Sure, but nobody says (I mean, the NATO lovers) that dragging Ukraine into the holy defensive alliance will cross an important russian red line, that is, intensification of war by all means. So, that will never be a path to peace but rather to more war. Everyone knows that but no one says it.
The problem Russia faces is that, short of launching an all-out nuclear attack, there is little they can do that affects the decisionmakers in Washington.
In _Naked Captialism_ yesterday (or a few days ago), Yves Smith and MIchael Hudson discussed what they called the zugzwang facing the US. "Zugzwang" means a move forced by the rules but which is disadvantageous (sometimes catastrophic) for the mover; this situation often occurs in games like chess and checkers. In this case, according to the authors, the flooding of the US economy with funny money to inflate rich people's asset prices has led to a situation in which the Fed is damned if it does and damned if it don't. As some of you may have noticed, when the interest rates were raised, several banks failed. The intention seems to have been to punish labor and some owners of capital from being too productive and thus supporting inflation, but this move failed; the economy refused to go into recession, which means the Fed will have to try harder to get worse results. I thought this might eventually affect the propensity of the government to throw money at its Ukrainian war project which in turn will affect the future of that project; see above where I speculate about the scorched-earth tactic of using cluster bombs.
The bond markets are purely synthetic, the price is not driven by investors or even markets but governments and central banks. Judging the health of the dollar based on bond rates is like judging the ethics of a prostitute in church on Sunday morning.
Bond markets don’t listen. Any more than oil giants. Nearly every respectable responsible economist is documenting the crumbling dollar. But in disaster capitalism, crumbling means a chance to make big bucks. Bond markets are the vultures.
If the largest, most sophisticated and liquid securities market in the world doesn't listen, you should be able to make an easy killing as an investor.
"The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent."
As documented in The Big Short, the guy who bet heavily on the mortgage crash didn't make as much as you would think, largely because the market was rigged.
The Federal Reserve dominates the bond market. The stock market is largely artificial due to the formerly illegal practice of stock buybacks combined with Congress shoveling money to the stocks they themselves own. Covid comes in, the economy tanks, and stocks soar. What's wrong with this picture?
Yes. For awhile. That seems to be the driving idea behind all of the US’s policy decisions now. No, we can’t win Ukraine but we can bilk trillions out of the economy. No we can’t stop global warming so we might as well dig and extract and chase $$$$ until we die. It is as you say, a killing. They’ll prop up investments until it’s time to take the winnings and run, at which time the soaring inflation will eat up all the profits they have so assiduously chased these last years of empire. They may go for gold, but since China is there ahead of us buying it up like crazy, there won’t be much place left to hide their ill-gotten gains and boo hoo, they’ll just have to start another war to steal it from someone somewhere.
Yes, nukes will not prove apocalyptic. Those who use them may well damage themselves more severely than their targets, such as a householder who tries to kill flies with a sledgehammer. He will have broken walls and still have flies.
US imperial war planners may have to consider the possibility that they have lost the war and what to do about it. A scorched-earth retreat may be their solution. Consider also the Nordstream bombing.
Based on comments from Putin if the conflict turns nuclear their target will not be Europe or Kiev, it will be east coast US. Russia knows who the enemy is and will target appropriately.
It is far from evident that the Empire is out of options, and its previous reckless escalations not only make it more reckless, but raise the stakes associated with defeat.
This abuse of The Sunk Cost Fallacy is entirely intentional.
I think if this were true, there would not be such a great need to hide the facts and repress the press. As it is, telling the truth (in the MSM) is career ending. Look at Seymore. If we were winning, we’d be bragging about blowing up the pipes!
I dunno, look how many years it took for the US to admit that it was behing the 1973 Chilean coup, which was "winning" in the sense that Allende was removed, or that The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident was, in fact, a false flag, even though it got the CIA and Pentagon what they wanted. Then, there's the USS Liberty, which is glossed over.
Sure, but nobody says (I mean, the NATO lovers) that dragging Ukraine into the holy defensive alliance will cross an important russian red line, that is, intensification of war by all means. So, that will never be a path to peace but rather to more war. Everyone knows that but no one says it.
The problem Russia faces is that, short of launching an all-out nuclear attack, there is little they can do that affects the decisionmakers in Washington.
Meanwhile, the dollar crumbles into worthless dust...
It does? Someone ought to tell the bond markets....
In _Naked Captialism_ yesterday (or a few days ago), Yves Smith and MIchael Hudson discussed what they called the zugzwang facing the US. "Zugzwang" means a move forced by the rules but which is disadvantageous (sometimes catastrophic) for the mover; this situation often occurs in games like chess and checkers. In this case, according to the authors, the flooding of the US economy with funny money to inflate rich people's asset prices has led to a situation in which the Fed is damned if it does and damned if it don't. As some of you may have noticed, when the interest rates were raised, several banks failed. The intention seems to have been to punish labor and some owners of capital from being too productive and thus supporting inflation, but this move failed; the economy refused to go into recession, which means the Fed will have to try harder to get worse results. I thought this might eventually affect the propensity of the government to throw money at its Ukrainian war project which in turn will affect the future of that project; see above where I speculate about the scorched-earth tactic of using cluster bombs.
Don't kid yourself. The Empire in general and the war on Ukraine in particular are sacred cows, and at the same time, labor must be brought to heel.
if the Fed has to offer an unlimited backstop to the banks, wipe out savers, print unlimited free money, whatever, they will do it in a heartbeat.
If we learned nothing else from the GFC, it is how far The Powers That Be will go to get what they want.
They can’t print money if the dollar is no longer the world currency. And BRICS is seeing to that.
The bond markets are purely synthetic, the price is not driven by investors or even markets but governments and central banks. Judging the health of the dollar based on bond rates is like judging the ethics of a prostitute in church on Sunday morning.
If you really think that, then there's easy money to be made.
Bond markets don’t listen. Any more than oil giants. Nearly every respectable responsible economist is documenting the crumbling dollar. But in disaster capitalism, crumbling means a chance to make big bucks. Bond markets are the vultures.
If the largest, most sophisticated and liquid securities market in the world doesn't listen, you should be able to make an easy killing as an investor.
"The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent."
As documented in The Big Short, the guy who bet heavily on the mortgage crash didn't make as much as you would think, largely because the market was rigged.
The Federal Reserve dominates the bond market. The stock market is largely artificial due to the formerly illegal practice of stock buybacks combined with Congress shoveling money to the stocks they themselves own. Covid comes in, the economy tanks, and stocks soar. What's wrong with this picture?
Yes. For awhile. That seems to be the driving idea behind all of the US’s policy decisions now. No, we can’t win Ukraine but we can bilk trillions out of the economy. No we can’t stop global warming so we might as well dig and extract and chase $$$$ until we die. It is as you say, a killing. They’ll prop up investments until it’s time to take the winnings and run, at which time the soaring inflation will eat up all the profits they have so assiduously chased these last years of empire. They may go for gold, but since China is there ahead of us buying it up like crazy, there won’t be much place left to hide their ill-gotten gains and boo hoo, they’ll just have to start another war to steal it from someone somewhere.
The value of the dollar is already deteriorating as evidenced by marked domestic price increases and the drop in bond values.
Massive foreign capital outflows have triggered the collapse of large banks
https://science1arts2and3politics.substack.com/p/world-strategy-today
Enough to say that you'll need to see a lot more than that to mean anything.
At least while the current illegal war mongering clowns are in office.
The people who make the decisions are not up for election.
Elections are all now questionable.
When the Cluster Bombs fail to defeat Russia, then what? Nukes!
And they will fail
Yes, nukes will not prove apocalyptic. Those who use them may well damage themselves more severely than their targets, such as a householder who tries to kill flies with a sledgehammer. He will have broken walls and still have flies.
US imperial war planners may have to consider the possibility that they have lost the war and what to do about it. A scorched-earth retreat may be their solution. Consider also the Nordstream bombing.
Based on comments from Putin if the conflict turns nuclear their target will not be Europe or Kiev, it will be east coast US. Russia knows who the enemy is and will target appropriately.
It is far from evident that the Empire is out of options, and its previous reckless escalations not only make it more reckless, but raise the stakes associated with defeat.
This abuse of The Sunk Cost Fallacy is entirely intentional.
I think if this were true, there would not be such a great need to hide the facts and repress the press. As it is, telling the truth (in the MSM) is career ending. Look at Seymore. If we were winning, we’d be bragging about blowing up the pipes!
I dunno, look how many years it took for the US to admit that it was behing the 1973 Chilean coup, which was "winning" in the sense that Allende was removed, or that The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident was, in fact, a false flag, even though it got the CIA and Pentagon what they wanted. Then, there's the USS Liberty, which is glossed over.
I can think of plenty more.