive, presidential heft behind peace negotiations with Moscow. And Washington must be an in-person party to those negotiations. Absent that, anything else he does goes down in history, if there even is a history, as a waste.

Eve Ottenberg is a novelist and journalist. Her latest book is Hope Deferred. She can be reached at her website.

Last Monday, when discussing Morgan Stanley well-known uber-bear Michael Wilson’s doubling down on his “tactical rally” call (as a reminder, he now expects that S&P to hit 4,000-4,150), we wrote that “Wilson is doubling down on his shift away from uber-bear to not just tactical bull, but full-blown bull, a transformation predicated by Morgan Stanley’s house view that both yields and the dollar have peaked. Of course, if that is indeed the case, then with both yields and dollar sliding, it’s virtually inevitable that the bear market ends somewhere here, because even as earnings slide, PE multiples start expanding again. Of course, Wilson won’t admit any of that just yet (keep an eye on his tone in coming weeks) and instead when sharing his feedback to last week’s notable call as well as color on where Wilson thinks the markets will trade from here, he writes what we first noted more than two weeks ago, namely that the meltup is all in the technicals.”

We didn’t have long to wait, because just two days later Wilson, who correctly predicted this year’s slump, told Bloomberg that he believes the bear market in US equities may conclude sooner than investors think.

Once again unexpectedly echoing everything that BofA’s Michael Hartnett – who is the true forecasting superstar of 2022 – has said this year and more specifically, Hartnett’s latest forecast that the “big rally” hits in H1 2023…

Hartnett Reveals Latest FMS Results: Macro, Investor Capitulation Is Here; Policy Capitulation Starting… The “Big Rally” Hits In H1 2023 https://t.co/eXb6VqWmx3

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 18, 2022

… Wilson told BBG TV that “ultimately the bear market will be over probably sometime in the first quarter” although since Morgan Stanley still hasn’t even bothered to make a recession its base case, he naturally had to CYA, adding that “all of this is subject to revision. I want to make clear, if the market starts trading off again and the S&P 500 blows through 3,650 on the downside, we will be bearish again.”

In other words, if stocks keep going up, Mike will stay bullish; if they drop, he will turn bearish. Which may or may not be useful information.

As a reminder, Wilson, who was ranked the best portfolio strategist in the latest Institutional Investor survey, said a 19% slump in the S&P 500 Index this year has left it testing support at its 200-week moving average of around 3,600, which could lead to a technical recovery. The S&P 500 has rallied nearly 6% since Oct. 12, when it closed at lowest since November 2020, just days before Wilson (echoing Hartnett before him, and the opposite of Kolanovic who had just turned bearish) predicted a meltup.

Which is not to say that stocks will be at 5,000 this time next year: Wilson is anticipating more pain for equities by the second half of 2023, and Morgan Stanley is forecasting that the S&P 500 will close at 3,900 by next June, according to the latest Bloomberg survey conducted in mid-October. Ultimately, he sees the broad equities benchmark bottoming around 3,000-3,200, although as we will discuss in a note later today, in the latest Morgan Stanley Sunday Start, Wilson writes that “inflation has peaked and is likely to fall faster than most expect, based on M2 growth. This could provide some relief to stocks in the short term as rates fall in anticipation of the change. Combining this with the compelling technicals, we think the current rally in the S&P 500 has legs to 4000-4150 before reality sets in on how far 2023 EPS estimates need to come down.”

In short: the bear market ends in Q1, 2023 but then stocks could go up or down – depending on where earnings guidance comes out – or as he puts it, “we’re probably more bearish than most for the outlook next year,” although he thinks “this tactical rally is going to be big enough to try and pivot and trade it.”

By Adam Andrzejewski of Open The Books substack

So, just who is making all of this money?

Meet the Illinois government employee $100,000 Club. It’s comprised of 132,188 public employees and retirees who earned a new ‘minimum wage’ of $100,000 or more.

While crime skyrockets in the neighborhoods, test scores plummet in the public schools, and inflation decimates private-sector paychecks, the Illinois public employee class is living the good life.

Our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com found nearly 500 educators in the public schools with salaries between $200,000 and $439,000. In small towns, city managers made up to $341,300. Three doctors at the University of Illinois at Chicago earned incomes between $1 million and $2.1 million.

Barbers trimmed off $104,000 at State Corrections; janitors at the Chicago Transit Authority cleaned up $143,634; bus drivers in Chicago picked up $242,812; and suburban community college presidents made $418,677.

Use Our Quick Search Tool

Using our interactive mapping tool, quickly review (by employer ZIP code) the 132,188 public employees and retirees across Illinois making more than $100,000. Just click a pin (ZIP Code) and scroll down to see the results in your hometown rendered in the chart beneath the map.

Following The Money

Public schools (43,500) – Last year, 26,904 educators earned six-figure salaries while 16,592 retirees pocketed $100,000+ pensions. However, test scores plummeted with only 31-percent of students reading at grade level.

Big salaries: Eighteen school superintendents made $300,000+, among them Edward Mansfield (Homewood Flossmoor D233— $434,323); Michael Lubelfeld (North Shore School D112— $392,952); Gregory Jackson (Ford Heights D169—$379,465); Kevin Nohelty (Dolton School D148—$373,626); and Blair Nuccio (Indian Springs D109—$355,154).

Big pensions: Eighteen retired school superintendents received $300,000+ in retirement pensions, among them Lawrence A. Wyllie (Lincoln-Way CHSD 210 – $361,787.64); Henry Bangser (New Trier Township HSD 203 – $351,676); Gary Catalani (Wheaton-Warrenville Unit SD 200 – $350,113.08); Laura Murray (Homewood-Flossmoor CHSD 233 – $344,450); and Mary Curley (Hinsdale CCSD 181 – $334,540.20).

Chicago (28,000) – Why is crime out of control in Chicago? It’s a matter of political will— not pay. The Chicago police and fire departments paid 600 employees between $200,000 and $480,000 in cash compensation last year.

In Chicago, 41 ‘street light repair’ workers made between $100,000 and $196,123 and 61 city ‘sign painters’ made six-figures up to $145,341. The boss at the city auto pound reaped $124,783 while the janitors at the auto pound made six-figures too. ‘Sanitation laborers’ made up to $125,783.

In Chicago Public Schools (CPS), CEO, Janice K. Jackson made $361,762: $298,923 in salary with $62,839 in benefits. Jackson’s salary alone exceeded the pay of the U.S. Secretary of Education ($203,500) —  a cabinet-level position – by $95,423.

However, student scores plummeted. Just 26-percent of eleventh graders perform at grade level in math and seven in ten students could not read at grade level.

No matter, we found the average teacher in the Chicago Public Schools made $108,730 last year when including benefits. In addition, there were 1,823 employees across six departments – outside the classroom – now dedicated to diversity, equity, inclusion efforts.

The Chicago Transit Authority, operator of trains and busses, paid rail service supervisors up to $294,609;  ironworkers as much as $251,376; and line workers $240,835. A signal maintainer took home $302,075, a telephone line worker was paid $247,677 and a customer service representative made $207,202.

Incredibly, 378 CTA bus drivers took home $100,000+ and top earner Yolanda Harris picked up $242,812.

Colleges & universities (18,000) – University of Illinois basketball coach Bradley Underwood earned $3.2 million last year. Fady Toufic Charbel ($2.029 million); Mark Gonzalez ($1.059 million); and Konstantin Slavin ($1.041 million) are million-dollar doctors at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC).

Universities: Highly compensated employees included those that work for the University of Illinois Foundation—a private fundraising foundation for the university. A staggering 42 employees cleaned off nearly $7 million in cash compensation making between $100,000 and $294,700 each. The top-paid employee, Edward Wald ($294,700), out-earned the president at Northern Illinois University and every other state university (except Illinois State).

Retired professors have some of the biggest pensions: University of Illinois at Chicago professor Wolodymyr Minkowycz ($426,656), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign physics prof Gordon Baym ($285,669) and engineering prof Vernon Snoeyink ($274,664).

Junior colleges: The top paid presidents included Christine Jean Sobek (Waubonsee Community College — $418,677) and Thomas Ramage (Parkland College—$339,000). Top retirees included Zelema Harris (Parkland College—$253,297); John Swalec (Waubonsee Community College—$239,871); and Vernon Crawley (Moraine Valley Community College— $239,851).

State of Illinois (16,500) – Eight barbers at Corrections made between $102,300 and $104,000. Veterans, Human Services, and Corrections paid 484 nurses between $100,100 and $255,300.

The top paid sergeants at the State Police earned $309,600. We found more state police officers retired on six-figure pensions (1,555) than officers currently paid on six-figure salaries (1,540)!

Gov. Pritzker appointed Cecelia Abundis ($147,500) as Director of Professional Regulations at the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR). It was an odd pick. Years ago, we exposed Abundis billing taxpayers for her 250-mile one-way “commute” from her home in Michigan to Chicago as she “managed” cases after she was promoted to supervisor in Attorney General Lisa Madigan’s office.  

A court-ordered monitor, Dr. Stewart Pablo, was paid $321,500 by taxpayers to report on the barriers to access mental healthcare within the prison system – his pay amounts to approximately $1.7 million during the past five years.

Cities & villages (14,500) – Small town managers collect high pay, along with perks and pension benefits. Top paid managers were Michael J. Ellis (Village of Grayslake –- $302,408); Reid Ottesen (Village of Palatine — $300,900); Richard Nahrstadt (Village of Northbrook – $280,516); and Stephanie Hannon (Village of Bannockburn – $252,360).

Most local six-figure employees are in the police and fire departments. The top-paid local police officer worked in Deerfield, John Sliozis ($226,241) although the next five officers making more than $200,000 worked for the Aurora department.

The small town of Rosemont (pop. 4,200), near O’Hare International Airport, has three highly compensated officials:

• Patrick Nagle ($282,304—head of the Allstate Arena entertainment venue),

• Christopher R. Stephens ($278,227—Executive Director of the Donald E. Stephens Convention Center), and

• Christopher’s uncle mayor Bradley A. Stephens ($225,652) – who also made $70,100 as an elected state rep. (Bradley is the son of Rosemont’s founding mayor, Donald Stephens, whom the convention center is named after.)

Private associations, nonprofits and retired lawmakers

There are several legal loopholes for individuals to access state funding through private associations, nonprofit organizations, and state legislative bodies.

• Retired Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley (D) double dipped pension systems for nearly $249,636. Daley made $158,076 per year in pension payouts after a short eight-year career as a state senator plus another $91,560 per year in city pension payouts for his 22 years as the mayor of Chicago.

• Three top paid earners within the municipal-government pension system work for private associations – not government. Brad Cole of the Illinois Municipal League pulled down $437,447, up from $407,656, (2020). Peter Murphy, executive director of Illinois Association of Park Districts, made $357,816, while Brett Davis, executive director of the Park District Risk management Agency, brought in $342,405.

• Former Illinois Governor Jim Edgar (R) double dipped pension systems: General Assembly pension ($186,660 per year) and University Retirement System pension ($90,336). Last year, Edgar’s total payout in pension heaven? $276,996

Since Edgar left the governorship in 1999, we estimate that he earned $2.4 million in compensation from the University of Illinois (2000-2013) and another $2.5 million in pension payments from his career as legislator, secretary of state and governor.

Highly compensated locals

DuPage County employees have a history of hefty salaries and pensions. In fact, the old county Republican guard are all retired on golden-parachute public pensions including former state’s attorney Joe Birkett ($182,910); former sheriff John Zaruba ($165,293); and former county clerk Gary King ($157,513).

Local park district administrators out earned the state director of parks ($158,100). These included James Pilmer ($256,447 at Fox Valley); Raymond McGury ($227,470 at Naperville); Michael Benard ($213,158 at Wheaton). The top pension payments for park retirees also exceeded $200,000 per year: Steven Messerli and Robert Vaughan, each of Fox Valley Park District, respectively took home $225,664 and $219,559 in retirement pension.

Even water district employees tapped into the largess: David Miller (North Shore Water Reclamation District — $235,615); Mark Eddington (Kishwaukee Water Reclamation District— $189,085); and John Spatz (DuPage Water Commission— $225,000). And retirees again received top payments—Albin Pagorski and Gregory Hergenroeder respectively got $226,817 and $216,795 in pensions from the Fox River Water Reclamation District.

Soon—It Could Get A Lot Worse

Two years ago, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker wanted to hike the income tax during pandemic and pushed for a state constitutional amendment to allow for a progressive income tax. However, the voters shot it down, 55-45.

This year, Pritzker is pushing Amendment 1 – which would enshrine long-term employment contracts for government workers, multi-year salary increases, constitutional backed lifetime pensions, the power to strike, and much more.

It would essentially make Illinois “unreformable.” A recent Wall Street Journal editorial by Wirepoints was headlined, “Unions Ask Illinois Voters To Sign Over Control Of The State.”

Already, updated analysis by the American Legislative Exchange Council shows that an Illinois family of four now owes two and a half times more in unfunded government pension liabilities ($168,000) than they earn in household income ($63,585). In a state of 13 million residents, every man, woman, and child owes $42,000 — on an estimated $533 billion pension liability for public employees.

Illinois may have already crossed the Rubicon. And now the public-sector unions are giving the state the last push off the cliff.

Note: all compensation amounts listed are cash compensation, or pensionable compensation and do not incorporate the cost of benefits, i.e. health insurance, etc., unless otherwise cited.

Remember when a group of psychiatrists led by fired ex-Yale shrink Brandy X Lee wanted to impeach Trump for ‘lacking mental capacity to fulfill the duties of his office’?

While Brandy continues to obsess over Trump, Joe Biden – the man with his finger on the button, is a complete vegetable.

In his latest gaffe, the ‘most popular president in US history’ claimed that Democrats campaigned in “54 states” in 2018 to defend Obamacare.

 “And, of course, they’re going try for their 499th time, or whatever the number is — they’re still determined to eliminate the Affordable Care Act. And, by the way, if they do, that means — not a joke, everybody,” said Biden, not jokingly. “That’s why we defeated it in 2018 when they tried to do it. We went to 54 states.”

Joe Biden said he’s been to 54 states

Jesus Help us all pic.twitter.com/JajQxUtYq8

— Terrence K. Williams (@w_terrence) October 29, 2022

“The reason is people didn’t realize that the only reason anybody who has a pre-existing condition can get health care is because of that Affordable Care Act,” Biden continued, warning that “these protections will be gone as well if Republicans get their way.”

Joe Biden now says there are 54 states.

I guess if you count the states of denial, confusion, delusion and disaster that his Regime has caused he just might be on to something.

— Lauren Boebert (@laurenboebert) October 29, 2022

Biden says there are 54 states in America.
Next speech he will explain the 81 million votes… https://t.co/LhCcwxWtDS

— Rob Schneider (@RobSchneider) October 29, 2022

Amazingly, Biden has his defenders – including this self-described ‘attorney and animal lover’ who claims Biden must have been referencing US territories, while talking about Dems campaigning for Obamacare.

Of course, even if Biden was talking about US territories – their residents can’t vote in US elections and have non-voting representation in Congress.

Authored by Satyajit Das via Naked Capitalism,

Ordinary lives are lived out amidst global economic, social and political forces that they have no control over. Today, multiple far-reaching pressures are reshaping that setting.

This three-part piece examines the re-arrangement. This first part examined current great geopolitical divisions. This second part looked at key vulnerabilities. The final third part, studies possible trajectories.

The Ukraine conflict may shape the trajectories of a fractured world. In the short-term, anti-Russian sentiment has united the West. In the long-term, it is likely to accelerate its divisions and decline. Individual pathways within the Western bloc will differ because, in part, of disunions.

Divergent Trails

American policymakers continue to believe that the global economy revolves around the US. They routinely use economic weapons, such as sanctions, to threaten foreign access to American consumer and financial markets. The aim is to force other countries to adhere to its positions and isolate opponents. American military capabilities serve to underline its power.

The US self-serving strategy seeks to weaken Russia by implicitly sacrificing Ukraine and Europe. Given its high dependence on imported energy and sensitivity to fuel costs, Europe, especially Germany and Italy, risk a severe economic contraction, damage to its industrial base, reduction of living standards and a financial crisis.

Industrial leaders have warned of an existential threat from higher power prices, highlighting the ruinous consequences for employment, taxes and ability to repay borrowing. Environmentalists worry about recommissioning nuclear power plants and restarting dirty old coal fired power plants.

Precarious coalition governments in Germany and Italy may not survive internal disagreements on Ukraine and the concomitant economic cost. Announcing aid measures including a gas price cap and cancellation of a gas tax, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz insisted that prices must go down. It was wishful thinking related to plunging support of his government and party.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, de facto leader of The Visegrád political alliance of Central European countries, recently questioned the effectiveness of sanctions against Russia asking pointedly as to how long Brussels will continue with this course. Hungary alongside other European Union members were also highly critical of Germany’s domestic energy cost aid package which, in their view, would distort fair competition within the single market. Orban termed it “cannibalism” and a “bombshell” calling instead for a co-ordinated solution to help all Europeans, presumably paid for by the continent’s richer nations.

Concatenating events – the Euro debt crisis, Covid19 and now the energy crisis – pose a serious threat to fragile European unity. Predicated on preventing a new continental war, the Union has become a financial transfer system between wealthier and low-income countries. Divides are likely to grow over time as Germany’s financial position becomes compromised and its ability to buy off weaker European Union members weakens.

Europe’s need for a negotiated solution, if possible, will increase. Despite periodic mindless moralising, the German Chancellor, French President and Italian Prime Minister have sought, at least, to maintain communications with Russia unlike the Anglosphere.

Japan’s high exposure to energy prices and important trade relationship with China complicates support for the Western position. The tensions underlie difficulties with the US-led ‘Chip  4’ alliance with Japan, South Korea and Taiwan to secure access to semiconductors. The east Asian partners have cited trade and security concerns.

Australia and New Zealand’s commitment to the Western alliance depends on developments in relations with China.

Over 35 percent of Australian exports  go to China, greater than the combined total to Japan, South Korea, India, the US and UK.  Australian imports from China comprise approximately 20 percent of the total. China is normally Australia’s largest source of higher education international students (over 160,000 or 38 percent). China is also its second-largest inbound tourist market (around 1.4 million arrivals) and the largest by expenditure. Over 28 percent of New Zealand’s exports and 38 percent of imports are to or from China. It is its second-largest source of tourism and 47 percent of foreign students at New Zealand universities are from China.

The US could place specific sanctions on China, over support for Russia, non-compliance with existing sanctions or actions in relation to Taiwan. The flow-on effect of secondary sanctions – penalties on persons and organizations, not subject to the sanctioning country’s legal jurisdiction, entering into dealings prohibited under primary sanctions- would affect Australia and New Zealand. They would find it extremely difficult to maintain commercial relations with its major trading partner without broad exemptions which may not be forthcoming. The national income loss would be substantial.

The issue is not exclusively antipodean as Europe is highly dependent on Chinese trade. In 2021, China was the third largest destination for European Union goods exports (10 percent) and the largest source for European Union goods imports (22 percent).

Outside of economics, there are concerns about the Disunited States of America, a deeply alienated mixture of honest hard-working people, a thoughtful and able if highly partisan intelligentsia, oppressed minorities and racist, misogynistic, conspiracy subscribing, religious fanatics. For outsiders, these internal divisions, bordering on an uncivil war between armed citizens, combined with abrupt policy shifts driven by never-ending electoral cycles complicates any alliance.

A simplistic Manichean foreign policy modelled on Superman’s pursuit for truth, justice and the American way is unhelpful. The persistent need to venture forth without thought to slay foreign demons -starting wars, staging coups or otherwise interfering in the internal affairs of other nations- is unsettling. US use of carpet bombing, napalm and chemical weapons in the Korean and Vietnam conflicts often against civilian populations or the supply of lethal weapons to American supported despots for use against their own citizens has not been forgotten.

The unexplained September 2022 destruction of pipelines for Russian gas added to concerns about America’s febrile approach. It was inexplicable why Russia would sabotage its own expensive infrastructure which historically generated up to 40 percent of Russian GDP. They could simply turn off supplies. Germany which is dependent on Nord Stream was also unlikely to have taken such action.

Cui Bono theorists suggested that America and Britain were responsible to prevent a recalcitrant Germany from breaking ranks with the Western alliance. The allegations gained traction when America’s Secretary of State pronounced the sabotage a great opportunity for US energy firms and a Polish politician deleted a tweet thanking the US. There were uncomfortable precedents including the false Gulf of Tonkin incident and incorrect WMD claims that was used to justify the Vietnam and Iraqi wars.

Policy positions are muddled. Recent positions on US support for Taiwan replace ‘strategic ambiguity’ with ‘strategic confusion’. Reacting to Chinese overtures, an US rush to engage with Pacific Islands attracted scepticism. Fiji’s attorney-general noted that US leaders saw the region as small dots from plane windows as they flew to meetings “where they spoke about us rather than with us”.

American willingness or ability to support allies, other than with financial assistance and low risk stand-off weaponry, is questionable. Outside of minor affairs like Panama and Granada, the US record in military combat is unimpressive. For Australians tied to the US and UK through the opaque 2021 AUKUS defence agreement, the possibility of being drawn into a military conflict with China and the prospect of the American cavalry not reporting for duty is a clear concern. The parallel to Great Britain’s abandonment of Australia during the World War 2 is striking.

Even US economic support is uncertain. Despite promises, America has, to date, been unable or unwilling to help meet European oil and gas needs. This is due to production constraints and prioritisation of domestic supply and low homeland prices. It flagging economic power also reduces its ability to provide assistance, especially with pressing domestic funding needs.

Playwright Harold Pinter’s acceptance speech for the 2005 Noble Prize for Literature set out a widely held view of US foreign policy: “The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It’s a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.”

More recently, the demonised President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin provided an updated analysis: “Europe is about to throw its achievements in building up its manufacturing capability, the quality of life of its people and socioeconomic stability into the sanctions furnace, depleting its potential, as directed by Washington for the sake of the infamous Euro-Atlantic unity. In fact, this amounts to sacrifices in the name of preserving the dominance of the United States in global affairs….The competitive ability of European companies is in decline, for the European Union officials themselves are essentially cutting them off from affordable commodities and energy, as well as trade markets. It will come as no surprise if eventually the niches currently occupied by European businesses, both on the continent and on the global market in general, will be taken over by their American patrons who know no boundaries or hesitation when it comes to pursuing their interests and achieving their goals.”

These concerns are strong in emerging countries. There is additional anger at duplicitous policies. After having spent decades championing free trade and capital movement and forcing the Washington Consensus on other countries (most recently on Sri Lanka and Argentina), the West are busily implementing the very programs they derided – trade and capital restrictions, price caps or controls, subsidies, nationalisation and replacing market forces with state diktats.

Suspicion of the rhetoric, disinformation and propaganda which masks America’s true objective of preserving its hegemony is widespread. To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, the US has no enemies but is intensely disliked by friends.

For British statesman Lord Palmerston, countries had no eternal allies or perpetual enemies just permanent interests.  Europe, Japan and perhaps Australia and New Zealand may drift away from the alliance. Already, protests have taken place in several European countries against continued support of Kyiv and its effects on the cost of living. Ultimately, the cost of energy and food shortages accompanied by declining living standards will have to be weighed against taking sides in another military and economic war between great powers.

The evolving stance on Ukraine may be an indication of the long-term path.

The Special Relationship

The most durable support for the US (the current global empire) comes from the UK (the previous holder of that position). The British empire ended over six decades ago and its position as a great power has been declining for a century, since its penurious victory in World War 1. The UK’s special relationship with the US is little more than sponging off the latter’s economic and military strength to prop up pretensions of British global influence. For the US, the UK is an useful messenger as evidenced by Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s obedient deliveries of missives to Ukraine.

The UK provides an useful road map for decline. Since the 1970s when it needed IMF intervention, the British economy has been propped by a combination of North Sea oil, membership of the European Union and flight capital. Common market membership provided cheap labour (mainly from the East and South Europe) and trade opportunities especially in financial services (which generates around 10 percent of British economic output). Monetary inflows of frequently dubious origins from Russia, the Middle East, China and other less salubrious jurisdictions underpinned prosperity. It funded the South-East property markets, the National Health System, cultural and educational establishments as well as ‘cool Britannia’.

Today, North Sea oil production and energy security are in decline. Brexit means worker shortages, loss of trade and a reduced role for London as the centre for Euro financial markets. Idle promises of sovereignty and new trade opportunities may flounder on the fact that Europe is hard to replace and Britain does not actually produce much anymore.

The UK, tacitly retreating from Brexit promise, sought to boost immigration. It sought to remain attractive to the non-Russian, non-Chinese newly minted rich from the emerging world – a no-questions-asked tax haven on the Thames. But the UK may no longer be a secure place for placing wealth or for potential investees personally due to the risk of sanctions and asset confiscations or freezes if geo-political winds change direction.

Even the special relationship may be weakened if the UK decides to abandon the Northern Ireland protocols, an action opposed by the US.

The UK’s vulnerabilities were on show in October 2022. The UK government under new Conservative leader Liz Truss announced tax cuts and substantial subsidies, funded by public borrowing, to ameliorate rising energy and food prices. While it pleased conservative ideologues, the fiscally incontinent and economically vacuous plan unleashed a predictable crisis of confidence amongst those being asked to finance it.

Investors savagely sold the pound and UK government bonds. They demanded a “moron risk premium” (a term attributed to TS Lombard’s Dario Perkins) on government borrowings and sought a restoration of “abacus economics” (Prime Minister Liz Truss’ derogatory reference to fiscal orthodoxy).

The Pound plunged to record lows and interest rates on UK government debt rose sharply. There were witty asides about King Charles’s currency being devalued even before his face was stamped on UK legal tender. Conservative parliamentarians and opinion-istas spoke darkly about a foreign conspiracy against the UK and its decision to leave the European Union.

The Bank of England intervened to prop up the currency and lower rates (a volte-face from its stance of higher rates and tightening liquidity) to counter what the UK government stoically defended as “a little turbulence”. It was a confused case of mixing ‘uppers’ and ‘downers’.

The UK’s strategy -dubbed Kami-Kwasi (a riff on UK Finance Minister Kwasi Kwarteng, whose tenure lasted a mere 38 days)- highlighted a Western weakness -the lack of currency reserves to intervene in foreign exchange markets. Other than the US ($716 billion), most of the West did not see the need for reserves as first world nations with internationally accepted, freely traded and, in some cases, reserve currencies.

Based on World Bank data, the UK’s reserves, as at end 2021, were $194 billion. This compared to China ($3,427 billion), Japan ($1,405 billion), India ($638 billion), Russia ($632 billion) and Saudi Arabia ($474 billion). The actual amount available as at August 2022 might be lower at around $108 billion. In addition, the funds that could be deployed were limited by not easily deployed holdings of gold ($17 billion) and the IMF’s special drawing rights ($39 billion). Nevertheless the Bank of England, with stiff upper lip, expended treasure to try to undo the actions of a government intent on self-harm.

Political pandemonium ensued. The plan to abolish the 45 percent bracket for highest-earning taxpayers was dropped when the government realised that the proposal would not pass in parliament because of opposition from members of the government itself. Literally hours before, the Prime Minister and Chancellor had repeatedly insisted that they would not change course. Spun as listening to the people, it was both shambolic and pointless as it did not alter the essential economic direction.

Ultimately, forced to back down on the entire package of tax cuts and large parts of her program, Truss resigned after the shortest prime ministership in British history. In little more than 4 months, the UK had cycled through four chancellors, three home secretaries, two prime ministers and two monarchs. Larry, the Prime Ministerial residence’s cat, had seen off no less than 4 incumbents and enjoyed support from many Britons to take over the running of the country.

The conservative party duly elected a new leader – former Chancellor Rishi Sunak. He promised a dullness dividend after the hysteric entertainment of Truss.

Ex-Prime Minister Boris Johnson, forced out by his own party only months ago, rushed back from a Caribbean holiday in a later aborted attempt to return to power. Johnson was under investigation for misleading parliament and, if found guilty, faced suspension or a by-election. The Bojo 2.0 campaign was founded on the assertion that he had learned from past mistakes. His acolytes, concerned only about their candidate’s assumed election winning credentials and personal re-election prospects, were untroubled by Johnson’s lack of leadership and scandal ridden reign. Other ruling Conservatives opposed the return of Johnson and threatened mass resignations. The fact that Johnson could be a serious contender beggared belief.

The chaos illustrated how a supposedly advanced economy could rapidly find itself near collapse through a mixture of ideological blindness, policy errors and insensitivity to its predicament. It showed how markets can destroy fantasies. Multiple co-morbidities and minimal resistance to shocks can rapidly unravel seemingly prosperous and stable polities.

Precedents

Britain provides a guide to America’s fate. There are similar economic susceptibilities -high debt, decayed infrastructure, and hollowed out industries. They are both deeply unequal societies, where the less well-off rank badly and a small group of the rich fare particularly well over-stating average incomes. Government and institutions are barely functional.

American strengths may not hold over the longer term. Food self-sufficiency is susceptible to climate change induced extreme weather. Energy independence is reliant on shale oil and gas production. Estimated US oil proven reserves that can be economically recovered is around 69 billion barrels enough for less than 10 years based on daily consumption of 20 million barrels barring further discoveries or new technologies. In contrast, Saudi Arabia, other Middle-East producers, Canada and Venezuela have reserves totalling more than 1,270 billion barrels.

The US may revert to an energy importer once the shale oil boom has run its course. This would make it vulnerable to oil-producers, especially Saudi Arabia which needs high oil prices in the short run to engineer its post-fossil fuel future. Under a young absolutist ruler who is willing to take sides in US domestic politics, the Kingdom, which is building ties with Russia and China, increasingly rejects America’s premiere position in the existing world order. The reformation of Middle East alliances reflects the fact that major energy exporters no longer regard the US as a reliable guarantor of security.

In October 2022, OPEC, in which the Kingdom is a pivotal player, cut output despite US pressure to maintain or even increase production to assist in keep fuel prices and inflation down. America’s furious response threatened possible bans on exports of petroleum products, which would damage Europe but not oil producers. Congress thundered about NOPEC legislation designed to break-up the cartel and exert US military leverage on Gulf oil exporters. The US policy responses reflected a persistent tendency to double down on what has not worked.

In The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers published in 1987, Paul Kennedy argued that great power ascendancy and decline correlates to available resources and economic durability. America’s military overreach and military spending – greater than China, India, Russia, United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Germany, France, Japan, and South Korea combined – is unsustainable.

America and the UK revel in the past. The UK, as the Queen’s death evidences, love expensive, meaningless pageantry and nostalgia. MAGA/MAGAA too is a fantasy of a return to a simpler, more prosperous and hopeful time. They fail to acknowledge the complex present global context.

In the election of Donald Trump and Boris Johnson, America and Great Britain were affirming their respective national narcissistic disorders. In anointing these individuals, voters embraced entitlement, media magic and most of all celebrity rather than dignity, decency or purpose. In choosing such leaders, once powerful nations abandoned all semblance of seriousness.

Despite its wealth and power, the likelihood is that the US will join the UK as a failed first-world state, a Somali with nukes. Historian Arnold Toynbee may have been correct in concluding that most civilizations commit suicide.

Succession

While the declining influence of the West, especially the US, is evident, it is unlikely that another nation or grouping can fill the vacuum in the short term. China, Russia and India are all Potemkin structures, with serious weaknesses.

China has massive overcapacity funded by debt which cannot be paid back of serviced. The dominant state-owned enterprises have low productivity and generate inadequate returns. The Chinese economy is in the early stages of a lengthy period of adjustment as its growth slows and its vulnerable $5 trillion property market and related debt are addressed.

Russia’s commodity fossil fuel export driven economic outlook is indeterminate in the face of long-term sanctions and decarbonisation. India’s economy is as always a heady cocktail of capability, protectionism, cronyism and oligarchies generously spiced with general societal chaos, delusions, mutinies as well as religious and social bigotry. The land of the license Raj remains self-harming and vain glorious.

The challengers’ limited capabilities for projecting military strength (most recent hegemons were naval powers) restrict the scope currently for full-fledged empire and global domination. Chinese, Russian and Indian imperial ambitions are confined to security and contiguous historical territorial claims. Another factor is historical differences and internecine rivalry – China gains if the Ukraine conflict weakens Russia to eliminate a potential contender; India benefits if US economic sanctions diminish the Middle Kingdom.

The governability and internal cohesion of putative powers is overstated. When congratulated by President Richard Nixon on his achievements, Chairman Mao Zedong reputedly replied that he had only been able to change a few places in the vicinity of Beijing. Even today, despite the advantages of a centralised top-down system, Chinese policymakers complain about the difficulty of implementing state policies beyond Zhongnanhai (the leadership enclave in the Chinese capital). Unstable leadership cults, absence of clear lines of succession or power transition, centralised power structures, and lack of effective institutions or structures worsens the problems.

In any case, survival and warding of collective disaster -climate change, resource scarcity-  may now be everyone’s primary focus. Talk of a Chinese or Russian world order is premature.

Wasteland

But a critical point is approaching. Economic growth is stagnating. Resource scarcity, climate problems and associated inflationary pressures are rising. High debt levels may prove difficult to sustain. The financial system is fragile. Global political, business and cultural elites are increasingly detached from the concerns of ordinary people. Geo-political tensions are high and the American-dominated unipolar world is under threat from within and without. The repeated shocks and loss of naïve confidence – political (911 and its aftermath), economic (successive crises), political (Brexit, Trump, rising populist authoritarianism) – are beginning to unravel existing structures.

But large systems do not fail quickly. British power has been falling for a century. The 1991 demise of the USSR can be traced back to Stalin’s commitment to unwinnable competition with an economically superior US at the end of World War 2.

While there are few clear markers, the internal contradictions of the existing order make instability likely. At the edge of chaos, the exact shape of any transformation is unpredictable. Poet TS Eliot wrote of history’s “cunning passages”, “contrived corridors” and “supple confusions”. The outcomes may be positive or negative. A violent conflagration is not unimaginable. Winston Churchill believed that the “story of the human race is war”. Peace was a short interlude between murderous strife and mayhem. Writing in AD120, Tacitus even questioned the calm: “Where they make a wasteland, they call it peace”.

The world may be on the verge of a period, like the Dark Ages (approximately 500 to 1500 AD) after the fall of the Roman Empire, where stasis or drift rule. During such times, multiple centres fight for influence and recurrent conflict, both within and between countries, is common. Stronger countries push aside or predate upon weaker countries. Most survive at different levels of subsistence as Cuba, Haiti, Venezuela, North Korea or Congo do today.

Famine, disease, declining living standards and feudal arrangements are features of these periods. Aristocracy and oligarchy thrive. Social and economic mobility become limited. These are also times of great superstition. Contemporary worship of technology and human invincibility resembles such a belief system. The past also reminds us that such periods release mankind’s violent and heinous impulses.

In his 1930 Prison Notebooks, Anton Gramsci elliptically anticipated the dystopian present: “the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.”

At least nine people were killed and twenty more wounded when a gas tanker exploded in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad on Saturday, national security services said in a statement. 

“The explosion is an accident and not an act of terrorism,” commander of security forces in Baghdad, Ahmad Salim, said. Most of the victims were soccer players participating in an amateur game on a field nearest the blast in a bustling eastern part of the city. However, conflicting reports pointed to the possibility of a car bomb having been denoted, or other IED which triggered the petrol tanker explosion.

An AFP correspondent cited that many area windows were blown out, with extensive damage to nearby parked vehicles. “We were at home and felt a very strong blast and a smell of gas” an eyewitness told AFP.

“It felt like we were suffocating,” the local resident added. “Our doors and windows were blown out.”

Iraq’s recently-elected president, Abdul Latif Rashid, vowed to launch an investigation to determine what happened and who was responsible. 

In an initial report, Reuters gave an account that appeared to conflict with Iraqi authorities saying it was ‘accidental’. 

10 killed, 20+ wounded in an explosion in east Baghdad, Iraq 🇮🇶

The explosion took place near a football stadium & a café, when an explosive device attached to a vehicle in the area detonated, leading to another explosion of a gas tanker that was close byhttps://t.co/IAuMsEouYN pic.twitter.com/IKEFT5jdTm

— Saad Abedine (@SaadAbedine) October 29, 2022

“The explosion took place in a garage near a football stadium and a café, when an explosive device attached to a vehicle detonated, leading to another explosion of a gas tanker that was close by, the security sources said,” Reuters wrote. 

Shrapnel damaged surrounding residential buildings. Other reports too have questioned whether it was an attack or the result of accidental detonation: “Security officials, speaking to Associated Press on condition of anonymity in line with regulations, said it was unclear whether the explosion was a technical failure or targeted attack.”