Attrition in the Ukraine

It looks like the war ends with the last Ukrainian. However, the last Ukrainian is now in sight.

It is difficult to know the number of human casualties on both sides, but when self propelled artillery get destroyed, it is sufficiently obvious and important that we do have good data. And the number of self propelled artillery losses is likely to be indicative of the number of human losses, since in war of attrition the main role of humans is sandbags to protect artillery from artillery and drones

For a long time, losses of self propelled artillery were roughly comparable on both sides, which meant that Russia, having more men and more artillery, was massively winning the war of attrition. As war of attrition approaches its end, the side with ever fewer men and ever less artillery suffers greater and greater losses, while the winning side has fewer and fewer losses.

Over time, Russian losses of self propelled artillery became less and less, and Ukrainian losses greater and greater, and it is now overwhelmingly one sided. So this would indicate that the end is near.

The village of Ternuvate is a little way west of a strong natural line of a defense, the Haichur river, with open flood plains on either side of the river, and overlooking the river and the plains a line of hills, hills now reinforced with anti tank dragon’s teeth, concrete bunkers, machine gun emplacements, and all that, from which troops can sit in comfort, dug in, and shoot anyone attempting to cross the river and the flood plains.

Theoretically, one of Ukraine’s better battalions was sent to man the defense line east of Turnuvate. But, being one of Ukraine’s better battalions, has been sent hither and yon into the worst of the fighting all over the front.

The Russians, in twos and threes, quietly crossed the river and snuck into these mighty bunkers.

Revealing that there are not many men left in this battalion. From the bunkers, they snuck into the little village of Ternuvate, which is now a base for Russian drone operators. Again, revealing that rather few men were left in this battalion.

Increasingly, the Ukraine is defended by ghost battalions, that exist mostly on paper, because nearly everyone has been killed, seriously injured, has deserted, or has been taken prisoner. That the Haichur river defense line was undefended suggests that the Ukrainian command does not know how many men it has, that a lot of ghost soldiers were still drawing pay.

That the defense line has been penetrated renders all those mighty defenses irrelevant. The Ukrainians then proceeded to scrape up some more troops, and recapture part of the village. It was undamaged when the Russians captured it, but is now being quite thoroughly leveled.

Recapturing part of the village is quite useless, unless the Ukrainians can recapture their mighty defense line on the hills overlooking the river flood plain.

Russian shell production is now so high they are refilling their strategic reserve which implies a lack of targets. Russian advances are clearly not motivated by territorial acquisition. Rather, they are looking for more targets so that they can apply their huge and rapidly increasing artillery advantage to attriting Ukrainian capabilities.

So, when Ukrainians, as now, go on the offensive, the Russians halt their advances on that part of the front, because now targets are coming to them. Once the Ukrainians stop sending more targets into Ternuvate, the Russians will resume expanding their bridgehead across the river.

This does not mean the Ukrainians are about to suddenly lose a lot of territory. Rather, they are going to be stretched thinner, because they will need to rely on meat to hold land, rather than concrete and rivers. So, if they let the bridgehead across the river and the valley into the hills stand they will lose men and artillery, and when they try to recapture, are losing men and artillery.

The Ukrainians were able to recapture most of the village, because the Russians had no strong reason to hang onto it if Zelensky was sending them more targets. They do have a strong reason to hang onto some territory across the river, because that is a bridgehead that renders a mighty natural and artificial line of defense irrelevant.

The Zelensky regime is now launching counter offenses all over the front, which have recaptured some territory here and there, but just as The Greatest Ukrainian Counter Offensive was a catastrophe because the Ukrainians were unable to penetrate the Russian defense lines and lost an army and most of the West’s supply of tanks and armored personnel carriers attempting to do so, the current counter offenses will also have been a catastrophe if they are unable to recapture any important defense lines.

War of attrition just gets worse and worse for the losing side. The fewer men they have, the more men they lose, and fewer men the winning side loses.

You have probably heard that front is collapsing all over the Ukraine. You have probably also heard that Ukrainian retreats are insignificant. Both are true simultaneously.

If Russians and Ukrainian spend years fighting over a grove of trees and a village, and eventually the Ukrainians withdraw to next village and the next grove of trees, that is an insignificant tactical retreat. If they spend years fighting over a grove of trees and village, and eventually the Ukrainian troops in that grove of trees and village are no more, it is a collapse of the front. The amount of land the Ukrainians are losing is insignificant. The problem is that in many cases, they are losing that land because they lost the military formations that were defending that land.

The Ukrainian war will end when the Ukrainian army vanishes, and the quiet undramatic fall of the little village of Ternuvate reveals that it is getting close to vanishing. It is only a little village, the Russians only took a few square kilometers, but in taking it, they rendered a mighty line of defense irrelevant, and in taking it, revealed that there are rather few Ukrainian troops remaining.

Trouble is that if Nato is stubborn about the Ukraine, the Ukraine war is likely to become the Polish, Lithuanian, and Moldovan war. A war can only ended by a deal — and inevitably that deal is going to be grossly one sided in favor of the Russians. And the longer this goes on, the more one sided that deal is going to be. It is pointless to hold out for a better deal, when you have fewer troops every day.

War is a test of will and capability. The test has been done. It is way past time to accept the outcome.

74 comments Attrition in the Ukraine

The Cominator says:

Eagerly awaiting the post on Basel III, PMs and crypto…

Jim says:

I will get onto it, but probably not till February 20th at the earliest.

The Cominator says:

Long as I know you are planning to do it, thanks Jim.

Neurotoxin says:

While there’s a fuck-ton of stuff on the Basel III regulations, there’s no single document called “the Basel III treaty.” Or if there is, I can’t find it. There’s a bunch of stuff at the Bank for International Settlements site and other places, but no one source.

The Cominator says:

The most important change I pointed out to Jim (and they really kept word of this from getting out early, most fund guys apparently didn’t know about it) was that Basel III makes gold (but physical only not paper gold contracts or ETF holdings) considered a tier one liquid acid as far as its treatment on bank balance sheets for reserve purposes. This essentially given that everyone knows treasuries are dogshit makes gold the international trade/reserve currency again. While physical silver doesn’t sound likes it was specifically mentioned it seems like national banking regulators are treating it the same way so silver has also been partially remonetized.

Jim says:

Hence the rise in gold. and the slump in Bitcoin. We figured the world was going to move to Bitcoin for international transactions. And it is moving, but at the level of not very wealthy individuals and small businesses. Brics has decided it wants nothing to do with blockchains.

Monetary demand for silver remains insignificant relative to the industrial demand. The recent price action in silver reflects Chinese technological advances in batteries.

China has declared silver a strategic metal, probably in response to Trump grabbing Venezuela’s oil — the Chinese want to pivot away from oil to electricity for military and strategic reasons — they don’t want outsiders to be able to turn China off. Also pollution, the Global Warming Climate Change demon, etcetera, but primarily they don’t want outsiders to be able to turn China off.

Making it a strategic metal makes monetary use of silver in China illegal or semi illegal and some wealthy individuals have been arrested over this. And indeed they don’t want anyone anywhere using it monetarily. They want it for batteries.

The Cominator says:

> Arrests in China over silver
The person who supposedly got in legal trouble was a major short seller probably working with the paper shorts at Comex. Not much detail on this but the gist of the rumor was he was apparently told he has to buy back his short ASAP whether it breaks him or not or go to a labor camp.

China seems to want to drive the silver price higher so more of it gets mined because they don’t think they can meet demand as is for every long, which is probably the most bullish scenario you can imagine. Silver will benefit from both being dragged by gold and a projected extreme industrial shortage…

Crypto probably is in a bear market till around 2030 (could end earlier but I doubt before the next US presidential election in late 2028) at which point you should sell PMs and mining stocks and rotate back to crypto (probably bitcoin but things may have developed since then).

Jim says:

The bear market in Bitcoin will end a lot sooner than that. Brics going gold and against blockchains was a big downer, but the forces that result in individuals using crypto for international transactions are not going away. Bitcoin is a better gold than gold, because somewhat harder to steal than gold bars in the basement, because a whole lot more movable, and because you can take it with you through the airport. Brics has erected a monetary system that makes it easier to transfer money between people who are not both in the globoempire, and this has reduced monetary demand for Bitcoin — but their system still sucks, just sucks less than it use to.

I am not calling the bottom yet, we are likely not at the bottom yet, but there will be a bottom in two years or less.

Why will the bear market end a lot sooner that that? Because the current price reflects lettuce hands unloading. And lettuce hands always unload at or near the bottom. When the lettuce hands capitulate, that signals you are near the bottom.

There have regularly been long bear markets in Bitcoin, but the past, most people who predicted that there was going to be long bear market in Bitcoin have predicted it near the worst possible time.

Bottom callers have a good record. Bear market callers have a very bad record. But if you want a bear call, bottom likely around 2026 December, 2027 January. But market timing is easier at the bottom than on the way down. Not nearly as useful, but a whole lot safer.

The Cominator says:

There were some whales who sold and Barron Trump hasn’t bought back in (what im watching).

f6187 says:

Jim:

Bitcoin is a better gold than gold …

No, Bitcoin is just different from gold. Each asset has distinct characteristics which different people regard as advantages or disadvantages at different times. That’s what makes a market. Rather than appraising one asset as ultimately and for all “better” than another, better to keep a cool head and appreciate each for what it is.

Jim says:

> Each asset has distinct characteristics which different people regard as advantages or disadvantages at different times.

So, what advantages does gold have, other than industrial and decorative use?

Mayflower Sperg says:

Hackers can’t steal gold. States love gold for the same reason hackers love crypto. Gold is a physical object in physical space, and states excel at controlling physical space.

Kevin C. says:

> So, what advantages does gold have, other than industrial and decorative use?

It’s not dependent on the continued existence and operation of the electrical grid? It won’t cease to exist if another Carrington Event hits the planet?

Daddy Scarebucks says:

Time in the market beats timing the market.

I sincerely wish you well with your silver speculation, but you’re crossing a line here by asserting your opinions as investment advice. You don’t know what, or when, the bottom is going to be with Bitcoin; and you don’t know what, or when, the top is going to be with PMs.

Selling one asset after it has deflated in order to buy a different asset that has inflated is usually a long-term losing strategy, especially if iterated upon, and regardless of the assets in question.

The Cominator says:

I sold BtC the not a ton I had a while ago (it was i think 104k) and bought silver and gold a while silver was around 28 an ounce.

Jim says:

Well, that has turned out to be a very good decision. But the time will come when you should switch back to Bitcoin.

f6187 says:

Daddy Scarebucks:

Selling one asset after it has deflated in order to buy a different asset that has inflated is usually a long-term losing strategy …

I try doing the opposite of that by the technique of asset allocation with targeted percentages. So maybe I target 10% in BTC and 30% in GAU. Later I see that I have 15% in BTC and 25% in GAU, so I sell off some BTC to bring it down to 10% and buy some GAU to bring it up to 30%.

It has served me well. However, two problems with this:

(1) When BTC falls 50% in price, as it “always” does, it takes a lot of nerve to buy more of it. I’ve missed the boat on re-upping my BTC. It did keep me fading the uptrends though.

(2) I don’t like selling gold or silver. However, that’s not really a problem, because just wait for my USD earnings to bring my gold and silver percentages back down “naturally,” since USD is also a part of my portfolio.

No strategy is perfect, but this does tend to place me toward the opposite side of manic price trends. Even with this strategy, there exist possible price charts that would lead my portfolio to a total loss, though I think these are improbable. The biggest risk is slavishly buying more of an asset that is going relentlessly to zero. For example, if BTC kept dropping by 50% five times in a row, it could lead me astray, so might need a higher-order rule that prevents buying after too much cumulative loss.

The Cominator says:

No apparently the major short seller (Bian Ximing) was not arrested.

yewotm8 says:

We figured the world was going to move to Bitcoin for international transactions. And it is moving, but at the level of not very wealthy individuals and small businesses.

Is it possible that we get a world where both precious metals and bitcoin are used for international transactions, depending on things like the parties involved, the monetary value of the transaction, the goods being transferred (if there are any), and so on?

Daddy Scarebucks says:

It is not just possible, it is already happening. Just not (yet) at the scale that either the Maxis or the Gold Bugs would like or anticipate.

Jim says:

Any investment is necessarily forward looking. Both the Gold Bugs and the Maxis are correct, but it is going to take a while for the Maxis to be more correct than the Gold Bugs.

I suspect that the future role of Gold was correctly priced in not long after the changes in Basel. If this is true, we are at, not a top in gold, but a gold valuation that is going to remain roughly stable in value (though rapidly appreciating in terms of the ever depreciating fiat money). While Bitcoin still has a lot of headroom to grow in value.

The US dollar has been rallying despite completely unsustainable deficits, the collapse of SWIFT, and all that. But though markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent, that which cannot continue, will not.

The Cominator says:

In the 1970s to early 80s PM bull market (and this one is potentially bigger than that) it didn’t work that way.

Jim says:

Gold cannot run a whole lot further, because the value of gold is already high enough to fulfill monetary demand as an international currency.

Value of the Bitcoin supply is about five percent of the value of the gold supply, so Bitcoin has the potential to rise in value by twenty times more than gold has potential to rise in value.

i says:

I find it annoying that they get to apply the same money magic to Bitcoin as to Fiat. Maybe its better. But damn I do hate this kind of Finance:
https://www.coininsider.com/cryptocurrency/bitcoin/trading/derivatives/

The Cominator says:

Not what AI slop says about the gold price and also the US government is going to print a lot more fiat to monetize the debt while holding on to physical gold for international trade. Estimate on my part for gold is 35000-50000 nominal terms 15000 in current real terms. Now heres the ai slop.

what price of gold would it have to be fill monetary demand

To fill current global or U.S. monetary demand, the price of gold would likely need to rise to between $9,000 and over $100,000 per ounce, depending on whether the backing covers only physical cash in circulation or broader measures of money supply (M2/debt).
Based on recent economic analyses, here are the estimated price points for gold to back different definitions of money:
1. Backing U.S. Federal Reserve Notes (Physical Cash)
If the U.S. moved to 100% gold backing for only the physical currency (Federal Reserve notes) currently in circulation (approx. $2.8 trillion), the price of gold would need to be roughly $9,000 to $10,000 per ounce. (Com: I agree this won’t happen)
2. Backing U.S. M2 Money Supply (Broader Money)
If the goal is to back the entire U.S. M2 money supply—which includes savings accounts, time deposits, and money market funds—the valuation changes drastically.
Total M2 Calculation: If all U.S. M2 were aligned with current gold reserves, the price could be roughly $84,700 per ounce. (Com: This will partially happen)
Other Estimates: Other analysts suggest a range of $10,000 to over $100,000 per ounce to cover broader, more inclusive definitions of money and debt.
3. Global Monetary Demand
If global central banks decided to reset their currencies to a gold standard, covering total global M2 money supply with official gold reserves would likely require a price exceeding $100,000 per ounce.
Key Context for These Numbers
Current Reality: As of early 2026, gold has been trading in the $4,000–$5,000+ per ounce range, driven by central bank buying and inflation hedging.
The “Gap”: These high figures exist because the global money supply has grown exponentially faster than the physical supply of gold in the last 50 years.
Theoretical Exercise: These figures are generally mathematical exercises used to demonstrate the level of inflation, rather than direct forecasts of the market price.

Jim says:

If monetary demand is that you buy your hamburger with physical gold coins, the tax collector demands you show up at the tax office with a bag of gold, then gold could go very high indeed.

But the physical characteristics of gold make it ill suited for that job, which is why bimetallism lasted so long. Obviously bitcoin is better suited for that job.

The low hanging fruit is monetary demand for international transactions, and that is what I was thinking of when I said gold cannot run a whole lot further.

If we assume that seventy percent of all currencies world wide go to physical backing by gold, and they are all sixteen percent marginal reserve, then around US$15000-$25000 per ounce.

But everyone going to bitcoin is more likely than everyone going to marginal reserve gold backed banknotes, because governments can steal the gold backing by just breaking the peg, while they cannot easily steal the bitcoin.

What is quite likely, and is in fact happening right now, hence the run up in gold, is central banks using gold for international settlements.

And the current price is kind of close to what is needed to supply liquidity for this use case. Maybe it might double or quadruple, Or maybe not. But there is room for bitcoin to go up astronomically.

For gold, becoming the currency of international settlements is about as far as it is going to get. For Bitcoin, that is a step towards the total replacement of fiat.

The Cominator says:

Basel III is semi bimetallic… the central banks favor gold of course as gold has always been the currency of the rulers but it does give physical silver a 0% risk weighting as well apparently giving a lane to the currency of merchants and gentlemen. Which is why I really like Basel III (its strange our rulers did something so sane in this era) because I think bimetallism was awesome whereas a pure gold standard has some problems which forced it to be abandoned…

Daddy Scarebucks says:

…If the U.S. moved to 100% gold backing for only the physical currency…
…If the goal is to back the entire U.S. M2 money supply—which includes savings accounts, time deposits, and money market funds…
…If global central banks decided to reset their currencies to a gold standard…

None of these things are happening, or have any reasonable prospect of happening in the foreseeable future.

Eventually, someday, maybe yes. Or maybe on that day they’ll use a cryptocurrency instead. Or maybe they’ll eventually succeed in their efforts to foist some terrible CBDC on us and call that a currency. No way to know, and probably best to hedge one’s bets if one is planning for this eventual future.

The Cominator says:

Your partially wrong already, gold is already the de facto international currency again. I won’t comment about Bitcoin because I honestly do not know what is going to happen and there are too many variables for me to even have an opinion. You guys are all bitcoin optimists whereas I see that you could be right but also that a lot could go wrong. I also think that given that we’ve had genuine whale selling for the first time ever this is probably going to be a bad deeper (like you could see prices of 40000 or lower) and more prolonged crypto bear market than you guys think even if you guys are ultimately right.

The Cominator says:

I meant I wouldn’t give a firm opinion about bitcoin’s long term future… I know I gave a rather negative opinion about it for the short term.

Daddy Scarebucks says:

You guys are all bitcoin optimists

Nope. I’m a Bitcoin Agnostic, and a Gold Agnostic.

If you are Peter Schiff, and have been holding gold since before I was born, then you are surely wearing a big smile right now. And if you bought Bitcoin at the worst possible time in 2018, when it ran up to nearly USD $20,000 shortly before collapsing back to $3500 or so, then you are also wearing a big smile right now.

What I am not agnostic about is that trying to time the market, for either metals or cryptocurrency, has ended rather badly for the speculators, far worse than simply holding onto either asset. I know several people who tried, with either or both asset classes, and landed somewhere on the scale between losing their shirts and simply underperforming the market, say 5-10% year-over-year compared to 50%.

Maybe whales have dumped Bitcoin, but I doubt it. For one thing, Bitcoin is simply not a market driven by whales, and I consider it a category error to even frame it in those terms. That’s not to say that huge market movements can’t be triggered by specific large holdings, or naked shorts, or a mess of derivatives; they can and they are. But these tend to be short-term phenomena that look much less interesting in the rear-view mirror. Hypothetically, if you dumped a quarter mil into the S&P just before the Great Minority Mortgage Meltdown of 2008, you would have been feeling pretty sick at the time, but had you subsequently held on and resisted the urge to panic-sell, you’d still be tremendously wealthy today.

There are many winning strategies. The one strategy that almost always loses is chasing the short-term movements. (Unless, of course, you have and act on insider information, or insider access to front-run the trades, both of which are de jure illegal and de facto permitted only for favored friends of the political elite.)

Jim says:

I have been calling the bottom when it happens fairly successfully. Of course, what people would love to know is the top and the bottom. Or failing that, at least call the bottom in advance.

Lots of people are claiming to have successfully called the top. But they were announcing the top every week or so during the bull market.

alf says:

I’m a bitcoin optimist but mostly because I wholly copy Jim’s opinion. Still, appreciate the alternative perspectives.

Jim says:

That world has already well and truly arrived.

Ayylo says:

This Lesbian Jewish Child-Abusing Color-Rev Leftist Democrat Lawyer Bitch Woman is responsible for massive amounts of damage to the USA, the Right, and the Alt-Right. There’s almost no other category of wench left that this woman could possibly embody.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberta_Kaplan

Brubaker says:

Well well well… searchy searchy… look what your favorite feminazi cunt Roberta Kaplan is up to now…

https://www.realclearwire.com/articles/2026/02/18/deporting_censorship_us_targets_key_ally_of_british_government_over_free_speech_1165667.html

When effective Monarchy gets restored, this Dyke will be tossed into the Lesbian Labor Compound never to be seen by the free world again.

jaggard says:

Meanwhile in the real world neocon emperor trump keeps escalating his attacks against Russia.

https://johnhelmer.net/the-five-surprises-breaking-on-the-war-fronts/

” Lavrov told the State Duma that the US escalation of maritime war against Russia and its allies is new. ”

This is worth noting too

“Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s open break with Kirill dmitriev’s negotiating strategy with the US; indirect criticism of President Vladimir Putin.”

dmitriev is a jew turd and russian traitor “negotiating” “economic deals” with wall street, that is to say ploting to loot Russia, with putin’s implicit aproval.

Jim says:

Nuts.

Not only do you not believe that Trump is not dumping the Ukraine hard enough, which is plausible, you also believe that Putin is not fighting Globohomo hard enough, which is absurd. He got into a war with Globohomo, and, hours before he started it, made it a Holy War as well as a Russian patriotic war.

Go volunteer for the Russian mercs in the Ukraine.

jaggard says:

Well Putin is certainly fighting against the west and globohomo. And you could further argue that Putin’s restraint has so far prevented a bigger disaster.

But it can also be argued that by toleranting constant and serious provocations Putin’s party is needlessly prolonging the war and also inviting a bigger disaster.

We’ll see…

f6187 says:

Jim:

So, what advantages does gold have, other than industrial and decorative use? …

(No Reply button, so posting down here)

Other people have posted good answers, and I’ll add some. First of all, industrial and decorative uses are nothing to be sneezed at. But it’s still a good question. Ignoring industrial and decorative uses, what use is gold?

One primary use of gold is as money. Now you might say, well hold up there, isn’t that some kind of circular reasoning? That gold is useful as money because it’s useful as money?

No. Gold is useful as money because it has physical characteristics which make it useful as money. It is very durable, and almost nothing in ordinary life reacts with it or corrodes it, including oxygen and even salt water. It is highly ductile and divisible. It is rare, but not too rare. It is easily recognizable and distinguishable from other elements. It is fungible, and obviously necessary characteristic of money. It is beautiful, which certainly doesn’t hurt as money. It is dense, and its value per unit mass is high. A mere 90 ounces will buy a median house. A million dollars in $100 bills weighs 22 pounds, but a million dollars in gold only weighs 14 pounds at the moment. You can easily store that gold in a harsh environment, but those $100 bills will get ruined fast.

Some say “you can’t eat gold.” Well duh, if you could eat gold, it wouldn’t be durable, and so it wouldn’t be useful as money. You can’t eat $100 bills either. The point of money is not to eat it, but to hold onto it for a while and later trade it for something you can eat. There are many reasons why you can’t use a pound of ground beef as money. Even cigarettes are more durable and fungible than that.

The supply of gold also cannot be easily inflated, also making it useful as money. If we used a rare orchid as money, people would just start growing lots of those formerly rare orchids. Gold is created in the universe when two neutron stars collide, resulting in several Earth masses of gold flying off in all directions, with rarity increasing with the square of the distance. So far only God Himself can create gold out of simpler elements.

Sure, humans might mine an asteroid and start hauling down huge amounts of gold. I’ll be watching the news for that development and maybe diversify into emeralds and z-snark tokens or whatever. But even if that happens and the price of gold drops to $50, I don’t think I’ll be too worried because we’ll all be a lot more wealthy in real terms. Maybe I’ll replace my gutters and wiring with gold. Maybe all sorts of electronics and applications become more feasible and cheaper. Bring on the asteroid. As they used to say in the coal mines after blasting, “let’s go get it.”

Some say “it’s hard to ship gold long distance.” Well, it’s still cheaper than shipping the equivalent amount of cash. Besides, just layer an accounting system on top of gold reserves so you don’t have to ship it as often. Can’t do that because governments don’t honor physical property rights? Then fix that problem. They’re not gonna honor your digital property rights either. It’s true that with some digital currencies there often is no vault for governments to raid, though there are some digital currencies backed by dollars or gold. Same problem there. Need to fix that.

Another advantage of gold that others have mentioned is that you can pass it directly from one human hand to another. The physical universe itself implements transfer of possession with no need for a digital signal network or distributed computers. It is nice after all to have a physical money of some kind, also known as “cash.” It is far less traceable than digital assets.

You also don’t need elaborate mechanisms of passwords and password shares to leave gold to your family when you die. Nothing to remember or record carefully, and no complex technology for wife-jack to navigate. Now sure, if she has the key to your vault she can run off with it at any time, but you need to fix that problem anyway even with digital assets.

One might ask, ridiculously, “Other than industrial and decorative uses, what advantage does Bitcoin have?” Hah. Bitcoin doesn’t even have those uses. It does however have other advantages, such as being transferable across vast distances with zero need for any central intermediary or storage vault. The trade-off is that there’s nothing of physical value to be had, and no ability to spend in person as cash. Life is full of trade-offs.

Crossing a border? Fine. Trade your gold for tokens, memorize a passphrase, reconstitute your wallet on the other side, and then trade your tokens for gold. If you’re worried about exchange rates, use Tether gold or Paxos gold. I know I’m talking about an ideal world here, but that’s the goal. Abolish any government that stands in the way.

f6187 says:

A mere 90 [troy] ounces will buy a median house

That’s about 6 pounds, the weight of a gaming laptop.

Daddy Scarebucks says:

Jim was asking about the advantages over Bitcoin. So the two main properties described here, survival through harsh storage/usage conditions and resistance to supply inflation (but not debasement), do not apply.

The argument presented on shipping gold is that it’s easier than paper money, and good governments shouldn’t confiscate your assets. Putting aside the charming naivete of Hollywood style briefcases and laundry bags full of hundred dollar bills, and the idea that oppressive governments can simply be resisted or toppled, these are still not arguments for gold over Bitcoin. They argue for gold over paper money and over some other real or imaginary crypto currency in a largely imaginary political landscape.

Regarding “elaborate mechanisms of passwords and password shares”, anyone who has been through a death in the family knows the current system to be an administrative nightmare, even with a crystal clear and recent will, and beneficiaries listed on all accounts. You have to hound the banks and holding companies to get the assets and titles and accounts transferred, locate the scrap of paper or .doc file where boomer dad/uncle wrote his online banking password just to pay the short-term bills, and so on. Gold is not going to solve any of those problems, unless every family keeps its entire savings under the mattress in a big safe in the basement, and that would be very far-fetched.

I’ll emphasize again that I don’t claim to know what is going to happen with Bitcoin and certainly am not going to put all my eggs in that one basket, but the arguments that the gold and silver bugs bring to bear against it tend to be consistently, atrociously bad. There are much more relevant and interesting arguments to be made against Bitcoin, such as scaling limits and blockchain analysis, both of which are being worked on, but in the present moment remain major barriers to wider adoption.

And ironically, the metal enjoyers rarely seem to deploy the best argument in support of gold and silver, which is historical momentum and Metcalfe’s Law. That, again, is something that could change (it’s not an “iron law”, no pun intended) in favor of Bitcoin but still currently favors metals.

f6187 says:

Jim was asking about the advantages over Bitcoin.

Ok. Gold is physical. It is valued in industry. It is valued for decorative purposes. It is valued as physical money. It can be traded and stored in the real world with no need for digital devices. Some ask “who cares?” but a lot of people care and for good reason.

Both gold and Bitcoin can be stolen in different ways. However, people have lost vast amounts of Bitcoin over the years with no thieves involved, simply by losing track of the keys. You could bury gold in a field and forget where you put it, but that’s unlikely and far easier to remedy than resurrecting a lost key.

The historical momentum you mention originally arose from the fact that when people traded goods, gold tended to be the thing that most people wanted most of the time. That common preference is what elevated gold to the status of money, unlike other commodities such as tobacco, whiskey, lard, and flour. So the long-term adoption of gold as money arises from very deep factors in human psychology.

Anonymous Fake says:

https://x.com/MaRy_JaNe1209/status/2023748134522978454

People are starting to notice that protests aren’t really real, if they ever were. But the weird thing is, that none of the insane stuff coming out about Epstein makes sense. Jailbait works fine for blackmail. But little children? And eating babies? Really?

I’ve said before that blackmail in itself is suspicious (and probably nonexistent at the elite level), because anything can be forged. It doesn’t have to be real. What if this slow “revelation” of the most unthinkable atrocities is all forgeries too? Who benefits?

Maybe Mossad is behind this in an ironic sense. It’s not threatening any American “elites” (clowns). It’s all designed to provoke attacks on Jews, who will be blamed for atrocities and the next economic depression, and they will be forced to flee to Israel and beef them up for their next expansionary campaign, the conquest of Syria.

The way this might fail is if Israelis figure out that American Jews are cultural cancer and they would be a burden, but this is the way a moderate and worldly Zionist would see things, not a fundamentalist zealot.

Jim says:

>. But little children? And eating babies? Really?

