A Context for the Global Trade War Now Underway

Some time ago, we offered our view here that the best way to understand the real global power struggle that goes on behind the scenes is to think in terms of a power struggle between globalists and nationalists rather than between political parties (like Democrat vs. Republican). Over time as things have evolved, the political parties have somewhat aligned themselves on these two sides with the Democrat party more aligned with the globalist view and the Trump led Republican party aligned with the nationalist view. 

Now that a full scale trade war has broken out with the announcement by President Trump of a tariff regime across the world, we believe the best way to get the proper context for this fight is still to think in terms of a globalist vs. nationalist power struggle. 

The existing global financial system since World War II has been mostly run on the globalist model. In regards to trade, the globalist model views the world as one big economic entity. In theory the idea is that free trade is best for everyone because it increases competition and lowers prices for consumers. A trade off for this benefit is that it also increases the supply of cheaper labor globally that large companies can tap into. You make your product where you can get the lowest cost of labor etc. The globalists will say that this model has created great global wealth and benefitted the world more than it has hurt wage earners. 

The nationalist counter argument is that this global free trade model was not genuine because nations used their political power to "game the system". Nations erected all kinds of trade barriers and regulations making it cost way more for their citizens to buy US made products creating an advantage for their goods in the global marketplace (hurting US companies and workers). They will say we did not truly have "free trade" and definitely not fair trade because the game was rigged. Their answer to this is to try and fully disrupt the globalist system that has mostly prevailed for a long time and replace it with a pro nationalist model for trade and economic growth with each nation putting it's own interests first. 

The goal here is not to try and tell people which view is right or wrong. The goal here is to try and help people understand what is actually happening. The truth is that the powerful interests aligned on each side of this global power struggle are primarily interested in achieving political power to implement their view and model of how things should be run. Both sides are quite willing to accept the fact that their policies will create winners and losers. Neither side is going to let the fact that some will be losers prevent them from moving forward as much as they can with their agenda. The look only at "the big picture". Not how any particular individuals may be impacted. 

Currently, the nationalists have managed to acquire more political power than at any previous time in my life span. It is crystal clear that they are going to move forward with their agenda as hard and fast as possible and are willing to accept any market turmoil and chaos that arises from it as just part of the transition process from a pro globalist system to a pro nationalist system. Sort of a "we have to go through the pain to get the eventual gain" idea.

The tariffs and trade war are just the current very prominent event that makes this aspect of the power struggle very clear. It's open warfare the public can see and feel directly. We can expect that the chaos and turmoil is more likely to increase rather than decrease short term. The Nationalists obviously see this as their opportunity to make long term structural changes to the system and I'm sure expected the market turmoil we see right now as just part of the deal. They expect to prevail long term and cement political power after the initial transition shock wears off (before the next election cycle).

So, how does all this end? I have no idea. How this is resolved will depend upon the decisions made by the most powerful interests on both sides of the power struggle (the people who make the rules). It's reasonable to assume they will be motivated first and foremost by whatever they think will best push their agenda forward. We should not ever assume that what happens to regular people will be the primary factor for these powerful forces vying for political power. In this situation, the best plan for regular folks like us is to understand what is really going on and do our best not to be collateral damage in the financial war. We think that is the proper context in which to view the current trade war.

Added note: Here is a blog article that explores a view I see out there that all this turmoil and disruption is not only expected, but part of the plan (to accept short term pain for long term gain). It is worth a read and one plausible theory.

The Trump Balance Sheet Strategy

In our last blog article, we made this comment about the plan that seems to be surfacing under the new Trump Administration in terms of improving the asset side of the US balance sheet:

"While recent comments by Secretary Bessent imply there is no near term plan to revalue US gold, I would not rule out the idea that over the next couple of years as the new US sovereign wealth fund is rolled out, he would not mind seeing the gold price revalue itself higher whether it is put into a wealth fund or not.

This really applies to any asset the US owns (including it's seized Bitcoin for example) that might go into a sovereign wealth fund or be used as collateral to get more favorable interest rates on US debt issuances."

As time goes by, it appears that the plan which we will call "The Trump Balance Sheet Strategy" is really what we need to keep an eye on.

First, for the non-accountants out there, what is a balance sheet? Just ask Google AI:

"A balance sheet is a financial statement that provides a snapshot of a company's assets, liabilities, and equity (net worth) on a specific date."

For an individual or a company, a balance sheet is just a statement with a list of all the assets and liabilities the person or company has at the date the statement is prepared. You subtract the liabilities from the assets to get the net worth (or negative net worth if liabilities are more than assets). Here is a simple quick individual example for an individual - John Smith in our example. 

John's assets:

Cash in the bank  $5,000

Savings - CD's    $20,000

House               $300,000

Car                      $25,000

------------------------------------

Total                  $350,000

John's liabilities: 

House mortgage   $250,000

Car loan                  $20,000

Credit Cards            $10,000

---------------------------------------

Total                     $280,000

So, John's net worth would be $350,000 less $280,000 or $70,000. If you just look at John's liquid assets he has $25,000 in cash and savings he can access quickly. He owes $10,000 on credit cards so he has covered his immediate potential cash requirements. John would appear to be solid financially and a decent credit risk to any bank for a loan at a good interest rate.

Now let's apply this concept to the US as a nation and how it might relate to "The Trump Balance Sheet Strategy". In recent years a public perception has grown that "the US is broke" and the media and many financial analysts tend to focus only on the liability side of the US national balance sheet (now at $36 Trillion in debt and rising). We never hear anyone talk about the asset side of the US national balance sheet. It's as if all the US has is debt and is therefore perceived as "broke".

Along comes real estate guy Donald Trump who tends to look at everything as a balance sheet. Trump knows that perception and branding can be as important as "assets" as cold hard cash. So how do you go about changing public perception from being negative to positive in terms of the way it views the US financial position. It appears the answer is to aggressively promote the asset side of the balance sheet and talk down the liability side. Public statements by both President Trump and his Treasury Secretary (Bessent) support the idea that this is the plan. We noted those kinds of statements in our earlier article linked above.

If you are President Trump, you are looking for every conceivable asset the US may have (tangible or intangible) to promote and also a branding slogan to change the perception from "the US is broke" to "the US is very wealthy". How does a "new golden age of America" sound as a branding slogan? Just sayin.

But is this just all hype and a branding slogan with no substance? Not if the Trump Administration can leverage US tangible assets (like gold, natural resources, Federal land, Federal property, even Bitcoin) and intangible assets (like free markets, a pro-business low tax atmosphere, power to offer security guarantees, power to put on or take off tariffs, etc.) the way they plan to do. It's not that hard to project that the US could be sitting on trillions in tangible and intangible assets. From the view of a lifelong business wealth creator like Trump, the asset side of the US balance sheet is only limited by your imagination and creative ability to create new wealth. It's not that hard to think those assets might even be worth more than the $36 Trillion in US debt.

