Jerome Powell didn't say anything with conviction. He merely said that some sectors of the economy had sticky inflation that might require more rate hikes to control, and other sectors were already showing stability. His final statements were neither bullish nor bearish, and he concluded his speech with, "We are going to react depending on the data we gather". - Who's in control in this situation? The Federal Reserve or Inflation?
Seems that the spiral for USD is behind them given that inflation is on the downward trend. Though I'm also concerned that the Chinese economy seems to be on the brink of a recession, which would then cause the U.S. economy to enter a recession given it's fragile state already. If the federal reserve does raise interest rates, a recession just arrives sooner. |
|
|
|
The BRICS gold backed currency hasn't yet come to fruition, it's a mere proposal: https://cointelegraph.com/news/gold-backed-brics-currency-very-hard-to-deliver-lyn-aldenAnd essentially the problem is that the world relies on fractional reserve banking and future GDP growth is entirely based on debt, so it makes it logistically difficult. Even absent of a gold backed currency, USD is still on a decline. There are other attractive options if countries are seeking a stable asset. |
|
|
|
|
Saudi Arabia are more adversarial to the U.S. than people might believe, which is why every now and then U.S. Presidents must get down on their hands and knees and beg OPEC to ramp up oil production. UAE is in a similar position, despite the Abraham Accords which was negotiated by the U.S. These relationships were brewing over some number of years but none of this actually had to happen were it nor for the U.S., and others, destroying their own currencies with sanctions and money printing. Self infliction is an understatement. This was premeditated.
The stronger BRICS gets, the stronger China gets.
|
|
|
|
|
BRICS is an economic partnership first, so their geopolitical ambitions are predicated on how aggressive they choose to be. We don't know what this looks like quiet yet. You can consider their strength relative to G7 to be proportional to the aggregate GDP of all combined members of BRICS and G7 respectively.
The more countries that join, the greater threat they become to G7.
|
|
|
|
Republican primary debate was last night, you can familiarize yourself with the participants: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/who-are-the-candidates-in-the-first-gop-primary-debateSome candidates are not even worth mentioning, the only major players were DeSantis, Ramaswamy, Pence, and Haley. Trump, obviously, was absent. Instead, he elected to do an "X" interview with Tucker Carlson here amassing over 200M impressions thus far: www.x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1694513603251241143I consider the winner of a primary debate to be someone who increases their chance of being the nominee for that party, and as such there was actually no winner of this debate. Trump sits 30-40 points ahead of every candidate, and no particular candidate had a stellar performance that would lend himself or herself to taking the Republican nominee from Trump. That being said, Ramaswamy stood out the most. He's charismatic and a good debater. He took the most attacks from other candidates and was able to respond efficiently. DeSantis, despite not being attacked, came out rather flat with many rehearsed lines. His conservative record is impressive, but he isn't a great politician. I see Ramaswamy surging slightly in the odds eating away at DeSantis's lead. |
|
|
|
|
A country in debt would not close its central bank, even when the debt is in foreign currency. Obviously if the debt is within its own currency, then the incentive to keep printing money to pay off the debt exists. But the central banks have pegged economic growth to their interest rates and there is simply no way out the system without a huge initial crash in economic activity. That's not to say the economy wouldn't recover and be better off -- though a politician wouldn't be amenable to taking the political ramifications for such a crash.
The interest rates in Argentina are abysmal. They've been battling inflation and have since been trying to balance their GDP and inflation rate. They'd be better off if the central banks were done away with.
|
|
|
|
|
If they're lowering the intellectual bar then one might assume they would lower the physical requirements. American youth are getting too overweight to serve in the military and that's reducing the pool of qualified candidates. You might imagine what happens to a country once their armed forces become too fat to serve.
|
|
|
|
It's great that others have mentioned a lot of cases where the SEC expressed their negative attitude toward various stable coins. I want to focus on another matter. The SEC is pretty consistent on what fall under their regulations: securities or something very similar to securities. But here we hit a weird spot because the SEC seems to believe that stablecoins are close enough to securities that they should be registered as such. On the other hand, some argue that since there's no expectation of profiting when it comes to stablecoins, they aren't securities and thus shouldn't be under the SEC. In any case, it seems that the op is wrong in assuming that stable coins are free from the SEC, at least if the SEC's position on the matter counts. The SEC's case against Binance, among other violations, was that they didn't register BUSD. Stablecoins aren't immune from government crackdowns but realistically, Bitcoin represents a greater threat to these government agencies than any asset backed coin. The government has the means to seize assets and render stablecoins useless. They obviously don't have this power with Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Older folks are generally reluctant to use Bitcoin, even when you set aside the technology learning curve. You're talking about a group of people that are close to retirement and have little incentive to change assets in their portfolio. That's if the pitch of Bitcoin is an investment vessel. I don't expect they would bother fumbling with crypto for day-to-day transactions either.
Is it worth it? Depends on how you value your time.
|
|
|
|
Currently, Americans want the regulations for crypto to be more transparent so that they can adopt it better. Republicans and Democrats also agree on the need for regulation to ensure that it becomes a safe investment option for American investors. 4 out of 5 Americans have a positive view of crypto. The acceptance of crypto among the American youth is so high that the American government is also paying special attention to it. A majority of older voters among American citizens also believe that crypto will create a more equitable economy with less reliance on banks and financial intermediaries. Crypto is currently the top investment choice for people aged 18 to 40 in this country. In almost every country in the world, the positive attitude towards crypto is increasing day by day, as a result of which cryptocurrency is going to play an important role in the economy in the future.
Will you agree with the thought that cryptocurrency is going to make a significant contribution to the economy of every country in the world ?
The world that democrats and republicans are living in are entirely different when it comes to crypto regulations. Most democratic politicians on the federal level believe in stringent regulations and higher taxes on cryptocurrency. Joe Biden explicitly laid out framework for crypto regulation under the guise of consumer protection: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/09/16/fact-sheet-white-house-releases-first-ever-comprehensive-framework-for-responsible-development-of-digital-assets/It's essentially a bunch of jumbled up jargon, hitting on all the buzzwords related to fraud prevention and consumer protection. When translated, it means higher regulation and bureaucratic red tape related to crypto. Republicans aren't particularly pro-crypto either, but relatively speaking, they are compared to democrats. Then there exists some portion of politicians that couldn't even define cryptocurrency. |
|
|
|
What do you guys think really drive all the government and platform like this new Platform vanguard, BlackRock and some other companies which holds 88% of the market in US and they are almost in every market and now these platforms are coming into Crypto too. I know i started the topic from history lesson and end up at today's problems, but I have to link something to make my point clearer. Why Corona Virus made some people rich why there is a monopoly in the whole world civilization.
The studies are out there and I can provide them if you wish (I assume this is common knowledge) -- COVID was the biggest transfer transfer of wealth away from the middle class to the elites (not the rich, but the ultra elite). It was entirely government induced. When the government began printing away trillions in cash, the new money that circulated the economy was spent at large corporations which only made the elite wealthier. When these new dollars caused inflation, it disproportionately affected those who are lower income. When businesses were forced to comply with government mandated restrictions, the larger corporations had the capital to comply, whereas smaller businesses shut down. Businesses with e-commerce platforms particularly excelled, whereas smaller businesses that relied on physical customers suffered. Again, the elites were not closely involved in the decision making process when it came to COVID. It was mostly politicians who felt too afraid of making the right decision in fear of political ramifications. |
|
|
|
In another three cases, those exterminated had reportedly been unable to consent. No different than state sanctioned murder. Canada ostensibly abolished their death penalty in 1998. The difference between euthanasia and the death penalty from the perspective of the state is compassion. And if you closely examine such cases of euthanasia in Canada, the compassion is nonexistent: https://apnews.com/article/covid-science-health-toronto-7c631558a457188d2bd2b5cfd360a867Alan Nichols, euthanized because of his listed condition of "hearing loss." Of course, he was helplessly depressed. The standards will only loosen. Government programs usually grow in size and service. |
|
|
|
...
Based on what others have said, I don't know if SpaceX sold its holdings for sure so it can't be tied to Evergrande, but anyone that's been paying attention to the markets as of the last 6 months know that that there's a relatively high likelihood of recession which increases the need for liquidity. Evergrande's bankruptcy was imminent when they defaulted in 2021 and it pointed to the economy in China slowing down, which would cause the global economy to recede in tandem. |
|
|
|
Devalutaion of Chinese Yuan
Speaking of the Chinese Yuan, Evergrande filed for bankruptcy in New York recently: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/china-evergrande-group-files-chapter-205343548.htmlThey have something like 300B in liabilities, and they aren't the only ones with a liquidity crisis. It tells you that the Chinese economy is heading in perhaps a tumultuous direction. The domino effect will be that other economies slide into a recession. I don't think it's some giant conspiracy. Companies rather have liquidity and let the recession present itself to be a buying opportunity of cheap assets. |
|
|
|
|
Africa is essentially free domain. They're malleable to whatever geopolitical forces enter the region and the government is receptive to such forces. I've always believed its within African countries interest to distance themselves from foreign influence in order to rid themselves of dependency. The politicians benefit from these partnerships, never the constituency.
The immediate impact on the global economy is nonexistent because Africa as a whole has a small GDP. Shipping routes and logistics aren't a concern as of yet either, so there would be virtually zero impact in that regard. Private companies who have interest in African minerals/resources are probably paying close attention, though.
|
|
|
|
The pioneer economic crisis for the world this decade began with COVID-19 pandemic IMO. The economic effect that is going on now has its roots from 2020 when the world almost shut down for the whole year. In fact some countries in Europe stayed back from manufacturing and financial activities. So the world economy is yet to recover from that, the infiltration of wars around only amplified the situation at hand.
LOL.. this is laughable. First of all, countries such as Netherlands were not that much affected by the COVID pandemic. Most of the population got vaccinated before the Delta wave began. It was third world nations such as India and Brazil that got impacted the most. And these countries have shown robust economic growth during the last few years. So what is wrong with Netherlands? The ongoing Russo-Ukrainian war has played its part, but the rot started long back. Many of the European governments still believe that they are super-rich and splurge money on unnecessary expenses. In the end, they are forced to increase taxes and this negatively affects the economy. It's a result of both -- Russian/Ukraine war and COVID related expenditures caused inflation: https://www.worlddata.info/europe/netherlands/inflation-rates.phpCore inflation was less, obviously. You can look at currencies like Swiss Franc if you want to get an idea of how energy prices effected inflation. Swiss Franc peaked at ~3.5% which was significantly lower than other currencies in Europe. Of course Switzerland did not aggressively print money during COVID as other nations did. Predictably, their inflation rate was much lesser than others even after their energy prices rose. |
|
|
|
|
It was meant to be a rebranding so "Twitter" could be incorporated into a multi-purpose app, but it turned to be a failure thus far. Hard to recall a company have such a rough landing with a company rebrand. Even though it's "X", you'll find its still called "Twitter" all over the web application and mobile app. Elon's stated his intentions are to turn Twitter into a payment platform, video publisher, etc. hence the rebranding, but at its current state, Twitter only has the utility of a social platform. They've rolled out a partner program that pays people for the impressions they garner, the intent being for posters to produce enticing original content. But it's only turned the platform into a space where people bait out interaction by posting low effort content.
So much for "X".
|
|
|
|
|
Who elects the politicians? The constituency. Seemingly everybody suspects politicians to be liars but they'll gladly vote them in anyways. The reality is that politicians get elected by telling people what they want to hear, not what they need to hear. And what people want to hear are often lies.
|
|
|
|
The obvious implication is it will allow for countries to circumvent U.S. sanctions but that's predicated on how willing a country is willing to adopt yuan. The Chinese economy, contrary to what people might believe, is unstable and dwindling; thus by proxy, yuan is too. Would countries be more willing to hold yuan oppose to USD? Perhaps if they had no choice, it's an attractive alternative.
States that not in at par with the USA would be very ready to adopt the Chinese yuan against the dollar so long as the decision creates a pathway for them to circumvent whatever U.S economic sanctions putting a hold on them. Russia, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Iran IMO are countries that are likely to adopt the Chinese yuan as they have been the few countries that are supportive of dedollarisation campaign in recent times. Russia does not have a choice but to adopt Yuan. They've been excluded from using USD due to sanctions. Countries that have the liberty of choosing between USD and Yuan might have some of their currency reserves be in both. As far as conducting bilateral trades, Yuan is a weaker alternative compared to USD unequivocally. Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and Iran are all "unfriendly" to the U.S. so they would benefit from something like this. Though for China to benefit, they would need large transactional volumes. These countries don't have the GDP to conduct transactions in large volumes. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
