MacroVoices #453 Dr. Pippa Malmgren: Unconventional Insights on US Presidential Election
01:31:18 Share

This is machar o voices, the free weekly financial podcast, targeting professional finance, high net worth individuals, family offices and other sophisticated investors. Mro voices is all about the brightest minds in the world of finance and macro economics. Telling IT like IT is bullish er barish no holds bar now here are your hosts eric tow and Patrick season A.

Macrovoice as episode four fifty three was produced on november seventh twenty twenty four i'm eric towns ant, it's election weak in the united states so best selling author and former U. S. Presidential adviser doctor pippa melbourn returns is this week's feature interview guest. Pippa and I will discuss what we know so far of the election results, what chAllenges may still lay ahead and what the implications and knock on effects for financial markets in the economy are likely to be. This was a very long interview for macro o voices well over an hour, but I think you'll find all the content very much worth your attention.

And i'm Patrick's resonant with the microscope board week over week as of the clothes. On wednesday, november six, two thousand twenty four, the december S M, P five hundred futures up one hundred and eighty one basis points, trading at fifty nine and fifty eight markets, ripping higher as election anxiety turns to clarity, we will take a closer look at that chart and the key technical levels to watch in the post game segment, the U. S. Dollar index up ninety seven basis points training at one or five eleven now a stone throw away from year as the december wti cruel contract up four hundred and forty nine basis points training at seventy, once sixty nine. In spite of a negative backdrop, all dips continue to be bought.

I'll take a look at that chart in the post game and there will have the ei venti data, the december r bob gasoline up three hundred and six spaces pots trading at two o two december gold contract down four hundred and forty six places points training at twenty six seventy six has a bigger correction begun or is this the big beyon dip copper down two hundred and thirty basis points trading at four and a quarter urania im down three hundred fifty six places points trading at seventy seven fifteen and the us. Ten year treasury ed up fifteen basis points trading at four forty three. The key used to watch next week is the core CPI and ppi inflation numbers and the core retail sales.

This week's feature interview guest is a selling author and former U. S. Presidential adviser doctor pepper mountain m.

eran. Pippa discuss the election outcome, government transparency, geopolitical implications and more. Eric interview with paper mm Green is coming up as macrovoice continues right here and macrovoice dotcom.

And now with this week's special guest, here's your host, eric towns.

Joining me now is best selling author and former U. S. Presidential adviser doctor pepper mill grin. People up. Let's start by informing our listeners. Ers, we are recording very early on wednesday morning, just a few hours before former president trump was reported to have basically won the presidential election in a massive red sweep with republicans taking control of the White house.

The senate, the house of representative, still looks like a little bit early to call decisively, but IT appears there's a good chance that republicans will take both chAmbers of congress and the White house. So the big question is, okay, does that actually mean that this races is over? Or is this just the beginning? And we're headed for, you know, a mountain of law, fair and so forth. Give us the road map of what lays ahead. Do we have to worry about unfaithful electors and refusals to certify results .

and so forth? Or is this a done deal? So it's hard to see the law are happening given the breath of this vote return.

I mean, this is a sweep by any measure. Now the media is not gonna call IT a landslide, but IT sort of is a landslide. So that makes that much harder to fight this thing.

So we might get pockets of that. But I don't think that we're going to get what would have happened if the vote had been a lot tighter. And this is the important point, I think.

No, I was up all night. I woke up this morning and early to do this call with you. I think this is much bigger than politics.

This is a cultural moment. This is a transformation in our understanding of the whole power structure of the country. So for example, IT is also that the media just got thrown out of office in the sense that the media did not report this grounds.

Well, the media across the board basically said that trump was a was a bad guy and the policies were all wrong and refuse to report the most important person, I think, in this whole election, which is bobbie Kennedy, who has played extraordinary part in producing the outcome that we've just seen. But he was completely silenced and dismissed. And so I think, for example, we've got to dig into this.

This is why jeff bezos at the washington post announced that they're not going to endure a candidate wasn't just about that. IT was knowing that the minute they announced that a whole bunch of the staff members would be very upset and they would resign, which is exactly what happened. So now he doesn't have to fire them.

And why would he want to fire them? Because, look, he's a tech bro. So he's got access to all the data. He seize this coming, as do all the tech brows. And that is partly why they joined with trim.

And he realizes, I don't have the team at the washing post that can report what's going to happen, because there are so heavily biased against this group of people, they literally won't be able to write the story. So how do you clean out the news room to make space for people who can? If you fire them, you've got to pay them.

If they resign, you don't have to pay anybody. And so I think bezz is already telling us the media was wrong footed about this. So that's just one element of the sort of culture aspect of what we're talking about.

So I don't think this is just a political result. This is something much more profound. Does that make sense?

That makes perfect sense. I definitely think you're on to something and saying it's a cultural shift. So let's take that theme a little bit deeper. There have been a lot of and i'm not talking about you know, fringe blogger, but serious, prominent people on the public stage on both sides of this have argued that what was at stake in this election was democracy itself.

And on the the democrats side, they had predicted if if trump were to take office again, he would seek revenge on the democrats party, he might even invoke martial law. On the other side, elon mosque was particularly outspoken and saying that if trump were not elected, that would mark our last free and fair election because the democrats would import enough illegal immigrants into the swing states to guarantee a new party democrat government going forward. Pippa, those are incredibly, incredibly extreme views.

Are they justified? Was democracy really at stake? And hang on if if IT was what could happen next from the very significant number of americans who still, since nearly believe that trumps reelection will literally cause the demise of the united states, a lot of people believe that. A lot of people believe the opposite, that that his reelection was the only way to save IT. But boy, this seems to meet like ingredients for A A lot of .

conflict indeed. And this is why this is a very delicate moment.

There's a kind of cognitive dissonance across the country, and it's not only the people on the democrat side who will be in shock, but I know for sure the trump team were asking themselves for the last two or three weeks, how is that possible that the numbers are showing? We're so far ahead, what are we getting wrong? why? Why are we not seeing the reality more clearly? Have we drunk our own cooler? So they're also having a kind of adjustment to the reality of what we see before us.

So this is a delicate moment in a moment where I think nobody left or right should be wing in with a lot of emotion. To your question, I think that i've i've characterized this race is not between the left and the right, but between the old establishment and the new anti establishment. So the old establishment was both left and right, and the new establishment is both left and right.

What's the difference? The old dist. Establishment really likes the structure of government. They like the bureaucracy. They like the rule system.

They like the old fashion way things get done, which is, you know, a lot of deals that are not a visible to the public, the new entire establishment crowd, let's go through who they are because they just won. And they have a completely different approach. They think the bureaucracy is a sign of disease that needs to be cut back and made more efficient.

Um government is dsf unctions and needs to be cleaned up. So this is not left and right. This is old establishment versus the new anti establishment.

So let's talk about what who's in the new anti establishment? Well, I think and I I wrote yesterday a peace on election day saying the real winner of this race is bobbi Kennedy. And I say that for multiple reasons.

Number one, he is the one who said, let's hold hands again. Let's get democrats to republic plans to work together. And everyone said, that's insane.

That's impossible. No one is ever going to do that. And what actually happened was IT happened on both sides.

So kala Harris ends up holding hands with dick tiny. I mean, you cannot get more extreme than those two, right? And that shocked everybody.

And on the on the right you got Donald trump holding hands with tosa garboard, right? So suddenly this fantastical notion that everybody could hold hands again actually materialized, and that was solely the work of bobbie Kennedy. Second, he is the guy who said, the real issue for the country is the outcome of this bureaucracy.

It's not the bureaucracy and the structure government itself, it's the outcomes. And the outcome is incredibly poor health for americans. You know, the beginning of this campaign, health was not a campaign issue.

Then suddenly, maha, make amErica healthy again, was everywhere. And what I noticed, you know, I moved to washington, D. C. In january because I thought this was gonna a be a truly historic election, I made a big personal bet that I was going to be important to have a front row seat on this thing, which I did.

And because i've been living abroad for so long, I had a very unusual situation, which was a lot of people gave me a free pass. You know, in a year when everybody was like, which team are you on? Because I won't talk to you until I know which camp you're in.

I was able to talk to basically all three camps, the democrats, republicans and this new force by the Kennedy. And what I realized is that they were also locked down in the Kennedy team, that the republican democrats were so locked down into their belief systems, they couldn't comprehend this new force. So they didn't anticipate that health was gonna become such big issue.

They didn't anticipate that Kennedy basically owns the under forty five year old vote in the united states. It's a massive use movement. It's much bigger than the obama use movement.

And so why? Why is IT that? We didn't hear about that. So I started digging into IT even more, and I realized I remember meeting with one of obama's advisers who said I was like, why are you guys not reporting this? This is massive.

What's happening with Kennedy? And they said, our best strategies, pretend, is not happening to don't mention, and maybe IT will go away. And second, we don't know how to deal with IT because the people he's bringing in have literally never participated in politics.

So we don't have their mobile numbers, their emails, we don't know how to track them. We have no idea how they think because they are independent. Now that is the word of this election, and I would call this moment a kind of independence day, as in this is a moment when you really, really see that roughly half of americans no longer identify as left, right.

They identify as independent of the system. And you notice in the election coverage, the mainstream media had a really hard time. They kept saying, we just don't know about these independence.

We don't know which way they're gonna break. And the answer is they don't break left, right. They break left on some issues and write on other issues.

And that's exactly what Kennedy introduced, where he said, you can have views to go with both directions. You can say, I want lower taxes, which should the line you at trump. And I don't want such aggressive immigration policy that no one can get in the border. And that which aligns with Harris, and that really filmic ed, everybody but the health care piece. Let me just say one more thing about this because I think it's really crucial.

So when I spoke to people in the media about why aren't you covering the Kennedy angle and they said, look, the largest source of advertising revenue in the media, whether you're talking C N N, C N B C, new york times, washington post, all of them are totally dependent on advertising, particularly from big farmer and big food. And so candidates had said, i'm gotten basically not only clean up the medical health care aspect of public policy, but I want to make advertising of pharmaceutical s on the public airwaves illegal. As IT is in every single nation except the united states in new zealand, these are the only two countries that permit direct advertising, two individuals.

And so basically the the advertisers said to the media, don't report this guy. And if you do, you have to make them sound like a nut case. And that's what they did.

And what they underestimated is that the entire country had become very uneasy with health policy, with the idea that, you know, for example, the whole issue of Mandatory vaccines, which, again, Kennedy didn't say there should be no vaccines, but he was portrayed saying that what he said was, we can have vaccines, but especially if you have novel vaccines that haven't been tested, that don't have a history, you couldn't mend them. You can make them available, but you can Mandate them. And this sort of more thoughtful, moderate approach, of course, is a big threat to these traditional industries.

And so what did this reflect? IT reflected the fact that the united states has become more corporations in its political management, and the public recognize that. The same thing with big food and the argument that, you know you basically have to accept the food you're given and you know, we've had a wave of instagram ers over the last year comparing the ingredients in american mcDonald's french rise versus european mcDonald's french rise.

Know in europe you you basically have foreign dienas. You've got salt potatoes, uh oil and um actually remember the fourth one off to my head but in the U S. You have nineteen and the nineteen or all these chemicals that are really about making IT easier for the vender, not for the consumer.

And so all of this gained immense traction. But I think there's one final thing, which is the core of what we're witnessing here. And that again came from Kennedy and a cold shanahan, his vice presidental candidate.

And that is the idea that technology, particularly artificial intelligence, can be brought to bear on the government database so that we can figure out what's the true situation as opposed to what we're told. Now, at the beginning, I remember everybody was laughing like, who the hackston shana hand, and why do we care? We don't. But I was like, wait a minute, you've got a really serious A I expert, someone who has created a law firm run by AI, which allows the poor to access legal services in a way that was never possible before.

And what is the intention that Kennedy and shana hand bring is that they want to get into the government database and figure out what is actually going on, how to actually make government more efficient, how to understand what is the bureaucracy up to, and are they really pursuing things that are in the public interest, or are there independent agendas? And so you could think about this as a moment where, in a sense, the democrats were arguing that government should be telling the social media platforms what who could, could, who would be allowed to go forward as a voice and who should be suppressed, right? Which is kind of reflecting there's a right, right way to talk about things and a wrong way to talk about things.

So all of the surveilLance, all of the attention is focused on who might not be in line. Where's what Kennedy and shinhan we're saying is let's turn the tables and have a look at what government is doing that have the surveilLance on the government, not the government, surveilling the citizens. And that resonated throughout the country.

So I think it's Kennedy and shanahan who brought in the tech brows. And once trump announced that he had them on his team, right? B talking elon mask, vivek ra, swam Peter till and all those guys have that attitude that technology is going to bring transparency and accuracy y to government.

So to your original question is, at the beginning of the end of democracy, what we have is a tech community that wants a new form of much more transparent democracy. And that is a problem for anybody who's been on the other side running the bureaucracy as if it's a private fifteen that will never be visible to the public. And I think it's about to become visible to the public.

Papa, I couldn't agree more. I think what just got kicked out of office was the left, right paradise. You'd have a lot of ordinary people say, you know, I know really relate to the mainstream, like, I can't like the Donald trump, the bernie Sanders kind of candidates.

And the political elites would roll their eyes and looked down their noises and say, you stupid little trump, you don't know anything about politics. Donald trump and bernie Sanders are exact opposite extremes of the left right paradigm, which is what politics is all about. You don't know anything and we, the people are speaking back and say no actually, it's your left right paradise and your latest bullshit attitude that we are firing.

We're not interested in the establishment anymore. I think that's exactly what's going on. I want to come back to Bobby Kennedy and just I think that's super important. But since it's trump that was just reelected, I want to start with what I think is a really important question because trump has been widely criticize and I agree on on this very strongly.

He campaigned for his first term on this populist and the forever wars drain the swamp platform, only to then surround himself in his first term office with a cabinet full of neocons like mike piao, nicky hal I giant boltt, who seem to represent the antithesis of everything that trump s supposed stood for. And prinkly ly IT made him look like he was, you know, he had an idea that was popular, but he didn't seem to know how to prosecuted in washington like he was too much of a rocky in politics. What's your outlook for the trump forty seven cabinet? Is he going to do a Better job of getting the right people who are aligned with with core values? And can they really drain the swap?

