McGlinchey: America Throws Its Service Members Into An Unjust War For Israel

Via Brian McGlinchey at Stark Realities

President Trump’s decision to join Israel in launching a regime-change war on Iran has so far cost the lives of at least 13 American service members. More than 200 have been wounded, dozens seriously enough to require evacuations to military hospitals in Europe and the United States. Among them are individuals who’ve suffered traumatic brain injuries, burns and shrapnel wounds. One was facing potential amputation of an arm or leg.

As much as these service members and their families are victims of Iran’s justified retaliation for a surprise attack perpetrated amid ongoing negotiations, they’re victims of a betrayal perpetrated by their president and the joint chiefs of staff, who cast them into an unconstitutional war of aggression, packaged in lies and initiated to advance the agenda of a foreign government, while undermining the security of their own country.

Of course, US casualties comprise a small subset of the total bloodshed. In executing this unjust war, Americans have collectively inflicted far more death and dismemberment than they’ve endured, teaming up with their Israeli counterparts to kill more than 3,000 Iranians, including some 150 schoolgirls — mostly between age 7 and 12 — whose school was destroyed by Tomahawk cruise missiles at the war’s very start.

Though it should have already been apparent, Operation Epic Fury should make clear that — service members’ good intentions aside — combat waged under the US flag rarely has anything to do with American security. Moreover — and I say this as former Army Reserve enlistee and Regular Army officer — anyone thinking of starting or extending a military career should understand that their government may send them to be killed, maimed or psychologically damaged, and to slaughter foreign innocents, so long as it helps those in power remain in the good graces of the extremists who rule Israel, and their powerful collaborators inside the United States.

The casket of a soldier killed in the US-Israeli war on Iran is carried past President Trump (Mark Schiefelbein/AP via Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

Under international law, a war of aggression is considered a supreme war crime unto itself, and Operation Epic Fury is precisely that. Like so many of America’s wars before it, this one was launched on false premises. Contrary to the US-Israeli narrative…

1. Iran was not developing a nuclear weapon. In 2007, the US intelligence community assessed that Iran halted any effort to develop a nuclear weapon in 2003. Since then, the intelligence community has periodically re-validated that conclusion, most recently in March 2025. Belying Trump’s claim that the United States had only two weeks in which to stop Iran from having a nuclear weapon, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard this week testified that Iran had made “no efforts” to rebuild its enrichment capacity after it was devastated by last summer’s US bombing.

Note that, in 2005, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued a fatwa — a formal interpretation of Islamic law — asserting that “the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons are forbidden under Islam and that the Islamic Republic of Iran shall never acquire these weapons.” In the opening act of their latest warfare on Iran, the United States and Israel collaborated to kill him.

2. Iran did not stray from the 2015 nuclear deal until Trump did. When Trump withdrew the United States from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Iran was in full compliance. Among other things, the JCPOA required Iran to eliminate its medium-enriched uranium, slash its cache of low-enriched uranium by 98%, limit future enrichment to 3.67%, agree to even more external monitoring than it was already submitting to, and render its heavy-water reactor worthless by filling it with concrete. After Trump withdrew the United States from the JCPOA in 2018 and reinstated sanctions, Iran waited a year, but then began straying from its own commitments, using elevated enrichment as a lever to push for a new agreement and relief from suffocating sanctions. Iran says the JCPOA permitted it to suspend its commitments after Trump’s withdrawal, citing language governing “material breaches” and “significant non-performance.”

Iran is a member of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and has long cooperated with international inspections and monitoring required by the NPT. On the other hand, Israel has refused to join the NPT and has some 200 nuclear warheads, a situation that makes every dollar of American aid to Israel illegal under US law.

In 2002, Netanyahu assured Congress that "Saddam is hell-bent on achieving atomic bombs" and "guarantee[d]" that a US invasion of Iraq would have "enormous positive reverberations on the region"  

3. Iran wasn’t the problematic negotiation partner. When historians write about the run-up to this latest of American regime-change disasters, they’ll surely emphasize that fact Trump assigned Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to represent the United States in negotiations. While people rightly scoff at their lack of credentials, it’s far more important to appreciate their intimate ties to the Israeli government and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — who has been trying to maneuver the United States into a war with Iran for decades.

As Branko Marcetic writes in an excellent account of the negotiations at Responsible Statecraft,

Witkoff is known as a staunch supporter of Israel. He counts pro-Israel megadonor Miriam Adelson as a “dear friend” and carries a custom pager gifted to him by Netanyahu and senior Mossad officials, in a reference to an operation in which Israel remotely detonated thousands of pagers that allegedly belonged to Hezbollah officials…

Kushner, meanwhile, has been steeped in the pro-Israel community his entire life. He counted Netanyahu as a family friend growing up, with the future Israeli prime minister occasionally borrowing the teenager’s bedroom during visits. Kushner reportedly consulted with Netanyahu officials to pen Trump’s 2016 speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and he is both friends with hardline pro-Israel figures and has donated money to illegal West Bank settlement-building.

In addition to their glaring conflicts of interest, Witkoff and Kushner refused to bring nuclear experts to their meetings with the Iranians, which reportedly left the Iranians perplexed about how any progress could be made in negotiating such a highly technical subject.

Iran put forward a fresh offer less than 48 hours before being attacked. In the last meeting before bombs dropped, Iran offered concessions that included dilution of its 60%-enriched uranium, a multi-year pause on new enrichment, subsequent enrichment capped at 20%, and expanded IAEA oversight. Sources say UK national security advisor Jonathan Powell, who attended that meeting, was surprised by the strength of the Iranian offer, and saw it as reason to be optimistic about reaching a deal.

Steve Witkoff (left) and Jared Cushner at an October 2025 meeting in Israel with Netanyahu (Maayan Toaf/GOP via Times of Israel)

After learning that Witkoff was grossly mischaracterizing Iran’s stance — if not outright lying about it — Oman’s foreign minister, who’d been mediating the discussions, made an urgent trip to Washington to tell the administration and anyone who’d listen that Iran had made substantial concessions, some of which surpassed the provisions of the JCPOA. His mission failed. In the aftermath, a Gulf diplomat bluntly told the Guardian, “We regarded Witkoff and Kushner as Israeli assets that dragged a president into a war he wants to get out of.”

4. Iran’s ballistic missile program wasn’t built for offense. In an example of moving goalposts that would be laughable if the context weren’t so tragic, the Trump administration reopened nuclear negotiations with a new demand — that Iran surrender its conventional ballistic missiles. The White House claimed Iran was building a “conventional shield” that would enable future “nuclear blackmail,” but anyone who’s been paying attention could see the demand sprang from last summer’s 12-Day War, when Iran effectively used cutting-edge ballistic missiles to retaliate against Israeli aggression.

That use is consistent with US intelligence’s characterization of Iran’s military posture as primarily defensive. As the US Defense Intelligence Agency wrote in a 2019 report, “Iran’s conventional military strategy is primarily based on deterrence and the ability to retaliate against an attacker…If deterrence fails, Iran would seek to demonstrate strength and resolve, [and] impose a high cost on its adversary…this strategy is unlikely to change considerably in the near term.”

The demand for Iran’s conventional disarmament and the demand for the scientifically-advanced country to end any nuclear enrichment had something in common: both were made knowing they’d be refused. Here’s how Joe Kent — the former National Counterterrorism Center Director who resigned this week in protest of the war — characterized the enrichment demand in his in-depth, post-resignation interview with Scott Horton:

“I really frankly don’t think the Israelis cared that much about…nuclear enrichment…What I think the Israelis care about is regime change. They wanted to push this war as fast as they could, so they came up with this talking point that zero enrichment was the starting point, knowing that was a non-starter for the Iranians.”

5. Iran hasn’t been waging war on the United States for 47 years. To the contrary, the hostilities have overwhelmingly originated in Washington, and any thorough survey of the history should go back at least 73 years, to 1953. That’s when the United States and United Kingdom orchestrated the ouster of Iran’s democratically-elected prime minister, and the installation of the Shah. The ledger should also include US support of Iraq’s eight-year war on Iran in the 1980s, which included giving artillery targeting intel to Iraq, with the knowledge those targets would be hit with chemical weapons. Then there’s decades of economic blockades, which, mirroring the morality of Al Qaeda, intentionally inflict suffering on civilians with a goal of forcing political change. Last summer brought America’s unprovoked bombing of Iran’s imaginary nuclear weapons program. The ceasefire that ended the so-called 12-Day War turned out to be a mere strategic pause before all-out warfare was initiated by Israel and the United States on Feb 28.

In 2007, a US Humvee burns after the detonation of a roadside IED 60 miles north of Baghdad (AP via Al Jazeera)

A central line in the “47-year war” narrative blames Iran for killing “thousands” of Americans in Iraq, by supposedly directing Shia militias to target Americans, and equipping them with improvised explosive devices (IED). In a concise treatment at his Substack, former Marine officer Matthew Hoh, who led counter-IED efforts in Iraq, dismantled that well-entrenched narrative. His key points:

• The great majority of American service members killed in Iraq died at the hands of Sunni resistance groups. Iran provided some support to Shia militias, but Hoh calls out the hypocrisy of US officials saying Iran alone has blood on its hands, pinning no such blame on US-aligned Gulf monarchies that backed Sunni militias in Iraq.

• Americans were an occupying force in a country that US forces had devastated and which was beset by civil war, which means both Shia and Sunni militias had their own reasons for using violence against US troops. Hoh notes that the now-decades-old narrative that Iraqis were killing American soldiers and Marines on orders from Iran “not only helped justify a longed-for war with Iran but also bolstered the fiction of the American occupation as a benevolent and liberating one.”

• The charge that Iran killed Americans with IEDs centers on the claim that Iran provided Shia militias with a special type of IED called an explosively formed penetrator (EFP). “Anyone with a simple understanding of explosive principles and a half-decent machine shop can make an EFP,” says Hoh. Given the abundance of explosives and other materials around war-torn Iraq, Hoh says “Shia forces were able to mass-produce EFPs in Iraq. Smuggling in EFPs from Iran was unnecessary.”

6. Iran isn’t the “world’s leading sponsor of terrorism.” If that title were awarded on the merits, top contenders would include Saudi Arabia, the United States and Israel. The US government selectively applies the “state sponsor” label to vilify countries and — more importantly — as the basis for imposing economic sanctions. As we’ve seen in the case of Cuba and others, American secretaries of state have full discretion to slap the “state sponsor of terror” label on and pull it off, with no due process or burden of proof required.

“The US’s list of terrorist organizations is at this point really laughable, because we take groups off willy-nilly based on whether we like them politically or not — not whether they’ve actually engaged in or continue to engage in terrorism,” said Trita Parsi, Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft co-founder, in a recent appearance on Judging Freedom. “The Sudanese got off the State Department’s terrorist list by simply agreeing to normalize relations with Israel — nothing else.”

It’s true that Iran has sponsored various groups in the Middle East that seek to thwart US and Israeli hegemony in the region. At times, some of those groups — like Hamas — have used violence against civilians to achieve political ends, which is the honest definition of terrorism. However, US and Israeli condemnation of Iran’s support for such groups is intensely hypocritical, considering the United States and Israel have themselves backed forces that have carried out terrorism. Indeed, if sponsorship of Hamas is damning for Iran, it’s also damning for Israel and Netanyahu, who long fostered the rise of Hamas even after it turned to terror.

Then there’s the regime-change campaign in Syria, which saw the United States and its Gulf allies empowering head-chopping terrorists, and saw Israel patching up al Qaeda members and sending them back into Syria to raise hell. Keep in mind, Iranian-backed Hezbollah and Shia militias were instrumental in beating back ISIS, the monstrous terror entity that sprang from the Syria regime-change campaign carried out for Israel.

The war on Iran isn’t about nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles or state-sponsored terrorism. It’s the continuation of a long-running Israeli program to achieve total dominance over the Middle East by repeatedly shattering surrounding states and territories. Here’s how the University of Chicago’s John Mearsheimer has described it:

“The Israelis want to make sure that their neighbors are weak and that means breaking them apart, if you can, and keeping them broken…The Israelis want Syria to be a fractured state. They want Lebanon to be a fractured state. What do they want in Iran? …What the Israelis want to do is to break Iran apart. They want to make it look like Syria.”

For many in Israel, this strategy isn’t merely about safeguarding the current version of Israel. Rather, it’s a means of achieving an expansionist dream of “Greater Israel.” While interpretations vary, this vision typically goes far beyond annexing the West Bank and Gaza, also taking Egyptian territory east of the Nile, along with all or portions of what is now Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

IDF soldiers in Gaza were seen wearing patches depicting Greater Israel

The US government has aided and abetted this ruthless strategy in a variety of ways, from the arming of Israel, to running covert operations to foment unrest and equip militant groups, to direct use of American military force. The human cost has been incalculable. In the regime-change wars against Iraq and Syria alone, more than a half million people have been killed, and several times more are believed to have died from secondary causes like disease.

Sadly, it seems it’s now Iran’s turn to be shattered in the pursuit of Israeli supremacy. Iran has been Netanyahu’s white whale: After the launch of Operation Epic Fury, Netanyahu gushed that Trump’s collaboration meant Israel was finally doing what Netanyahu had “yearned to do for 40 years.”

Underscoring the cold-blooded and maliciously dishonest nature of the regime-destruction campaign, consider that Israel and the United States have framed their surprise attack on Iran as a virtuous endeavor meant to liberate the Iranian people from theocratic rule. On the day Israel and the United States launched this new war on Iran, Netanyahu called on Iranians to rise up: “Do not sit idly by, very soon the moment will come when you must take to the streets to finish the job and overthrow the totalitarian regime.”

However, at the same time Netayahu was calling for an Iranian uprising, senior Israeli officials were privately telling US diplomats that “the people will get slaughtered” if they act on those exhortations. Of course, any such slaughter would serve the Israeli agenda, since it could be used to propagandize for more vigorous regime-change action, up to and including what is likely Netanyahu’s greatest wish: a US ground invasion.

It’s hard to imagine, but there could be something even worse than committing one’s self to the defense of America, only to be killed or maimed in a campaign to advance the agenda of a foreign government that is far less an ally than a parasite— and that’s killing, wounding and immiserating innocent people for that same government.

Through March 19, more than 3,000 Iranians have been killed by American and Israeli attacks, according to HRANA, an Iran-focused human rights group. Of that total, 1,394 were civilians, including those several dozen schoolgirls killed on day one; 639 deaths have yet to be classified as military or civilian.

Some 150 elementary-age schoolgirls were killed by a US cruise missile strike in the opening salvos of the US-Israeli surprise attack on Iran (Ali Najafi/ AFP and Getty via NBC News)

There have been more than 1,100 Iranian military fatalities. Among those dead Iranian service members are 87 sailors whose lightly-armed ship was sunk by an American torpedo off the coast of Sri Lanka. The ship was not only far away from the war zone, but it was reportedly lightly-armed as it was returning from a largely-ceremonial, multi-national exercise hosted by India in the interest of building international maritime cooperation.

Given they died on the receiving end of an unjust war of aggression, these and other dead members of the Iranian military were likewise innocent victims of America’s war for Israel. Note too that, unlike every American who’s dishing out death from the sky, land or sea, most Iranians in uniform are conscripts, not volunteers.

That said, there’s reason to empathize with volunteer American service members who’ve now been ordered to wage this war. Ahead of their enlistment or commissioning, most are ill-equipped to peel back the patriotic red-white-and-blue veneer and discern the true nature of US military service. In a sense, they’re victims of a grand fraud. Millions of their fellow citizens are oblivious collaborators in that fraud, to the extent they help perpetuate the false assumption that military service is inherently virtuous and invariably serves the American people.

With Marines now steaming toward the Persian Gulf, the 82nd Airborne Division gearing up and Netanyahu cryptically referring to the necessity for a “ground component”, the number of dead, wounded, dismembered and PTSD-inflicted Americans could soar higher. Given the unjust nature of this war, many are certain to face a lifetime dealing with a lesser-known type of wound — moral injury, which is psychological and emotional distress springing from having witnessed, participated in, or failed to prevent acts that go against one’s moral convictions.

Importantly, the suffering that springs from this war of aggression isn’t confined to the United States, Israel, Iran and Gulf states hosting US bases. People around the world are already coping with growing scarcity and increasing cost of oil and gas. Asian countries are particularly vulnerable, and they’re already taking measures like rationing fuel, cutting workweeks, urging more people to work from home and closing hotels hit by diminished air travel — all this after less than three weeks of the Strait of Hormuz being closed to most traffic.

There’s much more to this Pandora’s box of harms. For example, the world’s supply of medicine is in growing jeopardy. “Nearly half of U.S. generic prescriptions originate in India, which relies on the Strait of Hormuz for the arrival of key inputs in drug manufacturing,” explains CNBC. The Gulf also supplies about half the world’s urea — a fertilizer component — and the price US corn farmers are paying for fertilizer has jumped upwards of 70%. That presages higher food costs all over the world, with malnourishment and starvation a distinct risk in some parts of the globe.

Clearly, if the war continues and the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, it’s certain to result in a global health catastrophe, a devastating economic depression, surging crime and social unrest. America’s standing will be profoundly and irreparably damaged in a world united in outrage over a US president’s lawless decision to launch this demented war of choice in service to Israel. American citizens are likely to suffer terrorist acts inspired by this latest savagery inflicted on a Muslim country.

And it will have all started with weapons fired by American service members…

…service members who swore to defend the Constitution, but were given unconstitutional orders to wage war without congressional authorization

…service members who joined the military to defend America, but became attack dogs for a foreign country that saps America’s wealth, depletes America’s arsenal, undermines America’s security and standing, exerts alarming influence on America’s institutions, and inspires terrorism against Americans back home

…service members who should now recognize a stark reality — that they are cogs in a machine that repeatedly inflicts death, dismemberment, disease and destitution on countless innocents in service to the expansionist State of Israel.

Stark Realities: Invigoratingly unorthodox perspectives for intellectually honest readers. Join thousands of free subscribers at starkrealities.net

* * *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2026 - 23:20

"Going To Cripple Our Economy": Small Businesses Sound Alarm Over Record Diesel Price Spike

The latest AAA fuel data from across America shows that the national average diesel price at the pump has jumped nearly 40% this month, surpassing the 2022 fuel spike that followed Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Surging diesel prices are already generating a shock across trucking, rail, shipping, farm equipment, construction machinery, generators, and much of industrial logistics, given that the fuel powers the core of the economy.

Seasonality: AAA Daily National Avg. Diesel 2022 vs. 2026

Companies now face three difficult choices if they did not lock in fuel prices before the spike: absorb the impact and accept margin compression, add surcharges, or raise prices.

Last week, Rapidan Energy's Director of Refined Products, Linda Giesecke, told us that, "unlike 2022, the current tightness reflects physical supply disruptions rather than policy risk and trade reshuffling."

Giesecke warned that if the fuel spike proves prolonged, global economic growth could suffer because of diesel's close link to industrial production and freight activity.

BloombergNEF forecast that $5-per-gallon diesel could inflict a weekly $6 billion or more hit on the US economy because these surging fuel costs hurt truckers, construction firms, and farmers the hardest. With prices at $5.2 as of Friday, that weekly hit is set to rise next week.

Readers are already aware of the dire consequences of spiking diesel prices, as we've laid out in recent weeks (see here & here).

Adding more color to the fuel that underpins nearly every stage of production and transport is a Bloomberg report warning that small businesses are sounding the alarm over surging fuel costs.

Here's one example of a small business being financially crushed by surging fuel costs:

Roger Conner sells firewood for a living, but he might know just as much about another energy source: diesel. The fuel powers every step of the supply chain for his company, RC Conner Enterprises: the megatrucks that carry the logs from suppliers to his facility in Exeter, New Hampshire; the machines that offload and process those logs into kiln-dried residential and restaurant-grade firewood; and the trucks that deliver the finished bundles and cords to customers across New England. In a normal year, Conner spends roughly $6,800 a month on diesel. Now it's about $11,000. To absorb some of the cost, he's added a 5% fuel surcharge; when customers saw that, several walked away.

If diesel keeps rising, "we're going to have to keep going up on our pricing, but we probably won't have any sales," says Conner, 50. "This is going to cripple our economy. I don't think people think about how much the economy rides on diesel fuel."

Across the trucking industry, fuel costs are the second-largest expense after driver pay for carriers, according to Bob Costello, the American Trucking Associations' chief economist. He said that even in non-crisis periods, carriers carefully manage fuel consumption because small changes in diesel costs can erode profit margins.

Surging fuel costs are already pushing up freight rates (e.g., barge transport up 27%) across the economy, leading to fuel surcharges from carriers such as UPS, FedEx, and USPS.

Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at tax consulting firm RSM US, told the outlet that a 10% rise in diesel could lift the CPI by .1%, potentially adding .4%, given the nearly 40% spike in diesel prices this month alone.

The Trump administration is doing a delicate balancing act while attempting to neuter IRGC forces while ensuring domestic fuel prices do not spike out of control. The administration has pulled two of what JPMorgan analysts say are six levers to combat triple-digit WTI prices; those two levers pulled so far include an SPR release and a waiver of the Jones Act to ensure that crude flows from emergency stockpiles move more quickly from port to port.

On Friday, President Trump hinted at "winding down" the Iran war, as CENTCOM on Saturday morning announced its biggest move so far to free up the Hormuz chokepoint by degrading IRGC forces with air-delivered munitions. The administration's current goal is to ensure Hormuz reopens to avert what the IEA head warned last week could be the world's largest energy shock on record.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2026 - 22:45

New York City Is Spending $81,000 Per Year On Each Homeless Person

New York City spent about $368 million last year on services for people living on the streets, which equals roughly $81,000 per unsheltered person, according to the NY Post.

Spending through the city’s New York City Department of Homeless Services street outreach programs has increased sharply over the past several years. In 2019, the city spent about $102 million on these services, averaging around $28,000 per unsheltered individual. By the 2025 fiscal year, the average cost had risen to about $81,000 per person, close to the city’s median household income of $81,228.

Unsheltered homeless individuals are those who regularly live outside rather than in shelters or permanent housing. During this same period, the number of people living on the streets grew by 26 percent, rising from 3,588 in 2019 to 4,505 in 2025. However, spending increased far faster than the population itself.

Chart: Charlie Smirkley

The NY Post writes that the rise in street homelessness has been linked partly to the COVID-19 pandemic and increased migration. Still, the report noted that the reasons spending rose so quickly are not fully clear. One possible factor is the expansion of low-barrier shelters and drop-in centers that provide services such as meals, showers, and temporary sleeping spaces, allowing people to come and go freely. Financial records do not clearly separate how much funding goes to these specific programs.

The report says the city should examine more closely how these funds are being used and whether the programs are successfully moving people into shelters or permanent housing. Spending on street homelessness programs is expected to increase further, reaching about $456 million by fiscal year 2026.

Overall homelessness in New York City has also increased significantly. The city’s total homeless population is now around 140,000 people, about 78 percent higher than in 2019. Officials note that roughly 97 percent of homeless residents receive some type of shelter placement, although the number of people living outside continues to grow.

Some housing advocates argue that filling vacant public and supportive housing units could help move more people off the streets while reducing the high costs associated with short-term shelter programs.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2026 - 21:35

The State Will Always Socialize The Cost Of War

Via The Libertarian Institute

War is often sold to the public as an act of national will: decisive, necessary, and under control. The bill arrives later, in a quieter form. It shows up in insurance markets, shipping rates, emergency guarantees, higher fuel prices, and sudden policy reversals designed to keep the economic damage from spreading too far or too fast. That is what is now happening with the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. The fighting is not only destroying lives and widening instability. It is also revealing something more familiar about the American state: when private actors no longer want to bear the risk of a war Washington helped ignite, Washington moves to spread that risk across everyone else.

The clearest example came when maritime war-risk premiums in the Gulf surged, in some cases by more than 1000%, as ships and cargoes moved through a combat zone centered on one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints. This is what markets do when governments create danger: they start pricing reality honestly. Insurance underwriters do not care about speeches about resolve or credibility. They care about missiles, mines, damaged hulls, and the odds that a vessel will not make it home intact. Once those odds change, the market does what it is supposed to do. It becomes expensive to move goods through a war.

But the American state does not like that kind of honesty, because honest prices expose the real cost of intervention. So instead of letting war become unaffordable to the people escalating it, Washington stepped in. The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation announced a maritime reinsurance facility covering losses up to roughly $20 billion on a rolling basis, and later named Chubb as the lead insurance partner. In plain English, the government decided that if the private market was no longer willing to carry the full risk of this war, the state would help carry it instead. That is not a side effect of interventionism. It is one of its operating principles. Risk is privatized on the way up, then socialized when the numbers stop working.

The same pattern is visible in energy policy. As the war tightened shipping and pushed oil prices above $100 a barrel, Washington issued a thirty-day waiver allowing purchases of stranded Russian oil at sea to stabilize markets. That move was not just an emergency adjustment. It was an admission. The administration was effectively saying that one war had already become costly enough to require loosening pressure in another theater. A foreign policy that presents itself as hard and disciplined suddenly becomes very flexible when gasoline, shipping, and inflation begin threatening domestic politics. The slogans remain moralistic. The mechanics turn transactional overnight.

This is what statism looks like in practice. It does not simply bomb another country and call it security. It also rearranges the economic landscape at home and abroad so that the political architects of the war do not face the full consequences of their decisions. The cost is pushed outward onto taxpayers who did not authorize the war, consumers who will pay more for energy and goods, and trading systems that now have to absorb new shocks because Washington and Israel chose escalation over restraint. The state does not merely fight. It conscripts logistics, insurance, credit, and public balance sheets into the campaign.

That is why it is misleading to describe this as only a military conflict. It is also an exercise in political risk transfer. The Strait of Hormuz handles around twenty million barrels per day of crude oil and oil products and roughly a quarter of the world’s seaborne oil trade. Any government that helps turn that corridor into a war zone is not just making a strategic decision abroad. It is imposing a hidden tax on ordinary life. It is raising the cost of transport, trade, fuel, insurance, and eventually everything built on those foundations. And when those costs start climbing too fast, the same government asks the public to cushion the blow in the name of stability.

There is a moral evasion built into this arrangement. The public is told to think about war in the language of necessity and strength, while the real economics are handled behind the scenes through emergency waivers, public guarantees, and market interventions. Washington bypasses the discipline that peace would impose. It subsidizes the consequences of its own escalation, then presents the cleanup operation as responsible governance. That is not prudence. It is the imperial version of sending someone else the invoice.

The libertarian objection to this war is not only that it is reckless, unjust, and likely to widen. It is also that the state is once again doing what it does best: converting elite foreign-policy choices into burdens to be carried by everybody else. When insurers retreat, the government steps in. When sanctions collide with energy reality, the rules bend. When war becomes too expensive, the price is redistributed rather than paid by the people who chose it. That is the deeper scandal here. The state is not just waging this war. It is socializing its cost.

*  *  * JUST ADDED - 3 MONTHS OF [tasty] SURVIVAL FOOD - FREE SHIPPING

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2026 - 21:00

Costco Gas Lines Surge As Drivers Hunt For Cheaper Fuel

Rising fuel costs tied to the conflict in Iran are forcing many Americans to rethink everyday spending, especially on gas, according to Bloomberg.

At a Costco near San Antonio, drivers are waiting up to half an hour to fill up, while others are checking apps like GasBuddy or driving farther to save a few cents per gallon. With prices close to $4 nationwide, households are cutting back on dining out, travel, and even groceries.

The broader economic impact will depend on how long prices remain high. Oil has jumped about 45% since the war began, and gasoline futures are up more than 50%, driven by supply disruptions and the shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz. That has pushed pump prices higher across the country, with some states already well above average.

Economists say this kind of spike quickly changes behavior. Gregory Daco pointed to $4 per gallon as a key threshold: “When you go from $3.99 to $4.01… there is a psychological effect.” As prices cross that line, consumers tend to rein in spending elsewhere.

Some are already doing so. A Texas driver quit DoorDash after realizing higher gas costs wiped out her earnings. Others are chasing discounts at warehouse clubs or using grocery reward programs, increasing traffic at retailers like Costco and Sam’s Club. GasBuddy says its monthly users have doubled since the conflict began.

Bloomberg writes that lower- and middle-income households are being hit hardest, since fuel makes up a larger share of their budgets. Families are also seeing costs rise beyond gas, from groceries to basic goods, and are adjusting by cutting extras and planning purchases more carefully.

Even though inflation had been easing, higher energy prices could reverse some of that progress. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said the ultimate effect is uncertain, noting, “We just don’t know.”

With prices climbing after a period of decline, the issue could also carry political weight ahead of upcoming elections. While officials hope tax refunds and other measures will support growth, economists warn that prolonged high energy costs could further strain consumers.

For many Americans, everyday choices now come down to trade-offs, from driving farther for cheaper fuel to skipping small indulgences at the store.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2026 - 18:05

Iran Ready To Let Japanese Ships Use Hormuz As Chinese, Indian Tankers Already Allowed Passage

While Iran's decision to close the Straits of Hormuz in response to the US-Israeli bombing campaign was understandable, after all it's the biggest point of leverage the IRGC-controlled nation has left (it is certainly more understandable than bombing all of its Gulf neighbors in the process pushing them from being on the fence to being staunchly anti-Iran), there was always a bit of a glitch in Tehran's calculus: as we showed the day the war broke out, the biggest clients of Gulf exporting nations by far are China, India, Korea and Japan, namely Asian countries which - with the exception of Japan - are hardly allies of the US. Therefore, the countries that would be hit the hardest were those Pacific rim nations that would buy millions of barrels of oil daily from Gulf countries before the war, and now find that oil indefinitely blocked behind the Strait.

While prices are fungible, the biggest loser from a Hormuz closure in terms of actual physical oil is China which is the main destination of the 13.1mm barrels of oil that passes through the Strait every day https://t.co/FwWVsHiwpZ pic.twitter.com/ozXwXpo2El

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 1, 2026

Nowhere has this asymmetric impact been more evident than in the price of Asian-basin grades such as Dubai and Oman, which hit a record $170 on Thursday before retracing modestly to $160, while at the same time Europe-heavy Brent has been trading around $110, and WTI crude which primarily feeds the US is trading just below $100.

As a result, it's hardly a surprise that while ideologically they may support Iran, Asia's largest Gulf clients are suddenly finding themselves facing crashing stock markets and a brutal stagflation. 

It's also why while the world's attention has been focused on the escalating daily attacks in the Gulf, which last week crippled global LNG supplies for years - in the process once again hammering Asian supply chains far more than the US which for years has been swimming in natural gas - there has been a furious backchanneling operation to allow passage for tankers belong to said Asian countries.

To wit, late on Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the nation was prepared to facilitate passage for Japanese vessels through the Strait of Hormuz after consultations between the countries’ officials, according to Kyodo News.

"We have not closed the strait. It is open," Araghchi said in a telephone interview with Kyodo News on Friday. He also stressed that Iran, which was attacked by the United States and Israel in late February, is seeking "not a cease-fire, but a complete, comprehensive and lasting end to the war."

Araghchi said Iran has not closed the strategic waterway but has imposed restrictions on vessels belonging to countries involved in attacks against Iran, while offering assistance to others amid heightened security concerns. He added that Iran is prepared to ensure safe passage for countries such as Japan if they coordinate with Tehran.

Japan relies on the Middle East for over 90 percent of its crude oil imports, most of which travel through the strait.

Araghchi made the comments in an interview with the Japanese news agency on Friday, Kyodo said. Japan relies heavily on the Middle East for its oil-import needs. The war in Iran prompted the Asian nation to release oil from its reserves this month. 

Araghchi, a former ambassador to Japan, has held phone talks with Motegi twice since the attacks on Iran were launched on Feb. 28. The top Iranian diplomat said he had discussed the passage of Japanese ships through the strait with Motegi.

In their most recent conversation earlier in the week, Motegi urged Iran to ensure the safety of all vessels in the strait.

In Tokyo, a Foreign Ministry official said Japan will carefully assess Araghchi's remarks, adding even if Japanese vessels are able to sail through, the surge in energy prices will remain.

A Japanese government official said that "directly negotiating with the Iranian side" is the "most effective way" to lift the blockade of the strait, while noting the need to avoid provoking the United States.

The potential de-escalation comes as Japan has also been under pressure from US President Donald Trump to help secure the strait. At an in-person meeting with the president earlier this week in Washington, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi explained to him the legal limits to Japan’s involvement in such efforts. At the same time, she highlighted areas of agreement, including a pledge to import more oil from the US and to cooperate on missile development.

But it's not just Japan. In recent days, vessels from countries such as India, Pakistan and Turkey have also passed through the strait.As a reminder, all ships that fly Chinese national flags are free to pass the Strait of Hormuz as Beijing remains Tehran's only financial lifeline. 

In another indication that Iran's stance on the Hormuz blockade is softening, the Iranian Navy guided an Indian liquefied petroleum gas tanker through the Strait of Hormuz last week, allowing the ship to pass on a pre-approved route following diplomatic engagement by New Delhi, according to a senior officer onboard the vessel.

As Bloomberg reports, the officer asked for anonymity, as the crew of his vessel — one of two Indian ships that made the crossing — were not permitted to talk to the media. His account appears to confirm analysts’ views that Tehran is trying to impose a traffic control system through the strait, permitting safe passage for friendly vessels while leaving others fearful of attack.

Over the past week, several ships have transited via a narrow gap between the Iranian islands of Larak and Qeshm, and tracked close to the Iranian coast.

CONFIRMED - Iran is allowing select vessels transit the SoH after verfication

At least 4 vessels have transited outbound voa the Strait of Hormuz in the past 24hrs with a short diversion via the Larak-Qeshm Channel.

This appears to be a verification process whereby Iran… pic.twitter.com/csriocNo1h

— Martin Kelly (@_MartinKelly_) March 16, 2026

They include two bulk carriers that had called at Iranian ports, and a Pakistani-flagged vessel, the Karachi.

The officer on the Indian LPG ship declined to give specific details of their route. They traveled with their automatic identification system, or AIS, system switched off, according to the officer and AIS data analyzed by Bloomberg, turning it back on after they were safely out into the Gulf of Oman. The officer said the ship was also unable to use GPS, which has been subject to widespread interference since the beginning of the conflict. That meant the crossing took hours longer than usual.

During the crossing, the officer’s ship was in contact with the Iranian navy by radio, he said. The Iranians took details of the ship’s flag, name, origin and destination ports, and the nationality of the crew members - all of whom were Indian - and guided them on an agreed course.

Before they entered the strait last week, sailors onboard the LPG tanker prepared their life rafts, the officer said. They had been anchored in the Persian Gulf for around 10 days when they were told on the morning of Friday March 13 that they had been granted permission to make the transit that night. On the far side of the strait, Indian Navy ships were waiting to escort them, with the national flag flying higher than usual, the officer said. The vessel has since sailed on to India.

Anil Trigunayat, a former Indian ambassador in Jordan and Libya, said that the fact India was able to secure safe passage shows that diplomacy is possible. “Iran also would not want to burn bridges with everyone at this juncture,” he said. “India, if needed, can also play the role of an interlocutor. These factors have collectively led to India getting this window.”

On Saturday, the WSJ reported that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said he reiterated the importance of keeping international shipping lanes open during a call with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. Modi said in a social-media post on Saturday that he condemned attacks on critical infrastructure in the region, which he said threaten stability and disrupt global supply chains. He also “reiterated the importance of safeguarding freedom of navigation and ensuring that shipping lanes remain open and secure,” said the post.

Spoke with President Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian and conveyed Eid and Nowruz greetings. We expressed hope that this festive season brings peace, stability and prosperity to West Asia.

Condemned attacks on critical infrastructure in the region, which threaten regional stability and…

— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) March 21, 2026

While two India-flagged tankers passed through the Strait about a week ago, India is now negotiating for more ships to be able to cross, Indian maritime government officials have told The Wall Street Journal, and indeed overnight we received reports that two additional LPG tankers had crossed the strait with Indian navy protection. 

BREAKING: Two more LPG tankers are transiting the Strait of Hormuz under Indian Navy protection. Two Indian naval task forces have been deployed to escort India-bound vessels, ensuring the safe passage of crude oil and gas shipments bound to India amid rising tensions. pic.twitter.com/VPD11PTrlV

— Baba Banaras™ (@RealBababanaras) March 21, 2026

Iran’s threats to ships passing through the strait give the government in Tehran leverage over global energy markets, pushing up prices and creating fears of shortages of oil, natural gas, cooking fuel and fertilizer. Around a fifth of the world’s oil normally passes through the channel. Since the beginning of the war in late February, several ships have been struck by missiles or drones in the strait, at least two seafarers have died, and insurance costs have soared. There have been reports that Iran has mined the waterway.

“It seems that Iran is allowing select vessels to transit Hormuz after verification which takes place during the ships’ transit inside Iranian waters,” said Martin Kelly, head of advisory at EOS Risk Group. “While ships are being allowed to transit, it is mostly only to the benefit of Iran.”

Which is to be expected until some sort of ceasefire deal is reach, or the Iran government capitulates. But even if passage remains limited, recall again that the primary shippers through the Strait are already nations that are viewed as either openly friendly to Iran, such as China, or quasi friendly, such as India and now, Japan. Which means that a significant percentage of the ships that would otherwise be blocked by Iran, can pass through, and the actual limitation to oil and LNG passage is much less than the mainstream media reports. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2026 - 16:55

Musk Offers To Pay TSA Salaries, Trump Threatens To Deploy ICE As Democrats Hold Paychecks Hostage

Update (1655ET): In addition to Elon Musk offering to cover TSA workers' paychecks during the ongoing shutdown, President Trump has threatened to place U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents at airports if Democrats don’t agree to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

"If the Radical Left Democrats don’t immediately sign an agreement to let our Country, in particular, our Airports, be FREE and SAFE again, I will move our brilliant and patriotic ICE Agents to the Airports where they will do Security like no one has ever seen before, including the immediate arrest of all Illegal Immigrants who have come into our Country, with heavy emphasis on those from Somalia, who have totally destroyed, with the approval of a corrupt Governor, Attorney General, and Congresswoman, Ilhan Omar, the once Great State of Minnesota," Trump wrote on Truth Social. 

The post comes after Politico reported that Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) is "planning to put a stalled" bill to fund DHS "on the House floor a third time next week."

* * * Top selling supplements (in stock)

Brain Rescue (on sale!)

Iodine Fortify (are you deficient?)

Resveratrol (potent antioxidant for healthy aging)

* * *

The Department of Homeland Security shutdown entered its 36th day on Saturday after Senate Democrats blocked yet another funding bill for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Transportation Security Administration, and other federal agencies, triggering weeks of chaos at airports nationwide, including long TSA checkpoint lines during the peak of the spring break travel season.

Early Saturday morning, Elon Musk, closely tracking the DHS funding lapse, wrote on X that he would personally pay the salaries of TSA agents to get them back to airports and help avert further chaos.

"I would like to offer to pay the salaries of TSA personnel during this funding impasse that is negatively affecting the lives of so many Americans at airports throughout the country," Musk said.

I would like to offer to pay the salaries of TSA personnel during this funding impasse that is negatively affecting the lives of so many Americans at airports throughout the country

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 21, 2026

On Friday, a motion to advance a funding bill failed 47-37, falling short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a Democratic filibuster. John Fetterman (Pa.) was the only Democrat to vote "yes" on the DHS funding bill. Sixteen senators from both parties were absent for the vote. This marks the fifth time Democrats have blocked the Homeland Security Appropriations bill since DHS funding ended in mid-February.

Democrats have been absolutely furious over any funding bill for ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) that does not include reforms to immigration enforcement operations. That is mostly because they are watching President Trump erode their political power by deporting the very illegal aliens their party allowed to invade the nation under the Biden-Harris regime. Remember, these illegals are the future voting bloc of the Democratic Party, meant to seize political control by disenfranchising citizens.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) is planning to force a vote sometime today on a proposal to fund the TSA.

"The chaos at TSA is reaching a boiling point. We need to reopen it as quickly as possible. That is what Senate Democrats are intent on doing," Schumer said.

Related:

• "Problem Is Solvable": Airline CEOs Urge Congress To End Shutdown, Pay TSA Workers

By the end of the week, 10% of all TSA workers did not show up for work - just below the record 10.22% absentee rate set at the start of the week. Nearly 400 agents have quit so far in the months-long shutdown, according to DHS. These workers have been without pay since mid-last month, when the Democratic Party began using these agents as political pawns.

The severity of the government shutdown this time has not yet reached the crisis level of travel disruption seen during the 43-day shutdown late last year, when air traffic controllers were used as leverage in political disputes, disrupting air travel nationwide. To prevent such issues in the future, perhaps privatization talks for these agencies should begin.

Is it possible that an unhinged, left-wing judge might try to block Musk from offering to pay TSA agents' salaries during the funding lapse?

*  *  * GRAB A MULTITOOL OR THREE

Christmas is right around the corner... pic.twitter.com/TXc7STNYQW

— ZeroHedge Store (@ZeroHedgeStore) November 3, 2025

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2026 - 16:51

Major Trade Group Releases Framework For Tokenized Gold

Authored by Martin Young via CoinTelegraph.com,

The major gold trade association, World Gold Council, and the Boston Consulting Group have proposed a new platform to modernize how the precious metal operates in digital financial systems.

The World Gold Council said on Thursday that it published a white paper on “Gold as a Service,” a new platform to “support the issuance and operation of scalable, interoperable digital gold products.”

The open platform would connect the physical custody of gold with the digital systems used to issue and manage tokenized gold products. 

“By standardizing essential market processes such as custody coordination, reconciliation, compliance, and redemption, the model aims to reduce operational complexity, improve access, and enable greater consistency across digital gold products,” the World Gold Council said. 

Crypto-native tokenized gold products include Tether Gold or Pax Gold, which have formed their own custody, compliance and redemption models, but the World Gold Council’s standard could have more sway with institutions due to the trade group’s prominence.

Features include audits, fungibility, and liquidity 

Key features of the Gold as a Service would include standardizing tokenized gold issuance and management, increasing digital gold’s fungibility, embedding audits and assurance, enabling interoperability with existing finance rails, and improving liquidity in lending and borrowing markets. 

World Gold Council CEO, David Tait, said that financial services are undergoing a “rapid and pervasive digital transformation” and gold must also evolve to maintain its role in the global financial system. 

“Shared infrastructure can help gold become more accessible, more easily traded and fully integrated into modern financial systems — ensuring it remains as relevant tomorrow as it has been for millennia,” he added.

Matthias Tauber, a managing director and senior partner at Boston Consulting Group, said, “The question is no longer whether gold will be digital; it’s how it can participate in modern financial systems without compromising physical integrity.” 

Commodities are 20% of tokenized asset market

According to RWA.xyz, tokenized commodities such as gold account for around $5.5 billion, or 20% of the total on-chain value of tokenized real-world assets, a segment that has grown by 340% over the past 12 months, as demand for gold has skyrocketed. 

Tokenized gold and commodities represent 20% of the entire tokenized RWA market. Source: RWA.xyz

Tether’s tokenized gold product has a market capitalization of $2.6 billion, up 17% over the past 12 months, while Pax Gold has a market cap of $2.3 billion, according to CoinGecko. 

On Thursday, crypto exchange Bybit launched a yield-bearing tokenized gold product that lets users earn interest on Tether Gold. 

*  *  * ORDER BY SUNDAY NIGHT

 

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2026 - 15:10

Trevor Milton Is Back And Wants To Produce AI Powered "Fully Autonomous Corporate Jets"

Trevor Milton, founder and former CEO of the now-bankrupt Nikola, is trying to mount a "comeback story".

Through social media, interviews, and bold public claims, Milton once convinced investors that Nikola was on the verge of delivering breakthrough technology with trucks. Now he's going to attempt the same in the aircraft business, according to a new report from the Wall Street Journal.

He has reemerged in the aviation sector through his involvement with SyberJet, a company focused on developing a small business jet known as the SJ30. The aircraft itself is not new; its design dates back decades and has changed hands multiple times through bankruptcies and restructurings. SyberJet acquired the program and has since promoted plans to bring the jet into full-scale production, emphasizing its speed, range, and efficiency relative to competitors in the light jet category.

Milton’s involvement has drawn attention because it places him back in a leadership context tied to capital-intensive, technology-driven manufacturing—an environment similar to the one in which he previously operated. 

SyberJet’s core asset, the SJ30, is designed to fly faster and higher than many comparable business jets, with a focus on long range and fuel efficiency. The aircraft has received FAA certification in the past, but production has been limited, and the program has faced persistent financial and operational hurdles. The company’s current strategy centers on securing sufficient funding and industrial capacity to restart manufacturing and deliver aircraft to customers.

The company has also outlined ambitions to expand beyond the existing SJ30 platform, including potential future aircraft development and broader participation in the private aviation market. These plans depend heavily on capital access, supply chain execution, and the ability to convert interest into firm orders—challenges that have historically constrained the program. As with many aerospace ventures, timelines have proven difficult to meet, and progress has often been slower than initially projected.

Photo: WSJ

Milton’s reappearance at SyberJet comes at a time when private aviation demand has seen periods of strength, particularly following the pandemic-driven shift toward private travel. However, translating demand trends into sustainable aircraft production requires significant operational discipline and long-term investment. The company’s path forward will likely hinge on whether it can stabilize funding and demonstrate consistent manufacturing output.

Milton has described SyberJet as more than just a traditional aircraft manufacturer, outlining ambitions to integrate advanced software and artificial intelligence into both aircraft operations and the broader private aviation ecosystem. He has suggested that AI could be used to optimize flight performance, maintenance, and routing, as well as to enhance the customer experience through more automated and efficient service models.

From WSJ:

He said the avionics the company is developing will integrate some level of AI and that he hopes “to display that in the coming one to two years to the public.” He said he wants SyberJet eventually to be the first to produce fully autonomous corporate jets. “Eventually everyone is going to have to do what we do, but they’re probably just going to buy our platform,” he said.

In public statements, he has also pointed to longer-term plans that extend beyond the existing SJ30 platform, including the potential development of new aircraft and aviation-related technologies. These claims position SyberJet not simply as a jet producer, but as a technology-driven aviation company, though many of these initiatives remain conceptual and dependent on future execution.

 Nikola was first exposed by short seller Nathan Anderson, founder of Hindenburg Research, after the startup released a 2020 promotional video, which showed its Nikola One truck rolling down a hill to simulate full functionality.

In 2023, a jury found Milton guilty of lying to investors about Nikola's electric and fuel cell semi-truck technology and sentenced him to four years in prison. He was then pardoned by Donald Trump and attempted to sue both CNBC and Hindenburg Research, but his lawsuit was thrown out in December and costs were awarded to both CNBC and Hindenburg. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2026 - 14:35

Britain Once Led The World. What Happened?

Authored by Damian Pudner via the Foundation for Economic Education,

An unsettling look at the economic settlement that the UK now seems willing to accept can be found in the latest fiscal forecast, published on March 3.

By the end of the forecast period, borrowing will have decreased from 5.2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2024–2025 to about 1.6 percent. Public debt stabilizes at roughly 95 percent of national income. At those levels, even small shifts in interest rates matter: The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimates that a sustained 1-percentage-point move in the Bank Rate changes government borrowing costs by about 15 billion pounds (about $20 billion).

In the later years of the forecast, economic growth limps along at about 1.5 percent, while unemployment is expected to peak at 5.33 percent. Meanwhile, the tax burden approaches an unprecedented 38 percent of GDP, the highest sustained level in the postwar era, as public spending remains significantly higher than its pre-COVID-19-pandemic share of the economy.

Taken together, these forecasts describe an economy settling into a comfortable equilibrium of high taxation, high debt, and chronically modest growth. Expectations are quietly lowered and economic underperformance is being normalized.

There is no ambition here. Nothing is reset. Nothing is reimagined. Nothing really changes.

There is something unmistakably Starmerite about the entire outlook. Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s political persona is built on reassurance and managerial competence. The chaos will stop. The adults are back. Nothing dramatic will happen on his watch. Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves is no different.

But countries do not restore economic dynamism through managerial composure alone.

The UK was once the workshop of the world. Later it became one of the most open and dynamic economies in Europe. When the postwar economic model began to falter in the 1970s, the country eventually recognized that incremental tweaks would not suffice. Structural reform became unavoidable.

What followed was neither cautious nor gradual. The reforms of the 1980s dismantled large parts of the existing economic model and replaced them with something far more competitive. Nowhere was that clearer than in the financial sector. The Big Bang of 1986 swept away restrictive practices, opened London’s markets, and helped turn the city into one of the world’s dominant financial centers.

Whether one applauds or criticizes those reforms, their ambition is undeniable. That sense of ambition is strikingly absent from the UK’s economic debate today.

Instead, the state is not being structurally rethought. It is simply being financed more heavily. The clearest example is the continued freeze in income tax thresholds. According to earlier OBR analysis, this policy alone will be raising roughly 67 billion pounds (about $89 billion) per year by the end of the decade.

By 2030–2031, about 1 million more people will be brought into paying income tax, and roughly 1.6 million people will pay the 45 percent rate, a level originally introduced to target the “super-rich.” At the same time, another 1 million pensioners will be drawn into paying income tax. This is both unsustainable and politically corrosive.

As Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher reminded us, “You cannot tax a country into prosperity.”

The broader economic outlook is equally modest. Productivity growth is expected to recover only slowly, reaching roughly 1 percent annually in the medium term. That supports GDP growth of about 1.6 percent. Such growth may just about stabilize the debt ratio, but it is nowhere near the pace required to transform living standards or expand the country’s economic capacity.

Even the recent improvement in government revenues owes something to favorable financial conditions rather than deep structural change. Stronger equity markets have lifted receipts from capital gains and corporation taxes. Yet the same fiscal projections warn how vulnerable this is to reversal. A sharp fall in equity prices would quickly worsen the public finances. The OBR warns that a 35 percent correction in UK and global equity markets could widen the current budget deficit by about 26 billion pounds (about $34 billion) in 2027–2028. Even a more limited scenario—in which UK equities fall by 15 percent—still adds about 15 billion pounds (about $20 billion) to borrowing.

In other words, the strategy works provided growth improves modestly and financial markets remain cooperative. That is not a robust foundation for long-term prosperity.

Downing Street’s rhetoric is “growth, growth, growth.” The figures point to something more akin to steady, steady, steady or, perhaps more accurately, dull, dull, dull.

Growth is not being unleashed as much as carefully managed.

The economic horizon contains little in the way of bold reform or institutional redesign. For a country with the UK’s economic history, that is a strikingly modest ambition.

The UK deserves something more.

It cannot tax its way back to economic leadership. Nor can it rely on rising asset prices or modest productivity gains to do the work.

Increasing the economy’s potential for production would be the main goal of a more serious agenda: a tax system that rewards enterprise and investment rather than subtly expanding the middle-class tax base, planning reform that actually increases the supply of housing, and regulatory frameworks that promote innovation rather than administrative caution.

In short, something with the seriousness and disruptive intent of the Big Bang.

Political bravery will be needed for that. It will necessitate a government that is willing to pursue reform even if it goes against long-standing interests. Above all, it will necessitate a political elite that is prepared to acknowledge that cautious maintenance of the status quo is not a viable approach to national renewal.

The UK once set the pace of the global economy. Today, it risks settling for the careful management of mediocrity. And that, more than anything else in the fiscal forecasts, should concern us all.

 

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2026 - 08:10

Peter Schiff: Printing Money Is Not the Cure for Cononavirus



In his most recent podcast, Peter Schiff talked about coronavirus and the impact that it is having on the markets. Earlier this month, Peter said he thought the virus was just an excuse for stock market woes. At the time he believed the market was poised to fall anyway. But as it turns out, coronavirus has actually helped the US stock market because it has led central banks to pump even more liquidity into the world financial system. All this means more liquidity — central banks easing. In fact, that is exactly what has already happened, except the new easing is taking place, for now, outside the United States, particularly in China.” Although the new money is primarily being created in China, it is flowing into dollars — the dollar index is up — and into US stocks. Last week, US stock markets once again made all-time record highs. In fact, I think but for the coronavirus, the US stock market would still be selling off. But because of the central bank stimulus that has been the result of fears over the coronavirus, that actually benefitted not only the US dollar, but the US stock market.” In the midst of all this, Peter raises a really good question. The primary economic concern is that coronavirus will slow down output and ultimately stunt economic growth. Practically speaking, the world would produce less stuff. If the virus continues to spread, there would be fewer goods and services produced in a market that is hunkered down. Why would the Federal Reserve respond, or why would any central bank respond to that by printing money? How does printing more money solve that problem? It doesn’t. In fact, it actually exacerbates it. But you know, everybody looks at central bankers as if they’ve got the solution to every problem. They don’t. They don’t have the magic wand. They just have a printing press. And all that creates is inflation.” Sometimes the illusion inflation creates can look like a magic wand. Printing money can paper over problems. But none of this is going to fundamentally fix the economy. In fact, if central bankers were really going to do the right thing, the appropriate response would be to drain liquidity from the markets, not supply even more.” Peter explained how the Fed was originally intended to create an “elastic” money supply that would expand or contract along with economic output. Today, the money supply only goes in one direction — that’s up. The economy is strong, print money. The economy is weak, print even more money.” Of course, the asset that’s doing the best right now is gold. The yellow metal pushed above $1,600 yesterday. Gold is up 5.5% on the year in dollar terms and has set record highs in other currencies. Because gold is rising even in an environment where the dollar is strengthening against other fiat currencies, that shows you that there is an underlying weakness in the dollar that is right now not being reflected in the Forex markets, but is being reflected in the gold markets. Because after all, why are people buying gold more aggressively than they’re buying dollars or more aggressively than they’re buying US Treasuries? Because they know that things are not as good for the dollar or the US economy as everybody likes to believe. So, more people are seeking out refuge in a better safe-haven and that is gold.” Peter also talked about the debate between Trump and Obama over who gets credit for the booming economy – which of course, is not booming.

We are living in crazy times. I have a hard time believing that most of the general public is not awake, but in reality, they are. We've never seen anything like this; I mean not even under Obama during the worst part of the Great Recession." Now the Fed is desperately trying to keep interest rates from rising. The problem is that it's a much bigger debt bubble this time around , and the Fed is going to have to blow a lot more air into it to keep it inflated. The difference is this time it's not going to work." It looks like the Fed did another $104.15 billion of Not Q.E. in a single day. The Fed claims it's only temporary. But that is precisely what Bernanke claimed when the Fed started QE1. Milton Freedman once said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." The same applies to Q.E., or whatever the Fed wants to pretend it's doing. Except this is not QE4, according to Powell. Right. Pumping so much money out, and they are accusing China of currency manipulation ? Wow! Seriously! Amazing! Dump the U.S. dollar while you still have a chance. Welcome to The Atlantis Report. And it is even worse than that, In addition to the $104.15 billion of "Not Q.E." this past Thursday; the FED added another $56.65 billion in liquidity to financial markets the next day on Friday. That's $160.8 billion in two days!!!! in just 48 hours. That is more than 2 TIMES the highest amount the FED has ever injected on a monthly basis under a Q.E. program (which was $80 billion per month) Since this isn't QE....it will be really scary on what they are going to call Q.E. Will it twice, three times, four times, five times what this injection per month ! It is going to be explosive since it takes about 60 to 90 days for prices to react to this, January should see significant inflation as prices soak up the excess liquidity. The question is, where will the inflation occur first . The spike in the repo rate might have a technical explanation: a misjudgment was made in the Fed's money market operations. Even so, two conclusions can be drawn: managing the money markets is becoming harder, and from now on, banks will be studying each other's creditworthiness to a greater degree than before. Those people, who struggle with the minutiae of money markets, and that includes most professionals, should focus on the causes and not the symptoms. Financial markets have recovered from each downturn since 1980 because interest rates have been cut to new lows. Post-2008, they were cut to near zero or below zero in all major economies. In response to a new financial crisis, they cannot go any lower. Central banks will look for new ways to replicate or broaden Q.E. (At some point, governments will simply see repression as an easier option). Then there is the problem of 'risk-free' assets becoming risky assets. Financial markets assume that the probability of major governments such as the U.S. or U.K. defaulting is zero. These governments are entering the next downturn with debt roughly twice the levels proportionate to GDP that was seen in 2008. The belief that the policy worked was completely predicated on the fact that it was temporary and that it was reversible, that the Fed was going to be able to normalize interest rates and shrink its balance sheet back down to pre-crisis levels. Well, when the balance sheet is five-trillion, six-trillion, seven-trillion when we're back at zero, when we're back in a recession, nobody is going to believe it is temporary. Nobody is going to believe that the Fed has this under control, that they can reverse this policy. And the dollar is going to crash. And when the dollar crashes, it's going to take the bond market with it, and we're going to have stagflation. We're going to have a deep recession with rising interest rates, and this whole thing is going to come imploding down. everything is temporary with the fed including remaining off the gold standard temporary in the Fed's eyes could mean at least 50 years This liquidity problem is a signal that trading desks are loaded up on inventory and can't get rid of it. Repo is done out of a need for cash. If you own all of your securities (i.e., a long-only, no leverage mutual fund) you have no need to "repo" your securities - you're earning interest every night so why would you want to 'repo' your securities where you are paying interest for that overnight loan (securities lending is another animal). So, it is those that 'lever-up' and need the cash for settlement purposes on securities they've bought with borrowed money that needs to utilize the repo desk. With this in mind, as we continue to see this need to obtain cash (again, needed to settle other securities purchases), it shows these firms don't have the capital to add more inventory to, what appears to be, a bloated inventory. Now comes the fun part: the Treasury is about to auction 3's, 10's, and 30-year bonds. If I am correct (again, I could be wrong), the Fed realizes securities firms don't have the shelf space to take down a good portion of these auctions. If there isn't enough retail/institutional demand, it will lead to not only a crappy sale but major concerns to the street that there is now no backstop, at all, to any sell-off. At which point, everyone will want to be the first one through the door and sell immediately, but to whom? If there isn't enough liquidity in the repo market to finance their positions, the firms would be unable to increase their inventory. We all saw repo shut down on the 2008 crisis. Wall St runs on money. . OVERNIGHT money. They lever up to inventory securities for trading. If they can't get overnight money, they can't purchase securities. And if they can't unload what they have, it means the buy-side isn't taking on more either. Accounts settle overnight. This includes things like payrolls and bill pay settlements. If a bank doesn't have enough cash to payout what its customers need to pay out, it borrows. At least one and probably more than one banks are insolvent. That's what's going on. First, it can't be one or two banks that are short. They'd simply call around until they found someone to lend. But they did that, and even at markedly elevated rates, still, NO ONE would lend them the money. That tells me that it's not a problem of a couple of borrowers, it's a problem of no lenders. And that means that there's no bank in the world left with any real liquidity. They are ALL maxed out. But as bad as that is, and that alone could be catastrophic, what it really signals is even worse. The lending rates are just the flip side of the coin of the value of the assets lent against. If the rates go up, the value goes down. And with rates spiking to 10%, how far does the value fall? Enormously! And if banks had to actually mark down the value of the assets to reflect 10% interest rates, then my god, every bank in the world is insolvent overnight. Everyone's capital ratios are in the toilet, and they'd have to liquidate. We're talking about the simultaneous insolvency of every bank on the planet. Bank runs. No money in ATMs, Branches closed. Safe deposit boxes confiscated. The whole nine yards, It's actually here. The scenario has tended to guide toward for years and years is actually happening RIGHT NOW! And people are still trying to say it's under control. Every bank in the world is currently insolvent. The only thing keeping it going is printing billions of dollars every day. Financial Armageddon isn't some far off future risk. It's here. Prepare accordingly. This fiat system has reached the end of the line, and it's not correct that fiat currencies fail by design. The problem is corruption and manipulation. It is corruption and cheating that erodes trust and faith until the entire system becomes a gigantic fraud. Banks and governments everywhere ARE the problem and simply have to be removed. They have lost all trust and respect, and all they have left is war and mayhem. As long as we continue to have a majority of braindead asleep imbeciles following orders from these psychopaths, nothing will change. Fiat currency is not just thievery. Fiat currency is SLAVERY. Ultimately the most harmful effect of using debt of undefined value as money (i.e., fiat currencies) is the de facto legalization of a caste system based on voluntary slavery. The bankers have a charter, or the legal *right*, to create money out of nothing. You, you don't. Therefore you and the bankers do not have the same standing before the law. The law of the land says that you will go to jail if you do the same thing (creating money out of thin air) that the banker does in full legality. You and the banker are not equal before the law. ALL the countries of the world; Islamic or secular, Jewish or Arab, democracy or dictatorship; all of them place the bankers ABOVE you. And all of you accept that only whining about fiat money going down in exchange value over time (price inflation which is not the same as monetary inflation). Actually, price inflation itself is mainly due to the greed and stupidity of the bankers who could keep fiat money's exchange value reasonably stable, only if they wanted to. Witness the crash of silver and gold prices which the bankers of the world; Russian, American, Chinese, Jewish, Indian, Arab, all of them collaborated to engineer through the suppression and stagnation of precious metals' prices to levels around the metals' production costs, or what it costs to dig gold and silver out of the ground. The bankers of the world could also collaborate to keep nominal prices steady (as they do in the case of the suppression of precious metals prices). After all, the ability to create fiat money and force its usage is a far more excellent source of power and wealth than that which is afforded simply by stealing it through inflation. The bankers' greed and stupidity blind them to this fact. They want it all, and they want it now. In conclusion, The bankers can create money out of nothing and buy your goods and services with this worthless fiat money, effectively for free. You, you can't. You, you have to lead miserable existences for the most of you and WORK in order to obtain that effectively nonexistent, worthless credit money (whose purchasing/exchange value is not even DEFINED thus rendering all contracts based on the null and void!) that the banker effortlessly creates out of thin air with a few strokes of the computer keyboard, and which he doesn't even bother to print on paper anymore, electing to keep it in its pure quantum uncertain form instead, as electrons whizzing about inside computer chips which will become mute and turn silent refusing to tell you how many fiat dollars or euros there are in which account, in the absence of electricity. No electricity, no fiat, nor crypto money. It would appear that trust is deteriorating as it did when Lehman blew up . Something really big happened that set off this chain reaction in the repo markets. Whatever that something is, we aren't be informed. They're trying to cover it up, paper it over with conjured cash injections, play it cool in front of the cameras while sweating profusely under the 5 thousands dollar suits. I'm guessing that the final high-speed plunge into global economic collapse has begun. All we see here is the ripples and whitewater churning the surface, but beneath the surface, there is an enormous beast thrashing desperately in its death throws. Now is probably the time to start tying up loose ends with the long-running prep projects, just saying. In other words, prepare accordingly, and Get your money out of the banks. I don't care if you don't believe me about Bitcoin. Get your money out of the banks. Don't keep any more money in a bank than you need to pay your bills and can afford to lose.











The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more













The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more

The FBI released a summary of its file from the Hillary Clinton email investigation on Friday, showing details of Clinton's explanation of her use of a private email server to handle classified communications. The release comes nearly two months after FBI Director James Comey announced that although Clinton's handling of classified information was "extremely careless," it did not rise to the level of a prosecutable offense. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the next day that she would not pursue charges in the matter. "We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests," the FBI noted in a statement sent to reporters with links to the documents. The documents include notes from Clinton's July 2 interview with agents, as well as a "factual summary of the FBI's investigation into this matter," according to the FBI release. Throughout her interview with agents, Clinton repeatedly said she relied on the career professionals she worked with to handle classified information correctly. The agents asked about a series of specific emails, and in each case Clinton said she wasn't worried about the particular material being discussed on a nonclassified channel.