Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

🇺🇸 Executive orders are now doing the work that markets used to do, and the model for it is FDR George Gammon points at the pattern, where an intervention creates a distortion, the distortion gets blamed on the market, and the fix is another intervention with more authority attached.... show more

Mario Nawfal

3,916,721 subscribers

24,485 просмотров • 3 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политика Наука и технологии

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 2

Фото профиля Anurag pm

Anurag pm3 дней назад

the invisible hand now signs executive orders.

Фото профиля Ferreira Gui

Ferreira Gui3 дней назад

Chaque intervention engendre une distorsion, et chaque distorsion devient un prétexte pour un contrôle étatique accru. Un cycle sans fin qui étouffe le libre marché.

Похожие видео

🇺🇸🇨🇳 Oil prices are falling with supply this tight, and that should terrify you more than any war. George Gammon flips the standard read on the oil market. Everyone's obsessing over supply constraints, yet prices keep sliding, and to him that mismatch exposes something bigger: demand is rotting underneath. His explanation is a global economic slowdown already underway. The strongest evidence sits in China, where reduced purchasing points to cooling demand deep enough to swallow the supply concerns whole. Even the volatility around the US announcements on Iranian oil licenses hasn't changed the trajectory. The trend line, Gammon argues, keeps pointing at a world that simply needs less oil, because its economies are slowing down. George Gammon

🇺🇸🇨🇳 Oil prices are falling with supply this tight, and that should terrify you more than any war. George Gammon flips the standard read on the oil market. Everyone's obsessing over supply constraints, yet prices keep sliding, and to him that mismatch exposes something bigger: demand is rotting underneath. His explanation is a global economic slowdown already underway. The strongest evidence sits in China, where reduced purchasing points to cooling demand deep enough to swallow the supply concerns whole. Even the volatility around the US announcements on Iranian oil licenses hasn't changed the trajectory. The trend line, Gammon argues, keeps pointing at a world that simply needs less oil, because its economies are slowing down. George Gammon

Mario Nawfal

74,025 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🇺🇸 Everyone knows the dollar system can be turned against them, and nobody is leaving. George Gammon compares it to the phone in your pocket that spies on you constantly, or the platform that once deleted his entire channel and still gets his uploads: "It has ten times the utility as the second best." Philip Pilkington points to Bretton Woods as what made the dollar hegemonic in the first place, while George's catalyst for change is simpler: another economy has to get much bigger than America's. George Gammon Philip Pilkington

🇺🇸 Everyone knows the dollar system can be turned against them, and nobody is leaving. George Gammon compares it to the phone in your pocket that spies on you constantly, or the platform that once deleted his entire channel and still gets his uploads: "It has ten times the utility as the second best." Philip Pilkington points to Bretton Woods as what made the dollar hegemonic in the first place, while George's catalyst for change is simpler: another economy has to get much bigger than America's. George Gammon Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

41,034 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🇺🇸 The U.S is destroying the dollar, but the terrifying part is the world may have to keep using it anyway. That was the most important insight from my debate with Peter Schiff and George Gammon. Peter's argument is familiar, but powerful: America is running massive deficits. Interest costs are exploding, central banks are buying more gold, and the more Washington weaponizes the dollar through sanctions, the more incentive the rest of the world has to find an alternative. Eventually, Peter believes the dollar's loss of purchasing power accelerates so violently that confidence breaks, and its reserve status goes with it. George's response is much more counterintuitive. The dollar isn't just a currency; it's a global network of debt. Trillions upon trillions of dollars are lent into existence around the world, and every dollar-denominated loan creates something extremely important: Future demand for dollars, because eventually that debt has to be serviced or repaid. So here's the paradox. The dollar can fall against gold, it can lose purchasing power, it can even become a terrible long-term store of value. And yet global corporations, banks and financial institutions will still keep using it because the network around it remains deeper, more liquid and more useful than anything else available. George Gammon, Peter Schiff

🇺🇸 The U.S is destroying the dollar, but the terrifying part is the world may have to keep using it anyway. That was the most important insight from my debate with Peter Schiff and George Gammon. Peter's argument is familiar, but powerful: America is running massive deficits. Interest costs are exploding, central banks are buying more gold, and the more Washington weaponizes the dollar through sanctions, the more incentive the rest of the world has to find an alternative. Eventually, Peter believes the dollar's loss of purchasing power accelerates so violently that confidence breaks, and its reserve status goes with it. George's response is much more counterintuitive. The dollar isn't just a currency; it's a global network of debt. Trillions upon trillions of dollars are lent into existence around the world, and every dollar-denominated loan creates something extremely important: Future demand for dollars, because eventually that debt has to be serviced or repaid. So here's the paradox. The dollar can fall against gold, it can lose purchasing power, it can even become a terrible long-term store of value. And yet global corporations, banks and financial institutions will still keep using it because the network around it remains deeper, more liquid and more useful than anything else available. George Gammon, Peter Schiff

Mario Nawfal

304,748 просмотров • 16 дней назад

George Gammon says the AI industry may be building a business model where the endgame is failure and a government bailout. "They're charging $20 a month, but the cost to deliver the service is far more than $20." His argument: AI companies know the economics may not work, so they're racing to become too big to fail, fueled by massive spending and circular financing. “If we win, great. If we don’t, we’re going to get bailed out by the government. So, what’s my downside? Just keep selling the dream.” George Gammon

George Gammon says the AI industry may be building a business model where the endgame is failure and a government bailout. "They're charging $20 a month, but the cost to deliver the service is far more than $20." His argument: AI companies know the economics may not work, so they're racing to become too big to fail, fueled by massive spending and circular financing. “If we win, great. If we don’t, we’re going to get bailed out by the government. So, what’s my downside? Just keep selling the dream.” George Gammon

Mario Nawfal

62,951 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🇺🇸 The default rate on private credit may now rival 2008, and almost no one sees what's hiding underneath. George Gammon explains where the real danger lives: beneath the money invested sits the money borrowed to invest it, layer stacked on layer: "It's just like leverage on top of leverage, on top of leverage on top of leverage." When the defaults hit, someone takes the haircut. The question is who. George Gammon

🇺🇸 The default rate on private credit may now rival 2008, and almost no one sees what's hiding underneath. George Gammon explains where the real danger lives: beneath the money invested sits the money borrowed to invest it, layer stacked on layer: "It's just like leverage on top of leverage, on top of leverage on top of leverage." When the defaults hit, someone takes the haircut. The question is who. George Gammon

Mario Nawfal

103,083 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🇺🇸 Oil hit $140 in 2008, everyone screamed inflation, and two months later rates were at zero. George Gammon breaks down why the 1970s burned hot while 2008 collapsed cold, and why the difference had nothing to do with the Fed: "The beginning of the movie can start the exact same way, but the middle and the end of the movie can play out two completely opposite ways, just based on the health of the economy or the banking system." Which version of the movie are we watching right now? George Gammon

🇺🇸 Oil hit $140 in 2008, everyone screamed inflation, and two months later rates were at zero. George Gammon breaks down why the 1970s burned hot while 2008 collapsed cold, and why the difference had nothing to do with the Fed: "The beginning of the movie can start the exact same way, but the middle and the end of the movie can play out two completely opposite ways, just based on the health of the economy or the banking system." Which version of the movie are we watching right now? George Gammon

Mario Nawfal

88,545 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🇺🇸 Half of young adults are living with their parents because nothing else is affordable anymore. George Gammon says an entire generation locked out of the thing every generation before them took for granted cannot hold indefinitely, because people will put up with a lot of rules and paperwork and inconvenience before they snap. What they won't put up with is not affording rent or groceries, which is where societies have historically come apart. That's the line, and we're walking toward it. George Gammon

🇺🇸 Half of young adults are living with their parents because nothing else is affordable anymore. George Gammon says an entire generation locked out of the thing every generation before them took for granted cannot hold indefinitely, because people will put up with a lot of rules and paperwork and inconvenience before they snap. What they won't put up with is not affording rent or groceries, which is where societies have historically come apart. That's the line, and we're walking toward it. George Gammon

Mario Nawfal

64,803 просмотров • 3 дней назад

After decades of telling developing nations to privatise and let the invisible hand of the market do its thing, the West is coming out and saying government intervention is the way to go. Here, American political scientist, Elizabeth Economy says the United States, a country that has historically portrayed itself by free-market capitalism, can’t compete without direct state intervention in the economy. She says that if the US wants to compete with China it’s “going to have to adopt some elements of their playbook”. This is is important because she’s effectively saying the Chinese model with its strict control of the commanding heights of the economy is simply the better model. This moment would have been a great opportunity for the US to showcase to the world once and for all that letting the market dominate the economy is superior to having the state dictate the economy. Instead, we have the supposedly most pro-market country in the world coming out to say the markets simply cannot do it when forced to compete against state intervention. This goes even harder when you realise that Economy is responding to a question asking her if the market is not a better option. He response is that China has created a “playbook” of state intervention, and the United States doesn’t have anything to compete with. And you thought they had capitalism. All of this just reinforces what serious people have been saying for years, that taking firm control over energy, finance, heavy transit and raw materials to dictate national strategy, rather than trying to play a passive, balancing referee is precisely what separates perpetually “developing” nations from those that go on to realise their full potential. Of course, you have people who insist on some voodoo called a “mixed economy”, and claim that’s what China is doing. What they don’t say (or realise) is that this middle-of the-road half-assed “mixed” bs approach is what the most stagnant, perpetually “up and coming” countries have been doing for a while now. Think Brazil, India, South Africa and others. Beyond just its vagueness, the “mixed economy” stuff doesn’t work because whenever a developing state attempts to “balance” public interests with private market forces without establishing absolute strategic control, the private sector ends up controlling the state. Again, see the B, the I and the S in BRICS. This is because private monopolies, a.k.a. oligarchs in energy, telecom, or banking use their profits to buy political influence, dismantle regulations and extract state subsidies without any pressure to deliver public infrastructure. The result is that instead of getting a “dynamic market with government oversight” as promised, the nation gets crony capitalism where risks are socialised onto the public while profits are privatised. See Nigeria and Mexico. The historical reality is that from the West to the Far East, every nation that successfully transformed from poor agrarian societies into industrial powerhouses did so by exercising absolute control over its strategic economic nodes, and not by handing them over to the “efficiency” of the private sector. In the end, controlling the foundations of the economy with an iron fist, while forcing everything built on top of those foundations to compete ruthlessly, as China is doing, is the most proven industrial formula in modern history, and the Americans are openly admitting it now that doing so suits them.

After decades of telling developing nations to privatise and let the invisible hand of the market do its thing, the West is coming out and saying government intervention is the way to go. Here, American political scientist, Elizabeth Economy says the United States, a country that has historically portrayed itself by free-market capitalism, can’t compete without direct state intervention in the economy. She says that if the US wants to compete with China it’s “going to have to adopt some elements of their playbook”. This is is important because she’s effectively saying the Chinese model with its strict control of the commanding heights of the economy is simply the better model. This moment would have been a great opportunity for the US to showcase to the world once and for all that letting the market dominate the economy is superior to having the state dictate the economy. Instead, we have the supposedly most pro-market country in the world coming out to say the markets simply cannot do it when forced to compete against state intervention. This goes even harder when you realise that Economy is responding to a question asking her if the market is not a better option. He response is that China has created a “playbook” of state intervention, and the United States doesn’t have anything to compete with. And you thought they had capitalism. All of this just reinforces what serious people have been saying for years, that taking firm control over energy, finance, heavy transit and raw materials to dictate national strategy, rather than trying to play a passive, balancing referee is precisely what separates perpetually “developing” nations from those that go on to realise their full potential. Of course, you have people who insist on some voodoo called a “mixed economy”, and claim that’s what China is doing. What they don’t say (or realise) is that this middle-of the-road half-assed “mixed” bs approach is what the most stagnant, perpetually “up and coming” countries have been doing for a while now. Think Brazil, India, South Africa and others. Beyond just its vagueness, the “mixed economy” stuff doesn’t work because whenever a developing state attempts to “balance” public interests with private market forces without establishing absolute strategic control, the private sector ends up controlling the state. Again, see the B, the I and the S in BRICS. This is because private monopolies, a.k.a. oligarchs in energy, telecom, or banking use their profits to buy political influence, dismantle regulations and extract state subsidies without any pressure to deliver public infrastructure. The result is that instead of getting a “dynamic market with government oversight” as promised, the nation gets crony capitalism where risks are socialised onto the public while profits are privatised. See Nigeria and Mexico. The historical reality is that from the West to the Far East, every nation that successfully transformed from poor agrarian societies into industrial powerhouses did so by exercising absolute control over its strategic economic nodes, and not by handing them over to the “efficiency” of the private sector. In the end, controlling the foundations of the economy with an iron fist, while forcing everything built on top of those foundations to compete ruthlessly, as China is doing, is the most proven industrial formula in modern history, and the Americans are openly admitting it now that doing so suits them.

Sizwe SikaMusi

17,897 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

LAWRENCE LEPARD: "This is one of the best investment opportunities out there. It actually is the best in my opinion, if you can handle the volatility... having a zero allocation to it is just absolutely nuts." "When you buy into a network that's going to get adopted by everybody, the returns are just insane. My opinion is that Bitcoin is the monetary network of the future." "...And when it is... guess what, these are 5 million a coin or more." "The people that run the government, their major goal is to keep themselves in power and to keep the system running. They don't care about inflation. They say they do, but they don't. And they lie to us about that. And we know that if and when the sharp end of the stick comes for them, they're going to print the money to keep things going."

LAWRENCE LEPARD: "This is one of the best investment opportunities out there. It actually is the best in my opinion, if you can handle the volatility... having a zero allocation to it is just absolutely nuts." "When you buy into a network that's going to get adopted by everybody, the returns are just insane. My opinion is that Bitcoin is the monetary network of the future." "...And when it is... guess what, these are 5 million a coin or more." "The people that run the government, their major goal is to keep themselves in power and to keep the system running. They don't care about inflation. They say they do, but they don't. And they lie to us about that. And we know that if and when the sharp end of the stick comes for them, they're going to print the money to keep things going."

Simply Bitcoin

32,186 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

The “it’s rigged” people say the mail is rigged and the machines are rigged so it seems their solution is to not vote and keep losing? Why are we still listening to them? There is a changing of the guard in the California Republican Party - we’re doing it differently now. Get in.

The “it’s rigged” people say the mail is rigged and the machines are rigged so it seems their solution is to not vote and keep losing? Why are we still listening to them? There is a changing of the guard in the California Republican Party - we’re doing it differently now. Get in.

Elizabeth Barcohana

58,147 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

“A lot of people are familiar with the Jekyll Island meeting that created the Federal Reserve, and that happens in 1913. If you look at 1913, we become less and less of a republic, and the presidency of FDR is even more pivotal in that because he forms something totally different. He's elected to the presidency four times, creates the New Deal, and starts ruling more by executive order. Bush did it, Obama did it, Trump has done it, and that's a real problem because people didn't vote for executive orders.” Jeremy Ryan Slate

“A lot of people are familiar with the Jekyll Island meeting that created the Federal Reserve, and that happens in 1913. If you look at 1913, we become less and less of a republic, and the presidency of FDR is even more pivotal in that because he forms something totally different. He's elected to the presidency four times, creates the New Deal, and starts ruling more by executive order. Bush did it, Obama did it, Trump has done it, and that's a real problem because people didn't vote for executive orders.” Jeremy Ryan Slate

Shawn Ryan

193,307 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

The Deep State is an ENEMY of the American people. President Donald J. Trump: "Another official inside the FBI wrote that she was running 'a shadow government' to keep intelligence about China's election meddling from becoming known and to keep it away from the honorable press."

The Deep State is an ENEMY of the American people. President Donald J. Trump: "Another official inside the FBI wrote that she was running 'a shadow government' to keep intelligence about China's election meddling from becoming known and to keep it away from the honorable press."

Trump War Room

52,632 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🇺🇸 Bessent announced the Treasury buyback double-down, and yields erased the move within 24 hours. Macro investor George Gammon called it publicly and gave it a week. It took a day. His point is that long-term rates answer to growth and inflation expectations, and no announcement changes either one. The buybacks amount to selling short-term debt to buy long-term debt. On the sanctions, he's blunter still: "If sanctions would have worked, why didn't you do it before? It's just a total cop out, so they have a narrative to take into midterms." George Gammon

🇺🇸 Bessent announced the Treasury buyback double-down, and yields erased the move within 24 hours. Macro investor George Gammon called it publicly and gave it a week. It took a day. His point is that long-term rates answer to growth and inflation expectations, and no announcement changes either one. The buybacks amount to selling short-term debt to buy long-term debt. On the sanctions, he's blunter still: "If sanctions would have worked, why didn't you do it before? It's just a total cop out, so they have a narrative to take into midterms." George Gammon

Mario Nawfal

61,132 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🇺🇸🇮🇷 George Gammon warns that an Iran-driven oil spike could turn existing cracks in the U.S. economy into a full-blown crisis. If oil hits $120–130, higher inflation expectations could push rates higher, making private-sector debt and massive AI infrastructure borrowing increasingly expensive. George says the real danger is duration: “If it stays at $120 for a month, okay. If it stays at $120 for 6 months, we got a big problem.” The result could be falling stocks, collapsing AI CapEx, and eventually a weaker labor market. George Gammon

🇺🇸🇮🇷 George Gammon warns that an Iran-driven oil spike could turn existing cracks in the U.S. economy into a full-blown crisis. If oil hits $120–130, higher inflation expectations could push rates higher, making private-sector debt and massive AI infrastructure borrowing increasingly expensive. George says the real danger is duration: “If it stays at $120 for a month, okay. If it stays at $120 for 6 months, we got a big problem.” The result could be falling stocks, collapsing AI CapEx, and eventually a weaker labor market. George Gammon

Mario Nawfal

56,131 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

The same people calling RFK Jr. “dangerous” are the ones defending a broken system that treats chronic disease instead of preventing it. They keep handing out bandaids while millions die from heart disease, diabetes, and obesity. RFK is actually trying to fix the root of the problem and push Americans toward healthier lives. It seems democrats would rather protect the system as it is, even if that means the chronic disease crisis keeps getting worse.

The same people calling RFK Jr. “dangerous” are the ones defending a broken system that treats chronic disease instead of preventing it. They keep handing out bandaids while millions die from heart disease, diabetes, and obesity. RFK is actually trying to fix the root of the problem and push Americans toward healthier lives. It seems democrats would rather protect the system as it is, even if that means the chronic disease crisis keeps getting worse.

Jeffery Mead

47,472 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

🇺🇸 The 10-year hit 5.05 percent and mortgages crossed 7 again, so a diesel export ban would hand Americans a second bill on top of the first The rate jump came on strong PMI numbers, and George Gammon spent the day asking which part was growth and which part was inflation, because 6 percent nominal growth that is all price increases turns every car loan and mortgage into a tax. His answer leans inflation, and the war explains why. Long rates barely moved in February, when markets bet on a short shock and then on the MOU. They started climbing the day the MOU died and have climbed with every week that passes without a deal. The export ban is where he gets blunt. Refiners can't store what they can't ship, so runs get cut, supply shrinks, and when the ban lifts the price jumps higher than where it started. His image is a beach ball held underwater. It always comes back up, and it comes up faster. George Gammon

🇺🇸 The 10-year hit 5.05 percent and mortgages crossed 7 again, so a diesel export ban would hand Americans a second bill on top of the first The rate jump came on strong PMI numbers, and George Gammon spent the day asking which part was growth and which part was inflation, because 6 percent nominal growth that is all price increases turns every car loan and mortgage into a tax. His answer leans inflation, and the war explains why. Long rates barely moved in February, when markets bet on a short shock and then on the MOU. They started climbing the day the MOU died and have climbed with every week that passes without a deal. The export ban is where he gets blunt. Refiners can't store what they can't ship, so runs get cut, supply shrinks, and when the ban lifts the price jumps higher than where it started. His image is a beach ball held underwater. It always comes back up, and it comes up faster. George Gammon

Mario Nawfal

262,775 просмотров • 3 дней назад

🇺🇸 Suppress every small forest fire and you eventually get one that takes out half of California. Macro investor George Gammon uses that to explain what the Fed does to markets, because clearing out the underbrush is what keeps the system healthy. Let 2008 run its course, he argues, and the prudent banks absorb the assets of the reckless ones, leaving everything stronger afterward: "We're propping up all of the sickly banks. We're propping up all of the businesses that really shouldn't be there to begin with." He invokes Milton Friedman's point that everyone fixates on profits while losses matter just as much. George Gammon

🇺🇸 Suppress every small forest fire and you eventually get one that takes out half of California. Macro investor George Gammon uses that to explain what the Fed does to markets, because clearing out the underbrush is what keeps the system healthy. Let 2008 run its course, he argues, and the prudent banks absorb the assets of the reckless ones, leaving everything stronger afterward: "We're propping up all of the sickly banks. We're propping up all of the businesses that really shouldn't be there to begin with." He invokes Milton Friedman's point that everyone fixates on profits while losses matter just as much. George Gammon

Mario Nawfal

52,006 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🇺🇸 What actually controls the dollar? Peter Schiff points to the 1970s: the dollar remained the global reserve currency while collapsing against gold and losing heavily against currencies like the Deutsche Mark and yen. George Gammon agrees on what happened, but not why. His argument is that the global dollar system is much bigger than Washington or even the Federal Reserve, with commercial banks creating dollars through credit around the world. “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘦𝘥... 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩.” That’s the fascinating disagreement underneath the debate. Schiff focuses on Washington debasing the dollar. Gammon thinks we may be dramatically overestimating how much of the dollar Washington actually controls. George Gammon, Peter Schiff

🇺🇸 What actually controls the dollar? Peter Schiff points to the 1970s: the dollar remained the global reserve currency while collapsing against gold and losing heavily against currencies like the Deutsche Mark and yen. George Gammon agrees on what happened, but not why. His argument is that the global dollar system is much bigger than Washington or even the Federal Reserve, with commercial banks creating dollars through credit around the world. “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘦𝘥... 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩.” That’s the fascinating disagreement underneath the debate. Schiff focuses on Washington debasing the dollar. Gammon thinks we may be dramatically overestimating how much of the dollar Washington actually controls. George Gammon, Peter Schiff

Mario Nawfal

27,281 просмотров • 15 дней назад