Jeremiah Babe, 10/18/25
"I Wouldn't Have All My Money In The Bank,
The Entire System Is Going To Crash"
Comments here:
So, we rise from the rubble...
StatCounter
Saturday, October 18, 2025
Musical Interlude: The Rolling Stones, "Sympathy For The Devil"
Full screen highly recommended.
The Rolling Stones, "Sympathy For The Devil"
"Hell is empty and all the devils are here."
- William Shakespeare, "The Tempest"
o
"'Memnoch the Devil' is a novel by Anne Rice in which the concepts of good and evil are questioned. Through Memnoch's interactions with God and Lestat, all of the characters question their motives, and they search their souls to try to determine whether they are truly good people or not.
Lestat is a vampire who is tracking a victim that he has taken a special interest in, a drug lord, murderer and art smuggler named Roger. During his hunt he has become aware of another presence following him as well and has become frightened of what may be tracking him. For some reason he believes that this may be the Devil that is tracking him and he calls upon his close friend and fledgling, David, for comfort and advice. David advises that perhaps the events taking place may have something to do with the victim of choice, or with the victim's daughter, Dora, a religious leader. David actually feels more as though Lestat may be losing his mind.
When Lestat takes his victim, something unusual occurs that shakes Lestat. The victim first talks to Lestat, which is something that no other victim has been able to do. Also, Roger comes back to Lestat to tell him his life's story, make corrections to the gaps that Lestat has been made aware of and to ask that Lestat watch over his daughter. Lestat accepts the responsibility, but must also deal with his own personal feelings for Dora, as well as the past. Lestat 's past with women causes him trouble in this area in keeping his promise. Lestat's stalker turns out to confront him in the middle of his living up to this new responsibility and he must attempt to fulfill his promise to Roger and take on the challenge that has been placed at his feet.
Memnoch, the Devil has come to ask for Lestat's assistance as his first lieutenant. Lestat must now decide if he will accept the Devil's proposal and keep his soul. Furthermore, Lestat has to reconcile his religious ideas with the true history of the beginning of the world and the parts that both God and the Devil play in the world that exists and the afterlife. He is given the opportunity to find out the answer to the very question that has plagued mankind since the beginning, but once he does have the answers, will he be able to choose a side, and if so, will it be the right one? Lestat is taken to Heaven and to Hell, as well as to the beginning of time and even to the crucifixion of Christ to witness the events as they truly happened and make his decision based on what he witnesses."
Download "Memnoch The Devil", by Anne Rice, here:
An astonishing, can't-put-it-down book...
"A Deep Look to the Heavens"
"The Hubble Deep Field:
The Most Important Image Ever Taken"
"In 2003, the Hubble Space Telescope took the image of a millenium, an image that shows our place in the universe. Anyone who understands what this image represents, is forever changed by it."- YouTube/NASA
Full screen recommended.
Full screen recommended.
"It helps to put things in perspective here on our frenetic little planet with a look at this extraordinarily powerful and moving video of the Hubble Space Telescope mapping of the Universe, whose known size is 78 billion light years across. The video of the images is the equivalent of using a "time machine" to look into the past to witness the early formation of galaxies, perhaps less than one billion years after the universe's birth in the Big Bang.
The video includes mankind's deepest, most detailed optical view of the universe called the Hubble Deep Field (HDF). One of the stunning images was assembled from 342 separate exposures taken with the Wide Field and Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2) for ten consecutive days. Representing a narrow "keyhole" view stretching to the visible horizon of the universe, the HDF image covers a speck of the sky only about the width of a dime located 75 feet away. Though the field is a very small sample of the heavens, it is considered representative of the typical distribution of galaxies in space because the universe, statistically, looks largely the same in all directions. Gazing into this small field, Hubble uncovered a bewildering assortment of at least 1,500 galaxies at various stages of evolution.
Most of the galaxies are so faint (nearly 30th magnitude or about four-billion times fainter than can be seen by the human eye) they have never before been seen by even the largest telescopes. Some fraction of the galaxies in this menagerie probably date back to nearly the beginning of the universe. "The variety of galaxies we see is amazing. In time these Hubble data could turn out to be the double helix of galaxy formation. We are clearly seeing some of the galaxies as they were more than ten billion years ago, in the process of formation," said Robert Williams, Director of the Space Telescope Science Institute Baltimore, Maryland. "As the images have come up on our screens, we have not been able to keep from wondering if we might somehow be seeing our own origins in all of this."
- http://www.dailygalaxy.com/
"I Can Pretend..."
“I like the stars. It's the illusion of permanence, I think. I mean, they're always flaring up and caving in and going out. But from here I can pretend... I can pretend that things last. I can pretend that lives last longer than moments. Gods come and Gods go. Mortals flicker and flash and fade. Worlds don't last; and stars and galaxies are transient, fleeting things that twinkle like fireflies and vanish into cold and dust. But I can pretend...”
- Olethros, in “Sandman”
Chet Raymo, “Take My Arm”
“Take My Arm”
by Chet Raymo
“I’m sure I have referenced here before the poems of Grace Schulman, she who inhabits that sweet melancholy place between “the necessity and impossibility of belief.” Between, too, the necessity and impossibility of love.
Belief and love. They have so much in common, yet are as distinct as self and other. How strange that two people can hitch their lives together, on a whim, say, or wild intuition, knowing little if nothing about the other’s hiddenness, about things that even the other does not fully understand and couldn’t articulate even if he did. Blind, deaf, dumb, they leap into the future, hoping to fly, and, for a moment, soaring, like Icarus, sunward. The necessity of wax. The impossibility of wax. We “fall” in love, they say. Schulman: “We slog. We tramp the road of possibility. Give me your arm.”
The Poet: Wendell Berry, “Leavings”
“Leavings”
“In time a man disappears
from his lifelong fields, from
the streams he has walked beside,
from the woods where he sat and waited.
Thinking of this, he seems to
miss himself in those places
as if always he has been there.
But first he must disappear,
and this he foresees with hope,
with thanks. Let others come.”
- Wendell Berry
○
“Perhaps as he was lying awake then, his life may have passed before him – his early hopeful struggles, his manly successes and prosperity, his downfall in his declining years, and his present helpless condition – no chance of revenge against Fortune, which had had the better of him -neither name nor money to bequeath – a spent-out, bootless life of defeat and disappointment, and the end here! Which, I wonder, brother reader, is the better lot, to die prosperous and famous, or poor and disappointed? To have, and to be forced to yield; or to sink out of life, having played and lost the game? That must be a strange feeling, when a day of our life comes and we say, “Tomorrow, success or failure won’t matter much, and the sun will rise, and all the myriads of mankind go to their work or their pleasure as usual, but I shall be out of the turmoil.”
- William Makepeace Thackeray, “Vanity Fair”
"A Great Madness Sweeps The Land"
"A Great Madness Sweeps The Land"
by Charles Hugh Smith
‘In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups,
parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.’
- Friedrich Nietzsche
"A great madness sweeps the land. There are no limits on extremes in greed, credulity, convictions, inequality, bombast, recklessness, fraud, corruption, arrogance, hubris, pride, over-reach, self-righteousness and confidence in the rightness of one's opinions. Extremes only become more extreme even as the folly of previous extremes wearies rationality.
Imaginary sins are conjured out of thin air to convict the innocent while those guilty of the most egregious fraud and corruption are lauded as saviors.
The national mood is aggrieved and bitter. The luxuries of self-righteousness, indignation, entitlement and resentment have impoverished the national spirit. Bankrupted by these excesses, what little treasure remains is squandered on plots of petty revenge.
Blindness to the late hour is cheered as optimism, confidence in the false gods of technology is sanctified while doubters of the technocratic theocracy are crucified as irredeemable infidels.
Witch-hunts and show trials are the order of the day as those who cannot stomach the party line are obsessively purged, as healthy skepticism is condemned as a mortal sin by brittle true believers who secretly fear the failure of their cult.
Mired in a putrid sewer of suspected subversion and disloyalty to The One True Cause, heretics are everywhere to those caught up in the mass hysteria. In this choking atmosphere of toxic hubris, self-righteousness, indignation, entitlement and resentment, humility is for losers, prudence is for losers, caution is for losers, skeptical inquiry is for losers.
Completely untethered from cause and effect, those confident in the inevitability of a glorious future of unlimited expansion cling to past glory as proof of future glory, even as their hubris leads only to a treacherous path of decay and decline. As they stumble into the abyss, their final cries are of surprise that confidence alone is not enough.
Those who see the madness for what it is have only one escape: go to ground, fade from public view, become self-reliant and weather the coming storm in the nooks and crannies where cause and effect, skeptical inquiry, humility, prudence and thrift can still be nurtured."
o
"Hope In a Time of Hopelessness"
"Hope In a Time of Hopelessness"
by Washingtons Blog
"Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are anger and courage;
anger at the way things are, and courage
to see that they do not remain the way they are."
- Augustine of Hippo
"Several long-time activists have told me recently they are overwhelmed, worried, and think that we may be losing the struggle. One very smart friend asked me if there is any basis for hope. Hope is an act of will, not a passive mood. Admittedly, things are easier when circumstances bring hope to us, and we can just receive the hopeful and inspiring news. But if we care about winning, we have to be able to decide to have hope even when outer circumstances aren't so positive.
I have children who are counting on me to leave them with a reasonably safe and sane planet. As I've said elsewhere, I care too much about my kids and my freedom to be afraid. I care enough about them that it gets my heart beating, connects me to something bigger than myself, and that gives me courage, even when the chips are down.
If I allowed myself to lose hope about exposing falsehoods, about protecting our freedom and building a hopeful future, I would be dropping the ball for my kids. I would be condemning them to a potentially very grey world where bigger and worse things may happen, where their liberties and joys are wholly stripped away, where every ounce of vitality is beholden to joyless and useless tasks.
Many of us may be motivated by other things besides kids, and only you can know what that is. But we each must dig down deep, and connect with our most powerful motivations to win the struggle for freedom and truth.
I don't know about you, but I don't have the luxury of giving up hope. When I get depressed, overwhelmed or exhausted by the stunning acts of savagery, treason, and disinformation carried out by the imperialists, or the willful ignorance of far too many Americans, I will myself into finding some reason to have hope. Because the struggle for life and liberty is too important for me to give up."
Dan, I Allegedly, "Hollywood is Dead - Amazon Killed James Bond! I Can Fix It"
Full screen recommended.
Dan, I Allegedly, 10/18/25
"Hollywood is Dead -
Amazon Killed James Bond! I Can Fix It"
"Amazon killed James Bond - and in today’s video, I’m diving into how Hollywood’s obsession with wokeness and political correctness has led to the destruction of one of cinema’s most iconic characters. From removing firearms from Bond posters to slapping outdated warning labels on classic movies, Amazon has taken the charm, boldness, and grit out of 007. Remember when Bond was unapologetically cool? Well, those days seem gone. Let’s talk about how this reflects a bigger problem in Hollywood - endless remakes, the loss of originality, and the decline of storytelling that celebrates real, raw, and fun characters.
I share my thoughts on the state of modern entertainment, the "pussification" of men, and why Hollywood’s insistence on playing it safe is killing creativity. It’s time to bring back R-rated comedies, bold stories, and characters who don’t apologize for being themselves. James Bond was more than just a spy - he was an icon of unapologetic masculinity, and now, it’s all being stripped away."
Comments here:
"Fast Food Is Officially Dead, Restaurants Closing Down"
Full screen recommended.
Snyder Reports, 10/18/25
"Fast Food Is Officially Dead, Restaurants Closing Down"
Comments here:
"Things We Don't Want to Do: Outside the Comfort Zone"
"Things We Don't Want to Do:
Outside the Comfort Zone"
by Madisyn Taylor, The DailyOM
"Doing things we don't want to do, or that scare us, creates flow in our lives and allows us to grow. Most of us have had the experience of tackling some dreaded task only to come out the other side feeling invigorated, filled with a new sense of confidence and strength. The funny thing is, most of the time when we do them, we come out on the other side changed and often wondering what we were so worried about or why it took us so long. We may even begin to look for other tasks we've been avoiding so that we can feel that same heady mix of excitement and completion.
Whether we avoid something because it scares us or bores us, or because we think it will force a change we're not ready for, putting it off only creates obstacles for us. On the other hand, facing the task at hand, no matter how onerous, creates flow in our lives and allows us to grow. The relief is palpable when we stand on the other side knowing that we did something even though it was hard or we didn't want to do it. On the other hand, when we cling to our comfort zone, never addressing the things we don't want to face, we cut ourselves off from flow and growth.
We all have at least one thing in our life that never seems to get done. Bringing that task to the top of the list and promising ourselves that we will do it as soon as possible is an act that could liberate a tremendous amount of energy in our lives. Whatever it is, we can allow ourselves to be fueled by the promise of the feelings of exhilaration and confidence that will be the natural result of doing it.”
○
Of course, some have different perspectives...
VERY STRONG Language Alert!
"In life you have to do a lot of things you don't ****ing want to do.
Many times, that's what the **** life is, one vile ****ing task after another.”
- “Al Swearengen”,
Ian McShane's character in “Deadwood”
"Luddites Were Right, You Know…"
"Luddites Were Right, You Know…"
By Chris Black
"The term “Luddite” originated in the early 19th century and refers to a movement of English textile workers who protested against the increased use of machines in their industry. The term “neo-Luddite” was later applied to those who similarly oppose technology for similar reasons, but in a contemporary context.
Everywhere you go, you see people with their faces in their phones. Constantly, constantly, constantly. At the bus stop. On the train. In the driver’s seats of their moving cars. Their kid makes a bit of noise at the restaurant table? Shove the iPad in their face.
Boomerisms aside, it really can’t be overstated how f**ked up this is, and not because “people don’t interact” anymore. It’s actually much worse than that… Nobody ever allows themselves even a moment of peace inside their own heads. The real insidiousness of the smartphone is that it encourages you to constantly consume content, endlessly, never ever stopping. It’s common for people to spend their entire day with earphones in, listening to podcasts and watching Tiktoks literally constantly.
Our brains did not evolve to be bombarded with constant microbursts of hyper real stimulation this way. Attention spans are getting measurably shorter. Reaction times are getting longer. None of this sh*t is good for your brain.
Everyone always says, “Well, what about TV and the radio?” Inherently limited and fundamentally different because of the fact that they’re pre-programmed and don’t act as “magic mirrors” of you and your personal inputs into them. Your smartphone is designed to learn everything about you so that it can be as addictive as possible and maximize the amount of data it squeezes out of you. Nothing about TV or the radio - or even Web 1.0 internet - ever came anywhere close to this.
Even so, we have known for decades that TV is horrible for your brain on account of many of the same mechanisms that affect attention span and cognitive development. So imagine how much worse the smartphone is. Unfathomably worse. We already know it’s worse, but we won’t know exactly how much worse it is until at least another decade, when the younger Zoomers and Gen Alphas are a few years into adulthood after an upbringing that revolved around Web 2.0.
Millennials were lucky enough not to take the full brunt of the experience. We got our first taste as we came of age instead of growing up being marinated in it. The saddest part is that the only reason any of this even caught on or is the least bit operable is because of the fact that it hijacks the mechanisms that make us feel satisfied and good. We didn’t evolve to handle this level of stimulation, but BOY do we respond to it. It’s so excessive that it’s impossible for some people to resist. So there are no f**king brakes.
You have to cast The Ring into the fire or it totally consumes you. That’s the reality for most people. And that, my friends, is just sick.
Look at your screen usage on your phone and tell me I’m wrong, how you totally don’t need it and can stop whenever you want. You are no better than a crack head, and you won’t realize that until you actually do try to stop for real. It’s unprecedented in human history to think this way. We are truly in uncharted waters here. Just wait until the sensory overload most people are bathing in all day, every day becomes fully automated instead of just partially automated like it is now."
Bill Bonner, "Subscription Slaves"
"Subscription Slaves"
by Bill Bonner
POITOU, FRANCE – “Transitory” is catching on. First, it was inflation that was transitory, as Federal Reserve chief Jerome Powell put it. Now, it’s housing… transportation… even love.
Startling Statistics: While the U.S. population has grown by nearly a third since the 1970s, the number of married couples with children in the house has fallen by a third. On the other hand, the number of households with only one parent has more than doubled. Father and mother don’t seem to stick together.
A young colleague recently announced that he had become a father. “I didn’t even know you were married,” we replied. “I’m not… My partner and I aren’t getting married. We’ll stick together only as long as it works for both of us.” “Hmmm…” we replied, as if we knew something he didn’t.
People don’t feel much loyalty towards their cars or houses, either. Even when houses and cars are “bought,” they are often never fully owned. Mortgages are refinanced. Why pay it off when you can refinance at a rate below zero (inflation adjusted)? Car payments stretch out. Often the muffler falls off before the last payment is made.
Subscription Economy: It’s a “subscription economy,” say the buzz mongers. The CEO of a company called Zuora claims to have invented the term. This is from its website: "Customers have changed. They’re looking for new ways to engage with businesses. Consumers today have a new set of expectations. They want outcomes, not ownership. Customization, not generalization. Constant improvement, not planned obsolescence.
The result? Businesses are changing the way they sell their products and services. Over the past nine years, we’ve seen an explosion of new types of business models all designed to keep customers consistently engaged in long-term relationships – think Netflix, Amazon Prime, Uber, Spotify, Salesforce, Zendesk, Box.
The Subscription Economy® is a phrase (coined by our CEO, Tien Tzuo) to describe this new era of companies and business models. In the old world (let’s call it the Product Economy) it was all about things. Acquiring new customers, shipping commodities, billing for one-time transactions. But in this new era, it’s all about relationships. More and more customers are becoming subscribers because subscription experiences built around services meet consumers’ needs better than the static offerings or a single product. Largish companies are even giving up their offices altogether. Employees are expected to work from home… and make episodic appearances in shared workspaces."
Rent. Lease. Borrow. Squat. Own nothing.
Prisoners of Cashflow: Perhaps something is gained in the subscription economy – spontaneity? Flexibility? Optionality? But something is surely lost, too. Instead of being shackled to capital assets, people are now prisoners of cashflow. And what if their subscriptions are cancelled?
A dear reader recalls what it was like when the economy suddenly stopped last year. Blanca H. writes: "Before the pandemic: we were working on remodeling our home to start a bed and breakfast. I was forced into retirement and hubby ended with medical issues that limited his ability to work. But the best was there was no mortgage payments…"
Yes, there are some times when you don’t have to pay a mortgage or rent. But in the "Brave New World" ahead, only a few will escape them. A few people – the elite – will get rich. They will own the capital assets. Most of the rest will become “subscription slaves”… able only to enjoy their homes, their cars, their lives… as long as their monthly incomes continue.
Enter the Financiers: Following the mortgage finance blow-up in 2008, houses were cheap. And financing was cheap, too. Enter the financiers, richly funded by the Fed’s ultra-low-priced credit. They bought up thousands of houses. Home ownership began a decline. If the previous rate had remained, there would be 3.3 million more homeowners (and fewer renters) today. In 2004, home ownership reached 69%. Now, it is only 65%, a huge swing.
There is no particular reason to think that owning is better than renting. Each has its place. But like everything in the financial world, what matters is that the numbers be true and honest, and not persuaded by the heavy-handed feds. But as they manipulate and distort, the feds inevitably slap around the real estate market, along with everything else.
Steve Schwarzman, Blackstone’s jefe, can borrow a lot cheaper than the typical homeowner. (Blackstone was one of the big investment firms to buy foreclosed homes in bulk in the aftermath of the ’08 crisis.) And when the Fed puts rates so low, it puts Schwarzman into competition with homeowners.
The homeowner wants a place to live. Schwartzman aims for yield. And when yields are below zero in real terms, it doesn’t take much yield to make a good investment. That’s why Blackstone can pay more for a house than a family can. And that’s why house prices are going up… to the point where the average family can no longer afford to buy the average house.
Routine Manipulation: So here is another brick in the wall we’ve been talking about for the last 10 years. As asset price goes up, Wall Street makes money. But the homeowner, who works in the Main Street economy, doesn’t earn more money. He’s stuck, trying to pay for a more expensive house with the same old income. The same thing, more or less, happened in the stock market.
In 1980, before the Fed’s manipulation became routine, it took an average working person 160 hours on the job to buy the 30 stocks that make up the Dow Industrial index. Today, it takes 1,400 hours – more than eight times as much. In 1980, he was greatly aided, too, by a decent return on his savings. He could get 10% on his deposits, plus a free toaster oven for opening an account. Today, the going rate is less than 1%.
Subscription Slaves: Oh my… pity the callow youth! A subscription slave. Burdened with student debt… dumped into an economy in which the good-paying manufacturing jobs have been exported to China… unable to save money (on which he would earn nothing anyway)… with no capital and little chance of ever getting any… No house. No car. No business. No family. He sits in Mom and Dad’s basement… gambling his stimmy money on meme stocks and cryptos… and waiting for real life to start. More to come…"
"You Continue..."
“How is one to live a moral and compassionate existence when one is fully aware of the blood, the horror inherent in life, when one finds darkness not only in one’s culture but within oneself? If there is a stage at which an individual life becomes truly adult, it must be when one grasps the irony in its unfolding and accepts responsibility for a life lived in the midst of such paradox. One must live in the middle of contradiction, because if all contradiction were eliminated at once life would collapse. There are simply no answers to some of the great pressing questions. You continue to live them out, making your life a worthy expression of leaning into the light.”
- Barry Lopez
Free Download: Henry Hazlitt, "Economics In One Lesson"
"'Economics In One Lesson':
A Review of a Classic"
by Sean Ring
"If you’ve ever found yourself cornered at a dinner party by that one guy with a conspiratorial gleam in his eye and a penchant for explaining why the economy is “just a series of smoke and mirrors,” you’ll appreciate Henry Hazlitt’s "Economics in One Lesson." It’s The Book that offers the economically curious a set of brass knuckles to face the muddled nonsense of popular economic “thought.” And by “thought,” I mean whatever passes for it in political speeches, social media debates, or the average op-ed.
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. First, a quick primer: Hazlitt’s book is an economics classic, albeit one that uses plain language to dismantle the kind of Keynesian tomfoolery that has turned deficit spending into a national sport. Published in 1946, it’s a slim volume that packs a heavyweight punch. Think of it as the literary equivalent of Muhammad Ali in his prime - quick, elegant, and devastatingly effective.
A Double-Edged Sword: Hazlitt begins with the titular “One Lesson”: the art of economics consists of not just looking at the immediate effects of any policy but at the longer-term effects, as well. Further, it demands that the consequences of that policy be examined for all groups, not just one. A lesson so obvious it seems like common sense - until you realize it’s precisely what most policymakers and pundits ignore.
Why? Looking at all the consequences of an economic policy requires work, patience, and critical thinking. It’s far easier to promise free lunches than to explain why those lunches aren’t free. Hazlitt’s brilliance lies in his ability to show how economic fallacies perpetuate precisely because they focus on immediate, visible effects while conveniently ignoring long-term, invisible ones. The result? Politicians handing out economic band-aids while ignoring the arterial bleeding beneath.
Smashing Windows (and Fallacies): Hazlitt’s first stop is the famous “Broken Window Fallacy.” You’ve heard the argument before, even if you didn’t realize it: destruction stimulates economic activity. The idea is that rebuilding a shattered window, for example, creates jobs for glaziers, boosts spending, and pumps life into the economy. What could possibly be wrong with that? Everything.
Hazlitt dismantles this nonsense by pointing out the unseen cost: the money spent on the new window could have been used for something else - perhaps a new pair of shoes. Instead of creating new value, we’ve merely replaced what was lost. It’s like celebrating a flat tire because it “supports” the tire repair industry. Hazlitt’s takeaway: destruction doesn’t create wealth; it squanders resources. So, the next time someone extols the “economic benefits” of rebuilding after a hurricane or a riot, feel free to remind them that their logic is as sound as a screen door on a submarine.
Not Free, But Taxpayer-Funded: Ah, public works! The bread and circuses of modern governance. Hazlitt addresses the perennial myth that government spending on infrastructure - roads, bridges, statues of politicians with dubious legacies - is a magic wand for economic growth.
But wait, you ask, aren’t those things good? Sure, they can be. The problem, Hazlitt reminds us, is that taxes fund such projects. And taxes, lest we forget, take money out of the pockets of individuals and businesses. What could those people have done with that money? We’ll never know because the government has already spent it on a bridge to nowhere. Hazlitt’s biting critique should be required reading for anyone who still believes in the economic tooth fairy.
Luddites of the World, Unite! Ever since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, there’s been a persistent fear that machines will destroy jobs. Hazlitt gleefully trashes this notion, pointing out that technological progress doesn’t eliminate jobs; it reallocates them. Machines increase productivity, lower costs, and free up human labor for other pursuits - like writing snarky economic reviews. It’s a shame Barack Obama didn’t read this book. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have bemoaned how ATMs took the jobs of bank tellers. (They didn’t; see here.)
The real “curse” of machinery isn’t job destruction; it exposes the economic illiteracy of those who cry wolf every time a new technology emerges. Remember when computers were going to put us all out of work? Funny how that turned out.
The Donald Should Read About Tariffs: Hazlitt’s takedown of tariffs is a masterclass in economic wit. Hazlitt argues tariffs are a tax on consumers disguised as “protection” for domestic industries. Yes, they shield those businesses from foreign competition. But they shield them at the expense of everyone else. Higher prices, reduced choices, and economic inefficiency are the actual costs of protectionism. So, the next time someone suggests that tariffs are a “win” for the economy, remind them that taxing your citizens to prop up uncompetitive industries is about as bright as burning your house down to keep warm.
Inflation: The Illusion of Prosperity: Hazlitt’s chapter on inflation is remarkably prescient in today’s economic climate. He explains inflation is a stealthy way for governments to rob their citizens, not a sign of prosperity. It’s a tax that a central bank unethically levies, not a legislature. Inflation erodes the value of savings, distorts investment, and wreaks havoc on the economy. And yet, inflation is often sold to the public as a necessary evil or even a good thing. Hazlitt’s advice? Don’t buy it. Inflation benefits debtors (read: governments) at the expense of savers and wage earners. It’s the economic equivalent of a shell game, and you’re the sucker being fleeced.
Profit: Capitalism’s Dirty Word: Perhaps one of Hazlitt’s most important lessons is his defense of profits. In an era where “profit” is often treated as a four-letter word, Hazlitt reminds us that profits are essential for economic progress. They signal where resources should be allocated, incentivize innovation, and reward risk-taking. Destroy profits, and you destroy the engine of growth. It’s a message that should resonate with anyone who’s ever complained about greedy corporations while simultaneously complaining about them by posting on X from their iPhones while wolfing down avocado toast and an egg nog latte.
Why You Should Read This Book (Again): Hazlitt’s "Economics in One Lesson" is a survival guide for navigating the economic nonsense that permeates modern discourse. So, the next time someone tells you that we need more government spending, higher tariffs, or artificially low interest rates, do yourself a favor: hand them a copy of "Economics in One Lesson" and watch as their arguments crumble faster than a house caught in a tornado’s path.
Wrap Up: Hazlitt’s "Economics in One Lesson" is a welcome relief in a world celebrating economic illiteracy. It reminds us that good economics is about understanding the unseen, the long-term, and the big picture. So, grab a copy, pour yourself a stiff drink, and prepare to see the world - and its economic absurdities - in a new light. Just be warned: once you’ve read Hazlitt, you’ll never be able to watch the news without yelling at your TV."
Freely download "Economics In One Lesson", by Henry Hazlitt, here:
"Disruptive Thoughts"
"Disruptive Thoughts"
by John Mauldin
"Physicists have a concept called “entropy,” which basically says systems will tend to move from orderly to disorderly over time. Entropy is central to physics, thermodynamics, and other fields of physical science. Economics, however, isn’t a physical science. The way we allocate scarce resources isn’t bound by fixed laws of the universe. We have some general principles that are mostly reliable, but not always and everywhere. The rules can change. I described last week one way in which they have. (For some reason, that letter provoked a lot of responses, voicing both approval and disapproval. I read every reply that I see. Thank you for sending them.)
At its best, economics delivers the opposite of entropy, harnessing chaos into orderly systems that create opportunities and raise living standards for everyone. Yet a type of entropy still seems to apply, because these systems eventually change. Without careful monitoring, they can become dead weight bureaucratic cash sinks.
There’s small change and big change. The small ones are notable: recessions, market crashes, etc. You’ll see several in your lifetime. The greater changes tend to be technology-driven: the Industrial Revolution, the internet, and now maybe artificial intelligence, robotics, and what I’ve called the Age of Transformation. When you are living through such change, it’s easy to get caught up in the moment. Change is hard. But it’s also inevitable, whether we like it or not. The good news: Most people will not only muddle through, but their lives will improve and the lives of the children will be even better. That’s what free market entrepreneurialism delivers.
Sometimes, however, life changes and some changes are hard. There’s no sugar-coating that. Likewise, the changes will be harder on some people than others. There’s no sugar-coating that, either. We just have to prepare as best we can. Today I’ll tell you about a time in the past when people faced a challenge similar in some ways to our own. Then we’ll talk about the differences.
Resistance Was Futile: Today we use the word “Luddite” to describe those who fear new inventions, fighting to avoid change however they can. But the Luddites were actual people in 19th-century England. And if you or I had faced what they did, we might not have liked it, either. Here’s a short description from History.com.
“The original Luddites were British weavers and textile workers who objected to the increased use of mechanized looms and knitting frames. Most were trained artisans who had spent years learning their craft, and they feared that unskilled machine operators were robbing them of their livelihood. When the economic pressures of the Napoleonic Wars made the cheap competition of early textile factories particularly threatening to the artisans, a few desperate weavers began breaking into factories and smashing textile machines. They called themselves ‘Luddites’ after Ned Ludd, a young apprentice who was rumored to have wrecked a textile apparatus in 1779.
There’s no evidence Ludd actually existed - like Robin Hood, he was said to reside in Sherwood Forest - but he eventually became the mythical leader of the movement. The protestors claimed to be following orders from ‘General Ludd,’ and they even issued manifestos and threatening letters under his name.
The first major instances of machine breaking took place in 1811 in Nottingham, and the practice soon spread across the English countryside. Machine-breaking Luddites attacked and burned factories, and in some cases, they even exchanged gunfire with company guards and soldiers. The workers hoped their raids would deter employers from installing expensive machinery, but the British government instead moved to quash the uprisings by making machine breaking punishable by death.
The unrest finally reached its peak in April 1812, when a few Luddites were gunned down during an attack on a mill near Huddersfield. The army had deployed several thousand troops to round up these dissidents in the days that followed, and dozens were hanged or transported to Australia. By 1813, the Luddite resistance had all but vanished. It wasn’t until the 20th century that their name reentered the popular lexicon as a synonym for ‘technophobe.’”
I suspect the original Luddites didn’t fear technology so much as they feared losing their livelihoods. At the time, weavers were skilled craftsmen, often operating their own shops with a few apprentices. They were part of that era’s middle class, occupying a space below the aristocracy but above farm laborers. The idea of slipping down the ladder must have terrified them (not unlike today’s “knowledge workers” who do things AI is rapidly learning to do without human help).
Economic reality left few alternatives, though. The new technology was staggeringly more productive. According to one source I found, mechanized cotton spinning increased per-worker output around 500 times. The cotton gin removed seeds from cotton about 50 times faster than a human could. These weren’t small differences. They were revolutionary to the same degree AI is revolutionary when it produces in a few seconds a legal document (to name just one example) that would have taken a human attorney days to produce.
Gradual or Sudden: I imagine the weavers back then pointed to the machinery’s flaws and mistakes. “See, we can do it better!” That was probably true but also irrelevant. At some point, higher productivity outweighs lower quality. Machine quality improves, though, eventually surpassing even the best human experts. This gives everyone access to get better products at lower prices.
Two things happen during these periods of revolutionary technological change:
Higher productivity leads to innovation that makes life better and
Those same productivity gains cost some people their jobs or income.
These two changes—one good, one bad—happen at the same time. But in any given household, one of them predominates. Those rendered jobless don’t get to enjoy the fruits of innovation. Meanwhile, those who become more productive may forget the other group’s misery. Not surprisingly, conflict often follows.
The Luddite violence occurred in the early 1800s, a period we now call the First Industrial Revolution. The innovations it launched would enhance everyday life for everyone. But it was the Second Industrial Revolution, beginning around 1890 and extending into the Roaring 1920s, before the new technologies reached most people. In between was a long period of adaptation.
The adaptation period, while often uncomfortable, allowed enormous change to unfold gradually. Some groups like the Luddites saw their lives upended quickly but others had time to adjust. They were able to learn new skills, relocate to places with more opportunity, and otherwise find a way forward in a different kind of economy. We went from an agrarian economy where 90% of the people worked producing or moving food in Colonial America. By 1860 it was 53%, down to 23% in 1940, and less than 2% today. By the way, that 2% today represents more than 2 million farms. The growth in agricultural productivity is utterly astounding. Labor use is down by 80% or more. You can read about it here.
Note that this massive shift happened over almost 10 generations. People had a lot of time to adapt their economic circumstances even though it was always individually challenging. Electricity was a huge change but took multiple decades to show its true impact. Ditto for trains and then the automobile.
Today’s workers may not have that luxury. A faster pace of technological change means many kinds of jobs are being replaced faster than the economy can provide new ones for the displaced. And this time, young workers and those with fewer skills are bearing the brunt of the change.
In writing this letter, I did some browsing on jobseeker bulletin boards. I saw many examples of experienced technology workers in their 40s and 50s (and a few in their early 60s) who had been laid off, presumably because new technology had outmoded them. While they wanted to find new roles, few seemed desperate. Many even talked about the large portfolios they had accumulated in their apparently well-paid careers. Some owned their homes mortgage-free. Most were prepared to wait and, if necessary, just retire early.
In contrast, AI is wreaking havoc on job prospects for young workers, particularly recent college graduates. They prepared for a world in which companies hired large numbers of young professionals to do the “grunt” work of programming, analyzing numbers, writing reports, etc. Those jobs still exist, but AI tools mean there are far fewer of them than even 2–3 years ago. This is one reason unemployment is far worse for younger cohorts. Here’s an Ed Yardeni chart I shared last month.
Source: Yardeni Research
While higher unemployment for young workers isn’t new, it is unusual to see it rising so much faster than in the 25–54 and 55+ cohorts. This strikes me as an important difference from the Luddite example. Back then, the middle-aged craftsmen had the most to lose. They had invested a lifetime in mastering skills the new technology threatened to kill. Today, many older workers (though certainly not all) are better positioned to endure disruption than the young ones. And ironically, the younger ones are far more likely to embrace the technology that is taking their jobs.
Historically, having a large population of economically distressed young adults, especially young males, isn’t great for social stability. It would help if more could be attracted into the kind of work AI hasn’t yet reached – the construction trades, for example. But those who invested years in earning a college degree - and may have large student loan debts - are naturally hoping to find a job in the field they prepared for. As noted, the real key is timing. Will AI unlock new kinds of growth that create enough jobs to absorb those it displaces? I feel sure it will, but I don’t know how soon.
Asymmetric Gains: Last week Dave Rosenberg published a piece I need to think about and perhaps write about in a future letter. Briefly, he thinks the business cycle of expansions and recessions is no longer delivering useful investment signals. Structural “mega-forces” are reshaping markets in ways cycles alone can’t explain. He then lists several such forces, the first being AI. Here’s Rosie: “Today’s breakthroughs have so far been narrower and clustered. Semiconductors, hyperscale cloud capacity, and applied AI models absorb the bulk of capital flows, while most industries remain only marginally affected. The result is highly concentrated productivity and profitability - a widening divergence between firms able to harness AI at scale and those left behind.
Early adoption has created exponential gains for chipmakers, hyperscalers, and software leaders. Retail, Hospitality, Health Care, and other service-heavy sectors have lagged substantially. AI looks less like a rising tide than a powerful wave lifting a few boats. Yet, diffusion is inevitable: logistics optimization, medical imaging, algorithmic lending, and personalized education. The eventual scope will be broad, as it has been with every general-purpose technology, but the path there is jagged and contested.
The macroeconomic effects are profound. Automation dampens labor market cycles by reducing the elasticity of headcount to demand swings. Firms that deploy AI in coding, call centers, or logistics need fewer workers during downturns and can scale without proportionate hiring in upswings. This suppresses wage-driven inflation and makes employment less reliable as a growth signal. At the same time, productivity gains accrue asymmetrically, reinforcing the gap between winners and laggards.”
To summarize that last paragraph: Technology-driven productivity enhancement is separating employment growth from economic growth. That’s true at both the macro level and for individual companies. In the long run, this is probably good. Population growth is slowing and will turn negative soon (absent more immigration). We need higher productivity to maintain economic momentum. But again, it’s not enough to have a job for every worker. They have to be the kinds of jobs those workers can do, located in places the workers want to (and can afford to) live.
AI is only one of many significant disruptions ahead. Ultimately, almost all will be positive for mankind. In the short run it will be individually disruptive, as it was for early 1800s textile workers. Robotics really will take jobs in a wide variety of fields. And not just at work. Housework, caring for the elderly, healthcare, agriculture, and more. All those jobs are at risk. But affordable robots will also give entrepreneurs the opportunity to create whole new businesses, serving the public with better products at lower costs. And those new businesses will need human employees. Similarly autonomous vehicles will take jobs, but the increased productivity and dramatic drop in fatal accidents will ensure that it happens.
The next 10 years will see astounding gains in healthcare. We are on the cusp of extending health span significantly, with increased lifespan following shortly. All these technologies and more are going to happen in less than a generation. It will be a disruption we have never encountered in terms of the speed of different technologies reaching ubiquity. This will happen as a witch’s brew of politicians promise to “protect” various jobs and industries. There will be calls to have the government “do something.” There is a role for government, but in helping people transition to a new future, not protecting old jobs.
This is all going to happen at the same time as we have geopolitical crises, sovereign debt problems, and the social crisis stemming from generational leadership changing (Neil Howe’s "The Fourth Turning"). Clashes caused by the over-production of elites vying for power (Peter Turchin’s "End Times"), and young people not trained for the future we will actually experience will all come together in the latter part of this decade. Buckle up. We all need to figure out how to be part of the solution."
"Grocery Items at Walmart Everyone Should Be Buying Before Prices Go Up!"
Full screen recommended.
Adventures with Danno, 10/18/25
"Grocery Items at Walmart Everyone
Should Be Buying Before Prices Go Up!"
Comments here:
Friday, October 17, 2025
Jeremiah Babe, "16,000 More Job Cuts, Credit Markets Cracking"
Full screen recommended.
Jeremiah Babe, 10/17/25
"16,000 More Job Cuts, Credit Markets Cracking"
Comments here:
"A Look to the Heavens"
"Galaxies of the Virgo Cluster are scattered across this deep telescopic field of view. The cosmic scene spans about three Full Moons, captured in dark skies near Jalisco, Mexico, planet Earth. About 50 million light-years distant, the Virgo Cluster is the closest large galaxy cluster to our own local galaxy group. Prominent here are Virgo's bright elliptical galaxies from the Messier catalog, M87 at the top left, and M84 and M86 seen (bottom to top) below and right of center.
M84 and M86 are recognized as part of Markarian's Chain, a visually striking line-up of galaxies vertically on the right side of this frame. Near the middle of the chain lies an intriguing interacting pair of galaxies, NGC 4438 and NGC 4435, known to some as Markarian's Eyes. Of course giant elliptical galaxy M87 dominates the Virgo cluster. It's the home of a super massive black hole, the first black hole ever imaged by planet Earth's Event Horizon Telescope."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)