A personal note from longtime reader DC: “I have a question and seek your advice, please.” 

“Previously your advice – whether shared in your writings, your talks, or in person – has always been helpful, appreciated, and usually timely.

“A couple of years ago, I had to go through a rough and contentious divorce…. I know I did the right thing, but financially it wiped me out and necessitated a large debt hole. I just turned 60 and am healthier and happier than ever…. Income is solid, but it largely goes to servicing debt.

“Today, I read your writings on debt and will follow the ideas you shared. I am starting all over again. