This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comIt’s difficult to look beyond bitcoin and MicroStrategy (NASDAQ:MSTR) at the moment, the later in particular. Nobody expected this, not even Chairman Michael Saylor. The returns have been astonishing. A couple of readers have reported to me that the gains have been life-changing. Wow! What an email to receive. It’s easy to get hubristic when you have a big win. Instead, let us express gratitude for the good fortune that has smiled upon us. But look beyond we must, and so today I want to look at what I can only describe as a stealth bull market - natural gas. The price is creeping up, and few are talking about it.Natural gas is a bit like silver: if it can disappoint, it will. So we begin this piece with that reminder. Natural gas has broken the soul of many a wiser man than me.On the other hand, the next five years look pretty positive.It’s obvious that the world is going to go nuclear now, and that Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are going to provide the power AI so badly needs. However, it will be a good five years before they on stream, so what is going to provide the power in the interim?The answer is natural gas.There is a problem, however: Supply.America's Gas Wells Are Drying UpThe North American Shale Gas Revolution dramatically changed the outlook for fossil fuels. Peak Oil was a huge theme leading up to the Global Financial Crisis, and then it disappeared, almost overnight.Between 2005 and 2020, US natural gas production grew by 90%, with shale accounting for the bulk of it. In 2005, shale gas made up about 5% of US natural gas production; by 2020, it was over 75%. By 2017, the US had become a net exporter, especially of more transportable liquefied natural gas (LNG).The price, meanwhile, plummeted. Good for consumers!Here’s the long-term chart so you can see those price declines since 2005. From almost $16 to $3.50 today (as low as $1.50 earlier this year, where it has formed an attractive double bottom - you know how I like those).Obviously, we in the UK and Europe pay way more for our natural gas than they do in North America. It’s so dumb; we have enough to supply ourselves in the UK. But we don’t because fracking is deemed environmentally damaging. So we import gas from abroad, which is produced by, you guessed it, fracking. I guess if it is fracked somewhere else, it’s less harmful. Not Then there are the transport costs and the environmental costs that come with that.Anyway …Spanning Ohio, New York, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania, Marcellus is the largest natural gas-producing field in the United States, contributing over 25% of production. In 2010, output was 2 billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d). By 2023, it exceeded 35 bcf/d, but production has been falling for almost a year now. We are currently at 26.7 bcf/dThe next largest is Haynesville, in Louisiana, Texas, and parts of Arkansas. Extraction costs here are higher, and production stands at 16 bcf/d, but it is slowing here too, according to analysts Goehring & Rozencwajg.One of the few areas of growth is the Permian Basin, in Texas and New Mexico, currently around 23 bcf/d, but even there, growth is modest.Now, it might be that the reason for stagnating growth is low prices - they often are - and higher prices will result in increased production. They usually do. That is the way with commodities.But natural gas prices have already doubled this year, and they keep on creeping up.The other interpretation is that the North American Shale Gas Revolution has passed its peak.With America’s new president, you can expect plenty more investment in production than under the Democrats, and that should bring the price down, but the gas price has actually risen - from $2.70 to $3.50 - since the election.It might also be that Russian gas taps come back online to the EU sometime next year, which means America will lose its new market.But all of this conjecture is factored into the price. And that is rising.How to invest all this

Let’s start with some headline stats which emerged this week.* The number of migrants to Britain has doubled since Covid.* 747,000 “permanent-type” migrants moved to the UK last year, the OECD said, up from 488,400 in 2022.* This marks a 53% year-on-year rise.* The four countries seeing the biggest surge in migration are the UK, South Korea, Australia, and the United States.* Note: Three of those four countries are English-speaking. This is something I have long argued: the UK will inevitably see higher than average migration levels because people prefer to go where they can speak the language, and more people have some English than other languages.Meanwhile, our birth rate has dropped to 1.4 children per woman, the lowest on record. The net result is that the demographics of this country are changing dramatically and rapidly. Different people means a different culture.The demographics of primary schoolsMigration measures, particularly illegal migration, are not entirely accurate. If someone has entered the country covertly, for example, there's often no record. Nor are censuses entirely accurate. Some don’t fill the census in, many don’t fill it in accurately, especially if here illegally, if they don't understand what it is, or if someone is claiming the single person council tax discount. There is a lot of scope for double counting for people with multiple addresses - students and so on.However, pretty much everyone who has kids sends them to school. There is no hiding, no double counting and so on, so the numbers you get from the schools’ census are pretty accurate.White British now make up 61% of UK primary school kids. 37% are of minority ethnic background. The remaining 2% are unclassified. (In secondary schools, minority ethnic accounts for 36.6%).Minority ethnic includes Asian (13.4% of primary school kids), White non-British (8%), Black (6.5%), and Mixed (7.8%).Bear in mind that these figures are for the whole UK. This includes primary school kids in remote rural areas, where British ethnicity will likely comprise over 90%.White British was at 64.9% in 2020-21 and minority ethnic at 33.7%. The numbers are changing fast. From 65 to 61% in three years. Ten years ago it was 70%.This 61/37 ratio compares with 85/15 in 2002. Previously, I extrapolated that White British would be a minority in primary schools by 2035. But with the current trends, especially considering that migrants tend to have larger families than locals, white British could become a minority in primary schools as soon as 2030, or just after. The demography of primary schools will, within a generation, reflect the demography of the country.I doubt this is what the majority of British people want.But it's not a topic that's being discussed, let alone addressed, in the echelons of power. Instead, it's being brushed under the carpet.Well, it will soon be too late. This is an urgent and pressing issue. Without wishing to sensationalise, the future of the British people and their homeland really is at stake. Demography is destiny after all.You really should subscribe to the Flying Frisby.If you are thinking of buying gold to protect yourself in these uncertain times, I recommend The Pure Gold Company. Pricing is competitive, quality of service is high. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe or you can store your gold with them. More here.More on this: This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comToday, we are going to look at gold, bitcoin, and our way of playing it, MicroStrategy (NASDAQ:MSTR), which has now 10xd (!) since we first covered it last year. Amazing.Finally, there'll be a short update on gold miners. Remember them?Let’s start with gold.Gold - and most other metals - has been hit since the U.S. election last week. It’s down $200, or about 7%, with U.S. dollar strength being a big factor (the dollar has been storming higher since October).While I think this bull market might be punctured, as I put it last week, and that gold probably has a bit further to fall, I am not unduly worried. 2024 has hitherto been a great year for gold, and it remains an essential long-term core holding.It is an even more essential holding for UK investors. I think sterling has big problems ahead of it, and gold serves as your hedge against crap governments.If you are thinking of buying gold to protect yourself in these uncertain times, I recommend The Pure Gold Company. Pricing is competitive, quality of service is high. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe or you can store your gold with them. More here.Labour or Tory - I’m no fan of either. They’re both as bad as each other, in my view. The less government there is, the better things run. But that's irrelevant idealism. Of greater concern here is reality: there has never been a Labour Government that did not devalue sterling.* Blair and Brown crashed sterling in 2007-8 (though until then their record was okay);* Under Wilson, Callaghan, and Healey, we ended up going to the IMF in 1976. Callaghan and Wilson also devalued in 1967.* Cripps and Attlee devalued in 1949.* Ramsay MacDonald’s National Government, which followed Labour from 1929-31, took us off the gold standard in 1931.Why should this Labour Government be any different? If anything, it is even less competent. Sterling devaluation is coming. How exactly might not yet be clear. I rather suspect it’ll be an attempt to make us competitive against an ultra-streamlined US, but that’s just a guess. You must own some gold (and some bitcoin) in such an environment: non-government money.Gold under Trump - What Gives? What’s coming?

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comI’m sending out today’s missive a day later than usual because I wanted to see the market reaction to the US election results and leave a little time to digest it all.Broadly speaking, I am happy with the result, and I believe the world will be a better place for it than the alternative. We’ll see less technocracy, less deep state , and less overseas intervention; more pro-energy, pro-Bitcoin, and pro-business policy; and a stance that’s anti-seed oil (go RFK!), anti-subsidised, environmentally harmful green quackery, and anti two-tiered, inequitable woke ideology.Any administration that puts perhaps the most competent person alive, Elon Musk, in a prominent role, has got to be net positive.But be careful what you wish for and of that. Donald Trump is not, as his most ardent supporters seem to think, going to save the world, nor any such. You need to fix money and tax to do that, and while he might tweak the latter, there will not be wholesale reform. And he is going to print lots of the former. Trump will run deficits, US debt will grow as a result and the nefarious consequences of fiat will take other forms.If there are financial problems looming for the US, I suspect their roots lie in the bond markets, where yields are rising.In short, the better alternative won. There will be more opportunity in the US than there otherwise might have been, but Trump is no Javier Milei. America isn’t yet ready for that.The initial market reaction give us some insight into where things are headed in the next few months.If you are thinking of buying gold to protect yourself in these uncertain times, I recommend The Pure Gold Company. Pricing is competitive, quality of service is high. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe or you can store your gold with them. More here.How did markets react?First up, and something I’m particularly pleased about: bitcoin has broken to new highs, hitting $75,000 yesterday. I’m particularly pleased because new highs in bitcoin usually bring a lot of noise. This time, the noise got drowned in the election frenzy, which means there’s plenty more hype in the tank.Our chosen vehicle for bitcoin exposure, MicroStrategy (NASDAQ: MSTR), is now north of $250. This has been an incredible win for readers, as we first covered it last year at an adjusted $35. It’s risen 8x, compared to bitcoin’s 150%—that’s some outperformance.I wrote back in September that Q4 is usually bitcoin’s best season, and that is bearing out.Stock markets also rose, as you would expect with someone as pro-business as Trump. The Dow rose 3.5%, the S&P 500 climbed 2.5%, and the Nasdaq about 2.6%.During Trump’s last presidency, stock markets more than doubled, though with two major wobbles along the way, one due to Covid. Something similar this time around is not an unreasonable expectation—unless you subscribe to this view. If so, that would take the S&P 500 to around 12,000. Quite the number.What I found especially encouraging was the outperformance of small caps. The Russell 2000 was up 6%. Small caps have underperformed for years and are due for a run. Trumponomics clearly suits them.An interesting tidbit: Trilogy Metals (TSX: TMQ), a mining company I follow with two promising copper assets in Alaska, the development of which were blocked by the Biden administration on environmental grounds, saw its price rise 108% yesterday . Investors seem confident it will now get the green light.I expect similar stories across the mining, oil, and gas sectors. This is a time to be investing in the USA.On the other hand, commodities, especially metals, sold off. Copper fell 3%, with zinc and iron ore dropping by similar amounts. Crude couldn’t make up its mind: it came down a bit, then rallied, then ended the day flat. Natural gas was similarly indecisiveGold, silver and platinum all sold off, as the US dollar itself rallied quite sharply, rising 1%. Gold was off almost 3%, silver by almost 5%. Not good, though mostly a reaction to the dollar. Looks like those particular bull markets are, for the time being, punctured. That’s not me telling you to sell your gold by the way. Don’t. You are going to need it. Particularly if you are British.Which brings me to the UK and last week’s budget. I promised you my thoughts on it.

I am travelling this weekend so today’s thought piece is a conversation, which Mining Network recorded last week week between veteran gold guru, Alasdair Macleod, and myself. It’s heavyweight goldbug stuff. I hope you enjoy it.You can watch it below, but I have also ripped the audio so you have the option to listen to that if you prefer to escape the clutch of your screens. If you are thinking of buying gold to protect yourself in these uncertain times, I recommend The Pure Gold Company. Pricing is competitive, quality of service is high. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe or you can store your gold with them. More here.I’ll be MCing this year’s Moneyweek Summit this coming Friday November 8th. Readers of the Flying Frisby can get a 20% discount by entering the code FRISBY20And if you are interested in hearing more from Alasdair, he has a Substack too. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

I’m in Buenos Aires this week, so I might be a little slow reporting on today’s budget, but I’ll come to it, don’t you worry.Shortly before Covid hit, I became CEO of a Canadian company by the name of Cypherpunk Holdings (HODL.CN). I was very pleased with that ticker symbol—HODL. My idea. But I did not have a clue what would happen as a result …I’m writing about the company today because, even though I stood down four years ago, I know a number of readers bought shares because I was the CEO. It’s quite a story.Mining entrepreneur Marc Henderson controlled a shell company that had just received a large payout from the Mongolian government for some uranium assets it had seized illegally, as you do, and he wanted to use the opportunity to start a crypto business. We knew each other from way back, and he approached me because of my book.He also brought in Canadian bitcoin entrepreneur Moe Adham, and Moe and I put together a proposal to become a privacy tech investment company.We were both quite ideological about it. We had grave concerns about the increasing imposition on our privacy from both Big Brother and Big Tech. We felt it was only going to increase, and that therefore there would a need for privacy tech—anything from VPNs to private messaging apps such as Signal, to bitcoin and privacy coins. How right we were. Look at some of the stuff that went on during Covid.Perhaps where we misjudged was that we thought there would be a large appetite for privacy tech amongst the general public as a result. It turns out most of the general public care more about convenience than they do about their privacy, at least online. In many cases, they don’t even realise what they are sacrificing.Buying gold to protect yourself in these uncertain times? I recommend The Pure Gold Company. Pricing is competitive, quality of service is high. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe or you can store your gold with them. More here.Once we were up and running—and, believe me, there was a lot of compliance—I brought in my mate, bitcoin OG Jon Matonis, and we began the process of acquiring bitcoin. We would hold large amounts of bitcoin. (This was before Michael Saylor’s Microstrategy, which has been a big winner for the portfolio since we tipped it last summer it around $30 - now $220 - especially as bitcoin closes in on all-time highs). Upgrade your subscription.One of our key investors was poker champion Tony Guoga, who bought an enormous stake in the company and eventually joined the board to become Chairman.I stood down shortly after my dad died in April 2020. (From a financial point of view, that was a mistake, as I would have several million options now with the stock itrading at two bucks).But, despite the good work that the company was doing on the ground, the great investments it was making, and the phenomenal board, it just kept trundling along sideways, largely ignored by the investment community and trading at around half its NAV. Like a champ, Tony Guoga kept on buying stock, especially on dips, building up an enormous position. He owns about 35% of the company. Talk about management being aligned with the interests of the shareholders.Recently, however, the company had a rebrand. With all the bitcoin ETFs, it was pointless holding bitcoin, they thought, and the company decided to focus instead on SOL, which lacks a mainstream investment vehicle. Sol Strategies Ltd became the new name, and, a few months earlier, they brought in a new CEO, Leah Wald, as well.In the last fortnight, the shares have gone absolutely nuts—going from around twelve cents to above C$2. There have been several catalysts. First, Leah has made a number of well-received appearances in the media that have generated some interest in the stock. Second, it has become the easiest way to get exposure to SOL. Third, "HODL" is also the US ticker symbol for one of the bitcoin ETFs, and many Canadians, typing in HODL, accidentally bought this company instead. LOL.Veteran traders will know the chart pattern the stock has played out. I believe it’s known as the hockey stick.Just incredible. And look at the volumes that have come in. The market cap of the company went from about C$17m to C$335 at the top of the market yesterday. Guoga’s stake alone went from about C$6m to north of C$115m.For years, the company was trading at half its NAV of C$30. Suddenly it’s trading at ten times.From a technical point of view, it shows just what can happen to a company after it builds all that cause trading sideways for many years. When it spikes, it can really spike.I gather that it’s become something of a meme stock, so who knows when this will end? The algorithms have taken charge, especially on the US OTC markets where it also has a listing (CYFRF) and it is having daily swings of something like 30%.It even makes Lightbridge (LTBR) look calm. Have you seen that, by the way? $14 yesterday. It was $3 a fortnight ago, when I wrote it up.Another hockey stick:My broker commented that it’s good to see some animal spirit has returned to the markets.I’m just amazed at what algos can do to small-cap North American stocks. Talk about speculation.Casino!Let’s hope one day they discover AIM.I don’t know if this kind of speculation signals a top. It’s pretty obvious to me Trump is going to win next week, so maybe that’s all priced in and markets pull back after the election.On which note, I leave you with this crazy interview. It was recorded in March of this year, several months before the Trump assassination attempt in July, and yet predicts it with incredibly accuracy. He also predicts the weird weather, a Trump win, followed by a 1929 stock market crash. Watch a minute or two from around the 11-minute mark (it should start there). Nuts.I bet there are a gazillion things he’s predicted which haven’t happened. But I still thought it was pretty amazing.I probably shouldn’t even be sharing this stuff, but I remembered it last night it from a few months back and, with the election coming next week, I went back and re-watched it.What do you make of it?Let me know in the comments. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com(NB: At the end of this piece there is a short note on Lightbridge Corp (NASDAQ:LTBR), which has tripled since I covered it a fortnight ago).I have suffered from asthma for as long as I can remember.Others have it worse than me. I had always been able to manage it with drugs – salbutamol mostly – but, all the same, there was always that lurking thought that if I forget my inhaler and have an attack, I could be in trouble.Then, suddenly, in my early 50s, it disappeared.It is not uncommon to grow out of your asthma. It happens to a lot of people. But my asthma was not getting better; it was getting worse as I grew older. I can’t prove it, but I think I got rid of it. Here is what I did.How Bad Was My Asthma?As is quite common for people my age, I was not breastfed as a baby – science thought it knew better than Mother Nature – and the allergies I suffer from – the main ones being to animal hair and pollen, which result in hay fever and asthma – are a result of that, I’m sure. It’s part genetic too: my dad had asthma but grew out of it in his adolescence. None of my four kids, who I’m delighted to say were all breastfed, have it.There were two main triggers: animal hair, cats especially, and exercise. Sometimes going from warm to cold (e.g., going outside in winter) would bring it on, and it was worse during the hay fever season.As a child, we had cats – Persian ones too – and we didn’t get rid of them until I was nine. I can’t believe it took that long to figure out I was allergic to them; whenever I left the house, my asthma noticeably improved. But I took drug after drug every day, morning, noon, and night – Intal and Ventolin. We moved and got rid of the cats, fortunately. As a teenager, I got quite strong and fit: I played a lot of rugby and football. I found I could get through matches without needing the inhaler at all. But cats would always destroy me. Within ten minutes of being in a house with cats, I would be wheezing. I was just so sensitive to them. Prolonged exposure would take a day or two to recover from.It was so frustrating going to people’s houses and having to leave because of my asthma, or having to sit there and wheeze, while the owners scrabbled about putting the cat outside or hoovering. Made no difference. Every year on Christmas Eve, I would have the annual asthma attack when visiting my uncle and aunt.As I got into my late 20s and 30s and the fitness of my youth waned – not helped by smoking too much weed at university – I found myself needing my blue inhaler (salbutamol) more frequently again to play sport.By the time I got to my 40s, I often found myself getting wheezy for no apparent reason, and I was using the blue inhaler almost every day.Doctors advised me to use the brown inhaler – QVAR (beclomethasone) – every day, rather than salbutamol, and the brown did indeed clear it up so that I didn’t have to use the blue. But I don’t like taking drugs every day, and every time I tried to wean myself off the brown, I found my asthma had got even worse. I was too dependent.By my late 40s, I was quite overweight, and even though I did a lot of aerobic sport – running and football – I was heavily dependent on puffers.We had a dog too, and even though it was a hypoallergenic poodle, I was still sensitive to its hair.Alcohol made my asthma worse, especially red wine. Also, if I drank, there was always the risk I would then smoke, which of course made it bad the next day.Here I am today, and I have not used a puffer in maybe two years. I play football most weeks, tennis sometimes, I run, and do sprint training and cycling, including hill training.But this week came the acid test. I went for a drink at a some friends house, and they have a cat. I spent a very long evening there and did not leave until 3 AM. No puffer required. I went back the following day and spent several hours there. No puffer. Then again two days later (I really like these friends!). Still no puffer. My nose didn’t even run.I could still feel the allergy. But I was not remotely wheezy.For me, this is quite extraordinary. Fifty years of asthma have gone.How Did I Do It? (Plus a Note on Lightbridge)I’m going to spell out all the things I did. It might be that it was a combination of all of them.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comNB If you missed Sunday’s piece about what next to do with Lightbridge after its incredible rally - 3x in a week - it is here. This week has the potential to be one of the most significant weeks in the history of money.36 world leaders, including China’s Xi Jinping, India’s Narendra Modi, and UN Secretary-General António Guterres, are meeting in Kazan, Russia for the BRICS summit. The main agenda of the summit is de-dollarization. Even The Guardian has noticed. “One of the main aims of the summit,” it says, “will be to speed up ways to reduce the number of dollar transactions, and so mitigate the US ability to use the threat of sanctions to seek to impose its political will.”I’m not convinced the 36 nations in attendance are quite ready to abandon the dollar, or even make overt declarations of war against it, but for sure we will gain insights as to where we are in the grand scheme of this inevitable move away. We will learn where we are with the alternative payment systems being developed, be it BRICS Pay or mBridge.The most powerful weapon these nations have against the dollar is gold—far stronger than China’s yuan, or Russia’s rouble, or any other currency basket or crypto amalgam they come up with. Gold is universal money, and its value is understood by all. There has never been a global reserve currency that did not start out backed by gold. How ready these nations are to re-adopt it, we shall soon discover.In any case, gold has been rallying relentlessly into the de-dollarisation story. We are at $2,740/oz now. Amazing. Perhaps this is a case of ‘buy the rumour, sell the news.’ Whatever. Could be in the short or even medium term. But that’s not the attitude. Owning physical gold is an urgent necessity at the moment. Things are just too precarious. You don’t want to be letting go of long-term core holdings on the basis of potential short-term movements.I am watching developments closely.If you are buying gold to protect yourself in these uncertain times, I recommend The Pure Gold Company. Pricing is competitive, quality of service is high. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe or you can store your gold with them. More here.The Silver Surge: Is $50 the Next Stop?In the meantime, ever unreliable silver has been playing catch-up. It’s gone through all that resistance around $30-33 and has, having done a near-perfect inverted head and shoulders, now broken up to $35. I think it’s going back to $50.There is some resistance at $35, $37.50, and $44.You know my views on silver. It’s the metal with the most potential yet, if it can find a way, it will always let you down.Its natural price is 1/15th of the gold price, because there is only 15 times as much silver in the earth’s crust as there is gold. With gold at $2,700, silver “should” therefore be $180.In fact, there is a case for silver to be higher than that because, while all the gold that has ever been mined remains, the silver does not—it has been consumed. So above-ground silver stocks do not reflect gold stocks.The problem is that silver has long since been demonetised. It lost its monetary status when the world adopted gold standards after the various gold rushes in the second half of the 19th century. Without this official backing, silver is only going to be an industrial metal, albeit a precious one. Gold may no longer be an official medium of exchange, but central banks still buy and hoard it, as do corporations and private investors. The Bank of International Settlements recognises it as a Tier 1 Capital Asset. The same does not apply to silver.Silver, as we know, also has a multitude of industrial uses, which are only going to increase as the world gets more computerised and electric. There is also some evidence of silver shortages—over 200 million ounces this year, a similar amount to annual jewellery demand. Total annual silver demand is around 1.2 billion ounces—the second highest on record. 836 million ounces of that come from new mine supply, 180 million ounces from recycling, and the rest from sales of existing supply.Demand looks something like this:* 61% industrial (electrical, electronics, photovoltaics, photography & other) * 17% Jewellery * 5% Silverware * 17% Investment When silver moves, it moves fast, and it can turn on a sixpence, so it’s important not to get wedded to the silver story. The thing to remember about silver is, like errant girlfriends with personality disorders, if it can let you down, it will. The lovemaking will be unforgettable, you will have the time of your life, but, as sure as eggs are eggs, it will break your heart. Manage your risk.As I say, there is not a lot standing in the way of silver and $50. In that scenario, the miners will go to the moon.If it goes to $50, that will only be the third time in silver’s history it made it here—1980 and 2011 being the other two occasions. Third time lucky and all that. If it breaks above $50, there is nothing but blue sky above. Maybe it’ll go to $100 or even $180. It’s a maniacal metal.Here’s that amazing long-term chart.How am I playing it?I may be cynical, but I also think you should always have a position in silver. Its potential is too huge.I own a silver miner that is just coming into commercial production and therefore due a re-rating. It will make a fortune at $50 silver, but it doesn’t need $50 silver to work.That company is …

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comHere’s something a little different as your Sunday thought piece today - my Edinburgh “lecture with funny bits”. I hope you enjoy it. It lasts 50 minutes, so next time you fancy a bit of “edutainment” give it watch.The first part is available to all, and you can unlock the full experience by becoming a paid subscriber. I was super-pleased with this one, as I think I might have mentioned ;)Meanwhile, I wanted to share my thoughts about the amazing share price action we have seen in Lightbridge Corp (NASDAQ:LTBR). The stock really has exploded, more than doubling since I wrote about it last week. What was a $3 stock is now trading at $7.Here’s the original piece, in case of interest - I covered it in in last Sunday’s thought piece on SMRs too.The volumes are insane. What to make of it all? And what to do next?

Something a little different for you today.I am speaking at the Battle of Ideas this weekend on three rather different matters:* Immigration and Demographics* Who Is the World’s Greatest Comic?* Why Cash Keeps Us FreeDo come. You can get tickets here. With this years Battle in mind, the Academy of Ideas asked me to write one of its Letters on Liberty. Here it is for your reading or listening pleasure. (There is a PDF version here).It begins with this note from the Academy.What are Letters on Liberty?It’s not always easy to defend freedom. Public life may have been locked down recently, but it has been in bad health for some time.Open debate has been suffocated by today’s censorious climate and there is little cultural support for freedom as a foundational value. What we need is rowdy, good-natured disagreement and people prepared to experiment with what freedom might mean today.We stand on the shoulders of giants, but we shouldn’t be complacent. We can’t simply rely on the thinkers of the past to work out what liberty means today, and how to argue for it.Drawing on the tradition of radical pamphlets from the seventeenth century onwards - designed to be argued over in the pub as much as parliament - Letters on Liberty promises to make you think twice. Each letter stakes a claim for how to forge a freer society in the here and now.We hope that, armed with these Letters, you take on the challenge of fighting for liberty. Academy of Ideas teamWhy Cash Keeps Us Free by Dominic FrisbyGive most people the choice of living and working anywhere in the world, I bet the large majority would choose the US. For all its many shortcomings, it’s still the land of opportunity. It’s exciting, it’s dynamic. Wonderful things can happen there. In terms of tech, with Silicon Valley and all the ensuing social media and ecommerce, it is very much the world leader. And yet, Americans still use cheques.When was the last time you used a cheque in Europe? Donkey’s years ago. As much as 5 per cent of all financial transactions in the US last year were by cheque. For all its modernity, the US is - in terms of fintech - a good 10 years behind Europe or Australia. Not only do they use cheques, but people in the US still go out with cash in their pockets. Bunch of luddites.However, things are slowly changing, and the US is following the rest of the developed word to cashlessness. It is inevitable, I’m afraid. Technology is destiny.It’s also a great shame. Cash empowers its usersWhen I pay you in cash, nobody else gets in on the transaction - it’s a direct transfer from me to you. No grubby middlemen can cream off their percentage. No prying eyes of the state can monitor what we do. Big Tech can’t glean information from the exchange, to be used at some later stage to sell you stuff or, worse, report back to Big Brother, Big Insurance or whichever Big wants in on your data. Nobody can stop you making the transaction. With cash, you can buy and sell and store your wealth outside of the financial system, if you so choose. There are plenty of reasons, both practical and moral, to do this.Cash means control. Just take the recent de-banking scandals from Canada to the UK, where truckers had their fundraised money withheld because of their views on lockdown, and a UK politician was kicked out of Coutts for holding the wrong opinions. Both the Canadian truckers and their families, and Nigel Farage, had one thing in common – they held views outside of the liberal mainstream. And because their money wasn’t under their mattresses but in banks and websites, they lost control of their own cash.Indeed, instability is nothing new. We are repeatedly told how, in 2008, we were ‘on the brink’, how close the system was to imploding. Surely, then, it makes practical sense to keep money outside of the system? When Cyprus’ banks teetered on the cliff of financial disaster in 2011, there were bail-ins. Ordinary people’s money, sitting in deposit accounts, was sequestered to save the system. If your life savings were threatened with confiscation to bail out an organisation you considered profligate, I imagine you too would want little part of it.What you do with your money says more about you than what you say  - no wonder so many want access to this information.Indeed, the former governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, has admitted that banking is not fixed - and we will see financial panic again. It makes sense to hoard some cash, if only as emergency money.In 2016, the Japanese central bank imposed negative rates to try to goad people into spending rather than saving, as the ageing Japanese are prone to do. The spectre of being charged a fee to keep your money in the bank loomed, and so much cash was then withdrawn that the country sold out of safes. Who can blame the Japanese? In Germany, Denmark and Switzerland, some high-net-worth individuals with more than 100,000 euros were charged for being wealthy. There was plenty of talk of confiscation and bail-ins during the financial panic that came with Covid, though fortunately it proved to only be talk. Nevertheless, when in the bank, your money can become a tool of government. How often do you support what your government is doing? Not that often, I imagine. People don’t seem to realise this, but when you deposit money in the bank, you are actually lending it to the bank. The bank, under government orders, can then decide who you can and can’t send money to (anyone tried sending money from a UK bank to a bitcoin exchange recently? Most banks won’t allow you to). The bank can certainly monitor and then disclose what you do with your money. In times of financial panic, it is within the bank’s power to confiscate money, again, on government orders. Cash protects you against all of this. It enables you not to play the game - if you don’t want to.What you do with your money says so much about you - no wonder so many want access to this information. From the apparently benign (we can see what books you have bought, and so can suggest other books you might like) to the sinister (we can see what books you have bought, and therefore now have you marked down as a problem). When I was at university, a rumour circulated that various organisations monitored who took which books out of the library. Anyone who borrowed Mein Kampf went on a list as potential spy material - I’m not sure on who’s side.These are all, in my view, quite legitimate reasons to want to keep money outside of the system. I’m not saying we should take all of our money out of the bank, but that we should all have the option to do so. It’s our money, not the banks’. We need cash because it is private.Privacy - and why it matters‘Who are you? Why do you hide in the darkness and listen to my private thoughts?’ - William ShakespeareIt’s so obvious why we all need some privacy in the real world that it almost doesn’t need explaining. Yet, in the digital world, so many of us don’t realise just how much of our privacy we are giving away. On a daily basis, we sacrifice privacy for convenience. Different people know different things about you. You might supply your doctor with information you wouldn’t give your taxi driver, but your taxi driver knows where you are going - and your doctor might not. You might supply your lover with information you wouldn’t give your lawyer. Then again, you might tell your lawyer something you wouldn’t tell your lover. The difference is, information you supply online - what you say, read, watch, share, buy or sell - can be used for purposes beyond those for which it was supplied.Information is taken, without you realising that you are granting permission, and is used to shape your behaviour.How often has this happened to you? I was talking to my daughter on the landing outside my bedroom about a trip I was planning. I said, ‘should I bring my Timberlands or my hiking boots?’ She said ‘your Timberlands’. I said that they were a bit old. I got into bed, looked at my phone, and Amazon was flogging me Timberlands. Your phone is listening - accumulating information with which you did not deliberately supply it.It’s not all bad - often that information might be used advantageously. I’m a huge Game of Thrones fan but I only discovered the books all those years ago because Amazon recommended them. YouTube frequently suggests videos to me that I’m interested in, which I might not otherwise have found. Nevertheless, information is taken, without you realising that you are granting permission, and is used to shape your behaviour and influence the decisions you make. The same data mining is taking place every time you use your credit card, or Apple Pay. It is used to determine the content you receive, to sell things to you, to make decisions about you - the loan, insurance, job or the opportunities you are offered. It is used to influence the political decisions you make. And all this information could be stolen. In the wrong hands, it could be used against you in some way. It can and is being used to spy on you.With financial transactions in the online world, you have little idea what information about you is being used, how it is being used or by whom. You have little say in its use - no ability to object nor power to amend that information. You have no control. There are no such concerns when using cash.You have nothing to hide‘If you’ve done nothing wrong, you’ve got nothing to hide’ is the common argument against worrying about privacy. But if you are exploring new ideas - dangerous ideas, ideas that go against the orthodoxy, perhaps investigating the concept that the world might not be flat and is in fact round - do you really want some hidden power knowing what you are up to? The effect of this threat of intrusion is to censor free thought - to censor your inquisitiveness.One solution is to become a drone, to not do anything experimental or anything wrong. Perhaps that’s what they - whoever they are - want. Gmail reads the emails you draft but decide not to send. Effectively it knows what you thought, but decided not to say. How dark is that?A better solution is to protect privacy - to limit the scope that others have to use our information beyond the purpose for which it was supplied. It allows us to have greater control over our online reputation and enables us to grow and mature without being shackled by foolish things we might have said or done in the past. It enables us to explore new ideas outside the mainstream, without fear of being watched. Those that know about us have power over us. Protecting privacy limits that power. Cash is key to this.But, of course, protecting privacy costs money. The internet is, mostly, free. Protecting your privacy takes effort. If you protect your privacy, you lose all the benefits that your phone and computer knowing a bit about you brings, from saved passwords to helpful book recommendations.This is the dilemma we all face, and most choose convenience without even realising it. This, above all, is why the world is going cashless. It’s more convenient to pay with your phone, or with a card, than it is to carry cash. In the marketplace, convenience always wins.Mobile phones and the naysayersHere’s a little story for you. By 2023, some 85 per cent of the global population - 6.8 billion people - had a smart phone. That’s more people than have a toilet. Yet, at its peak in 2008, there were 1.3 billion landlines for a global population near 7 billion. Why did the mobile, and then the smartphone, succeed where the landline failed?Yes, superior wireless technology made widespread coverage more possible. But there is another, simpler reason: to get a landline, you need a bank account. When more than half of the world’s population is ‘unbanked’, as it was in 2008, without access to basic financial services, telecoms companies saw no potential custom. Those companies would have built lines in the Arctic circle if there was profit to be made by it, but there wasn’t. Too many people were financially excluded. The infrastructure was never built, and people were left with fewer possibilities to communicate. A mobile, on the other hand, you can buy with cash. You don’t need to be banked. The financial system was a barrier to progress for the world’s poor. Cash is a facilitator for them - it means total financial inclusion, a luxury the better off take for granted. Without financial inclusion - and there will always be some that, for whatever reason, often some bureaucratic quirk, won’t have it - you are trapped in poverty. Beware the war on cash.The irony is that the smartphone now facilitates financial inclusion, whether via traditional finance (banking etc) or modern alternatives - the likes of the African mPesa (a widely used currency based on airtime) or bitcoin and other crypto currencies.Handy cashCash still has its uses for small transactions - a chocolate bar, a newspaper or a pint of milk. It will always be the fastest form of payment there is - think of the change you might put in a busker’s hat or the bucket of someone collecting money for charity. It is also the most direct payment there is.For many people not at the top end of the economic scale, cash is still king. For example, I like to tip waiters in cash, knowing they will receive that money without it being syphoned off by some unscrupulous employer. I like to shop in markets, where new businesses often start out. Cash is widespread - it’s fast, it’s cheap. I can buy directly from the producer knowing they will receive all the money, without middlemen shaving off their percentages. Goodness knows it’s hard enough for new, small businesses as it is.A quick look at a recent British Retail Consortium report shows that, surprisingly, cash remains the least costly payment method to process. I want to maximise new businesses profits where I can. Many new businesses starting out need the cash economy. Small businesses need it. The financially excluded need the cash economy. The war on cash is a war on them. Cash also has its uses for private transactions, for which there are many - and by no means are all of them illegal. But if you listen to the scaremongering, you’d start to think that all cash users are either criminals, tax-evaders or terrorists. Sure, some use cash to evade tax, but it’s paltry compared to the tax avoidance schemes multi-national corporations employ. Starbucks doesn’t use cash to avoid tax, it’s all done via legislative means.I have a confession to make - even I, with my highfalutin principles, no longer carry cash, guilty though it may make me feel.A quick poll of my Twitter followers showed that 36 per cent no longer carry any cash when they go out. This is also a generational thing. The number of no-cash-users is much higher among the under-30s. I have four kids between the ages of 18 and 23, none of them carry cash. Nor do their friends. It’s the older (wiser?) generation who still carry cash, even if only as emergency money. The problem is, cash is like playing records, when the rest of the world is on Spotify.Use of cash fell quite dramatically with Covid, but it still accounts for 14% of all retail payments in the UK, according to a 2023 House of Commons paper. Projections are that, by 2031, this number will fall to 6%. (Obviously, if you include other payments the proportion is much lower.)In mainland Europe, the use of cash is higher at around 20% of all retail transactions. Germany, Italy and Spain are still at 35-50% cash, while the Nordic countries are below 10 per cent. In the US, the number is in the 20-25% region. But the trend is very much down. But here I have a confession to make - even I, with my highfalutin principles, no longer carry cash, guilty though it may make me feel. The truth is, cash is dying. The convenience of fintech is killing it. Money is now almost entirely digital.Bitcoin and digital cashTech might have doomed cash, but it is also coming to the rescue in the form of bitcoin and other crypto currencies. Bitcoin itself was invented to be a digital replication of the cash process. A can send money directly to B without there having to be any middleman to process the transaction. Bitcoin is cash for the internet.Among the many breakthroughs which got people so excited about this new technology was that Satoshi Nakamoto’s blockchain solved the problem of ‘double spending’ - making sure you can’t spend the same money twice - without having to use third parties such as banks to process the transaction. There is now a plethora of copycat currencies, with many of them focused on privacy in order to make their usage anonymous.At the other end of the scale, we have central bank digital currencies - CBDCs. These have been piloted in various countries around the world and, fortunately, nowhere has really got them to work. They have been met with neither trust nor understanding, and in many cases the tech has fallen short. In Nigeria and the Eastern Caribbean, they went beyond the pilot phase and have been out and out failures. Even in the Bahamas, the one place where a CBDC is said to have worked, adoption has been much lower than hoped. I asked my friend who lives there how successful it had been. He gave me this reply: ‘LOL. I have never seen one person use it.’Fortunately, government incompetence is on our side.Money has always been a bottom-up technology. Users prefer what is convenient. The fiat currency we use in the West today has evolved over many hundreds of years, especially as communication technology has developed. All you are doing when you make a payment is, effectively, sending a promise - the money itself does not exist. There is no gold or anything tangible backing it.Cash is slightly different, because you are handing over something physical. But read what’s on that piece of paper - it’s just another promise. Once upon a time, you might have been able to swap a 10-pound note for 10 pounds of sterling silver (not quite true as silver was abandoned before paper money became widespread) or 10 gold sovereigns (true). But today, all it says is ‘I promise to pay the bearer the sum of 10 pounds’ - it is a promise of nothing. How the whole house of cards doesn’t come tumbling down is beyond me, but there you go.Many central banks want to make the transition to CBDCs, despite zero democratic mandate. The planners want it because it then allows for money to become even more of a tool of government policy: whether it be monetary policy, taxation, welfare, surveillance or control. Fortunately, government incompetence is on our side. The history of government IT is so bad, it’s unlikely any will succeed, thank goodness, especially not in countries with large populations. Heck, they can’t even fix the potholes! But that’s not to say they won’t try. Always end on a song That’s an old show-business maxim. Why don’t we do just that?‘Programmable Money’, a song I wrote last year about CBDCs, summarises everything there is to be worried about. Enjoy!If you liked this song, you should sign up for my comedy newsletter.Lyrics C - B - D - C. C - B - D - CProgrammable money. Programmable money.We’ll monitor every purchase you make,Every transaction or decision you take.If you’re not doing wrong, what is there to hide?How you spend money is for us to decide.Your social-credit rating, how do you score?If you’re compliant you will get your reward.You may only own what we deem you can own.If you don’t register, we’ll block your phone.Wait! You’ll be late for the expiry date.The state has mandated your money terminatesSo spend, speculate before it’s confiscatedThis is what we’re going to orchestrateNo more savingProgrammable money. Programmable money.C - B - D - CC - B - D - CYour money’s now a tool of policy.You will be living in a smart city.You may only travel in a limited range.Energy and meat rations cos, climate change.We’ll take your dough if we think it’s owed.No matter if you do not think it’s so.Taxes and fines, fares, fees of all kinds.All embedded in the lines of code.Hail Big BrotherProgrammable money. Programmable money.C - B - D - CC - B - D - CTears of the sun, fallen from heaven.Empires fall. Radiant droplets everlasting.We will implant you with a microchip,AI and other forms of censorship.We will decide what is good for you.Total control there’s nothing you can do.Bitcoin fixes this!From here.Here’s a PDF of today’s piece.Finally, here are some videos I made of recent articles, for your viewing pleasure. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

Quick heads up. I have made some video versions of recent articles. Here they are, in case you are a watcher rather than a reader:I don’t know about you, but I use artificial intelligence (AI) all the time. ChatGPT has become my right-hand man. It gives me advice (really – and good advice too), it helps me make decisions, it gives me exercise workouts, recipes, it proofreads what I write, it helps me write titles, it even helps me write song lyrics. Midjourney does all the imaging for this newsletter. Even a simple Google search now involves lots of AI.I know I’m not alone. Almost everyone is using AI, consciously or not.Guess what? AI requires bucket loads of power. That’s why Microsoft recently agreed to pay Constellation Energy, the new owner of America’s infamous nuclear power station, Three Mile Island, a sizeable premium for its energy. There is cheaper wind and solar power to be had in Pennsylvania, but it isn’t as reliable as nuclear, 24 hours a day.It’s not just AI. The widespread political desire to rid ourselves of fossil fuels means the world needs electricity, and fast.Nuclear is the solution, of course. But nuclear takes a lot of time, even with AI now “re-routing” the anti-nuclear narrative. It takes especially long in the UK where any kind of infrastructure project requires billions to be spent on planners, lawyers and consultants before a brick is even lifted.It’s so stupid of course. Nuclear power stations have been operating commercially for 70 years, providing reliable, affordable, and almost infinitely renewable “clean” electricity. Nuclear has the best safety record of any energy technology. Almost all environmental concerns, such as waste disposal, have been solved. But if you want to know the name of the point at which stupidity, hypocrisy, waste and weakness meet, it’s called British Energy Policy.Layer upon layer of safety is demanded in nuclear plant design. The regulatory process is slow, cumbersome, and complex. There is a long lead time between planning, building, and operation, which adds to expense. Political uncertainty meant many proposals for nuclear power stations in the UK were shelved. It all drives away investment.But governments around the world are waking up to the fact that the silver bullet is nuclear-powered. Thus, the narrative is changing. The dawn of the new age of nuclear power is upon us, and it can’t come quickly enough.That’s why the focus has shifted to small modular reactors (SMRs). These have been operational for almost 70 years now in submarines, aircraft carriers, and ice-breakers, but in the last few years, land-based SMRs have been developed to generate electricity.They use simple, proven technology, and are safer than current nuclear power stations. They can be manufactured in factories and then rapidly erected on-site. Modular refers to the design principle of breaking down a system into small, independent, and interchangeable components, or “modules”, that can easily be combined, modified, or replaced without affecting the rest of the system. This flexibility means they are scalable. It aids manufacture, transportation, and installation while reducing construction time and costs.SMRs don’t occupy much land, so they have little impact on the landscape. Some can even be constructed underground – surely preferable to wind turbines and solar farms. In the UK, they could be erected on the redundant sites of closed nuclear and coal-fired power stations, where grid connections are readily available. A 440 megawatt (MW) SMR would produce about 3.5 terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity per year, enough for 1.2 million homes – or to provide power to Wales, the Northeast of England, or two Devons. It would require about 25 acres of land. A solar farm would need 13,000 acres for the same output; a wind farm, 32,000 acres. Three 440MW SMRs would be enough for London, which has around 3.6 million homes.What’s more, their output is not dependent on the weather. Reliability is why Microsoft paid a premium of more than 85% for Three Mile Island’s power. SMRs produce electricity that can easily be adjusted to meet the constant, everyday needs of the grid (baseload), and they can also ramp up or down to follow changes in demand throughout the day. They spin in sync with the grid, so they help keep everything stable. When they’re running, they act like a steady hand, providing momentum that makes it easier to manage sudden changes in electricity supply or demand.Why not subscribe to this amazing publication?How To InvestThere are all sorts of ways to invest in nuclear power. The simplest and least risky is to buy the metal itself. Current demand for uranium stands at around 200 million pounds per year, while mining output totals only 140 million pounds. Another 25 million pounds comes from secondary sources, such as scrap and recycling. So there is a uranium supply deficit. I’m surprised the price isn’t higher. London-listed Yellowcake (LSE:YCA) has been set up with this purpose in mind. It is, essentially, a uranium holding company. You buy the shares, and thus own a share of the uranium it holds. It makes up part of the Dolce Far Niente portfolio.You could also buy uranium miners, though I have to say I do not like the miners at all. There are the large producers, such as Cameco (Toronto: CCO) and Paladin Energy (Sydney: PDN). You can also gain exposure via large caps, such as Rio Tinto (LSE: RIO), but they are not pure plays. There are mine developers too, such as NexGen Energy (Toronto: NXE), whose Rook 1 project should be producing a whopping 30 million pounds a year by 2030, almost enough to solve the uranium supply deficit single-handedly.If you don’t fancy your stock-picking skills, go for a fund instead. The London-listed Sprott Uranium Miners ETF (LSE: URNP) is an exchange-traded fund that gives you exposure to a basket of mining companies, as does closed-end fund Geiger Counter (LSE: GCL). Another popular ETF is the Global X Uranium UCITS ETF (LSE: URNU).Why don’t I like uranium miners? About 90% of those listed in the funds do not have any production coming in the near future and are, therefore, huge vortexes into which capital will disappear. At present, they are fully valued. That’s not saying they won’t go up. But when the time comes for them to fall, they will bomb.When I last looked at SMRs in 2021, the companies I tipped were Rolls-Royce (LSE: RR) and Fluor Corp (NYSE: FLR). Both have been real winners. Rolls-Royce has built seven generations of SMRs for use in nuclear submarines and, with its modern designs for SMRs, has been winning contracts all over. Rolls-Royce is not a pure SMR play. But it has put its SMR business into a separate entity (Rolls-Royce SMR) and I presume this will be spun out and listed at some later stage.The stock has been going great guns under its new CEO, Tufan Erginbilgiç. I tipped it around the 100p mark and it’s now at 530p and there’s no stopping it. It was 1,350p in 2013, so there’s plenty of upside left, and that was before there was any urgency about SMRs. I’ve taken my original stake off the table, and the rest I’m holding.I also mentioned NuScale, a US outfit, which in 2021 was unfortunately still private. There was a way to get exposure to NuScale, however: via majority shareholder and engineering company Fluor Corp. It has been a real winner too. We tipped it at $18. It’s now $50. The stock remains a hold, although it is not a pure play. Worth $8.6bn, Fluor has $200m of free cash flow and trades at 42 times earnings.But the company we were looking at, NuScale Power Corporation (NYSE: SMR), has now listed – good ticker – and you can buy the stock at not far off the flotation price. Be warned, however: this is a volatile company. Since its initial public offering (IPO) at $10, the stock has been as high as $15 and as low as $2. It is now at $13.NuScale designs, develops, and commercialises SMR reactors for nuclear-power generation, aiming to provide a “safe, flexible, and scalable nuclear-energy solution”. Its flagship product is the NuScale Power Module, a self-contained pressurised water reactor (PWR) that is far smaller than traditional nuclear reactors. Each module has an electric capacity of about 60 megawatts, but they can combine to scale up.NuScale has partnered with various organisations, including the US Department of Energy (DOE) and global energy firms, but it does not yet have a solid sales pipeline, so it is hard to value. Instead, it’s a bit of a meme stock that rises and falls when it gets tipped. NuScale has a market capitalisation of $1.2bn and revenues of $23m; it lost $273m last year. It now has $180m in negative free cash flow, $130m in cash and a burn rate of about $35m per quarter. (So it’s got enough money for another year.) Caveat emptor.Another option is BWX Technologies (NYSE: BWXT), but again it’s not a pure SMR play, more of a picks-and-shovels play. The company manufactures nuclear-reactor components, systems fuel, and other critical parts for the nuclear-power industry. It really is wide-ranging (think anything from naval nuclear propulsion to nuclear defence) and its history goes all the way back to the Manhattan Project.SMR developers will often rely on BWX’s expertise and manufacturing capabilities to ensure the safety and functionality of their designs. As demand for SMRs grows, so will the appetite for BWX’s products and services. BWX has a market value of $10bn and $1.2bn in debt. Earnings per share are just shy of $3, and the price/earnings (p/e) ratio is close to 40. But it is profitable and pays a yield just below 1%.If you want to go really small and speculative, there is always the mining exploration option (not recommended), or uranium enrichment firms. If this technology of enriching uranium to make it more powerful comes good, then the efficiencies of the industry will improve even further, and the problem of uranium supply deficits will quickly vanish, along with the high prices of many uranium miners. Silex Systems (Sydney: SLX) – market cap A$1.1bn (£565m), 50% owned by Cameco – is the market leader here, although Centrus Energy (NYSE: LEU), worth $1bn, is not far behind.We are still some years from successful enrichment, but it is coming. I doubt we will see it before the uranium price itself breaks to new highs above $140/lb, which it hit in 2006, and probably not until $200 uranium. High prices have a habit of accelerating everything. Uranium is now at $70/lb.That’s when tiny-cap nuclear-fuel tech firms such as Lightbridge (Nasdaq: LTBR), worth $46m, could rocket. Lightbridge, looking to improve the safety, economics, and proliferation resistance of nuclear power, is developing a fuel that operates about 1,000 degrees cooler than standard fuel. It’s got $27m in the bank, is losing $10m a year and, like NuScale, seems to rely on memes and tipsters. The stock costs $3 so there is plenty of upside. But be warned: this is an illiquid Nasdaq stock. Don’t chase it.Amazing chart. From $4,000 - to $2. Talk about wealth destruction. It’s like an NHS IT project. Looks like it might, finally, have bottomed though. This article first appeared in Moneyweek Magazine.I’ll be MCing this year’s Moneyweek Summit on Friday November 8th. Readers of the Flying Frisby can get a 20% discount by entering the code FRISBY20If you’re interested in nuclear, Wednesday’s piece might be of interest: I had an email from Nick Lawson, CEO of investment house, Ocean Finance, which has put together some research on Lightbridge. I share it here, in case of interest. And here once again are those vids: This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comFinal call for my “lecture with funny bits” about mining this Thursday. Hope to see you there. But here it is, finally, the follow-up to How to Sleep Well, in which we address the bane of many who would sleep well: peeing in the night.Did you know one in three adults over 30 and more that half of adults over 50 wake up to pee at least once a night? The interruption damages the precious rhythm of sleep, especially later in the night when getting back to sleep again is harder.The problem plagued my dad for decades, and it was bladder issues that eventually took him. His peeing was a major source of misery, especially in his later years, and my eyes still well up now when I think how much pain and discomfort he was in. Unfortunately, like father like son and all that, I have my father’s bladder. I’m only 55. I’ve been having to get up in the night for at least 25 years now. It is not uncommon for me to have to get up as many as five times. On a really bad night, it can get to ten.For years, I accepted this as my genetic destiny. But with this sudden turnaround in my health and fitness—in which I have rid myself of many things I thought I was stuck with—and not wanting to follow in Dad’s footsteps, I’ve put some considerable effort to this issue in the last few months.I’m delighted to report that I have made real progress. Twice this week, I have got through the night without having to pee at all. It’s been 25 years since that happened for me, and the exhilaration I felt the following morning was quite something. I even got 100% sleep scores on my Whoop.If buying gold to protect yourself in these uncertain times, let me recommend The Pure Gold Company. Pricing is competitive, quality of service is high. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe or you can store your gold with them.Five things I did which made a differenceThe condition of having to pee in the night is called nocturia. I started by going to the doctor, where I had all sorts of tests: blood tests, urine tests, and the infamous finger up the bum. Everything came back fine. No prostate or bladder issues. The only thing they found was that my kidney function was sub-optimal.There are five stages of kidney function, with stage 1 being optimal and stage 5 being failure. I’m stage 2, “mildly reduced function,” which is not ideal, but it’s also not abnormal for someone my age. In any case, it’s often asymptomatic.So if everything is mostly working down there, why all the peeing? I have a theory which I’ll come back to in a moment.By the way, while I remember: fasting does not help. When fasting, if you’re like me, you will consume loads of liquid—soup, herbal tea—to fool your body into thinking you’re full. All that liquid means a lot of peeing.Also, fasting puts your body into a state of ketosis, which makes your kidneys work harder. Ergo more peeing.However, the health benefits of fasting, especially weight loss, are so great that, in my view, they outweigh the increased peeing.1. SupplementsI tried a million different supplements:* Pumpkin seeds* Linseed / Flaxseed* Walnuts (also good for Omega 3)* Zinc* Selenium* Pygeum Africanum* Magnesium* Vitamin D (though I also read that it makes you pee more—you can’t win)* QuercetinI’m not convinced any of them made a significant difference, but I mention them because they were part of the process.2. BoozeSorry, but it’s a killer. Especially, beer. Lots of liquid plus the diuretic effects of alcohol. Try not drink as much, try and drink your booze earlier in the day, away from bedtime. Best of all, don’t drink at all.If you need help cutting down on booze, get a Whoop. I explain how they help here. 3. Fluid ManagementConsume your fluids earlier in the day. Avoid drinking anything for at least three hours before bed, even if it means going to bed a bit thirsty (though that might not be great for your kidneys).This makes a huge difference - it will reduce your peeing by as much as 40% I’d say.At the same time as making sure I didn’t drink three hours before bed, I started doing two other things. I think it these three things in tandem that made the difference.4. Getting your body out of the habitOften I’d wake up in the night with the feeling that I needed to pee, when I didn’t even need to. I began to suspect that my body had simply got into the habit of waking up. I needed to break the cycle. How to do that?

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comYou can watch a video of this article here: For the first time in history, gold went above £2,000/oz yesterday.This is a huge landmark in the decline of sterling.Of course, nobody in the UK echelons of power is talking about it.We are, however, because it matters. Who is buying so much gold that price keeps going up? Why are they buying? There are hugely significant developments taking place in Asia that have the potential to reshape the global financial order.This bull market is not like previous bull markets. It’s not driven by retail buying. What’s driving it is far more significant than that.Clowns to the left, cretins to the rightHere is gold in pounds since Gordon Brown sold ours in 1999. It’s quite something—over ten times higher! What a clown.Meanwhile, in other currencies, gold continues its march. Here it is in dollars, the preferred benchmark, over the past three years. This is proper bull market stuff.I know I have said this a million times, but I really urge you, if you haven’t already, to diversify out of sterling—indeed any form of fiat money—and use gold as your savings vehicle.The gold price action is telling us something.The way this government is going—it’s proving almost as rudderless as the Tories were, and in record time—sterling could have real problems, and soon.To my knowledge, not one influencer in the Labour Party, over the course of its conference this week, mentioned stewarding the currency, protecting its value, or any of that stuff. Just as every government before it has, they will use sterling devaluation to compensate for their deficit spending.The pound is only holding up in the forex markets because the Bank of England did not cut rates last week, when the Federal Reserve and the ECB have gone into a rate-cutting cycle.Perhaps, more significantly, no one in the Labour Party is discussing what is happening in Asia. Central banks are buying gold in huge quantities. They are no longer waiting for the price to pull back before making their purchases. Perhaps most significantly of all—they are not reporting all their gold purchases. It is happening on the quiet.If you want to buy gold to protect yourself in these uncertain times, let me recommend The Pure Gold Company. Pricing is competitive, quality of service is high. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe or you can store your gold with them.De-dollarisation is happening in front of our very eyesThe implications for the West are huge. But, despite the geopolitical significance, this issue is nowhere close to the Labour radar.This goes back to early 2022 and the Russian invasion of Ukraine when the US confiscated Russia’s US$300 billion. Most of the rest of Asia looked at that and thought, “we need to de-dollarize.”China, as we know, has quietly been reducing its holdings of US Treasuries. It now holds $777 billion in US Treasuries, which is about 10% of the US national debt held by foreign entities. This compares to 22% in November 2013. That is quite the reduction.China has also, as we know, been accumulating vast amounts of gold.Analyst Jan Nieuwenhuijs calculates that China has bought 1,600 tonnes of gold since Covid. I think the number is higher. That is on top of the 370 tonnes it mines annually—and most of that mining is state-owned. I was having dinner with a VIP Chinese investment banker last night. I asked him about the Chinese mentality and de-dollarisation. “It is a matter of pride,” he said. China does not want to be beholden to the US. Global reserve currency status is a goal. There has never been a global reserve currency that did not start out backed by gold.For now, it continues operating by its doctrine, “we must not shine too brightly,” but all the while it is accumulating gold and reducing its dollar dependency.But it is by no means the only country doing this.Saudi Arabia was “caught” a fortnight ago secretly buying 160 tonnes of gold in Switzerland—kudos to Jan Nieuwenhuijs for the scoop. “One thing is for certain,” says Jan. “Saudi Arabia owns much more gold than it wants the world to believe.”This is significant because Saudi Arabia was such a key player in establishing the petrodollar in the early 1970s after the US came off the gold standard, enabling the dollar to retain its status as the global reserve currency.Saudi Arabia could be quietly repositioning itself as an ally of the next global superpower. It could also, as we shall see, be at the heart of a new global payments system.The new international payments system which bypasses the US dollar

I’m delaying the follow up to last week’s piece on sleep for another week because I am still experimenting ;). In the meantime, I hope today’s little story will put a smile on your face.And a reminder there are just a handful of tickets left for my “lecture with funny bits” at the Museum of Comedy on October 10th - October 9th was cancelled - sorry. This is a super interesting show, even though I say so myself. If you are free, I really recommend it.In 1914, a young German named Heinz Kurschildgen started his first job as an apprentice in a dye factory in his hometown of Hilden. He became fascinated by the chemicals he was working with, and built a small laboratory at home to conduct experiments.Before long, he thought he had found a way to make gold, and even persuaded several investors to give him money. However, it soon became clear that he couldn’t make gold and found himself prosecuted for fraud. The courts let him off on the grounds that mentally he was not all there, but only on condition that he solicited no further investments with schemes to make gold. He was soon claiming he could make other transmutations, and became something of a joke figure in his hometown, where a bust was even erected in his honour, albeit ironically, inscribed with the words: “For the genius gold-maker, from his grateful hometown.”But in 1929, he returned to his first calling, which was kidding people he could make gold. He approached German President Paul von Hindenburg and Head of the Reichsbank, Hjalmar Schacht, with a proposal to make the gold they needed to pay off Germany’s WWI reparations.These had been set at 132 billion gold marks, which translates to 47,300 tonnes. To give you an idea how unrealistic a figure this was: it was an amount not far off all the gold that had ever been mined in history by that time. That would take quite some alchemy.But Kurschildgen was not a man to be deterred. He raised a load more money, defrauded his clients, and ended up with another 18 months in jail.You really should subscribe to this wonderful publication.After his release, he was soon at it again. This time, he approached the newly elected Nazi government with a plan to make petrol from water. Chief Scientific Advisor, Wilhelm Keppler, paid him a visit and Kurschildgen agreed to reveal his methods and surrender the rights to the government. Meanwhile, his claims about being able to make gold piqued the interest of SS leader Heinrich Himmler, who had a notoriously superstitious streak and a fascination with alchemy. Himmler started generously funding Kurschildgen to conduct his experiments. But Reichsanstalt physicists soon declared his contraptions useless, and Kurschildgen ended up in a concentration camp.“Himmler has fallen for a gold and petrol maker,” said Joseph Goebbels in his dairy. “He wanted to defraud me, too. I knew what he was about straight away”.After two years Kurschildgen was released for good behaviour. Himmler had him put straight back in the camp. On no account did he want this embarrassing story becoming public.After the war, Kurschildgen tried to get recognized as a victim of Nazi persecution, so he could claim compensation. “The Gestapo would stop at nothing to get my invention," he told the courts. As with most of his ventures, his petition was unsuccessful.Even so, you can’t fault the man’s ambition.Until next time,PS Don’t forget Shaping the Earth on October 10th.If you are interested in buying actual gold in these uncertain times, then look no further than my recommended bullion dealer, the Pure Gold Company. Premiums are low, quality of service is high, and you get to deal with a human being who does not moonlight as an alchemist! This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comThere are just a handful of tickets left for my “lecture with funny bits” at the Museum of Comedy on October 10th - October 9th got cancelled - events beyond our control, sorry. This is a super interesting show, even though I say so myself. If you are free, I really recommend it.Some charts have been doing the rounds this week, and I wanted to take a look at them today, as a couple of you have been asking about them.The first is this one, which shows that, relative to stocks, commodities are as cheap as they have ever been.I have little doubt that there will be another bull market in commodities, that it will come when people are least expecting it, and that, when it does come, it will blow everyone’s minds, just as previous commodity supercycles have done.But here’s the thing: we have got better at producing commodities. Modern farming methods mean we can produce more grains and softs at cheaper prices than ever before. Yes, sometimes there are events beyond human control that get in the way—bad weather being the most obvious example—but the broader trend will always be towards lower prices (especially if you use ratios and thereby strip out the fiat factor).But these are the commodities that we grow. What about fossil fuels and metals, which are finite resources? We’ve long since taken the easy stuff.Well, yes. But the same logic still applies. Modern mining means we can now explore far-flung corners of the earth and economically produce from much lower-grade rock. The same applies to fossil fuels. Fracking is an example. This new technology meant that previously uneconomic deposits became economic. The result was a glut of supply and lower prices.So, while I do not doubt that commodities will have their day, I also look at the chart above and see no reason why they can’t get cheaper still. The trend of the last two or three years is lower. That ratio could quite easily go back and retest its 2020 lows. It could go even lower.There is a lot of value to be had from ratio charts, but you also have to factor in basic stuff like improved productivity. However, there are other factors too. Many think we are heading towards some huge international conflict. If so, international trade will suffer, countries will start stockpiling, and commodity prices will quickly revert to 1973-4/1999/2008 levels.Are you buying gold to protect yourself in these uncertain times? Let me recommend The Pure Gold Company. Premiums are low, quality of service is high and you deal with a human being who knows their stuff.Here’s another ratio that is doing the rounds: gold miners versus goldNow this one is pretty compelling. Time to pile in to gold miners? Let’s see. and let’s also check in on the miners we own.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comInnocent sleep … sore labor’s bath,Balm of hurt minds, great nature’s second course,Chief nourisher in life’s feast.William ShakespeareSleep is so important to your well-being. Your mind works better when you sleep well. Your moods improve. Your outlook improves. Your physical condition improves. Your health improves. Life is better when you sleep well.We spend—get this—a full third of our lives asleep. Yet how much do we treasure sleep? How much do we guard our sleep time? How much effort do we put toward improving our sleep?Like so many things in this modern, fiat world of declining standards, the value of sleep has been overlooked.Science may only just be starting to acknowledge the benefits of good sleep, but it’s something we’ve intuitively known since forever. From time immemorial, art and literature have been filled with references to the value of a good night’s sleep. The Ancient Greeks, Hippocrates among them, knew it was a prerequisite for good health. Many cultures considered dreams to be a form of contact with the divine.I used to think I had mastered the art of sleeping. In the last couple of years, I’ve learned this is far from the case. However, I’ve put in a lot of work and now, in my newfound role as health guru, I feel I’m in a position to dish out some advice on how to improve your sleep.England cycling coach David Brailsford used to talk about the incremental effects of marginal gains. Sleep improvement is very much the same. There are lots of little things you can do, and, with the accumulation of these, you will see vast improvements.Here are ten ways to improve your sleep, including how to deal with waking up in the night, bedtime habits, alcohol’s impact, melatonin, peeing in the night and more … 1. How to get to sleepI always struggled to get to sleep, even as a youngster. I can remember lying in bed for endless hours, really trying to get to sleep and not being able to. When you’re lying in bed trying to sleep, and you can’t, that is when the demons come: unwelcome thoughts creep into your mind and then start looping over and over. It’s good to be able to fall asleep quickly.I now realise one of the reasons I got into the habit of drinking too much was that, after a few drinks, whenever I lay down, I would go straight to sleep. Drinking was a way of avoiding that difficult period of trying to get to sleep.My other method was doing loads and loads of physical activity and then going to bed absolutely shattered. Not always possible.So, here’s the first lesson I’ve learned, and this is the best hack ever.First thing in the morning, go outside and get 15 or 20 minutes of sunshine. Do this as soon as you wake up. Make your morning cup of tea or coffee, then take it outside and get some sun. Even if it’s cloudy and cold in the middle of winter, go outside and stand where the sun would be. Open your eyes towards it. You’ll still get some rays.This has been shown to regulate your circadian rhythms. In my view, it’s the single best thing you can do to help you fall asleep at night.You’ll find, like magic - or is it clockwork? - that as soon as the sun goes down that evening, you’ll start feeling tired.2. Darkness.Darkness aids sleep. Blackout curtains in the bedroom are a good idea, but if that’s too much hassle, there’s a simpler, cheaper solution: sleep masks.I’ve only lately taken to wearing sleep masks in bed (I’ve always used them when travelling) and I’ve come to love them. Go for a silk one—they’re very comforting. I use this silk one by Alaska Bear.3. Breathe BetterThere is a simple product for this too. Mouth tape. Stick a little bit of this tape across your mouth and it forces you to breathe through your nose. You’ll be amazed. You sleep so much better if you only breathe though your nose.I’m currently using this light weight one and I like it. My son prefers this heavy duty stuff, which might be better as a stating point to change your breathing habits.If you sleep on your back and then snore, mouth tape can really help out.4. Get a sleep trackerI use the Whoop fitness tracker, which you wear on your wrist.When I compare my data with friends using other devices like Garmin, Apple, Fitbit, Whoop, and Aura, there’s quite a bit of divergence between the brands, particularly on calories burnt. I don’t think it really matters: it’s the act of monitoring and tracking that leads to improvements.Whoop seems to generally regarded as the best for tracking sleep though. An unintended but incredibly beneficial side effect of getting a Whoop is that it will massively cut down your drinking. More on this in a moment.5. Room temperature

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comDon’t forget Shaping The Earth, “my lecture with funny bits” in London this October 9th and 10th at the Museum of Comedy. Please come if you fancy a bit of “learning and laughter”.Three subjects I want to briefly look at today, starting with everyone’s favourite non-government money.There were rich promises of huge gains in bitcoin with the launch of the bitcoin ETFs and the halving cycle. Neither has quite materialised.Bitcoin is “only” up by 30% this year, though to read some of the commentary, you’d think this is another Bitcoin winter.The problem is that most of those gains came in February. For the other eight months of 2024, we’ve been generally stagnant. In fact, since March, we’ve been making a series of lower lows and lower highs and are clearly in a downtrend—hence the despondency.However, despondency is often the ally of the contrarian investor, and with that in mind, I want to share a table with you (borrowed from Coinglass).It shows Bitcoin’s quarterly performance. I’m sharing this now because we’re heading into Q4, which has historically been Bitcoin’s best quarter, with average returns close to 90%.Seasonal patterns aren’t always the most reliable indicator, but the odds are favourable: seven positive Q4s against just four negative ones.Better than Q1, which is 50:50; Q2 with seven positive and five negative; and Q3, which shows five positive and seven negative years (including this one, which isn’t over yet).Let’s hope those averages hold.I argue that Bitcoin should be a core holding. Many don’t like bitcoin, but the potential is so huge that, in my view, the greater risk is not owning it rather than owning it.My guide to buying Bitcoin is here. And here, I detail the easiest way for UK investors to gain exposure via a traditional broker.How Japan finances the world - and why we should be worriedAbout a month ago we explained the summer turmoil and the unwinding of the yen carry trade. The big question we all want to know the answer to is: was that it? Are we done now, or is there more to come?

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comYou can watch a video of this article:When I was 19, I started getting these weird heat rashes. Every day, whenever I got hot, these debilitating, paralysing heat rashes would envelop me. Burning, bumpy, red weals suddenly covered my body. So itchy—you wanted to scratch everywhere, though scratching brought no relief. Once the rash started, there was nothing I could do. I just had to wait for it to pass, which would take about half an hour.I didn’t even have to get so hot that I broke sweat for the rash to come on. Just walking briskly would do it, getting flustered, wearing a layer too many, even having a shower.And it came every day, usually mid-morning.I thought it might be stress that was causing it, but it was the other way around: these rashes were causing the stress.I found a way of coping with it: do intense exercise every morning and actually induce the rash. Then it seemed to burn itself out for the rest of the day.But the next morning, it would be back again.I went to see doctors about it. None of them knew what it was. As GPs often do when they don’t know the answer, they brushed it aside, “Oh, it’s probably stress.” I wasn’t making this up! But unless I actually had an attack in front of the GP, there was no way of showing them what it was.I saw a dermatologist, who gave me anti-depressants. I saw Chinese herbalist after Chinese herbalist, who all concocted these disgusting teas for me to drink. Lord knows what damage I did to my liver drinking that stuff. I saw an acupuncturist who declared brightly that he could cure it. But he couldn’t.It made my life a nightmare, because you never quite knew when the rash was going to hit. What if it came on when I was on stage? During that all-important meeting? When I was with a girl I liked? It was a source of acute embarrassment.The condition disappeared, bizarrely, if I went to the tropics. Why, Lord knows. But as soon as I got home, back it came. Then I noticed the condition also disappeared in the summer. What was that about? I realised the antihistamine I was taking for hay fever also prevented these rash attacks.But I didn’t want to take antihistamine every day—that couldn’t be healthy—so, once the hay fever season was over, I would go back to keeping it at bay by trying to do intense exercise every morning and burning it off.When I got married and had kids, aged 30, this became impossible, so I resigned myself to daily antihistamine. This started with Clarityn (Loratadine), moved onto Zirtek (which I hated because if I drank alcohol, I used to get incredibly drunk and that led to a lot of bad decisions and mistakes) and, eventually, Xyzal, which I found I only needed to take every other day. The potential long-term damage of sustained anti-histamine use was a gamble I was prepared to make to avoid the daily nightmare of this condition.If you are buying gold to protect yourself in these uncertain times, then let me recommend The Pure Gold Company. Premiums are low, quality of service is high and you deal with a human being who knows their stuff. Eventually, I discovered that the problem I had was a condition called heat-induced cholinergic urticaria. I went to see a specialist at St Thomas' Hospital. “There is no cure,” she told me. “Sometimes it clears up by itself,” she told me, “sometimes not. You’re lucky antihistamine stops it. For many that doesn’t work.” I volunteered to be a guinea pig so she could experiment on me as part of her research into the condition. I would go to the hospital, have a hot bath, my skin would erupt, and then she’d prod me and prick me and nod and mutter, but it got me no nearer to a cure.Here I am at 54, and it has not cleared up.What is the cause?I’m still not quite sure if something I did caused it. Urticaria is from the same allergic school of illnesses as asthma, eczema, and hay fever, from which I suffer a little (asthma especially if I run or am near cats), so it might be hereditary or genetic. It affects young men more than any other group, which is what I was.I’ve been on numerous forums where fellow sufferers discuss the condition, and a lot of us took the antibiotic tetracycline. I took it for years as a teenager to help with my acne. God, it makes me cross that I was allowed—even encouraged—to take it for so long. Bloody doctors, or one in particular (no longer with us so I won’t name him and speak ill of the dead), and my mother’s blind trust in them. I thought it might be tetracycline.I had spent two months in Egypt just before I got my first outbreaks, and I got very ill with Giardia, a form of dysentary. Maybe I lost some essential bacteria in my stomach or something, or got leaky gut. (I’ve taken a million probiotics and all the rest of it—didn’t work).Also just before the first outbreaks, I got the sh*t kicked out of me in a park in Milan by a group of young Italians - I mean properly beaten up, 7 v 1 and I made the mistake of fighting back - so maybe it was somehow related to that.Maybe it was the accumulation of everything.Nature’s magic superfood comes to the rescueOne of the unintended benefits of my health drive in recent years is that my asthma, which I’ve had since I was born, appears to have, for no apparent reason, gone. I haven’t been near cats to test it there, but I no longer need my puffer to play football. (Don’t know why. It might be an age thing; a health thing, most likely a seed oil thing).Then I forgot to take my antihistamine for a few days, and I noticed that I wasn’t getting urticaria attacks either. Praise the Lord! I thought my urticaria might’ve cleared up too. No such luck, as it turned out. It hadn’t. I went abroad and, after a few days, it came back. Then I realised there was something I’d been taking at home, and I hadn’t taken it away with me.It made all the difference.That mysterious ailment you’ve had for ages and can’t rid of. this might sort that out too.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comYou can watch a video of this article here: Robert F. Kennedy has been grabbing headlines this week, not just for his alliance with Donald Trump, but for his criticisms of the American food industry, which he holds responsible for the epidemic of obesity and poor health.I can’t believe what he has to say is even considered controversial, when it’s so obvious it’s true. Yet Time, The Guardian, The New York Times, and all the usual suspects have all come out to smear him.Surely it’s clear? Processed food is bad for your health. Processed food causes obesity. Processed food is the cause of many modern illnesses. Don’t eat processed food. It is bad for you.I’m not a doctor. Then again, I’m not an economist either. I’m just a guy who gets interested in stuff, especially systems—how they work and what their effects are.In the noughties, I became very interested in our systems of money, largely because I couldn’t understand why houses cost so much relative to what people earn. Before long, I felt I had a good grasp of how money works. I ended up writing a film that became an internet sensation (and got horribly plagiarised in the process), several books, and umpteen articles, all making the case that if the West is to save itself and create a level playing field, we need sound money. Whether that’s based on gold or bitcoin doesn’t really matter. Money needs to be independent, rather than a tool  of government.Recently, I’ve become very interested in health - on particular, improving mine. For years, I have been unable to understand why I—and millions like me—could never keep weight off.I have become convinced that seed oils are to health what fiat money is to the economy. It is that fundamental, in my mind. Thanks to bitcoin and gold, the fiat money narrative genie is out of the bottle. Fiat is not going to die tomorrow—it will probably take decades —but more and more people are realizing how bad it is and are taking steps to escape the system via alternative money. The same thing needs to happen with seed oils. I find myself becoming as passionate about this as I was about money 15 years ago. Why are so many people obese? Why are so many people, who work on their health, diet, and fitness still 10 or 20 pounds heavier than they’d like to be? Why were so many people skinny in the 60s and 70s, but not now? Are people greedier now than they were then? They can’t be. We are the same human beings. Indeed, we exercise more.What’s changed is processed food. It barely used to exist. Now it’s almost impossible to avoid. The main enabler of processed food, the thing that gives it such a long shelf life, is seed oil.What are seed oils?"Seed oils" is a catch-all term for the various vegetable oils that have replaced animal fats to become a mainstay of the Western diet: sunflower oil, rapeseed oil, canola oil, soybean oil, corn oil, palm oil, margarine, and so on. Anything hydrogenated is bad.Seed oils were mostly invented for industrial purposes, but because of their price and properties, “entrepreneurial” companies, assisted by regulators, quack research, and lots of PR, gradually added them to their food products, so that seed oils have now, mostly, replaced animal fatsJust look at how they’re made. You gather seeds from plants such as soy, corn, cotton, safflower, or rapeseed; heat the seeds to extremely high temperatures, so the fatty acids oxidize; process the seeds with petroleum-based solvents such as hexane to extract the maximum amount of oil; add chemicals to remove the foul smell (this deodorization process produces harmful fatty acids); and then add more chemicals to change the colour and appearance of the oil. Not healthy. One of their properties is that they don’t break down easily (they can thus help lengthen food’s shelf life). The problem, it seems, is that the human body can’t properly break them down either.Okinawa in Japan became famous for its longevity, with many people living well into their 90s and 100s. Then along came Western processed food, and suddenly there is an increase in obesity, diabetes, and other modern illnesses. The once famously long-lived population is now seeing both a decline in life expectancy and an increase in health problems that were previously unknown.When correlation equals causationThis chart shows the consumption of vegetable oil in the US since the late 19th century. We didn’t used to eat seed oils; we ate animal fats. You can see they change in diet.Sugar often gets the blame for the rise in obesity, but if you look at current US sugar consumption, it’s not that different from what it was in the 1930s or 40s. Obesity has grown, while sugar consumption has remained broadly flat.Now, let’s look at vegetable oil consumption and obesity rates. They correlate. And in this case, correlation is causation.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comA cock-up at HQ some of you didn’t see Sunday’s piece about a scam in the gold bullion markets. Here it is ICYMI: Also in video format if you prefer.Now we look at what must be the most important price in the world: that is the price of the global reserve currency, the US dollar.Does it go up or down from here?There is probably no more important question in global finance to know the answer to.If the dollar is falling, it usually signals boom times for assets: equities and commodities especially. The US prints and spends, and then exports the inflation. Money gets loose and the party rocks.But when the dollar is strong, everyone gets the jitters.Today the US dollar is seriously oversold.Conversely, the inverse trade—gold—is at all-time highs. US equity markets are flirting with all-time highs, while the euro and the yen, even the pound, have been soaring.What’s more: the US General Election is coming. On which note, how about this for a chart? Since 1985, the dollar has declined with the Republicans - Reagan, Bush x2 and Trump - and rallied with the Democrats - Clinton, Obama, and Biden.Who wins in November has a big impact on the priceBut there’re several months to go till November, and a lot can change in just a few weeks.Let’s start with US dollar index, which tracks the dollar against the currencies of the US’s main trading partners', over the past year. Look at the RSI.The RSI has gone beneath 30 for the first time in over a year. You would typically expect a reversal from these levels.Look at the 3-month rally the dollar had starting in July 2023, the last time it was this oversold, it was quite something.In fact, based on this, I have taken a small short position in cable, betting that the dollar will rise against the pound.Last week, Fed Chief Jerome Powell indicated that the Federal Reserve is now ready to start cutting rates, which should be bearish for the dollar. However, oversold is oversold."The time has come for policy to adjust." he said. "My confidence has grown that inflation is on a sustainable path back to 2%."The market is somewhat divided as to whether that cut will be 0.25% or 0.5%, but lower rates go. The inflation—by their definition—monster has been tamed.“The 2-year yield has fallen to 3.9% compared to base rates at 5.5%, which is the bond market’s way of pricing in future rate cuts,” says Charlie Morris at Bytree. (Have you subscribed to his letter? You should.) "The difference, at -1.6%, means that a full rate-cutting cycle lies ahead. Indeed, this reading is more pronounced than seen in 2001 and 2008, implying the cuts could come thick and fast."2001 and 2008 were major turning points in the US dollar. What about sentiment?To gauge this, I ran some polls on various WhatsApp chats and Twitter/X. What did they show?

You can also watch this article in video format here:There are some unscrupulous bullion dealers out there who are taking advantage of rookie buyers who don’t entirely know what they are doing when buying gold.I am not going to name names. But don’t fall the scamIf a dealer tries to flog you graded coins, in almost all cases they are trying to rip you off. Don’t pay a premium for graded coins.You are not buying gold to try and be clever and hope that your coin gets some kind of rarity value. In most cases, that will not happen. There are clever people who know this market better than you already playing this game. Don’t get involved. Your priority is to get as much gold for your money as possible. You are buying gold to preserve purchasing power, not to lose it. If a dealer tells you that some recent sovereign, for example, is extremely rare, that it was one of the last coins minted under Queen Elizabeth or some such, and that it has been graded and has a special certificate and blah blah, and it therefore carries a huge premium, they are trying to pull a sly one. The reality is that the extra premium paid is almost impossible to claw back when you come to sell.It really annoys me that bullion dealers are doing this. When buying gold, trust is everything and they are breaching that. You are buying gold for safety, not to be ripped off.Eventually, the FCA or the Office For Fair Trading or someone will eventually come after the dealers, but it will be too late. We all know how slow these organisations can be and by this point many more people will have been scammed. Why do dealers do it? A dealer might buy a large stock of coins from the Mint. Coins are often of a slightly different quality. Dealers then send them off and pay a small fee to get them graded according to their Mint State. The scale ranges from MS-60 to MS-70, with MS-70 being a perfect, flawless coin. They then charge a large premium for coins with high grades, even though they barely paid any premium when they bought the coins The margins when dealing in gold are on the slim side - sometimes just a few percent. But if they get an additional premium for the rarity, that margin can rise to 100%. No wonder there are so many unscrupulous salesman trying to flog graded coins. Fractional coins—¼ or 1/2 sovs for example—or older coins do trade at a higher (though not enormous) premium. These can trade for 15-20% above the spot value of the gold content. But you are likely to get that back when you sell. (Demand for fractional coins has increased this last year while it has fallen for 1oz coins).But for graded coins you can end up paying 100% premium to the spot value of the gold, yet when you come to sell you get little more than the spot value. So when you come to sell, you can lose over 70% even if the spot price of gold has increased. It’s like buying a painting by a modern artist and being told by the vendor he’s more famous than he is, only to find out later on that he isn’t.Don’t fall for it. And spread the word. The more people that know about this the better.If you are interested in buying gold in these uncertain times, then check out my recent report, and look no further than my recommended bullion dealer, the Pure Gold Company. Premiums are low, quality of service is high, and you get to deal with a human being who knows their stuff and won’t try and flog you graded coins at rip-off premiums.IMPORTANT: somebody keeps impersonating me on various social media, including on here asking readers to message them on WhatsApp. It is not me. Don’t engage. Please report and DON’T send any money.Finally, my Edinburgh Fringe show Shaping the Earth, a “lecture with funny bits” about the history of mining, is coming to London October 9th and 10th to the Museum of Comedy. Please come if you fancy a bit of “learning and laughter”. It’s a really interesting show, even though I say so myself. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

If you would rather watch this piece go here:IMPORTANT: somebody has been impersonating me on Substack, on Instagram and on YouTube. Please don’t engage. Report and block. And please DON’T send any money.Thanks to all who came to see Shaping The Earth up in Edinburgh. The show got incredible feedback. I am doing it in London October 9th and 10th at the Museum of Comedy. Please come if you fancy a bit of “learning and laughter”. House prices have to come down some time. But when exactly? That’s what we all want to know. So here’s your answer.The declines start in the US and Canada in 2025, followed by the UK, Europe and Australia in 2026.That’s what the 18-year property cycle says, at least.Today we explore that cycle and what it says about house prices.18 Years of Boom and BustEconomist Fred Harrison, who first covered the theory in his 1983 book, The Power in the Land, is very much the Godfather of the idea that real estate follows a predictable pattern over an 18-year period. I first stumbled across Harrison in 2005, when so many were sure house prices had to come down (needless to say they didn’t), on reading his brilliantly prophetic article for MoneyWeek, arguing that we were two or three years from the top. Wasn’t he right. Today, by most accounts, property should have already crashed. Real estate prices bear little resemblance to earnings. With the rise in interest rates that followed Covid, mortgage-holders found themselves with higher costs. Some were forced to sell, while prospective buyers could no longer afford to borrow as much as before. Increased taxes - I’m looking at you, Stamp Duty in the UK -  have only added to the unaffordability.And yet, while the market may be slow and stagnant in many parts of the country and indeed the world, it is not exactly crashing.There was one school of thought that was steadfast in all the house-price bearishness which followed Covid, saying property’s time to crash had not yet come. They were the acolytes of the 18-year cycle in real estate. Yet again they’ve been proved right. Real estate peaks in 2026, they said. After that we get four years of decline.You know my views on cycles. We have the seasons, days and nights, the moons, menstruation, the cycle of life - cycles are turning all around us. There are economic and investment cycles too: bull markets and bear markets, commodities super-cycles, Gordon Brown was always blathering on about the economic cycle, mining is cyclical. New technology goes through a clear cycle as it evolves and is adopted. On the other hand, it’s easy to look back at the past, find some random pattern and declare it a cycle. Actually trading them in real time is a very different matter. In fact, the human need for narrative and the fact that cycles make for good copy mean it’s very easy to get wedded to the idea of a cycle, when a very different reality is staring you in the face. After 2008 many got it stuck in their heads that this was Kondratiev Winter and the next Great Depression, and, as a result, missed one of the most rip-roaring bull markets in history. With all that said, the 18-year cycle in real estate has proved remarkably reliable, and, says Akhil Patel, author of The Secret Wealth Advantage, and one of Harrison’s great disciples, it goes all the way back to the turn of the 19th century. (I’ll show you that data in just a sec).Looking to buy gold in these uncertain times? Check out my recent report, and look no further than my recommended bullion dealer, the Pure Gold Company. Premiums are low, quality of service is high, and you get to deal with a human being who knows their stuff.Broadly speaking, there are four phases to the cycle - and it actually lasts about 18 and a half years.* Years one to seven. A silent rally followed by …* A mid-cycle slowdown or dip at around the seven year mark.* The explosive phase. That’s when house prices really get on the map. Think 1983 to 1989 or 2002 to 2007. In the last couple of years you get a classic blow-off top - the winners’ curse.* Finally, the correction which lasts around four years. Think 1989 to 1993 or 2008-2011. Then the cycle starts again.Here it is, illustrated.This is, says Akhil, “primarily a North American phenomenon, though Britain and Europe follow the US and, increasingly, emerging markets do as well.”Here, for the historians out there, is a table from Akhil’s book that shows the data in the US going all the way back to 1800.Recent turns of the cycleThere is no doubt the cycle has played out in the UK over my lifetime. (The US is typically 6 months to a year ahead of the UK ). From the mid-1970s through to 1989 there was an extraordinary boom in the UK, followed by that infamous crash from 1989 to 1993 and negative equity so bad that thousands simply posted their keys in the letter box and walked away from their homes. Prices peaked in the third quarter of 1989 at £63,000, before falling to £51,000.But in 1993 things got going again. By the turn of the 20th century property erotica was all over the television, houses had become financial assets and today’s intergenerational wealth divide was just beginning to show its face. The market peaked in Q3 2007, and declines followed, though it wasn’t such an out and out crash as 1989-93, largely because there were few forced sellers with the slashing of interest rates. The average house price then fell from £183,000 in Q3 2007 to £149,000 in Q1 2009. They fell by a lot more than 18% if you were a foreigner, however, as the pound lost a good 30% in the foreign exchange marketsIt would be 2012 before the market properly got going again. We saw the mid-cycle dip around about Covid time, and now we are in the explosive phase, though in many parts of the country this is one helluva limp explosive phase. While prices are rising in some areas, the market is stagnant in many others.It’s clear from all the leaks that Labour are looking at ways to extract some of the wealth tied up in housing. Whether that’s going to come from increased council taxes (0.5% levy of the value of the property - a number that will only go one way), capital gains tax on the sale of your main residence, increased attacks on buy-to-let landlords, increased Stamp Duty or by some other means, we do not yet know. (Labour are doing what the Tories used to do: leaking and then seeing what the reaction is). None of that bodes well for house prices. Nor do their plans to increase housing supply via new builds, or indeed the mass exodus of people with money.On the other hand, lower interest rates, which are coming, should give the market a boost.Overall, my advice to any prospective buyers is to wait. I think this market is primed for big falls, but, like the 18-year guys, I don’t think these falls come for another couple of years. That said, often not buying a home means putting the rest of your life on hold, which is not a good thing to do. If there’s a place you’ll be happy in, and you can afford it now, then do it. Cost is not always the main priority. And, of course, there’s always the possibility the 18-year-cycle guys have got it wrong. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

(And, no, I’m not standing on a stool!)After the unexpected popularity of my post about weight loss (still can’t believe it had 11 million views), I am trying something a little bit different this Sunday morning with this short video about dead hangs, while doing a dead hang. I am planning to cover alternative health a bit more frequently on here in the Sunday morning thought pieces. (NB If you want to try dead hangs, but aren’t yet ready to hang fully, try resistance bands or standing on a step and still putting as much weight as possible through your shoulders).Enjoy!In case you missed them, last Sunday’s post on immigration was extremely popularAnd we also had an update this week on the Dolce Far Niente portfolioTRANSCRIPT:Hey Siri. Timer in 2 minutes.Today, I’m going to talk to you about dead hangs. I’m going to try and do a 2-minute dead hang while recording this video. Not sure if I can last two minutes while talking.I had a motorcycle crash when I was 27, and I've had problems with my neck ever since.Then, last year, I got a trapped nerve in my shoulder and I was in agony. My osteopath helped a lot. I did about 3 or 4 minutes of neck stretches most days. However, the problem continued.And it was only after I started doing dead hangs a few months ago, that my neck issues, shoulder issues and trapped nerve mostly cleared up.Dead hangs are great. Everything we do, whether exercising or just sitting, compresses the spine. Dead hangs stretch it all out.As well as decompressing the spine, they have all sorts of beneficial side-effects. * They improve your posture.* They re-aligning the spine.* They stretch out all the evils of sitting at a desk in front of a screen all day.* They increase neck and shoulder strength, flexibility and mobility.* They stretch through your torso, particularly if you swing from side to side, improving your stomach and core strength. * They are great for your grip strength, your fingers and forearms. * And holding the position for extended periods is probably good for your determination too.So get a pull up bar. The ones you hang in your doorway are you but the ones you put on the wall are better, like this one, and keep hanging every day. At first you’ll only be able to hang for 10, 20 or 30 second, but keep doing it and you’ll quickly increase the time you can hang for.Then you can start hanging in different ways. You can extend the width of your grip. swing, do one-armed hangs. Try and do a couple or three dead hangs a day and they will benefit you in all sorts of unexpected ways, I promise. I can’t think of a physical more beneficial way of spending a couple of minutes than a dead hang. When it finishes you get this rush of pain, this exhilaration through your shoulders.And I’m hoping it finishes pretty soon. Hey, Siri, how long on timer?Hey, Siri, how long on timer?It didn’t set!Tell your friends about this amazing video.Here’s the original weight loss post, in case of interest.Charlie Morris is one of my closest mates and he writes what I think is one of the best investment newsletters out there, in fact a suite of them. I urge you to sign up for a free trial. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

To watch this piece, go to: 1. There are more people in the world than ever - and we all want better livesThere are some 8.2 billion people in the world - more than ever - and, whether it’s people displaced by war, famine, or lack of water, or (the big one) people seeking a better life with more opportunity, more us are on the move than ever.Some stats:4.6 billion live on less than $10/day.7 billion live on less than $40/day. 7 billion!While the number of people in extreme poverty (below $2.15/day) has capitulated in South Asia, East Asia, and the Pacific, it is rising in sub-Saharan Africa.I was interested to know what the global population by ethnicity is (search engines do not make that easy to find out), but, broadly speaking, it looks something like this (obviously there are lots of mixed race people):* Asian (Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc.): ~3.2 billion / 43%* Indian (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka): ~1.5 billion / 20%* Black African: ~1.4 billion / 19%* White European: ~750 million / 10%* Middle Eastern (Arab, Persian, Kurd, Turk, etc.): ~500 million / 7%* Amerindian (North and South America): ~100 million / 1%* Pacific Islander: ~12.5 million / 0.2%Visualised:Though this is rapidly changing with Asian growth, the majority of the world’s wealth lies in the predominantly white (for the time being) countries of Western Europe and North America. There are a gazillion different reasons put forward as to why this might be, which differ according to worldview, ranging from slavery to IQ to system of rule. Regardless of what the reason is, Western Europe and North America have become the prime destinations for migrants. That is where the money is. Language is a huge and overlooked factor too. Most people around the world speak some English. If the migrant speaks German, they might prefer Germany, but English is more widespread, and that means greater numbers will favour the Anglo-Saxon nations.But the population of Western Europe is less than 200 million, 265 million if you include the UK. The population of the U.S. is 345 million. We are tiny in the global context.The difference in the weight of numbers is staggering. (Another good stat for you: more people are born in Nigeria each year than in all of Europe).2. Modern transportationBecause of planes, trains, and automobiles, not to mention boats (fossil fuels and engines, basically), people are able to travel further and faster than ever before.Forget Around the World in 80 Days, itself a miracle in 1872 when the Jules Verne story was published, now, it’s almost (not quite) possible to get around the world in 24 hours.Meanwhile, the days of the medieval serf, who was tied to his land and not allowed to travel, are long gone (for the most part—there are bits of Africa and Asia where you are still tied).3. Modern mediaMedia and communication are more advanced than ever. Whether it’s TV, film, or, most crucially, social media, the whole world is able to see how the other half lives. As of 2023, there are approximately 6.8 billion smartphone users worldwide, representing about 85% of the global population.This has increased awareness of better lives to be had, and it has stoked desire. Modern communication has also enabled travellers to exchange information on how to move.So you have:* more people than ever* better transport than ever* more awareness than ever * more desire than ever.That is why the mass movement of people is now at levels never before seen in history. That is also why it is only going to increase.This is a point that nobody in a position of influence in the media or politics seems to be making. Global migration levels are not going down. They are going up.So instead of brushing the issue under the carpet and calling people racist, immigration is a conversation we need to be having.What is the plan in the face of migration levels that are inevitably going to increase? Do we want more people? Fewer people? More of certain types of people? What is the optimum number of people? Who are the optimum people? People with certain qualifications? People from certain cultures—Judeo-Christian/Muslim/Buddhist/Hindu? People of certain ethnicities? Must they pass wealth tests, skills tests, IQ tests, values tests? What?How can this all be agreed? By referendum? By poll?And once agreed (fat chance), how can it all be ensured?Spoiler: it won’t be. We are not even going to properly talk about, let alone do anything. At least not until it’s too late (if it isn’t already).Instead, we will see the further South Africanisation of everything, and yet more internal division while these issues of immigration continue unaddressed.If you are young, I really wouldn’t hang about. There is a whole world out there. I’d go and be a migrant yourself.Until next time, DominicLooking to buy gold in these uncertain times? Then check out my recent report, and look no further than my recommended bullion dealer, the Pure Gold Company. Premiums are low, quality of service is high, and you get to deal with a human being who knows their stuff.On the subject of the recent protests, you might find this of interest: why I think they will achieve very little:Finally, Charlie Morris is one of my closest mates and he writes what I think is one of the best investment newsletters out there, in fact a suite of them. I urge you to sign up for a free trial. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comIMPORTANT: somebody has been impersonating me on here and asking readers to message them on WhatsApp. Obviously it is not me. Don’t engage. Stop engaging and block, if you have started. And DON’T send any money.I am now at the Edinburgh Fringe with Shaping the Earth, a “lecture with funny bits” about the history of mining. The show is going great guns. I’m then taking it to London on October 9th and 10th to the Museum of Comedy. Please come if you fancy a bit of “learning and laughter”. The Edinburgh link is here. And the London link is here.But today, just as the title suggests, I am going to explain the extraordinary volatility we have seen in markets all over the world this week. I’ll then look at what we should be doing next. What should we do with our gold/bitcoin/oil and gas/equities and all the rest of our holdings?The trigger for all of this lies in the Land of the Rising Sun.The Japanese yen has been undervalued for a long time. For the first time, perhaps in my living memory, Japan has become a cheap—well, not super expensive—country to visit. Against the dollar, pound, and euro, then yen was at multi-decade lows.The main reason for the weak yen is Japanese monetary policy. The Japanese central bank has suppressed rates for many years in an effort to stimulate the Japanese economy. It hasn’t worked, but like so many policymakers, when confronted with a failed policy, the reaction is not to change tack but to double down. In 2016, rates actually went negative.But even as the rest of the world raised rates to try and counter the inflation that came post-COVID, Japan kept them low, creating quite the differential.Until last week, Japan had only raised rates once in 17 years—by 0.25% in March.Here are 15 years of the yen against the US dollar so you can see just how weak the currency had got.Talk about a long-term bear market.This situation created what is known as the Yen Carry Trade. You borrow in yen, pay a very low rate of interest, and then use the money to buy other assets that pay a better yield. It might be other currencies, bonds, equities, or even cryptocurrencies.Let’s say you borrow at below 1% and buy a government bond in another currency that yields 5%. The arbitrage is pretty generous, and the risk is very low. Borrow at below 1% and buy something like an S&P 500 tracker, which might grow by 10-15%, and the rewards are handsome.The longer this situation has gone on, the more capital has gone into this trade, and the greater the risk taken on. Not unlike the British riots (too much immigration for too long when nobody voted for it), this has been a powder keg waiting to blow for a long time. All that was required was the spark.

I am now at the Edinburgh Fringe with Shaping the Earth, a “lecture with funny bits” about the history of mining. I’m then taking the show to London on October 9th and 10th to the Museum of Comedy. Please come if you fancy a bit of “learning and laughter”. The Edinburgh link is here. And the London link is here.ALSOIMPORTANT: somebody has been impersonating me on here and asking readers to message them on WhatsApp. Obviously it is not me. Don’t engage. Stop engaging and block, if you have started. And DON’T send any money.“They don't give you gold medals for beating somebody. They give you gold medals for beating everybody.” Michael Johnson, sprinterWhy do Olympic winners bite their gold medals? The short answer is: for no other reason than a photographer just told them to. But the tradition of biting gold goes back a long way.You might have seen pirates in movies biting their coins too. While such hard-toothed individuals might inspire excitement in modern audiences, ordinary merchants and traders, indeed anyone handling money, used to bite their coins too: it was a rude test of the purity of the metal. Prospectors in the 19th-century gold rushes also used this method to differentiate between real gold and fool’s gold? As well as scraping (to look for plate) or indenting to test softness, biting might involve a little bending too, using the teeth as a clamp to bend against. If the metal is soft and malleable, it was likely pure gold or silver. Hard and brittle, it could indicate that the coin was counterfeit or mixed with other metals. Too soft, however, and the coin was likely lead, coated with gold, a common counterfeit in the 19th century. (Lead is softer than gold). The method might expose crude forgeries, but it would by no means have been foolproof. Copper was added to gold coins from the Tudor period onwards, which would have made them harder, and the bite test that much less reliable, though in Mediaeval times biting might have worked better. Coins, such as Florence’s florin, the standard of the day, were 24 carat, thin, and relatively soft. The bite test might have exposed forgeries.Weighing is more effective, and any merchant would have a set of scales, though perhaps not a pirate. The stamp of the issuer, ideally a reputable royal, also went a long way to certifying authenticity. For the prospectors of the gold rushes, however, who only required a simple differentiation between actual and fool’s gold, the bite test would have been more dependable. We have always used our bodies to measure things.Looking to buy gold in these uncertain times? Then check out my recent report, and look no further than my recommended bullion dealer, the Pure Gold Company. Premiums are low, quality of service is high, and you get to deal with a human being who knows their stuff.What are gold medals made of?Today’s Olympic winners needn’t bother biting their gold. The last time an Olympic gold medal was made of solid gold was over a hundred years ago in 1912 in Stockholm.The gold medals at the 1896 Olympics in Athens, when the Games were first revived, did not contain any gold. They were made of silver and gilded with a thin layer of gold. The same happened at Paris in 1900.Things perked up for the athletes in 1904 at the St. Louis Olympics, when the gold medals were made of 12-karat gold (50% gold, 50% copper). There was a considerable upgrade in 1908 in London, when the gold medals were 22-karat gold, weighing almost an ounce (25g). This proved the peak. (Just as it was probably Britain’s peak too). There were 109 gold medals handed out. That’s over 100 ounces. Expensive!Steady debasement followed. At the 1912 Stockholm Olympics the gold medals were 18-karat gold. From 1920 in Antwerp onwards, the medals were back to gilded silver.Today the International Olympic Committee stipulates that modern Olympic gold medals must weigh at least 500 grams, and contain at least 6g of gold. Olympic gold medals remain largely of silver (93%), copper (6%), plated with about 6 grams of (a bit more than a 1/5 ounce) of gold. A gold medal is thus roughly 1% gold.  At the 2022 Olympics in Tokyo, the metals to make the medals came from a recycling initiative. The Japanese handed in nearly 80,000 tonnes of electrical gadgets, including laptops, digital cameras, gaming devices and 6 million phones. The appliances yielded 32kg/1,000 ounces of gold, 3,500 kg/113,000 ounces of silver and 2,200kg of copper. (There is, I learn, about eighty times as much gold in one tonne of cellphones than there is a typical tonne of rock at a gold mine). All 5,000 medals were made from the recycled materials, which were identified using Vanta X-ray fluorescence analyzers, which can identify metals and accurately determine their karat value in a matter of seconds.Until next time,DominicCharlie Morris is one of my closest mates and he writes what I think is one of the best investment newsletters out there, in fact a suite of them. I urge you to sign up for a free trial. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

Good Sunday afternoon to you,I was blown away by the response to Wednesday’s article about weight loss. The Twitter/X summary got more than 10 million views. Here it is, in case you missed it. Going forward, I am thinking of writing more alternative health stuff, as there seems to be a huge appetite for it. But today it’s business as usual: gold. And I have a question for you …The Great Steppe stretches approximately 5,000 miles from the Pacific coast of China through Mongolia, Siberia, Xinjiang, Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine, and Romania, reaching the Danube Delta and Hungary.Vast stretches of grassland, savanna, and shrubland—harsh and dry, devoid of trees and large vegetation—are sandwiched between forests to the north and mountains and deserts to the south. This region has connected Central Europe, Eastern Europe, Western Asia, Central Asia, East Asia, and South Asia since the Paleolithic Age, serving as a predecessor to the Silk Road and the Eurasian land bridge.This ocean of grass is one of the world’s largest ecosystems. Many remarkable species—elk, gazelle, brown bear, leopard, and tiger—have made it their home. So have many great nomadic empires—the Xiongnu, the Scythians, the Mongols, the Huns, and the Göktürk Khaganate—all famous for their ferocity, horsemanship, and military might.The open space gives rise to mighty extremes of weather—howling winds, unbearable heat by day, and freezing cold by night. Humans could only survive by breeding creatures—goats, sheep, camels, and cattle—even hardier than themselves. Of all of these, perhaps the most essential to human survival and evolution was the horse.The horse was first domesticated on the Steppe about 6,000 years ago, probably by the Botai people in present-day Kazakhstan. Their horses—likely similar to today’s Mongolian horse—were small, stocky, and hardy, able to travel long distances in trying conditions. The horse enabled tribes to guide their flocks over large distances as they searched for new grazing lands. It facilitated trade and exchange, and allowed them to form huge and terrifying armies.The fearsome Scythians were the first to use horses in battle, carrying stones, clubs, and bows as weapons. These marauding armies inspired fear. Their warriors were such brilliant horsemen that it seemed they and their horses were one creature, giving rise to the Greek myth of the centaur: wild, untamed, and violent; strong, fast, and ferocious; drunken, lawless, and lustful, with the upper body of a man and the lower body of a horse.The Greeks had a complicated relationship with the Scythians, both admiring and fearing them. Chiron, one of the centaurs famous for his wisdom and knowledge of medicine, tutored many of the greatest Greek heroes, including Hercules, Achilles, and Jason. Perhaps the Greeks exaggerated their barbarity to contrast it with their own sophistication and culture.In any case, while the centaur has endured in myth, it was not long before it was realized that man and beast were not one, and the practice of horse-riding spread beyond the Great Steppe. The horse became the primary mode of land transport for thousands of years.You really should subscribe.Then the Industrial Revolution came along. The first steam locomotive was developed in England in 1804. By the mid-19th century, railroads had become the primary mode of transportation for people and goods across much of the world. It was the beginning of the end for horses as a primary mode of transportation.In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the automobile emerged. “Horseless carriages,” they were called. Karl Benz developed the first gasoline-powered car in 1885. By the early 1900s, cars had become a common sight on many roads, further diminishing the need for horses.Inventor Alexander Winton sought investment for his Winton Motor Carriage Company. “Get a horse!” a banker told him. “You’re crazy if you think this fool contraption you’ve been wasting your time on will ever displace the horse.”Winton continues:“From my pocket, I took a clipping from the New York World of November 17, 1895, and asked him to read it. He brushed it aside. I insisted. It was an interview with Thomas A. Edison: ‘Talking of horseless carriages suggests to my mind that the horse is doomed… Ten years from now you will be able to buy a horseless vehicle for what you would pay today for a wagon and a pair of horses. The money spent in the keep of the horses will be saved and the danger to life will be much reduced.’”The banker threw back the clipping and snorted, “Another inventor talking.”Today, the horse is, for the most part, an expensive luxury. Its use is often just symbolic.How does this relate to goldHere is my question:Could you say the same about gold?The horse was transport for 6,000 years. It was transport for almost as long as gold was official money. It was “natural transport.”But just as transport changes as technology evolves, so does money.Perhaps gold is to money as the horse is to transport?Something to ponder this Sunday afternoon.(SPOILER: I don’t think it is!)Tell your friends about this amazing article. As from later this week I will be at the Edinburgh Fringe, performing Shaping the Earth, a “lecture with funny bits” about the history of mining. I’m then taking the show to London on October 9th and 10th to the Museum of Comedy. Please come if you fancy a bit of “learning and laughter”. The Edinburgh link is here. And the London link is here.Plus:Charlie Morris is one of my closest mates and he writes what I think is one of the best investment newsletters out there, in fact a suite of them. I urge you to sign up for a free trial. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

In the last few years, I have gone from this to this. I’ve written about my weight loss before, but, just in the last two or three months, something has really accelerated, and I’m not quite sure what.I’m now 54. I’ve suddenly got a six-pack. Well, sort of. A four-pack. I’ve lost 48 pounds (22 kg). My metabolic age has come down from 57 (when I was 51) to 49. I am super fit and bursting with energy.Even at the age of 22, when I had just left drama school and won a British Open Martial Arts Tournament (BOMAT 1991 - I’ve got the trophy somewhere if you don’t believe me), I don’t think I was nearly as defined. I’m the same welter weight as I was then too.What’s the secret? There isn’t one. I’d love to say this was all deliberate, but really, it has happened by accident. I was overweight, started fasting to lose weight, and it spiralled from there. Normally, I put the weight back on, but this time it’s not only stayed off, but I have lost more weight and got into better shape.I thought I should describe some of my habits here, in case you find them beneficial. I don’t think it is one thing that has done it. I think it is the aggregation of everything.So here we go: 12 habits to transform your health. If you are interested in following me down this route, don’t try and do all of these at once. Do one, then gradually add others. Baby steps …1. FastDo the 5:2 diet. It takes effort, but it works. It is probably the single most effective thing you can do to lose weight. Fasting brings mental clarity too. Watch videos, listen to podcasts, read, indoctrinate yourself, then do it. After a while, you look forward to the feeling of being hungry and the good feeling you get after: I call the morning after a fast the inverted hangover because you feel so good.2. Avoid Seed OilsBy seed oils, I mean all the industrial oils that have only entered our diet in the last 50 or so years and that human beings were never supposed to eat - vegetable oil, sunflower oil, rapeseed oil, canola oil, palm oil - all that stuff. These things were invented to be industrial oils, and they’ve made their way into our food supply and they are poison. Why is obesity such a problem? Look no further than seed oils for your answer. 100 years ago, Americans got zero calories from seed oils; now they make up a third of their daily intake. In this case, correlation is causation. Things like olive oil, butter, tallow, and coconut oil are fine. Seed oils are in everything. Assume what you are considering eating contains seed oil and only eat it when you have ascertained that it doesn’t.Tell someone you know about this.3. Dead HangsI think these might have been the transformer, as I’ve only been doing them a few months. Get a pull-up bar. You can get ones that you hang in your doorway or, better, get one outside for your garden and hang from it. At first, you will only be able to hang for a short time, but keep hanging every day so that eventually you can hang for two minutes. Then do two two-minute hangs per day. I only started doing dead hangs to cure my various neck ailments (too much computer), but they have had all sorts of unintended, beneficial side effects. They improve your posture, they stretch out all the evils of sitting in front of a screen all day, they sort out your neck problems, your shoulder problems, they stretch through your torso. I can’t think of a more physically beneficial way of spending two minutes than a dead hang.4. Get a Whoop Whoop is a health and fitness tracker watch which focuses on sleep and recovery. I got one to improve my sleeping habits. Sleep is the new exercise, as I’m sure you know. It measures, among other things, heart rate variability (HRV), which plummets when you drink. You then get a big red warning which puts you off drinking. The unintended consequence, then, of getting a whoop was that my alcohol consumption has gone from having a couple of drinks or more most days - half a bottle of wine a day kind of stuff - to almost zero. I now crave not drinking. It’s not just the calories in alcohol, it’s the bad decisions you make after drinking, particularly late-night bingeing. Not drinking also improves sleep and general health. I did not plan to give up booze. I like booze. I love beer. I love wine. I like drinking. If you told me I had to give up drinking, I would’ve said no. But that’s what happens when you get a Whoop. So get a Whoop. Plus your sleeping habits improve too.5. Have a partner you want to look good forI had one - now sadly no more - but I’m sure it made me generally up my physical game. She was also extremely health-conscious and got me into all sorts of good habits. It helps to have a partner with whom you can eat well and exercise well. It makes you accountable too.Sometimes splitting up with someone you like or love can be great for your weight too. Maybe that’s what happened to me!You really should subscribe to this wonderful publication.6. Cider vinegarIt’s better for you than Ozempic. It’s cheaper than Ozempic and it reduces your appetite. More here on the glories of cider vinegar.7. SupplementsI’ve gone from taking zero supplements to taking so many so that I don’t know which ones are actually doing good. But I’m pretty sure Tongkat Ali and Fadogia Agrestis have had an impact. I sometimes think the act of taking supplements is more effective than the supplements themselves.8. WaterDon’t know if it did anything, but I stopped drinking tap water where possible and only try to drink mineral water. (Next worry is microplastics).9. ExerciseI try to do some form of exercise every day, and I mix it up between cardio, stretching, and weights. I probably could do more weights: I only do one session per week with some dumbbells at home. I need to join a gym. I find cycling good because it doesn’t hurt your joints. When I run, I usually only run two or three miles, but I live near a steep hill, so I do four 30-second sprints up the hill at the end. I play a bit of tennis and a bit of footy. Swimming is also good, but I don’t like chlorine, so that is more of an occasional summer pastime when I can do it outside .10. Two meals a dayDo you really need three? Skip breakfast, have an early lunch, and go to bed early. And no seed oils.11. 15 Minutes of Sun The first thing I do every morning is drink a pint of water, make myself a cup of tea, then go and sit in the garden for 15 minutes and get some sunshine. This is supposed to help regulate your circadian rhythms and sleeping habits. I have been getting to sleep much more easily since I did this. Even if it’s cloudy and it’s winter, go and sit outside for 15 minutes first thing in the morning.12. Count CaloriesI have only just started counting my calories using the Calorie Counter app. The thought of putting your calories into this every time you eat deterred me from doing it sooner - yet more time on my wretched phone - but I’m actually quite enjoying it and I keep it probably 85 or 90% accurately. Eating discipline definitely improves if you get one. Ultimately, losing weight is basic maths: fewer calories in than out, and you lose weight. Net immigration is the same.Share this with your friends.A Bruce-y Bonus. Learn to stand up from the ground without using your handsThis is supposed to be an indicator of longevity. A few months ago I was hopeless. I could barely stand up from a yoga block. But now I can do it. Here’s the proof.So there you go. I hope this helps. As I say, don’t try to do everything at once. You can’t. Baby steps. This is a case of the power of incremental gains and compounding.Diet is the most important thing. If you don’t get that right, it doesn’t matter how much you exercise. You can’t outrun a bad diet.Until next time,DominicPS Don’t forget the mining show - the Edinburgh link is here. And the London link is here.Plus - Charlie Morris is one of my closest mates and he writes what I think is one of the best investment newsletters out there, in fact a suite of them. I urge you to sign up for a free trial. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comIMPORTANT: somebody has been impersonating me on here and asking readers to message them on WhatsApp. Obviously it is not me. Don’t engage. Stop engaging and block, if you have started. And DON’T send any money.It’s a question that comes up a lot. In fact, a friend was asking me just this week, so let’s try and resolve it here and now, once and for all: gold or silver - which should you buy?Full disclosure: in my own portfolio at one stage I was geared as much as 70% towards silver and 30% towards gold. But in 2011, when silver went to $50, I rolled into gold and never went back. My physical allocation is now probably something like 90% gold and 10% silver.(For clarity’s sake: we are not talking about mining companies - these are a different kettle of fish altogether - just physical metal).Make no mistake: silver has a great deal more potential than gold. There is every possibility that the silver price could triple or quadruple from today’s price just below $30/oz. It could even go to $200. But my experience of 20 years investing in silver is that if it can find a way of disappointing, it will. The out-and-out silver bugs all scream manipulation, and maybe the silver market is manipulated and repressed. For sure, if all the longs on the futures exchanges were to hold out for delivery, the silver price would go shooting up. There is not the physical supply to deliver on all the contracts. That applies to many commodities, though none, it seems, consistently to the same extent as silver. But why invest in something if forces stronger than you are repressing it?It is unlikely, meanwhile, that gold will triple or quadruple from today’s price of $2,300/oz unless we enter into some kind of currency crisis or extreme inflation.Then again, the silver price could easily halve from $30/oz. I don’t think a 50% correction in gold is likely, outside of some deflationary financial panic or liquidity crisis such as we saw with COVID in 2020. In any case, any such correction would be temporary.Reasons to Buy SilverMy friend was told to buy silver because the silver-to-gold ratio at 80 is high and should come lower. Let’s consider that argument.There is 15 times as much silver in the earth’s crust as there is gold, and throughout all of history, the monetary ratio between the two reflected natural supply. Fifteen silver coins got you a gold coin.But silver stopped being used as money in the late 19th century. The many gold rushes of the period increased gold supply so that most countries around the world followed Britain’s model and adopted pure gold standards (more on this here). By 1900, China was the only major country in the world on a bi-metallic standard, which included silver. Every other nation was on gold.In my lifetime, the silver-to-gold ratio has only once gone back to its natural levels of 15, and that was in 1980 for an afternoon, when the Hunt brothers’ attempt to corner the silver market reached its climax. The reality is that the silver-to-gold ratio has been gradually getting higher for a generation now, averaging between 50 and 85, though going above or below those levels at times of market extremity. In 2020, it went to 125.Reality check - this is a long-term uptrend.I accept that the silver-to-gold ratio “should” be 15. In fact, perhaps it should be even lower because silver gets consumed, while gold does not. But in practice, I don’t think that ratio will ever go to 15 in my lifetime, certainly not for any extended period.The other argument that my friend was given to buy silver instead of gold was that silver has many industrial uses. This is indeed the case. It has many more than gold, even if gold’s biggest source of demand is jewellery. (More on gold’s industrial uses here).Gold’s use throughout history has been to store or display wealth. Silver’s has been to exchange it. Silver no longer has that use, nor is it likely to. We don’t use metal as a medium of exchange anymore, nor are we likely to. Money is digital.Gold is the store of value, not silver, which is expensive and bulky to store. Gold is the constant.We don’t buy gold to become millionaires. We buy gold to protect the value of what we have already earned. Gold will continue to do that. Silver might not.Silver is much more speculative. It has the potential to earn you more money than gold, but it also has the potential to lose you more than gold.Why not own a bit of both?Where to buy gold or silver?I’ve used many bullion dealers over the years. The dealer I like most, and with whom I have an affiliation deal, is the Pure Gold Company. Premiums are low. Quality of service is high. You get to deal with a human being. You can take delivery of your gold or store it online with them in their vaults. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe. (If you speak to them, tell them I sent you). I also like Goldcore.Why are you buying gold or silver?Are you buying precious metals because you think fiat money is going to collapse and, in this hyper-inflationary scenario, you’re suddenly going to become a multimillionaire, sweeping up assets at bargain basement prices because you own precious metals? Or are you buying them because you think the purchasing power of fiat will continue to erode over the next 10 or 20 years and you want to protect what you have?If your purpose is speculation and you want to get rich, then maybe silver or silver options are a way to do that, or silver mining companies, or even gold mining companies or cryptocurrencies. Maybe even silver itself. But they are all also means to get poor.But if your purpose is simply to protect what you have earned, then gold is the way.There is a definite case for both. But understand why you are buying the metal and be truthful with yourself as to why you’re buying it. That will give you the answer between gold and silver.In the end, I recommended my friend buy 75% gold and 25% silver. I have to say, at $30, the silver price looks a bit frothy to me and it could correct. My ambivalence towards silver is long-standing.But I don’t think my friend is going to listen to me. I think he’s gone 100% gold and that makes a lot of sense.If your purpose is protection, insurance, and safety, then gold is the way.If your purpose is speculation and something more aggressive, then silver.My Biggest Silver PositionOn the subject of silver mining, I thought I should give you a quick update on the silver company that represents one of my largest mining positions and certainly my largest position in a silver mining company.

I am bringing my Edinburgh Fringe “lecture with funny bits” about the history of mining to London on October 9th and 10th to the Museum of Comedy. Please come if you fancy a bit of “learning and laughter”. The Edinburgh link is here. And the London link is here.Let’s start with an overview of gold demand as it currently stands.Never mind central banks, investment banks, or private investors—almost 50% of annual gold demand comes from the jewellery industry. It is, by some margin, the single largely buyer of gold. Another 23% is investment demand, and 21%—last year at least—came from central banks. Just 6% of demand is industrial (excluding jewellery, of course).Jewellery, investment, and central bank demand have all been increasing in recent years. However, a change in macroeconomic circumstances could easily mean, for example, that central banks become net sellers. It's not like it hasn't happened before. But, while de-dollarisation remains a growing theme, I do not see that as likely for several years at least. Similarly, investment demand could easily shrink. Jewellery demand is more constant, and it increases when people feel rich and decreases when they don’t.Gold’s main use has always been and will always be to store and display wealth—in other words, investment and jewellery. Technological demand is rather at the margin, but might we see demand growth there? Let’s investigate. Interestingly, one huge potential increase in demand will come, ironically perhaps since that is where gold came from, at the final frontier in outer space.At the Final Frontier - Also On Your PhoneBoth silver and copper are better conductors of electricity than gold, but gold is more resistant to corrosion and oxidation. Therefore, it finds considerable use in electronics as a coating, especially where long-term stability is important. It is used to cover connectors, switches, and relay contacts; in printed circuit boards, microprocessors, and memory chips. This resistance means it finds considerable use in both aerospace and outer space, where it is used to coat satellite components and spacecraft. It can reflect infrared radiation and protect craft from overheating—especially important in the wild temperature fluctuations of outer space. It is also used in the heat shields which protect sensitive equipment from high temperatures during re-entry into Earth's atmosphere. The umbilical cord that binds an astronaut to their spacecraft is plated with gold. The visors of astronaut helmets are plated with gold to protect their eyes from harmful ultraviolet radiation. The MOXIE (Mars Oxygen In-Situ Resource Utilization Experiment) instrument, which forms part of NASA’s Mars exploration programme, is plated with gold. Its purpose is to create oxygen from carbon dioxide, effectively replicating the role of plants on Earth, so that a human mission to Mars can one day take place.Ultimately, gold’s permanence is the fundamental reason for its use. You need durable materials. When you send a spacecraft to outer space, you can’t repair it. This usage is not yet significant enough to radically alter gold demand, but that could change, and quite dramatically so, as space exploration increases.At the 2022 Olympics in Tokyo, the metals to make the medals came from a recycling initiative. The Japanese handed in nearly 80,000 tonnes of electrical gadgets, including laptops, digital cameras, gaming devices and 6 million phones. The appliances yielded 32kg/1,000 ounces of gold and 3,500 kg/113,000 ounces of silver. There is, I learn, about eighty times as much gold in one tonne of cellphones than there is a typical tonne of rock at a gold mine. Increased high tech means increased gold demand, but perhaps not enough to effect the price.Optics and Other High Tech UsesGold's reflective properties, combined with its stability, mean it finds use in optics—in lenses and mirrors, especially space telescopes, to reflect infrared light. Gold plates the mirrors of the celebrated James Webb telescope, the largest optical telescope in space, to optimise the mirrors’ function, allowing it to view objects too old, distant, or faint for the Hubble Space Telescope. For example, the first stars, the formation of the first galaxies, and the detailed atmospheric characterization of potentially habitable exoplanets.There is a Canadian company, Totenpass, which has been developing some interesting gold tech, also related to gold’s longevity: “a permanent digital storage drive constructed from solid gold that requires no energy and has no movable parts. Digital data is written onto the drive by way of a proprietary light-diffraction process which imprints images, documents, and other files that can be stored as either human readable without the aid of computers or machine-readable with the employment of a smartphone. This technology allows for the permanent storage of precious digital data, thereby eliminating any future dependence on the internet and the vast amounts of energy required presently to store content. By consequence, this technology will empower both individuals and corporations to decentralize, preserve and fully control their precious digital data once and forever.” Here, it seems, is a very modern application for the extraordinary permanence of gold.If you are interested in buying gold, check out my recent report. I have a feeling it is going to come in very handy.My recommended bullion dealer is the Pure Gold Company.Gold is being used increasingly in nanotechnology. Gold nanoparticles are used in photonics (the science of light waves), especially in the development of light-based technologies for imaging and sensors. Gold's inertness makes it an excellent material for nanoparticles used as catalysts in various chemical reactions. For instance, gold nanoparticles are employed in the oxidation of carbon monoxide in air purification systems. Researchers are also exploring gold's potential as a catalyst to improve renewable energy efficiency and solar cells. Again, its conductivity and resistance to oxidation make it ideal for nanoscale electronic components.Gold is like the sun: it can kill but it can cureAs for the medical industry, gold and healing have a long, intertwined history. Gold was associated with the sun gods who bestowed health and vitality, or “helped the body produce vitamin D,” as we might put it today. (More and more health benefits from vitamin D are being discovered today, especially bone health and immune function). The Egyptian God of the Sun, Ra, the giver of life, was made of gold. Gold was the flesh of the gods. It symbolised health as well as eternal life. Apollo, the Greek God of the Sun, was often depicted with gold, and he was also the God of Healing, and father of Asclepius, the god of medicine.Gold nanoparticles are used today in medical diagnostics and treatments, including targeted drug delivery and cancer therapy, because they can be easily detected and manipulated. Additionally, gold's biocompatibility ensures it does not provoke an immune response, making it suitable for use in various biomedical applications. In 2013, researchers found that gold nanoparticles reduced the ability of HIV to reproduce and infect new cells.It is becoming one of the weapons in the battle against malaria. Of the hundreds of millions of malaria tests sold each year, many contain gold: gold nanoparticles bind with specific malaria antigens, which help quick and accurate detection of the disease. The test results can be ready in 15 minutes.Golden BuildingsGold nanoparticles also find use in occasional building materials to enhance strength and thermal regulation. Coating glass with gold can reflect the sun's heat in summer while bouncing internal heat back into rooms in winter, resulting in substantial energy savings. It is corrosion resistant too, which increases longevity.But the main reason for its use in building is opulence. On the facades of buildings, gold will give your building unique and striking appeal. Toronto’s Royal Bank Plaza, the Grand Lisboa hotel and casino in Macau, and Al Yaqoub Tower in Dubai are all notable examples, as is Trump International Hotel and Tower in Las Vegas: its gleaming gold-tinted glass makes it stand out even on the Las Vegas Strip. The golden domed St. Michael’s Cathedral in Kiev is also a stunning example. To use gold on a roof or facade is extravagant but perhaps not as extravagant as you might think: an ounce of gold will cover up to 1,000 square feet (90 square metres) in gold plate and it brings substantial savings. Internally, gold also finds occasional decorative use: gilded furniture, fixtures and wall decorations, such as seen at the Burj Al Arab hotel in Dubai, which makes extensive use of gold leaf in its interior design.ConclusionAll in all, exciting stuff, but none of this demand will be enough to significantly affect the price of gold. In most cases, we are talking about plate and nanoparticles. If every roof were to be coated in gold as part of some green energy initiative ordered by the government, or space travel were suddenly to get extremely popular, then I might change my mind, but neither scenario is imminent. The main source of gold demand will be what demand has always been: as a store and display of value. Jewellery and investment, in other words.Until next time,Charlie Morris is one of my closest mates and he writes what I think is one of the best investment newsletters out there, in fact a suite of them. I urge you to sign up for a free trial. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

Over the last decade, the Turkish lira has seen declines of more than 95% against the US dollar. It took just ₺1.50 to buy it dollar ten years ago. Now it takes ₺33. The lira has been one of the world’s worst-performing currencies - and in a fiat world, that is saying something - rivalled only by the Venezuelan bolivar and the Argentinian peso.While in Istanbul last week, I spoke to two young professionals, Emre, 25, and İlker, 27, about life under the lira. Both are bright, articulate, and empathetic young men who speak three languages fluently - English, German, and Turkish - as well as competent French.Given that the currency has been so bad, I was expecting to see more widespread use of foreign money, but in fact, lira are changing hands everywhere - you see people all over the place with wads of them. “You have to use lira,” they explained. “It is the national currency.” Even with such dire inflation, there is still trade. The economy still functions, albeit badly. (That said everything in the airports was denominated in euros).Food, energy, travel, housing, consumer goods - everything has gone up in price, but, surprise, surprise, wages have not gone up by nearly as much. The result is that ordinary people have been impoverished.“The average wage in Istanbul is about £650 per month,” they told me. (One thing that impressed me was how immediately they could translate the lira into pounds, dollars, or euros).“What about the receptionist in my hotel or a waiter?”“Maybe £500. A taxi driver working all hours, maybe £800.”With those kinds of earnings, it is hard to make ends meet. “That’s why everybody wants to meet a tourist,” they smiled in reply.“What do you do?” I asked. “Do you spend money as soon as you have it? Before it loses purchasing power?”“Yes,” they said. “There is no point saving. When we were students a few years ago, you could save for maybe three years and buy a car. Now it would take you 20 years. There is no point saving in lira. We spend the money as soon as we have it.”“Even on stupid things,” added Emre, pointing to his Casio watch. “You may as well.”Everyone is the same, apparently. They spend as soon as they earn. There is no point saving a currency that will soon be worth less. The rates of interest paid do not compensate, especially given that you usually have to tie your money up for one, two, or three years to obtain decent rates, and the inflation risk of doing that is too great.Interest rates have been quite the issue in Turkey, by the way. Mainstream Islamic finance prohibits interest, something they claimed Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan exploited. Until 2023 Erdoğan kept a lid on rates (they are now 50%), arguing that high rates cause inflation. He repeatedly replaced central bank governors who resisted low rates.“How do people save?” I asked.“Gold,” came the answer straight away. Everyone who can buys gold, even tiny amounts below a gram.“Silver?” I asked.“Not so much.”I asked them if they use Revolut or similar to hold foreign currencies. They had no idea what Revolut was (probably a good thing, given what can happen), but it seems most banks also offer the ability to hold euros, pounds, and dollars, and so citizens tend to convert their lira as quickly as they can.“What about bitcoin?”“Not really,” they said. “Some young people.”I was surprised by that. I saw a few adverts for bitcoin-related products out there. But apparently gold is more common.“What about saving up to buy a house?”They both laughed at the impossibility. And there isn’t even a lot of debt in the Turkish housing market. Mortgages, as we know them in the West, don’t really exist, though there are ways to borrow money. Housing is still unaffordable“So people aren’t starting families then?”“No, we can’t. Our population growth is starting to turn negative.”“So you two are not close to starting a family.”They shook their heads sadly. “What do we have to offer?”I felt so sorry for these two young men. Both would be good husbands and fathers.“When people do start families, they rent small flats. Mum works, dad works, grandparents work.”This is something I saw directly. The taxi that met me at the airport had mum and dad in the front and their two kids asleep in the back, while dad continued working into the night.A typical one-bed flat might be about £500 per month. There is not really the same culture of flat-sharing among young professionals that we have in the UK, except maybe for students, and most young people stay with their parents until they marry.I struggled to understand how anyone could make any money in such a situation. All asset owners are doing is protecting their wealth against the currency debasement; they are not actually growing it. “Who’s the richest person in the country?” I wondered.“Erdoğan,” they both said immediately. “Officially, probably the Koç family. They own Fenerbahçe, the football club. But really it is almost certainly Erdoğan.”The state of the currency and the political leadership is no doubt a huge deterrent to foreign investment.What about leaving?, I asked.That is hard too. The routes into Europe are not as easy as they once were. Far fewer Turks now go to Germany, for example. Even just getting a tourist visa can take two years, and the money they earn lasts barely a few days in Europe. Some illegals travel across the Mediterranean and up through Spain, but the US, via Mexico, is now the most common escape. Very expensive. Most are trapped in their own country. What a sad state of affairs. Isn’t fiat money a terrible thing? What it can do to a country and its people, how it can make things so hopeless.The bizarre thing: there is economic activity everywhere. Everyone is hustling. Everyone is working. They all want to better themselves and their lot. People want to trade. That is the natural human way of things. Imagine if it were all underpinned by sound money.If you are interested in buying gold, check out my recent report. I have a feeling it is going to come in very handy.My recommended bullion dealer is the Pure Gold Company. I also like Goldcore.And one other thing:Charlie Morris is one of my closest mates and he writes what I think is one of the best investment newsletters out there, in fact a suite of them. I urge you to sign up for a free trial. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comI started out with the intention of writing just one article on this subject, but it has become three. It’s a big subject … (Here is part one and here is part two, if you are not already up to speed)The latest polls show Labour comfortably in excess of 400 seats, maybe even 500.They are going to have such a thumping majority (with less than 50% of the vote - how crap is first past the post), together with a Blob which, broadly speaking, is theologically aligned, that they are going to be able to do pretty much what they like. There is scope for a lot of invasive government. The socialist mindset does not respect private property. It feels entitled to it. So today I wanted to further explore wealth taxes and what Labour might do, should the socialist-leaning instincts in the party come to the fore during those first 100 days and beyond.Wealth taxes are hard to collectLet us start with the golden rule of taxation, something with which readers of Daylight Robbery, the definitive book on taxation, will be familiar, as articulated by Louis XIV’s minister of finance, Jean-Baptiste Colbert.The art of taxation consists of so plucking the goose as to obtain the most possible feathers with the least possible hissing(If you haven’t read Daylight Robbery - How Tax Shaped Our Past and Will Change Our Future, by the way, I urge you too. I think it’s the best of my books and one of the things I will go to my grave feeling proud of).With that Colbert quote in mind, let us turn to wealth taxes. I’ve often argued that one reason we don’t see as many wealth taxes as you might expect is that, in practical terms, they are not as simple as they might seem. Income Tax works well because it is easy to collect. The employer collects it for the government - and faces harsh penalties if they don’t, so the onus is on them. Ditto VAT: only it is the seller on whom the responsibility to collect falls.Wealth taxes, however, rely on declarations. There is much more scope for non-compliance, whether deliberate or accidental. Say the government wanted to impose a 5% net worth tax. It would have to find out about your real estate, both at home and abroad, and reach a fair valuation for that. It would have to find out about your stocks and bonds, your possessions, your vehicles, your savings, your ISAs, your pensions, your cryptocurrencies, your art, your antiques. Anyone who has ever had to value an estate for Inheritance Tax purposes knows what a headache this is. It can take many months.The government can force banks to collect a lot of this information, and the bank can then get heavy with you, if you don’t comply (this is a route I think we will go), but there is still an awful lot of scope for non-compliance, avoidance, and evasion. Most will be truthful about what they own; but many will not - and hope that HMRC does not have the resources to investigate them properly, which it doesn’t. Many people have valuable things - from antiques to lost bitcoin wallets - that they don’t even know have value or can’t access. Note: I’m not saying a “net worth tax” won’t happen - I’d give it a 50:50 chance - just that they are not quite as easy as they sound. The goose will hiss a lot.That said, I do think that, for sure, we will see changes to wealth reporting requirements, which is a first step in that direction.You really should subscribe to this letter.But if not a net-worth tax, here are some wealth taxes that could quite easily be imposed:* A savings tax. Savings are relatively easy to prove and then tax. Banks are the ally of government here. There is some  £1.5 trillion held in savings accounts in the UK, so there is plenty there to be tapped (though a lot of this is in ISAs, which are supposed to be tax free). Starmer has made noises about ordinary working people not having savings, so I doubt he will have too many qualms about sticking his snout in that particular trough. The complaint is that people have already paid tax on their savings when they earned the money in the first place, plus they pay taxes on the interest.* An equity and bonds holdings tax. Again, relatively easy to prove - banks and brokers to report and collect. I doubt, however, Starmer will tax gilt holdings or remove the CGT exemption on gilts: he will want that particular income tap to remain free-flowing.* Taxes on ISAs. The tax-free goalposts on ISAs can quite easily be changed, and there are a lot of people who have built up large pots, which no doubt Labour will be eying. The £20 grand annual allowance might be reduced or, more likely, there will be a maximum tax-free cap of, say, £100 grand. As to whether they can tax existing holdings, difficult but not impossible.* Tax relief on pension contributions. The sixty grand limit will probably come down and the tax-free lump sum will probably not be quite so tax-free.* An off-shore wealth tax. You have to declare any holdings you have overseas and then pay tax on them. Lots of scope for dispute and non-compliance, of course. Doesn’t mean it won’t happen.* A luxury goods tax. It’s not right that you should be able to afford luxury goods and that others can’t, so we are going to tax them, just as we do alcohol, fuel, and cigarettes.* Exit taxes. A lot of rich people are already leaving, others will follow. Labour will know this. I would not rule out some kind of exit tax, as reader AK pointed out to me. The USA, Canada, Australia, Germany, France, Spain, and Denmark all have exit taxes - in many cases, taxes on unrealised capital gains. (Imagine paying a tax on the gain, not realising it, and that gain turns to a loss. Horrible).If you are interested in buying gold to protect yourself in these frightening times, check out my recent report. I have a feeling it is going to come in very handy.My recommended bullion dealer is the Pure Gold Company. I also like Goldcore.The equalisation of Capital Gains Tax and Income Tax, as mentioned in part two, looks more likely than ever. Wrong, of course. Capital gains are not something most people experience year in year out. For many, they are one-off events on the sale of a major asset or company. But such morals do not enter into it.Similarly, Inheritance Tax is likely to go to 50%, also as mentioned in part two.Angela Rayner has said that Labour is not planning rises to Council Tax “at the moment,” presumably with the permission of the party strategists, though Keir Starmer conspicuously did not rule rises out earlier in the week. As previously outlined, Council Tax is an obvious target because the banding - the prices at which homes are valued - is so out of date (based on 1991 valuations), but the money does not go to central government, which is what Labour would want. Local taxes also tend to create a lot of agro - Colbert’s hissing - which governments prefer to avoid. There is, in addition, the fact that Council Tax rises target the “wrong” people (council taxes tend to be higher in Labour-voting boroughs, which are often less well off, and Labour will not want to tax these people as much as they will the “capitalist classes”). One solution is to levy much higher Council Taxes on the most expensive properties. As with wealth taxes, I’m not saying Council Tax rises are not coming. They probably are, but they are not the prime target. One final thought: thanks to VAT on school fees, there is going to be even more pressure for places at good state schools, which will mean homes in catchment areas will command an even higher premium than they do already. (Labour says it’s going to modernise the curriculum. Oh, God. Is it not modern enough already?)Right, I think that’s your lot on Labour’s tax rises. Look out for pieces in the near future on Turkey’s inflation and the damage it has done to its people (I am actually writing today’s piece from Istanbul); on my picks from the Weird S**t Investment Conference; and I’ve got a great piece coming on wages and gold).If you are in the Edinburgh neck of the woods this August, look out for me at the Edinburgh Fringe. I’ll be performing one of my “lectures with funny bits”. This one is all about the history of mining. As always, I shall be delivering it at Panmure House, where Adam Smith wrote Wealth of Nations. It’s at 2pm most afternoons. You can get tickets here.Condor Gold (CNR.L/COG.TSX)

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comWe have a General Election coming up in the UK, and citizens of this once-great nation want to know how to protect what they have worked for from the incoming Labour Government, which, you can be sure, is going to be sniffing around like a spaniel on luggage in an airport. We now have the Labour Manifesto, so we can start to be a bit more specific than we were in part one of this series. (Here, also, is part three).I stress: this is only the manifesto. There is a long history of governments doing things they didn’t mention in their manifestos or failing to honour manifesto commitments. Roosevelt’s confiscation of Americans’ gold is one example that springs to mind, but that might just be because I have just been writing about it. There are plenty of examples in the UK too, even with the current government - increases to National Insurance, the Covid money splurge, failures on renters’ reform, home building, immigration pledges, social care, and so on. Circumstances change and so will pledges, especially with a Prime Minister who has quite a track record when it comes to changing tack. Do not be surprised by the surprises that are inevitably coming.The broad argument of part one is that the pound will continue to be debased. It will buy you a lot less in five years than it does now. Whether we will see the 33% declines in the pound’s purchasing power we have seen since 2020, I’m not sure, but the way to hedge yourself is to own non-government money - gold and bitcoin.Labour has pledged to “keep mortgage rates low” and to “retain the 2% inflation target,” which means it will keep a lid on interest rates, or try to, especially with official inflation now having come down to 2%. That all furthers my argument that the pound will continue to lose purchasing power.Labour has a gazillion things it wants to spend money on, ranging from Great British Energy to new teachers, breakfast clubs, and increased NHS appointments, so it is going to need low rates. It has also said it plans to move the “current budget into balance” and “ensure debt is falling.” All I can say is good luck with that. No chance. Spending is going to increase, and, even with the inevitable currency debasement, it is going to need to find tax revenue too. That means higher taxes.But higher taxes where? Taxes, relative to GDP, are already at their highest levels since World War Two, and Labour has promised no increases in National Insurance, Income Tax rates, or VAT. It has also pledged to cap corporation tax at 25% throughout the Parliament.Some increased revenue, it says, will come from clamping down on tax avoidance and modernising HMRC. A lot easier said than done.The big unmentionables have been Council Tax, Capital Gains Tax, and Inheritance Tax. All three, I expect, will go up. Council Tax valuation bands are based on 1991 property prices. That is an obvious anachronism to “update,” though council tax goes to local coffers and Labour will be more interested in revenue at the national level. Even so, it is an obvious area of tax revenue growth. Not a lot you can do to avoid it, except move.Inheritance Tax, meanwhile, will not come down and will probably go up. It is, of course, morally wrong to want to pass the wealth you have earned and already paid taxes on to your heirs. Changes will be justified on the grounds of unearned wealth and exploit the politics of envy. The rate could rise to 50%, I suppose, while areas of relief - the seven-year gift rule, perhaps, the relief on main homes - could be removed. All I can say is plan early.Capital Gains Tax, meanwhile, is likely to rise. Starmer has avoided saying it won’t. I expect to see it rise to levels concomitant with Income Tax with similar bands (i.e., 40% above £37k and 45% above £125k). The way to avoid this is by not transacting, which is what most will do unless they really have to, and so the effect of CGT rises will be market atrophy.Labour will also come after your pensions too - there is so much capital there - with those in the private sector likely to take a bigger hit than those in the state.There is also a lot of blurb about the launch of Great British Energy to “harness Britain’s sun, wind and wave energy” with a windfall tax on oil and gas giants. That makes British oil and gas companies uninvestable. It says it will “deliver one hundred percent clean power by 2030,” though we know that clean power is neither clean nor green . They clearly haven’t read their Alex Epstein, and it all means that essential fossil fuel will inevitably get more expensive, and the country will function less well as a result. Labour says it is going to reduce energy bills. Not possible without subsidies somewhere else, and these have to be paid for.The Housing MarketFollowers of Fred Harrison and the 18-year property cycle will note that Britain’s housing market is heading towards a cycle high, with collapse starting in 2026. Perhaps that will be triggered by Labour’s plans. It wants to fix planning and build a lot of social housing - that means a bet on builders and builders’ merchants (Travis Perkins and Vistry, for example) might make sense, at least in the short run. There is a long history of governments failing to deliver on this, and I don’t think Labour has any chance of meeting targets. If it comes anywhere close, it means Britain’s housing stock is about to get even uglier.Labour’s Freedom to Buy scheme, like Help to Buy, is just another means to pump more money into the housing market, and the general drift seems to be to subsidize at the bottom and tax at the top. It has ruled out Capital Gains Tax on your main residence, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see it anyway. Meanwhile, Stamp Duty will continue, even if it means atrophy at the top end of the market. The attack on non-doms will also hit homes at the top end. For homes above £1 million, the costs of moving - high stamp duty especially, more if we get CGT too - just points to stagnation.Meanwhile, I expect the introduction of numerous schemes to protect tenants, which will only drive away landlords and end with higher rental costs.You know that I am a free-market guy, and I dislike on instinct market intervention, subsidy, and all the rest of it. All Labour’s grand plans to encourage investment just reek of crony capitalism to me, so I tend to avoid, but I’ve no doubt that industrialists, who position themselves correctly, might make good money out of them. More on this after the election.My theory used to be this: that in the same way a Conservative Party that was so scared of the left-wing press became a social-democrat party, so will this Labour Government, scared of the right-wing press, end up lurching to the centre-right. I no longer see that. Labour is trying to present itself as centre-left, but the instinct is for government intervention and I see a lot more of it coming. The civil service, the Blob, and the government are theologically aligned and that is not good. It means they can progress their agenda. I’d love to be more optimistic, but, despite Starmer’s purges, there is still a lot of socialist instinct in that party.Bottom line. Taxes are going to go up. Freedom is going to be eroded. The pound is going to lose purchasing power.If you are interested in buying gold, check out my recent report. I have a feeling it is going to come in very handy.My recommended bullion dealer is the Pure Gold Company. I also like Goldcore.Don’t forget Life After the State - Why We Don’t Need Government (2013), my first book, and many readers’ favourite, is now back in print - with the audiobook here: Audible UK, Audible US, Apple Books. I recommend the audiobook ;)And if you are in the Edinburgh neck of the woods this August, look out for me at the Edinburgh Fringe. I’ll be performing one of my “lectures with funny bits”. This one is all about the history of mining. As always, I shall be delivering it at Panmure House, where Adam Smith wrote Wealth of Nations. It’s at 2pm most afternoons. You can get tickets here.Thoughts on Condor Gold

At a drinks party in around 2011 or 2012, I had the ear of Andrew Feldman, aka Baron Feldman of Elstree, former Chairman of the Conservative Party—he of “swivel-eyed loons” fame, though he never actually said that. (Andrew is a friend, by the way.)“Tell George Osborne to buy back the gold Gordon Brown sold,” I advised.“At these prices?” smiled Andrew with a mix of incredulity, amusement, and polite condescension.“Yes!” I said. “It might be good publicity, even. Or do it secretly, and announce it afterward. The important thing is getting the gold back. We will need it at some point. Why not just quantitatively ease the money and buy it back? You’re doing that and buying bonds.”Andrew laughed at my joke, which wasn’t a joke, and then wandered off in search of someone more sane to talk to.Given the government has this extraordinary power to create money out of nothing, why don’t they just print money and buy hard assets with it?Park that thought for a moment.A couple of months ago, I was at Liz Truss’s book launch—aren’t you impressed with all this name-dropping?—and I ran into Mark Littlewood, former director of the IEA and now of PopCon. I started bending his ear about the media’s failure to report on the Bank of England and how it had shafted Truss with its advanced notice of gilt sales, Quantitative Tightening, which began the day before Kwasi Kwarteng’s budget and led to a collapse in the gilt market, the blame for which was then left at Kwasi Kwarteng’s doorstep. Mark nodded. “Do you think I don’t know?” said Liz.“I would love to be able to grill Andrew Bailey in public,” I said. “Or just ask him one question with people watching. I know exactly what I’d ask him.”“What?” said Mark.“If the Bank of England can print money, why do we need taxes?”Mark laughed and, thinking I was asking him that question, replied, “Money illusion.”Money illusion is one of those economic terms that is pretty self-explanatory, but here is an example. Most of know a hundred pounds does not buy you today what it bought you ten years ago, but we still think in terms of past prices. (Old people do this more, for obvious reasons). A worker might feel great with a 5% raise, but if inflation is 7%, he is actually earning less than before. This has been an ongoing process for decades with the result that, in real terms, wages are lower.Here’s the Wikipedia definition (edited by me):In economics, money illusion, or price illusion, is a cognitive bias where money is thought of in nominal, rather than real, terms. In other words, the face value (nominal value) of money is mistaken for its purchasing power (real value) at a previous point in time. The term was coined by Irving Fisher in Stabilizing the Dollar, and popularized by John Maynard Keynes in the early twentieth century. Fisher also wrote a book on the subject, The Money Illusion, in 1928.Mark and I both doubted that Bailey would give that as the answer, even if he thought it, which we doubted he would. If governments started printing money and buying assets, many would start questioning money, and faith in fiat might quickly evaporate. If governments worldwide started doing it (eg Britain prints money and starts buying land in France) you are in race-to-the-bottom territory. It would be a race to the bottom for fiat currency.Even if Bailey thought money illusion was the answer, he certainly wouldn’t say it because that in itself undermines fiat.Modern money has nominal value, but not intrinsic value. It relies on illusion (and the law) to function. The more you debase it, the less likely that illusion is to hold. Maybe money delusion is more accurate. Obviously, the backing of the law makes a great difference, as does the fact that taxes must be collected in this money, but, boy, is the system vulnerable. Illusions can last a long time. But when they shatter, they shatter very quickly, and then there is nothing.I don’t say the system will pop. It has been going on for a long time. But I do observe that it very easily could.It’s why I recommend both gold and bitcoin. Both are money in and of themselves: one is the product of nature, the other the product of extraordinary amounts of computer power. Neither relies on anyone else.If you liked this article, please tell a friend.If you are interested in buying gold, check out my recent report. I have a feeling it is going to come in very handy.My recommended bullion dealer is the Pure Gold Company.Life After the State - Why We Don’t Need Government (2013), my first book, is now back in print - with the audiobook here: Audible UK, Audible US, Apple Books. I recommend the audiobook ;)And if you are in the Scottish neck of the woods this August, look out for me at the Edinburgh Fringe. I’ll be performing one of my “lectures with funny bits”. This one is all about the history of mining. As always, I shall be delivering it at Panmure House, where Adam Smith wrote Wealth of Nations. It’s at 2pm most afternoons. You can get tickets here. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

While Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, like a jilted boyfriend turned desperado, is announcing a new policy every day, future Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s strategy has been to be as vague and non-committal as possible about everything, and get elected on the back of the Tories being so useless. It makes sense: the less he promises now, and the less specific he is, the more scope he will have when he comes to power to do what he wants.Such is the topsy-turvy Orwellian world in which we live. Labour’s five missions—massive cringe—read like something that should be on the Conservative Party website. Labour declares upfront, first and foremost, that its “first duty” is “to protect our country – through economic stability, secure borders, and strong defence.” I’m sure this is all part of Starmer’s strategy to win over the middle and rid himself of the ghosts of Labour incompetence. “I’ve changed the Labour Party so we are back in service of working people,” he boasts. “Together we can change Britain.”So what exactly will this huge change that is coming to Britain entail?One of the few things Labour has been specific about is VAT on school fees. This has generated a lot of negative press, particularly in the mainstream media, which is heavily populated by people who went to public school and send their kids there too. But with only 7% of children actually going to public school, I guess Labour has figured, in these times of envy, that this will be a vote-winner. While it purports to be an attack on the rich, in real terms it is an attack on the middle classes, many of whom will now put their kids into state schools. The extra burden of this on an already overburdened sector does not justify the limited increase in revenues that will come from VAT, never mind the practicalities of imposing this charge and the schools that will go bust as a result. But extra revenue is not what this is about. It’s exploiting the politics of envy.Nevertheless, there is one clear thing we can infer from it: the middle class is going to get shafted. Where it tries to be independent and self-sufficient, it will find itself dragged into state dependency. That is not change, though. This is a process that has been going on for decades—since the imposition of fiat money, in fact. And that, I’m afraid, is the broad brush stroke. The details may be different, but the direction is the same. We are going to see more government, more spending, more technocracy, more bureaucracy, more quangos, more regulation, more taxation, further declines in the purchasing power of money, further erosion of individual liberty, more state solutions to things that would sort themselves out perfectly well if government stayed out of it, and so on. We will also see further steps in the direction of supranational bodies, one-world government, and all the rest of it. Change is not coming. Continuity is.So the absolute first thing you have to do is keep as much wealth as you can outside the system. Do not hold sterling, or any other fiat money for that matter. Yes, sterling is holding up moderately well in the forex markets, which know Labour will win, but that is just comparing it with other fiat currencies. Use gold and bitcoin as your savings vehicles. They will outperform sterling quite comfortably by the time of the next government. Make a note of what £100,000 currently buys you. It will buy you a lot less in five years. If you are interested in buying gold, check out my recent report. I have a feeling it is going to come in very handy.My recommended bullion dealer is the Pure Gold Company.Labour’s Five Missions* Get Britain Building AgainLabour promises to “strengthen public finances” and “reform planning laws, so we build more houses, giga factories (SIC), windfarms, roads, labs, and ports, developing the skills needed to do so.” It will “reduce energy bills and invest in the jobs and industries of the future via our Green Prosperity Plan and Great British Energy, a new publicly owned clean generation company.” And it will build more homes (heard that one before?).This all means more state: more state spending, planning, regulation, subsidy, and action. You don’t need me to tell you where that leads.* Switch on Great British Energy“A new publicly owned, clean energy company that ensures jobs are created here in Britain to cut your energy bills, create 500,000 new, skilled jobs in the industries of the future, and deliver energy security.”What could possibly go wrong? All that green energy stuff has been an unbridled success so far without a whiff of corruption. * Get the NHS Back on Its FeetIt promises to “pay doctors and nurses overtime to work evenings and weekends to cut the backlog, cut waiting times by giving the NHS the staff and technology it needs, end the 8am scramble for GP appointments, improve cancer survival rates, and reduce deaths from heart disease and suicide, with more care in the community so patients aren’t stuck in hospital.”Sounds great. What’s actually going to happen is that further enormous amounts capital disappearing up the backside of the dysfunctional money pit.* Take Back Our StreetsLabour will put “13,000 more neighbourhood police on our streets, halve violence against women and girls, and introduce tougher sentences for rapists and new ‘Respect Orders’.”More spending and, no doubt, more two-tier policing.* Break Down Barriers to OpportunityLabour will “create a modern childcare system with breakfast clubs in every primary school, recruit 6,500 new staff” and further fiddle with a system that doesn’t work. (My edit in the interests of brevity.)More spending, more intervention, more state.I’m reminded of the lyric of a certain Specials song.I’m already at 900 words and I haven’t yet got to taxes and the specifics of which ones are going to go up. I’ll have to do that in a part 2 coming very soon.Despite all the pledges about fiscal rectitude and stability, and there are lots, the next government is not going to run a balanced budget. It might start out with good intentions, but deficit spending will continue and, at the first sign of crisis, it will print. It is always the way.The increase in state and quango, meanwhile, will lead to an increase in crony capitalism and deter genuine free-market, wealth-creating activities.Own gold and bitcoin. Don’t own sterling is the solution.I’ll do a part 2 about the coming tax rises very soon.If you agree with the argument of this piece, you might like Life After the State - Why We Don’t Need Government (2013), my first book, which is now back in print - with the audiobook here: Audible UK, Audible US, Apple Books. I recommend the audiobook ;)And if you are in the Edinburgh neck of the woods this August, look out for me at the Edinburgh Fringe. I’ll be performing one of my “lectures with funny bits”. This one is all about the history of mining. As always, I shall be delivering it at Panmure House, where Adam Smith wrote Wealth of Nations. It’s at 2pm most afternoons. You can get tickets here. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

I am experimenting again with a video this Sunday morning. (Podcast listeners can still get just the audio). Enjoy :)It was August 2018. Brexit Derangement Syndrome was only just starting to kick in, though the effort to derail it was underway. In comedy circles, I still was not talking very openly about having voted for Brexit—it would be another six months before I wrote 17 Million F Offs.I was doing a show at the Edinburgh Fringe, my financial gameshow.Now something happens to a performer at the Fringe. There are so many shows and so much competition that you will do (almost) anything to get publicity and draw attention to your show. The Fringe is a distillation of the entertainment industry; all the best things about it and the worst, all the highs and lows, seem to get magnified there. My PR man texted me and asked if I wanted to do a short spot about Brexit and comedy for Channel 4 News. I said yes. He said to go to the Pleasance at 5pm. They wanted someone who voted Leave.I met the film crew there, and the presenter— I have no idea what his name was—was a very nice, very charming young Englishman in his early 30s. University-educated, probably public school, made me feel very at ease. We found a little alcove, and our interview began.“In a comedy club, what do you say when heckled about Brexit?” he asked me.Now there are three types of comedy gigs. One is where the audience has come to see you; two is when they have come to see comedy (not necessarily you); and three, the worst type of gig, is when they neither come to see you nor comedy.Comedy clubs mostly come under category two (unless you are doing a solo show).I answered the question truthfully: “I MC a lot of nights. My job is to create a warm and friendly atmosphere. Audiences in comedy clubs are fairly mixed. So, I tend to avoid talking about Brexit, as you risk losing half the room, which is not good for the night.”“Sure, but what would you say if someone heckled you about Brexit?”“Well, I don’t talk about it, so they don’t.”“But if you did?”“But I don’t.”This went round in circles for a bit. Then he changed his approach. “And if someone heckled you about voting Leave?”“Well, they don’t because I don’t talk about it.”“No, but what if they did?”“Well, they don’t. As I say, in a regular comedy club, with a mixed crowd, if you come down very heavily on one side, you risk losing half the room. I’m the host. I don’t like to do that. It might be different if I was doing a show specifically about it, but I’m not.”“Well, what if you were?”“Well, I’m not. And if I was doing a show about voting leave, I doubt many remainers would come.”“But what if they did?”It just kept going round and round in circles. I thought I was being reasonably articulate about the need to be diplomatic in a mixed room if you are the host, and I made the same point several times, each time phrasing it slightly differently, but he just was not having it. He kept coming back to this same question.“But if someone heckled you about voting Leave, what would you say?”Eventually, somewhat exasperated, I said, “Oh, I don’t know. ‘Whatever, loser.’ Something like that.”He smiled and quickly drew the interview to a close. We parted company with, apparently, good will expressed. I had spent probably five minutes explaining the need to be diplomatic and a microsecond with that last line.Later that day, I watched the clip from Channel 4 News. Guess which part of the interview they used?“Leaver comedian calls people who voted Remain losers,” ran the headline of the vid on the Channel 4 site, or some such (I can’t find the vid now to quote it accurately).The only clip from the interview they used was me saying, “Whatever, loser,” even though it was totally misrepresentative of the rest of the interview. Then in the comments beneath, I remember reading a load of remarks along the lines of, “Well, how is that funny?”, “Remind me to never go and see that guy,” “Leavers just aren’t funny,” and so on.I won’t say I was shocked by how disingenuous the process was, but I was shaking my head wearily. I explained it to myself along the lines that he had gone into the interview wanting a certain clip that he could use to illustrate a story he had already formed in his head. He would not stop until he got that clip, and he had no interest in anything else I said. I suppose that’s a kind way of looking at it—a trap I often fall into. On the other hand, he was a lying cheat, and the clip he showed of me was completely misrepresentative. It could have been quite damaging to me reputationally, but fortunately, the clip was so short, and not that many people will have watched it.If nothing else, it showed me just how untruthful the news is.You really cannot trust it. No wonder so many have lost faith.When you have a reporter brimming with ambition (the same ruthless ambition that actors, singers, comedians, and other media stars have), the most important thing is their career. Everything else, including the truth, is subordinate to that. Sometimes there is a happy coincidence: the reporter boosts his career by breaking some amazing truth. But given a choice between the two, career usually wins. Such is the nature of the ambition of many in the media.Even with everything I know now, I still watch a news story and am taken in by it. It’s only when you were actually there that you see just how misrepresentative it can be.Don’t trust the news. It lies.I’ve now just remembered another story. It was during the 1990 World Cup when the English fans got into scuffles with Dutch fans just before the England-Holland game in Cagliari. Evil, terrible hooligans causing trouble, ran all the headlines, alongside lots of footage of Italian police with riot gear, firing off tear gas, and all the rest of it. I was there. I’m bilingual. I saw the whole thing. The Italian police directed tens of thousands of English straight into tens of thousands of Dutch in the narrow lanes of the historical centre—the police messed up badly. They then panicked and started firing off tear gas. The news told a completely different story.I was 20 at the time. I think that was my first taste of the BS.Thank you very much for reading this and for being a subscriber. Don’t forget:* This August I am going to the Edinburgh Fringe to do one of my “lectures with funny bits”. This one is all about the history of mining. As always, I shall be delivering it at Panmure House, where Adam Smith wrote Wealth of Nations. It’s at 2pm most afternoons. Please come. Tickets here.* My first book and many readers’ favourite, Life After the State - Why We Don’t Need Government (2013), is now back in print - with the audiobook here: Audible UK, Audible US, Apple Books. I recommend the audiobook ;)* You can catch up on all my latest pieces here.Until next time,DominicP.S. In case you missed them, check out these recent pieces:Argentina and the Accidental Gold Standard both proved very popular. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comTwo bullish developments for Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies this week: first, Donald Trump, who is currently the favourite to be the next US President, declared, 'I am very positive and open-minded towards cryptocurrency companies and all things related to this new and burgeoning industry. Our country must be the leader in the field; there is no second place.'Those words will have been written for him, but they nevertheless show that policies, should he win the election, as currently looks likely, will be favourable. That has to be good for the sector.Second the Ethereum ETF got green lit this week in the US, so today we consider the implications of that, and give our outlook on the sector more generally.First up, ether has rallied. It’s risen by about a third from $2,900 a coin to within spitting distance of $4,000.I must confess to being somewhat flummoxed by Ethereum. (If you want to read my guide, it is here). Briefly: its founding principle is to use blockchain technology for purposes beyond an alternative system of digital money. Known as "the world's programmable blockchain," it can be used to “codify, decentralize, secure, and trade just about anything.” Charlie Morris of Byte Tree likens it to a decentralized App Store (you should all read his letter by the way). Developers can use the platform to build and publish smart contracts and distributed applications (dApps), and it is a kind of marketplace for financial services (DeFi), NFTs (non-fungible tokens), games, and apps, all of which can be paid for in ether.The Bitcoin maximalists don’t like it. Ethereum is not properly decentralized. The numerous forks that have taken place in reaction to hacks prove this—they would not be possible with a properly decentralised platform. Too many coins were pre-mined and handed out to founders. Ethereum 2.0 met with delay after delay. Transaction costs, known as gas fees, can get exorbitant. Its blockchain is not that robust. In short, it’s something of a ticking time bomb.Well, maybe. But its founder, Vitalik Buterin, a billionaire many times over by the time he was 28 (just in case you weren’t feeling inadequate enough already this morning), will know all this. He is a genius, and I satisfy myself that by owning Ethereum, I am effectively long Buterin—not unlike being long Elon Musk by owning Tesla.Ethereum also has numerous competitors—not least Solana, but also Binance Smart Chain, Polkadot, Cardano, Terra, and Fantom - which may or may not be a good thing. Many of these are technologically superior, say critics—faster, more robust.Price-wise ethereum been something of a laggard. Its all-time high was $4,800 and it’s about a thousand bucks, or 20%, below that. That said, it does tend to move later in bull markets - and by more.But despite all of this, Ethereum remains by some margin the number two cryptocurrency by market cap—at $465 billion—followed by Tether, which has another purpose altogether ($110 bn), then Binance Coin ($89 bn). By way of comparison, HSBC has a market cap of $165 bn. And you thought crypto was a passing fad.So what can we expect with the launch of this new ETF?

A slightly-longer Sunday morning thought piece than usual today, but one that is well worth the effort I hope you’ll discover.A reminder that:* This August I am going to the Edinburgh Fringe to do one of my “lectures with funny bits”. This one is all about the history of mining. As always, I shall be delivering it at Panmure House, where Adam Smith wrote Wealth of Nations. It’s at 2pm most afternoons. Please come. Tickets here.* My first book and many readers’ favourite, Life After the State - Why We Don’t Need Government (2013), is now back in print - with the audiobook here: Audible UK, Audible US, Apple Books. I recommend the audiobook ;)Isaac Newton, who, along with William Shakespeare, Leonardo Da Vinci and Aristotle, must be one of the cleverest individuals to have ever lived, made groundbreaking contributions to physics, mathematics, optics, mechanics, philosophy and astronomy. The laws of motion, the theory of gravitation and the reflecting telescope were among his many contributions. He was also a brilliant alchemist, obsessed with theology and biblical prophecy. As if that isn’t enough, he is credited with the design of the Gold Standard, the primary monetary system of the world for over two hundred years. Today we explore how this brilliant system was accidental.In 1695, counterfeit coins accounted for more than a tenth of all English money in circulation. Massive LOL: the English used the counterfeit coins, in particular, to pay their taxes. The Exchequer that year reported no more than ten good shillings for every hundred pounds of revenue. Coin clipping was also a major problem, especially of old coins, and silver coins were disappearing from circulation altogether. Silver was worth more on the continent as bullion than it was in the UK as tender, so arbitrageurs shipped coins abroad, melted them down, and sold them for gold. Everyone from the Jews to the French was blamed, but by 1695 it was almost impossible to find legal silver in circulation. It had all been melted down and sold.This all led to a scarcity of money, which inhibited trade. More damage was caused to the English nation in just one year by bad money than “by a quarter century of bad kings, bad Ministers, bad Parliaments and bad Judges”, said the historian Thomas Babington Macaulay.King William begged the House of Commons to respond to the crisis and, seeking help, Secretary of the Treasury, William Lowndes wrote letters to England’s wisest men, asking their advice: among them, philosopher John Locke, architect Sir Christopher Wren, banker Sir Josiah Child, and scientist, Sir Isaac Newton.Newton was in his mid 40s and probably not far off the peak of his powers. He had published his most famous work, the Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, just eight years earlier in 1687, and it had established him as the smartest man in the country. He would now put his great mind to money.With the formation of the Bank of England the previous year, Newton had become aware of the possibilities of paper money. “If interest be not yet low enough for the advantage of trade,” he wrote, “the only proper way to lower it is more paper credit till by trading and business we can get more money.” He could see that token value and intrinsic value were not necessarily one and the same.It was also obvious to Newton that the currency criminals were rational actors. They would continue to clip, counterfeit, and sell abroad while there was profit in it. Bullion smuggling carried the death sentence, yet still it went on. Coercion alone would not be enough to stop it from happening. The market itself needed to be changed.He came up with two measures. First, to deal with the clipping, all coins minted prior to 1662 should be called in, melted down, and, using machines, re-made into coins that had a single consistent edge. With no more hand-hammered coins in circulation, clipping coins would become that much more difficult. Re-minting the entire country’s coin, however, at a time of such primitive machinery, was no small undertaking. Second, to deal with the silver issue, the amount of silver in coins should be lowered so that the silver content and the face value of the coin were the same.The thought of such a devaluation went against the psyche. The idea that token value and intrinsic value might be different was alien and Newton’s second proposal was not widely welcomed. There were 20 shillings to a pound, so a shilling should contain a concomitant amount of silver.  Newton may have thought that the token was more important than the silver content, but landowners and the government, which was largely made up of them, would lose 20% of their silver by Newton’s proposal. In 1696 Parliament approved the recoinage, but stipulated the new coins maintain the old weights. Newton warned that the silver outflow would continue.The following year, nudged by John Locke, Charles Montague, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, sent Newton a letter notifying him that the King intended to make him Warden of the Mint. So began his new career. Perhaps the role was only intended as a sinecure, but Newton took it very seriously.Putting his chemical and mathematical knowledge to good use, Newton got the Mint’s machines working and the coins minted at a speed that defied the predictions of even the boldest optimist and, as an industrial operation, Newton’s recoinage was an enormous success. Newton would also have to learn the skills of a policeman—both investigator and interrogator—and he proved masterful. This ruthless enforcer of the law, oversaw numerous investigations, exposing frauds, and then prosecuting perpetrators. Poor counterfeiters had no idea what they were up against, and many were sent to the gallows for their crimes.So good at the job of Warden was Newton that, in 1699, he was promoted and made Master of the Royal Mint, and after the Union between England and Scotland in 1707, Newton directed a Scottish recoinage that would lead to a new currency for the new Kingdom of Great Britain.He had solved the clipping issue, the counterfeiting issue was vastly improved, but silver was still making its way across the Channel, just as Newton had said it would. As long as the silver content exceeded the face value of the coins, the trade would continue. By 1715, almost all of the coins that Newton had struck between 1696 and 1699 had left t he country.Newton’s studies had moved on from tides, planetary motions, and pendulums to the gold markets. He drew up an extensive table of assays of foreign coins and in doing so realised that gold was cheaper in the new markets opening up in Asia than in Europe, and thus that silver was not just being sucked out of England, but out of Europe itself to India and China where it was traded for gold.Meanwhile, the world’s next great gold rush had started.If you are interested in buying gold, check out my recent report. I have a feeling it is going to come in very handy in the not-too-distant future.My recommended bullion dealer is the Pure Gold Company.World gold output doublesSome time in 1694 Portuguese deserters had found alluvial gold two hundred miles inland from Rio De Janeiro in Minas Gerais in Brazil. Soon everyone was flocking there, “white, coloured, black, Amerindian, men and women; young and old; poor and rich; nobles and commoners; laymen and clergy,” said a Jesuit priest who lived in the area. By 1724, within just three decades of the discovery, world output had doubled. By 1750, 65% of global production was emanating from Brazil. The gold made its way to Lisbon, along with sugar, tobacco and other Brazilian products - similar amounts to that which the Conquistadors had sent back to Spain the previous century - and with it the Portuguese minted their moidores coins.The Portuguese used their gold to buy English cereal crops, beef and fish, woollen goods, manufactured articles, and luxuries. Portugal imported five times as much from England as it exported to it, and it used its gold to settle the difference. The moidores, which weighed slightly more than an English guinea, worth 28 shillings, actually became currency, especially in the west country, where there were more of them than local coins. “We hardly have any money,” wrote an Exeter man in 1713, “but Portugal gold.” In London, the Bank of England began buying vast amounts of gold, “to be coined as it comes in” and the Mint began minting guineas from the moidores. By 1715 the Bank had 800 kg/25,700 t.oz, a nascent central bank reserve, and this figure would rise would to 15.5 tonnes/500,000 t.oz by 1730. So much gold coin had never been minted before and London soon overtook Amsterdam as the foremost precious metals market. Gold was coming and staying. Silver was leaving for Asia. In 1717 Newton was called on to investigate.He came up with a new system and outlined it in a report to the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury in September 1717. Less than three months later there was a Royal Proclamation that forbade the exchange of gold guineas for more than 21 silver shillings - even if they were clipped or underweight. Thus was a guinea just over a pound, which was 20 shillings, or 113 grains of gold. The ratio of gold to silver was effectively set at roughly 1:15.5.But silver coin clipping continued, and full-weight silver coins continued to be exported to the continent, where 21 shillings of silver could still get you more than a guinea’s worth of gold (just over 7.6 grams/1/4 t.oz), and to Asia, especially India and China, often via the East India Company, where silver was even more valuable. The result was that silver was used for imports, and so left the country, while exports were traded for gold, which thus came into the country.All in all, some two-thirds of that Brazilian gold is thought to have ended up in England. Hundreds of tonnes in total.Britain had always been on a silver standard. A pound was a pound of sterling silver. “In all men’s minds the only true money of the country was the silver coin,” said Sir John Craig, historian of the Mint. Although that Royal Proclamation suggested a bimetallic standard, in practice, with so much silver going abroad, it moved Britain from silver to its first gold standard. Gold was more dependable than clipped silver. The future would look back on Newton as the father of the gold standard. His system proved the bedrock of Britain’s domestic and international trade through the 18th century, helping it to become such a formidable commercial power. But it was an accidental gold standard. Nobody—not the institutions nor the persons involved—had had the slightest intention of creating a new monetary system on gold. Most people wanted to sustain silver as the prime coinage of the land. Newton had tried to create a functioning bimetallic standard. But market forces had other ideas.In the 1770s there was another recoinage in Britain, which, in terms of sheer scale, was unprecedented. Some 155 tonnes/5 million t.oz of gold in total, perhaps 30 times greater than Newton’s recoinage of 1696-9, greater than anything attempted by Spain or Venice, or even Rome. No attempt was made to recoin silver. It was a formal admission that Britain was now on a gold standard. Newton’s accidental gold standard was formalised.Anno domini for goldThe second half of the 19th century proved the golden age of the gold rush. First California, then Australia, then New Zealand, then South Africa, then Western Australia, and finally the Klondike.Aside from taxation (see Daylight Robbery), it is difficult to think of anything more overlooked that has had a more profound influence on the course of human history than the gold rush. Nations, indeed civilisations, have been formed on the back of them. (The beneficial impact of gold discoveries in Northern Spain to the Roman Empire is dramatically understated, for example). The fifty years from January 24th, 1848, were perhaps the golden era of the gold rush. The date stands as a watershed moment, the dawn of a new golden age. You might say there are two histories of gold, one before and one after 1848, akin to a BC and AD moment in time. On that day a carpenter from New Jersey by the name of James Marshall saw something shiny at the bottom of a ditch while carrying out a routine inspection of a lumbar mill he was helping build on the western slopes of the Sierra Nevada in California. The scale of the gold business changed out of all proportion. The amount of metal available changed beyond all recognition. Annual production rose fivefold in five years. The Paris Mint coined 150 million Napoléons D’Or in eight years from 1850-57, compared to 65 million in the preceding 50 years. The US Mint’s output of gold eagles rose fivefold.The gold price should surely fall with all the new supply, feared bankers and economists. “The price must fall,” said the Economist, wrong about everything even then. The Times agreed. French economist Michel Chevalier wrote an entire book, On the Probable Fall in the Value of Gold. But the gold price did not fall. It stayed constant. What the Times, the Economist and Chevalier had all failed to appreciate was that most of the gold would use as money, and that trade, exchange and economic expansion would be the result.Surprisingly perhaps, the biggest casualty of the gold rush was silver. Silver had been money for thousands of years. Not for much longer. Its price halved. In 1850 only Britain, Portugal, Brazil, and a handful of other nations were on the gold standard. Everyone else was on bi-metallic standards. Come 1900 China was the only major nation not on a pure gold standard. Scarcely had the discoveries in California been made when the US began minting $1 and $20 gold coins, in addition to the $10 eagle. Before the discovery, the US Mint struck $4 million worth; in 1851 it minted over $62 million worth. Gold is “virtually the only currency of the country,” said a Congressman proposing a $3 gold coin in a debate in 1853. 1853 would also prove the last time silver dollars were struck, though they still circulated. In practical terms, if not nominal, the US was moving to a gold standard. Then the Coinage Act of 1873 eliminated the standard silver dollar altogether. The act became known as the Crime of 1873. There was a rearguard action, a “silver crusade” to get silver reinstated, especially as silver supply was now increasing thanks to discoveries in Nevada, Colorado, and Mexico. There was, thought some, a “deep-laid plot” engineered by a foreign conspiracy to increase the national debt, which would have to be paid in gold. Bimetallism became a central issue of the election of 1896, when an ambitious young Democrat by the name of William Jennings Bryan won the nomination that he thought would carry him to the presidency with what is widely regarded as one of the greatest speeches in American political history. “Thou shalt not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold,” he bellowed. But no.Gold rather than silver was now in the pockets of millions of people around the world. The increased gold supply effectively sent both France and the US onto gold standards, even though nominally they remained bimetallic (the US until 1900). The move from silver to gold gathered pace in Europe from the 1870s. In 1872-3 Germany launched its new mark, followed by Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands. France, Belgium, Switzerland, and Italy had signed up to a Latin bimetallic monetary union in 1865, which was undermined by the tumbling silver price, and they largely abandoned the silver part of the equation after 1874. By the end of the century, every major nation bar China was on a gold standard, the classical gold standard which Isaac Newton is credited with having designed.But that classical gold standard, that golden age of sound money for which many hard money advocates of today, including yours truly, pine, was not designed and planned, it was accidental.As a the poet Robert Burns wrote:But Mousie, thou art no thy-lane,In proving foresight may be vain:The best laid schemes o’ Mice an’ MenGang aft agleyThe modern system of fiat money by which we operate today is also accidental, evolving from political expediency, political pressure, technological developments, deficit spending, suppressed interest rates, misguided obsession with GDP, and more. Many, especially the powerful, have exploited it for their own ends, but nobody designed a system in which 99% of money is digital, in which 99% of money is debt, in which loss of purchasing power and Cantillon Effect are built in, which robs the young, the salaried, and the saver, which makes an increase in the wealth gap inevitable and so on. The modern system is clearly in its endgame. Better systems are emerging. But endgames last a long time.Enjoy this article? Please consider becoming a paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

A few years ago I wrote a script called Four Murders and Some Funerals, about an old lady who is the victim of a terrible miscarriage of justice. Seeking revenge she murders one of the perpetrators (by accident - long story, but it works), discovers she’s a natural at bumping people off, does away with the other three, and ends up becoming a vigilante serial killer - righting wrongs wherever she finds them and usually where the law has failed. I still think it was a pretty good script, though it never got made - a bit like Miss Marple, only more savage and retributionist. Anyway, as a result of writing said script, I had to come up with a number of original ways by which an old lady might kill people: I had one person pushed down a lift shaft, another electrocuted in the bath, another shot and another poisoned. This all involved quite a bit of research, especially the various poisons. Should our heroine use cyanide, polonium, fentanyl or botulinum, for example?For obvious reasons, I wasn’t quite comfortable googling all the questions I had, so I took to Tor, DuckDuckGo and internet anonymity. I’m glad I did because, believe you me, how to murder someone is one heck of an internet rabbit hole to go down. Before long I was reading about hiring Chechen hitmen and lord knows what else. Obviously, in the grand scheme of things, researching a script about a murderer is a fairly trivial use case for internet anonymity. But I don’t think the day is far away when your internet search history - which Google keeps forever, by the way, unless you take steps to delete it - will be taken into account for things like insurance risk, profiling, social credit score, by potential employers and so on. I don’t think several days researching how to kill someone reflects particularly well. Of relevance, one of my followers tells me that Justin Trudeau is trying to impose a law whereby police can retroactively search the Internet for ‘hate speech’ violations and arrest offenders, even if the offence occurred before the law existed.But you don’t have to be asking questions about how to kill someone to want anonymity. You might be living under some extreme theological regime, asking questions like is there a god; or under a totalitarian regime, asking questions about freedom; or under a corrupt and incompetent regime, asking questions about vaccine safety. You get the point. Anonymity protects you. It limits the power that others have over you and the ability they have to control you. It enables you to protect your reputation, and stop things from being used against you, especially out of context. It gives you greater control over your own data and thus your destiny. But let’s say I did actually want to kill someone, and that I even researched how to do it, before deciding not to. The only crime I would be guilty of is thought. But if my search history can be used against me, it doesn’t matter if, ten years later I have moved on from the murder thing, it’s still there, and if the police or some activist decided to uncover it, I would, in the eyes of many, forever be guilty of murder, even if I had committed no such crime, beyond thinking about it - which, I bet, most of us have at some point in our darkest hours.For me the most powerful use case is freedom of thought. Being anonymous is liberating. I’m sure that is why masked balls proved so popular.  If you know you are being watched, you are less likely to explore new ideas outside the mainstream, ideas which family, friends, colleagues or even society may dislike. These might be philosophical, political or theological ideas, scientific or artistic. We might want to express thoughts we otherwise feel unable to express. A lot of things, if judged from a different time or place, by people who lack complete knowledge or understanding, may seem odd or worse intolerable. Anonymity protects against having to worry about how actions are perceived and against  constantly having to justify them. Anonymity is the nemesis of censorship.Get your friends to read this.This happened to a comedian friend of mine the other day. I don’t want to say his name, because I don’t want to draw attention to the doxxing. He was posting anonymously on Telegram. Some ideological opponent spent hours following him, going through his material and then exposed his identity, publishing all the stuff he had been saying in order to try and lose him his job. (Which he nearly did: he got suspended but thankfully re-instated). They did something similar to the tycoon Paul Marshall, who had an anonymous Twitter account.The most compelling real life example of why we need internet anonymity must be Satoshi Nakamoto. We would not have bitcoin without it. For sure, many will say, “bah, bitcoin”, but we are talking here about one of the most revolutionary technologies ever invented, and one that has the potential (I don’t say it will, I say it has the potential) to fix our broken political and economic systems peacefully. How? Because it enables people to opt out. It provides an alternative money system and money is the zero patient: “Fix the money, fix the world,” runs the mantra. Remove the state’s monopoly on money, you reduce its ability to create money at no cost to itself and you limit its ability to do all the terrible things it does. And please don’t say, “But what about the NHS”.Subscribe to The Flying Frisby.So I favour internet anonymity, which is a much harder feat to achieve now than it used to be. But I also get that this is not a black and white issue. I’ve no doubt that many a murderous act has been plotted anonymously by terrorists and others looking to kill innocent civilians. Certain politicians, celebrities and others take an enormous amount of abuse from anonymous accounts: I have heard Ian Wright complain many times about the racist trolling  he gets from anonymous accounts, demanding that X, Facebook et al take the trolls to account. The privilege of anonymity gets abused, and badly. What is they say, “with freedom comes great responsibility”?With anonymity, even more so.Many government ministers will care more about the terrorist plotting and the online abuse (which they probably get more than their fair share of) than they will about the freedom to explore new ideas. And, as I say, the censors hate it because the anonymous are harder to control. So, going forward, we can expect more and more attempts to prevent it. Seven reasons we need internet anonymity:* Freedom of expression.* Protection of privacy.* Safety and security.* Overcoming barriers to access.* Encouraging innovation and creativity.* Protection against online harassment and abuse. * Preserving autonomy and control.Tell your mates. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

Good morning,As an experiment, today’s Sunday morning thought piece is in video. If you prefer, you can also read it below. You should also be able to read and listen, as many like to do.Let me know what you think.This week, May 7th, marks the 25th anniversary of one the UK’s greatest ever financial blunders. There is no shortage of them, but this one really stands out: that is Gordon Brown’s decision to sell more than half of Britain’s gold. The decision and then its implementation were both of such cack-handed incompetence that for many the only possible explanation is conspiracy. We will come to that in a moment.Every now and then the government does something that makes your ears prick up and think, “Well what are they doing that for?” This was one of those times. I knew nothing about gold or investing back then, but, even I, could see it was a dumb and needless thing to do. That’s the most amazing thing: Brown was under no pressure to sell. He was under no pressure to do anything. Even non-libertarians will struggle to explain why we need government when they are this incompetent.It wasn’t just me. The tabloids said the decision was, “catastrophic.” Gold traders called it, “appalling”. Parliament was outraged. Foreign central banks were too. What was Gordon Brown thinking?It was two years into Brown’s new job as Chancellor of the Exchequer. At the time, the UK held approximately 715 tonnes of gold, worth around $6.5 billion. The value of the country’s gold amounted to about half of its US$13 billion foreign currency reserves and the Treasury wanted to “achieve a better balance in the portfolio”. There was, it said, too much exposure to a single asset, which paid no interest and its price was volatile. Via a written question in the House of Commons the Government suddenly announced that it would be holding a series of auctions for its gold reserves, starting in six weeks, with an eventual plan to sell 415 tonnes by 2002. Eddie George, the Governor of the Bank of England, raised “strong objections” as he and Gordon Brown clashed, but he was “outgunned by a coalition of the treasury and some of his own senior officials”. "The sale of the gold was not something that we recommended at the Bank,” George later said. “We did not think it was a good idea to sell such a large amount of gold at once. However, the decision was taken by the Chancellor and his advisors, and we respected their right to make that decision."London was still (just) at the epicentre of the gold market and its numerous gold traders thought the decision was nuts. Gold prices move in decades-long cycles, they told Bank of England officials, and the price was likely a lot nearer the bottom than the top.  “The timing of the decision was ludicrous. We told them, ‘You are going to push the gold price down before you sell’,” said Peter Fava, then head of precious metal dealing at HSBC. “We thought it was a disastrous decision; we couldn’t understand it.” Revealing the timings and amounts for sale so far in advance would cause traders to short the asset, and that would drive the gold price lower.Not only did Brown give a six-week advance notice to the market that the UK would be selling, driving away any potential buyers and sending speculators short in advance of the sale, the UK had even lent one fifth of its gold out, which speculators borrowed and sold in order to front run the UK’s sale. Sure enough, the price fell 10% by the time of the first auction in July to lows not seen since shortly after the US abandoned the gold standard in 1971. No wonder so many see this as the worst decision in British financial history.Here is the timing of that first sale illustrated. £150/oz. Today we are at £1,900/oz. What a bunch of clowns. As soon as the commitment was made, a consortium of central banks - including the European Central Bank and the Bank of England - signed the Washington Agreement on Gold in September 1999, limiting gold sales to 400 tonnes per year for 5 years. This triggered a reversal in price, a 25% rally in a week. Such gains have never been seen before or since. If you are interested in buying gold, check out my recent report. I have a feeling it is going to come in very handy in the not-too-distant future. My recommended bullion dealer is the Pure Gold Company.In total, the UK eventually sold 395 tonnes over 17 auctions from July 1999 to March 2002, at an average price of US$275 per ounce, raising approximately US$3.5 billion. I have had it said to me many times that China was on the other side of the trade, but that is something we will never know. Never explain as conspiracy that which can be explained by incompetence runs the wisdom, but this was so incompetent even those who favour that line of thinking struggle to explain Brown’s logic.It was done to diversify UK assets, runs the standard explanation. Gold pays no interest, Brown wanted a yield. How was Brown to know interest rates would fall for the next 20 years? Many, especially on the left, supported the decision. But such are the levels of incompetence, and it being gold, many other theories quickly emerged. It was “a political decision”, not a financial one, said the Bank of England. Many argue that the sale was part of Gordon Brown and Tony Blair’s plans to take Britain into the new euro currency without asking voters: either to fund the euro itself, or to fund the UK's entry into the European single currency. This theory is linked to the wider belief that there is an agenda to create a European superstate that will replace national sovereignty. Hence the argument that the sale was part of a broader plan to suppress the price of gold. Brown was acting on behalf of a shadowy cabal of bankers and financiers, the same people that today are thought to be attempting to impose the Great Reset and control the world's financial system.Others argue that he sold the gold at a low price in order to benefit his friends in the City of London. Brown is always suspiciously, in the eyes of some, quick to defend the “transparent” manner in which the sale was carried out. “The National Audit Office said that it was in a transparent and fair manner that the sale had happened while achieving value for money, so that is actually what happened,” Brown declared in 2007.Perhaps, simply, Brown thought the price was going even lower and called the market wrong. Not such an unlikely mistake to make. The 1990s had seen something like 1,600 tonnes sold by Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Canada and the Netherlands. Official sector holdings in 1968 accounted for some 40% of all the gold ever mined in history. By 1999, that figure had fallen below 25%. The new European Central Bank might not even bother keeping any bullion from the 11 founders of the forthcoming single euro currency. Analyst Kamal Naqvi, then at Macquarie Equities, told the FT: “The British are looking to sell before everyone else.”Two months earlier, in April 1999, Switzerland, the fifth-largest holder of gold, narrowly passed a referendum to take the franc off the gold standard - it became the last nation to leave the gold standard. The sale of another 1,300 tonnes was green lit (Switzerland never actually sold). The following week the International Monetary Fund was “practically unanimous” in its plans to follow suit. There had been calls - led by Gordon Brown (who would repeat them in 2005) - to use the money to write off Third World debt for the new Millennium. “100 per cent debt relief on multi-lateral debt, IMF debt, to be written off by revaluing or dealing with IMF gold through sales,” Brown said."The decision to sell gold was taken after extensive consultation with the Bank of England, and based on their advice that the price was likely to fall further. It was the right decision, and it released over £2 billion to invest in other assets".He was never a man to admit when wrong, even with reality staring him in the face. Once the decision had been taken he was too stubborn to go back on it, even with all that advice from the gold markets. The result was that he nailed the bottom of the market.Of everything he did as Chancellor, internationally, this stupidity is what he’ll be most remembered for. The mistake was to swap gold, the money of last resort, an asset that is nobody else’s liability, an asset with a track record as money going back to pre-history, for modern fiat money, beholden to the whims of others. Gold’s day was done, they thought. Professor Niall Ferguson declared the “twilight of gold”., whose only future was “as jewellery or in parts of the world with primitive or unstable monetary and financial systems.” Hello!Thanks very much for reading.Until next time,Dominic.PS Here also in case of interest is my conversation with Tom Clougherty of the IEA from a fortnight ago. Enjoy! This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

I love how easy it is to predict things about you based on what you like or dislike.Did you know, for example, that if you buy fresh fennel, you are likely to be a low insurance risk? If you like traditional architecture and old buildings, you are more likely to have a conservative, right-of-centre worldview. Whereas if you like modern architecture, you will lean to the left.For what it’s worth, there are plenty of 20th-century buildings that I find beautiful. I like Art Deco; I like Bauhaus stuff; I think a lot of modern US residential architecture is great. But I think a lot of more recent Deconstructivist and Parametric stuff has disappeared up its state-funded backside and has no chance of standing the test of time. Post-war social housing the world over is verging on the sinful, it is so ugly, not a patch on the almshouses built a century before for the same purpose, when mankind was far less “advanced”. Meanwhile, the glass-fronted apartment and office blocks that blight cities worldwide may be nice to look out from, but to look at they are horrible.When I look at, for example, what has been built in Lewisham, Elephant and Castle or along the banks of the Thames, you have to wonder what on earth people were thinking. What a wasted opportunity to build something with beauty that endures.I was looking out on the Thames from Canary Wharf the other day. Here is what we built.Here is what was possible.In any case, it is inevitable that most modern architecture will not be beautiful. Inevitable! It is built into the system. Let me explain why.Yes, there is regulation. When final say falls to the regulator, not the creator, and he/she never thinks in terms of beauty, only rules and career risk, and construction is always planned with his or her approval in mind, you immediately clip your wings and more. Imagine Michelangelo, Rembrandt, or Beethoven requiring regulatory approval for their work. Under this banner falls health and safety, bureaucracy, the technocratic mentality, planning, standardisation of materials and their mass production, and more.But there is something even more fundamental, which makes lack of beauty inevitable. That is the system of measurement itself. In the past, before mass-produced tape measures were a thing, we made do with the most immediate tools we had to measure things: the human body. Traditional weights and measures were all based around the human body. A foot is, well, a foot. A hand is a hand. A span is a hand stretched out. An inch is a thumb. There are four thumbs to a hand, six to a span, 12 to a foot, 18 to a cubit, which is the distance from elbow to fingertip. A yard is a pace, which happens to be three feet as well. A fathom is the arms stretched out - two yards, or six feet. It goes on: a pound is roughly what you can hold comfortably in your hand. A furlong is the distance a man of average fitness can sprint for. A stone is what you can carry without strain. A US pint is a pound of water, enough to quench a thirst, and so on. Man is indeed the measure of all things, to paraphrase Protagoras. Spread the truth about weights and measures.Da Vinci noticed it. “Nature has thus arranged the measurements of a man: four fingers make one palm. And four palms make one foot; six palms make one cubit; four cubits make once a man's height," he says in his notes for Vitruvian Man.It turns out the feet are very similar the world over and have been throughout history. The foot, for example, was the principal unit in the design of Stonehenge. Here are some different feet from around the world and from throughout history:The cubit was the principal unit of the Pyramids. The pound is the oldest measure of all and goes all the way back to the Babylonian mina.Here’s the thing: proportion is inherent to traditional weights and measures because they derive from the human body, which is proportionate. We are biologically programmed to find the proportions of the human body attractive. The religious will argue that God made man in his own image. Traditional weights and measures derive, therefore, from God, or his image at least, and so are divine.The metric system, on the other hand, is not based on the human body, but on the earth itself. A metre is supposed to be one 10 millionth of the distance from the North Pole to the Equator (though one of French scientists measuring the distance forged the data, so the measure is flawed). The idea of a system based on the earth itself rather than the human body was to achieve a “universal measure based on the perfection of nature” and “a system for all people for all time” to use the words of those who commissioned the measure in the years after the French Revolution. Metric may have a brilliantly simple and comprehensible design, based around the number 10, but unlike traditional weights and measures, proportion is not intrinsic to it. For the purposes of science and for safety, as I argue in my lecture with funny bits, How Heavy?, a universal system of weights and measures is a very important thing. Thanks to the simplicity of decimals (again which derive from the human body and the ten fingers we use to count), metric can scale up or down for use in nanotech or in macrotech .As proportion is inherent to traditional weights and measures, buildings based on them will inevitably have inherent proportion and thus all the beauty which comes with proportion. But most of the world now uses metric in its building, which has no inherent proportion, so it becomes inevitable that modern buildings will not have the proportion inherent to older buildings, unless, the architects deliberately plan otherwise, which most of the time they don’t. Thus is modern architecture inevitably not beautiful.It’s why even functional old buildings, such as barns or warehouses, have a beauty to them. The proportion is inherent in the foundational weights and measures. It is missing in modern buildings.In the past, weights and measures changed, even if only slightly, from region to region. The result was regional diversity in buildings. Using local materials will have added to this regional individuality. But the world over now using the same system of weights and measures, following similar regulations, using similar mass produced materials, means modern architecture will lack beauty the world over. Bland conformity reigns. Even something as foundational as an old brick is proportionate. A brick is a hand in width. For obvious reasons: so a brickie could handle it.In short, unless an architect or builder takes deliberate steps to remedy this problem of proportion, modern buildings will only ever be beautiful by accident. Here’s a little irony: if you like traditional weights and measures, you’re more likely to be right of centre, favour free markets, individual responsibility - all that kind of stuff. Favour metric, and you’re one of those evil left-wing technocrats who champions government intervention, experts and the BBC.Now go tell your friends about this amazing post.Until next time,DominicPS Here is my lecture with funny bits about weights and measures from the Edinburgh Festival in 2022. I think it’s probably the best of all my lectures so far.PPS And here is an 5-minute extract from Italian TV series Sense of Beauty, which I presented a few years back, about beauty and architecture. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comI was going to call this article “a tale of national betrayal.” Sterling is a national disgrace. If ever there was something that symbolised the decline of Britain from world leader to tin pot sh*te show, it is our currency. The US dollar has lost at least 93% of its purchasing power since World War Two. The pound, which was a few cents shy of $5 at the onset of war and today sits at $1.24, has lost an additional 75% against the US dollar.It’s shocking. An appalling betrayal by successive leaderships. When you devalue your currency, you devalue your entire country: the people’s labour, their savings, their assets.As long-time readers will know, I have identified a long-term cycle in the pound, and the next capitulation is due this year. If this plays out, then the pound is about to hit the skids.Don’t get wedded to the idea of a cycleLet me start with my usual disclaimer: it’s easy to look back at the past, find some arbitrary pattern, declare it a cycle, write some persuasive copy, and, all of a sudden, you’re a guru. When things don’t pan out as they should, you blame some outside factor, usually the government.Cycles do exist. We have the seasons, the moons, the cycle of life. There are good times and bad times. There are investment cycles too: bull markets and bear markets, the Kondratiev cycle, the 18-year cycle in real estate, commodities super-cycles, the 4-year presidential cycle. Mining is cyclical. New tech goes through a clear cycle as it evolves. I’m a big believer in the hype cycle. Yet actually trading them in real time is hard.Thinking in terms of cycles does help you to frame the bigger picture: it can give you an idea where you are in the grand scheme of things. But you can easily get wedded to the idea of a particular cycle, and then it’s very hard to break the mindset, even if real life right in front of you is telling a very different story.I remember people in the years after the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) being wedded to the idea of Kondratiev Winter and the next Great Depression. The Dow was going to 1,000, they said. It never went close and here we are today above 38,000. The problem was that the Kondratiev Winter argument was persuasive, and once you’ve been hooked by a narrative, it’s hard to break its shackles.If you are interested in buying gold, check out my recent report. I have a feeling it is going to come in very handy in the not-too-distant future. My recommended bullion dealer is the Pure Gold Company.So to Frisby’s FluxWith all that said, I am now going to argue that there is an 8ish-year cycle in the British pound that goes all the way back to 1968, at least. I’ve called it Frisby’s Flux, because I was the first to observe it and I’ve got to get my name on something.We’ll start with a quick skim through recent sterling history, then we’ll look at a chart, and finally, we’ll look at what’s coming next.In November 1967, the British government devalued the pound by 14% from $2.80 to $2.40 in order to “achieve a substantial surplus on the balance of payments consistent with economic growth and full employment”.In the early 1970s, after the Nixon Shock, the pound rallied against the dollar, but fast forward to 1976, eight (ish) years on, and we are in the year of the IMF crisis when Chancellor Dennis Healy is said to have gone “cap in hand” to borrow money from them. $3.9bn was the agreed sum, at the time the largest loan ever requested. Inflation in the UK reached 24%. From high to low, sterling lost around 40%, reaching $1.60.The pound recovered, and by the early 1980s, sterling was back above $2.40.Move forward eight years and we come to 1984 when the pound would drop by more than 55% to reach an all-time low against the dollar – $1.04 - in early 1985. This was during the miners’ strike and shortly after the Falklands War, but the real issue was extraordinary US dollar strength, something which took collusion between the G5 nations of France, Germany, Japan, the US and the UK and the Plaza Accord of 1985 to depreciate it.Again sterling would recover – this time to $2.Eight years later and we come to the notorious cycle low of 1992 and Black Wednesday, the day that sealed George Soros’s reputation with his bet against the pound. Sterling fell to $1.40 – a 30% loss - as the Bank of England took the UK out of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism.Eight years later, in 2000, the Dotcom bubble collapsed, and the pound lost 20% of its value, again falling to $1.40. (The pound is geared to financial markets. When they struggle it usually does too).But again it recovered. By 2007, it was above $2.10. Can you imagine? The pound above two bucks, and not so long ago.Then, in 2008, came the GFC and, yup, the pound lost 35%, hitting a low of $1.36. What did I say about the pound being geared to financial markets?The next low came in 2016 with the infamous Flash Crash , shortly after Theresa May's speech at the Conservative Party Conference. Having been above $1.70 at one point earlier in this cycle, it hit a low of $1.14, according to some measures. The overall drop from high to low was almost 35%. (As that $1.14 number came in the early hours of the morning, it is not showing up on the chart below).Here we are in 2024, eight years on. The next capitulation is due. Are we about to enter the drop zone? Could well be.Here is an illustration of the cycle. You can see how every eight years, the pound hits a low. (The chart starts at 1970, I couldn’t find data going back to 1967-68).Show this chart to your friendsSo what’s next?And how to protect yourself? And possibly even profit?

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comCards on the table: A Western fiat money collapse, along the lines of Zimbabwe, Venezuela, or Weimar hyperinflation, despite unsustainable deficit spending and un-payable government debt, is not something I think we are likely to see. Many more knowledgeable souls than myself deem it inevitable, but more probable in my view is just the continued debasement of currency and the erosion of its value, so that, with the incremental effects of compounding, a generation from now fiat will have lost another 90% or more of its purchasing power. Heck, the pound has already lost a third of its value just this decade. Since the beginning of the century, it has fallen by over 90%.I guess that constitutes collapse. It all hangs on how you define collapse, I suppose, and over what timeframe.Yet, there's one scenario I can envision that could lead to a more rapid collapse, and it's one we might even be careering towards: war. If tensions between East and West escalate into full-blown conflict, you can be sure the East will attack Western currencies, just as the US weaponized banking and the dollar following Russia's invasion of Ukraine.China has lots of gold, as we know, much more than it says it does. Russia has plenty. Shanghai Cooperation Nations are all accumulating. US gold has not been audited for decades, casting doubts over whether it even exists. As for British gold, I wonder what happened to that! In short, Western fiat money is extremely vulnerable should the East decide to attack it. (For the time being at least, I don’t expect it to: China has some $3.25 trillion in reserves, and another $800 billion in US Treasuries. Why collapse their value?)But whether Biden or Trump wins in the US elections this autumn, neither is going to balance the books. Nor will Labour here in the UK. So you know that both the pound and the dollar are going to see their value steadily eroded for the next five years. Deficit spending will continue and debts will increase.Indeed, outside of a full-on deflationary tightening or collapse - I mean Paul Volcker in 1980 scale tightening - it is impossible for fiat money to see its purchasing power grow. Supply is going to increase, and purchasing power will decline. This is built-in, inherent, and inevitable. Hence why I advocate owning alternative, non-government money - gold and bitcoin.Today, I want to explore a scenario in which Western currencies come under attack and are forced to back their currencies with gold. I understand Russia briefly did this in March 2022. In other words, what happens to the gold price if gold gets remonetized?Similarly, we’ll explore potential bitcoin prices in the event of hyperbitcoinisation (where bitcoin becomes the dominant global money). The Remonetisation of Gold

I have a friend from school who is obviously gay. We’ve all known it for a long time, yet, for whatever reason, he has never been able to come out. He has never been able to admit to himself what is so apparent to everyone else. He’s miserable. Has been for years.I’m not sure if I were gay, if I would be able to come out.I have actually tried to be gay. Well, sort of. In the dark years of my late 30s and divorce, I thought a couple of times being gay might save me from having to deal with the alien species that is woman, so I tried watching gay porn. I was just bored by it. Within a few minutes I was looking at second-hand cars on Autotrader. I have never found men remotely attractive, even if I can admire a beautiful male physique. The only time I might possibly waver is if they are all dolled up in drag, with glamorous dresses, heels, breasts, makeup, wigs, and all the rest of it. But take the wig off and any spell is broken. In any case, to come out as gay requires coming to terms with the truth. I think it is a very brave thing to do.I think that’s why so many great social commentators and comedians are gay. Never mind the obvious love of performing and attention; why, for example, a disproportionately large number of actors and dancers are gay. (By disproportionate, I mean the ratio of gay to straight increases in acting and dancing relative to what it is across the broader population). I mean, because of this phenomenon, whereby gay people are able to speak truths; in many cases, truths that straight people are unable or too shy or polite or repressed to express. How often, for example, when watching a gay performer, does the word “outrageous” burst out of the mouths of those watching, often accompanied by a gasp and the hand going over the mouth? Yes, what they are doing or saying may be outrageous, but it is usually outrageous because it is an unspoken truth.The act of coming out is enabling because it requires tremendous honesty. That honesty is then carried into other areas of life. I’m sure that’s why, for example, Douglas Murray, is able to say the things that many of us are thinking, but few of us dare articulate. Coming out teaches you to be truthful, and truth is power.Even an entertainer like Kenny Everett was so baring of his soul, thereby revealing his vulnerability; I’m sure that is one of the reasons he was so loved. Also, because he was so funny; but often being funny is just being truthful where a subject is taboo.In my immediate circle, it is usually my gay friends who are the boldest. I immediately think of comedian Scott Capurro, who has been in the news quite a bit recently for upsetting people. The reason Scott upsets people so regularly is that so much of what he says is so close to the bone. If it were me, I would pull back. But Scott, like so many gay people, is fearless.Many of the greatest warriors in the ongoing culture wars are gay. I’m sure it is for the same reason: in this age of increasing censorship, the importance of speaking truth is ever more needed, and gay people are not scared of the truth. They have learnt to come to terms with it What’s more, a lot of gay people feel like outsiders, even if we live in much more inclusive times compared to say a century ago. So perhaps, by speaking truths, they do not feel there is as much risk to them as to someone on the inside. Or maybe, by being an outsider—whether by sexuality, or by something else (race, political belief, whatever)—you are forced out on a limb, and that in itself is bracing.They say the fool was often the only one who spoke truth to Power. I bet a lot of the time the fool was gay. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comI wanted to take a look at the gold price today. As I'm sure you are aware, it has been extraordinarily strong in recent weeks.$2,100/oz, or just below, was resistance for four long years. Each attempt - and there were at least three - to get through that level stuttered and stalled. Then, last month, after a false break late last year, we broke out. Gold has not looked back, suddenly putting on over $200 and behaving like something out of the spivvier end of the cryptocurrency markets.

All four of my children were born at home. I feel extremely fortunate about this - they should too. Four wonderful experiences. I will forever be in debt to Louisa and Jolie.When, twenty-four years ago, my then wife, Louisa, told me she wanted to give birth to our first child at home, I thought she was off her rocker, but I gave her my word that we would at least talk to a midwife, and we did just that. Within about five minutes of meeting Tina Perridge of South London Independent Midwives, a lady of whom I cannot speak highly enough, I was instantly persuaded. Ever since, when I hear that someone is pregnant, I start urging them to have a homebirth with the persistence of a Jehovah’s Witness or someone pedalling an upgrade to your current mobile phone subscription. I even included a chapter about it in my first book Life After the State - Why We Don’t Need Government (2013), (now, thanks to the invaluable help of my buddy Chris P, back in print - with the audiobook here [Audible UK, Audible US, Apple Books]).I’m publishing that chapter here, something I was previously not able to do (rights issues), because I want as many people as possible to read it. Many people do not even know home-birth is an option. I’m fully aware that, when it comes to giving birth, one of the last people a prospective mum wants to hear advice from is comedian and financial writer, Dominic Frisby. I’m also aware that this is an extremely sensitive subject and that I am treading on eggshells galore. But the word needs to be spread. All I would say is that if you or someone you know is pregnant, have a conversation with an independent midwife, before committing to having your baby in a hospital. It’s so important. Please just talk to an independent midwife first. With that said, here is that chapter. Enjoy it, and if you know anyone who is pregnant, please send this to them.We have to use fiat money, we have to pay taxes, most of us are beholden in some way to the education system. These are all things much bigger than us, over which we have little control. The birth of your child, however, is one of the most important experiences of your (and their) life, one where the state so often makes a mess of things, but one where it really is possible to have some control.The State: Looking After Your First BreathThe knowledge of how to give birth without outside interventions lies deep within each woman. Successful childbirth depends on an acceptance of the process.Suzanne Arms, authorThere is no single experience that puts you more in touch with the meaning of life than birth. A birth should be a happy, healthy, wonderful experience for everyone involved. Too often it isn’t.Broadly speaking, there are three places a mother can give birth: at home, in hospital or – half-way house – at a birthing centre. Over the course of the 20th century we have moved birth from the home to the hospital. In the UK in the 1920s something like 80% of births took place at home. In the 1960s it was one in three. By 1991 it was 1%. In Japan the home-birth rate was 95% in 1950 falling to 1.2% in 1975. In the US home-birth went from 50% in 1938 to 1% in 1955. In the UK now 2.7% of births take place at home. In Scotland, 1.2% of births take place at home, and in Northern Ireland this drops to fewer than 0.4%. Home-birth is now the anomaly. But for several thousand years, it was the norm.The two key words here are ‘happy’ and ‘healthy’. The two tend to come hand in hand. But let’s look, first, at ‘healthy’. Let me stress, I am looking at planned homebirth; not a homebirth where mum didn’t get to the hospital in time.My initial assumption when I looked at this subject was that hospital would be more healthy. A hospital is full of trained personnel, medicine and medical equipment. My first instinct against home-birth, it turned out, echoed the numerous arguments against it, which come from many parts of the medical establishment. They more or less run along the lines of this statement from the American College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology: ‘Unless a woman is in a hospital, an accredited free-standing birthing centre or a birthing centre within a hospital complex, with physicians ready to intervene quickly if necessary, she puts herself and her baby’s health and life at unnecessary risk.’Actually, the risk of death for babies born at home is almost half that of babies born at hospital (0.35 per 1,000 compared to 0.64), according to a 2009 study by the Canadian Medical Association Journal. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence reports that mortality rates are the same in booked home-birth as in hospitals. In November 2011 a study of 65,000 mothers by the National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) was published in the British Medical Journal. The overall rate of negative birth outcomes (death or serious complications) was 4.3 per 1,000 births, with no difference in outcome between non-obstetric and obstetric (hospital) settings. The study did find that the rate of complications rose for first-time mums, 5.3 per 1,000 (0.53%) for hospitals and 9.5 per 1,000 (0.95%) for home-birth. I suspect the number of complications falls with later births because, with experience, the process becomes easier – and because mothers who had problems are less likely to have more children than those who didn’t. The Daily Mail managed to twist this into: ‘First-time mothers who opt for home birth face triple the risk of death or brain damage in child.’ Don’t you just love newspapers? Whether at home or in the hospital there were 250 negative events seen in the study: early neonatal deaths accounted for 13%; brain damage 46%; meconium aspiration syndrome 20%; traumatic nerve damage 4% and fractured bones 4%. Not all of these were treatable.There are so many variables in birth that raw comparative statistics are not always enough. And, without wishing to get into an ethical argument, there are other factors apart from safety. There are things – comfort, happiness, for example – for which people are prepared to sacrifice a little safety. The overriding statistic to take away from that part of the study is that less than 1% of births in the UK, whether at hospital or at home, lead to serious complications.But when you look at rates of satisfaction with their birth experience, the numbers are staggering. According to a 1999 study by Midwifery Today researching women who have experienced both home and hospital birth, over 99% said that they would prefer to have a home-birth in the future!What, then, is so unsatisfying about the hospital birth experience? I’m going to walk through the birthing process now, comparing what goes on at home to hospital. Of course, no two births are the same, no two homes are the same, no two hospitals are the same, but, broadly speaking, it seems women prefer the home-birth experience because: they have more autonomy at home, they suffer less intervention at home and, yes, it appears they actually suffer less pain at home. When mum goes into labour, the journey to the hospital, sometimes rushed, the alien setting when she gets there, the array of doctors and nurses who she may never have met before, but are about to get intimate, can all upset her rhythm and the production of her labour hormones. These aren’t always problems, but they have the potential to be; they add to stress and detract from comfort.At home, mum is in a familiar environment, she can get comfortable and settled, go where she likes and do what she likes. Often getting on with something else can take her mind off the pain of the contractions, while in hospital there is little else to focus on. At home, she can choose where she wants to give birth – and she can change her mind, if she likes. She is in her own domain, without someone she doesn’t know telling her what she can and can’t do. She can change the light, the heating, the music; she can decide exactly who she wants at the birth and who ‘catches’ her baby. She can choose what she wants to eat. She will have interviewed and chosen her midwife many months before, and built up a relationship over that time. But in hospitals she is attended by whoever is on duty, she has to eat hospital food, there might be interruptions, doctors’ pagers, alarms, screams from next door, whirrs of machinery, tube lighting, overworked, resentful staff to deal with, internal hospital politics, people coming in, waking her up, and checking her vitals, sticking in pins or needles, putting on monitor belts, checking her cervix mid-contraction – any number of things over which mum has no control. Mums who move about freely during labour complain less of back pain. Many authorities feel that the motion of walking and changing positions can even enhance the effectiveness of the contractions, but such active birth is not as possible in the confines of many hospitals. Many use intravenous fluids and electronic foetal monitors to ensure she stays hydrated and to record each contraction and beat of the baby’s heart. This all dampens mum’s ability to move about and adds to any feelings of claustrophobia.In hospital the tendency is to give birth on your back, though this is often not the best position – the coccyx cannot bend to help the baby’s head pass through. There are many other positions – on your hands and knees for example – where you don’t have to work against gravity and where the baby’s head is not impeded. On your back, pushing is less effective and metal forceps are sometimes used to pull the baby out of the vagina, but forceps are less commonly used when mum assumes a position of comfort during the bearing-down stage.This brings us to the next issue: intervention. The NPEU study of 2011 found that 58% of women in hospital had a natural birth without any intervention, compared to 88% of women at home and 80% of women at a midwife-led unit. Of course, there are frequent occasions when medical technology saves lives, but the likelihood of medical intervention increases in hospitals. I suggest it can actually cause as many problems as it alleviates because it is interruptive. Even routine technology can interrupt the normal birth process. Once derailed from the birthing tracks, it is hard to get back on. Once intervention starts, it’s hard to stop. The medical industry is built on providing cures, but if you are a mother giving birth, you are not sick, there is nothing wrong with you, what you are going through is natural and normal. As author Sheila Stubbs writes, ‘the midwife considers the miracle of childbirth as normal, and leaves it alone unless there’s trouble. The obstetrician normally sees childbirth as trouble; if he leaves it alone, it’s a miracle.’Here are just some of the other interventions that occur. If a mum arrives at hospital and the production of her labour hormones has been interrupted, as can happen as a result of the journey, she will sometimes be given syntocinon, a synthetic version of the hormone oxytocin, which occurs naturally and causes the muscle of the uterus to contract during labour so baby can be pushed out. The dose of syntocinon is increased until contractions are deemed normal. It’s sometimes given after birth as well to stimulate the contractions that help push out the placenta and prevent bleeding. But there are allegations that syntocinon increases the risk of baby going into distress, and of mum finding labour too painful and needing an epidural. This is one of the reasons why women also find home-birth less painful.Obstetricians sometimes rupture the bag of waters surrounding the baby in order to speed up the birthing process. This places a time limit on the labour, as the likelihood of a uterine infection increases after the water is broken. Indeed in a hospital – no matter how clean – you are exposed to more pathogens than at home. The rate of post-partum infection to women who give birth in hospital is a terrifying 25%, compared to just 4% in home-birth mothers. Once the protective cushion of water surrounding the baby’s head is removed (that is to say, once the waters are broken) there are more possibilities for intervention. A scalp electrode, a tiny probe, might be attached to baby’s scalp, to continue monitoring its heart rate and to gather information about its blood.There are these and a whole host of other ‘just in case’ interventions in hospital that you just don’t meet at home. As childbirth author Margaret Jowitt, says – and here we are back to our theme of Natural Law – ‘Natural childbirth has evolved to suit the species, and if mankind chooses to ignore her advice and interfere with her workings we must not complain about the consequences.’At home, if necessary, in the 1% of cases where serious complications do ensue, you can still be taken to hospital – assuming you live in reasonable distance of one.‘My mother groaned, my father wept,’ wrote William Blake, ‘into the dangerous world I leapt.’ We come now to the afterbirth. Many new mothers say they physically ache for their babies when they are separated. Nature, it seems, gives new mothers a strong attachment desire, a physical yearning that, if allowed to be satisfied, starts a process with results beneficial to both mother and baby. There are all sorts of natural forces at work, many of which we don’t even know about. ‘Incomplete bonding,’ on the other hand, in the words of Judith Goldsmith, author of Childbirth Wisdom from the World’s Oldest Societies, ‘can lead to confusion, depression, incompetence, and even rejection of the child by the mother.’ Yet in hospitals, even today with all we know, the baby is often taken away from the mother for weighing and other tests – or to keep it warm, though there is no warmer place for it that in its mother’s arms (nature has planned for skin-to-skin contact).Separation of mother from baby is more likely if some kind of medical intervention or operation has occurred, or if mum is recovering from drugs taken during labour. (Women who have taken drugs in labour also report decreased maternal feelings towards their babies and increased post-natal depression). At home, after birth, baby is not taken from its mother’s side unless there is an emergency.As child development author, Joseph Chilton Pearce, writes, ‘Bonding is a psychological-biological state, a vital physical link that coordinates and unifies the entire biological system . . . We are never conscious of being bonded; we are conscious only of our acute disease when we are not bonded.’ The breaking of the bond results in higher rates of postpartum depression and child rejection. Nature gives new parents and babies the desire to bond, because bonding is beneficial to our species. Not only does it encourage breastfeeding and speed the recovery of the mother, but the emotional bonding in the magical moments after birth between mother and child, between the entire family, cements the unity of the family. The hospital institution has no such agenda. The cutting of the umbilical cord is another area of contention. Hospitals, say home-birth advocates, cut it too soon. In Birth Without Violence, the classic 1975 text advocating gentle birthing techniques, Frederick Leboyer – also an advocate of bonding and immediate skin-to-skin contact between mother and baby after birth – writes:[Nature] has arranged it so that during the dangerous passage of birth, the child is receiving oxygen from two sources rather than one: from the lungs and from the umbilicus. Two systems functioning simultaneously, one relieving the other: the old one, the umbilicus, continues to supply oxygen to the baby until the new one, the lungs, has fully taken its place. However, once the infant has been born and delivered from the mother, it remains bound to her by this umbilicus, which continues to beat for several long minutes: four, five, sometimes more. Oxygenated by the umbilicus, sheltered from anoxia, the baby can settle into breathing without danger and without shock. In addition, the blood has plenty of time to abandon its old route (which leads to the placenta) and progressively to fill the pulmonary circulatory system. During this time, in parallel fashion, an orifice closes in the heart, which seals off the old route forever. In short, for an average of four or five minutes, the newborn infant straddles two worlds. Drawing oxygen from two sources, it switches gradually from the one to the other, without a brutal transition. One scarcely hears a cry. What is required for this miracle to take place? Only a little patience.Patience is not something you associate with hospital birth. There are simply not the resources, even if, as the sixth US president John Quincy Adams said, ‘patience and perseverance have a magical effect before which difficulties disappear and obstacles vanish’. The arguments to delay the early cutting of the cord (something not as frequent in hospitals as it once was) are that, even though blood going back to the placenta stops flowing – or pulsing – non-pulsing blood going from the placenta into baby is still flowing. After birth, 25–35% of baby’s oxygenated blood remains in the placenta for up to ten minutes. With the cord cut early, baby is less likely to receive this blood, making cold stress, infant jaundice, anaemia, Rh disease and even a delayed maternal placental expulsion more likely. There is also the risk of oxygen deprivation and circulatory shock, as baby gasps for breath before his nasal passages have naturally drained their mucus and amniotic fluid. Scientist W. F. Windle has even argued that, starved of blood and oxygen, brain cells will die, so cutting the cord too early even sets the stage for brain damage.Natural birth advocates say it is vital for the baby’s feeding to be put to the breast as soon as possible after birth, while his sucking instincts are strongest. Bathing, measuring and temperature-taking can wait. Babies are most alert during the first hour after birth, so it’s important to take advantage of this before they settle into that sleepy stage that can last for hours or even days.Colostrum, the yellow fluid that breasts start producing during pregnancy, is nature’s first food. is substance performs many roles we know about and probably many we don’t as well. Known as ‘baby’s first vaccine’, it is full of antibodies and protects against many different viruses and bacteria. It has a laxative effect that clears meconium – baby’s black and tarry first stool – out of the system. If this isn’t done, baby can be vulnerable to jaundice. Colostrum lines baby’s stomach ready for its mother’s milk, which comes two or three days later, and it meets baby’s nutritional needs with a naturally occurring balance of fat, protein and carbohydrate. Again, with the various medical interventions that go on in hospitals, from operations to drug-taking to simply separating mother and baby, this early breast-feeding process can easily be derailed. Once derailed, as I’ve said, it’s often hard to get back on track. I am no scientist and cannot speak with any authority on the science behind it all, but I do know that nature, very often, plans for things that science has yet to discover.Once upon a time, when families lived closer together and people had more children at a younger age, there was an immediate family infrastructure around you. People were experienced with young. If mum was tired, nan or auntie could feed the baby. Many of us are less fortunate in this regard today. With a hospital, you are sent home and, suddenly, you and your partner are on your own with a baby in your life, and very little aftercare. When my first son was born I was 30. I suddenly realized I had only held a baby once before. I was an only child so I had never looked after a younger brother or sister; my cousins, who had had children, lived abroad. Suddenly there was this living thing in my life, and I didn’t know what to do. But, having had a home-birth, the midwife, who you already know, can you give you aftercare. She comes and visits, helps with the early breastfeeding process and generally supports and keeps you on the right tracks.It’s so important to get the birthing process right. There are all sorts of consequences to our health and happiness to not doing so. And in the West, with the process riddled as it is with intervention, we don’t. We need to get birth out of the hospital and into an environment where women experience less pain, lower levels of intervention, greater autonomy and increased satisfaction.A 2011 study by a team from Peking University and the London School of Hygiene found that, of 1.5 million births in China between 1996 and 2008, babies born in hospitals were two to three times less likely to die. China is at a similar stage in its evolutionary cycle to the developed world at the beginning of the 20th century. The move to hospitals there looks inevitable. Something similar is happening in most Developing Nations.In his book A History of Women’s Bodies, Edward Shorter quotes a doctor describing a birth in a working-class home in the 1920s:You find a bed that has been slept on by the husband, wife and one or two children; it has frequently been soaked with urine, the sheets are dirty, and the patient’s garments are soiled, she has not had a bath. Instead of sterile dressings you have a few old rags or the discharges are allowed to soak into a nightdress which is not changed for days.For comparison, he describes a 1920s hospital birth:The mother lies in a well-aired disinfected room, light and sunlight stream unhindered through a high window and you can make it light as day electrically too. She is well bathed and freshly clothed on linen sheets of blinding whiteness . . . You have a staff of assistants who respond to every signal . . . Only those who have to repair a perineum in a cottars’s house in a cottar’s bed with the poor light and help at hand can realize the joy.Most homes in the developed world are no longer as he describes, if they ever were, except in slums. It would seem the evolution in the way we give birth as a country develops passes from the home to the hospital. It is time to take it away from the hospital.Why am I spending so much time on birth in a book about economics? The process of giving birth is yet another manifestation of this culture of pervasive state intervention. (Hospitals, of course, are mostly state run.) It’s another example of something that feels safer, if provided by the state in a hospital, even if the evidence is to the contrary. And it’s another example of the state destroying for so many something that is beautiful and wonderful.What’s more, like so many things that are state-run, hospital birth is needlessly expensive. The November 2011 study of 65,000 mothers by the National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit looked at the average costs of birth in the NHS. They were highest for planned obstetric unit births and lowest for planned home-births. Here they are:* £1,631 (c. $2,600) for a planned birth in an obstetric unit * £1,461 (c. $2,340 for a planned birth in an alongside midwifery unit (AMU)* £1,435 (c. $2,300) for a planned birth in a free-standing midwifery unit (FMU)* £1,067 (c. $1,700) for a planned home-birth.Not only is it as safe; not only are people more satisfied by it; not only do the recipients receive more one-to-one – i.e. better – care; home-birth is also 35% cheaper. Intervention is expensive.So I return to this theme of non-intervention, whether in hospitals or economies. It often looks cruel, callous and hard-hearted; it often looks unsafe, but, counter-intuitively perhaps, in the end it is more human and more humane.When you look at the cost of private birth, the argument for home-birth is even more compelling. Private maternity care is expensive. For example, in summer 2012, a first birth at the Portland Hospital in London costs £2,880 (about $4,400) for a normal delivery and £3,790 (about $5,685) for an elective caesarean and for the first 24 hours of care. Additional nights in a standard room cost around £1,000 (about $1,500). You also have to allow for the fees charged by your private consultant obstetrician, which might be £3,000–£4,000 ($4,500– $6,000). So, in total, a private birth at a hospital such as the Portland could cost £7,500–£10,000 ($10–$15,000). There will be some saving if you opt for a ‘midwife-led delivery service’ or ‘midwife-led care’. In this instance, you will still have a named obstetrician, but he or she will see you less often, and the birth may be ‘supported by an on-call Consultant Obstetrician’. London midwives charge £2,500–£4,000 (c. $4–6,000) for about six months of care from early pregnancy to a month after birth. The comparative value is astounding, I would say.To have a planned home-birth on the NHS is possible, but can be problematic to arrange, depending on where you are based. Most people, after they have paid taxes, do not now have the funds to buy a private home-birth, so they are forced into the arms of government health care, such is the cycle at work.I was first introduced to the idea of home-birth by my ex-wife, Louisa, something for which I will forever be grateful. She hated hospitals due to an earlier experience in her life and only found out about alternatives thanks to the internet. I, as well as my friends and family, thought Louisa was insane. But she insisted. And she was right to.Our first son was actually two weeks and six days late. Because he was so late, we were obliged to go to the hospital, which we did, after two weeks and five days. We were kept waiting so long in there, we decided to go and persuaded an overworked nurse that we were fine to go and we left. The confused nurse was glad to have one less thing to think about. The next day Samuel was born: a beautiful and wonderful experience that I will never forget, one of the happiest days of my life – exactly as nature intended.Simply talking to people that have experienced both home-birth and hospital birth, or reading about their experiences, the anecdotal evidence is compelling. Home-birth may not be for everyone – I’m not suggesting it is. Birthing centres seem a good way forward. But a hospital birth should only be for emergencies. Childbirth is a natural process that no longer requires hospitalization, except in those 1% of situations where something goes seriously wrong. If it does go wrong and there is an emergency, call an ambulance and be taken to hospital – that is what they are for.Returning to the original premise of Natural and Positive Law, it’s pretty clear which category hospital birth falls into. Hospitals do things in the way that they do because of the pressures they are under, not least the threat of legal action should some procedural failure occur. Taking birth back home and away from the state reduces the burden of us on it and of it on us.Life After the State - Why We Don’t Need Government (2013) is now back in print - with the audiobook here: Audible UK, Audible US, Apple Books. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

As promised, here is my updated guide to buying and investing in gold. I really think it is important that you own some, given what governments are doing to currency. Spool down to the bottom if you want to see this guide in video form.I have also made this available as a PDF, which you can download here:(If that PDF doesn’t work, try this link)We are living in a world of uncertainty. There is inflation, war, political discontent, financial instability and, perhaps most concerning of all, state incompetence everywhere you look. The case for owning gold, for having wealth stored outside the system, where it is nobody else’s liability, is as strong as it has ever been.There is old Wall Street adage: “Put 10% of your net worth in gold, and hope it doesn’t go up.” If gold is going up, it usually means there are problems elsewhere.The adage applies now, as much as it did when it was first coined many decades ago.How to invest in gold.There are five ways:* You can go old school and buy bullion - coins or bars.* You can buy gold stored in vaults in places like London, Jersey, Zurich or Singapore. This gold is allocated to you.* You can buy ETFs via your stock broker. These are funds that store gold. The price of the fund tracks the gold price, and you own shares in the fund. (See footnote 1, if you need to understand what an ETF is).* You can buy gold companies - refiners, royalty companies, miners and so on.* You can buy futures, options, CFDs or spreadbets.I’m not talking today about buying mining companies (if you are interested in mining companies, consider a paid subscription, as gold mining companies are one of my areas of expertise). Nor am I talking about futures, options, CFDs or spread betting the gold price. Neither is safeguarding your wealth. They are speculation. In the right market they can make you a lot of money. In the wrong market, they can also lose you a lot.Upgrade your subscription here.Today we are talking about old school, physical goldI’ll put to one side arguments about whether gold is a good investment or not (I think it is), and whether I think it is going up or down. I’ll simply explain what is the easiest, cheapest and, perhaps above all, safest way to buy gold.A note on ETFsETFs are a simple way to get exposure to the gold price. It’s not really the same as owning actual metal, so the purists tend to veer away from ETFs, though institutions like them, as do traders. ETFs are easy to buy and sell. You buy an ETF just as you would buy any stock or share through your broker. London-listed gold ETFs include RMAU.L and PHAU.L. The world’s biggest is the NYSE-listed GLD. Costs - for example storage - are baked into the price.To buy an ETF, you need an account with a broker, such as Hargreaves Lansdown or Interactive Investor. You deposit money and buy through them.I steer away from ETFs mainly because they are too easy to get shaken out of. When you buy physical gold, to sell can be a bit of an undertaking, so it’s less likely to be done on a whim. Owning physical turns you into a long-term investor. It may be that you never sell at all and end up passing the gold on to your heirs.So where do you buy gold from?I’ve used many bullion dealers over the years. The dealer I like most, and with whom I have an affiliation deal, is the Pure Gold Company. Premiums are low. Quality of service is high. You get to deal with a human being. You can take delivery of your gold or store it online with them in their vaults. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe. (If you speak to them, tell them I sent you). I also like Goldcore.In theory, there is not a great deal of difference between an ETF and storing your gold online with a bullion dealer. Both are extremely convenient, whether for buying or selling. Both give you exposure to the gold price. But I favour the storing-it-with-a-bullion-dealer route, as, somehow, you are less likely to sell. ETFs make it too easy to sell and so weaken your hands.If you are buying coins, then beware of this scam.Where are you going to put your gold?Once you’ve decided where to buy your gold, the next question is: where to put it? Different people with different circumstances have different solutions.Some people have a safe at home and keep their gold there. Some keep their gold in safety deposit boxes. Others never take delivery at all, and keep it safely stored in a vault with the dealer in sensible places like Zurich, Jersey, London or Singapore.I’m not convinced homes in our “vibrant” British cities are safe, so these are not options I would take, but ... I know one guy that has all his gold stored in a sock in his loft. I know another that has buried it in his garden, and only his close family know the location - he has quite a bit of land. I know another that keeps his gold and silver in plain sight - he uses the bars as doorstops. Nuts you may say, but how about this? He got burgled and the burglars didn’t take the bars. They obviously thought they were just doorstops.If - and only if - you have somewhere safe to store it, I’m a great advocate of taking delivery. You get to handle your metal. There are lots of fantastic different coins from around the world to buy - Chinese Pandas, South African Krugerrands, American Eagles, Austrian Philharmonics, Canadian Maples, Australian Kangaroos. The bars are nice too. It’s good to handle gold. But I refer you to my above comment about cities today. I’ve also heard about homes being burgled by people with metal detectors - but I gather this is mostly an Asian-on-Asian crime. For now.If you are buying coins, then beware of this scam.What about tax?Competition amongst ETFs and bullion dealers has conspired to drive down prices, much to the benefit of the consumer. But there is one enormous cost that neither of these methods are able to avoid - tax.When you sell, you are incurring a Capital Gains Tax (CGT) event - 20% in the UK for higher rate tax-payers and 10% for lower. That’s an unavoidable 10 or 20% erosion of any profit.But there’s another method of buying gold (and silver), which, quite legally, avoids this cost altogether. There is a slightly higher premium to spot when you buy, but we are talking about a tiny amount, nothing like 20% CGT. Given the potential savings involved, it’s surprising that more UK investors don’t buy their gold and silver in this way. The method I’m describing, if you haven’t already figured it out, is to buy sovereigns and Britannias.The gold sovereign used to be the pound coin. Imagine that - a pound coin made of solid gold. It was the pound coin from 1816, after the Great Recoinage, until 1932, when the UK finally abandoned its gold standard. Until then, the pound really was “as good as gold”. 22 carat gold to be precise – that’s about 92% purity. A sovereign weighs about 7gs, which is around a quarter of an ounce, the same weight as a 2p piece.Such is the devaluation of currency that has taken place over successive generations in the UK, it now takes well over 400 pound coins to buy one of these old pound coins.Despite no longer being on the gold standard, the Royal Mint began producing sovereigns again in 1957 and continues to the present day. A large number of them are actually minted in that well known British heartland, Delhi. (That’s because there is a huge market for them in India).Technically these coins are legal tender, so they are exempt from CGT.As sovereigns are so common, the numismatic value is very low. You can pick up 100-plus-year-old Victorian coins at a few percent over spot. You get the history for free. And you can buy them from most dealers, including, of course, the Pure Gold Company and Goldcore.The main exception is the 1937 sovereign struck for Edward VIII. As he abdicated, the coins were never circulated. One sold in 2014 for over half a million quid. That’s some premium.Gold Britannias – which are an ounce in weight – only began to be issued in 1987. But they too are considered coins of the realm. Despite the fact that an ounce of gold is £1,800, the face value of a Britannia is £100. Don’t ask me how that works. I’m sure there’s a reason. But, as coins of the realm, they too are exempt from CGT.The Royal Mint began producing silver Britannias in 1997. They also weigh an ounce. They have a face value of £2 (an ounce of silver is about £16) and are also exempt from CGT.Sovereigns are not the most beautiful coins in the world - Britannias are nicer - but both make for a considerable saving on CGT (assuming you have made a gain when you come to sell - of course, there is no guarantee of that).Thank you very much for reading this report. Good luck with your investments. Remember the adage: “Put 10% of your net worth in gold, and hope it doesn’t go up.” If gold is going up, it usually means there are problems elsewhere.Once again my recommended bullion dealer is the Pure Gold Company. Premiums are low, quality of service is high. You can deal with a human being. You can take delivery of your gold or store it online with them in their vaults. They deliver to the UK, US, Canada and Europe, or you can store your gold with them in their vaults. I also like Goldcore.Until next time,Dominic This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.theflyingfrisby.comWith gold hitting new highs yesterday and the importance of owning some, in my view, as paramount as ever, I am going to send out my report on how to buy gold later today or tomorrow. If it is old hat to you, please just ignore the email.If you prefer, you can also download the PDF version here:(If that PDF doesn’t work, try this link)In the meantime, today I want to take a look at oil. It is having a nice, quiet run.What fossil fuels have made possibleThere were some really interesting comments following this week’s Sunday morning thought piece about declining birth rates. You lot are clever.My argument is that unaffordable housing has been a major cause of declining birth rates: people are having smaller families later in life, for the simple reason that they cannot afford anywhere to live. Dan Shaw replied as follows:For the housing cost argument to be credible, it needs to explain what has changed. Basic necessities, including housing, have consumed the vast majority of people’s incomes until very recently in the developed world. They still do for most people today in the global south (where birth rates are also falling). Fiat inflation is undoubtedly eroding real income in the developed world, but it is only regressing disposable income towards historic norms when people were happy to start families. Why will people not start families when they have roughly the same wealth, in real terms, as their greatest generation (great) grandparents? Why are people in the global south, who have never seen Western wealth, also not having children?Let’s put aside the issue of birth rates - they is not the focus of today’s piece, but Sunday’s. Instead let us ask: what was it that created this unique period in the 20th-century West, when ordinary middle-class people could afford housing and other basic necessities, and still have plenty of income left over for cars and other luxury items? It goes against almost all of history. The answer must surely be fossil fuels. The energy they granted made us incredibly productive. It made 20th-century progress possible.Today a variety of factors are undermining that: fiat money and the debasement of currency; restrictive planning laws and overregulation; and of course, a needless focus on other, more inefficient and wasteful energy sources.The world seems to be slowly coming to its senses regarding fossil fuels, thank goodness, and, like them or not, they are clearly going to have an enormous role to play in powering economies for, at a guess, at least a hundred more years or until a superior form of energy is found. This is why they make up a core 10% of the Dolce Far Niente portfolio.Whether it’s mines, farms, or factories, trucks, cars, boats, trains, or planes, or heating and cooling, we need fossil fuels, and they are going to make life a lot better for a lot of people.Global economies seem to be ticking over reasonably well and finding their feet again. In particular, Chinese manufacturing data seems to be quietly improving. China and India are certainly growing consumption. Attempts to electrify western economies, well-meaning though they may be, seem to be coming apart, meanwhile. In short, oil demand is on the up.This is confirmed by the  latest oil market report from the International Energy Agency, which says: “Global oil demand is forecast to rise by a higher-than-expected 1.7 mb/d in 1Q24 on an improved outlook for the United States and increased bunkering” (refueling of cargo vessels). Meanwhile: “World oil production is projected to fall by 870 kb/d in 1Q24 vs 4Q23 due to heavy weather-related shut-ins and new curbs from the OPEC+ bloc.”The combination of falling production and increased demand is what has led to higher prices.Here’s Brent crude over the last two years, and you can see that nice solid low around $72.50, and the recent run from December to today’s price of $88.The seasonal patterns favour a continuation of this run for at least another few weeks. January to May tends to be the best time of year to be long oil. Things tend to get dicey in the autumn. (Though beware of attaching too much importance to seasonals; they are more an additional rather than core reason for an investment decision).Oil is still relatively cheapI have two very interesting long-term charts to show you next.First, is the long-term ratio between gold and oil. When this chart is high, oil is expensive relative to gold. When low, as is the case now (to an extent), oil is cheap relative to gold.On a long-term basis, of the two, you probably have to say oil is the better bet. It’s not often you will hear me say that! To be clear: I advocate owning both.This next chart is also interesting from a very long-term perspective. It shows energy as a percentage of the S&P500.This has been creeping down for years - ever since $150 oil in 2008, but it has been creeping back up since Covid. You might validly argue that because of the emergence of new tech, new tech companies, and improved productivity, energy as a percentage of the S&P500 will inevitably go lower. That is certainly the evidence of the last 16 years. But you could equally make the case that energy is both essential and undervalued. In my view, it’s a bit of both.So how to play all of this?Simple ways include the likes of Shell (SHEL.L) and BP (BP.L), with Guinness Global Energy (ISIN 0P0000SV1G.L) another, more diversified possibility.If you are looking for something at the spicier end of the market, then I challenge you to find a better report than this one by Dr. John from last autumn, in which he identifies his picks of the North American oil and gas juniors.So to my vehicle of choice, and the one we hold in the Dolce Far’ Niente portfolio: