ericbj

No simple answer to that question, especially in present very volatile conditions. But certain sectors of the market tend to do well for a while while others do badly. Then that sector goes down and another comes up. So you have to be on your toes. However, Trump, with his desire to make the U.S. self-sufficient in vital raw materials hitherto imported (mainly from China - think rare earths, antimony, etc.) while itself possessing them under its soil, is causing a succession of U.S. companies' shares to suddenly shoot up in value. The problem is to know - in advance of the knowledge becoming public - which companies will benefit. If you want to make wapping gains in short order. If you have a deeper pocket than mine, Jim Rickards has an investment advisory subscription where he uses AI to trace sudden surges in a company's shares due to insider trading. Insiders have knowledge of forthcoming deals before they become public. The service is called "Rickards' Insider Intel". Not to be confused with his "Strategic Intelligence". Much cheaper, but good value. Otherwise, for longer term gains, see what sectors are likely to benefit. E.g. Trump will likely oblige Europe to buy more U.S. natural gas. If so, it will be a boon for gas-tanker shipping companies. If interested, Bonner Private Research's paying version of its free newsletter can suggest which ones to buy.

Mike Maloney's video tends to confirm the increasing importance of gold and the likelihood of a radical change in the payment system for international trade: Very clear explanation of a complex situation. He mentions the as-yet non-existant Mar-a-Largo Accord.

Thanks for the feedback. I can see that you have knowledge of that market, something that I lack. I believe one needs to have at least some degree of knowledge of a sector one is investing in, especially in difficult times. My impression is that quite a few AI companies are not doing too well at present, so one would need to know to avoid them. If I were going to invest in that area it might have to do with energy for the new data-centres. Personally am more into stuff I can understand fairly easily, like metals and minerals, and energy. Commodities as a whole have had a pretty rotten time in recent years, but probably have quite a future. But WHEN depends upon when manufacturing surges again. So am heavily (relative to my resources!) into gold which is real money (a "tier-one asset", the only one apart from the now-dodgy U.S. Treasuries). And also silver, much more volatile and unpredictable, but underpriced in view of its high industrial demand and limited availability. Moreover, unlike gold, it gets used up, as not economically recyclable. Hold some bullion and some stocks, mainly royalty companies like Franco-Nevada and Wheaton. Copper very good potential, but economic lift-off needed to realise it.

I agree that most "experts" are salesmen either for an investment letter of dubious quality, or to push up demand for stocks they are invested in or paid to promote; or both. I tend to go for contrarian opinions, because those people are going against the grain and have likely done some homework. And because what is currently unpopular because of some temporary setback (nothing fundamentally serious - could be something cyclical) stands a better chance of rising in value later. Take uranium for instance. Fortunes made. Then boom! Nobody wants it. Green politics against it. Now they are needing it more and more and saying it is ecological because no CO2 emissions (at least not from 'burning' it). Here are a few names to look out for, if interested: Doug Casey of International Man Bill Bonner Jim Rickards Happy hunting !

Stock and bond markets, foreign exchange rates, and inflation are a particular concern to those of us living on a "nest-egg", whether pension and/or other sources of income. The financial media are mentioning an as-yet hypothetical development they refer to as 'The Mar-a-Largo Accord'. A term coined by Dr Stephen Miran, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors to the President, in "A User's Guide to Restructuring the Global Trading System". Bloomberg Law: "The Mar-a-Largo Chatter is Getting Wall Street's Attention." Forbes: "Why the Mar-a-Largo Accord Would Matter To You." The Financial Times: "What a Mar-a-Largo Accord Could Look Like." What actually comes out of this remains to be seen. What one can say for sure is that Trump & Team are seeking to turn around the growing, decades-long trade deficit and to restructure and drastically reduce an unsustainable debt. How are they hoping to do this? 1. By devaluing the dollar (while persuading major trading partners not to follow suit, which would negate the effect. The tariffs are there as a persuasive threat to gaining acceptance of this). It would make U.S. exports more competitive and foreign imports less so. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is a former hedge-fund manager whose thinking helped George Soros and others generate billions of dollars profit by crashing the GBP and the Japanese yen. Just before his appointment to his present position he said in an interview with Ted Seides "We're in the midst of a Bretton Woods realignment …I'd like to be part of it, either on the inside or the out." And "The tariff gun will always be loaded and on the table but rarely discharged." 2. Restructuring of the U.S. government's debt, to free up capital. For brevity's sake, let it pass. 3. Monetisation of U.S. government assets. Bessent recently said, in Trump's presence: "Within the next 12 months, we're going to monetize the asset side of the U.S. balance sheet." What are these assets? a) Gold reserves. It is believed that a revaluation of U.S. reserves, something that has been done four times in the past, will greatly increase gold bullion's retail price. Share prices of gold mining, royalty, and streaming companies could be leveraged four-fold. (Exploration companies are a risky bet that can pay off big, but rarely do so) b) Land, and the mineral and other resources it holds. The Federal government owns vast tracts of mineral-rich land, located mostly in the western parts of the country. Executive Order 14196 has created a Sovereign Wealth Fund, in anticipation of having national wealth to invest and manage. Sovereign wealth funds already exist in a number of countries, such as the Irish Republic, to manage and grow the tax revenues from the many transnational companies headquartered there, and Norway, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, mainly to invest oil revenues. Retirees may draw their own conclusions from the foregoing as to any moves they may need to make. Or make their own enquiries. The Internet is a useful resource.

Unacceptable opinions by the BBC "contributor". But were they expressed on the BBC? If so, the BBC must be condemned for doing nothing. But if not, was the BBC aware that they were expressed on other media? If unaware, they should investigate more closely the background of those they employ, in whatever category. Today's BBC (no longer what it was) is given more to presenting ready-made "narratives" rather than investigative journalism. Opinions such as those held by the person in question are held by others amongst the Gazan population, whether or not they support Hamas. Not all do. And not all hold such opinions. If you take the trouble to listen to a cross-section of opinions of Palestinians and Jews, Jews are not all identified as Zionists. Many orthodox Jews are supportive of the Palestinians. If you do not believe it, do a search. Many Zionists are not Jews. There are self-identifying "Christian" Zionists; and even Hindu-extremist Zionists in the IDF. A reporter should report all relevant facts and opinions (however objectionable) while endeavouring to be as objective as possible. Otherwise the reporting becomes "an opinion piece", and should be identified as such.

The statistics provided show there are a lot of empty chambers. You make your choice.

Play Russian roulette and you can still survive unharmed.

There is more than one side to science. It depends upon its intended use … or unintended consequences. "Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this Island or lose the war. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science." Churchill, June 1940. Much science today is perverted by the quest for profits at the expense of all other considerations.

It is quite possible that the heavy metals in vaccines are the cause of recent cases of 'autism' because this latter condition was known to be sometimes caused by earlier vaccines than those for Covid-19. The former also include heavy-metals (and other junk) intended to stimulate an immune response. Metals usually involved are aluminium and mercury (as thimerosal). Although the latter is now said to have been withdrawn from children's vaccines, at least in some countries. When suffering suspected heavy-metal poisoning in 2005, my doctor asked me if had been recently vaccinated. [answer: "No. Last time was for tetanus about 7 years ago."] Unlike 'autism', long-Covid is thought to be caused by a persistence in the body of the spike-protein, which can come either from the virus or the vaccine.

Regarding inflation: Q.E. produced massive inflation, as might be expected when currency is 'printed' into existence without an equivalent increase in goods and services. That this does not show up in official figures is due to the way those figures are calculated, and who received the low-interest bank loans and what they did with it. The banks that received the hand-outs principally lent it out to their best customers: wealthy investors and speculators. These had already virtually all they needed from High Street and so invested the bulk on Wall Street (and in real estate etc.). Thus creating a huge bubble in such places as the stock-markets, where share prices rocketted in relation to actual or potential earnings. A stock-market crash was made inevitable by runaway inflation in share prices caused by cheap loans. All it needed was a trigger to make it happen.

If the WSJ says that Trump's tariffs were designed to strengthen the dollar, I do not believe them. Instead, IMHO, the tariffs were designed to initiate world-wide negotiations on a restructuring of tariffs to produce a situation more favourable to U.S. exports and less favourable to its imports. In order to correct trade imbalances. For the same reason Trump wishes to see a cheaper dollar. The dollar is falling in purchasing power. So is the euro, which therefore cannot be said to be 'soaring' in real terms. Fiat currencies are pieces of paper of no guaranteed value, backed only by government decree that they are to be used as a means of commercial exchange. Their value relies upon the confidence of those that use them. Which can be related to scarcity or otherwise, and the reliability of the issuer. As regards the reliability of the dollar's issuer this took a bad hit on the international stage from the Biden administration's use of it to sanction foreign powers. Bank notes are no longer promissory notes that the issuer guarantees to redeem for real money. I.e. gold. (Or possibly bitcoin but certainly not other cryptocurrencies).

MOST people have sufficient acumen to see for themselves. 🙂

May be of interest: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5256332-trump-economic-advisers/

If you want some big-timers you scarcely need to look. Because they stand out like a sore thumb. They are people with huge fortunes, supported by huge investments in critical sectors of the economy, and who often have managed, through a well-endowed foundation, to spread largesse where it matters to them (notably throughout the mass-media, and/or ownership of a part thereof; but also by making other "non-profits" financially dependent upon them). They stifle well-aimed criticism, and may even successfully project themselves as experts and advisers to governments on subjects where they have no real expertise, but where they have financial interests. This type of deep-state operator is not interested in amassing further wealth for the comfort and security it can provide. Theirs is a power game. No need to name them, as most people have sufficient acumen to see for themselves. However, these prominent characters are only the tip of the iceberg. Their propaganda is spread insidiously at all levels of society by self-interested individuals and those who have not "woken up" to the game being played upon humanity.

Some brief definitions of DEEP STATE. From which it will be seen that the compass is very wide. And does not necessarily involve consciously executed conspiracies but in many if not all cases is simply a question of common interests. Nothing radically new really. Wealth has always had power to influence governments in its own interest, often to the detriment of the common people. I guess it is what the British have long referred to as 'The Establishment'. Remember what one of the early Rothschilds is alleged to have said "I care not what the governmeent is so long as I control the currency." The reaches of modern media combined with what Edward Bernays initiated, however, offer greater possibilities of manipulating the minds of the populace. So they can for instance be induced to welcome wars that impoverish them and further enrich those already extremely wealthy. "Deep state - Wikipedia "The term 'deep state' is a direct calque of the Turkish phrase derin devlet (lit. 'deep state'). It originally emerged in Turkey to describe an alleged network of military, intelligence, and bureaucratic elements operating independently of elected officials to maintain a particular ideological or political status quo." "What you need to know about the 'deep state' - ABC News "What is the 'deep state'? The 'deep state' is the notion that there is a network of career government employees who are secretly manipulating government policy." "The 'Deep State' Theory, Defined and Explained - ThoughtCo "The 'deep state' theory suggests secret control over governments without official approval. The deep state is viewed as a mix of government and private interests exerting influence. Some cite actions like leaks and opposition to support claims of a deep state in the U.S." "State Secrecy Explains the Origins of the ‘Deep State’ Conspiracy Theory - Scientific American "Lost in today’s misinformation fights is the recognition that modern conspiracy theories spring from excesses of state secrecy "From election denial to QAnon, the origins of our age of misinformation too often go unexamined. That’s too bad, because unraveling the roots of one popular conspiracy theory - of a 'deep state' - might reveal something important about the cynicism now infecting U.S politics. "In the U.S., the idea of a deep state cabal of unelected officials secretively pulling the strings of American government, is widely believed. One 2018 poll even claimed that a majority of American voters place credence in the theory. This is no fringe phenomenon. America’s democratic political institutions and public opinion are riven by anxieties that have been given voice in the pronouncements of Donald Trump: "Either the deep state destroys America or we destroy the deep state," he told a rally in Waco, Texas, in March 2023."

This may help: https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/5245624-deep-state-shock-trump-pursuit/

Background Plan to Trump's Tariffs? Essentially an attempt to force through an agreement with trading partners to devalue the dollar, along the lines of what happened 40 years ago with the Plaza Accord? This could concern the many with dollar-denominated savings (such as retired expats). For more details of this suggestion see here: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-04-10/what-is-the-mar-a-lago-accord-donald-trump-tariff-policy/105153862 Other aims of Trump and his administration, in these cases clearly stated, are (1) to "monetize" U.S. government assets, notably vast tracts of government-owned, mineral-rich lands mostly in the western parts of the country [and also 8,133 tonnes of gold, if there]; and (2) to build a Sovereign Wealth Fund, similar to those of some other nations, such as Norway, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Trump's goals are to change the annual balance of payments from negative to positive, and ultimately to wipe out the huge national debt. These goals, to be achievable, call for inflation of prices and depreciation of the currency (two sides of the same coin). It is open to question as to whether international co-operation is more readily obtained by aggressive domineering or by seeking understanding of mutual benefits for a proposed course of action. The U.S. economy has been on the road to self-destruction since at least Nixon's decision of 1971. Or earlier, in view of the circumstances that led to that decision. And when the lynch-pin of the global economy fails, all nations who are part of that economy are severely affected. Whether Trump's various projects succeed, in the face of strong opposition from many quarters to the multiple upsets and setbacks they occasion, is something that remains to be seen.

Tariffs are sometimes necessary, within reason and subject to negotiation, to protect a weaker nation against economic domination. Trump has said that foreign manufacturers can avoid paying tariffs on their products by building factories in the U.S. [However in view of the recent practice of seizing foreign assets (no longer limited to Treasuries) for political reasons, some countries may be discouraged from doing this; if they are not actually prevented from doing so] It seems that Foreign Direct Investment is the method some foreign companies avoid paying Thai tariffs : FDI applications for 2024 : Singapore: 358B THB China: 175B THB Hong Kong: 82B THB Taiwan 50B THB Japan 49B THB Note: Most of the investment from Singapore originates from China and the U.S. Figures refer to applications, of which about 75% are taken up. One of the claims of "unfair" treatment by the Trump administration is that U.S. manufacturers have to pay sales or value-added-tax on their exported goods. These are paid by domestic producers so how can they disadvantage U.S. produced items ?

What about lacking cement? Could be low cement-to-water ratio, maybe from adding too much water to reduce vibration needed? I recall having read somewhere a mention of non-adherance of concrete to reinforcing bars. Potential causes?

"He stresses the significance of correct reinforcement patterns, advocating for rebar stirrups at strategic points like the base and top of columns on every level." Perhaps something is lost in translation from the Thai, but "stirrups at strategic points" makes it sound as if they do not space them very closely ! [Stirrup translates as étrier in French which is what goes across a pillar (or beam) to link two main rebars where the pillar's large section requires additional main rebars between those near the four corners. The corner main rebars are linked to one another by a cadre, or frame] My understanding (I am not a structural engineer, so perhaps someone who is can comment on this) is that good seismic resistance calls for linking the reinforcing bars of supporting pillars with those of the beams they support. So they become just a single structural item. This is obviously labour-intensive and means the reinforced concrete must be cast in situ. Of course the design of the Audit Department building did not make use of beams but instead counted upon its self-supporting floors to lock the pillars in place.

UNKNOWN EFFECTS OF TRUMP TARIFFS Dependent upon currently quoted tariff rates, and on the extent they remain as they are, we are likely to see changes in global trading patterns with the USA, influenced by the different rates imposed on different countries. Many U.S. companies moved their factories from China to Vietnam or Cambodia to avoid tariffs on Chinese goods (and at the same time employ a cheaper workforce than present-day Chinese labour). Now they may need to move again. The question is: whither? To the U.S.? Would they be able to produce in the U.S. at a cost of less than the c.i.f. price from South-East Asia plus import duty? Very uncertain. Remember the cost of building and equipping a factory in the U.S. needs to be included in the calculations. (Let's ignore that a major recession would result in vacant industrial premises etc. But also most likely diminished market demand for the product to be produced) This is where consideration of lower tariffs imposed on other ASEAN countries, and local taxes, and availability of any technical skills needed by the work-force, come into consideration. Lower tariffs rates are: Singapore 10% Philippines 17% Malaysia 24% Thailand 36% Trump is bringing about a regionalisation of world trade. The U.S. will no longer be the global hegemon but will still be a major player on the world scene. Trump's modus operandi is bizarre in the extreme, does not conform with the norms we have known in recent times, and is likely producing results that he himself never foresaw. The result is chaos. But a consequence of this may be to break the mould of thought that developed our world to what it has become, only to stagnate and leave us with defunct and often corrupt institutions, that could only fail. Failure of the old is a necessity to make way for the new. The seeds of failure were sown at Bretton Woods, but began to sprout with Nixon's "temporary" removal of gold-backing to the dollar. And the dollar has been taking the U.S.A. down ever since. Trump is accelerating the decline of the outworn. Hard times ahead. But new horizons can usher in better prospects for the generations to come. So long as we do not descend to firing off nuclear weapons. An ever present threat when playing at brinkmanship.

An interesting article on the Greek Debt Crisis : https://econreview.studentorg.berkeley.edu/a-tale-of-two-countries-a-history-of-the-greek-debt-crisis/ But do not see much mention of the forced privatisation of Greek national assets.

I am wondering to what extent these U.S. import tariffs will impact U.S. exports of imported goods. Let me explain. I recently purchased a very nice Trek bicycle delivered from the U.S. but manufactured in Cambodia. Would the 47% tariff be applied to such a purchase when delivered to the U.S. prior to export from there? Or would the goods be held in bonded warehouse until exported? Or the tax reimbursed to the importer upon export? One can understand Trump's desire to relocate manufacturing and jobs to the United States. But his analysis is erroneous of why they were dis-located from the U.S. in the first place. It was in the interests of major financial interests, abetted by the U.S. government. And initially welcomed by many U.S. consumers who saw a reduction of prices without realising the ultimate price to be paid by the working man and woman. There was an interesting interview by CBC News of Joseph Stiglitz on this question about a fortnight ago. Can be found on YouTube. Exporting countries will cease selling to U.S. markets if they cannot make a profit. Which is perhaps the unstated intention. Either tariffs will be paid by the consumer, or they will have to buy from American manufacturers, assuming their factories are capable of producing the goods, likely at higher cost. Another economist, whose name escapes me for the moment, said (in an interview also published recently on YouTube) that many countries, notably developing nations, borrow dollars from US sources to finance their development. These loans must be repaid in US dollars, both capital repayments and interest. To have these dollars there must be an imbalance of trade with the U.S.in favour of the borrowing country. Otherwise they will likely have to default on their loans. If they cannot repay their loans, what action will the U.S. government take? Write off the debts? Or seize the country's assets? (Look at what the E.U. and its French, German and Finnish banksters did to Greece) Many of Trump's long-term goals may be valid, but his approach seems to be that of a "bull in a china shop"; creating resistance at every step. We are entering uncharted waters.

Many thanks for that info. Shall endeavour to act on it. Did take the bankbook to the bank and we spoke with both a cashier and the bank branch manager. Latter is a friend of my Thai friend, both born and educated in Thailand of Burmese (Karen) parents. Unfortunately my friend is frequently very occupied with work and other activities, and also sometimes away, so can only call upon her from time to time.