Authored by Michael Matulef via The Mises Institute,

The threat of hyperinflation has haunted fiat money economies throughout history. Although past empires crumbled under the weight of unrestrained money printing, modern bankers at the Federal Reserve assure us that today’s financial system is immune to such a fate. Austrian business cycle theory, however, reveals that current economic stimulation may be propelling us toward a crisis of catastrophic proportions: a crack-up boom that marks the dramatic end of this boom-and-bust cycle. When a central bank expands the money supply to reinflate bubbles, it destroys the currency’s purchasing power. This endgame, in which the monetary system crumbles beneath a weak economy, represents the ultimate failure of interventionism.

Once the public expects prices to keep rising, hyperinflation becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The Expanding Boom-and-Bust Cycle Ends in a Crack-Up Boom

To comprehend the precarious state of America’s monetary system, we must first review the boom-and-bust cycle as formulated by Ludwig von Mises and the Austrian school. The Austrians observed that the artificial suppression of interest rates by a central bank initiates an unsustainable economic boom by promoting malinvestment. Pushing rates below natural market levels sends a distorted signal to businesses that long-term capital investment is more profitable than the economy can actually support. In the euphoric boom phase, jobs multiply and GDP grows with investment. But the investments lack economic merit, so the house of cards eventually collapses.

With the liquidation of malinvestments, the bust phase emerges: unemployment soars, output contracts, and a recession begins. Since the investments were built on quicksand, they must unwind. Each failed business further curtails consumer spending, rippling the bust through the economy. But rather than letting liquidation and market corrections occur, policymakers add stimulus, setting up a larger bubble and more painful bust down the line.

At this point, people panic and exchange currency for real assets before rapid devaluation consumes their savings. As the crack-up boom picks up steam, the demand for money plummets while prices of real goods skyrocket, leading to hyperinflation. This psychological shift marks the event horizon where monetary policy is rendered impotent. Mises describes the nature of this crisis:

This phenomenon was, in the great European inflations of the ’20s, called flight into real goods (Flucht in die Sachwerte) or crack-up boom (Katastrophenhausse). The mathematical economists are at a loss to comprehend the causal relation between the increase in the quantity of money and what they call “velocity of circulation.”

The characteristic mark of the phenomenon is that the increase in the quantity of money causes a fall in the demand for money. The tendency toward a fall in purchasing power as generated by the increased supply of money is intensified by the general propensity to restrict cash holdings which it brings about. Eventually a point is reached where the prices at which people would be prepared to part with “real” goods discount to such an extent the expected progress in the fall of purchasing power that nobody has a sufficient amount of cash at hand to pay them.

The monetary system breaks down; all transactions in the money concerned cease; a panic makes its purchasing power vanish altogether. People return either to barter or to the use of another kind of money.

The crack-up brings the unsustainable, debt-fueled boom to a catastrophic end. Personal savings are wiped out along with the monetary system’s credibility. Society becomes less stable as the populace loses faith in institutions and scrambles for resources. The economy finds its ultimate bottom not in recession but in the total decay of the currency itself.

The Facade of Stability

Today, deficits balloon out of control as a result of efforts to sustain demand. Rather than allowing healthy corrections, the Fed piles on monetary stimulus at the first signs of financial crisis. Like an addict, the economy needs increasingly larger doses to maintain the status quo. But this trajectory of interventionism cannot persist forever without severe consequences: the Faustian bargain of trading long-term stability for short-term gain will backfire catastrophically.

With each intervention, the Fed suppresses market corrections, inflates asset bubbles, and encourages high-risk debt. This constant flood of stimulus promotes moral hazard as it optimizes the economy for speculation while curtailing organic productivity. How much longer can this monetary dance along the precipice of hyperinflation continue before the dollar plunges into the abyss?

Despite the veneer of stability, individuals sense that the economy rests on a precarious foundation of debt and deceit. They intuitively grasp that capitalism has metamorphosed into a cronyism that disproportionately rewards those with political connections in an amalgamation of concentrated power, unrestrained money creation, and escalating inequality.

The Mirage of Reform

Hoping for a return to monetary and fiscal restraint may prove naively optimistic. Exercising prudence would require immense political courage and social responsibility, qualities rarely exhibited in politics. Politicians face overwhelming incentives to maintain short-term stability through stimulus, spending, and low rates. And restructuring programs with enormous and unfunded liabilities like Medicare and Social Security would spur public backlash, even if it was fiscally prudent.

After decades of excess, the economy is addicted to perpetual stimulus and deficit spending. The prevailing social mindset assumes that unending, debt-fueled growth is the natural state of affairs. With little political will for discipline, reform may depend on a crisis to force change. In the meantime, politicians, paralyzed by the status quo, are unlikely to make the difficult choices that could preempt such a crisis.

It is all but inevitable that central banks will continue expanding the money supply to delay the day of reckoning and preserve the facade until the inevitable hyperinflationary crack-up boom, although the sheer weight of debt alone may produce this outcome. Promises of reform have been made, only to go unfulfilled. In order to prevent disaster, we must fundamentally rethink our monetary and fiscal policies against the temptations of short-term political gain. To quote Ayn Rand:

Just as a man can evade reality and act on the blind whim of any given moment, but can achieve nothing save progressive self-destruction—so a society can evade reality and establish a system ruled by the blind whims of its members or its leader, by the majority gang of any given moment, by the current demagogue or by a permanent dictator. But such a society can achieve nothing save the rule of brute force and a state of progressive self-destruction.

The Erosion of Centralized Control

A crack-up boom would erode the power of the federal government: with a dramatic fall in the currency’s purchasing power, the administration’s ability to fund programs and institutions would deteriorate, the Treasury would go bankrupt, and the government would have to either massively downsize or attempt to fund operations by printing even more money. Along with the value of the promissory notes, trust in centralized authority would evaporate.

With the federal government weakened and desperate, power would naturally shift back to individuals and their local communities. When faced with harsh economic realities, communities depend on themselves rather than flailing national policy. Individuals and communities should strengthen their local networks to weather the coming storm, increasing local involvement and forging bonds of cooperation. Joining area organizations and neighborhood groups can foster mutually beneficial relationships and support systems, invaluable resources for when the currency buckles. With shared purpose, communities enhance their capacity to withstand the crisis.

Equally vital are the practical skills and knowledge that can provide real value to others when centralized systems fray. Pursuing expertise in food production, energy generation, medicine, engineering, and other technical fields equips people to meet local needs. In these ways, proactive societies can cultivate the true source of lasting wealth: strong social webs and skilled human capital. Global forces are beyond local influence, but strong communities retain some control over their destiny, even in hyperinflation’s wake.

Praxeological reflection, the methodology of Austrian economics, can expose the unsound foundations that stretch currencies to their breaking point. It cannot foresee when hyperinflation will arrive, but it can point to the causes and guide human action toward stability and prosperity.

After three week under Israeli siege and a bombing campaign which has been unprecedented in its intensity, Gazans are getting increasingly desperate. The Strip is almost completely enveloped in darkness, also with communications cut, which happened Friday, and the United Nations is now warning of a total breakdown in civic order.

UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) in Gaza has said that thousands of Palestinians have broken into several of its warehouses in the Strip, raiding wheat, flour, and hygiene stores – among other basic necessities stored there.

“This is a worrying sign that civil order is starting to break down after three weeks of war and a tight siege,” UNRWA director Thomas White told press agencies. 

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has also in fresh Sunday statements called the crisis a “nightmare” and again urged a ceasefire. “The situation in Gaza is growing more desperate by the hour. I regret that instead of a critically needed humanitarian pause, supported by the international community, Israel has intensified its military operations.”

Over the weekend the Gazan death toll surpassed 8,000 – with Gaza’s Health Ministry saying that most of these are women and young people. The Biden administration, which has repeatedly affirmed that it “stands with Israel”, has also said that it doesn’t trust casualty figures being issued by Hamas or Palestinian sources.

There are reports that communications were restored to much of the Gaza Strip as of Sunday, possibly the result of growing international pressure on the Israelis. Ten more aid trucks have also reportedly crossed from Egypt on Sunday.

According to Al Jazeera, “The Israeli military said on Sunday it had struck more than 450 targets over the past 24 hours, including Hamas command centres, observation posts and antitank missile launching positions. It said more ground forces were sent into Gaza overnight.” The Israeli ground offensive has continued expanding, with The Guardian observing, “Under the cover of strikes and artillery, Israeli ground troops have begun moving into the north of the strip in Beit Lahia and Beit Hanoun in what the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, described as the “second stage” of the war triggered by Hamas.”

As we continue to expand our ground operations in northern Gaza:

🔴IAF aircraft, guided by IDF troops, struck Hamas structures.
🔴Anti-tank missile launch posts & observation posts were struck.
🔴Multiple terrorists were eliminated. pic.twitter.com/XMwKPKGZ1R

— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) October 29, 2023

IDF troops have been seen reaching a point some two miles into Gaza:

Israeli troops appear to have advanced over two miles into Gaza, according to a CNN analysis of video published by an Israeli media outlet. 

The troops in the video, taken on Saturday, are seen putting an Israeli flag on a Gaza resort hotel’s roof. CNN geolocated the video to an area just over two miles from the Gaza-Israeli border.

“Soldiers of the 52 Battalion of the 401 Brigade are waving the Israeli flag in the heart of Gaza, by the beach,” a soldier is heard saying in the video, taken several miles north of central Gaza City. “We will not forgive nor forget, and we’ll not stop until the victory.”

Palestinian sources are also saying another major hospital, which is treating hundreds of patients and giving shelter to over 10,000, has come under attack:

Israeli airstrikes have “caused extensive damage to hospital departments and exposed residents and patients to suffocation” at the Al-Quds Hospital, the Palestinian Red Crescent Society said Sunday.

The aid organization accused Israel of “deliberately” launching the airstrikes “directly next to Al-Quds Hospital, with the aim of forcing the medical staff, displaced people, and patients to evacuate the hospital.”

Major bulldozing and tank operations have been observed on the beach in Gaza…

Israeli Defence Forces over the last few hours continued to strike and kill terrorists in the Gaza Strip. IDF soldiers operating adjacent to the Erez Crossing identified a number of terrorists exiting the shaft of a tunnel in the Gaza Strip. Following the identification, the… pic.twitter.com/EKGA69Vvdo

— Aditya Raj Kaul (@AdityaRajKaul) October 29, 2023

A statement cited in The Times of Israel described:

The IDF says troops killed a number of Hamas gunmen who opened fire at the ground forces in the Strip, and other terrorists identified on the beach in Gaza, near the southern Israel community of Zikim.

Hamas and the IDF have continued to exchange gunfire, but the status of forces on either said remains unknown and for the moment lost in the fog of war. At this point, if either suffers significant casualties, they are unlikely to make it publicly known.

Meanwhile, the intensifying crisis for Palestinian civilians has not only led to massive street protests in various nations, particularly in Europe, but has resulted in rare criticism aimed at Israel from leading Western nations. The French government has issued scathing criticism of “unacceptable” Israeli settler attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank:

More than 100 Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank since the outbreak of war in the Gaza Strip earlier this month, mostly during raids by Israeli forces or attacks by settlers, according to the Ramallah-based health ministry.

“France strongly condemns the settler attacks that have led to the deaths of several Palestinian civilians over the past few days in Qusra and Sawiya, as well as the forced departure of several communities,” said a foreign ministry statement.

And Norway too has condemned what it says is a massive and “disproportionate” response and death toll among Palestinians in the wake of the Oct.7 Hamas terror attack which killed 1,400 people. “International law stipulates that [the reaction] must be proportionate. Civilians must be taken into account, and humanitarian law is very clear on this. I think this limit has been largely exceeded,” Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store aid in a public broadcast radio interview.

“Almost half of the thousands of people killed are children,” he stressed. “Israel has the right to defend itself, and I recognize that it is very difficult to defend against attacks from an area as densely populated as Gaza,” Store said. “Rockets are still being fired from Gaza into Israel, and we condemn this.”

Israeli flag flies inside Gaza for first time since 2005pic.twitter.com/uc0sJrNyXW

— Lucas Tomlinson (@LucasFoxNews) October 29, 2023

Even the White House has begun to urge caution, with national security advisor Jake Sullivan telling the Sunday shows that even though Hamas used civilians as “human shields” – it’s still ultimately Israel’s responsibility to avoid hitting them.

“They’re putting rockets and other terrorist infrastructure in civilian areas. That creates an added burden for the Israeli Defense Forces,” he said. “But it does not lessen their responsibility to distinguish between terrorists and innocent civilians and to protect the lives of innocent civilians as they conduct this military operation.”

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

U.S. Department of Justice officials corroborated some of the information an FBI source provided to the bureau on allegations that then-presidential candidate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, were bribed, a former official who worked on the case said in newly reviewed testimony.

“We did corroborate certain things” from the source, Scott Brady, the former U.S. attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania, told a U.S. House of Representatives panel on Oct. 23.

Members of Congress obtained and released over the summer a copy of the summary from FBI agents who spoke with the source, with the source conveying comments from Burisma executives concerning the Bidens.

Among them was the claim that it cost $5 million to pay one Biden and $5 million to pay another Biden.

Mr. Biden worked for Burisma, a Ukrainian firm, for years while President Biden was vice president, including in 2016. That’s the year the discussion involving bribery took place, the source told the FBI in 2020.

Mr. Brady, appointed under President Donald Trump in 2017, told members this week he was tasked by superiors to accept and vet Ukraine-related information sent to or gathered by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), which includes the FBI.

That office is headed by U.S. Attorney David Weiss, another Trump appointee. Mr. Weiss has for years been investigating Mr. Biden for intentional tax avoidance and other crimes.

Mr. Brady’s team briefed Mr. Weiss’ team in October 2020 on the summary, known as an FD-1023.

“What we were doing was, as a part of the briefing, giving them the investigative steps that we had taken within our limited ability to corroborate the information that the [source] had provided us, and we informed them that we felt that the 1023 had indicia of credibility sufficient to merit further investigation,” Mr. Brady said. “And so that’s what we communicated to them.”

Neither Mr. Weiss’ office nor any of the other U.S. attorney’s offices who received the 1023 from Mr. Brady’s team reached back out about the document, according to Mr. Brady.

He said there was “both a skepticism of the information that we were developing, that we had received, and skepticism and then weariness of that information” from Mr. Weiss and Mr. Weiss’ team.

“I don’t want to speculate as to why, but I know that there was no information sharing back to us about what they were—or very limited. And, at one point, the communication between our offices was so constricted that we had to provide written questions to the investigative team in Delaware, almost in the form of interrogatories, and receive written answers back,” Mr. Brady said.

That was not normal, he added.

The document showed the source traveled to Ukraine and spoke with top Burisma executives, including owner Mykola Zlochevsky. The source said executives said Burisma hired Mr. Biden “to protect [the company], through his dad, from all kinds of problems” and that Mr. Biden would take care of problems “through his dad.”

Ukraine’s president ultimately ousted Viktor Shokin, the prosecutor who was investigating Burisma, at the behest of President Biden.

“I said, ‘We’re leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor’s not fired, you’re not getting the money,'” President Biden said at a public event in 2018, relaying the interaction about a $1 billion loan guarantee he threatened to withhold. “Well, son of a [expletive]. He got fired.”

The FBI has largely declined to comment on the substance of the document but said previously the summary was part of a “sensitive investigation” and should not have been released to the public.

The transcripts of the recent congressional interviews with Mr. Brady and U.S. Attorney E. Martin Estrada, appointed by President Biden, were obtained and reviewed by The Epoch Times.

In his interview, Mr. Estrada confirmed IRS whistleblower accounts and said he rejected Mr. Weiss’ request to partner to prosecute Mr. Biden in California.

Mr. Estrada also said that he believed several attorneys with Mr. Weiss’ office were able to bring charges in his district, the Central District of California, and that he offered office space and administrative support if they did.

Mr. Biden was ultimately charged with tax and firearm crimes in Delaware. He has not been charged in California or Washington, another district where the Biden-appointed U.S. attorney turned down a request from Mr. Weiss to partner.

Mr. Weiss earlier this year was made special counsel as he continues investigating Mr. Biden. Both Mr. Weiss and Attorney General Merrick Garland, appointed under President Biden, have been unable to explain why he needed to be made special counsel if he already had what they described as the “ultimate authority” to bring charges against the target.

Mark Tapscott contributed to this report.

United Airlines has announced a new boarding sequence for its flights, stirring praise from some but dismay from others who fear they’ll be forced to gate-check bags for lack of remaining overhead bin space. 

With an eye on minimizing boarding time and thus maximizing the use of their fleets, airlines have perpetually wrestled with the question of which boarding sequence is fastest. Now, in a bid to shave upwards of two minutes off the typical boarding duration, United Airlines has announced it’s embracing a system the industry calls “Wilma,” an abbreviation of sorts for a sequence that proceeds from window to middle seats, with aisle seats going last. 

United Airlines puts new plane boarding system to the test pic.twitter.com/D47bcbXRAj

— Flight Informer👁🇮 (@FlightInformer) October 28, 2023

United’s new process will be used on all domestic and some international flights. People traveling on the same reservation — such as families, friends and couples — will still be allowed to board together. 

According to the Wall Street Journal, the aisle-seat-last rule will only apply to economy-class passengers. Those in window and exit seats will be in Group 3, middle-seaters in Group 4 and aisle-seaters in Group 5. There will be a new Group 6 for “Basic Economy” passengers…as if there weren’t enough groups already:   

Wilma isn’t a new concept. United says it used it to load coach passengers up until 2017, when it created Basic Economy class but at the time faced a software limitation on the number of boarding groups, prompting the carrier to drop Wilma — until now. 

The new process kicked in on Thursday. Many prospective travelers on social media are keen on the concept, but others are expressing anger and anxiety. Those who prefer aisle seats fear they’ll be left without bin space for their carry-ons — and thus punished simply because of their seat preference. Some foresee it causing tension among passengers and crew. Others are pledging to choose another carrier.  

With this approach, window seat passengers will have first dibs on overhead bins. Unless the gate personnel strictly enforce the 2 item rule, I predict some interesting dialogue and disruptions to occur during boarding.

— Ross Smith 🟧 (@rossqsmith) October 26, 2023

Won’t by flying with them then

— StoneRoses 🍋🍋🍋 (@StoneRoses_News) October 19, 2023

RIP aisle seat overhead space.

— Tom Becktold (@becktold) October 19, 2023

Makes sense BUT Then don’t charge me extra $ for an isle seat or to check my bag if there is no longer room in overhead when I get on plane

— ShannyShea (@ShannyShea) October 26, 2023

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

There is so much going on in the world that it is difficult to keep track. On Wednesday Academy published its latest Around the World. By Friday, we needed to publish a SITREP on the U.S. Airstrikes in Syria. This was all on the back of The Middle East – A Difficult Week and Increasing Our Risk Assessment due to The Middle East. Between Academy’s Annapolis Geopolitical Summit, speaking at AFP, and countless video conferences, the Geopolitical Intelligence Group has barely been able to come up for air. That is all separate from trying to track the bond market in the Fed Has Lost Control of the Narrative.

The pace has been frantic:

• We are increasingly worried about the risk of escalation in the Middle East.

• We are increasingly worried about the risks globally.

  • We often find ourselves trying to squeeze in important topics like trade, commodities, India, coups in Africa (remember when that was headline news just a few weeks ago?) and now something called the Second Thomas Shoal.

In any case, the pace of these meetings, the urgency, and the sheer number of topics to discuss has left me with this Billy Joel song in my head (apparently the Fall Out Boy version is also very good).

The chorus, if nothing else, resonates with what is going on:

We didn’t start the fire

It was always burning, since the world’s been turning

We didn’t start the fire

No, we didn’t light it, but we tried to fight it

Apologies to Billy Joel and the readers for the artistic liberties that I had to take (the coup was in Niger, not Nigeria), my attempt to keep some of the original lines (where they fit), and my need to force a few personal notes into the remake of this song.

Maybe it isn’t “macro” or “geopolitical” research per se, but there are worse songs to have stuck in your head, and it does capture the frantic pace of issues that the world is facing. It is also a decent reminder that variations of these issues have existed for decades, but we’ve still made it through.

We didn’t start the fire

It was always burning, since the world’s been turning

We didn’t start the fire

No, we didn’t light it, but we tried to fight it

 

Taylor Swift, Scary Day, Red lines, Gitmo Bay

NATO, Hezbollah, India on the rise

Wagner Group, President Xi, Blood diamonds, EVs

North Korea, South Korea, Inflation too damn high

 

Smart phones, Smart bombs, Stupid decisions, Pandemonium

Putin, for his big lie, how many have to die?

Plastic straws, Vaccines, England’s got a new king

Jimmy Buffet, Matthew Perry, Alex Trebek, goodbye

 

We didn’t start the fire

It was always burning, since the world’s been turning

We didn’t start the fire

No, we didn’t light it, but we tried to fight it

 

Expanding BRICs, Hamas, Cyber, Legal grass

Old Yeller, Coachella, Bama rush on TikTok

Iron Dome, Evita Peron, Tuscany, Macron

Crimea falls, Drones in the sky

 

Einstein, Katniss Everdeen, Meadowlands has no winning team

Shoots a rocket, Peter Tchir, China not buying our bonds

Gaga, Gaza, Erdogan, Zelensky

Kirk in Space, Melrose Place, Trouble in the Suez

 

We didn’t start the fire

It was always burning, since the world’s been turning

We didn’t start the fire

No, we didn’t light it, but we tried to fight it

 

Climate change, Surprise attack, Steph Curry, Bivouac

AI, Chandrayaan, Russia crashes on the Moon

Lebanon, Second Thomas Shoal, San Diego baseball

On campus homicide, children are so horrified

 

Luddite folly, Taiwan, Space monkey, Wikipedia

College hoops, NLA, TPP is a no-go

U2, Mexican cartels, Debt ceilings and shutdowns

Silver or lead, Skynet, Violence in the Congo

 

We didn’t start the fire

It was always burning, since the world’s been turning

We didn’t start the fire

No, we didn’t light it, but we tried to fight it

 

AFP, NFP, Jolts, What can the Fed do?

Taiwan, Sanction, Ukrainian invasion

Coup in Nigeria, Syria, Social media mania

Dollar, Euro, Yen, and now the Yuan

Pope Francis, Complex, Have we reached our apex?

Shinzo Abe – blown away, what else do I have to say?

 

We didn’t start the fire

It was always burning, since the world’s been turning

We didn’t start the fire

No, we didn’t light it, but we tried to fight it

 

KSA, MBS, President Xi back again

Streaming, Screaming, Hormuz Strait, Punk rock

Vegan, Reagan, Palestine, Democracy on the decline

Ayatollah’s in Iran, No one’s in Afghanistan

 

“Wheel of Fortune”, Pat Sajak, Lithium dioxide

Foreign debts, Homeless vets, COVID, Frack, Fighter jets

Fentanyl on the shore, China’s under CPP law

Shock and awe, Chip wars, I can’t take it anymore…

 

We didn’t start the fire

It was always burning, since the world’s been turning

We didn’t start the fire

No, we didn’t light it, but we tried to fight it

 

We didn’t start the fire

It was always burning, since the world’s been turning

We didn’t start the fire

No, we didn’t light it, but we tried to fight it

Hopefully things calm down on the geopolitical front, but with so much to unpack, that seems like wishful thinking. On top of it all, we have a Fed meeting this week! I’m in the “no chance of a hike” camp and expect some admission that certain things are out of their control (meaning what is going on globally, not the bond markets, despite those getting out of their control as well).

After USA’s economic growth in Q3 smashed expectations (rising 4.9% QoQ SAAR thanks to Taylor Swift and Barbenheimer), expectations are for a let-down in Q4, slowing growth to just over 2% overall for 2023…and 2024 is expected to slow even more.

Not exactly a Bidenomics’ barnstorm given the growth in debt.

So, which countries will see the most economic growth in 2024?

To answer that question, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu created the following chart, visualizing GDP growth forecasts from the IMF’s October 2023 World Economic Outlook. Unsurprisingly, many of these countries are located in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa—two of the world’s fastest growing regions.

For India, data and forecasts are presented on a fiscal year basis (starting April). Continue reading below for additional context on these figures.

Highlights: Asia Pacific

The fastest growing economies in Asia are forecasted to be Macao (+27.2%), Palau (+12.4%), and India (+6.3%).

• The economy of Macao is heavily reliant on tourism, an industry that represents over 60% of the region’s jobs, as well as roughly 70% of its GDP.

• Palau is a tiny country consisting of 340 islands, representing an overall land area of 180 square miles (466 square kilometers). According to the U.S. State Department, tourism represents approximately 40% of Palau’s GDP.

• India, which recently became the world’s largest country by population, is expected to reach a peak of 1.7 billion people by 2064.

Highlights: Sub-Saharan Africa

Sub-Saharan Africa accounts for half of the top 20 list, with Niger (+11.1%) and Senegal (+8.8%) leading.

• A recent military coup could have serious implications on Niger’s future economic growth. The country’s Agadem oil field, which is majority owned by China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), could see its exports disrupted as a result of global sanctions.

• Senegal’s economy is also linked to the oil industry, meaning its growth could fluctuate in the years to come.

Oil Drives Growth for Guyana

Guyana (+26.6%), with a population of only 815,000, is expected to be the second fastest growing economy in 2024. Interestingly, it was the world’s fastest growing economy last year, with a 62% increase in GDP, and is likely to claim that title again in 2023 with expected growth of 37%.

This growth is largely driven by rising oil exports from Stabroek Block, an offshore oil field being developed by an Exxon Mobil-led consortium. According to BBC, Guyana has over 11 billion barrels in oil reserves.

Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

Where were you on March 9, 2022, when President Biden signed the death warrant on American freedom?

On that day, in a hushed ceremony at the White House without the approval of Congress, the states or the American people, Biden signed into law Executive Order 14067.

Buried in his order are a few paragraphs, titled Section 4. The language in Section 4 makes Order 14067 the most treacherous act by a sitting president in the history of our republic.

That’s because Section 4 sets the stage for legal government surveillance of all U.S. citizens, total control over your bank accounts and purchases and the ability to silence all dissenting voices for good.

In this new war on freedom, they aren’t coming for your guns. No, they’re thinking much bigger than that.

They’re coming for your money.

And it’s already started. These efforts are stepping up and taking on a nefarious tone that also involves surveillance and loss of our freedoms under the guise of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), or Biden Bucks as I call them.

If you had asked me about this two years ago, I would have said the U.S. is taking a rather studious approach to it. It was too important to not be involved in, but the U.S. did not seem to be in any hurry to actually implement it.

There were studies, and I would have said my estimate at the time would have been, “OK, China has it. Europe, maybe another year. The U.S. might be three or four years down the road because the dollar’s too important. They don’t want to race into it. They want to get it right. There are a lot of ways to mess it up.”

But that’s changed under Joe Biden.

Biden has now fast-tracked this thing.

We’ve moved pretty quickly from what I would call a research phase to an implementation phase. So I give it the name Biden Bucks, because Joe Biden will prove to have been responsible for actually implementing this at a very quick tempo in the United States.

NOT Cryptocurrencies

CBDCs are digital money, not cryptocurrencies. The differences between CBDCs and crypto are important.

Cryptocurrencies are recorded on a blockchain, which is a particular type of ledger that shows every transaction ever made in each currency.

Cryptos also claim to offer anonymity and decentralization, which are said to be virtues but are actually fatal flaws because the “anonymity” is a greater cover for crime and fraud.

I worked with the U.S. Strategic Command to unravel crypto ownership when Isis was using digital tokens to finance its caliphate in 2015–2016. It’s not easy to pierce the veil, but it can be done.

By contrast, CBDCs do not use blockchain; they have a digital ledger accounting system, but it’s not a blockchain. They’re the opposite of decentralized; they are highly centralized under the control of a single issuer, usually a central bank.

There’s no anonymity. The issuer knows every account holder and every transaction — that’s the whole idea.

CBDCs are promoted on the idea that transactions are faster, cheaper and more secure when all money is digital and controlled by a government.

Compared with credit cards, debit cards, wire transfers, Venmo and PayPal, that may be true. Those systems have multiple intermediaries and layers of fees, so CBDCs may actually be able to streamline payments and make the payment system more efficient.

But while the government positions CBDCs as a benefit to consumers in performing transactions, including faster settlements, better security, ease of use and transaction costs that are lower than with cash, it’s also crucial to think through the implications of the technology and how it could negatively affect the economy and our individual rights.

The Death of Privacy

The first part of the hidden agenda is to eliminate cash. If you’re the government and you want the central bank digital currency to succeed, you have to eliminate cash because it’s your competition.

Cash is anonymous. If you pay for something with cash, the purchase can’t be directly tied to you. That’s not true of Biden Bucks.

The government knows exactly what you’re buying, to whom you’re making donations and (by extension) what you’re reading based on which books you buy, etc.

That means we’ve come very far down the road toward thought control, censorship and selective law enforcement against political enemies.

It’s a government that looks like the state ruled by Big Brother in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.

The government might want to freeze your account, they might want to seize your assets, they might want to put an expiration date on your money.

Imagine you get paid and the government says, “OK, you got the money. Nice job, but that money is going to evaporate or disappear if you don’t spend it in the next six months.” How’s that for a stimulus program?

None of these things is possible if there’s cash around. But if you get rid of cash and force everyone into a digital system, then you can do these kinds of things.

That means fiscal policy can actually be dictated by Biden Bucks. With total control of your money, the government can conduct fiscal policy at will.

What if the government wanted to stimulate the economy and increase the amount of consumer spending? They could simply send you a letter that states, for example, “You must spend $200 in the next 30 days or we will take $100 out of your account as a penalty.”

As most citizens will not want to risk losing $100, they will spend the amount requested and create stimulus in the economy as the government had wanted.

This could also work in the opposite direction. Say the government wanted to cool down the economy and not have as much money in circulation. They could encourage savings by requesting a certain balance in your account be kept and not spent.

If you went under that set balance, a penalty would be triggered.

Private Banks Are Pushing CBDCs

All that being said, the digital takeover of the financial system is not an all-or-nothing event, and it will happen in stages and not all at once. When the CBDCs are finally rolled out, it may be a bit of an anticlimax if private companies have already eliminated cash and invaded privacy on their own.

For example, the Italian bank Intesa SanPaolo has begun forcing customers to use an all-digital mobile phone service with no ability for customers to visit a branch or interact with a human bank official.

This is exactly what the world of CBDCs will be like except that a private bank will be doing the dirty work and not waiting for a government mandate. The CBDC effort in Europe will inevitably involve the European Central Bank (ECB) since they are the issuer of the euro and will be in charge of the digital ledger of transactions.

Still, private banks are not waiting for the ECB and are laying the groundwork today for a world without cash or human bankers.

All that’s left is a digital ledger and total surveillance of everything you do.

Again, the endgame for CBDCs would closely resemble George Orwell’s dystopian Nineteen Eighty-Four. It would be a world of negative interest rates, forced tax collection, government confiscation, account freezes and constant surveillance.

You might not be able to fight back easily in the world of Biden Bucks, but it can be done.

There is one nondigital, nonhackable, nontraceable form of money you can still use.

It’s called gold (and silver). I urge you to get your hands on some while you still can.

Authored by Amy Denney via The Epoch Times (Emphasis ours),

Follow the entire  “What You Need to Know About Surgery” series here.

In this series, we’ll share how to determine if your surgery is right for you, how to ask the right questions, and what you can do to prepare and recover optimally

There’s a certain logic to doctors who don’t disclose their mistakes: their reputation, discipline, and the looming threat of medical malpractice lawsuits incentivize silence. However, patients display an unexpected silence about their own suffering—even when they know mistakes have been made.

The maker of Jeep Wranglers and Ram trucks, Stellantis NV, reached a tentative agreement with the United Auto Workers to end a 44-day strike, days after Ford Motor Company reached a deal with the union.

The tentative agreement, which must still be approved by local union leaders and ratified by Stellantis’ 43,000 members, calls for a 25% hourly pay hike plus cost-of-living allowances over the four-year contract:

The agreement grants 25% in base wage increases through April 2028, and will cumulatively raise the top wage by 33% compounded with estimated COLA to over $42 an hour. The starting wage will increase by 67% compounded with estimated COLA, to over $30 an hour. The lowest-paid workers at Stellantis, temporary workers, will see a raise of more than 165% over the life of the agreement. Some workers at Mopar will receive an immediate 76% increase upon ratification. –UAW statement 

“Once again, we have achieved what just weeks ago we were told was impossible,” said UAW boss Shawn Fain.

Fain continued, “At Stellantis in particular, we have not only secured a record contract, we have begun to turn the tide in the war on the American working class. Going into these negotiations, the company wanted to cut 5,000 jobs across Stellantis. Our Stand Up Strike changed that equation. Not only did we not lose those 5,000 jobs, we turned it all the way around. By the end of this agreement, Stellantis will be adding 5,000 jobs. We truly are saving the American dream.”

We have a tentative agreement at Stellantis. #StandUpUAW pic.twitter.com/NsVL6w77WN

— UAW (@UAW) October 28, 2023

Two of Detroit’s Big Three automakers have reached a tentative agreement with the union. Ford first reached a deal last Wednesday as the last holdout of the automakers is General Motors.

However, UAW expanded strikes on GM’s assembly plant in Spring Hill, Tennessee. Fain said, “We are disappointed by GM’s unnecessary and irresponsible refusal to come to a fair agreement.” 

GM and Ford have both retracted earnings guidance after the strike has cost them billions. Ford said last Thursday that the strike would cost it $1.3 billion, and GM said it would be hit with $800 million in costs. Wells Fargo analyst Colin Langan said the strike costs Stellantis $200 million per week. 

Authored by Mark P. Mills via RealClear Wire,

This essay is based on the opening remarks delivered at a recent SOHO Forum Debate on electric vehicles.

If we could imagine a time machine bringing to New York City, an American citizen from the 19^th century, odds are the one thing that would seem the most amazing about our time would be the proliferation of the personal automobile. Big buildings, big cities, roads, nighttime illumination would all be imaginable, even if different looking and greater in scale. But the one thing radically different about modern daily life is the convenience and freedoms that come from a car.

Yes, that 19^th century citizen would probably be puzzled by people staring at glowing rectangles in their hands. In fact, the personal computer and the personal car are co-equal in their transformative impacts. MIT historian Leo Marx put it well when he wrote that: “To speak . . . of the ‘impact’ of … the automobile upon society makes little more sense . . .than to speak of the impact of the bone structure on the human body.”

The centrality of the car in the social and economic structure of society is evidenced by how citizens have voted with their pocketbook. A car is the single most expensive product that 98% of consumers ever purchase. Over 90% of American households own or have access to a car. Average household spending on personal mobility is the second biggest expense after mortgage or rent.

And there’s nothing to the trope that the rising generations will abandon automobiles. A recent MIT analysis found Millennials exhibit no difference in “preferences for vehicle ownership” and in fact drive more miles per year than Boomers. As for Gen Zs, the share of cars bought by that cohort has increased five-fold in the past five years.

Finally, to finish framing why cars matter, let’s consider what used to be called telecommuting, Zooming and remote working, especially following the epic exodus caused by the destructive Lockdowns of 2020. Surveys show the lockdowns accelerated a trend that was already underway, one of a huge swath of Americans moving to suburbs or rural areas. It’s a trend that invariably leads to a greater need for cars and distances driven.

Now come politicians in a dozen states—and the EPA via a creative exercise of regulatory authority—with plans to to ban the right to purchase a car with an internal combustion engine, the kind of car that 98% of Americans own, and the kind of car that 98% of average-incomed Americans still buy. The goal of the bans is not, we’re told, to deny any citizen the ability to own or afford a useful car. Instead, as everyone knows, it is in service of the goal to cut carbon dioxide emissions by mandating the use of so-called zero-emission electric vehicles. EVs for all. The process of “transitioning” to EVs for everyone, everywhere, we’re also told will be painless because EVs are inevitably taking over the entire automobile market because they are—it is said—simpler, better, and easier to use, and “cleaner.”

And now the Orwellian-named Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) promises a gusher of money to induce that transition. Let’s stipulate the obvious – one doesn’t need subsidies and mandates to convince people and businesses to buy products that are inherently radically better and cheaper.

But, assuming that the inflationary legislation isn’t reversed by a future Congress, the IRA’s push for an energy transition will deploy $2 to $3 trillion, (when it’s fully ‘costed’ to include unfunded mandates and in-perpetuity subsidies), half of which will be for EVs and related infrastructures. You can buy a lot of obeisance with that kind of money. With so much money combined with political mandates and PR momentum, we should not be surprised to find no auto maker dare avoid genuflecting to the grand vision of an all-EV future. But money can’t buy a change in the laws of physics and underlying engineering realities.

The ostensible inevitability, the enthusiasm, the subsidies, and the mandates for EVs are anchored in three claims:

• That EVs will radically reduce global CO2 emissions.
• That EVs are cheaper and easier to fuel because, well, you can “just plug them in,” and
• That EVs will soon be cheaper than conventional cars because they are inherently simpler.

All three of these claims are simply wrong.

Start with the core claim that “they’re simpler.” Yes, conventional cars have complex thermo-mechanical systems. Engines and automatic transmissions are made from hundreds of components, although mated with a very simple fuel system, a tank holding a liquid with a one-moving-part pump. EVs, inversely, have a simple motor made from a few parts. However, the EV fuel tank is a complex electrochemical system made from hundreds, sometimes thousands of parts including a cooling system, sensors, safety systems, and a boatload of power electronics. EVs aren’t simpler, they’re just differently complex.

The illusion of EV simplicity has relevance to the strike underway by the United Autoworkers Union. EVs do not entail less labor to build, but instead shift where the labor takes place. The data show that, overall, while about 80 people are employed per 1,000 conventional cars produced, Tesla, the world’s biggest EV maker—for now—employs about 90 people per 1,000 cars produced per year.

Seem strange? Consider just the labor to make the two different drive trains. Again, take Tesla and specifically its trend-setting Nevada “gigafactory” where public data shows about 8 people are employed per 1,000 EV drivetrains produced – that’s electric motor plus battery. The combined employment at conventional engine and transmission factories is just 4 people per 1,000 drivetrains. That’s the inverse of the EV labor argument. And there’s more to the labor story, realities that have implications for emissions and costs.

Look upstream at the primary materials sent to the factories to fabricate the vehicles. Steel and iron make up about 85% of the weight of a conventional car. That upstream supply chain requires less than one person per 1,000 vehicles produced. Meanwhile, most of the weight of an EV is found in more exotic, so-called energy minerals, from copper and aluminum to, obviously, lithium, and also nickel, cobalt, manganese, and rare earths like neodymium. That upstream supply chain employs roughly 30 people for every 1,000 EVs. Of course, all that labor is elsewhere since the mines and refineries are not in America.

But before turning to cost and emissions implications of the upstream realities, we need to address the claim that EVs are simpler to fuel.

It’s obvious that the imagined all-EV future requires on-road fast-charging. First, the total labor to deliver the same energy to EV fueling stations is greater than it is for the gasoline infrastructure… something that will necessarily, ultimately impact costs. But setting that aside (and that’s a lot to set aside), the lie of the simpler-to-fuel is in the nature of electrical engineering for fast-charging batteries. The so-called superchargers offer, instead of overnight fueling, 80% charge in 30 to 40 minutes. This is only fast if it’s not compared to the 3 to 4 minutes it takes to fill up a gasoline tank. Long refueling times will translate into long lines at EV fueling stations as well as the need for five to 10 times more charging ports than fuel pumps.

That won’t be convenient, simple, or cheap. Each supercharger costs two to three times more than a gasoline pump. And, because superchargers necessarily operate at 100 times the power level of an overnight home-charger, that translates into staggering requirements for grid infrastructure upgrades. Today roadside fuel stations have the electric demand of a 7-Eleven; but convert those to EV fueling station and every one of them will have the electric demand of a steel mill – and highways will need thousands of them.

Enthusiasts are either unaware of or profoundly naïve about the time and cost challenges of all that. The naivety extends in particular regarding the materials demands for the quantities of copper needed for all the wires and transformers that will be required to replace cheap steel pipes and tanks. And the metal demands of the electric infrastructure will necessarily be piled on top of an unprecedented increase in demand for metals and minerals to fabricate the EVs.

While copper is the long pole in the tent, it is only one of the mineral challenges. The realities of costs and emissions for EVs is dominated by a simple fact: a typical EV battery weighs about 1,000 pounds to replace the fuel, and the tank weighing together under 100 pounds.  That half-ton battery is made from a wide range of minerals including copper, nickel, aluminum, graphite, cobalt, manganese, and of course, lithium. And to get the materials to fabricate that half-ton battery requires digging up and processing some 250 tons of the earth somewhere on the planet. Those numbers, it’s important understand, are roughly the same no matter what the specific battery chemical formulation is, whether it’s lithium nickel manganese, or the popularly cited lithium iron phosphate.

And yes, that EV tonnage should be compared to the combined tonnage of metals and the weight of the oil used to produce and fuel a conventional car. Even if you compare those numbers, over a 10-year lifespan of both kinds of cars the EV still entails a ten-fold greater extraction and handling of materials from the earth, and far, far more acreage of land disturbed and, unfortunately, often polluted.

The astronomical quantity of materials needed for EVs has led proponents to claim that there are, after all, enough minerals on the planet and there’s nothing to worry about. And anyway, they say, we can recycle to reduce the monumental materials requirements. But recycling will be irrelevant for a long time since manufacturers claim EV batteries will last a decade. That means there won’t be anything significant available to begin recycling until the early 2030s, long after the world has had to face up to the biggest expansion of global mining in history.

As for the underlying geological resources to supply the suite of energy minerals: Of course there are enough of all those on planet Earth, and even in America. That’s irrelevant. What’s relevant is that the data show that, overall, the mines operating and planned can’t supply even a small fraction of the 400% to 7000% increase in demand for minerals that will be needed within a decade to meet the ban-the-engine goals. What’s relevant is that the IEA has told us we’ll need hundreds of new mega-mines, and that it takes 10 to 16 years to find, plan and open a new mine. You can, as they say, do the math on that.

The need to supply astonishing quantities of battery materials is also where we find the core problem with the claims for big EV emissions and cost savings.

Since over 70% of the price of an EV battery comes from the costs of just buying the basic materials needed – that means the future price of EVs is dominated by the future costs of those basic materials and is dependent on guesses about the future of foreign mining and minerals industries, not the labor and automation prowess at domestic assembly plants. Over the past half-dozen years, the often-cited long-run, rapid decline in battery costs has slowed dramatically. And now prices have increased some 20% since 2021. So far, that’s with EVs still under 10% of total vehicle production. We’re still in early days of minerals demands.

And it’s with the acquisition of key materials where we find flaws with the core claims for emissions. The energy used and thus emissions from producing a pound of copper, nickel, and aluminum, for example, is two to three times greater than for steel. The numbers are higher for the other minerals. Importantly, as researchers at the Argonne National Labs have pointed out, relevant data for all the battery materials “remain meager to nonexistent, forcing researchers to resort to engineering calculations or approximations.”

That means every emissions claim is a rough estimate or an outright guess based on averages, approximations, assumptions, or aspirations. There are huge variables and uncertainties in the emissions from energy-intensive mining and the processing of minerals used to make EV batteries. The simple fact is that no one knows how much CO₂ emissions will decline as materials production rises to build more EVs.  And all of the key variables point to higher, not lower, emissions in the future.

The energy used to obtain a pound of metal depends on the size, nature, and location of the mine. For copper, that number can vary at least two-fold, and for nickel by three-fold. Getting accurate information is complicated by the fact that 80%–90% of relevant minerals are mined and refined outside the U.S. and E.U. and will be for a long time regardless of subsidies. And, since China refines 50%–90% of the world’s suite of energy minerals for EVs, it’s relevant that its grid is two-thirds coal-fired—and will be for a long time.

There is a dishonesty at the center of all the facile claims about big EV emissions reductions. In fact, nearly all studies making emissions claims are worse than guesses, the estimates frequently cherry-pick low numbers for what’s really happening upstream. A meta-study of 50 different technical studies found the estimates of emissions varied by over 300%. And, worse, that analysis exposed the fact that most emissions claims were based on assuming use of a small 30 kWh battery. That’s one-third the size of batteries actually used in most EVs. Triple the battery size and you triple the upstream emissions – and you triple the demand and thus price-pressure for the minerals.

Upstream minerals emissions not only offset the savings from not burning gasoline but, as the demand for battery minerals explodes, the net emissions savings shrink and could even vanish. Reasonable, even likely scenarios will lead to EVs causing a net increase in global emissions. Geologists have long documented that ore grades have been and will continue declining. That’s because global ore grades are declining – for the non-cognoscenti, that means for each new ton of mineral there’s a steady and unavoidable increase in the quantity of rock dug up and processed. A decrease of just 0.4% in copper ore grade will require seven times more energy to access the copper. 

Unlike cars with internal combustion engines, it’s impossible to measure an EV’s CO₂ emissions. And, unlike cars where those emissions are the same wherever or whenever the car is made or used, EV emissions vary wildly depending on how it’s made and where it’s used. While, self-evidently, there are no emissions while driving an EV, emissions occur elsewhere—not only upstream before the first mile is ever driven, but also when the vehicle is parked to refuel. The latter, emissions from the grid, is also far more complex than simplistic forecasts assume. Real-world emissions from charging depend on precisely where and exactly when it’s done. The refuel emissions can vary from near zero on a sunny day in some states and, in other states and times, to the same or more than would have come from burning gasoline.

None of this means that the lithium battery doesn’t deserve a pivotal place in history. Its invention was consequential for many reasons, nearly all of which have little to do with EVs. Nor do the inconvenient complexities of mining and grids mean there won’t be many more EVs in the future. Today’s fleet of nearly 20 million EVs globally—notably half of which are in coal-burning China—will doubtless balloon to hundreds of millions of EVs on global roads in the coming couple of decades. But even such dramatic growth would mean that EVs would by then account for barely 15% of all consumer vehicles, and far tinier share of industrial and commercial vehicles.

By way of analogy, the future of EVs in land transportation ecosystems will end up echoing, in market share terms and for similar operational reasons, the role of helicopters in aviation. Helicopters offer very different and, in many applications, far more useful even essential features compared to conventional fixed-wing aircraft. That’s why there’s a very significant $60 billion a year global market for helicopters. Even so, helicopters are only 15% of the overall global aircraft market. While helicopters, like EVs, are useful for a large number of applications, one would no more expect all aviation to use helicopters than for all drivers to use EVs.

The realities of physics and engineering mean that politicians pushing for an all-EV future run a high risk. Quite aside from the eventual discovery that EVs will disappoint with only a tiny impact on global CO₂ emissions, the bigger impacts will come as consumers find vehicle ownership costs and inconveniences both escalating. That will lead to unhappy voters motivated by the key underlying reality: A car is the single most expensive and critical product used by the overwhelming majority of citizens.

Mark P. Mills is a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, author of the 2023 report, Electric Vehicles for Everyone? The Impossible Dream, and author of the 2021 book (Encounter Books), The Cloud Revolution: How the Convergence of New Technologies Will Unleash the Next Economic Boom and A Roaring 2020s. Mark is also part of RealClearEnergy‘s BrainTrust.