Friday, November 28, 2025

Gold Beats the Dollar Because Politicians Trash the Dollar


A reserve money is used by the world’s people to buy from and sell to one another. 

If a reserve money is produced by a nation’s politicians, this is both good and bad.  It helps the nation’s people buy more products from other nations’ people.  But it also helps the nation’s politicians borrow and spend more

When the nation’s politicians borrow and spend more, that forces the nation’s people to invest less and produce less.  At the same time, that also forces the nation’s people to pay interest and pay back principal.  (Although constitutionally they are required to push back against repaying any debts incurred to finance Progressive politicians’ rebellion, by repudiating those debts.)

The people and the government people each do their part

The people of the USA make the dollar desirable as a reserve money because they create a wide array of products that people everywhere want.  These products include assets, skilled labor, materials and energy products, intermediate products, and final products.  Some of these products can’t be found anywhere else at a comparable quality and price.  A few of these products can’t be found anywhere else at all. 

USA government people make the dollar desirable as a reserve money if they make people’s life, liberty, and property secure. 

But USA government people are doing worse at this, and that is making the dollar less desirable as a reserve currency, due to a couple of key actions.  First, they have long granted bankers license to steal interest they haven’t earned by collecting deposits, by instead simply creating dollars and loaning them out.  Lately, they are pushing bankers to lower interest rates even more than in the past by creating even more dollars.  Both actions dilute the value of the existing dollars that the world’s people have been using to buy from and sell to one another. 

Predictably, USA politicians keep spending more, and they keep making us pay for it by borrowing more, and this is making the dollar worth less over time.  USA politicians have kept this up throughout the Progressives’ century-plus since 1894.

The long-term historical purchasing power of the dollar is approximated in the figure. 

Figure: The dollar’s purchasing power, 1800–2024.  Semilog plot using CPI data, scaled so purchasing power was 100% in 1894.

The figure’s vertical axis has a log scale.  On such a semilog graph, a sloped straight line indicates that there has been a constant rate of exponential growth or decay

At first, the USA government people held to a fractional-reserve gold standard.  In general, people’s productivity increased exponentially, and as a result, the dollar’s purchasing power also increased exponentially. 

But since the government people allowed bankers to lend out more money than people had saved, this practice’s intrinsic instability periodically caused sensible runs on banks that have been called panics, across which the dollar’s purchasing power decreased exponentially.  Also, government people periodically caused wars, across which the dollar’s purchasing power also decreased exponentially, at even faster rates. 

Later, across the Progressives’ century-plus, politicians started decreasing the dollar’s purchasing power at exponential rates. 

Even the one period of seeming respite — the Roaring Twenties followed by the Great Depression — brought its own deprivations.  These included WWII, which was brought on by the new Fed’s 1920s boom and 1930s bust

Progressive politicians’ debasement of the dollar’s purchasing power proceeded at faster exponential rates across sustained periods around WWI, WWII, the 1970s Great Inflation, and government people’s COVID responses

Reserve moneys’ customers are always right

This latest time is different.  USA gross public debt as a percentage of GDP is now a historically high 139% and is still growing without limits.

If something cannot go on forever, it will stop

Eventually, creditors will stop buying depreciating bonds at affordable interest rates, or the people will stop keeping up with interest payments. 

In the more inflationary 2000s, people’s usual capital-preserving shift away from underperforming stocks and depreciating moneys and toward hard assets has begun already and is increasing. 

Since 2010, gold has been increasingly bought by various nations’ central bankers.  Since January 2025, gold has been increasingly bought by various other institutions and individuals.  If current central bank holdings would simply stay the same but the price of gold would rise from $4,000 per ounce to just $5,600 per ounce, the world’s largest reserve asset would no longer be dollars.  It would be gold

The USA people already produce much of what the world wants. 

Also, with only few exceptions, all in smaller nations, USA government people beat other nations’ even worse government people, making property more secure here than elsewhere.

But that’s not as good as things could be.  The USA people will be freed to create far more value once our governments become less able to borrow on the backs of all of us

So it’s great news for the USA people that the choices of myriad people in other governments, other groups of people, and individuals are converging to transition the world’s reserve money from the dollar to gold

The way things work in practice in the real world, things could hardly be better for freedom and for everybody’s future



Entertainment thread for Nov 28

 


Hope your shopping was a success.

Tamkeen: The Muslim Brotherhood Way Of Conquest


Muslim immigration is unlike anything we’ve experienced in the past. The current best estimates are that Islamic fundamentalists (those advocating for sharia law) make up between 20 and 30 percent of immigrating Muslims. Between 1991 and today, over 2 million Muslims arrived.

Using the 20-30 percent figure, that would suggest that there are 200,000 to 400,000 Muslims here who do not intend to assimilate and, in fact, are here to spread traditional Islamists views, including Tamkeen (more on this term later) and Sharia Law, sometimes violently. That’s not just a problem; it’s a threat. This level of radicalism can lead to violence, as was seen in Israel with the October 7th attack, and with the destruction of America’s traditional political and social institutions.

For anyone who believes that Islamists are not a threat to ordinary Americans, consider that, since 2000, Islamist-inspired attacks in the United States have killed roughly 3,100 Americans (almost all from 9/11) and injured several thousand more. Outside of 9/11, fatalities from Islamist-linked incidents number in the low hundreds, with injuries in the hundreds to low thousands.

President Trump recognizes this, for he has designated certain chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist organizations. This begs the question: Why is the seemingly non-violent Muslim Brotherhood a threat?

The Muslim Brotherhood has long eschewed jihadist violence, opting instead for something more insidious: Tamkeen (Arabic for “empowerment” or “entrenchment”), which is the Muslim Brotherhood’s primary strategy designed to overcome Western culture and obtain dominance. It’s methods include:

  • Institutional penetration: Establishing presence in civil society organizations, education systems, legal advocacy, and cultural institutions.
  • Community consolidation: Building authority within Muslim communities through religious leadership, social services, and grassroots networks.
  • Discourse normalization: Shaping public narratives to align with Islamist values, often through media, academia, and religious platforms.

This approach, often described as nonviolent strategic entryism, aims for long-term transformation rather than short-term upheaval. Entryism itself is a sub-strategy that sees members of one group join another—usually a larger or more influential one—to change its policies, leadership, or ideology from within. It often involves infiltration, sometimes covert, to steer the host organization toward the entryists’ agenda.

You may recognize what happened to the Democrat party, as radical leftists entered it and took over. But that’s another subject, though the new Democrat party is often a Muslim Brotherhood ally.

The Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP) has extensively documented Tamkeen as a staged political process aimed at constructing Islamic governance in non-Muslim societies. It is seen as a theological innovation that adapts classical empowerment concepts to modern institutional contexts.

  • Analysts describe Tamkeen as part of a “settlement strategy” in which Brotherhood-affiliated actors embed themselves in Western institutions to reshape public discourse and policy over time.
  • This strategy exploits democratic freedoms to advance ideological goals that conflict with liberal democratic norms.

Things to keep in mind and be aware of:

  • Tamkeen is not universally accepted or practiced by all Islamist groups, and interpretations vary across regions and factions.
  • The concept should not be conflated with Islam itself. It is a political strategy rooted in specific ideological frameworks.
  • While Tamkeen is a threat to liberal democracy, its proponents argue that its nonviolent nature makes it a legitimate form of political participation.

So, how pervasive is the Brotherhood and how focused is it on exporting its version of Islam to the Western world?

The Muslim Brotherhood is a transnational Sunni Islamist movement. It initially focused on religious revival, social services, and anti-colonial activism, but later evolved into a powerful political force with branches worldwide.

The Brotherhood has more than 500,000 adherents operating in dozens of countries, including the U.S. and Europe. Given those numbers, who are a few more things to know about it:

  • It advocates for Islamic governance under sharia law and, in its most ambitious vision, a caliphate.
  • It’s influenced by thinkers like Sayyid Qutb, who radicalized parts of the movement toward violent jihad. This includes Pan-Islamism, religious conservatism, anti-Zionism, anti-imperialism, and anti-communism.
  • It’s designated as a terrorist organization by Muslim countries, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, Russia, and Syria.
  • In the past, it was not designated as a terrorist group by the U.S. or EU, although Donald Trump is finally trying to change that.
  • Notably, it includes Hamas (founded as the Palestinian branch of the Brotherhood in 1987).

To understand how the Muslim Brotherhood operates, it’s worthwhile to focus on CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), which presents itself as just another civil rights organization. However, it has roots in Brotherhood-linked networks, and employs similar institutional embedding tactics in the U.S.

Thus, it actively courts political officials and directs other institutions and individuals to contribute almost exclusively to Muslim leaning candidates. CAIR’s influence in U.S. politics comes far more from lobbying, advocacy, and community mobilization than from traceable financial contributions. It’s pure Tamkeen, and we ignore it at our peril.

God Bless America!



🎭 π–πŸ‘π π““π“π“˜π“›π“¨ 𝓗𝓾𝓢𝓸𝓻, π“œπ“Ύπ“Όπ“²π“¬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, π“žπ“Ÿπ“”π“ 𝓣𝓗𝓑𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The π–πŸ‘π π““π“π“˜π“›π“¨ 𝓗𝓾𝓢𝓸𝓻, π“œπ“Ύπ“Όπ“²π“¬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, π“žπ“Ÿπ“”π“ 𝓣𝓗𝓑𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 
man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 


On Target: The Perfect Guide To Gifting Your Favorite Firearm-Loving Friends And Family



Christmas is, without a doubt, the time to pull out the big gun gifts — especially when buying for the Second Amendment lovers in your life. Whether you need help scoping out the best presents for your firearm-loving friends and family or you are ready to pull the trigger on a purchase for yourself, you’re in luck. Get the most bang for your buck with these nine handpicked suggestions.

Ol’ Reliable

Starting off strong, we have Sig P365 — SIG Sauer’s hottest carry gun of all time.

There are many different variations of this reliable recommendation, but the P365 X Macro Comp reigns the best in my book. The pistol is sleek, thin, and holds a full-size 17+1 round capacity. The built-in compensator also reduces recoil by about 10 percent.

P365 X Macro Comp

Holsters For All

Need a safe and secure place to store your gun while on the go? G-Code allows you to custom-order holsters for every carrying occasion.

Whether you prefer something more concealed inside a waistband or want to show your stuff with an outside sheath, G-Code’s wide range of affordable options will ensure a snug fit for anyone and their carry choice. For your fancier Second Amendment-loving friends and family, G-Code holsters can also be modified to fit various light or optic combinations on dozens of different pistol models.

holster options from the G-Code website
holster options from the G-Code website

In Plain Sight

Need something to pair with that X Macro Comp recommended earlier? Check out the Holosun 407k. This open reflex optical sight won’t break the bank and adds a nice addition to most subcompact firearm footprints. Options in both red and green dots are available.

Holosun 407k open reflex optical sight

Rifle Rec

Whether you’re into hunting hogs or protecting yourself against tyranny, the legendary FN Scar 17S is the perfect powerful rifle for you and yours. It’s got an ambidextrous safety lever and magazine release, shoots 7.62x51mm, and includes a number of accessory rails that will fit your favorite sight or light.

FN officially discontinued this rifle from the civilian market as of October 2025, so the remaining stock is all that is left to snag.

 FN Scar 17S rifle

Hot and New Home Defense

On the hunt for a home defense gun? Look no further than the Glock 17 V. Not only is it brand new to the market from the most well-known firearm company on the planet, but this 9mm pistol boasts “maximum control and comfort in a duty-grade platform” and three 17-round magazines.

Glock 17 V

Med Bag

If you are buying tools that poke holes in things, you should also have the supplies to fill them. The Everlit Advanced Trauma Kit from Krate Tactical, “field tested by veterans,” is a great start to your combat treatment supply stash. It includes a variety of bandages, a splint, a tourniquet, trauma shears, and more first aid gear designed to assist with bleeding, bone fractures, and wounds.

Carrying Case

Your resident gun guy may have all the firearms he needs, but does he have a good way to transport them? Check out these Condition 1 hard exterior, waterproof pistol cases. Not only do they have options to store up to 18 pistols in one place, but they also come with a lifetime warranty and are TSA-approved.

condition 1 pistol case

Bringing A Knife To A Gunfight?

Slice into this holiday season and the world of high-quality knives with the new Benchmade Bailout featuring CPM S90V steel. With a lifetime warranty, customization, and price options for all different budgets, Benchmade Knives, like this beauty of a pocket knife, land at the top of my recommendations each and every year.

Benchmade Bailout knife

For The Ladies

Guns are the great equalizer, but far too few women have found a comfortable way to carry. Change that this Christmas by gifiting your favorite females their choice of a Bulldog concealed carry purse. Stylish options such as these satchelschic crossbodies, and shoulder bags equipped with “color matched holsters” embolden women to prioritize safety without sacrificing their feminine flair.

conceal carry purses



Trump Slams New York Times for 'Hit Piece' Claiming He’s Losing His Energy



President Donald Trump took aim at The New York Times on Wednesday over a “hit piece” the news outlet published speculating about his health.

The piece, written by reporter Katie Rogers, reads like yet another left-wing attempt to insinuate that Trump’s age could be impeding his ability to perform as president. It’s quite ironic given that these same outlets all but completely ignored former President Joe Biden’s apparent cognitive and physical problems until after it was clear he was not seeking a second term.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump noted that “The Creeps at the Failing New York Times are at it again.”

“I won the 2024 Presidential Election in a Landslide, winning all Seven Swing States, the Popular Vote, and the Electoral College by a lot. I won our Nation’s Districts by 2750 to 550, a complete wipeout,” Trump wrote. “I settled 8 Wars, have 48 New Stock Market Highs, our Economy is Great, and our Country is RESPECTED AGAIN all over the World, respected like never before.”

The president savaged the Biden administration for having “the Highest Inflation in history” and said he has “already brought that down to normal, and prices, including groceries, are coming down.”

To do this requires a lot of Work and Energy, and I have never worked so hard in my life. Yet despite all of this the Radical Left Lunatics in the soon to fold New York Times did a hit piece on me that I am perhaps losing my Energy, despite facts that show the exact opposite. They know this is wrong, as is almost every thing that they write about me, including election results, ALL PURPOSELY NEGATIVE. This cheap “RAG” is truly an “ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE.” The writer of the story, Katie Rogers, who is assigned to write only bad things about me, is a third rate reporter who is ugly, both inside and out. Despite all of this, I have my highest Poll Numbers, ever, and with record setting investment being made in America, they should only go up.

Rogers’ piece notes that Trump is “the oldest person to be elected to the presidency” and that “he is aging.” 

With headline-grabbing posts on social media, combative interactions with reporters and speeches full of partisan red meat, Mr. Trump can project round-the-clock energy, virility and physical stamina. Now at the end of his eighth decade, Mr. Trump and the people around him still talk about him as if he is the Energizer Bunny of presidential politics.

The reality is more complicated: Mr. Trump, 79, is the oldest person to be elected to the presidency, and he is aging. To pre-empt any criticism about his age, he often compares himself to President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who at 82 was the oldest person to hold the office, and whose aides took measures to shield his growing frailty from the public, including by tightly managing his appearances.

Mr. Trump has hung a photo of an autopen in a space where Mr. Biden’s portrait would otherwise be, and disparages his predecessor’s physicality often.

“He sleeps all the time — during the day, during the night, on the beach,” Mr. Trump said about Mr. Biden last week, adding: “I’m not a sleeper.”

Rogers further notes that “Americans see Mr. Trump less than they used to” and that he has had “fewer public events on his schedule and is traveling domestically much less than he did by this point during his first year in office.”

The reporter further pointed out that Trump “keeps a shorter public schedule than he used to” and that “Most of his public appearances fall between noon and 5 p.m., on average.”

And when he is in public, occasionally, his battery shows signs of wear. During an Oval Office event that began around noon on Nov. 6, Mr. Trump sat behind his desk for about 20 minutes as executives standing around him talked about weight-loss drugs.

At one point, Mr. Trump’s eyelids drooped until his eyes were almost closed, and he appeared to doze on and off for several seconds. At another point, he opened his eyes and looked toward a line of journalists watching him. He stood up only after a guest who was standing near him fainted and collapsed.

The bruises on Trump’s hand, which many on the left have been fixated on, also make an appearance in the article. Rogers notes that he “applies makeup to a bruise on the back of his right hand, adding speculation about a medical condition that his physician and aides say is caused by taking aspirin and shaking so many hands.”

The article continues in this vein in a desperate attempt to use the same attacks against Trump that Republicans (rightly) made against Biden.

I have no idea why they are still going with this line of attack. Yes, Trump is almost 80 years old. Expecting him to behave like a spring chicken is silly.

But even further, Trump demonstrates none of the obvious issues Biden had. He’s not randomly walking off the stage during speeches or press conferences. He doesn’t rely on flash cards to remember journalists’ names. He doesn’t fall up and down stairs. He can even get through an entire speech without making a gaffe.

The comparison is absurd — as is the fact that the media is all of a sudden concerned about the president’s health when he happens to have an “R” next to his name.



Blue States Revolt: Democrats Sue Trump Over SNAP Rules Targeting Immigrants



Twenty-one Democratic states and the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration on Wednesday over the new Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) eligibility requirements that they say block groups of legal immigrants from accessing the program. 

One disputed provision would require green-card holders to wait five years before becoming eligible for SNAP. Another would make legal permanent residents, including refugees and asylum seekers, permanently ineligible for the program. The plaintiffs are asking the judge to block the USDA from putting the new guidance into effect.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, states:

The Guidance is arbitrary and capricious because the Defendants failed to provide a reasoned explanation for why the agency was changing its position as to whether individuals who have had the following status were subject to the five-year waiting period: Refugees, Individuals Granted Asylum, Deportation Withheld, and other groups that have the same eligibility as Refugees under statute.

New York Attorney General Letitia James, fresh off a brief dismissal of an indictment, wrote in a statement Wednesday:

USDA’s interpretation could saddle states with fines so extreme that some warn they could be forced to shut down their SNAP programs entirely — a disastrous outcome that would leave millions of Americans without access to the nation’s most essential anti-hunger program.

Officials also argued that the USDA had not granted the required 120-day grace period after issuing the new eligibility requirements. This left states scrambling to implement the changes overnight. 

“The federal administration should stop violating the law so blatantly,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta told POLITICO. “We will continue to monitor, hold them accountable.”



The Jackson Plan for Dealing With Nullifiers and Insurrectionists


RedState 

The Seditious Six Scandal continues to mushroom, with FBI interviews to be scheduled for the six members of Congress who made the video encouraging members of the military to refuse any "illegal orders" from President Trump, despite the lawmakers being unable to specify any example of such an “illegal order” having ever been made.  

Apparently, the Democrats were projecting again after January 6, 2021, when they condemned a so-called Republican “insurrection.” Amazing how the projecting keeps happening.  

Nevertheless, this is a serious business in American history. But it is not unprecedented. Another president who dealt with an analogous situation was Andrew Jackson, the seventh president of the U.S.   

As you may know, many political commentators have compared President Jackson’s foreign policy to President Trump’s. However, perhaps there is more to this comparison?


Trump Is a Jacksonian President—Reagan Was Too


In the 1830s, President Jackson dealt with two specific but overlapping domestic enemies from within his own Democrat Party. They were: 1) the Nullifiers, i.e., Southern Democrats determined to protect slavery and strongly opposed to a high tariff, who promoted the idea that a state could “nullify” federal government actions on these (and potentially other) issues; and 2) the Insurrectionists, i.e., Southern Democrats who were so angry about the above issues that they were willing to leave the Union over them, or commit violence.  

Jackson, although himself a slaveholder from the Southern state of Tennessee, was opposed to these two groups, as he was a strong Union man, and he was not hard-core regarding the tariff.

Today, we see these same two overlapping groups among the Democrats. For example, on the issue of illegal aliens, Democrats are making a priority of fighting against, or nullifying, the Trump administration’s constitutionally and legally valid border crackdown. Some Democrat-run states and cities are claiming that they will refuse to enforce federal actions against illegals, some Democrat judges are blocking federal actions to deport illegals, and some regular Democrat citizens – including a Democrat Congresswoman – are actually attacking ICE agents who attempt to arrest the illegals.  

And now, we can see that there are modern-day Democrat insurrectionists, as well.

So, how did Andrew Jackson handle the nullifiers and insurrectionists of his day?  

Throughout his eight years in office, Jackson dramatically reinvigorated the presidency and its powers. He fought his opponents through a combination of (usually) open, unrelenting, and fierce political warfare, but also mixed it with some legislative compromises, some attempts to obscure his actions, and occasionally, some threats of force.

After South Carolina passed a nullification law opposing the federal tariff, Jackson wrote:

…our social compact, in express terms, declares that the laws of the United States, its Constitution, and treaties made under it are the supreme law of the land, and, for greater caution, adds "that the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."… I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one State, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, unauthorized by its spirit, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object far which it was formed.”

Jackson also asked Congress for authority to send troops into South Carolina to enforce the law. At the same time, he urged Congress to reduce the tariff rates it had enacted a few months earlier. “On March 1, 1833, Congress sent to the president two companion bills. One reduced tariff duties on many items. The other, commonly called the Force Bill, empowered the president to use the armed forces to enforce federal laws.” South Carolina eventually backed down.   

In opposition to the National Bank, Jackson expressed his belief that the Courts did not necessarily have the final say regarding Constitutionality:

The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution.  Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others.  It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill or resolution which may be presented to them for passage or approval as it is of the supreme judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision.  The opinion of the judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion of Congress has over the judges, and on that point the President is independent of both.  The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control the Congress or the Executive when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve.

So, based on his philosophy, Jackson may not have been willing to honor every judicial decision that went against him. Although the common (mis)perception that Jackson ignored a contrary Supreme Court decision is not correct – that Court decision overruled a Georgia state court holding and did not implicate federal power.  

And when individual nullifiers threatened actual violence, Andrew Jackson was quite vocal. He warned:

Tell the Nullifiers from me that they can talk and write resolutions to their hearts’ content.   But if one drop of blood be shed there in defiance of the laws of the United States, I will hang the first man of them I can get my hands on to the first tree I can find.

Spirited language, from an emotional president, don’t you think?  It reminds me of someone.