/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>54134504
>Military matters (Ukraine in particular)
Col Douglas McGregor
>Global energy markets and policies
Doomberg (Zeihan-esque outside of this though, so be careful)
>China geopolitics and Global Macro
Louis-Vincent Gave
>Historical Geopolitics
Victor-Davis Hanson

All of those listed have made meaningful predictions in the last six months and generally stay in their lane of expertise. They also all notably contradict Zeihan (correctly) on those predictions in their areas of expertise.

'Geopolitics' is far too vast for any one person to meaningfully comment. Zeihan thrives off the ignorance of his audience. Although, ironically, he's useful to keep tabs on so that you know what the judeo-neocons are thinking at any given time.

>>54121579
>>54121674
Higher inflation does not automatically result in hyperinflation. I know it's a /pol/ shibboleth, but it's simply not true.

Weimar Germany is one of the very few pieces of economic history that anyone has heard of, so they assume that it's some inevitable consequence of inflation that it will spiral to 1,000,000% if left unchecked. It doesn't. Weimar inflation was actually a cynical attempt by the German government to get out of paying crippling reparations and war debt by the inflation of Marks into absurdity (this kinda worked, until the French simply seized the Ruhr instead). Also, contrary to popular belief, the hyperinflation had long ended (almost a decade) before Hitler was elected Chancellor. The other hyperinflation everyone knows about, Zimbabwe- well, that was fucking Zimbabwe. The country completely stopped functioning after the Whites were evicted.

Many European countries successfully ran very high-inflation regimes post-WW2 to get rid of crippling war debt. It never span out of control into hyperinflation.

Even the modern US government could run a high inflation regime- that, yes, would fuck over what remains of the middle class- without spiralling into Weimar-esque hyperinflation. I dont think that will be a good thing. I think it will cause a lot of dissent, but not completely collapse. And, as commented, I think it's the only choice they have left: >>54130222

>>54081107
I get the point: fuck the jews and jeets making out at our expense, etc. But... is this not true? I've been thinking about this. If poor people have money they spend it on cars, nike trainers, more goyslop, etc. They consume more and more. Very inflationary. If rich people have money they invest it, OR spend it on luxury goods, which (as far as I can tell) don't impinge the market for non-luxury goods.

Think: 1,000 pairs of Nike trainers vs a luxury handbag. 10,000 Ford F150s vs a yacht. In terms of both the markets they address AND the raw materials, energy, workers, transport, etc they involve, it seems as if one is far more inflationary than the other despite equivalent monetary value, no?

Frenchfag mentioned this in another thread

>>54075125
Capped.