Rickards: This Is What Will Destroy The Dollar Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com, Janet Yellen gave a speech on Sept. 26 at the 2024 U.S. Treasury Market Conference in New York. The speech was largely about risks in the banking system and the market for U.S. Treasury debt. In a pre-speech interview with Politico, Yellen was asked about risks related to a smooth presidential transition in this election cycle. While that may seem like a straightforward question, it contained a particular bias that somehow Donald Trump, win or lose, might make the presidential transition difficult. Difficulties could arise if Trump loses and claims the election was “rigged” or if Trump wins and radical groups like antifa commence violent protests. My estimate is that the former is unlikely, and the latter is far more likely but Trump haters in the media will take the opposite view. Yellen replied, “It really is essential to our having a democratic system and a democratic government, and one of the tremendous strengths of our financial system is that it is based on strong institutions and the rule of law.” While this statement may seem reasonable on its face, it was Yellen’s thinly disguised way of saying that Donald Trump’s actions on Jan. 6, 2021, and possible similar acts on Jan. 6, 2025, are a threat to the “rule of law” and therefore a danger to the stability of the financial system. There are many forces at work in this statement by Yellen. In the first instance, this is an example of the Biden-Harris administration “all of government” approach. What this means is that when the White House has a top priority (open borders, climate change, defeat Trump), every department and agency is expected to advance that goal even if the role of that agency has nothing to do with the issue at hand. The White House says, in effect, “Find a way.” So here is Yellen dragging the Treasury Department into the effort to discredit Trump by suggesting he is a threat to the financial system and the Treasury market. This political twist has almost nothing to do with the Treasury’s role in the executive branch except at a stretch. The irony is that Yellen herself is the greatest threat to the Treasury market through her persistent and illegal efforts to steal $300 billion in U.S. Treasury securities owned by the Central Bank of Russia and held in custody in U.S. and European banks and the Euroclear clearinghouse in Brussels. That particular threat to steal the Russian securities to be used as backing for a loan to Ukraine has accelerated efforts of the BRICS and the Global South to move toward a new currency linked to gold that would initially compete with the dollar in global payments and eventually rival the dollar as a major global reserve currency. Those efforts will see major advances made at the BRICS leaders’ summit in Kazan, Russian Federation on Oct. 22–24 hosted by President Putin. The BRICS summit will announce new members. That’s important because expanding the membership is the key predicate to launching a viable payment currency. Will a new BRICS currency instantly displace the dollar in its role as leading reserve currency? How much of a threat would it be? Read on… BRICS Currency Won’t Displace Dollar Overnight The original BRICs membership from 2009 consisted of Brazil, Russia, India and China. South Africa was added in 2010 when the group’s name was changed to BRICS. That group expanded significantly at the 2023 Leaders’ Summit in South Africa when Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) were added. (Argentina and Saudi Arabia were also permitted to enter but Argentina withdrew its application, and Saudi Arabia deferred its membership saying it was still considering the matter.) The BRICS has been active over the years in institutionalizing its initiatives. In 2014, the BRICS created the New Development Bank (NDB), which functions along the lines of the World Bank to promote infrastructure development in emerging economies. The NDB was capitalized with over $100 billion from its members and currently has 53 projects underway with commitments of over $15 billion to those projects. In 2015, the BRICS established the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), which acts as a swing lender to members experiencing temporary balance of payments difficulties. In this regard, the CRA functions somewhat like the International Monetary Fund. Between the NDB and the CRA, it is clear that BRICS are intentionally constructing their own version of the Bretton Woods institutions but with their own controls and membership. Beyond the nine current members, there’s a waiting list of over 20 aspiring members including economic powers such as Nigeria, Venezuela, Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey, Thailand and Vietnam. Current members Russia, UAE and Iran make BRICS an oil output heavyweight. Russia, China and South Africa are among the world’s largest gold producers. India and China alone have a combined population of 2.8 billion or 35% of the entire population of the globe. The BRICS are part of an emerging Global South that is challenging the Collective West for world economic and geopolitical dominance. The subject of a BRICS currency is confusing to most observers and is a fraught topic even for many experts. We’ll call the potential currency a BRIC for convenience although no formal name has been announced. The starting point is to distinguish between a payment currency and a reserve currency. A payment currency is used to settle purchases and sales of tradable goods and services. A reserve currency is the denomination of the currency in which national savings are invested, typically in U.S. Treasury securities or gold. Some currencies perform both functions as reserve and payment currencies especially U.S. dollars and euros. A finance minister or central banker can move from one to the other; currencies earned can be invested as reserves or reserves can be sold to finance purchases. Still, it’s important to bear the distinction in mind when evaluating the use case for each currency, especially BRICs. Put differently, a flaw or deficiency in one usage does not preclude the other. The BRICS currency is very far along in establishing itself as a viable payment currency. The prerequisites are: agreed-upon value (which can be fixed to another currency, floating or pegged to a weight of gold), secure payments channels (basically high-speed, encrypted digital pipes for authenticated message traffic), digital ledgers and an agreed issuer (the NDB based in Shanghai may be suitable for this purpose but another institution could be created). The single most important element is a sufficiently large membership in the BRICS currency union such that a recipient of BRICS payments can use them for purchases in many jurisdictions for many goods and services. This last point is where most alternative currency payments arrangements fall down. Russia can sell oil to China for yuan (which they are currently doing) but they are constrained in terms of where they can spend the yuan (basically limited to Chinese manufactured goods and semiconductors). The same issue arises when Russia sells oil to India (for rupees) or weapons to Iran (for rials). The seller is limited in terms of what they can buy with the trading partner’s currency. This constraint goes away in a currency union with 15 or 20 members or more. If Russia earns BRICs from China, they can buy Embraer aircraft from Brazil or semiconductors from Malaysia. For that matter, use of a payment currency in a multimember currency union is not limited to members. With access to the payment channels, non-members can nevertheless agree to receive the BRICS currency in payment confident in their ability to spend it among the other BRICS members who are trading partners. The proof of this is the eurozone, which is currently a 20-member currency union with a single central bank and worldwide acceptance of the euro. Moving from a payment currency to a reserve currency is more difficult. The prerequisite here is a large, liquid bond market. That bond market has to be surrounded by extensive transactional and legal infrastructure including: securities at all maturities (30 days to 30 years), an underwriting system (primary dealers in the U.S.), an auction system for sales of new issues, a repo market to finance inventories, futures, options, other derivatives (swaps), settlement channels, custodians (DTCC, others), etc. Above all, holders need a good rule of law regime on which to rely in the case of disputes or defaults. All of these elements exist in the reserve currency bond market nonpareil — the U.S. Treasury securities market. None of it exists in the form of a putative BRICS bond market. It would likely take 10 years or longer to create reserve currency infrastructure with the biggest single impediment being the rule of law. That said, there are several interesting developments taking place. The first is that the U.S. is squandering its rule of law advantage with sanctions on Russia, the freezing of the assets of the Central Bank of Russia and efforts to actually steal those assets and convert them into a $50 billion loan to Ukraine using structured finance. Given this rogue behavior by the U.S., countries are becoming more cautious about large U.S. Treasury note reserves. This may account in part for the recent rally in the price of gold. The second is the upcoming BRICS summit in Kazan. Russia will announce significant progress in building out secure payments channels and will admit new members, which will drive the group closer to the critical mass needed to launch a currency union. Finally, the impact of Yellen’s efforts to steal U.S. Treasury securities from Russia goes beyond the BRICS meeting and the rise of a new payment currency. Yellen’s blatant theft from the Central Bank of Russia is a driving force behind the price of gold reaching new all-time highs recently. Central banks have been net buyers of gold since 2010, but the tempo of gold buying has increased as the U.S. rule of law under policymakers like Yellen begins to crumble. Gold is a physical non-digital asset that cannot be stolen, frozen or seized provided it is in safe storage. Until the BRICS currency is ready, gold will be the asset of choice for foreign reserve managers faced with a rogue Treasury Secretary. What began as a political hack (to beat Trump) has turned into another driver in the downfall of the dollar and the U.S. Treasury market. This is one more example of short-term, self-defeating thinking by the White House and the U.S. Treasury. Tyler Durden Tue, 10/15/2024 – 14:40

Cold Blob Invades Central & Eastern US As Proper Autumn Arrives For Millions  A cold front swept across the north-central US through the eastern half of the US late weekend into the early part of the new week. For readers based in the east and central US, Brrr! It’s a chilly morning as fall-like weather roars in, and it could get even chillier into Wednesday.  “Below average temperatures forecast across the central and eastern United States, while summer-like warmth remains over portions of Texas today and the northern Plain by Wednesday,” NWS’ Weather Prediction Center wrote on X.  Below average temperatures forecast across the central and eastern United States, while summer-like warmth remains over portions of Texas today and the northern Plain by Wednesday https://t.co/A3RX3bxaUJ — NWS Weather Prediction Center (@NWSWPC) October 15, 2024 X user MyRadar Weather shows the cold blob of Canadian air descending into parts of the central and eastern US. See that big bowling ball of cold over the Great Lakes? That’s helping milder air over the Great Lakes to rise, priming the atmosphere for waterspouts. Don’t be surprised to see a few spouts, especially on Lake Michigan! pic.twitter.com/c2SW8X1yol — MyRadar Weather (@MyRadarWX) October 14, 2024 As of Tuesday morning, tens of millions of people from the Plains to the Appalachians and Northeast were under frost or other winter alerts as temperatures were below freezing in many parts.  Snow showers have been reported in the mountains of Western Virginia, with accumulation already taking place at the Canaan Valley ski resort. A chilly start to Tuesday as most areas dropped into the 30s. Snow is falling in the WV mountains & accumulating at Cannan Valley as seen on the webcam. Highs stay in the 50s today with isolated showers possible this afternoon. Some graupel could be possible. #MdWx pic.twitter.com/KoPHboEt5A — Ryan Kane (@ryankanerWX) October 15, 2024 Accumulating snow was reported in the Northeast.  I don’t always make a forecast from over a month away for #snow in a specific area, but when I do…☃️#WinterIsComing #wxtwitter #wxX #PAwx #NYwx #VTwx pic.twitter.com/duqyGfHL4f — Mark Margavage (@MeteoMark) October 15, 2024 Wednesday will also be the chilliest day of the week.  More broadly, across the Lower 48, global warming seems to have disappeared after MSM reporters warned this summer the Earth was doomed – yet – here we are now – and it’s chilly out. Temperatures in the US are tracking a 30-year seasonal trend lower. This latest cold front has ushered in a proper autumn chill for tens of millions. It’s about the time for households who can build those firewood stockpiles to do so ahead of what could be a cold and snowy winter. Terrible ‘green’ energy climate policies have sent power bills through the roof – one way to offset this is to burn cheap wood or coal. Tyler Durden Tue, 10/15/2024 – 14:20

Peter Schiff: FEMA Makes Hurricanes Worse Via SchiffGold.com, In this week’s episode, Peter offers an important reminder: the government has a strong incentive to bend the truth with their data, especially when we’re less than a month out from an election. Beyond this, Peter spends time discussing the proliferation of free market ideas on X, declares Grover Cleveland to be the last good Democratic president, and explains the broken window fallacy in light of Hurricane Milton.  With last week’s jobs numbers still in the news cycle, Peter reiterates why they’re unreliable. Bidenomics shills like Paul Krugman are sorely mistaken: “The numbers don’t matter anyway. They are subject to massive revisions in the following month, even in the following year. … The government grades its own report card. It doesn’t want to give itself an F, especially when you’re a month away from an election. So there is a lot of political pressure to make these numbers look good, especially the inflation number and the unemployment number.” The data does not align with Americans’ feelings toward the economy, and knowing that thousands of new government jobs have been created doesn’t help the working class: “It defies logic that people would be working two or three jobs and have maxed out their credit cards, be mired in more debt that they’ve ever been, despite working more jobs than they ever had, and say, ‘Oh, we’ve got a great economy.’” This numerical deception is augmented by the fact that one key metric– inflation – has had its meaning corrupted by state statisticians: “[Inflation] is an Orwellian double speak to pretend inflation is rising prices, but they’ve already pulled that off. But now that they’ve got the public to accept the false definition, they keep changing the index that measures those prices.” Peter comments on Elon Musk’s recent pro-market posts featuring economist Milton Friedman, in which Friedman explains that government creates inflation: “It’s not greedy companies. He [Friedman] says, ‘Businessmen are greedy. That’s just the way people are. They’re no different than anybody else. We’re all greedy.’ And greed doesn’t cause inflation. I’ve pointed out that greed actually brings prices down.” Another recent source of economic fallacies is the havoc caused by hurricanes Milton and Helene. Many politicians wrongly assume both that the federal government is responsible for hurricane relief and that natural disasters are a boon for the economy. This is nothing more than a revival of the long-debunked “broken window fallacy:” “You’re never better off because you have to rebuild something that was destroyed or because you waste your money. Like the Keynesians say, “Look, as long as we spend the money, it’s good for the economy.” … It’s like digging a hole, paying people to dig it, and then paying someone else to fill it back up. At the end of the day, you’re right back where you started. You’ve spent a lot of money, a lot of people have worked, but there’s nothing to show for it.” Even worse is the fact that federal intervention has made natural disasters more destructive. By subsidizing insurance in disaster-prone regions and crowding out local aid, organizations like FEMA ultimately make people more vulnerable to disasters:  “In fact, because now everybody expects the federal government to take care of every emergency, nobody is prepared. It would be much more efficient if we allowed local governments to pay for their own disasters and prepare for them. But we’ve created this huge moral hazard—that’s the real disaster. It’s the moral hazard created by FEMA. Now, natural disasters collectively cost a lot more because we’ve outsourced everything to the federal government, which even subsidizes people to build in flood zones.” In times of disaster, federal policy should mirror the actions of the last admirable Democratic president: “Grover Cleveland was the last great Democratic president. When there was a drought in Texas and Congress appropriated around $10,000 to help the drought-stricken farmers, he vetoed the bill. … He said, ‘I could lay my finger on no section of the Constitution that authorizes this spending.’ So he vetoed it. He said, ‘Look, I feel badly for the farmers, and I want to help them, but as president, I can’t use taxpayer money to help them.’” If you missed it, check out Peter’s Commodity Culture interview from this week, where he dives deep into the economics of current global events. Tyler Durden Tue, 10/15/2024 – 14:00

Walgreens Jumps Most In Years After Better-Than-Expected Earnings, Outlook, & Widespread Store Closures Walgreens shares in New York surged the most in 16 years on Tuesday after the struggling pharmacy chain delivered an unexpectedly optimistic forecast for 2025. Simultaneously, Walgreens announced plans to shutter over a thousand stores nationwide as its turnaround plan gains steam.  Fourth-quarter earnings were 39 cents, beating the Bloomberg consensus of 36 cents. This indicates that the struggling drugstore chain is executing on its aggressive cost-cutting measures in an ambitious turnaround plan after years of pain. Here’s a snapshot of the quarterly results (courtesy of Bloomberg): Adjusted EPS 39c vs. 67c y/y, estimate 36c International sales $5.97 billion, +3.2% y/y, estimate $5.84 billion Sales $37.55 billion, +6% y/y, estimate $35.56 billion Adjusted gross margin 16.9% vs. 18.6% y/y, estimate 17.6% US Retail Pharmacy Sales $29.47 billion, +6.5% y/y, estimate $27.48 billion US Healthcare Sales $2.11 billion, +7.2% y/y, estimate $2.15 billion Adjusted gross profit $6.33 billion, -4% y/y, estimate $6.24 billion Adjusted operating income $424 million, -38% y/y, estimate $396 million With the fourth quarter print not so bad, Walgreens issued profit guidance for 2025 that was in line with the average analysts tracked by Bloomberg:   Sees adjusted EPS $1.40 to $1.80, estimate $1.73 (Bloomberg Consensus) Sees sales $147 billion to $151 billion, estimate $146.9 billion Sees adjusted operating income $1.6 billion to $2.0 billion, estimate $1.89 billion CEO Tim Wentworth wrote that the “turnaround will take time, but we are confident it will yield significant financial and consumer benefits over the long term.” Walgreens also announced that 14% of its US stores, or around 1,200 locations, will close over the next three years. About 500 of those stores will close in 2025. In June, the drugstore chain announced that 300 underperforming locations would close as part of the turnaround plan. It also noted about a quarter of all stores were unprofitable and would usher in “imminent” changes. Here’s analyst commentary about Walgreens’s ER and turnaround plan: Leerink Partners, Michael Cherny (market perform, PT $9) Says WBA’s FY25 guidance “needs more details from the upcoming deck on the full breakdown from revenue guidance to EPS guidance” The updated commentary on the store closure plan is a start, although further visibility into the makeup of the closures is going to be another focus “All-in, the FY4Q’24 print and FY25 guidance was not as bad as it could have been, which is somewhat of a positive relative to recent trends” Evercore ISI, Elizabeth Anderson (in line, PT $7.50) Says WBA finished its FY24 on a relative high note, with strong pharmacy comp sales “US Healthcare adj op margin was also positive (first time!) as the company continued to make progress on both GMs and OpEx” Barclays, Stephanie Davis (underweight, PT $7) Calls the 2025 guidance “better than feared” Jonathan Palmer, an analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence “The decisive decision to shutter a large cohort of underperforming stores is a positive in a narrative where the expectations are exceedingly low.”  WBA shares jumped as much as 15% in markets—the most in 16 years. Shares peaked at the $96 handle in August 2015 and have since tumbled 91%. The latest downward pressure comes from budget-conscious consumers.  We wonder how many of the Walgreens stores slated to close next are in lawless progressive cities.  Brazen theft at @Walgreens. Yet @Flo4Sacramento is against @YesOn36Now and said cut @TheCityofSac police by -20%. pic.twitter.com/sa5bZW96Oi — BetterSacNow (@SunnySacParks) October 13, 2024 In San Francisco, we went to the Walgreens that is the #1 spot for theft in all the 9000 US stores, per Walgreens. This is where chains once shut the freezer section. And we saw 3 thefts right in front of us. But across SF, coffee, mustard, nail polish– are all locked up: pic.twitter.com/IfYBVgpeI2 — Kyung Lah (@KyungLahCNN) July 25, 2023 Unchecked theft in Portland Guy with sleeping bag was stealing through Walgreens, walked behind the counter and stole from the cigarette section, and left while the poor beaten down checker asked him to stop. Thief knows there’s no consequences Checker didn’t even notice the… pic.twitter.com/wOCqT6H9EN — garbage ghost Tara Faul⚡️ (@tarafaul503) January 15, 2024 Here’s what ⁦@annamajaCNN⁩ & I saw at San Francisco’s Richmond area Walgreens, the worst spot of all 9000 US Walgreens for theft, per the co. We watched 3– and grabbed video of this shoplifter walk out right in front of us. pic.twitter.com/XJJxNcJ8Yj — Kyung Lah (@KyungLahCNN) July 25, 2023 Group of thieves steal cash registers from Walgreens in Oakland, California pic.twitter.com/s70gUKdMLN — BAY AREA STATE OF MIND (@YayAreaNews) November 3, 2023 Sigh.   Tyler Durden Tue, 10/15/2024 – 13:40

Harris-Walz: “The Most Anti-Free-Speech Ticket In Centuries” Authored by Jonathan Turley, Roughly five centuries ago, a new dance first reported in Augsburg, Germany was promptly dubbed the “waltz” after the German term for “to roll or revolve.” Today, there is no more nimble performer of that dizzying dance than Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz. Indeed, “Walzing” has become the Minnesota governor’s signature political two-step after his controversial statements on his allegedly socialist views, eliminating the electoral college and other topics. On Sunday, Walz’s dance partner was Fox News host Shannon Bream, who seemed to be fighting vertigo as the candidate tried to deflect his shocking prior statements on free speech. Bream asked Walz about his prior declaration that there is “no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech”— a statement that runs counter to decades of Supreme Court decisions. Walz notably did not deny or retract his statement. Instead, his interview ironically became itself a flagrant example of misinformation. First of all, misinformation and hate speech are not exceptions to the First Amendment: Whether it is the cross burnings of infamous figures like KKK leader Clarence Brandenburg or the Nazis who marched in Skokie, Ill., hate speech is protected. Yet both Harris and Walz are true believers in the righteousness of censorship for disinformation, misinformation and malinformation. The Biden administration defines misinformation as “false, but not created or shared with the intention of causing harm” — meaning it would subject you to censorship even if you are not intending harm. It defines malinformation as “based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.” So you can post “true facts,” but would still be subject to censorship if you are viewed as misleading others with your pesky truth-telling. Furthermore, “book bans” are not equivalent to the Harris-Walz censorship policies. After years of supporting censorship and blacklisting, Democrats are attempting to deflect questions by claiming that the GOP is the greater threat. “We’re seeing censorship coming in the form of book bannings in different places,” Walz told Bream. “We’re seeing attempts in schools.” First, a reality check: The Biden-Harris administration has helped fund and actively support the largest censorship system in our history, a system described by one federal court as “Orwellian.” These are actual and unrelenting efforts to target individuals and groups for opposing views on subjects ranging from gender identity to climate change to COVID to election fraud. While Walz and others rarely specifically reference the book bans in question, Florida is one state whose laws concern age limits on access to graphic or sexual material in schools. School districts have always been given wide latitude in making such decisions on curriculum or library policies. Indeed, while rarely mentioned by the media, the left has demanded the banning or alteration of a number of classic books, including “To Kill a Mockingbird” and “Of Mice and Men,” under diversity or equity rationales. I have long opposed actual book bans perpetrated by both the left and the right. However, school districts have always made such access and curriculum decisions. Finally, Walz and others often sell censorship by citing the dangers of child pornography or of threats made against individuals. Walz on Sunday followed Hillary Clinton’s recent pro-censorship campaign as he employed such misdirection. “The issue on this was the hate speech and the protected hate speech — speech that’s aimed at creating violence, speech that’s aimed at threats to individuals,” he claimed. “That’s what we’re talking about in this.” First, he’d said there is no protected hate speech. Second, the law already provides ample protections against threats toward individuals. What’s most striking is that, after years of unapologetically embracing censorship (often under the Orwellian term “content moderation”), the left does not seem to want to discuss it in this election. Democrats in Congress opposed every major effort to investigate the role of the Biden administration in the social-media censorship system it constructed. Many denied any such connection. Elon Musk ended much of that debate with the release of the Twitter Files showing thousands of emails from the administration targeting individuals and groups with opposing views. Now the public is being asked to vote for the most anti-free speech ticket in centuries — but neither Harris nor Walz want to talk about it in any detail. The result may be the largest bait-and-switch in history. Walz, Clinton and others also falsely claim they are simply trying to stop things like child pornography — which is already covered by existing criminal laws. But what many on the left want is to regain what Clinton called their loss of “control” over what we are allowed to say or hear on social media. Make no mistake about it: The “Walzing” of free speech is one dance you would be wise to decline. Otherwise, do not be surprised if, when the music stops, you find yourself without both your partner and your free speech. *  *  * Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.” Tyler Durden Tue, 10/15/2024 – 13:20