Recently I heard Jim Rickards do a presentation where he stated the US has over $100 Trillion in "hidden wealth" assets that can be leveraged into reality under the Trump Administration because it will unleash them by reducing and eliminating stifling regulations that have prevented them from being brought to market before.  Assets that locked in the ground by regulations were worth "pennies on the dollar" Jim said. Obviously, the US owns 260 million ounces of gold. The US has a military that can offer security guarantees to business partner nations. The US dollar is still the global reserve currency. Someone like Trump whose entire career has been based on "The Art of the Deal" will of course be looking for all kinds of public/private joint venture deals that could add asset value to the US balance sheet (TikTok is a recent example). I'm sure he is thinking in terms of trillions. 

On the liability side of the balance sheet, we can expect the Trump Administration to try and limit the future debt increase as much as possible and also extend the term of the US debt as far into the future as possible. If the US were John in our above balance sheet example, it might refinance the house mortgage and go from a 6% mortgage rate down to 4% rate, lowering monthly payments while the house (the asset) keeps growing in value longer term. Most people can easily understand this kind of personal "balance sheet strategy". All of this would have the goal of making the US creditworthy at the lowest possible interest rates far into the future and changing public perception that "the US is broke".

We will continue to monitor all this ongoing, but it is becoming clearer and clearer to us here that something like "The Trump Balance Sheet Strategy" is in play. Again, we would not see that as a major change to the present monetary system, but rather a way of continuing to extend the present monetary system further into the future without something like a systemic failure or US debt collapse. Will it work? Maybe or maybe not. Only time will tell us the answer.  But we expect to see a major PR/branding effort over the next year to try and change the public perception from "the US is broke" to "the US is very wealthy". Just look at the balance sheet.

Added notes: Here are a couple of recent articles discussing this line of thinking from various points of view.

A Trillion Dollar Sovereign Wealth Fund

Jim Rickards - Trump and the Dollar

Will we see major monetary system change under this second Trump term?

This blog attempts to monitor events to watch for any signs of potential major monetary system change that could impact the average person directly in their daily lives. With the election of Donald Trump, we are seeing a lot of changed rhetoric about how the US should conduct it's finances. Only time will tell us how much will actually change and how dramatic any change will be. 

The question here is will the basic fiat US dollar debt based monetary system be radically changed? All kinds of speculation is out there suggesting radical change will take place during the next four years. Much of the speculation centers around the idea that perhaps the US will return to some form of a gold standard. President Trump (who loves branding and slogans) has often stated his term will usher in a "new golden age" for both the US and world. Is this a cryptic hint from Trump  that  the US will return to a gold standard?

We'll see what happens. But for now I am going to take Trump and his new Treasury Secretary (Scott Bessent) at their word. They appear to be laying out a general outline for a plan that may very well include the use of US gold, but not any kind of return to an actual gold standard. If there is any plan to return to an actual gold standard, it is well hidden because neither Trump or Bessent have talked about any such thing. In a recent interview, even gold advocate Judy Shelton does not suggest a return to a gold standard is in the works. Instead, she proposes that in 2026 the US offer a relatively small (compared to total US debt) amount of long term gold backed US bonds. The bonds would give the holder the right to redeem them at maturity either for fiat US dollars or a fixed amount of actual physical gold. This of course means that she thinks fiat US dollars will still be here a long time into the future. 

This proposal does offer us a glimpse though into how Trump and Bessent might really plan to use US gold reserves (and any other US assets that might be part of a new US sovereign wealth fund). Think of gold more as an asset to be used as collateral for borrowing money than as a currency. The Judy Shelton proposal follows that line of thinking. No one is using actual gold as a currency for transactions under her proposal. Instead, gold is used to add credibility to US fiat dollar debt instruments. The idea being that markets perceive gold as rock solid collateral for money loaned out. Rock solid collateral gets a more favorable interest rate in the credit markets. 

So, perhaps Trump and Bessent are planning to use this same concept on a grander scale. Recently we have Trump signing an Executive Order to establish a US sovereign wealth fund. This recap of the executive order directly says the following (bold is mine):

ENSURING LONG-TERM ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS AND FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY: 

The creation of a sovereign wealth fund for the United States will help maximize the stewardship of our national wealth.

• Sovereign wealth funds exist around the world as mechanisms to amplify the financial return to a nation’s assets and leverage those returns for strategic benefit and goals.
• The United States can leverage such returns to promote fiscal sustainability, lessen the burden of taxes on American families and small businesses, establish long-term economic security, and promote U.S. economic and strategic leadership internationally.
• The United States already holds a vast sum of highly valued assets that can be invested through a sovereign wealth fund for greater long-term wealth generation.
• The Federal government directly holds $5.7 trillion in assets. Indirectly, including through natural resource reserves, the Federal government holds a far larger sum of asset value.

Yesterday Trump states the US will do some kind of audit to insure US gold reserves are accurate. Secretary Bessent stated recently he is excited that the US will be able to "monetize" it's assets for the benefit of the general public. He later clarified that this did not mean the US has plans to revalue it's gold reserves as has been speculated in some media outlets.

So, what is the plan? Obviously, there is some kind of plan in mind to utilize existing US assets and we know one of the biggest assets the US claims to own is 260 million ounces of gold. This recent article appearing in Zero Hedge is the best guess I have seen as to what they may have in mind. It suggests a plan to use gold as high quality collateral in the credit markets and of course suggests that the higher the gold price, the more collateral is available. 

While recent comments by Secretary Bessent imply there is no near term plan to revalue US gold, I would not rule out the idea that over the next couple of years as the new US sovereign wealth fund is rolled out, he would not mind seeing the gold price revalue itself higher whether it is put into a wealth fund or not.

This really applies to any asset the US owns (including it's seized Bitcoin for example) that might go into a sovereign wealth fund or be used as collateral to get more favorable interest rates on US debt issuances. 

If this is the plan, I would not view this as the kind of major monetary system reform we watch for here. It would be a new creative approach to extending the life span of the existing fiat US dollar based debt system. It would just be using gold and other assets to assure credit markets they can keep loaning the US money and at more favorable interest rates. 

We have said here for a long time that the biggest thing that keeps the present monetary system going is public trust in it. So, if this is the Trump/Bessent plan, it appears to be designed more to keep that public trust going in the present system than to actually make major fundamental changes to the basic monetary system. We'll continue to monitor it here and see what actually happens.

Public Service Announcement - Re Jim Rickards X Account Hacked

Jim Rickards who we follow here had his X account hacked recently. Until that problem is corrected he has setup an alternate X account which you can find here:  James Rickards (@RealJimRickards) / X

Where are Things Headed Now?

Now that the results of the US election are in and we are seeing the new Trump Administration start to take shape, we can try to assess where things may be headed. If you frame the political battle as nationalists/populists vs. internationalists/globalists as I do, of course the nationalist populist view prevailed in this election. I believe this is the more accurate way to analyze the two competing power factions rather based on one political party vs. another political party. Although, it is true that at this point the nationalist populist agenda is supported by a solid majority of the Trump led Republican party and the internationalist globalist agenda is supported by the now much more progressive based Democrat party.

With that as our basis for analysis, what might we expect to unfold that could impact the monetary system during this new Trump Administration? The easiest way to look at this is probably just in a Q&A format.

The Trump/nationalist/populist agenda calls for dismantling the so called "deep state" or "draining the swamp" as some like to say. What can we expect to happen related to that agenda?

Based on what I see so far, it appears President elect Trump is determined to surround himself with people loyal to him personally and his "America First" agenda. In Trump's first term, we heard a lot rhetoric and hyperbole about "draining the swamp" and "dismantling the deep state". The reality was quite different. 

Trump spent most of his first term on the defensive and having to overcome many of his own appointees not seriously pursuing his stated agenda or even turning against him. So, we should expect that this will continue until proven otherwise. Those who oppose Trump's agenda are likely going to do everything they can to prevent him from moving it forward. I'd expect him to win some battles and lose some battles, but the basic power structure to remain mostly in place (not dismantled). We can expect a Trump Administration to tout any reduction in "deep state" power as being game changing. But will it really be? We probably won't know until six to nine months into his term. I'd expect more of ongoing stalemate until we see proof otherwise. We'll see what happens.

Will a Trump Administration seriously challenge the monetary and financial system status quo? 

If you follow some of the strongest core Trump supporters, you will hear them talking about things like ending the Federal Reserve or the US bringing back a monetary system more based on "sound money". However, based upon what Trump and his first round of new appointees are saying, nothing like that appears to be on the agenda. 

What we hear being said is that the plan is to support the current US fiat dollar based system by creating enough growth to just continue to sustain rolling over the massive US debt at least another four years. In other words, just more of the status quo with some fringe reductions to spending here and there in some government programs. In a recent Fox Business article , the nominee for Secretary of the Treasury (Scott Bessent) stated the economic plan is 3-3-3 meaning 3% GDP growth, a reduction of  annual deficit to 3% of GDP, and a 3 million barrel a day growth in US oil production. 

So this is just the "we can grow our way out of the problem" approach under the current system and not any kind of major system overhaul. On top of that he stated that this Administration won't be able to deal with the largest areas of government spending (entitlements) at all and will just have to leave that up to the next Administration. This hardly sounds like any kind of revolutionary upheaval to the present system. It sounds like the plan is to grow enough to keep rolling over the debt another 4 years and then it will be someone else's problem. Until proven otherwise, we should not expect major monetary system changes. Here is the relevant quote from the article above.

"These entitlements are massive. I think the next four years isn't the time to deal with them, that we've got to deal with the discretionary portion of the budget and get that under control. But I think the signal – I always say, crawl, walk, run – we've got to crawl, maybe walk our way to get the current deficits under control, then the next step is for a future administration to have the confidence to be able to deal with entitlements," Bessent said. (article is on Fox Business and may not be accessible from the link above).

Will Congress work with the Trump Administration to make major systemic changes either in government or to the US financial system?

Early indications are that the new Congress will probably pass some of the "easy" things the Trump Administration wants like extension of the previous tax cuts enacted in 2017 and child care tax credit increases, etc. Both the House and the Senate are creating committees said to be ready to work with the unofficial D.O.G.E. led by Elon Musk to make substantial spending cuts (in the trillions according to Musk). So, we just need to watch and see where this goes. Things like this have been talked about for years, but nothing major ever really happens. Will this time be different? We'll just have to see. 

We already have the incoming Secretary of the Treasury saying the biggest area of spending (entitlements) is off the table (see above). We can expect all kinds of efforts by Administration opponents to block any kind of really significant government spending cuts. In the past, these simply never happen after a lot of rhetoric and hyperbole about it from the Republican party. The Senate has already positioned the more "anti Trump" Republican Senators in some of the key spots that determine what goes on in the Senate.

Musk has zero authority to actually cut anything, so he will be fully dependent upon Congress (including the Senate) for that. Will anything major really happen or will this end up just being a big PR campaign where any minor cuts will be proclaimed as a major overhaul to the system? Until proven otherwise, history tells us we won't see any real meaningful permanent changes to the system. Politicians love to tout relatively minor achievements (in the big picture of the longer term) as something "historic in nature". In reality, many things they do are quickly reversed once they leave office. But the one constant is the Administrative State which stays in place permanently while politicians come and go.

We'll see if it is "different this time".

Bottom line: The first Trump term was mostly a lot of bark and very little bite in terms of any major changes to the existing system and power structure. Will this second term be different? HIstory says probably not, but we'll see what happens.

Added note 12-1-2024: Trump Issues Tariff Threat to Protect US Dollar and here is Jim Rickards reaction to this threat.

Will the US Election Result Impact the Monetary System?

Now that the US election is over it's reasonable to ask if the result will spur any major change to the existing monetary system. For now, there is nothing to suggest any major changes are on the immediate horizon. Neither candidate really discussed the issue at all and every public comment I heard from President elect Trump implied the existing US dollar fiat based monetary system will just plod along. 

The US national debt continues to explode upward and all the risks to the present monetary system we have identified and discussed here remain in place. So, any new major financial crisis that destabilizes the current system could always force some kind of major systemic change. But absent that situation, it appears the new Trump Administration has no urgent plans to push for any major change.

The one ongoing global event we have discussed here with potential to impact the US dollar based system may actually diminish as a trigger for major change now. The BRICS, mostly encouraged by Russia and Brazil, have been working towards an alternative to the US dollar based monetary system and the SWIFT payment system. While they will continue forward with that initiative, a sense of urgency to use it as a counter to the US dollar may no longer exist. The main reason for this alternative was the US weaponization of the US dollar and SWIFT system imposing sanctions on Russia (and others) related to the war in the Ukraine. If Trump follows through on his promise to negotiate an end to the war, the sanctions likely would be dropped as part of the process. So, the urgency for a system to bypass the US dollar may subside. I'm sure they'll keep working on it to have something in place for the future if needed, but if sanctions are dropped, the urgency for implementing it soon will probably diminish..

As always. we'll continue to monitor events If anything surfaces to suggest major change could happen, we'll report it. 

