Here's our summary of key economic events overnight that affect New Zealand, with news markets are waiting for some big earnings reports, especially from Big Tech in the US. They are waiting in a positive mood.
But first in the US, the Chicago Fed's National Activity Index rose for a second consecutive month March, the first time that has happened since mid-2022. The result was more than expected and is the highest reading since last November, build primarily on employment gains. When this index is positive it indicates activity is expanding faster than its long-term average.
Canadian producer prices fell -0.5% in March from the same month a year ago, notable because this the smallest fall since February 2023. Raw material prices rose, only the second year-on-year rise in the same timeframe.
The People's Bank of China left benchmark lending rates unchanged at the April fixing, in line with market expectations. The one-year loan prime rate (LPR), the benchmark for most corporate and household loans, was maintained at 3.45%. Meanwhile, the five-year rate, a reference for mortgages, was retained at 3.95% for the second straight month. The strong USD limits their ability to cut rates to provide local economic stimulation because doing so would sharply weaken the yuan.
Following a weak February, Taiwanese exports jumped in March to their highest level since July 2022 in an impressive performance. They also got a strong rise in export orders in March, although only at the upper end of what they have been getting over the past year.
Although it is in a minor improving trend, EU consumer sentiment in April has remained deeply negative, well below its long-term average.
In Australia, their eSafety regulator won a court order requiring X/Twitter to take down video of the Bondi Junction knife attacker in action. But the social media platform seems likely to ignore it, and 'reputation damage' is no longer a thing for these companies. But ad revenues from the publicity are.
Cocoa prices leapt up through an all-time record US$5000/tonne in early February. Three weeks later they hit US$6000/tonne. Two weeks after that it was US$7000/tonne. US$8000/tonne came just a few days later. Then an accelerated surge began in earnest, hitting US$10,000 at the end of the first week of April. Today? well this price has reached US$12,218/tonne. Where to from here? As hard as it is on chocolate consumers, I hope the West African farmers are getting some long-delayed rewards.
The UST 10yr yield is now at 4.63% and up a minor +1 bp from this time yesterday. The key 2-10 yield curve inversion is less at -34 bps. And their 1-5 curve inversion is little-changed at -51 bps. Their 3 mth-10yr curve inversion is still at -77 bps. The Australian 10 year bond yield is now at 4.35% and unchanged. The China 10 year bond rate is now just under at 2.26% and and a new all-time low. The NZ Government 10 year bond rate is now at 5.00% and up a sharpish +8 bps from yesterday.
Wall Street is roaring today with the S&P500 up +1.3% on expectations of strong earnings reports and future guidance that is positive, especially from Big Tech companies. Tesla is likely to star in these releases for all the wrong reasons, however. Overnight European markets all rose, led by London's +1.6% and trailed by Paris's +0.2%. Yesterday, Tokyo ended its Monday session up +1.0%. Hong Kong ended up +1.8%. But Shanghai fell -0.7%, a real outlier in yesterday's trade. Singapore ended up +1.5%. The ASX200 finished up +1.1% and the NZX50 closed up +0.5%.
The price of gold will start today sharply lower, down -US$61 from this time yesterday at US$2330/oz.
Oil prices have slipped -50 USc again to just on US$81.50/bbl in the US while the international Brent price is down -US$1 at just under US$86/bbl.
The Kiwi dollar starts today up +¼c at just under 59.2 USc. Against the Aussie we are still at 91.8 AUc. Against the euro we are a +¼c firmer too at 55.5 euro cents. That all means our TWI-5 starts today just on 69.1 and up +30 bps from yesterday.
The bitcoin price starts today sharply higher at US$66,788 and almost a +3% gain from yesterday. Volatility over the past 24 hours has been modest however at just on +/- 1.9%.
Daily exchange rates
Select chart tabs
The easiest place to stay up with event risk is by following our Economic Calendar here ».
82 Comments
Supposedly it's weather (really hot, and unwanted rain). The farmers probably won't profit, as their yields are down.
In some countries, 90% of cocoa growers don’t earn a living income. Many of the 800,000 cocoa farmers in Ghana survive on just US$2 a day.
I don't think most people are aware how much of their basic food and goods are subsidized by indentured labour and slavery.
Closer to home: https://www.postcourier.com.pg/cocoa-prices-rise-to-k2000-within-a-mont…
No doubt there are middlemen profiting and poor labour practices in some of the larger markets, but PNG cocoa growers are feeling positive at the moment. Pretty dark clouds over the country so this is a bright spot.
It blows my mind how many intelligent people will complain about the cost of food when it's something like 20% of their salary - in other words, one day's work to take care of their biggest need for a whole week, usually including plenty of discretionary luxuries.
In today's developed world, food costs relative to labour are unbelievably cheap by historical standards, and this is to a large extent made possible by exploited labour, mistreated livestock and ruined environments. It is breathtakingly ignorant to complain about the cost.
By contrast the amount modern workers spend on shelter and tax is remarkably high - often as much as 70% of our work or even more goes towards these two things. It's here that we should be targeting our frustration, not at the price of food.
True but by historical standards labour is not exploited nor is livestock mistreated. Historical standards are very low standards. Admittedly environments are ruined but at least it is noticed and some minimal action taken. What do we know of previous ruined environments - the last trees cut down on Pitcairn, goats eating the grasslands of the Sahara?
Surprised you had to ask that question Murray?
Ghana and Ivory Coast, which produce nearly 60% of global cocoa, experienced heavy rains in December. Flooding caused crop damage and led to cocoa plants rotting with black pod disease.
Extreme heat has hurt, too.
"That's affecting not only the crop, because it's difficult to grow cocoa in these conditions, but also the farmers themselves,” Sawyer said.
Yes, there is underlying scarcity - usually is.
But Murray is right too - and Jfoe put it best of all yesterday evening. The problem is our financialised world - too many rentiers; people betting but not being productive. The proportion is way out of whack, Those bets amplify any signal. Oil in 2008 was an example - one I learned from. I'd expected $200 a barrel, as per Goldman Sachs. It can't happen in a physics sense, though; so that bubble popped. Doesn't invalidate the fact that initial scarcity drove the lemmings to lay their computer-generated bets.
https://academic.oup.com/icc/article-abstract/17/6/1097/751321?login=fa…
'The instability of the world financial system, starkly revealed in the recent debacle, is not the only problem it poses. Its secularly increasing dominance over the real economy is in itself a phenomenon that needs examining. The article traces the source of this increasing dominance not just to the increasingly leveraged and increasingly incomprehensible forms of intermediation between savers and those in the real economy who need credit and insurance, but also to the increasingly universal doctrine that maximizing “shareholder value” is the sole raison d’être of the firm and the promotion by governments of an “equity culture.” Some of the social consequences of financialization are exacerbating inequalities, greater insecurity, misdirection of talent, and the erosion of trust.'
Actually wasn't aware of the weather impact, so thanks for that, but PDKs comment too. At $12,000 per tonne a lot of lost income would be recovered, but I seriously doubt much of that would find it's way to the farmers. PDK calls them 'rentiers', other terms are 'middlemen' but most if not all are thieves, rip off merchants, and charlatans. A farmer owned auction house when the end user could buy directly is what is needed.
Apparently, if the US Govt is pumping 6% of their GDP in freshly minted US dollars into the economy, companies there find it easier to achieve a dollar surplus (profit). It's almost like if Govt gives the private sector dollars, the private sector gets more dollars and people get more jobs. Who would have thought it?
But, but... splutter... engines of GROWTH... splutter...
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com
'It might help to put some numbers on this. With everything stated at constant 2023 values, reported global GDP has expanded by $88 trillion over the past twenty years. But this has been accompanied – indeed, made possible – by a $290tn increase in debt, the latter accounting for only half of an estimated $580tn escalation in broader liabilities over the same period.'
Yes, I agree. Let's break this down a bit for our mates...
GDP-P (the standard) is basically the difference between the cost of goods and services needed to make a thing and the price the thing is sold for. So, if my business makes something out of goods and services that cost $100m and then I sell it for $150m, then I basically add $50m to our GDP. Weirdly, GDP also includes an estimate of how much rent I would pay to live in the house I actually own. This 'imputed rent' makes up about 8% of our GDP ($32bn a year) - and the higher rents go, the more GDP is added to the economy! You can see NZ GDP share by industry here.
The surplus that businesses can generate (aka GDP) depends on how much money is being spent and how quickly. The volume of money circulating in the economy is a function of:
- Private debt growth (loans add $ to bank deposits, repayments destroy it)
- Net Govt deficit spending (spending adds $ to private sector bank deposits, taxation destroys it)
- Savings rates (how much money is taken out of circulation and stashed in savings accounts in NZ or offshore). Govt bonds are best thought of as just another form of NZD 'savings' - like tradable term deposit accounts
As you often point out, the money (debt) that is stashed or moving around the economy is a call on future resources - including energy, labour, materials etc. Obviously people and businesses also use to money to buy shares, equity, digital currencies, which have whatever value markets assign. Buying assets doesn't destroy money, it transfers the ownership of the money from the buyer to the seller.
The big question is whether the amount of NZD debt in the economy (about $700bn in NZ) creates too high a call on future resources. This is a very complicated question. I mean, if everyone repaid their debts tomorrow, the total amount of NZD in the economy would fall to zero. We would have no money at all. Everyone would be broke - but at least we would have no debts!
More seriously, the forward strategy here has to stop focusing on the debt / money and start focusing on how we use our real resources. How many people, how much material, how much energy do we need to run an economy that meets the needs of the population? Where are we going to get the energy and materials? How do we stop money and resources being hoarded by the few per cent that own the means (assets) to extract rent from their countrymen?
Brilliant post.
I'm not sure we can 'stop money and resources being hoarded by the few percent'- but I think that process has always imploded in the past, and the signal has been the inflection-point of exponentially-increasing wealth-disparity. That's been coming - think CEO 'incomes'- for a long time, but is inflecting now. So not long to go.
If you haven't read Tainter, he's worth the time:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/24543829
The ordinary citizens of Rome actually welcomed the 'Barbarians'; anything was better than where depletion and stratification had left them. Reminds one of Trump supporters...
There's also the Trump evangelicals, who are pretty damn well off and happy to give support to anyone waving a bible and promising to wind womens rights back to the middle ages.
Be interesting to know the financial profiles of the respective supporters, but theres more complexity here than merely societal stratification.
"More seriously, the forward strategy here has to stop focusing on the debt / money and start focusing on how we use our real resources. How many people, how much material, how much energy do we need to run an economy that meets the needs of the population? Where are we going to get the energy and materials? How do we stop money and resources being hoarded by the few per cent that own the means (assets) to extract rent from their countrymen? "
And crucially how do you achieve that while the rest of the worlds economies remain wedded to the status quo AND we need access to many of their resources???.....more than a wicked problem.
Re ... "Weirdly, GDP also includes an estimate of how much rent I would pay to live in the house I actually own. This 'imputed rent' makes up about 8% of our GDP ($32bn a year) - and the higher rents go, the more GDP is added to the economy! "
This is what happens when economists get to to decide what goes into a 'measure'. Technically, from a pure economics point of view, this is entirely correct. But is it meaningful to most people? Not really.
Another way to look at debt is that it is a way we bring tomorrows spending into the present.. ... A tendency towards over consumption..... over investment....... materialism... etc "GDP growth" ...mantra
Savings might be looked on as a form of under consumption....deferred spending...
There is a balance somewhere..... maybe we can both "walk lightly on the earth", so to speak ....and enjoy a good standard of living, without the incessant focus on materialism/consumerism... ?
Can someone provide a compelling argument as to how debt has "made possible" GDP growth in recent decades? (genuine request, I'm not an expert)
Printing debt doesn't create physical resources or labour. Yes, it can be used to divert those resources to investment in capital that improves productivity. It can also be used to divert those resources to pointless luxuries and rigmaroles that worsen productivity - especially in the long term - whilst also having a destructive effect on the social fabric. Is there any evidence that the former effect has outweighed the latter? Because that's not what it looks like to me.
I can have a go.
Firstly, it is important to understand (and I'm not saying that you don't) that all money is debt. When you go to the bank and get a $1m loan to buy a house, they don't lend you other peoples' money, they create $1m out of thin air, and pop it into your bank account. They take your signed loan agreement (worth $1m) onto the asset side of their balance sheet and the $1m in your bank account goes onto the liabilities side of their balance sheet. Voila - new money in the economy. When you pay off your loan the money is destroyed and the $1m loan agreement is thrown in the bin. Govt deficit spending is similar - Govt spending adds money to private bank accounts, Govt taxation takes it out again.
Now, what do we do with the $1m loan? Do we put it in a house? No. We give it to the house seller. At the end of any chain of house sales is someone walking away with actual money in their bank account. This money gets spent into the real economy - Jack pays John to build a swimming pool, John buys a jetski from Bill, Bill buys some beers from Bob etc. All of these transactions increase GDP as companies sell stuff for more than it cost to make them. People also get paid to do work.
Now (finally) to your last point. How can we keep increasing GDP with limited resources? Easy. We increase consumption and transactions. We send kids to daycare instead of a parent looking after them at home. We rent out bachs to each other. We rent storage space for our yacht. We import cheap labour to pick more grapes, to make more wine, to sell to each other and the world.
Don't even get me started on productivity - it's more econometrics nonsense. If I start a self-service boat storage business on some cheap land and I make $1m a year, this gets counted as being massively productive (the labour productivity is almost infinite). Do you know which industry has by far the highest labour productivity in NZ (more than 10 times the average)? Yep, real estate. Should we do more of that?
Govt spending adds money to private bank accounts, Govt taxation takes it out again.
Government dispensing bank credit adds money to private bank accounts. The redemption of bank underwritten government debt extinguishes this credit.
Banks do not purchase government issued debt at syndication and tender events with bank reserves. They credit the Crown settlement accounts with what they owe the government for the bonds, which we call deposits. Bank reserves are simultaneously debited from bank settlement accounts since they are immediately in receipt of coupon bond interest and have yet to pay interest to beneficiary bank accounts. When the government enacts transfer payments to banks, an equal amount of reserves are credited to bank settlement accounts at the RBNZ
Yes, I am being purposefully brief in this description (and should probably say 'Crown spending' to reflect that RBNZ is part of a consolidated Crown balance sheet). Obviously there are steps between - e.g. the hoops that Treasury / RBNZ / Westpac jump through to credit Ministry bank accounts.
The RBNZ’s balance sheet is a subset of the consolidated Government (Crown) balance sheet. However, there are legislatively defined rules of engagement between the RBNZ and the Crown to ensure that the RBNZ has sufficient operational independence and the financial capacity to achieve our goals, while maintaining transparency of, and accountability for, our decisions. Link
Yes, I understand that. It didn't stop RBNZ doubling the 'overdraft' on the Crown Settlement Account in 2020 (to $10bn) though did it? Other central banks are also creating lines of credit for Govts to support green infra investments (although they are being purposefully opaque about the mechanisms) - like a good version of RBNZ's FLP!
Not totally true, not all money is debt, all new lending is debt. The Assets that have been paid off are backing the debt and the total value of the assets far exceeds the level of debt. Debt is always increasing because the population is always increasing and inflation is fuel on the fire. The current monetary systems works if you are prepared to play the game, its pointless throwing your toys in the air and saying the system is unfair.
Good charts, thanks. But to me it seems the key is whether the 'debt' is in your own currency, or not. If the debt is local-currency-based it has proven easy to go through long deficit periods, some very long, without too much pain (like Japan). If the debt is in foreign currency, things can unravel quickly.
New Zealand is in between, I think. Almost all debt is in NZD, and the central government debt is relatively low. But foreigners hold more than half the NZGBs issued. For the US and Japan, foreign holdings are very much smaller (<15%) but they attract political chatter more than here.
This is global, David.
And sooner or later, debt is either reconciled (jubilee, inflation, default) or belief in money has to evaporate. Because debt IS money (and it follows that money is NOT a store of wealth, if scarcity overrides).
Maybe it's time for an article; Amount of remaining planet versus current debt-repayment expectations?
I can't imagine a more important topic...
It would be a great article were it to include two issues that are usually left out.
1. Total costs are used. Total cost is both the financial costs and the environmental costs. Environmental costs are usually left out because they're so hard to establish (apparently). Thus the real cost of our excessive non-renewable energy use aren't used and this distorts the entire 'energy market'.
2. Total potential renewal energy is included. And not some pie in the sky measure (e.g. sunlight falling on the earth each day!) but what is actually realistic to harvest when environmental costs are included in the cost-benefit analysis.
I'd also add that the "quality" of the GDP is meaningful as well. This interactive is worth thinking about. (NZ shows a shift from producing things to more services...)
https://www.stats.govt.nz/tools/which-industries-contributed-to-new-zea…
I'd also add... there there is also , maybe, a tipping point where the markets start to lose "confidence" and step back from Govt debt...causing risk premiums to rise.... ie...higher interest rates.
If there is growing issuance of Debt and the Mkt steps back..... what happens to interest rates.? OR....maybe it manifests in FX values..?
Fiscal dominance is probably the next step in Govts appropriating....ie. "taxing"...
https://files.stlouisfed.org/files/htdocs/publications/review/2023/10/0…
Worthless liabilities demanding taxpayer resources:
Great point (and welcome to the cheap seats DC).
I really wrestle with whether the high % of offshore held NZGB is a problem or not. I mean if there was even a sniff of a big sell-off (bonds dropping in value, yields heading north quickly), RBNZ could declare that it would buy any NZGB at whatever price (yield) it chose. This would instantly set the global trading price for NZGBs at that level - providing that RBNZ / NZ had the credibility to hold firm (and be prepared to follow through for a day or two if challenged). This move would also wipe out any trader trying to short NZ Bonds. This is how central banks have stopped bond runs in their tracks before (see BoE when they finally intervened in the Truss debacle).
Obviously, this kind of move would cause all manner of frothing at the mouth responses, which I guess is the downside. The other downside of large offshore bond holdings is the flow of dollars into offshore ownership, which add to our current account deficit.
Obviously, this kind of move would cause all manner of frothing at the mouth responses, which I guess is the downside. The other downside of large offshore bond holdings is the flow of dollars into offshore ownership, which add to our current account deficit.
So that's more or less a vote for the carry trade; for ex, borrowing in JPY and buying NZGBs, right? Now assuming that RBNZ can gobble up all these bonds at any price, would that also mean an unwinding of the carry trade be orderly? Because if it's not, one would think that has the potential to cause havoc with the currency.
Also, why are concerned about CA deficits when the monetary mechanisms suggest that the central bankers can adjust any settings accordingly? Does this have anything to do with sovereignty?
Thats the nature of debt.... Its never a problem ...until it is. ( and that "until it is" can unfold very quickly )
The Govt budget is like a household ....is like a Buniness....is like a Multi National.... is like a City Council... Except for its ability to print money and extract taxes....Govts can tax and print....
You think there is many more years of "Money printing, without unintended consequences" ahead of us.... But I dont.
It seems obvious to me that we are in the middle of a paradigm shift from 30 yrs of Global deflationary tailwind forces....to now Global inflationary headwinds...
Exponentially growing govt and/or private sector debts wont have the benefit of the trend of lower interest rates or ultralow interest rates.... going forward....
So..... from my view ..it is a big deal.... and I'm not laughing and I'm not calling anyone dumbass as , in my experience, the unintended , higher order effects , can be pretty difficult to anticipate. ( extrapolation of the past is not such a good way to anticipate these higher order effects).
thats my view..
"It's almost like if Govt gives the private sector dollars, the private sector gets more dollars and people get more jobs." Nah, Its the moneymen just pandering to their billionaire pals. There will be no new jobs, just richer billionaires. More people to ride their rocket planes to space, doing a Bezos while they pay their workers sweet FA. It must be great being a slave owner?
Exactly. In March 2020 the Fed literally set out to create significant inflation, and it was successful (using my QE2 proposal for deflationary situations when that wasn't the case, buying performing assets from non-banks at great volume, hiring Blackrock to help with the buying. Link
Even the Bank of Japan, having previously argued for two decades that it could not possibly purchase assets from anyone other than banks, suddenly engaged in this unusual operation at the same time as other central banks, and on a massive scale.
The reasons for this coordinated policy are not immediately apparent, although there is some evidence that it was sparked by a proposal presented to central bankers by the multinational investment company Blackrock at the annual meeting of central bankers and other financial decision-makers in Jackson Hole, Wyoming in August 2019. Soon after this, difficulties in the Fed’s repurchase agreement (“repo”) market in September 2019, triggered by private banking giant JP Morgan, may have made up their minds.
Apparently agreeing with my critique that pure fiscal policy does not result in economic growth unless it is backed by credit creation, Blackrock had argued at Jackson Hole that the “next downturn” would require central banks to create new money and find “ways to get central bank money directly in the hands of public and private sector spenders” – what they called “going direct”, bypassing the retail banks. The Fed knew this would create inflation, as Blackrock later confirmed in a paper which stated that “the Fed is now committing to push inflation above target for some time”.
This is precisely what was implemented in March 2020. We know this both from available data and because the Fed, largely without precedent, hired a private-sector firm to help it buy assets – none other than Blackrock.
The strong USD limits their ability to cut rates to provide local economic stimulation because doing so would sharply weaken the yuan.
Kremlin vows legal action against US bill on seizing Russian assets
Dmitry Peskov noted that the trial will be "very complex," but will cause severe damage to US economic interests if the US authorities finally approve the bill regarding Russian assets
The Kremlin will be being willfully blind on its place in the world. Its 2023 economic activity totalled US$1.86 tln. Canada is US$2.12 tln. Australia's was catching up, now US$1.69 tln. That is not a good place for Russia when facing the US (US$29 tln) or China (US$17.7 tln). Yes, they may have more resources than say Ukraine, but not compared to any of the top ten global economies. It won't be long before Russia is a full client state of China (if it isn't already).
Zwifter and a few others will be crying into their vodkas. Poland is again putting a case forward to base NATO's nukes there. For all the anti war rhetoric here, much of which seems to favour Putin's propaganda, current NATO members seem awake to the very real threat not far from their homes.
Yep they are really that stupid in Europe, lets move some nukes closer to Russia, that's going to solve everything. Meanwhile the migrants are pouring into the UK, I was sent a truly horrific video from Luton. The PM wants to put them all on planes to Rwanda, its about 15 years too late.
For all the anti war rhetoric here, much of which seems to favour Putin's propaganda, current NATO members seem awake to the very real threat not far from their homes.
NATO hasn't had to do anything yet. The US taxpayer has their back. And young Ukrainians feed the meat grinder.
‘Thank You America!’: Ukraine’s Zelensky and Israel’s Netanyahu hail House passage of $95 billion foreign aid package
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/20/world/foreign-aid-bill-ukraine-israe…
Yes that is essentially true. And more this war is fought by warm bodies on the battle field and Ukraine's pool is running low. It is possible that Russia's is too, but Putin's catchment area is a little bigger. The games the US politicians played will have significant consequences. But one of NATOs flaws is that it must have US support before it makes any major move. It is not really a democratic institution despite appearances. The Ukraine war has exposed Europe's inability to quickly ramp up arms production in times of need. That is a major vulnerability if they are going to persist in limiting conflicts to conventional only. (I am not advocating escalation)
Little Vlad is free to spend as much of Russian GDP on military toys as he desires. Shame if you're a pleb expecting basic sevices in civil society.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kwmm6kYOLQM
Don't bother complaining when your home and city drowns because someone thieved the maintanance cash, otherwise the guys in riot gear will show up and drag you off to a storm Z unit.
Stories of flood victims refusing to be evacuated because guys in boats were sailling around emptying their homes.
Kharkovka Karma?
The Kremlin will be being willfully blind on its place in the world. Its 2023 economic activity totalled US$1.86 tln. Canada is US$2.12 tln. Australia's was catching up, now US$1.69 tln. That is not a good place for Russia when facing the US (US$29 tln) or China (US$17.7 tln). Yes, they may have more resources than say Ukraine, but not compared to any of the top ten global economies. It won't be long before Russia is a full client state of China (if it isn't already).
The glorious Anglosphere. Let's not forget that it's pretty obvious now that the $60 billion in US military aid to Ukraine was made in exchange for Ukraine passing a wildly unpopular mobilization law expanding military draft. Into the meat grinder for Ukrainian youth in exchange for US death merchants' profits and Western power.
NATO's biggest fear is actually having to put skin in their game. As long as Ukraine is able to push its people into the grinder, the West can throw any amount of money at them and not even pretend to care about the inevitable outcomes.
As I mentioned, young Ukrainians are taking care of the existential stuff for you. Given that the US and the West have the monetary hegemony, they have some global responsibility right? If you're going to have all that power, you should at least have some responsibility.
Are you personally interested in donating your own savings to Ukraine for the war effort when your benevolent US is doing it for you?
There's everything on the line for Ukrainians. That retarded indivduals like MTG, Matt Gaetz, Boebert, Johnson and Trump can hold such influence over geopolitics is genuinely frightening! There should have been no interuptions to the flow of resources, but the actions of these individuals has extended the killing and emboldened the authoritarian club.
I look at the reality quite differently.
I can understand why NATO doesn't want direct involvement, as can you.
I can also understand why young Ukrainians don't want to be forced back into the Russki Mir. How Russia treats its own people is a clue?
How will this play out? I don't know. Mr Putin is really the only person with a solution at hand and he is all in on absorbing Ukraine. Territorial integrity can be restored, but only if Russia experiences extreme discomfort. The problem is Russian energy. The world needs it on line. Vlad knows it, hence his move. Russian production will decline, because money spent on tanks can't be spent on development, maintanance, and sanctions/targeting. Russias budget will suffer. Ukraine needs to cut Crimea off. If that can be achieved, futher erosion of Russian efforts could accelerate.
You could essentially say that about any country. The only time that changes is when there is a clear path to a threat to them visible. I struggled to understand NATO and Europe's sit on their hands attitude to the invasion of Ukraine. The threat to Europe seemed clear to me. Perhaps there were too many old hands who remembered living in the shadow of the wall, telling themselves nothing ever happened? Putin is an entirely different beast. Mitt Romney is perhaps the only US politician who seems to understand the threat.
Yes and they'll support Ukraine until the last Ukrainian just to stick it to Russia. I feel its a race between a Russian economic meltdown aagainst military and other aid to Ukraine. Time will tell. Once the dogs of war have been unleashed anything can happen, much to Putin's surprise.
One thing for sure Ukraine will be a basket case and Russia will be impoverished for at least the next ten years , which ever way it goes.
Following a weak February, Taiwanese exports jumped in March to their highest level since July 2022 in an impressive performance.
"We have the most sophisticated semiconductors in the world. China doesn't. We've out-innovated China,” boasts Secretary Gina Raimondo. “Well, ‘we,’ you mean Taiwan?” asks Lesley Stahl. https://cbsn.ws/3JsRTIp Link
The price of gold will start today sharply lower, down -US$61 from this time yesterday at US$2330/oz.
Just in CME just raised margin requirements on Gold and Silver Futures https://cmegroup.com/notices/cleari Link
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.