What caught my eye this week.
Well he’s achieved what the simultaneous fears of an AI bubble and the fear that AI would take all our jobs couldn’t quite manage.
For a moment yesterday, US President Donald Trump had sent the Nasdaq market into correction territory:
Of course it’s true that markets – especially US markets – have been cruising for a bruising for ages.
But still, we haven’t seen a decline like this since Trump last took his agenda to the global stage, when he was throwing around (figurative) bombshells back in April 2025 on his ill-fated Liberation Day.
Most of the tariff hullabaloo has since been unwound, either by Trump’s own backpedaling or the intervention of the US courts. And the final bill for his economic illiteracy has largely been paid by the US taxpayer, in the form of US firms and consumers.
It would be nice to think the Iran conflict will end the same way, and soon.
It’s possible. Despite Trump having said hours earlier that he wasn’t interested in a ceasefire with Iran, I woke to news that some tweet or segment from a Fox News pundit now had him pondering winding down his latest campaign.
Top Trump
We’ll have to see how Trump feels tomorrow. Nothing else will matter.
US politicians have been supine while enabling Trump’s second term antics – which is why he so swiftly went from abducting a head of state to at least taking the cellophane off the manual marked World War 3 – and he doesn’t appear bothered about the average US voter, either.
So despite the war cementing Trump’s status as the most unpopular president of all-time, so far he’s not for TACO-ing.
And yet the bombing potentially going into a fourth week is already surprising, given that the White House war aims appear to have been met:
- The casual decapitation of another sovereign regime
- Plenty of exciting new downloadable content for fans
- Nobody moaning – or reading – about ICE shooting US citizens anymore
But what about the ‘complete obliteration’ of Iran’s capacity to develop nuclear weapons, you say?
Don’t be silly. Trump assured us he’d already done that last year.
No doubt he’ll completely obliterate it again next year if he needs to.
The sick man of the G7
Falling stock markets are one thing, and arguably not even unwelcome. They come with the territory.
The unmooring of the world’s hegemonic superpower is another, more frightening thing. At the far end of that storyline is a long global conflict just one mistake away from the four-minute warning.
And slap-bang in the middle is good old Blighty, always ready these days to get the worst of it:
Other consequences that even those who complain that ‘politics’ – if that is what we’re witnessing – has no place on an investing website like Monevator will concede are relevant include a near-50% rise in the oil price to $100, and a direct hit on UK households:
-
- Energy bills could hit almost £2,000 a year… – Guardian
- …as gas prices reach their highest level for three years – This Is Money
There’s little that the UK government can do in response. Not least because Rachel Reeves has bills to pay of her own. Any breathing room from lower borrowing costs has again gone for now:
If yields stay up here for long they will kibosh any economic recovery. They’ve probably already done for a spring bounce in our beleaguered housing market.
Hence the UK economy will continue to languish – at least £100bn a year smaller than it would have been if we had remained in the EU, and thus £40bn short annually of the tax receipts that might have helped make things better.
But I won’t shoot more fish in the Brexit barrel today.
Indeed one can almost look fondly on our own poundshop populist-in-chief, given that Nigel Farage can apparently satisfy his own urges for crass showmanship and self-interest by charging £100 a pop to meet the whims of white supremacists on the Cameo app, when the alternative is blowing up the Middle East.
Falling down
Unlike our own witless foray into national self-harm though, something good could actually come out of this unnecessary conflagration with Iran.
Were the regime to fall and a version of democracy to take hold, I’d be the first to cheer Iran rejoining modernity. A bigger Dubai with better museums and restaurants, or more seriously a proper grown-up country with a global standing befitting its size, resources, and storied history.
However that end does not justify these means.
Veteran anti-American leftists must look back on President George W. Bush’s laborious efforts to establish a coalition and a cause for the Iraq war as fantastical. Something more akin to the Council of Elrond in The Lord of the Rings compared to this president, who sets the Middle-East ablaze one week then mutters about ‘taking’ Cuba the next.
But maybe you’re one of those supposedly tough-minded realists who thinks we’re just seeing how the world was always run, now President Trump has bravely pulled down the curtain?
Firstly, you’re wrong. This isn’t how the Western world was run for the past 80 years. (Granted it’s how it’s sometimes run in banana republics, or under African tyrants).
But secondly, there’s nothing tough about smashing stuff up for no good purpose other than to make a lot of noise to please your base and satisfy your ego.
Hard things require hard work, as well as holding your tongue and sometimes your power.
As Canadian PM Mark Carney eloquently put it at Davos in February:
For decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order.
We joined its institutions, we praised its principles, we benefited from its predictability. And because of that, we could pursue values-based foreign policies under its protection.
We knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false, that the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient, that trade rules were enforced asymmetrically. And we knew that international law applied with varying rigour depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.
This fiction was useful, and American hegemony, in particular, helped provide public goods, open sea lanes, a stable financial system, collective security and support for frameworks for resolving disputes.
The rules-based order that some now scorn is exactly why the West enjoyed many decades of relative peace and prosperity.
But it’s also why, for instance, China was able to pull a billion people out of poverty, and why – and always most importantly and easiest forgotten – why the post-nuclear horror film Threads is still a work of fiction, as opposed to what happened last Tuesday.
Won’t anyone think of the despots?!
You might say the rules-based order was a lie that didn’t give Vladimir Putin or Kim Jong Un – let alone Saddam Hussein or any number of Central American dictators – a fair shake.
Fair enough, but at least be clear who you’re advocating for.
Similarly, you might find it refreshing to hear the leader of a nuclear superpower calling his NATO allies cowards for not diving into the latest mid-season plot twist for the Trump White House.
But don’t complain when every other country starts pointing nuclear missiles at their neighbours as a consequence.
As Janan Ganesh points out in the FT [Paywall] this week:
As of last month, there is for the first time in over half a century no binding agreement to limit nuclear arms between America and Russia, which have the world’s two largest arsenals.
What is this?
A wave of recklessness? Perhaps, but also a natural response to events.
If the worst that results from this circus is higher prices at US gas stations and another 20% down on the S&P 500 then we will have gotten off lightly.
But I’m inclined to worry that the unravelling of the post-WWII Western consensus will – eventually – come with a higher and bloodier bill.
Of course the United States is far from the first empire to grow fat, hubristic, and ignorant at the height of its power.
But it is the first to be run by a former TV game show host.
No wonder Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy, and The Price Is Right seem to be the closest we have to a doctrine in Washington these days.
Housekeeping: email issues
It seems more Monevator emails have been going into spam and junk folders than even my critics’ complaints about my forays into politics would warrant.
The issue may be that I’ve been using URL shorteners to tidy up lengthy link addresses. So I’ll be cutting back on that.
Anyway if you’re reading this article on the website but you’re also an email subscriber who hasn’t seen an email for a while then please do double-check. Mark any Monevator emails you find in spam as ‘not spam’.
We’ve been doing three emails a week for many years now. That’s how many you should get!
Related, several dozen Monevator members are not receiving member posts over email, so they must be reading them on the site. (Via the growing Mavens and Moguls archives perhaps).
If that’s how you want it then fine. But if you’re a member and you’re missing the emails, then please make sure you’re subscribed to get all Monevator emails.
Re-subscribe if need be. (And again, look out for the confirmation email getting lost in spam…)
If that doesn’t work then please do drop me a line.
It’s our lovely Monevator members who keep the lights on around here these days, and I want you to read us exactly how best suits you.
Have a great weekend!
From Monevator
Year 3 withdrawal from the No Cat Food portfolio – Monevator [Members]
The wild last year of a linker – Monevator
From the archive-ator: Why commodities belong in your portfolio – Monevator
News
BOE vote 9-0 to hold interest rates steady on Iran war risks – Reuters via MSN
IT failure locked out Hargreaves Lansdown’s customers – BBC
UK housing costs rose 41% in five years, for owners and renters – Guardian
Banks keep £100 contactless payments limit despite new powers – City AM
Stopping gas dictating UK energy price could cut bills by £200, study finds – Guardian
Revolut to IPO above $100bn, says former licence boss – City AM
Comedian Sean Hughes’ £4m estate finally given to Shelter – Independent
Five-Year Annualized Value Premium (Jan. 2021 – Dec. 2025)
Value is back – Verdad
Products and services
Disclosure: Links to platforms may be affiliate links, where we may earn a commission. This article is not personal financial advice. When investing, your capital is at risk and you may get back less than invested. With commission-free brokers other fees may apply. See terms and fees. Past performance doesn’t guarantee future results.
Sub-4% mortgage rates vanish as banks pull deals – Yahoo Finance
Typical new mortgage costs up £788 a year in a fortnight – BBC
What next for mortgages and how long should you fix for? – This Is Money
Average ‘shelf life’ of a mortgage is now just two weeks – Guardian
Get up to £1,500 cashback when you transfer your cash and/or investments to Charles Stanley Direct through this affiliate link. Terms apply – Charles Stanley
Eight expensive mistakes to avoid when buying life insurance – Which
Santander switch offer: £200 + Amazon gift card – Be Clever With Your Cash
HMRC has a new ‘Tax Confident’ educational portal – GOV.UK
Get up to £3,000 cashback when you open or switch to an Interactive Investor SIPP. Terms and fees apply, affiliate link – Interactive Investor
How does shared ownership work? – Be Clever With Your Cash
Shrinkflation takes a bite out of Easter eggs – Guardian
Making Tax Digital myths debunked – Which
Homes for sale with uplifting views, in pictures – Guardian
Comment and opinion
Side hustles and the UK tax system – Guardian
Five ways to avoid triggering tax traps – Which
Why private school isn’t worth the cost – Of Dollars and Data
How to ‘peakspan’ your retirement – A Teachable Moment
When the benchmark becomes a bet – Capital Allocators
Private credit: for most, an asset-liability mismatch – A.W.O.C.S.
Here’s why you are constantly fighting off scammers [Podcast] – Freakonomics
Emotional yields of collectibles [Research] – Elroy Dimson et al via SSRN
Naughty corner: Active antics
An unsustainable bubble is growing inside fintech – Forbes
Waiting for the IPO wave – Arcadian
Saba forces the wind-up of Edinburgh Worldwide – AIC
Ten growth stocks to buy for the long-term – Morningstar
Hyperscalers and hard hats – Sherwood
The biggest active funds picked the right stocks, then fussed – Flyover Stocks
AI is disruptive, but it isn’t a moat killer – Morningstar
Venture capital doesn’t exist – Investing 101
Kindle book bargains
The End of Reality by Jonathan Taplin – £0.99 on Kindle
Boomerang by Michael Lewis – £0.99 on Kindle
Money Men by Dan McCrum – £0.99 on Kindle
Economica by Victoria Bateman – £0.99 on Kindle
Or pick up one of the all-time great investing classics – Monevator shop
Environmental factors
Researchers turn waste plastic into vinegar – The Conversation
The plastic detox – Guardian
Trawling ban off Sussex coast sparks marine recovery – BBC
England must allot 7% of land to nature and renewables to hit targets – Guardian
The moment one polar bear took on a walrus herd – BBC
Robot overlord roundup
The 12x bet on AI – Tom Tunguz
A petri dish of human brain cells is playing Doom – Guardian
Judge issues AI warning as after landlord uses fake law defence – BBC
How much computing power is in a data centre? – Construction Physics
Parents think they know how kids use AI. They don’t – BBC
Will AI replace financial advisors? – A Wealth of Common Sense
Agents over bubbles – Stratechery
Not at the dinner table
Why Labour’s Brexit focus has shifted from Leavers to Remainers – BBC
Sadiq Khan cites £30bn GDP Brexit hit to London – Standard
Inside the White House plan to sell the Iran war online – Politico
Green leader Polanski wants to back the ‘caring majority’ – Green Party
US judge orders Trump administration to reopen Voice of America – BBC
A whiff of stagflation – Paul Krugman
You can just do things – N+1
Off our beat
Why has this meningitis outbreak spread so fast? – BBC
RIP my profession (and probably yours too) – Hello, Mortal
Ukraine is hanging anti-drone nets over cities – NPR
Why Nigeria is burying its history under a mountain in Svalbard – Guardian
From Hormuz to Malacca, global trade relies on five waterways – The Conversation
One situation after another – The Atlantic [h/t Abnormal Returns]
The Cassandra and The Machine – New Atlantis
In favour of enjoying things on purpose – Raptitude
And finally…
“It is easier to stimulate asset prices then it is to stimulate the economy.”
– Terry Smith, Investing for Growth
Like these links? Subscribe to get them every Saturday. Note this article includes affiliate links, such as from Amazon and Interactive Investor.
Trump is fighting Israel’s war, no doubt they will decide how long it will continue. Now we know who the real superpower is!
@Warren — Israel is influential no doubt, but I don’t want these comments turning into the worst of the Internet.
Let’s consider that point of view expressed for now and leave that aspect there please all.
The trouble is that for it to work, everyone has to see a benefit to being part of an international rules based system. If you think that there’s no compensation to being the worlds banker, or if your plan, as a theo-nazi is to drop a 5kt yield dirty missile on Tel Aviv, you will test those rule based ideas beyond their breaking point. Then you find that globalisation requires muscular control of sea lanes, which it would seem, no coalition, willing or otherwise, has the means or materiel to provide. What a mess, a reset is necessary.
@Bassavoce — Yes, but it is a complete fiction that the US didn’t benefit from the rules-based order. It was set-up by (infinitely wiser and war-scarred) Americans and it has helped make the US the richest country in the world, and the best armed, by several light years. MAGA whining otherwise is just pampered privilege speaking.
(I’m not saying it worked for everyone, not even all Americans, but big picture).
Ditto the sea lanes. They’ve been basically open for decades, despite numerous warmish wars in the region.
Trump kicking everything over in a couple of weekends then moaning others don’t want to help him clean up is not the same order of what he’s throwing away.
Thanks for the links.
Not sure how we get the OMB to safely return the toys to their various prams. Maybe it is really a job for Supernanny?!?
I think Krugman is onto something, and have thought so for a couple of months now. Buckle up, it might just get even bumpier!
Perhaps easter egg shrinkflation (and the like) will soon be re-packaged as a health/well-being boost!
Agree, but as an investor surely I have to work out what sort of economic weather the bombast in the White House is making and then steer a course that’s appropriate for me. Much as I would like the rules based system to return, I fear the time for that has passed.
I continue to play this as I have for the past three years now…. Basically like Berkshire conbined with Renaissance. Fat stack of dry powder in MMF, 30% AUM available for quick deployment.
But we may be getting to the end game with equities, let’s see.
Governments and central banks have made a mess, moral hazard is everywhere and is going nowhere.
The line about our ‘beleaguered’ housing market – AKA our pumped up disenfranchisement engine that means social mobility is a myth – made me amused in the use of the word. It can be true from either perspective. If you want the asset prices up, good luck. Be careful what you wish for with housing. Social integrity is already bad.
Anyway – same old story this week. Yields spike in a large way, buy 2061 gilt. Wait two days to to weeks, sell for 1-4% gain. Take what’s on offer, don’t get greedy, wait for next panic, which sometimes is only a few days later!
Same *occasionally* with US mega caps, but they are far less predictable than government / central bank behaviour. The system does always want to bail itself out.
Eventually, maybe I get back to equities in a big way. For now this will do.
Reaching r in r > g and indeed discovering, as expected it is a profoundly disgusting place was the most liberating moment of my life.
Another good post TI.
Ignore those (who read your site for free) and then lambast your politics!
It just sums up the mad world we live in where folk want the world to burn but complain when they get singed. Keep up the good work!
Lee.
Trump can claim an end to the war all he likes, but the Iranians have already said there will be no ceasefire and an end requires payment of reparations and security guarantees (which will need to involve China/Russia). The missiles won’t stop and Hormuz won’t open until Iran is satisfied.
Iran has shown they can not only meet but beat the US/Israel at each step of the escalation ladder which is why the US doesn’t want to climb it (see the walk back on the South Pars attack after Iran then hit Ras Laffan in Qatar).
The Houthis have also been left in reserve to close the Red Sea if the US escalates (the same Houthis Trump already gave up trying to destroy last year: “We hit them very hard. They had a great capacity to withstand punishment. You could say there’s a lot of bravery there.”)
The rules-based order has always been a fiction most US Presidents entertained because they knew they made the institutions and wrote the rules. To the extent there has been peace and prosperity in the West it has come from living in a unipolar world for decades, not the rules-based order.
China was brought into the rules-based order because US liberal orthodoxy at the time was that richer and more integrated countries will become democracies forever grateful to the US for letting them into their club.
Incidentally, I like the part about Iran getting democracy so they can become a bigger Dubai (an absolute monarchy). Or a proper grown-up country with global standing (maybe like Marxist-Leninist China) 🙂
I take a more positive view especially for investors – looking long term
Iran is the last in a long line of misbehaving rogue Middle Eastern states fuelled by oil revenues-the others have all withdrawn from trying to kill everyone especially their neighbours and Jews ie Iraq,Syria,Afgahanistan .Libya etc all are notably quiet
Hopefully Trump can finish the job soon
This leaves only Russia intent on attacking all and sundry especially Ukraine
The Russians are a European problem and the Americans will leave it to us
Peace when it comes might actually be quite long term and good for investors
xxd09
Good article, thanks.
Bit difficult to avoid politics at the moment. The USA is a disgrace. So much for the ‘ day of infamy’ when Japan mistimed it’s declaration of war. As for the political assassinations……
Wish you wouldn’t go on about the consequences of brexit though, we know already, but a ‘we wuz robbed’ tone 10 years after the event isn’t informative or helpful. We are where we are, now what to do about it that’s the thing.
Opinions are like mouths. Everyone has one. What matters is not what anyone thinks about the perceived or actual rights and the wrongs of what’s happened or is happening now, but, rather, what happens next and what then are the nth order effects of that (and how might/do those effects manifest, and over what periods)? The questions to relevantly ask are not whether all this is good/ bad but:
– Whether to stay the course with existing allocations?
Or
– Rotate into risk or tilt away from it?
– Whether or not the risk on/off assets have changed, and, is so, then how, and for how long/under what future conditions?
My analysis is China wins. They’ve got the largest (by far) strategic petroleum reserves (1.1-1.5 bn barrels). They’re installing more renewables capacity each year than the rest of the world combined. They’ve a massive roll out of nuclear power. They’ve got access to oil/gas at a discount from Siberia (and non discounted from Africa) as well as from Lat Am and the Mid East (their consignments are not being targeted). They’ve a chance to get America bogged down a la Vietnam or Afghanistan. They also get great real time intel on cutting edge US military capabilities.
Even if the US back away (and it takes two to TACO) they run down their interceptors and guided munitions. Those rely on rare earth’s where China controls 90-95% or refining capacity globally. It will takes many years of breakneck investment to change that.
In the meantime, China can embargo the metals essential for America to rearm.
At the very least this self made US quagmire gives Beijing more leverage to get export restrictions on Blackwell (and maybe even Rubin) GPUs relaxed.
It’s already getting Hoppers via gray channels and is far more algorithmically advanced than the hyperscalers enabling (IDC if not already) Chinese effective (albeit not raw) compute to surpass the US.
If Xi plays his cards right he can act the honest broker, keep Iran in the fight to drain the US ahead of the midterms (turning Trump into another lame duck, likely being impeached by a Dem Congress) and render the econ/tech reason for taking Taiwan (the fabs) otiose.
Maybe they even get a tariff concession, but, as these hurt the US more that China, perhaps they aren’t bothered.
As good Communists, the CP of China Central Standing Committee won’t be giving thanks to any God for Trump, but if they were Believers then they probably would.
MAGA is making America weak again and (right after the PRC’s international difficulty over COVID and Warrior Wolf diplomacy) is now handing Beijing the keys to the future.
@Lee — Cheers. I’ve deleted the poster concerned; I explained to him a few months ago that he was now on my auto-delete list (still fewer than five all-time) as he just said the same thing every time, and he doesn’t really object to politics, he objects to *my* politics. I’m not explaining myself to him anymore. He never acknowledged previous explanations, and assuming he’s not just a Russian bot or whatnot he doesn’t appear to come back and read responses anyway.
It’s a big Internet, and we can all make our choices. I have similar issues from the other side with Merryn Somerset-Webb among others (like her on investing, dislike her politics) so I do understand.
@Mr-Optimistic — As I’ve said before, Reform is leading in the polls! So whatever you or I think, the message clearly has not been universally heard or accepted.
I take your point though. I don’t think I did overdo it here, a slightly pejorative framing (which I feel is warranted here given the populist parallels) and then a reminder of the economic facts, and that they have further consequences.
Again, I’ll keep doing this now and then until Brexit has no more economic credibility for the average person than Stalin’s take on communism. Which is possibly more (again, economically) than it deserves.
@deltahedge
China also wins because it is playing a blinder on AI.
The greatest, most amusing irony of what is currently happening is the ‘authoritarian’ nation is currently the one flooding the world with open weight, incredibly adept reasoning engines that can be run locally with £1-10k of capex, and then opex is energy. These models if you know what you are doing can be fine tuned in reverse – stripping the biased RLHF, and giving you a model that can audit power at a rate that matches or beats the speed they can construct an opposing narrative.
This is not nothing. Give the bazaar the tools, and the cathedral is b*ggered.
Meanwhile, the ‘democracies’ are frantically pulling by their hair out under the guise of AI safety, that – oh no – we may have given access to … something that can audit power … to the great unwashed.
It is profoundly hilarious.
Now, of course the most obvious reason is the destruction of the western labs ‘moat’, but it really doesn’t matter the why.
It’s the beautiful symmetry of it. Yet another reason to only trust your own eyes and ears and nothing of what you hear or see from supposed authority.
“Green leader Polanksi wants to back the ‘caring majority’ – Green Party”
What on earth are you doing?
You’re posting Green Party propaganda amongst the news and analysis articles?
@Moggers #14 and @platformer #9 (especially ‘Iran has shown they can not only meet but beat the US/Israel at each step of the escalation ladder’): Yes and yes.
DJT is no Richard Nixon (no realpolitik / triangular diplomacy). RN tried to extricate the US from war on Asia’s mainland (Peace with Honour / Vietimisation). DJT has started a war in West Asia. Nixon’s 1972 Christmas Bombing was to induce Hanoi to return to negotiations. DJT / Israel obliterated the very leader’s in Tehran with whom the US might have negotiated. Nixon removed Allende by deniable proxy through Pinochet. Trump had Maduro openly kidnapped. Nixon negotiated SALT 1 and the ABM treaties with Moscow. Trump has allowed New SART to lapse and withdrew from the INF treaty. Nixon attempted a discrete (but bungled) burglary at the Watergate. Trump incited a televised riot at the Capitol. Nixon came from humble origins, was clever and operated with some self awareness. Trump is everything that you’d expect of a TV performer who inherited great wealth and managed to underperform a SPY tracker.
Lyndon Johnson discovered the North Vietnamese had no threshold of pain. Washington may (will?) discover the same of the Shia fundamentalist regime in Iran. They’ll rather fight and die than accept the humiliation of submitting to ‘the Great Satan’. This is an industrialised nation of 92 million, far more capable, on paper, and in a better strategic geography, than North Vietnam in 1964-73.
And the IRGC thought nothing of massacring 36,500 of Iran’s citizens over two days in January.
A regime that ruthless generally stays in power provided the army doesn’t revolt (as it did in, say, Romania in December 1989).
As the Iran-Iraq war showed, an external attack on Iran is more likely to solidify the army behind the regime than undermine it’s support (in 1980 the mullahs were unsure if the armed forces they’d so recently inherited from the fallen Shah would rally round, but they need not have worried).
I may well be wrong on this, and will stand corrected if so, but I doubt Iran in 2026 is like Iraq in 2003 or Libya in 2011.
If that’s right (and it may well not be, I concede), then I suppose this might mean more inflation, higher rates, less growth, more defense spending and less public services (for longer). But who knows?
Maybe the renewables will get some tailwinds as hydrocarbons (esp LNG) gets more expensive going into winter. Then again, we can’t even manage connecting new solar and wind farms to the grid (there’s a massive backlog).
O&G E&P players are reluctant to invest given the one day chicken, the next feathers, experience of the oil / gas glut and shale price collapse of 2014-16. So supply looks tight.
Good if your Norwegian, or live in French Guyinea. Less good if you live here in Blighty.
All China has to do, meanwhile, is to remember Napoleon’s maxim, “Never interrupt your opponent when he’s making a mistake”.
“Let’s consider that point of view expressed for now”
If only this could apply to the B word too.
I don’t buy China in the same league as our other problems
China is not an imperial power-it doesn’t launch violent physical attacks across the globe as the European,Arabs etc have recently and Romans etc did historically
Been in this mode for 4000+years
However they are a totalitarian police state with a large import export business with some serious problems-no oil,plummeting birth rate
Use soft power only-bribery,corruption and extortion/intimidation-a problem but of a different order -we won’t be killed in our beds but we might have to pay sweetly for the bed we are sleeping on!
xxd09
@Reactive – Brexit has caused us significant economic damage, which those with learning and education in business and econimic matters predicted. In contrast, a “point of view” is just that. The proverbial frying pan really does need frequent hitting across the bonce of most in the hope they learn that, despite what their favourite noise source tells them, they might not be an expert. However, I take your point that most aren’t here reading this.
Blimey what happened to this site? I know a lot of sources have paywalled their content but compare weekly round-up from 15 years ago to now – just pages of rambling followed by not one link anyone has commented on except to question its inclusion.
The first comment more or less shows direction site is taking – yes he was asked to tone it down – but this is monevator 2026.
No wonder there’s 18 comments – one questioning inclusion of a link and one calling Brexit bashing trite and three are from TI! Was a time it’d hit three figures every week
>> Blimey what happened to this site? <<
I just read Monevator's "About" link:
"Monevator is a personal blog about money: making, saving, growing, and sometimes even spending it."
&
"Want to make money? I do. Want more money to save, more to invest, more to give away or spend or leave to your grandkids? Do you want to be free? I do."
Make money, become financially free, & remain financially free? Great, count me in.
But no, let's instead impress upon readers the exact same political point every single week, seemingly, while banning the people who call this out. Even people who happen to agree with some of the underlying sentiment…
Please ditch all the political lecturing and return to being a beacon for (aspiring) financial independents.
It doesn’t even matter if the arguments happen to be right, or more right than wrong. Endlessly repeating them to a readership who are here for something else entirely, and then blocking those speaking up who disagree with the “house view”, is terminally destructive. In time, this place will become just somewhere else on the internet to be bypassed by those of us sick of political partisanship encroaching everywhere we go.
Or perhaps I’m misreading the intentions here, and the link to the Green Party speech is, in the spirit of the blog’s raison d’être, intended as an early warning for aspiring and actual financial independents to begin preparations for tax exile?
Please end it all.
@CH – practically speaking, all you have to do is avoid the weekend reading (or just scan it for the apolitical bits of interest) and the site pretty much exactly fulfills the remit you’ve quoted. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. I quite like the variety that WR brings. Just filter for the stuff you don’t like.
Just a comment in support of the site and the authors … keep it up ….
@Al Cam — I have been thinking for a while that GLP-1 drugs might produce a convenient off-ramp to legitimise shrinkflation. (I’ve read US fast food chains have begun to reduce some portion sizes, for example — and not before time!)
@Bassavoce — Yes, agreed, I just wouldn’t go looking for a coherent doctrine. My concluding comments about the Trump administration having more in common with luck-based game shows wasn’t entirely for colour. There’s clearly no consistency, almost all his former allies from round one he’s thrown under a bus, and look at the falling out with Musk. This is hardly an extremist or distorting view to point this out. The doctrine is that of a particularly tacky personality cult.
@Moggers — Don’t disagree that the housing market is a mess but we are where we are. Even getting people moving (without prices rising) would be a big boon to economic growth, albeit that seems impossible in the South-East (where much of the wealth is) with stamp duty at these levels. The annual movement numbers compared to years ago with lower taxes/prices are shocking. It has to be having a sclerotic affect on the economy.
@platformer — Well I’d agree in as much as I don’t think the US is winning this war, though it is hard to say that Iran is either, except in as much as the theocracy is surviving. Many more grown-up and capable US administrations have looked at Iran and not acted because they knew it was potentially intractable. Admittedly they’ve proven more of a paper tiger and looked more vulnerable before this latest incursion than for decades, but there was always going to be knock-on ramifications. Re: your characterisations of Dubai and China, well of course I would like Iran to look like France or Germany but baby steps. 😉 I’d take either of your version of the alternatives over the current regime anyway I think, especially the first!
@xx009 — At the risk of being mischaracterised by my critics again, the country missing off your active belligerents list is the US! Also I’m not sure those other Middle Eastern regimes are exactly stable paragons yet, most were plunged into brutal civil wars post regime change and Afghanistan seems to have even alienated its Pakistani allies. With all that said I’ve read research saying that the Middle-East was quietening simply because of demographics… fewer angry young men. Makes you wonder.
@DH — “My analysis is China wins”. Yep, China can only win when the US decides to reduce its own soft power and alienate its allies for no good (national) end. That said Asia is very reliant on Middle Eastern oil. China has been making huge strides with its electrification/renewable push but it’s far from weaning off that energy dependency. From memory it is the largest oil importer in the world!
@Jonathan the Evil — It was in the political section. The Greens literally just won a by-election and are polling very strongly, so I think it behoves informed citizens to know where they are coming from. (For my part, I agree with some of the environmental stuff and I can see the power of the grievances they are tapping into, but obviously I do not share their economic perspective.)
@reactive — Reform is periodically leading the polls. Clearly a signification proportion of the country still thinks it was anything other than a disaster. Why should I not continue to flag (in barely 100 words this week) the harms that until recently dare not speak their name? Except in as much as it annoys some Leavers. (Well I’d be annoyed if I’d voted Leave too. Or perhaps embarrassed. But a chunky cohort are ready to double down ho hum).
@Always Late — Exactly. Again, if Farage was a discredited charlatan and the parties were all saying “Brexit caused real economy harm, let’s have a sensible conversation about how far we want to reintegrate – and if the answer is we don’t for political reasons then let’s all plainly and unanimously acknowledge those economic harms” then I wouldn’t still be posting about Brexit. Instead we have denialism in a vast swathe of the electorate, and politicians happy to exploit that credulity.
@C H — Please feel free to read another website. Cheers!
@Lee @Rhino @Kwaker — Cheers! I appreciate the nod from the other side, though please know I’m not bothered by these people.
They almost invariably don’t engage with other articles, don’t subscribe, aren’t members. They just don’t share my political perspective (or they don’t like theirs being challenged) and so they pipe up because… the Internet.
There’s slightly fewer unsubcribes on this Weekend Reading then last weekend’s!
The idea that there’s this mass of people seething at the occasional aside into (entirely relevant) politics is not borne out.
Jesus wept. I read the comments before I read TI’s article and thought he must have gone off the deep end.
Now I read the article and see that what he wrote was mild. Obviously not complimentary if you love Mr Farage but still, the bloke is quite marmite-y isn’t he? 🙂
Politics are unavoidable. Inextricably linked to our investment outcomes. Why not debate the issues in good spirit? TI writes what he thinks and he gives people space to air their views.
FWIW, I can assure anyone who’s concerned that TI is unlikely to moonlight as a propagandist for the Green Party. I’ve known him for a long time and I don’t think he’d have much truck with their economic prescriptions.
I won’t speculate on why he linked to the speech as I haven’t got time to read it and guess.
On ‘sub 4% mortgages vanish’. So not only have I made paper losses over the last two weeks equal to about 50% of the value of my mortgage. The chance of me getting a < 4% rate when re mortgaging later this year has pretty much vanished. 4% was the go/no-go threshold I had in mind for carrying on with the leverage experiment. It's a mad old world and a good reminder things can change unexpectedly and very quickly.
There’s me thinking the article was primarily about Trump’s latest assault on the global economy, and the resultant adverse effects on us all.
The government direction of travel on the EU seems now to embrace default alignment. This is still a long way from what we had but at least we have ministers now prepared to talk about the negative effects of leaving. Perhaps we can work back to SM/CU membership, which is probably where it should have gone to in the first place.
Thanks to all the fuss I read Polanski’s speech. I don’t agree with their positions on defence etc but a lot of the rest of it was interesting. There’s a fair chance the next government could be some sort of coalition with the Greens as a part of it so we should be looking at what they’re saying. And who still thinks privatisation of water was a good idea?
I found the article on shared ownership useful, partly because it also mentioned the first homes scheme, which I wasn’t aware of. As a parent of someone living in the SE and who is starting to think about trying to buy somewhere this was helpful. Though I seem to recall shared ownership is very unfavourable if you have to sell when prices have fallen, but I’m not sure if it’s any worse than if you own the whole property.
Another vote to keep up the good work, how can you avoid discussing politics, it affects us as investors in every way.
@TI
“Why should I not continue to flag…”
You occasionally mention that the blog has an intelligent readership. Do intelligent people really need to be told the same thing over and over again, and is it surprising that some find it rather exasperating if not patronising?
@Larsen — I’m of a similar mind with the Greens. Re: shared ownership, I have two close friends who bought under these circumstances, including one who did so with my assistance (in as much as I flagged it and helped with viewings when she was away). I think the latter had a particularly superior kind of shared ownership deal and I wasn’t involved with the former, but nevertheless I’m a bit concerned. It’s hard to unpick the current disdain for (London) flats from the shared ownership issues though, when virtually all the latter are flats too.
@reactive — You’ve been objecting to my commenting on Brexit for many years now, from a particular political position (as evidenced by older comments I can point to if you like) albeit in a polite manner so I’ve no complaints on that score. 🙂
Let me ask you this. If you were reading an article in The Times say and it mentioned the size and issues raised by the UK’s national debt profile, or if you were reading the Telegraph and they mentioned the relatively high tax take regime we now ‘enjoy’ would you object to these things being mentioned in context?
I have my doubts.
This wasn’t an article about Brexit. The Brexit reminder was in the context of the especially straightened circumstances of the UK due to Brexit.
Let’s be clear, the Government by now would have brought in at least £150bn more in taxes if we hadn’t made this decision. Think of the difference that would have made in services or tax cuts (or not rises) at the margin, let alone the bigger impact of us all enjoying a higher GDP and all that goes with it.
And yet you will still look for this missing context in vain in many articles and commentaries, especially from partisan right-leaning media.
I accept that there has to be some kind of statute of limitations on this but I’m not persuaded we’re there yet. (And even then I’m sure I’ll sometimes mention in 20 years, like someone might mention Thatcher or Gordon Brown selling the gold reserves).
When Brexit happened I said it would still be a factor in a decade’s time. It’s (then far more vociferous) supporters shouted me down, said it was all decided, stop moaning, sunny uplands ahoy, just wait I’d see etc.
Well here we are ten years later and I’ve seen. Pretty much *everything* they said was wrong (even on immigration etc, let alone the economic ‘dividend’ *bitter laugh*).
Yet they are either not around to recant or they’re too (insert adjective of choice to suit) to recant, like our friend BBlimp here.
Many Brexit-supporting mainstream commentators in the investing sphere still laugh off ‘remoaning’ and have never conceded the *economic* consequences (as always my major complaint, I accept the (very minor in terms of the win) political/sovereignty decision as a matter of conscience) before lambasting Rachel Reeves as if her (admittedly inauspicious) reign is the chief cause of all our problems.
Given this backdrop, I remain entirely happy to occasionally reference Brexit when I see the relevance. Cheers!
On the whole Brexity business and all those moaning at what @TI says or doesn’t – uhmm, it’s his website. He pays for it.
If you’re a paid up subscriber then, granted, maybe you’ve got a sort of a ‘stake’ of sorts, but if you read for free, then you really can’t complain. There’s plenty of pro Brexit / pro Reform sites out there. Last time I checked people could express whatever peaceful political views they wanted to on their own site.
It probably helps that I’m no fan of populist patter, and I do (somewhat) respect why people voted Leave etc. It’s just I don’t see why the economic costs shouldn’t be pointed out here given the above principle (i.e., if you own a website, then you get to say what you like), and given also that those costs arguably really don’t get the exposure that they should in what the Brexit crowd likes to call the MSM.
I’m not saying that Brexit alone is the cause of all our ills (I don’t think that it is), but it sure doesn’t help that it’s shrunken the economy by 4% to 8%. These are big numbers.
For right or wrong on all the other issues, it was an expensive mistake economically for the UK to make in 2016. I wish personally that it hadn’t, although I do concede that regret is not itself a particularlly great framework for decision making (at least as far as investing goes).
Does anyone else just read it for this for the comments?
I think once men of a certain age get a bit of money behind them they lose their edge and just spout off all sorts of various quantity and quality.
Even the links are a bit tenuous to the original mission statement.
Just turns into an echochamber of wealthy purple chino and sweater wearing, espresso drinking middle class beardy weirdies complaining. I think I will go ask grok to draw me a pic of the average reader to prove im not imagining it
>> @C H — Please feel free to read another website. Cheers! <<
Ha, ha. So, for once push backing against the increasing politicisation here, I've gone from being asked to interview for the FIRE-side chats series to now being "these people" and asked to do one? Nice!
Message received.
@TI
“as evidenced by older comments I can point to if you like”
Please feel free if you think it would be helpful
With respect, reiterating (again) how bad Brexit has been for the economy, and how right you were all along, isn’t the strongest justification for the constant reiteration. What do you hope to achieve by it? I highly doubt that we’ll ever be in a place where it’s Monevator wot won it.
@reactive — But I didn’t say that though did I? I said I am reiterating it because it to some large but far from exhaustive — and definitely under-commented — extent the state we’re in.
Yes, it rankles that people won’t admit they were wrong and I’m sure you’re right most won’t. That does creep in to my intransience on (not my motivation for mentioning) Brexit. But the main issue is economic. I almost never mention the sovereignty/political side, for example. I disagree with that too but it barely gets a mention, except for what it (populism) says/implies about where we are and where we’re going.
@CH — There isn’t increasing politicisation here, US politics aside but unfortunately Trump put that on the agenda. I’ve been occasionally going into it from the start and more so for a decade (post-Brexit). So your point isn’t really valid as I see it. Cheers.
Carried over from the broker comparison thread:
I think it was Ermine who said that dealing with ISAs on the first death of a couple is much easier if the survivor also has an ISA with the same provider. So we are considering moving our ISAs from two different providers to iG, chosen partly because its ISAs are flexible. If we’re quick we’ll also get a cashback each.
Would anyone like to opine on iG, please?
I thought the green party speech was disappointing. I’d hoped they might promise to keep the temperature a steady 21 degrees throughout the year along with all the other unattainable fantasies.
It is depressing (so laugh about it in a have I got news for you fashion) that there isn’t a single party across the political spectrum that seems to have any cogent policies to, if not increase living standards into the 2030’s at least perhaps arrest further decline.
On the balance of probabilities (i.e. something typically goes wrong geo-politically every five years or so and the UK is running out of all sorts of capital) it’s potentially going to get quite bumpy here over the next ten to fifteen years. This is the latest in a series of events since 2008, which is slowly nudging us towards the edge I feel.
The latest geo-political crisis has illustrated how much the UK has fallen down the pecking order in the past thirty years. We have one hunter killer submarine in service, which is in the middle east. Nothing to protect the UK now at all from that perspective at the moment. Probably a good thing we can’t launch the aircraft carrier as I don’t trust our political class anyway – here’s to Tony and another shockingly out of tune intervention the other week.
Your domestic politics intersects with personal finance to affect your risk profile. If you are Norwegian you can feel reasonably good about life. Ultimately American too if you are properly middle class. British you are increasingly at the whim of the winds of change and should plan accordingly if you can. At least we’re not in Lebanon.
Which means for me, having no mortgage – so who cares about 5% interest rates apart from a domestic recession, have a stack of gold sovs to make sure you can keep the family lights on, some rentals to keep a bit of income coming in whatever the weather, $TIPS and global equities to diversify. Opt out of failing public services wherever you can. No man’s an island but I’ll give it a go.
I was v fortunate to listen into a debate with the ex-head of MI6 and US national intelligence earlier this week – seemingly they’ve not got a clue where this is going either. Equities are going to be a bit higher, around about the same or a heck of a lot lower in two weeks’ time and I haven’t got a clue where this is going myself.
p.s Vanguard 250 yields 4% now. not bad.
I feel it’s at least partially relevant to say this, because this is a site about money, and to a degree wealth accumulation/ FIRE etc, which is in the end, a position of privilege once reached.
Different people have different opinions (very few like mine) on whether getting to that point, especially without inheritance etc means you ‘deserved’ it through hard work, a genuine meritocratic system etc.
Now – I will qualify this further by saying Polanski is likely just as much a ‘I’ll say what people want to hear’ as any of the others…
But when he said on a show I was listen to that if he was poor, he’d likely consider shoplifting if that was the only way he could feed his family, I liked it.
I liked it because whether or not it’s performative, it was provocative. And provocative it was to the ‘outraged’ commentators they had on after. Good on him for winding them up, although it was probably all orchestrated, panem et circum.
Where am I going with this…well, in the spirit of Polanski…
…The whole FIRE thing is a crock of sh*t. If you reach FI, and then decide to RE and cream passive income, good for you, but it’s yet another example of the corrosive nature of our economic system. But we shouldn’t pretend we were all geniuses and we all had some degree of privilege to get there. Mine was the luck of my brain.
I am the biggest hypocrite going in how I act, to a degree. I skim sovereign debt incompetence. I’m literally extracting money like some kind of fish who eats the bits that float after a shark has eviscerated something.
I’m just sick of what I see. The system is designed to turn us all into parasites and speculators. Why can’t we just pay people fairly for labor income, have houses that are affordable, and tear down all these arbitrary borders? I hope AI does.
@ti – re housing – we are where we are indeed. And that point has destroyed the fabric of western society. Moral hazard, tbtf, we are all part of it.
I’d genuinely be happy to be taxed on my capital – that I can make more now sitting there, clicking a mouse twice in a week than by working is just … crass. So take it all. Just f**king leave my labour income alone.
@Seeking Fire — I’m really torn about the mortgage. I certainly don’t like running mine as much as when it was 2%, obviously, and I’m viscerally allergic to debt. But equally I do consider it something of a unique inflation hedge (long-term) and am loathe to give it up for that reason.
Perhaps my thinking is slightly wooly on this in that I don’t entirely load equities against it. I’ve got a ‘lower risk / lower volatility’ bucket with repaying its name on it that I’d still hope will do usefully better than the cost of the debt, but much of which would suffer in an inflationary environment. And my (anyone’s) property itself is an inflation hedge too some degree too (a real asset…)
I suppose maintaining optionality is the extra reason for me to keep it. If I had a normal-looking financial profile and I could just get one on a whim maybe I’d think differently!
@dearieme My ISA is with IG. Wide range of ETFs (I moved from HL a few years ago as I was annoyed by their narrower offering), completely fee-free now, I’m happy with it. I don’t love the UI but it’s fine, gets the job done.
Before borrowing to invest, whether against an (offset) mortgage or otherwise, consider this:
– Peter Spiller reckons the best time to borrow to invest is when rates are high but likely to fall (i.e. not now when they’re likely to rise)
– Excessive pessimism is usually a contrarian indicator. Whilst short term VIX is not especially elevated at 26, three and six months is at the 98% percentile. The fear gauge is now at 15, extreme pessimism. The number of stocks trading above their 50 DSMA has now dropped under 20%, down from 73% when this war was started. Given that the narratives follow the prices (not the other way round) and that it took just 57 days for SPY to retake it’s ATH from the COVID lows; all that might sound like some decent cause for hope. And indeed it might be.
– But this war is not like Gulf War #2, which started 23 years ago today. In March 2003 markets had spent three years correcting, and correcting damn hard for the Nasdaq, which was down a whopping 78% from it’s March 2000 ATH by September 2002. Contrastingly, we’re now still not all that far off both the ATH and 52 week high. That’s not good…
https://substack.com/@paretoinvestor/note/c-231442411?r=2kxl2k
We need cool heads to prevail. Blessed is the peacemaker and all that. Sadly, I can’t see that sentiment coming out of Theran, Tel Aviv and Washington.
Unfortunately, I think we may have to prepare to be made poorer (again 🙁 ).
At least we’re still alive. It could always be worse…
That said, I’m neither looking forward to my heating bills this winter nor to taking stock of my war battered portfolio (with ten out of eleven sectors in the red, and no prizes for guessing the one that’s not).
@DH look on the bright side. The Poodle has just said just kidding, we have had a great agreement with Eyrahn. Mind you, the alleged counterparty is saying nuffink, so this could just be DJT’s increasing apparent senility speaking.
I think I’ve expressed my Brexit/political views often enough here that I feel no need to weigh in on most of the conversation above. As I occasionally say, your site your rules.
On Polanski, however, I feel compelled to comment as the Greens seem unpopular with the Monevator readership. I’ve listened to him in quite a few interviews now. I honestly quite like his message (other than what I see as cynical, tactical pandering to sectarian grievances in Gorton and Denton and similar). As @Moggers says, the whole system is starting to stink a bit. Whether you think Greens, Reform or neither are onto the right ideas, I think it’s time for a new narrative to emerge and that needs some fresh debate that moves us beyond the 20th century orthodoxy.
Ok, so today’s shenanigans serve to demonstrate my net worth is perfectly correlated with DJTs truth social feed. What a fantastic position to be in!
@ermine — Iran is actively denying the talks. It’s coming to something when I hold that statement with the same weight truth-wise as the US President’s (though not yet the US government writ large). As I wrote above though, Trump’s war aims are basically met (note: Trump’s) and $4 gasoline in the US is perhaps too much for him to stomach. Having lied innumerable times I’m quite prepared to believe he’d lie here to create an offramp from this quagmire now.
@Northern Lad — I agree the falcon increasingly cannot hear the falconer, as W.B. Yeats put it. Whether it had to be like this is another matter, however. No Leave win to Brexit and a continuing softening of the Tories under Cameron, a better (coherent) Democrat candidate beating Trump in 2024, and Putin staying his own hand on Ukraine without the incentive of the West fracturing before his eyes (/online media pedalled lies) and perhaps we wouldn’t be in the same position as a Greece or Italy 15 years ago and looking for radical options. But then I’m just a centrist dad, really. (Albeit a kidless one 😉 )
@Rhino — Yep, as I said above the whole thing is just running on his whims. Even if you dislike the Iranian regime (of course I am no fan, to say the least) this is no way to run geopolitical affairs.
@DH — Well of course we’d all like to borrow when we know rates are going to fall. 😉 The problem, as ever, is the difficulty of knowing such things. (Rates were falling in the UK six weeks ago. As of this morning, post-Iran, markets were pricing in four rate *rises* as the next moves, though I’m sure that’s coming off a bit now for as long as this Trump TACO holds and seems vaguely credible.)
@TI (#44) – obviously I’m only expressing opinion, but I don’t think the centre could have held indefinitely, regardless of the factors you mentioned. Things like the constant upward march of sovereign debt, or the significant demographic change towards an increasingly tricky ratio of ‘workers’ to ‘non workers’, and indeed cultural issues around mass immigration etc. are all bubbling away in a way that even Blair/Cameron/Clegg and a benign US president would have had to face. And I don’t think the answers of the 90s/00s would have worked there. Not that I relish the situation we’re in, which I accept isn’t ideal even relative to those challenges. But I don’t honestly think the centrist dad line was sustainable for ever.
@Northern Lad — I concede you could well be right, especially given the same forces (and outcomes) can be seen in multiple places across the world right now. I think technology is missing from your mix by the way, especially social media and so forth, and all that has brought with it.
I’d still maintain though that there’s a few knife-edge decisions that could have seen things go differently for us and the US.
Look by way of example at Canada, where Mark Carney is now insanely popular, even getting grudging respect from traditionally hostile quarters. Of course events / persons outside of his control are partly behind that popularity (by making his local opponents look like US tools through a certain lens) but still, hard to imagine a more centrist 1990s figure… We’ll see if it lasts I suppose.
I’m as centrist as they come 😉 But only if you sum the positions together such they negate each other in a beautiful mass of contradiction
My inherent social philosophy is akin to way past the ultra left (complete world wide open movement, no nation states, no borders, people’s time valued similarly, housing as housing – not a speculative asset), my economic policy is in part aligned with the best of the Austrians (no moral hazard, proper genuine free markets with failure, actual hard money), and I act like Mark Hanna in the Wolf of wall street (whatever makes me money). Add in that I am a-ok with meritocracy but would rather a carer in a care home was on twice my salary (which is 6x theirs in reality) because they actually do something valuable ….
…. and it’s incoherently beautiful.
As I’ve alluded. The FI part of FIRE got reached, and it fried my brain.
Investing.com: “In a social media post, Trump said that the talks over the last two days about arranging a “complete and total resolution” to hostilities were “productive.” “Based on the tenor and tone of these” conversations, which will continue throughout the week, Trump said he had instructed the Pentagon to “postpone any and all military strikes” against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for five days. However, Iranian state media said Tehran has had no direct discussions with the U.S. Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson dismissed claims of any talks and said the country’s position on the Strait of Hormuz and the “prerequisites for ending the war remains exactly as before,” state media said.”
Is it really possible that the Orange one went into this actually thinking that he could wrap it up before the Strait ‘closed’ (Lloyds syndicates withdraw insurance or premiums rocket) and before the Gulf region’s hydrocarbon refining and transport infrastructure came into the line of fire?
That would be like an arsonist thinking that he could put out the flames before a blaze started.
The US was in Iraq for 8 years after ‘Mission Accomplished’, with escalating casualties and costs (and only left after the Obama/ Petraeus surge). Vietnam started as combat advisors only and ended with half a million pairs of US boots on the ground. Korea was a ‘policing action’ that went on for three years with almost as many dead and deployed Americans (54k v 58k US fatalities).
The one and only good things about Trump 1.0 was that he then seemed less inclined towards imperial misadventures (forever wars).
Admittedly not so good for Ukraine/NATO but, whilst I generally despise both the man (albeit his clownery and pugnacity is occasionally somewhat amusing) and the movement, I did think the first time around that the isolationist slant of MAGA wasn’t necessarily all bad. Certainly for me it was the least unpalatable piece of the Trump menu.
Now I think that like Putin and so, so many others down the decades and centuries that he’s going to find out that it’s easier to start a war of choice than to end it.
They blinked!
xxd09
Personally I like WR as it is, the variety of the links and the narrative that usually leads the direction of the comments.
I continue to learn so much from all of the above.
Differing views, debate, fresh ideas, all good in my humble opinion.
It’s a shame the people whining about Brexit being mentioned in WR never seem to counter it with anything meaningful. Leaving the world’s largest free market was obviously going to have financial consequences, so pretending it has nothing to do with the economy and finances is just daft, its not purely politics. :eyeroll:
Whehey. @TI you’re getting named checked and sourced on YT (Pensioncraft, 2 mins 54 secs in):
https://youtu.be/gdHKTxnlgpI?si=GqYEGLGDy1VztH-f
@The Investor-regarding comment #1, I think with all due respect that it should not have remained up. While I agree with your own response that Israel has been ‘influential’, to say as warren says that it was the brains behind this and Trump is just a puppet is disgraceful. Joe Kent notwithstanding. He’s not the oracle he’s being made out to be by some.
There has been a torrent of conspiracy theories surrounding Jews and Israel especially since October 7th (there is an overlap in some cases whatever some might say) and violent attacks have been committed.
It is worth it for me to have this comment deleted just to point out to #1 that there are credible reports that Gulf states have also been urging the US to end the Iranian regime for years, Saudi and MBS in particular. Funny that this doesn’t get mentioned. Oh well. Rant over. Thank you, and keep up the good work. I really enjoy this site.
@Gil #53: it’s all very complicated. Noone in the Middle East is completely in the wrong or in the right. They’re many different perspectives and narratives. There’s a lot of nuance. The KSA v UAE v Iran v Israel v Turkey conflicts and rivalries don’t get the proper attempt at explication which they deserve (especially given that the UAE/KSA/Turkey aspects extend to North Africa, the Sudan and Horn of Africa). Caspianreport, Reallifelore and War Fronts are doing a decent job on YT IMHO.
Personally I don’t take sides. I’d rather we just stayed out. You don’t have to pick a side in a fight. Neutrality is an option.
Whilst, having watched all 566 minutes of Claude Lanzmann’s “Shoah”, I do feel some ‘instinctive’ sympathies towards the predicament of the Israelis, there are equally powerfully held perspectives on the current situation from the Arab/Emirati/ Palestinian, Persian, Turkish, Kurdish, Azeri, Egyptian etc viewpoints. The Middle East is a tough and heterogeneous neighbourhood, with a difficult and colourful history. It has fallen to the twin curses of oil and (as the Chinese proverb puts it) having lived through ‘interesting times’.
As for Washington’s and Tehran’s differing aims and red lines, this is how one Substack based investment commentator summed up the odds for peace “[their] positions are not in the same galaxy. They are not in the same universe. They are in the kind of parallel dimensions that theoretical physicists argue about at conferences that nobody attends.”
If we suppress discussion of anything, especially when there is evidence, subjective perspectives and factors that go beyond what the media presents or the prevailing narrative of the location we are in, we go down a very, very dark road.
That is a general comment that can apply to anything. It isn’t specific.
@Moggers: I think your comment might be a direct response to mine or it might be a more general one but still following on from mine. As a rule I agree. and perhaps was too precipitous in suggesting that the comment should not stand. To explain, I made #53 because I had understood the Investor not unreasonably to be asking for a moratorium on the topic. Notwithstanding, I did feel that #1 deserved a response and if I had followed the Investor’s plea to the letter it would have omitted a counter perspective.
In principle I agree with you. In practice I’ve seen much of the Internet and pretty much every social media platform in turn made into a (both sides) invective factory that has polarised society, so as a blog owner and comment moderator I tread warily and look at the world wearily.
Typically those who make the most noise or have the strongest opinions are the least interested in discussion. That’s true of the ‘usual suspects’ I alluded to earlier in this thread; no doubt some would say it’s true of me when it comes to Brexit, though I do think I’ve shown repeatedly willing to discuss it in the comments, with facts back in the day before it was obvious that 95% of my ‘opponents’ weren’t interested in them.
If this thread had been allowed to develop into a discussion of Middle Eastern realpolitik then yes, there’s a chance as a one-off that we could have all come away a bit wiser. But sadly it’s much more likely that — unmoderated and especially if it came to the attention of a wider non-regular audience — it would devolve into people shouting abuse and hate at each other.
Like most of you I’ve seen this happen again and again, on social media, in forums, in mainstream media comments and beyond. It’s destroyed places I once held dear.
We have to have free speech and I support it. But we do not have to have free speech on every platform, and for every audience, all the time. We have never had that as a society. You could never just write anything you wanted and get it printed in The Times or read out on BBC Radio 4. The reasons were not only technological.
Personally and somewhat reluctantly I think the world was discussing things better when we had a lot more media and opinion gatekeeping going on (I write that as a ‘failed romantic’ when it comes to the promise of the Internet, having watched it develop/degenerate over 35 years as an adult).
And so Monevator is thus a dictatorship when it comes to the comments, as I’ve long warned. Most of the time I don’t delete anything. Sometimes people get onto a ‘auto delete’ list for a bit when I’ve had enough… we’re talking 3-5 such people over 20 years and literally thousands of commenters.
You haven’t got a ‘history’ here at doing so @Moggers so this isn’t directed at you, but as someone who has been moderating forums and comments for most of those 35 years on and off, I can tell you that I am rarely learning anything from the people who cry ‘censorship’ and rail at measured moderation; generally they are full of sound, fury, and saying nothing.
The Telegraph/Socialist Worker/4Chan/ X is there if they want it. I’m not interested in regularly hosting it here and hence moderation will continue for as long as this website has comments.
Also, this is why I say “welcome to read elsewhere”. I’m not interested in trying to tailor my website or my writing for a few noisy angry people. Not because I think their actual opinions on this or that issue of the day are worthless, but because I think them arguing with me about what I write and moderate and me trying to cater to them is both worthless and pointless. It’s shorthand for ‘been there, done that, 50 times, this isn’t going anywhere, and this isn’t working.’
The idea that I’d actually change the substance of my own 20-year old website and what I see fit to write about based on noisy disagreeable people on the Internet is absurd, unless you’re a troll. In which case shouting about how unreasonable I am for not doing so is why you get up in the morning.
It will seem a stretch unless you’ve ever done a stint moderating a forum. Anyone sceptical is welcome to try. You’ll learn. 😉
@Gil — Thanks for at least pausing before posting your reply. 🙂
It’s tricky, when I read your comment I did think that at the least I should have presented a line or two more of the counter perspective myself before asking for no more on the topic, but I was loathe to amplify the discussion in any direction. Hence, particularly as this thread has now effectively quietened, I broke my own ruling and didn’t delete you.
As I just waffled above I’m sure 98% of Monevator readers could meet up in a pub / a picnic in the park, commit to a few ground rules and good faith, and have an interesting and perspicacious discussion of this issue.
However that isn’t how the Internet works, the other 2% would have loomed large, and this issue in particular is one of those that is absolutely incendiary.
Hence I felt better to cut it off, with all the obvious downsides that come with such a decision. :-/
Hopefully the war will end soon, peace will break out forever, and we can stick with arguing about Brexit instead.
@TI — Fair play. Your house, your rules.
@Gil – Thank you, genuinely, for your follow-up comment. It takes a lot of character to step back, reflect, and concede nuance in the middle of a heated internet thread. I really appreciate the good faith.
I’ll just leave this final thought: In 2006, polite society aggressively silenced anyone screaming about subprime rot and painted them as toxic cranks disrupting the peace and the money making. The establishment suppressed the voices to keep the markets calm. It didn’t cure the rot; it just ensured that when the margin call finally came in 2008, the entire system burned to ash.
… And after that, as always – the system made it worse. We are continuing to live with (in that case, the youth) with the consequences of what happens when you disenfranchise swathes of society.
This is a finance site, and as I’ve alluded, my learnt play is volatility. I have sadly concluded that that, more than true genuine human flourishing growth, is what the cathedral seems to optimise for.
Welcome to TACO Tuesday. Well Trump’s TACO got fried at $120 per paper barrel ($140 physical delivery to Asian markets and $200 equivalent for diesel and aviation fuel):
https://substack.com/@shanakaanslemperera/note/c-240009333?r=2kxl2k
Better (Israel aside) for all than the alternative, including the US*
*As this mythologically based witticism reminds us:
https://substack.com/@jonathancioran/note/c-239588166?r=2kxl2k