Yeah, he has admitted that recently, saying no because, again, bob Kennedy said to him why the he said, exactly. We just said, why the hat did you surround yourself in neocon? They did IT in a public discussion.

And trump said he basically said, I didn't even know I was gonna win. I was completely unprepared to govern. And I took the people that the donors told me I should take.

And so that's how he ends up surrounded by neil kins. This time he has been in office, and he understands Better, not account rely, but Better how the game works. And he surrounded himself with a whole different crew, which is this technology community, who are in a position to give him actual data.

And also, they tend to lean a little softer, right? They, they, the tech community is not fundamentally racist. They are not fundamentally against liberal values, right? They, they want a kind of old fashioned democrat approach to things.

Actually, it's really an old fashion republican as well. It's basically government should leave you alone at home. So whether you you know, whatever your personal preferences are, government shouldn't be chasing you down is in your own home and preventing you from leading the life that you want to lead.

So that's a whole different tone than the neocon crowd. And also these guys are very anti war. They are they're all against continuing being in, you know, ongoing wars.

That's the opposite of where the team was around trump when he started last time. So I think we're going to see a profoundly different trump outcome, one that's probably more closely aligned with trump s actual positions. But i'd also say trump is a lot older and I think his energy levels are not what they were then.

And so he's not in a position to have the internal fights that he was in the past. So I think we're going to see more of a cabinet approach then people realize now are, having said that, this is potentially, depending on the house, an incredible historic Mandate. But the thing is a Mandate of this magnitude, if IT holds, that brings a huge responsibility to actually make these changes really, really fast.

For example, I think it's a Mandate for a tax reform. And they can they can do IT now if they have the house, right, because that's where you start the revenue earning. And so who will trump have? I personally put my money on Scott basin, who I think will make a very serious secretary of the treasury.

And he's you highly experienced investor, very, you know, very highly regarded, very measured. And I think that's the sort of person who will shephard through some fundamental reforms, but in a non aggressive none, you know, in a way that the public can absorb what's happening and understand as we move into new territory. I mean, that face the whole country once stacks reform, everybody feels the code has become too complex.

They don't understand IT. It's been benefiting the wealthy more than the poor at setter, at set setter. So this is a moment to address that kind of issue. I think trump is already surrounded themselves with people who can handle this magical ude of an event. Similarly defense policy. And you know there's a lot of betting on my gallagher as uh, a secretary defense, for example, but certainly he'll be central and that's a person who really knows the defense community comes from that background but will execute trumps views on let's make a deal, let's make a deal in ukraine to end the war let's make a deal that, you know gets us out of the the immediate confrontation with china.

You know, have to fight with them about trade and terrace and the rules of the game for the international economy but is taiwan actually central to the american national interest? Maybe there's a way to cut a deal that allows china to have something, allows taiwan to have something, allows amErica have something, something that couldn't even be considered under the previous administration. In other words, is there some third way? And I think somebody like gallagher, that's the way he thinks. So these are some examples of a very different kind of cabinet than we had under trump around one people.

Let's come back specifically to bobbie Kennedy. Your subject piece was excEllent. I encourage our listeners to read IT. You can find the link in your research round up email. Now what's been discussed so far is Kenny's role in maha make amErica healthy again, with no real mention of exactly what role he would be in.

One of the speculative rumors is that he might be our attorney general so that he could act against farmer and make amErica healthy again, but that would also imply that he might have other roles as a cherney general, maybe even in bringing people to account for their behavior during the by administration. And that obviously is a very controversial subject because democrats have accused president truman saying he would weapon ze the justice system against the democratic party. And of course, the mugger republicans are all saying no. And how that, you know, they're just accusing president trump of what they are already guilty of and what he needs to hold them accountable for is IT likely that bobbie Kennedy would be the atterley general and what would that look like?

So I know there's a lot of speculation about this and that's a call that you know you can't really offer people cabinet positions until you actually become president. So there's a lot of fluidity until we, you know, get a little bit further on. Having said that, trump has created a transition team.

They've been up and running for a while. This is very unusual. They were acting as if they would win and preparing to be ready on day one, much to the staging of the democrats.

They were doing IT without needing federal funds. That means the democrats couldn't get any visibility on who's on the transition team, what does their focus. And so in a sense that that was very clever of the triumph team to really begin the preparation early.

What I think honestly, and this will be controversial, is that the most significant roles that Kennedy is going to play or on two fronts, number one, the health care piece. And I don't think the markets have been properly discounting what that means for certain industries. But the more important one is what trump announced, that he's creating a presidential commission on presidential assassination, specifically the J, F, K.

Assassination, the R, F K, which is bob Kennedy is father, and the two assassination attempts on trump. And by putting bobbi Kennedy in that role as chairman of that new presidential commission, which is not a cabinet appointment, that is an independent appointment, and Kennedy said yes. And along with that, trump said, I will declassify all the remaining J, F, K.

Documents, which trump had promised to declassify but had the neocon around him, as I understand, particularly mick pompeo, said him, don't do IT. IT will be so damaging to the U. S.

government. And particular parts of the U. S. Government don't do IT. And so he didn't, but he's changed his mind. And I think my understanding from people around him as a two assassination attempts really changed his mind and put him in a completely different attitude because, of course, that team doesn't think those assassination attempts were random, and they do think that there's been a lack of investigation into them and therefore they wanted know who the hacked is behind this.

And not only who's trying to take out the potential next present, the united states, who's doubt one in a remarkable outcome, but who took out the previous president. Now this is going to be like it's literally uncovering A I wound that's been festering in the american psyche since the sixties. And cleaning that out and cleaning that up is going to be, I think, painful.

Uh, it's kind of reveal things that are going to make the public rethink. They're ending of government and trust in IT. And I think that may prove to be the most important consequential position that he's gonna a have the actual attorney general role.

I do think whoever has that role there is going to be an element of looking back at the past and asking who did this. And let me just add to this, you know, I went to university and at the lantis o economics, and I remember, you know, people come from all over the world to the to the L A. And I remember friends whose parents were in government, and they used to save very casually.

You know, some years my parents are in the cabinet and some years my parents are in prison. And in most countries you go back and forth between power and prison, that's Normal. The us. Has not been like that. But I suspect that we're going to see of that.

We're going to see inquiries into decision making processes and ask, did people pursue this outcome because they were aligned with corporate interest? Did they pursue this outcome because they you believe they could do IT without the public ever finding out right there? There's gonna be a lot of that kind of digging around.

Then the question is, are we're going to see a trump approach, which is throw them in jail or a Kennedy approach, which is now lest time for forgiveness, right? Well, we need is a kind of truth and justice commission. So you get to deal with the fact that these things happen, but you don't condemn everybody forever.

Just as know, when south africa left apartheid, rather than throwing all of the s of the black community and depression, they did a, you know, truth and justice commission and try to help the nation through that period. So this is the question, who will dominate what is found? You know, is that going to be the trump, but had them medan kind of approach or candidates? Let's take a deep breath.

Let's acknowledge the wrong, and let's find a way to move on. And I again suspect, but because so many technology experts are now in the center circle, there's there's gonna be some temping of trumps kind of um new jc desire to you know break a firing squad in right? I think that's where we're gonna go.

People I hear you on what may be going on with to punishment versus forgiveness, but I also like, as you do, to listen to what people in other countries are saying, including countries that are not necessarily our friends, to understand the international perspective. And separately, russian politician demean midway ative, who many analysts is the air apparent to the russian presidents they would.

Putin leaves office in twenty thirty motivates recently said in his reMarks that the ukraine conflict was set to continue indefinitely regardless of who is elected us president, because even if trump tried to intervene, he would be jfk. Nevair is directly insinuating that for decades the united states president has not really bit in charge, and that there is really interesting some deep state force within the U. S.

Government that has the power to literally assassinate the U. S. President if he doesn't play ball with their agenda. Now, papp, twenty years ago, I would have said that is the most ridiculous, absurd russian propaganda, disinformation bullshit i've ever heard. But look, I just watched the president of the united states, Joseph fighting, get fired from the White house.

I'm not sure exactly by who, but IT was Crystal clear when I was announced to expect his stepping out of the race this coming weekend. And then he immediately retorted, said, no, that's baloney. I am not going to get no way and all the sudden, he just go silent for a week and he's gone.

He got fired, pippa. So is that, I mean, you've actually worked in the White house as an advisor to the us. president.

Is IT really possible that there could be powers or forces within the U. S. Intelligence community that are capable of assassinating A U. S. President who won't support their war agenda, is that what happened to jfk, and is IT possible in this day and age that that could happen to present to trump .

and they could get away with IT. Well, this is the question that's on the table, and I would pass IT a part a little bit because and this this is the thing when I say this is a culture change that happening, it's going to be also the culture are not of not just the media, but this intelligence side of what goes on on the government. So you could think of IT as maybe it's factions.

So do you have one faction within the intelligence world that believes what probably look, they all think they know best, right? Because they think they've got the best intelligence that I don't think is true any longer. I actually think that private companies and the google s of this world are vastly Better sources of true intelligence, and that alone has shifted the baLance of power in the political round between those with access to intelligence and those without.

So they don't have a lock anymore on the truth. But also within that committee, you know do you have people who who believe they know best and therefore, they do their utmost influence policy versus factions where they Operators, if they are independent and they're doing what they think is the best thing for the country, but they're not elected to do that. So I I kind of think is the deep state to me, a deep the deep state is a bureaucracy that basically believes cabinet ministers come and go, but we really know what's going on and we really run things behind the scenes. But then there is a counter state.

And is there a group that says, if we don't like the president, we take them out, it's possible and so the question is, you know I mean, we have a lot of issues, uh, where if someone starts to speak about them publicly, they get threatened, they get uh, accidents, they get murdered, right? We do have issues like that. So the question is, who are these guys? And I think now that question is actually going to be as in a way that IT wasn't asked under previous president.

That's why I think katey being in church, this present to commission is materially important. I think that's connected, by the way, to the media as well. Why is IT that certain stories never get any traction?

Why is IT that certain topic s can't be discussed? So here's an example. It's very practical, back to ukraine and made of.

So in the course of trying to negotiate a deal, we ended up with the head of the CIA burns as the principal negotiator. That was partly because biden was not compass mentis, and we do that. And then the vice president is not an expert on foreign policy. So you could couldn't negotiate with her, shouldn't really have a team around her to negotiate.

And because of the hostilities between the biden team and the Harris team, because they have not gotten along well since they won the White house, there wasn't a way to have that conversation with russia and china about can we cut a deal that would bring this water to an end. And I think they're been very obvious signs that everybody wanted to get to the negotiating table. Putin was ready, g was ready, elenchi was ready, and everybody was just waiting for the us.

To come to the table initially, the biden White house said, we too want to deal, but not until like August, september, october because we need IT to get the voters right, right. It's it's got to fit in with the political timetable. And the russians in the chinese, we're like seriously, I mean, combine really and okay, fine, if you're going to do that, i'll just make your life help between now and then, which they have.

So so here we have a situation where the russians and chinese think there's a way to resolve these issues, but not with this particular team. So they end up with burns being kind of the main negotiator now is part of the negotiation, burns publicly said. We, the united states, and in fact, the CIA specifically, we had CIA Operational stations on the russian border.

We had ten of them from twenty fourteen, and everybody was like, what like weight? The russians were right about that. And of course, then the story went away. You was discussed, but, you know, IT popped into the media briefly, and then IT disappeared.

So this is part of the problem, because how do you get to a deal if you don't acknowledge what you've actually been up to? And so that's why, again, I come back to Kennedy, he keeps saying. We know that our position has been that this with the war was totally unprovoked.

And Kennedy, like what was IT? Or did we actually do some stuff to help provoke not just expanding nature, but actually doing, you know, undercover Operations to destabilize this region? And i'm not saying whether this was right or wrong.

I'm sure there were people who can make the case that this was the right thing to do at the time. That's not the problem. The problem is how do you negotiate a deal now in light of what seems to have actually occurred in the past? Of course, nobody in the intelligence world wants to acknowledge they might have made some mistakes.

Nobody like acknowledging that things went and that's why it's maybe worthwhile watching the um the interview that mr less fox just did with talk of carson and everybody y's like whose emory's fox well, SHE is Kennedy campaign manager and she's X C, I, A, and she's also his daughter in law. So she's the next generation of Kennedy SE and I think sh'll play a significant role in this question that we're talking about right now. So he goes on talker and SHE basically says, look, we can say that we are defenders of democracy, but spend our time overturning democracies in other parts of the world is just not consistent.

And we have to look at our past and say, we've somehow had an intelligence community that has been very actively formatting conflicts in different parts of the world that we keep ending up in the last for decades and we can never win the other. Like why are we doing this that these questions are so uncomfortable for the establishment? right? There's now i'm talking about the entire establishment coming and asking questions.

I tried to make a comment on her interview on linked in and when I wrote her name in, I got a little pop up and says, emery's fox, Kennedy cannot be mentioned on linked in and you're like, what how would you mean you can't be mentioned? And it's because this open questioning of how have things been done, and is that the right way to continue doing things, is so chAllenging to the establishment. They would rather silence the people who raise the questions, then respond to the questions.

But this, this, if we ve got a sweep now of the house, the senate and the White house, which means nobody needs to be going through a confirmation process. They're gone to establish the new government very, very fast. And they are going to ask these questions, and there is going to be, uh, as a demand for accountability, a kind of true reckoning of where are we really not what's the official narrative, but where are we really, what are we really, what's the true position so that we can negotiate our way out of a whole bunch of problems.

So I think we're onna see an old intelligence community that is really upset about all this and they will fight all this. They don't want to be held accountable for anything they've done in the past. And a new intelligence community.

And I would say it's on age grounds. A lot of this is an age division. The people who are under forty five are gonna.

You know, there are Better ways of doing this. We did make some mistakes in the past, but that doesn't have to define our future. Let's figure this out. So within each part of government, whether the intelligence community any other, there is going to be this split between the old guard and the new guard.

And so the question isn't gonna be, you know, should we talk them all out, which you know some people will take that view, but which ones are are are ought to be retired and which ones ought to be elevated and promoted into a new way of managing foreign policy? And will those people take the view that it's OK to get rid of a not just a president, but anyone who raises any questions about sensitive subjects, that it's not OK to threaten them a murder them, right? So I don't want to say that we have definitive answers on this. I do want to say we have definitive questions on this that nobody y's been able to pose. And that's a problem for the efficacy of government.

Pepper, I want to go back to who is in the process of getting thrown out of office and why I think that they ought to be thrown out of office. If you talk about some of the things you just talked about, you get deep platform. You said maybe IT wasn't an unprovoked invasion of ukraine that russia did in february of twenty twenty two.

Maybe IT was provoked. Well, if you say that, as glen Greenwald has been saying for many years, as tucker carlson has said, you get deep platform. You get kicked off of everything except rumble. Rumble is basically been made illegal in several countries because there's people telling a different story there if you want to do something like play.

The recording of Victoria newland basically picking a new cabinet for the the puppet government that they were installing in ukraine after the midon massacre re, which some people have even speculated the CIA might have been involved in you you can play that Victoria newland basically chose the new government of ukraine recording or you get deep platform because that's not allowed d to be broadcast in media. It's off limits. IT seems like what's happening is maybe the public is saying enough of that shit we're tired of.

This is what's happening here. The corporate media, the television news, which has been in charge of our information flow for more than half a decade for both of our lifetimes. Are they getting fired right now in its independent media about to replace them? If so, are we going to start to see more of the truth? Or are we going to see more platforms like rumble being outlaw around different countries around the world? Is this already happened in brazil and I think also in france?

Okay, here's the deal. Like if you suggested that the U. S. Intelligence agencies were active in provoking the situation we have now in ukraine. Yeah, you got the platform.

But what do you do when the head of the CIA tells you that that that's what they were doing? And there's an article written by mat taibi from february to twenty seven, twenty twenty four called CIA ukraine exchange pre divorce propaganda and IT says the new york times exposes out years of in savery details about ukraine's relationship with the c CIA. And so what did the head of the cic? He says, well, actually, yes, we did have.

We had a CIA supported network of spy bases constructed in the last eight years, including twelve secret locations along the russian border. Like this is, this is not someone speculating. This is the agency telling you this is what we've been doing.

Okay, now we're in a different conversation, which is what's the best way to negotiate, create our way out of a disaster, which, by the way, is potentially provoking the use of nuclear weapons, right? It's only a few weeks ago that putin try to do a test launch of their largest nuclear weapons, which happen to be destroyed on launch. But you know and a look even yesterday, the us um actually didn't see whether we did IT or not, but the announcement was that we were launching an icb m test just as the polls were closing from vandenberg airbase.

Like wait, what the hack, what's going on with signaling here. So a lot that means that the stakes are incredibly high. So I don't think now if this selection result holds, even if the house ends up as democrats in some, you know, if that we're still waiting on a number of the number of districts to come in, but I think it's no longer gonna be possible to just cancel people for saying things that government officials themselves know to be true.

So now will alternative media be a Better source? Well, that already has been and I think now IT really will be because there is a wonderful article that's worth reading as well on this by a guy called uh eury berliner and he wrote A A peace some months back saying there was entitled i've been an npr for twenty five years here's how we lost america's trust and he ended up getting fired over this article because basically he said we've done the public a disservice by not telling them what's actually going on but what we want to be going on, what we hope is going on. And because of the newsrooms, you know, having, you know, a particular inclination in terms of political philosophy, there weren't many people at npr saying trump would be good for the country, obviously. Well, now he wins.

And so can you trust M, P, R to give you to do as well? They didn't give you the news. And this article explains why that wasn't right, because the big emphasis of national public radio should be that its national and public, but instead they kind of chose en sides.

Now the management of npr said this is outrageous, and of course, but that's not true, but it's gonna very difficult to maintain that position with this political result, because I gotto go to the public and say, we didn't we didn't give you any heads up that there was any possibility that this was gonna happen. We missed IT. And again, I come back to the jeff bezz decision over at the washington post.

I don't think it's random. It's a recognition that there's a whole new set of stories they need to be covered in a whole new way. And the old folks who were doing the news coverage will never be able to report. This is so far out of their um ability, they just can't.

So you actually need a new group of people and that's why and I think a lot of bombers who had all been washing traditional media, they're also going, wait a minute, how did I miss this? And the answer is because you weren't watching alternative media where you get a whole lot more information about what's really going on. So again, there's a kind of discounts around all of this that has to be managed. Just the recognition of weight. I don't know where I am on the map, and they're gonna be a lot of americans today who feel they cannot identify where they are on the map of reality.

Speaking of alternative media, your own most recent subject piece on Bobby Kennedy suggested that there might be an even bigger shift going on out of the left, right political paradigm, which is persisted for all of our lifetimes into a new paradigm where its establishment, or I let's say, old establishment versus the new anti establishment.

And you said that some of the prominent tech pro, the elon mosques, the mark sucker birds, the Peter teals, might somehow a line with one another in order to introduce a new political paradise. Maybe its its social media and the people who control IT that are the air apparent to what used to be the source of all of our news, which was the television networks. You went on to say that my good friend is a belkin scut.

One of my favorite journalists in the whole world is also appeared here as a microvolts back when. SHE was till at F, T. Alphaville said that easy has been digging up some fresh dirt on this trend. What is he uncovered and why is that important?

So SHE SHE is a totally brilliant journalist. There's no yeah, yeah, yeah.

She's extended.

And I think a lot of her, her, her, her insights come from the fact that he grew up, you know, inside the soviet union, write her parents or polish. And so she's experienced, and her family's experienced, what IT is to be undergoing unison. And so she's super alert to any sign that authoritarian rule is coming into into play. SHE can kind of smell IT from a mile off. So SHE, like neil ferguson has said, maybe this moment is a lot like the hundred and eighty eight eighty nine moment in the soviet union.

It's a time when the existing establishment is falling apart LED by very old people who are not compass menus, which is we have you seen that certainly on the by inside, but there a lot of people who would argue that president trump is also showing signs of being not as on his game as he used to be um and therefore I matters you know who is got on his team but this idea that the old guys who are kind of rambling on with the old story and there in in fact, the reason why the system doesn't work. And so when the system stops working, what happens is the technocrats and oligarch step in. Now, has that just happened? Have we just seen the equivalent of technocrats and oligarchs step in with elan mask and Peter tile and viva ruma swarm? And but the difference, I would say, is that in the soviet union, no one understood how to fix anything, right? There was no understanding of how markets worked or how you could make politics work without the party being in charge of everything.

AmErica is very different in america. We know how to fix things. We know how to break things fast, and we know how to fix things. And there is no group that does this Better than the technocracy of the united states, right? These are the start up wizards, and they, I think we're gone to be given the keys to the kingdom again.

I would say no, kl shana n is the god mother of this whole movement where SHE has said we're going to bring in these experts and give them access to the government databases and then we're going to see what is the true story about any public policy issue versus what's the story, you know, that we've been told, and that's exactly what is abela is arguing, is that this is not just any old election. This really is the transition from the equivalent of an old soviet way of running things versus a new, more open, economic way of running to things. And again, this is what's so frightening to the existing establishment.

They're like weight, what there's a new way of running things. We don't understand that. We don't understand artificial intelligence. We don't want A I brought to bear on the government database because they're gona see whole bank of things that we've been either denying we were doing or we said IT was fine even though we knew IT wasn't fine. Yes, nobody wants to face all that from the existing establishment.

And the ananta establishment wants to come in and say, list, just clean this whole thing up so that's why I quoted her you know that's why I think we see both elan mask can Peter till they are clearly both thrilled and terrified at this opportunity, right? Clean things up, make the nation fly Better than I did in the past. Um but there are downsides as well and isabela is the one who always says tech brings many upsides and I tender personally on the tech utopia end of the spectrum but he talks about the downside.

And there's a great lecture that she's done called the ubi zone of the economy where SHE basically says, you know, we could all end up a slave labor to artificial intelligence and that's not a good outcome. So you know, we have to manage this. And I think there's upside and there's downside.

Both of them have to be managed. But the problem is, you know, we have one group of people coming in who are like, i've got a vision, I know how we can fix this. And a people, a group of people who are going out who are like, oh my god, everything that i've been saying and doing is now going to be transparent.

And I may be held accountable and shown to be wrong, or shown to be a furious, or shown to be, you know, duplicity, or shown to be an apt like basically that is terrifying to the existing establishment. And I think that's why we see, like the washington post came out with an article yesterday advising everyone to keep your head, basically everybody stay home. But that's why because when the new establishment takes over the old stablished, it's hard to stay calm.

That's a perfect set up for my next question because what you're describing, the old establishment is totally stunned that don't understand what's going on. Everything's changing their like what happened? Wait minute, pepper.

The old establishment is the people in charge of defending the country at a time when there's immense geopolitical tension on several different theatres at once. Isn't this logically a moment of opportunity for china or russia or iran to say, hey, these guys are stunned. They're in this this epic presidential race outcome that nobody really expected to go quite this way. It's time to make our move. Is that what we need to talk about next?

I actually have reached to the opposite conclusion on this. I think that they won't do anything in this moment because first, both china and russia are having internal fights that are really severe in china. The the old liberal crowd from shanghai are increasingly gaining the upper hand. They are arguing that g has too much power.

And why is he talking about going to war with the united states over taiwan? And can we just all go back to making money again? Like why are we doing geopolitics when we need to be raising national incomes? And after all, china's demographics are so terrible, they don't have the Young men or Young women needed to fight a traditional fight, and technology is going to be the answer for them.

So why are they wasting time arguing about getting into A A physical fight, a shooting war with the united states over taiwan? Instead, they should fight a technological fight with the united states, which that they could win in, in theory. So I think that he doesn't have the attitude.

now. He uses taiwan in the thread of action there as a way to maintain power and control over his domestic situation, and is very useful for that purpose. But IT doesn't mean that the whole countries is in favor of this outcome.

So russia is similar. You know, putins inner circle is getting smaller by the minute, because he keeps eliminating or assassinating the members of his inner circle, and eventually there's no inner circle left. So how fragile is he? Increasingly, that's why he wants to come to negotiating table on ukraine, because it's bleeding him dry as well.

So is he really in a position to act? And again, I mentioned, you know, I mentioned this test of a of a nuclear warhead um which failed on launch just a few weeks ago. The heat is not in a strong position.

His machinery is not working IT maybe that his military is not CoOperating. There was a russian general that was found dead in a most gruesome sort of way, a kind of within A A short period right after that failed missile launch. Was that because putin thinks that the military is deliberately sabotaging his efforts because they don't want to be launching a nuclear missile and starting world war? You know, the end of the words, let's put IT that way.

Not even war were three. We're kind of already in world war s but do they really want to launch nuclear anio lation? Even the russian military doesn't necessarily want that.

So I don't think they're in a strong position to act. But i'll add one more thing. If they think that trump and Kennedy are gonna come in and turn the focus on the existing government or institutions and bureaucracy, then they may be aligned with that.

They may want that outcome. They may say that actually serves our interest, too. Did you mean like they might not want to provoke, they don't want to provoke the neocons? This may be the moment that the tables are turned on the neocons. So I think rather than taking action, they'll just go quiet for a while. I suspect.

Pip, up. Final question. Lets translate all of this into an outlook for financial markets despite the fact that so many pundits said a trump in is going to be uber bullish for gold.

The shiny metal took a forty dollar dive in the overnight session just after the results we're in, and trust Victory had become clear IT did cat bounced off of that retraced more than than half of that move. But then in the time that we've been speaking, we're down another thirty five dollars on gold, almost touching the twenty seven hundred dollar around number, bouncing off of IT now. And I won't be surprised if it's taken out by the time our listener's hear this.

So seems like not everything's going exactly the way people expected. Doctor copper also took a nose dive on the news that is plumbing new lows as we speak, touching the two hundred day moving average at for spot thirty two. We're looking at a lot of things not going quite the way some people thought.

U. S. Dollar index above one of five now. So huge Spike up on the dollar, which probably explains some of the weakness and gold.

What's going on here? What does that mean? Why is the dollar so strong? Why is gold so weak when people expected the opposite? And what is the outlook for the stock market, the dollar, the economic commodity, yy crypt, al currencies and everything else?

Well, first is the fundamental problem is people are not able to disentangle their emotional position on dont trump from their financial trading position. And this happened last time to remember. Everybody said the stock mark is going to collapse of dotal.

Trump wins and factor went up and that's because they're like weight. But I hate this guy. So therefore, the market must go down, but they're not registering. You can dislike him.

And by the way, I think many of the people who voted for him don't particularly like him, but they didn't want their taxes to go up and they didn't want more regulation and they wanted cleaner food and cleaner environment, right? There were basic reasons they to alive with him, but that didn't mean they like him. And so we have to understand IT, what does he stand for? Lower taxes in general, less regulation.

But with the bia, this Kennedy emphasis on cleaning up abuse of the system. So generally speaking, that's good for the stock markets. He's four bring manufacturing back into the united states. So terf on foreign products, but lots of support for domestic manufacturing. That tends to be a good for the country kind of position. Depending on how the troops are used, if there used is an instrument to compel china and other nations to play by the rules Better, then that's one thing because then if they do, then the terrace will get lifted if they're there just to generate, you know, cash flow revenue. That's a different story.

And that's a really profound question because I suspect one of the things is gonna come up, especially if the house is going republican, is tax reform, which will open the door to the possibility of a whole new kind of tax system that's much more based on terrorist, then on income taxes and a tax system that is leaning into value added attacks, which the united states has never had, mainly because all the states would argue among themselves about who gets IT. But that would be one way to resolve the overall debt problem is to move away from traditional income tax towards other forms of taxation that used to be used, but we haven't seen them for quite a while. So these are big adjustments that, generally speaking, the market hasn't properly thought through, let alone have the ability to discount yet.

So I think there's strong dollar makes total sense. I think that's where trump is gonna want to go. And finally, look, both Kennedy and trump have said we should make bitcoin and crypto currencies legal.

why? Well, partly Kenneth's logic is because I would hold us to account Better that we wouldn't be able to do this runaway spending if we had a kind of anchor to hold onto. And bitcoin might be that anchor.

IT would impose discipline on the fiscal side is his view. Trumps view is probably a little different, which is if you make crypto and bitcoin legal, and you say, and you know, i've said this to you in the past, I thought the U. S.

Is moving in this direction anyway, even without trump. The thing is, IT would bring a lot of the black economy into the light. In other words, a whole bunch of things could become taxable.

And that would be a good thing in light of the, you know, terrible deficit that we see and, you know, the budget, the current account deficit at sea. So I think they'll say these things are gonna legal. You can't hold them anonymous ly, you have to declare them.

So a bunch of bit pointers are gonna. Well, that defeats the purpose. But you know you're not going to be able to like escape the reach of the U.

S. government. You you're gonna be in the system when, where or another. And because we're in a data age, you can't have bitcoin accounts that nobody knows about, it's on your phone. So you know it's detectable.

And again, we've got of a government now full of tech brows that know how to read your digital twin incredibly easily. And so I think we're going to see the legalization of bitch coin and corpo under trump in. And that's why bitcoin, I think, jumped overnight.

I didn't look, but I I heard that IT IT did. And look at all the companies that are run by the tech community, the especially island's companies all up. So that kind of tells us something about the direction of travel.

By the way, it's kind of like when the U. S. Starts making marijuana legal. It's not that everybody's morals have changed. It's just they realized that if you make a legal, you contact. So I think that this idea that trump equals to stock market crash is the confusion of your emotional position with your trading position.

Um and if we do get a deal, by the way, on ukraine and any kind of deal over um which I think would lead to china and russia diminishing their supply of support for hamas and the hoods, which would mean taking some of the heat out of the middle east if those sorts of things happen. Those are piece dividends. Peace dividends are super valuable.

Peace dividends make the markets go up. And so we could actually see a much more significant rally than we currently have under trump. And that's not to say that, you know I like trump is just to say if you get peace dividend, they have value. And so try not to confuse your emotional with your trading position.

But but I can't thank you enough for a terrific interview. We dragged you out of bed at six thirty in the morning because you have such a busy international speaking schedule. I know you ve got a head off to the airport.

I let this one run long because bit on fire on this interview. So I I really wanted to take advantage of all of your wisdom before we let you go tell us a little bit more about your sub stack. We do have a link in the research round up email to your latest piece, which is titled the winner is and that was penned before the election results were known. You anticipated the trump win, but you explained in that peace why you thought Kennedy was the real winner. Tell us more about the sub stack where people can sign up and what else you're doing?

yes. So look, sub stack is a wonderful platform, allows you to write on any issue that you think is interesting. So I try to cover geopolitics, technology, markets, some cultural issues.

Just as an economist, i'm interested in all these things. And i'd love covering the things that nobody else is talking about. So the previous piece to the Kennedy piece was about the geopolitical contest for the north pole and the south pole.

And people like what their stuff happening at the north pole in the south pool. And I like, yeah and it's central to understanding modern geopolitics if you don't understand the fight that's happening in those two locations. So I try to get IT into stuff that's not mainstream that you important to round out your view of of what is really going on in the world. And once again.

folks, you'll find a link in the research round up female Patrick, a resonant. And I will be back as macrovoice continues right here at macrovoice that come.

Now back to your hosts, eric towns and Patrick season. A eric IT was .

great to have pippa back on the show. Now IT, let's get to that chart deck. Listeners, you're going to find a download link for the post game chartered in your research rounded up email if you don't have a research rounded up email IT means you have have not jyar registered a macrovoice dot com just go to our home page micro voiced 到 com and click on the red by no pipers picture saying looking for the downloads now， eric, let's cover crude oil, starting with the E I A inventory. E I A printed .

builds across the board, with crude oil getting two point one billion various pushing olah ma. In five hundred twenty two thousand barrels, gasoline building four hundred and twelve thousand beards and is still its building, a massive two point nine million barrels for a net petron build of five point five million barrels, with us production holding steady at thirteen point five million balls.

We test that the hundred day moving average and two hundred months resistance on wednesday, with the dollar index shooting much higher. Of course, that's barish on crude il. At the same time, we have to consider what policy implications will be what's going to happen with OPEC plus and so forth in the trump presidency. I think it's await and see as far as what happens next year in this oil market. I'm still flat crude oil futures and focused on other markets.

Yeah, eric, come in the camp. Of this being a basing formation largely because of the reaction function. What you have is all the fundamental reasons why oil is negative and can even potentially go to lower.

And then when these candles come about, oil starts to lower, but that almost immediately gets bid. And and you see a rally that comes right back into the trade range, creating what is a bigger fair value zone. The way I look at this is that you will take a new barrier cydalise to break that level lower at this moment.

Every IT seems that this is an area where oil is settling in that doesn't make IT immediately bullish, is simply a level where the downside risk is probably marginal and you're going to see a lot more of choppy Price action here as bouncers around within a trade range. And let's move on to the equity markets. What is that heard?

The initial reaction to the election result was clearly positive. So now the question is whether the rally can be sustained or if this is going to turn into the cell. The news event so far, we've already had, I think, is the biggest post election day stock market rally in history.

So IT seems like the momentum is pretty strong. Or can this really be sustained? I'm not sure.

Patrick, do you think? Well, I work. The way I look at this is that we had massive anxiety going into these elections with so many people, a worry that this could lead to some crazy outcomes.

And when the market got clarity as to the outcome and in the size of clarity, then the S M P. Futures reacted bullishly to this. And now is create an environment where all of that anxiety now is leading to everyone making sure that they want to be positioned the way they do based upon this new information. So the from a flows perspective, I think the sp five hundred and the rest of the equity markets could have some short term tail in as everyone needs to reposition in this post election period.

And but the question is that after we have these these flows settled in, the bigger question is that what will the market backdrop look like, uh, in the months to come? Because ultimately, when trump comes to power and how long this will take him to implement his policies, we could be talking about the second and even third quarters of next year, which basically means these equity markets are going to have to trade on the fundamentals and macro o economic data that starts to emerge going into the tail end of the year and into the first quarter of next year. And so there could be room for a lot of volatility later.

But most likely, here there's going to be this little party in the equity markets for at least another week as markets are just going to need to absorb all of this new information. On page four, I have the chart of the volatility index. And one of those tail wins is the fact that the volatility was able to come right back down to the bottom end of its second and third quarter lows, largely because election premium can now have been drawn out of the market.

Now we're at a fix around fifteen that immediately creates a tail in for all adJusting funds that create some of these flows that IT will contribute on the short term to that upside. But what really one of highlights is on page five, where we look at the small caps. And the small caps have been a massive under performer for many years, particularly when you look at as a factor against the nasal.

And what we had yesterday was an explosive rally in the small caps, up six percent in one gulp, as the idea of terrorist s and protection of these kind of smaller companies will become a priority under the trumpet administration. The bigger question is, was this one time repricing? Or will we see a brand new trend where the Russell on a relative basis will continue to outperform as some of these other markets is one of the things that I think i'm going to continue to focus on in the weeks and months to come on. Let's move on and talk to dollar. What are your thoughts here, eric? Well.

we were starting to see signs of what looked like a topping pattern where we topped out just above one or four, which had been a key technical level in the dixi for years, looked like the market was going to roll over then. But boy, the trump win really rocked the dollar much higher. Closing wednesday above one or five after testing almost one of five.

And I have midd session. now. The question is how long this rally can be sustained. And I think it's going to take a few days for the market to shake out all of the consequences and not on effects of this election Victory. Also, at least as of this recording, we don't know for certain what the house of representatives outcome is going to be, whether this is a full republican sweep or if they have just got the White house in the senate. So we will see what happens.

Well, clearly, a strong dollar regime is going to be coming in and we're the stone thrown away from the year high. We could easily be up at one or six. But what's more interesting to me is where this move is happening.

Sure, we sauce drinking of the dollar against the cat and against the end. But really the big move was against the euro. And this is the bigger question for me is, is that will there be a bigger move coming against that euro? Will we see the materially start to break down against the U. S.

dollar? Because that's where the real currency moves can get under way. And so that's the area where I think the focus really has to be as we move forward. Now let's talk all dec.

Quite a few pundits, including our friends over a sexual bank, had predicted a massive trump in would beat a massive gold rally. As I said several weeks ago here on macrovoice, I think people may have been allowing their political biases to influence their trading views. Now there's certainly a correlation in that people who like trump are often the same people that like gold.

But IT makes no sense to assume that your favorite asset class is going to outperform just because your political candidate happens to won the election. What I think most people are forgetting is that gold's biggest competitor as a safe haven independent of the financial system, kind of risk asset or hedge against the world going to shit is bitcoin. Well, until now, there's been a lot of reservation in the institutional community for good reason about betting on a private limited crypto currency, which by its very design, exists for the purpose of competing with and displacing government issued money.

But president elect trump is clearly going to support bitcoin and oppose any anti bitcoin legislation. That means that the biggest reason to favoured gold over bitcoin may have just been eliminated. Now personally, I don't think president elect trump has a particularly strong understanding of the risks inherent to government endorsing a currency system that was designed to defeat governments monopoly on coining money. But what matters is how policy around bitcoin will evolve. And as the market has already shown us, trumps landslide Victory, is more bitcoin bullish than gold bullish.

Terms of gold, they come trying to keep up much more simple. The way I look at this is that we had basically huge euphoria toward goal. There was simply nobody barish, everybody was long. We were over extended on the upside and at some point, some sort of a correction needed to happen and so happens that the election triggered a some sort of a cell event.

The bigger question is, is this just a short term correction that is going to a be typically bought on debt, which is what we've seen over and over again a year? Or are we going to start one of those multi months corrective minor versions that see a gold maybe head back down to twenty five hundred? Now that is something that I think has a realistic chance of happening.

It's not because gold isn't bullish in the bigger picture. I still in the view that goals going away in north of three thousand on the upside, but he does IT in a natural eban flow movement. And whatever we reach these very overboard states, my goal is typically gone into these multi month periods of consolidation and just absorbing the move.

And that is very likely. We've begun one of these and and it's more likely that we're going have to wait until the first quarter of next year to get the next really big bullet shampoo. Now Erica wanted to move on to uranium and have the chart of that prop physical uranium trust.

IT was trading a net asset value. And when we saw the youth rio weight start dropping down towards seventy seven dollars, suddenly not only did this get hit by a drop in a spot Prices, but also IT started trading again at a discount to that net asset value, which made to drop a little bit more volatile overall. I don't see the this is changing at all, but we are clearly not in a bull phase on the actual spot Prices of uranium self.

Now the charts on uranium equities have been behaving way Better. I'll be interested to see when will this translate to the movement of the underlying commodity? And the last thing I wanted to to touch on is that ten year treasury yield, which clearly jumped uh on the post election results, and we are nowhere near those march, April highs that we saw in the summer.

But I know here we are going into an evolution seat meeting with a clear rate cut cycle going and some very prominent. Investors such as standard drug in Miller, clearly short long term bonds. And you will be interesting to see whether or not this can make IT all the way back to those march, April highs.

And more importantly, when does the sock market start to care? Because right now the markets are behaving ah like everything is super bullish. But clearly higher interest strates at some point are going to start to impact the broader markets.

Folks, if you enjoy Patrick stark dex, you can get them every single day of the week with a free trial of big picture trading. The details are on the last pages of the slight deck. Or just go a big picture trading that com. Patrick, tell him what they can expect to find in this week's research round up.

Well, in this week, research rounded up. You're going to find a transcript for today's interview as well as the chat book, which you discuss here in the post game, including a link to a number of articles that we found interesting. You're going to find this.

And so much more in this this research rounded up that does IT for this week's episode. We appreciate the feedback and support we get from our listeners, and we're always looking for suggestions on how we can make the program even Better for those of our listeners that right or blog about the markets to share that content with our listening ers. Send us an email at research round up at macrovoice 点 com， and we will consider for our weekly distributions. If you have not already follow our main x account at macrovoice for all the most recent updates and releases, you can also follow eric on x at erik s harson that eric spelt with A K and we could follow me to Patrick Regina on the half eric towns and myself. Thank you for listening, and we'll see you all next week.

That concludes this edition of micro o voices. Be sure to tune in each week to hear feature interviews with the brightest minds and finance and macroeconomics. Macro o voices is made possible by sponsorship from big picture trading dot com, the internet premier source of online education for traders.

Please visit big picture trading dot com for more information, please register. You are free account add macrovoice dot com. Once registered, you'll receive our free weekly research round up, email containing links to supporting documents from our future guests and the very best brief financial content or volunteer research team could find on the internet each week.

You'll also gain access to our free listener discussion forms and research library, and the more registered users we have, the more will be able to recruit high profile feature interview guests for future programs. So please register your free account today at macro o voices dod come. If you haven't already, you can subscribe to macro voices on itunes to have macrovoice ticket delivered to your mobile device each week free of charge.

You can email questions for the program to mail, bag, get mro voices and will answer your questions on the air from time to time. In our mAiling segment, macrovoice is presented for information and entertainment purposes only. The information presented on macrovoice should not be construed as investment advice.

Always consult licensed and investment professional before making investment decisions. The views and opinions expressed on macrovoice are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect those of the shows host or sponsors macrovoice its producers, sponsors and host erik townson and Patrick season a. She's not be liable for losses resulting from investment decisions based on information or viewpoints presented on macro voices. Macrovoice is made possible by sponsorship from big picture trading dot com and by funding from fourth turning capital management L L, C. For more information, visit macro voices com.