Demon worship.

The Cominator says:

There isn’t any pizzagate (which was real) tier stuff in the Epstein files it’s boring. If he was doing that there wouldn’t be tons of living victims, he was just an intel asset pimp running a honeypot. The only one who i think of as smart normally who has taken the other side is Jay Dyer.

Contaminated NEET says:

He won Powerball. It’s got to take some serious suction to rig that.

The Cominator says:

He didn’t rig it his intel agency masters rigged it for him. Whitey Bulger (FBI asset) “won” powerball too by tracking a guy who bought a winning ticket at a store he supposedly was some kind of under the table partner in and forcing him to co sign the ticket but I now figure the FBI tipped off Whitey to that.

Pax Imperialis says:

There is a market for powdered human flesh and worse in certain parts of the world.

While typically not a Western problem, if you know where to look there are quite a few pictures and videos of similar activities occurring in the West floating around in the darker recesses of the net.

Contaminated NEET says:

>I’ve said before that blackmail in itself is suspicious (and probably nonexistent at the elite level), because anything can be forged. It doesn’t have to be real. What if this slow “revelation” of the most unthinkable atrocities is all forgeries too? Who benefits?

Blackmail is clearly part of it, but it’s far from everything. You build cohesion by doing forbidden things together and then keeping the secret: it proves you can trust each other. You also prove you’re willing to do anything at all that might be required by doing the most horrible things imaginable. Credible demonstrated commitment.

The British Empire was run by men who sodomized each other in boarding school and then kept quiet about it. This made them a stronger and more cohesive ruling class, not a weaker one.

As for literal, true-believing demon worship, well, I’m still skeptical. Nothing I’ve seen so far in the emails suggests that the demon worship was anything but metaphorical. I’d be willing to believe they do it as a joke, to prove they’re beyond the goycattle’s silly kindergarten morality, but these self-proclaimed Masters of the Universe don’t acknowledge any power greater than themselves, neither divine nor diabolical.

The Cominator says:

“The British Empire was run by men who sodomized each other in boarding school”

I always assumed this was a myth and still do. Men need a lot of propaganda and repression to tolerate most homosexuals at all one who was actively trying to force his dick up my ass my instinct would be to respond with really extreme violence or get together with others and respond with extreme violence.

Tejano Bob says:

my inference from working with common wealthers is the Dutch rudder circle jerk is the common thing.

The Cominator says:

Don’t know what that is… the most homosexual thing most guys will naturally tolerate if horny enough and if the girl is hotter than one they would normally get is some kind of train/threesome/gangbang of one chick.

Jim says:

> The British Empire was run by men who sodomized each other in boarding school and then kept quiet about it. This made them a stronger and more cohesive ruling class, not a weaker one.

Nuts.

Faggots are always writing themselves into history.

Jim says:

> but these self-proclaimed Masters of the Universe don’t acknowledge any power greater than themselves, neither divine nor diabolical.

Notoriously and obviously, there is a whole lot of demon worship among Jews. Where there is demon worship, there is also going to be child sacrifice.

I am quite sure Epstein was not a demon worshiper, let alone himself a child sacrificer, but he was a pimp and procurer, and a whole lot of his clients would have wanted him to procure children. But he, for himself and most of his clients, was primarily interested in procuring young fertile age women. On the other hand, the temple on Lolita Island was obviously built for demon worshipers, so he was probably supplying them with what they wanted.

Demon worship is demonized in Christianity and in postChristianity that has only recently transitioned to postChristianity, but mainstream Judaism, including old type Judaism, is startlingly tolerant of it.

Contaminated NEET says:

>mainstream Judaism, including old type Judaism, is startlingly tolerant of it

Ron Unz’s Oddities of the Jewish Religion blew my mind.

Still, the Little St. James “temple” was stage scenery made from plywood and paint in an afternoon. I could put that thing together with a $1500 and a couple of buddies. That doesn’t mean they couldn’t have done a human sacrifice there, but with the resources these people command, they would build it from marble and cedar if they truly believed.

Jim says:

OK, Epstein was obviously not a demon worshiper. But he was servicing his demon worshiper customers, even if only on the cheap. And why would he be servicing his demon worshiper customers, if not in his primary role and primary job: Procurer.

The Cominator says:

I don’t think they used him for that its not like Pizzagate (which as you expect had no living witnesses among the victims). I mean its possible Epstein brought in snuff victims and none of the other regular girls saw them (because if they did we would hear about it) but nah I expect the demon worshippers at least as far as the United States goes revolved around an axis of Alefantis, Abramhovic (however you spelled that demonic witch’s name) and the Podestas as we saw from the pizzagate emails with other figures more peripherally involved. Epstein was a bit of a shitlib but just doesn’t seem on that level of evil from what I’ve seen.

Fauci got his regular Jesuit demonic sadism out by utterly pointless experiments slowly torturing puppies to death by having them eaten alive by flies over months and months nothing I’ve found directly involving kids except testing deadly aids drugs on orphans in the 80s.

Karl says:

Does anyone have any idea why Russia isn’t targeting members of the Ukrainian government? Ukraine does try to assassinate Russian generals and sometimes succeeds. I haven’t heard of any comparable attempts of the Russians.

c4ssidy says:

Putin speaking to Tucker talks about Zelensky pulling crazy manoeuvres (Kursk) for appearance’s sake, without apparent consideration towards grand strategy. Maybe he has a similar opinion regarding Ukrainian generals

Jim says:

The current Ukrainian counter offensive is catastrophic. The Russians always respond to Ukrainian offensives by pulling back to more defensible positions, and bread tube announces “yay we are winning”. Then the counter offensive penetrates into more defensible positions, or is allowed to penetrate into more defensible positions, gets pinned down, is unable to retreat, and gets annihilated. A very large proportion these counter offensives result in the annihilation of the forces sent in, even though they invariably “succeed’.

Varna says:

If Russia does too much too fast it can initiate a panic stampede from NATO into escalation country.

If it does too little too slow it can provoke a misguided euphoria stampede from NATO into escalation country, and also home front demoralization.

Can’t go too fast, can’t go too slow.

Karl says:

Of course, but the war will end when Ukraine surrenders. The present government does no want to surrender. Maybe a different government would?

Perhaps the explanation why Russia is no targeting members of the Ukranian government is simply that the Ukrainian government does not govern and has no say in any matter related to the war.

Jim says:

The present government of the Ukraine is never going to surrender. The war in the Ukraine will end when the Zelensky government flees the Ukraine, but Ukraine war is between Europe and Russia, and is not going to end until Europe cuts a deal, or the nukes fly. The Ukraine war will end in the Ukraine when the Ukrainian government flees, but the Ukraine war will continue, only now in Poland, Lithuania, and Moldova.

The Cominator says:

Its funny that despite being Jewish how much Zelensky and the Ukranian government are like Hitler in the bunker… complete with Zelensky being fucked up out of his mind on drugs all the time.

Karl says:

Well yes, but wouldn’t the present government flee sooner if Russia starts targeting members of the government?

Wouldn’t ending the war in Ukraine militarily justify the cost of a few missles or drones targeting members of the Ukrainian government, even if the war keeps going on at other places?

I don’t understand why Russia isn’t killing members of the Ukrainian government. What am I missing?

The Cominator says:

I think the Republicans would do well to run on proscriptions for the enemy rich. Okay the left wants to run on ant rich rhetoric and communism let’s redistribute some wealth for real. Mackenzie Bezos proscribed, Soros and his son, proscribed. You switch sides to the left because you want open borders, proscribed…

Fidelis says:

Yes I agree. Property rights return when the fighting is over and done with. Now we are at war, and we must deny the enemy resources.

The Cominator says:

The American right needs to collectively learn the word “proscribe”.

Jim says:

Obviously secure property rights are a good thing — and feral women will always vote against secure property rights. But when at war, we have to deny property rights to our enemies. Long term, we need to permanently repeal the nineteenth, but short term, we need to proscribe a whole lot of billionaires.

Dan says:

Reactionaries saw Trumps last election as evidence of a legitimate Thermidorian alliance ie. members of the uniparty willing to accept Trump. Presumably for a myriad of self-interests.

There always remained of course the question who would ultimately take power and which direction the empire would move.

Fuentes maintains Trump sold out MAGA to the Israeli’s immediately – cabinets still full of the usual suspects; money from Adelson; seemingly doing a 180 on the application of US hard power in the ME.
Simplicius mostly agrees, seeing Iran especially as evidence Trump has forgone MAGA and capitulated wholly to the neocons – drawing the US back to its staus quo just with a little more emphasis on global pillaging in lieu of spreading dei.

Would love to get your opinion on this Jim. Has Trump capitulated? Been compromised? Or still trying to walk this tight-rope of competing Washington elite interests while maintaining his eye on MAGA?

alf says:

Fuentes maintains Trump sold out MAGA to the Israeli’s

What a fresh and never before heard take. /s

Only a useful take in that you can safely bet the person saying it is trying to shill you something. As I am fond of repeating, we know what kind of guy Trump is. We’ve gotten to know him pretty well over the past decade, for Americans decades even, we know his strengths as well as his weaknesses.

Trump is his own man. That is simply his character, has always been his character. To the extent he is “in the Jews’ pockets” he has simply made a deal with them, as he makes deals with anyone. Any other read intentionally misreads who Trump is as a man.

Jim says:

Trump is Trump. He will make a deal with anyone, but he is no one’s pocket, and whoever makes a deal with him is going to get a tough deal, and usually the deal will be worse for them and better for Trump than they expected.

Yes, obviously he has made a deal with the neocons. But he is still kicking the Ukraine to the curb.

He blocked Russia’s capability to ship oil to Cuba, but the Americas are his turf. He has not blocked it, and is not going to block it anywhere outside the Americas. He is not going to go to ground war with Iran, because not his turf.

Dan says:

I see. Thanks to you both.

Leave a Reply to Fidelis Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *