- Russia does not want to fight a war, but in order to force political and security concessions, it must convince the West that it’s prepared to fight.
1/6
2/6 -The implications of a full-scale Russian invasion would impact #oil, #naturalgas, #fertilizer, nickel, and wheat prices
-Russia has deployed over 100k soldiers to its border. According to the DoD, Russia is ready to invade with the goal of conquering the entire country
3/6 -According to Reuters, Russia has even shipped blood and medical supplies to the frontlines.
To counter the threat, the US has placed 8,500 troops on “heightened alert” (That’s less than 10% of Russia’s deployed strength… Putin must be terrified).
4/6 -The US is promising the EU enough oil and natural gas to meet demand if Russia cuts them off
-Meanwhile, Sergey Lavrov has repeated what Russian officials have insisted for months: Russia does not want war, but is prepared to respond to provocations from the US and Ukraine
5/6 As for Kyiv – it has been telling everyone to chill out. In the words of Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov: “Don’t worry, sleep well” as Russian and Ukrainian officials hold talks in Paris and promise to maintain a ceasefire in Eastern Ukraine “unconditionally.”
6/6 Don’t feel bad if you’re confused. On the surface, very little of this makes sense. Geopolitics, however, can light our way – and can also help zero in on exactly how and why this should matter to global investors as well.
1/6 "If you claim to be serious about reducing our carbon intensity but you are opposed to nuclear power, you aren’t actually serious about reducing our carbon intensity – you are a scientifically ignorant poseur." @DoombergT #COP26
2/6 "If nuclear fission was discovered today, without all of the historical political baggage, it would be heralded as the miracle solution to solving the climate change problem.” @wolfejosh
3/6 Energy Returned on Energy Invested (EROEI) means for every unit of energy invested, you receive energy back of
"It frames the broader discussion on fiscal and monetary expenditure because it outlines an unconstrained model of spending for a country which has sovereignty over its own currency (which is a central pillar of MMT)."
(2/7)"Modern Monetary Theory focuses primarily on the efforts of the fiscal authority (government), whilst the role of the monetary authority (central banks) is to facilitate these efforts. Again, government is elevated to the top of the economic hierarchy."
(3/7)A country who has sovereignty over its own currency:
1) Issues its own currency 2) can’t have debts in its own currency if it issues its own currency
@RepCasten this is a long tweet but hopefully, you get through it. We just finished the recent @FinancialTimes article covering the suicide of Alex Kearns where you are quoted saying, “We need to do something to make sure these kinds of things don’t happen.”
We completely agree. What we hope, however, is that you are not proposing legislation to restrict retail investors from entering the market, but rather, find a better alternative to get them exposure to markets in a better way.
May we suggest that instead of legislating away their ability to gain access to the market via options or fractional share trading, we legislate away the account minimums charged by institutional active managers (not ETF or mutual fund managers), to allow the same type of
(1/8) If we just focus on returns, buying the dip has worked well for retail investors. As @FortuneMagazine wrote earlier this month, “Retail investors outperformed in part because they were quick to snap up value stocks as the rally gained traction...
(2/8) ...since mid-May, the rally has shifted toward cyclicals, small-caps, and economically sensitive stocks, Goldman notes. “Stocks with these qualities…were quickly embraced by value-seeking retail investors, and now make up a large portion of our retail basket.”
(3/8) Retail investors have apparently even outperformed seasoned hedge fund managers. The Twilight Zone is real. But, as we have discussed over the last few weeks, to what extent isn’t this actually fair?
(1/6) The policies of the @federalreserve over the last decade have suppressed financial distress, which has curtailed the forces of creative destruction, the system of checks and balances required throughout the business cycle, and for a well-functioning economy.
(2/6) The decade pre-COVID had seen the opposite of this. The monetary policies adopted by the fed prevented creative destruction to naturally take place as easy financial conditions allowed for less efficient companies to survive.
(3/6) The total number of listed companies began declining; fewer companies went public, and increased M&A activity decreased the total count of companies that were already public. Additionally, through share buybacks, companies continued to ‘retire’ shares at a record pace.
(1/3) Over the next ten years, ~$30 trillion of deficits plus maturities need to be financed. Historically, the largest buyers of USTs (foreign, intragovernmental, and the fed), will all come into focus as the willingness of buyers gets tested by exogenous factors...
(2/3) Intragovernmental accounts are beginning to see net outflows (as opposed to inflows which are required to purchase USTs and subsequently finance the budget deficit...as Boomer retirements accelerate, so does the depletion of these accounts
(3/3) Foreign buyers: The re-domestication of supply chains we may see in a post-COVID world may decouple the implicit quid pro quo between the countries that produce and export to the US its goods, and subsequently, buy the one thing the US exports the most of; debt.