I was surprised this week that the stock market reached new highs — despite the fact that expectations of a March rate hike by the Fed moved from 40% to 60% in three days. Today those expectations are about 75%.
When the Fed raised interest rates in December, many believed gold would plunge. But it didn’t happen.
Jim Rickards breaks down the signals to watch as questions over inflation, deficits and budgets rise. Here’s where this Wall Street insider is watching and why it matters to you…
Donald Trump has signaled one of his chief policy aims is to substantially increase defense spending. His $54 billion request from Congress may go down as a watershed moment — a window of opportunity that’s only opened five times in the past 60 years.
America is going broke. That’s not an opinion or scare tactic — it’s a fact based on simple arithmetic. President Trump could be forced to face this fact as early as March 15, the date the latest U.S. debt ceiling suspension ends.
Jim Rickards shows you “the biggest financial story in the world today.” Will it accelerate demands for a new monetary order? Read on.
In the world of geopolitics, broadly defined to include defense, military, intelligence, diplomacy and various the aspects of statecraft in the international arena often intersect with the world of global capital markets. The sphere of global capital markets include stock, bonds, derivatives, gold, commodities, foreign exchange, etc. These those two worlds are not completely independent, and often converge.
The Chinese economy has a convergence of geopolitical and economic problems that could collapse at any time. Jim Rickards reveals this $3 trillion problem and how it will impact you…
China’s problems are not entirely external and are not limited to the new Trump administration. China is now embroiled in an internal political struggle around the efforts of President Xi to make himself the most powerful Chinese leader since Mao Zedong.
In September Janet Yellen gave a speech in Jackson Hole, Wyoming titled “Designing Resilient Monetary Policy Frameworks for the Future.” That title at least suggested that some new thinking and new policies might be on display. They weren’t.