What if Neither Kamala Harris or Donald Trump is the Next President?

With the US election coming up on the horizon there is still no indication that anything significant is going to change soon in the monetary system. That's the main topic this blog follows. However, since the election outcome will be of interest for most people and the outcome could eventually impact the monetary system, here is a potential election outcome scenario you won't see discussed very many places. 

This scenario comes from Jim Rickards who admits this would be a strange and totally unexpected outcome for most everyone. But he does view it as potentially possible and I can't rule it out since things just as strange have been going on in US politics quite often lately. Basically it involves Trump winning the race in the electoral votes, but the Democrats winning the House of Representatives. If that were to happen, some Democrats have threatened to pass a resolution in the newly elected House (just before the election would be certified on (1-6-2025) to declare Donald Trump an insurrectionist. If passed, that would disqualify Trump to be certified as President despite winning the electoral votes to become President. 

Since no candidate would then have the 270 electoral votes to be certified as President, the House then decides it under the 12th Amendment to the Constitution. The House can only vote for a candidate who received electoral votes so if the House met they would have to vote for Harris as President. However, a reasonable assumption is that Republicans in the House would likely revolt if this were attempted and refuse to meet to certify, denying the House a quorum. That means no one would be certified as President until the House changed it's mind and resolved things. Jim Rickards explains all this in some detail in this recent interview.

Based on this potential outcome there are some questions that come to mind very quickly:

Who becomes President if this were to happen? 

JD Vance would become acting President under this scenario until the matter was resolved in the House. 

What would prevent this from happening?

If the Republicans maintain control of the House, this will not happen. We can also assume that litigation would ensue likely going all the way to the Supreme Court over any resolution declaring Trump to be an insurrectionist. The Supreme Court could rule in Trump's favor eventually. That of course would take some time.

Who would become the VP if JD Vance became Acting President?

I asked Jim this question directly and he informed me Vance would serve as both Acting President and the VP until the House resolved the matter.

Bottom line: Jim Rickards believes there is a good chance the US election will not get resolved until 2025. That would be prevented if either candidate wins more than 270 electoral votes and no one attempts to challenge the outcome. If either party wins both the White House and the House of Representatives, this scenario likely will not happen. Markets may react to the uncertainty in a poor way if this scenario does unfold. There is still no indication major fundamental monetary system change would take place soon regardless. 

Update 10-30-2024: In a new video today intended for his newsletter subscribers, Jim altered his election forecast as described above. He is now projecting a comfortable Trump win and also that the Republicans will hold the House of Representatives based on how the election is trending. So, this would mean there would be no bill passed to declare Trump an insurrectionist under that scenario. He bases this on a combination of his own forecast models and the fact that large amounts of investment dollars are flowing into certain stocks that would benefit from a Trump win. Nothing he presented today would suggest any major change to the present momentary system soon regardless of who wins the election.

Update 11-07-2024: With the election results now in, Jim did hit his forecast again this year. We'll have to see if the results impact the monetary system, but I have not seen anything from Trump indicating he plans any kind of major change. Likely just more of the same as we have had, at least for now.

Mid Year Review - Is there anything that can disrupt the present monetary system?

The purpose of this blog is primarily to monitor current events and watch for anything that might have the potential to disrupt the present US dollar centered fiat currency system. Nothing has changed much from what has been posted here for a long time so there is really no need to post often. But we are at the mid point in a US election year, so this post will attempt summarize anything out there that might potentially disrupt the current system. This is important to follow because any such disruption will certainly directly impact all of our lives. 

With that introduction below I will just list the issues to be aware of. This is my most updated list. It is based on both my own research monitoring current events along with direct input from some of the experts I hear from by email and that have been featured on this blog over the years. These are experts who have the best chance of knowing what is going on. I work very hard to sort out what I believe are the most reliable sources before posting anything here. Of course no one knows everything or is always right.

Here are the top two issues I am aware of with potential to disrupt our present monetary system. The first one is more likely to have a shorter time frame than the second one.

-the US/West confrontation with Russia and it's other BRICS+ partners. This is the most serious threat I know of right now because of the continuing escalation by the US/West of various financial sanctions against Russia. The most recent escalation was the G7 announcement to seize the interest from frozen Russian assets and use it for US/NATO purposes. Jim Rickards views this as the most potentially disruptive current event, especially if Russia responds by seizing Western assets and/or initiates a legal action against the Euroclear platform where most of the frozen Russian assets reside. Jim says Russia could lock up this $40 Trillion system with a legal action filed in a jurisdiction more favorable to Russia (like say Hong Kong). Obviously, anything like that could be very disruptive. So this is a situation to monitor closely.

-the "De-Dollarization" movement underway in the BRICS+ nations. Basically this is another reaction to the US using sanctions in a weaponized fashion. Nations see that the US is willing to abandon long held norms in the global monetary system and use severe sanctions to punish other nations. The most obvious recent example being Russia. This inspires a counter movement to try and find ways to bypass the US dollar based system and the SWIFT payment system. Jim Rickards has a recent article that talks about the current status of that movement. Currently, Jim thinks this process will take some time to fully play out, but the next major event to monitor will be the BRICS+ meetings held this fall in Russia. It is possible some kind of announcement of a competing payments and trading system could take place. It is possible the new BRICS+ currency could be based on something called The Unit (described in this article). Note that Jim references The Unit in his article linked above. Anything that bypasses the current US dollar based system is a potential threat to be disruptive. But if it phases in gradually over time, it may be less disruptive.

A question that might be asked is: Will the US election results have a potential to disrupt the present monetary system?

The answer is yes, but very hard to quantify in terms of degree of impact or the timing of any such impact. Earlier on this blog we outlined how we view the current global power struggle that is ongoing. It's not really as much political parties fighting for power so much as it is a global vision for how the future should unfold between two very powerful opponents.

On one side we have what we will call the establishment power base attempting to push forward what is called a "globalist vision" for the future. On the other side we have the "nationalist/populist" opposition to the globalist vision for the future. In the US, this power struggle surfaces in the form of a Trump led Republican party vs. an increasingly progressive left Democrat party. It's actually more complicated than that because there are pro globalist Republicans and a few nationalist Democrats, but this is the surface power struggle (Trump/populists vs. Dems/globalists) the public will see in the upcoming election this November. 

So the question is will one side emerge powerful enough to push forward their agenda and  if so will their agenda involve major changes to the existing monetary system?

These are really impossible questions to answer. First we have to see if one side or the other emerges in a more powerful position since they have been pretty much grid locked for a long time. It's always possible in any election something could shift in power leverage, but it is just as possible that neither side gains much advantage and things just stay mostly grid locked. 

Then if one side does gain enough additional political power to move forward an agenda, will that agenda include any major changes or reform to the present monetary system? Again, an impossible question to answer right now.

Our take here has been and continues to be that until something forces the present system to make major changes, inertia is most likely to prevail and the present system will just continue to limp along. Despite massive problems in the present monetary system, an uncontrolled major collapse or failure will result in enormous hardship to pretty much everyone and the public will be angry and looking for who to blame. No one involved the big power struggle wants to take the risk of being held responsible by the general public for all the hardship a systemic failure will bring about. 

So our take here is that the grid lock in the power struggle combined with the fear of being blamed for any major systemic failure creates an incentive for the present system to just struggle along until it literally cannot continue to function. Central banks have enormous power to intervene to try and assist the present system and step in to "ring fence" any major failures in the system. They have unlimited power to create money and inject it where needed in a crisis. So we would expect all that to continue unless something happens that is out of the control of those who run the present monetary system. Something that catches them by surprise or is just too overwhelming to prevent (like an overnight derivatives meltdown), even with all the power they have to create money.

If I had to offer advice on the best public source to follow to monitor all this, I would say to follow Jim Rickards public interviews or subscribe to his newsletter if you can afford it. Jim is the most plugged in source I know right now to what is going on with the two key issues listed above. He also provides regular free updates to the public in various interviews. Just follow his X account to find links to his interviews (example here). His newsletter is not expensive, but I know some will not be able to afford that. Input I get from Jim by email is very helpful to sorting out various information we have coming at us from all directions these days and helps inform some things I post here along with input from some other similar high credibility experts.

Of course if we learn of something that could disrupt the present system, we will post about it here. But in the current environment, with so many sources of potential instability in play, things could always happen quickly and by surprise. So Jim is the best source we can recommend to stay as up to date as possible on the most critical issues right now.

Summary: Things tend to stay the same until something forces change to take place. Try to monitor events and prepare for any surprises that might arise at any time.

Added note 7-6-2024: This is the latest public interview with Jim Rickards for those interested. Jim lays out the current global power struggle as globalist vs. nationalist as we have done here for some time. The main point is that a lot of the old political labels and terms are not as relevant in this new power struggle paradigm (left vs. right - Democrat vs. Republican, etc). So it's important to understand the real power struggle that is ongoing (nationalist vs. globalist). Whoever controls the monetary system and how money is distributed will set the future agenda. That's why it's the focus of this blog.

Added note 8-21-2024: This is Jim Rickards latest update interview on the election, geo politics, etc. Nothing is this interview changes the analysis presented in the post above. So lots of unusual events have taken place since this was posted, but the analysis remains unchanged at this time.

Is Gold (and Silver) Trying to Tell Us Something?

Anyone who has followed the monetary system issues discussed here on this blog understands that one of the key signals to keep an eye on is what is happening in the gold market. Sometimes what is happening in the silver market is also something to monitor as well. This blog is not focused on the gold and silver markets, since there are plenty of sites and information sources that cover those markets.

What we do try to monitor here are any signs that the existing US dollar based monetary system might be under stress or on the verge of some kind of major change, since that would surely impact all of our daily lives in a direct way. 

For years here, we have presented many risks that exist and are ongoing to the present monetary system. We have presented proposals from some of the leading experts in the world on ways to reform the monetary system with the goal of making it stronger, more resilient, and to hopefully better serve the average person this blog has tried to reach.

Recently, we have seen gold rise to historic highs in terms of its price in US dollars (and all other fiat currencies for that matter). Silver has now also showed signs of trying to confirm that perhaps something unusual is starting to unfold in the gold market. When we see this, the obvious question to raise here becomes -- Is Gold (and Silver) Trying to Tell Us Something about the stability of the present monetary system? 

We don't know the answer to that question yet, but we do believe it is time to monitor this more closely. There are several explanations offered for the recent move in gold prices. But in this article we will provide some links below to some that suggest this time could be different and we might be seeing early signs of some cracks in the present monetary system. We don't make predictions here and readers can research this and draw their own conclusions. But below are some experts who are worth listening to just in case this time is different.

This first link is more of a background to "the big picture" of why many are concerned about the soundness of the money used in our present monetary system. It's a 2022 interview with authors Brendan Brown and Robert Pringle about their book - A Guide to Good Money. Robert Pringle is a good friend and his views carry a lot of weight here having spent his entire career inside the central banking system. I view him as an expert on the present monetary system so his comments on what has gone wrong with it are valuable for anyone wanting to learn about these issues.

This next link is a recent interview with another expert and good friend - Jim Rickards. Jim believes there are several factors influencing the rise in gold including inflation and debt. In this recent interview he talks about one he feels is key, but overlooked in mainstream media. The weaponization of the US dollar now taken to new extremes with recent action in Congress (Repo Act) that authorizes the President to seize Russian assets (denominated in US dollars) that have been frozen as part of the sanctions. Jim explains why he thinks this could be a huge miscalculation by the US with potential significant ramifications on both the gold market and ultimately global acceptance of the US dollar around the world. That of course is exactly what we try to monitor here.

Next, we have Michael Oliver sort of summarizing these same issues and explaining why he thinks gold is saying this time will be different.

Then we have this recent interesting comment by Judy Shelton on her X account in reply to being asked if we will return to a gold standard in 2024. She replied "Thinking something like that, but in 2026. Stay tuned." You may recall she was nominated to be on the Federal Reserve Board by President Trump, but was not confirmed before he left office. What might prompt a reply like that is a reasonable question to ponder.

These links are enough to give you a feel for the big issues at stake here and why it seems like it may be time to monitor the gold and silver markets closely into the November elections in the US. There are many different stress points on the system out there and the coming US election is more likely to amplify them than to calm things down. 

Added note: 5-22-2024 -- Steve Forbes adds his thoughts on a future for gold in a recent article as described at Kitco here. 

ERA -- A Novel Approach to Achieving Sound Money?

With not much happening in terms of major monetary system change, I did hear from Dr. Joseph Potvin recently. He updated me in regards to some potential real world experimentation with his Earth Reserve Assurance Proposal (covered some time ago here). He forwarded me a copy of his December 2023 conference paper that covers the proposal in detail. A very recent version of the proposal paper can be found here.

We have archived several different proposals for monetary system reform and this one falls into a category I would describe as creative and innovative new ideas.

Below I have pasted in the abstract for the paper that explains the proposal in general and how Dr. Potvin envisions it functioning in a real world environment.

Abstract

"This paper presents a novel approach to achieving sound money. The design can be incrementally retrofitted to any conventional currency in a multi-currency system without a central reference unit of account. Drawing upon monetary theory and elements of monetary system designs of ancient Sumer and modern Hungary, a new tradable deposit receipt security would be introduced that is indexed to changes in the capacity of ecosystems within the currency zone to produce primary commodities, relative to a base year, weighted by currency of invoicing data across jurisdictions. 

This would establish a grounded 'Money-of-Account' referent for that currency. New money creation involves a second new tradable deposit receipt security to be issued by corporations and communities that have verifiably improved the primary productive capacity of ecosystems in their currency zone. 

Central banks would be invited to redeem the securities with a special series of commemorative banknotes, to serve as Money-in-Trade valued in accordance with the Money-of-Account. With this auxiliary method, relative currency worth reflects changes in the core ecological co-determinants of economic activity. Instead of expressing ecosystem productive capacity in terms of money, this framework expresses money in terms of ecosystem productive capacity."

Will Anything Change in the Monetary System in 2024?

Now that the BRICS summit has resulted in no significant changes to the monetary system so far, a reasonable question to ask is -- Will Anything Change in 2024?

We can never make future predictions with any certainty, but the odds are that not much will change in the monetary system in 2024. The US is in another Presidential election year so the focus by those in power will be to reassure the public that all is well which suggests no major monetary system reforms will be coming from inside the system. Why change things if things are going great as they will assure the public they are under their superb leadership?

On the flip side, those seeking to replace those in power will campaign on every negative thing they can think of and attempt to convince the public that only replacing the those in power now with themselves can save us from total imminent economic destruction.

In other words, the same political rhetoric we have had for decades on both sides by those in power vs. those seeking to replace them. 

Those attempting to replace those in power now will likely promise all kinds of "transformational change". If history is any guide, very little transformational change to the system will actually happen regardless of who wins the elections. It's mostly just campaign rhetoric on both sides.

The view on this blog for years now has been that only a collapse or implosion of the present (very corrupt) monetary system will open the door for any kind of major transformational changes. Those in power always have incentive for that not to happen on their watch since the "transformational change" will be quite painful for most people and result in total loss of their credibility from the general public. They would lose their positions of power and privilege. 

Those not in power tend to revert to this same mentality once they gain power (if they win) after telling everyone disaster is on the horizon if they are not put in power. Now they will own any disaster that happens, so they revert to saying everything will be great again with no real major changes actually taking place and hope the system keeps pumping out enough money (credit) to keep things afloat and most people content.

So, our expectation here is the same as it has been for a long time. Nothing major will change in the monetary system unless it collapses and change is forced upon those in charge (or those who replace those who are in charge). The trick in politics is to hope that the timing of something bad happening in the economy or with your currency is when the other guys are in power so you can blame them. No one wants to be Herbert Hoover.

We'll continue to monitor things here, but no postings here means we don't see anything major happening that would lead to major systemic changes. Most likely, if something happens that leads to major change, it will catch most everyone by surprise including us. But we'll continue to monitor events as best we can here and alert readers if we see something real and tangible that might impact the present monetary system.

Did Anything Dramatic Happen at the BRICS Summit? Maybe

The buildup to the August BRICS summit was quite something. Predictions of what would be announced ranged from an announcement of a new gold backed BRICS+ currency and the end of the petrodollar to the view that nothing of substance would come out of the summit.

So, what is our take here? First, there was no announcement of not only any new gold backed BRICS+ currency, but not even any kind of new BRICS+ currency. There was talk of using BRICS national currencies more for trade which is nothing new.  There was talk about studying the issue of a new BRICS currency going forward. So this was also nothing new from the BRICS and not a dramatic announcement. 

On the other hand, BRICS did announce six new members will be joining the BRICS in January 2024 including both Iran and Saudi Arabia. So was this announcement a dramatic game changer? Maybe, depending upon what happens next year. How energy is priced is for sure a key component of how the present monetary system works. The decades long petrodollar agreement whereby the Saudis agree to price and sell oil in US dollars definitely provides strong support and global demand for US dollars. As things unfold, if that agreement goes away and the largest global oil exporters (aside from the US) no longer price and sell oil in US dollars, we may have a potential game changer on our hands. It's what we will monitor here over the next year.

One lesson to take from how this summit played out versus how it was built up is that the norm is that things rarely change quickly in the global monetary system. It's just not how things happen unless some kind of dramatic unexpected black swan event happens suddenly. We have long reported that here, even as many dates have come and gone where forecasts that "the monetary system will be turned upside down" did not pan out. Does this mean that cannot happen? Of course not. There are many systemic risks (that we have documented here on this blog) that can arise at any time to destabilize the system. This BRICS summit however was not such an event in terms of any immediate major shock or impact on global markets. We'll see if Saudi Arabia joining BRICS leads to something more dramatic over the next year.

As various analysts react to the summit, we'll post some links below over time. For now, there is nothing upcoming we are aware of to report on related to major monetary system change, so we'll return to just monitoring events here.

Official Summit Declaration

Item #45 (bold and underline is mine)

"We task our Finance Ministers and/or Central Bank Governors, as appropriate, to consider the issue of local currencies, payment instruments and platforms and report back to us by the next Summit." (scheduled to be held in October 2024 in Russia)

The six new members to what I guess will be called BRICS+ are Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. This article says some analysts facetiously suggested a new name of BRICS + OPEC.

Analyst Reaction to BRICS Summit:

Jim Rickards - Here is a link to the last public article from Jim as the BRICS summit began and here is a link to his latest article reviewing what happened at the summit and what he sees going forward. Although BRICS did not announce a new gold linked currency at the August summit, Jim remains convinced that is still their long range plan with the inclusion of Saudi Arabia as a new BRICS member being a first step in the plan. New article 9-6-23 -- The Dream is Dead.

Alisdair Macleod is a gold market analyst who has been writing all year that the BRICS would announce a new gold backed currency at the summit which would then trigger a major global loss of confidence in all fiat currencies including the US dollar. In this new audio interview, he acknowledges that his prediction did not pan out and goes on to offer his thoughts on why. Basically, he believes China prefers not to move forward with a separate BRICS+ currency at this time. He still believes a gold back BRICS+ currency will eventually emerge.

Willem Middelkoop - In this new interview on Kitco, analyst and financial system author Willem Middelkoop offers his take on things.

Silk Road Briefing Article

This article in Silk Road Briefing suggests any common BRICS+ currency will not happen soon and only possibly after other events listed in the article take place. The article does claim that a potential name for an eventual common currency has been chosen however (the R5).

Global Times (Chinese Publication) 

This article in Global Times quotes an anonymous "insider" as follows making it clear what the long term goal is for the BRICS.

"people are witnessing the twilight of the petrodollar"       . . . .

"The selling of US dollars and US Treasuries will be accelerated," the insider noted.

Business Insider  - BRICS Leaders Appear to Disagree on a Common Currency

Kinesis & Indonesia Launch New Gold Backed Digital Currency Alternative

While no news came out of the BRICS Summit concerning a new gold backed currency, in their latest weekly video update, Kinesis spokesperson Andrew Maguire reports the Vice President of Indonesia has now officially launched it's gold (and silver) backed digital currency alternative to the full population of Indonesia (PosPayGold -use Google to translate to english). Maguire also hinted that more government partnerships involving digital gold and silver backed currencies are in the works in the future. We'll monitor that here in the coming year.

Will Something Dramatic Happen At the BRICS Summit in August?

With very little happening to suggest any major change in the global monetary system for quite some time, I have not written much here on the topic. That's because we have spent years here documenting the risks to the system and offering input from a variety of leading experts around the world on how to potentially reform or replace the existing monetary system. In the past several years we have noted the ongoing political stalemate between those who view the world from a "globalist" perspective and those who view the world from a "nationalist" perspective. Our analysis here is that they have been locked in somewhat of a stalemate in terms of gaining enough political leverage to push forward their agendas for the future. Since each side has a different agenda for how the monetary system should work, the outcome of that battle could very well impact the monetary system. However, at this time, it appears that battle will just continue until the 2024 US elections. If one side or the other gains leverage in those elections, we might see some significant changes. But it is also possible that the elections will just end up with divided government once again. That tends to negate any significant change coming from political policy changes. So for now, no change on that front from the perspective of our analysis here.

There is however an event upcoming in August (the BRICS Summit) that many are eagerly watching with the view that something dramatic may be announced that could impact the monetary system. Some are forecasting that a new BRICS+ currency will be announced and that it may be tied in some way to gold. There are various speculations on how gold might be involved. Jim Rickards (an expert we follow here and get some input from) has written an article recently talking about how he sees this playing out. He believes that a new BRICS+ currency will likely be tied to a specific weight of gold (rather than fixing a set exchange rate between the currency and gold) whenever it is announced. Jim also sent me a link to this interesting article which he says is a good read on this topic.

There is some intrigue ahead of this summit to be held in August. In the past few days, articles are appearing that seem to put out conflicting statements and signals from various BRICS nation officials as to what will actually happen in August. Fortune put out this article quoting the VP of the BRICS New Development Bank as follows:

“The development of anything alternative is more a medium to long term ambition,” he said. “There is no suggestion right now to creates a BRICS currency.”

Soon after this article comes out, articles like this one carried on Kitco appeared quoting a Russian official as saying the BRICS will in fact announce a new "gold backed" BRICS currency system. Other non mainstream media sources are also reporting this citing the Russian backed RT (Russia Today) media as "official" confirmation. So far, no western media outlets I have found are confirming this story coming out of Russia. 

Obviously, a new BRICS+ currency backed in some way by gold has the potential to be a significant event in terms of what we follow here. If it does happen, how markets react to that event needs to be monitored to see if it is viewed as significant or not. It's appropriate to try and understand what will actually happen in August and keep an eye on it.

So, what is going on here? Why are we seeing clearly contradicting statements from various BRICS officials coming out like this ahead of the August summit? We cannot know, we can only speculate as to the reason. Here is a short bullet point list of some possible explanations:

-BRICS officials are not properly coordinated and are putting out conflicting statements due to poor communications between them

-the BRICS do plan to make a new currency announcement, but want to shock and surprise the markets so as to try and hurt the US dollar as much as possible by surprise

-BRICS nations are truly conflicted about whether to move forward with this kind of announcement right now. They do plan to do something like this eventually, but not all members are on board with moving forward at the August summit

-Russia is putting out it's statement because it has the most incentive to try and hurt the US dollar given it's conflict with the West in the Ukraine. So, they hope to try and force this announcement at the August summit by putting out this statement ahead of the summit

-western media want to downplay any announcement of such a new currency to try and negate any negative impact on the US dollar as part of the ongoing conflict with Russia in the Ukraine

Fortunately, we won't have to wait too long to find out what will really be announced and how much impact it will have. The main point to make in our analysis here is that you must view these monetary system battles as part of the much bigger political war ongoing between the nationalists and the globalists. The present globalist US dollar based monetary system of course does not want to see anything seriously disrupt that system. The nationalists see disruption of the US dollar based system as a key part of their strategy to upset the globalist hold on the global monetary system. So, in our view here, you should follow this from that perspective to better understand what is actually going on. We'll follow it here and report what happens after the summit.

Other side note: In our world today, we see people sharply divided on many important issues. In the monetary system realm, those who see the present fiat US dollar based system as corrupt and close to failing believe we are on the cusp of major change that will see a return of gold to the system one way or another. Those who are what is called the "mainstream view" don't see this happening and assume the present system will continue into the future with just various tweaks to the system (such as CBDC's issued by central banks) gradually in the years ahead. Both views acknowledge there is always a risk of systemic failure opening the door for some kind  of major monetary system change (which is what we monitor here). But they have vastly different ideas on what should reform or replace the current system. With that in mind, I am linking below to an interesting recent interview between Andrew Maguire and Danielle DiMartino Booth. Andrew Maguire is a well known icon for advocating for the gold and silver markets and Danielle DiMartino Booth is a former official at the Dallas Texas branch of the Federal Reserve. So they come from very different perspectives as this interview illustrates, but they also agree on some points. DiMartino Booth has become an outspoken critic of Fed policy on many issues.

Civil Discussion on key Monetary System Issues

First, congratulations to Andrew Maguire for conducting an interview like this. Here we have a civil and thoughtful discussion of some of the key issues we see today related to the monetary system. So often what we see is different sides only pushing out their talking points in a echo chamber fashion without even listening to another point of view. This discussion is not like that which is why I am featuring it here. Having covered this topic for many years, I am well aware of the divergence of views between those who view a "sound money" system as being important and the need include gold as part of the system for public trust and confidence on the one hand. On the other hand is the view that the fiat US dollar based system is entrenched so deeply it is not going to be disrupted for a long time unless a catastrophic collapse of the present system happens (something both sides concede is possible). So here in this interview I think we see a real honest discussion centered around that divergence of views well worth listening to. In our view here, we need more of this kind of exchange of ideas and respect for different views across all aspects of society.  So we applaud this example of a civil discussion about issues that are certainly very important and will likely decide how the future of the monetary system unfolds. In August we will find out if anything along these lines is imminent or not.

Added notes related to the August BRICS Summit 7-19-23:

News reports indicate Russian leader Putin will not attend the Summit in person (Lavrov will instead) but will attend via video phone conference. 

Jim Rickards publishes this article again pointing to this BRICS summit as an important event in terms of potential its future impact on the global monetary system.

Added notes related to the August BRICS Summit 7-21-23:

Reuters reports the discussion for a new BRICS currency is not on the agenda for the upcoming summit in August.  However, the South China Morning Post quotes the President of South Africa assuring the President of Brazil that a BRICS currency discussion is on the agenda.

Added note related to the August Summit 7-22-23:

In this new interview, Jim Rickards addresses the conflicting statements from various BRICS officials about what will be on the summit agenda in August. Jim's comments in this interview are very interesting. 

Added note related to the August Summit 8-14-23:

In this interview, gold dealer Andy Schectman offers his thoughts on the upcoming BRICS summit and the future afterwards.

Just a little over a week ahead of the summit, there continues to be a wide variety of views on exactly what will be announced at the August summit. The two keys we will watch here are what new countries join the BRICS (especially if Saudi Arabia is one of them) and what is announced in regards to some kind of new BRICS+ payment currency system. The views on that last one are all over the board ahead of the summit.

Added note related to the August Summit 8-16-23:

In this new article, former Goldman Sachs economist Jim O'Neill says nothing of significance impacting the US dollar or monetary system will come out of the BRICS August Summit.

Added note related to the BRICS August Summit in progress 8-23-23:

The AP reports that discussions are being held to decide about adding new BRICS members including Saudi Arabia. This is a key we are watching here. So far no mention of a new BRICS+ currency being close to implementation in news reports from the Summit. We'll review the Summit after it concludes to try and determine if anything dramatic happened or not.

Added note related to the BRICS August Summit in progress 8-24-23:

Iran and Saudi Arabia are among 6 nations set to join China and Russia in the BRICS economic bloc | AP News

AP reports that Six Nations Including Saudi Arabia and Iran will become members of BRICS starting in January 2024. We do view this as potentially significant news which could impact the present dollar based monetary system depending upon what follows next. We'll review it after the summit concludes. Some expected an immediate impact on markets this week, but it appears if any impact emerges, it will happen over time.

Where Are We?

Not much has changed so not much has been posted here in terms of where things may be headed for monetary system reform or (even more dramatic) monetary system failure requiring some kind of new "restart" monetary system. 

Everything posted here for years is pretty much still valid today. All the monetary system risks listed and explained mostly still exist and if anything are riskier than ever. All kinds of various proposals to reform the system or replace it with a new system have been offered and many documented here on this blog. For years, I got direct input from a variety of leading experts from around the world on these issues. Virtually all of them agreed with the risks that exist to the present monetary system. Many of them offered a variety of ideas on the best ways to fix the system going forward. None of these reforms have gotten any traction anywhere as far as I know. 

So, Where Are We Today and why are we where we are?

The best answer I can give is that we are still clinging to a wobbly debt based monetary system administered by central banks using national fiat currencies. Debt levels never imagined possible are now accepted as routine and business as usual. The world seems to accept that all this debt will not be paid off unless it is paid off with currencies that continue to lose significant purchasing power over time. So long as governments and central banks can continue to create money with computers and people keep accepting it for use in business and trade, business as usual does just go on and on and on.

Having followed this for years, I can attest that almost everyone accepts the above analysis as true. All kinds of official warnings have been issued related to the risks that exist to the current monetary system, so it's not that no one realizes the risks exist. 

So why does nothing change?

All I can offer here is my own opinion and speculation based on covering this in some detail for a long time. The global political stalemate between two very powerful factions appears to remain in full force. There are two basic forward looking political agendas or ideas on how the future should look. Both sides are unwilling to compromise and are determined to eventually prevail. So long as this condition continues, the most likely scenario is that every possible effort will be made to prop up and sustain the current unstable (and quite corrupt in many cases) system. I believe the reason for this is because both sides in the larger global power struggle understand that whatever happens to the monetary system impacts every person on earth in their daily lives. If the system fails and that results in major human suffering on a global scale, most of the world population is going to be very angry and looking for who to blame for this total disruption of their ability to plan and conduct their lives freely. No one on either side of this power struggle can really be sure who will get the blame. So neither side has an incentive to see it fail because of the risk their side will get the blame and will suffer complete loss of power and influence for a long time (probably for generations). So the stakes are enormous for both sides.

Thus, whatever has to be done to keep the existing massive debt based system afloat continues to be done unless one side or the other thinks they can leverage a system failure to the advantage of their side. That's my take on it.

So, when will that come to an end?

That is the Trillion dollar question that apparently no one can answer. Everyone knows it cannot go on forever. No one knows when it might fail dramatically. So, politicians and officials on both sides of the major power struggle are spending their time and effort trying to spin whatever talking points they can out to the public to try and insure the other side will get blamed when the system does fail. That's the objective now on both sides. No actual efforts at compromise or genuine solution finding are in play at all as best I can tell. 

So, what does the average person do in a world like this?

There is not much of anything the average person can do to impact what policy makers and officials decide to do in my opinion. They are going to make decisions based upon whatever they think will advance their cause (their side) and provide them with political power to shape the future agenda. Certainly people should vote and express their views as they feel led to do so. But in reality, there is no evidence I see to suggest policy makers will pay attention to any of that other than needing people's votes to be in power. Once they get their votes, they will go back to ignoring them in terms of their policy making as I view the situation. 

Here is what I would offer for the average person to do in bullet point form in this kind of world:

-stay as informed as possible about what is actually happening by looking at many various forms of media sources. Follow them over time to establish which information sources are more credible based on what actually happens, not what you prefer to happen or want to believe. There is massive misinformation and disinformation in circulation from all directions. Time usually tells what information is more credible. 

-try to be a responsible adult focused on doing the best you can to take care of yourself and your family so as to be as prepared as possible for whatever the future may bring. Try to stay informed on the big picture, but don't over stress about it.

-reduce debt as much as possible, build up an emergency savings fund if possible, add some amount of precious metals to your savings to better diversify against a potential systemic failure.

-be a person of honesty and integrity and kindness to everyone in your circle of influence. The world is badly divided and there are people who don't mind trying to capitalize on that to gain wealth or power. While people will always disagree on important issues, there is no reason they cannot make an effort to get along and work together whenever possible. A couple of major common goals should be human freedom and a decent standard of living for everyone. People of genuine good will with those key goals can usually find ways to work together despite differences.

I'll continue to monitor events. If I become aware of something new that could involve a major change in the monetary system (either a planned change or an unplanned systemic failure) I will post it here as always. For now, the global power struggle and political stalemate continues until it doesn't -- and no one knows when it will end as far as I know. It is possible we could see some closure on the political front by the 2024 US elections. The monetary system remains at risk of some level of failure at virtually any time.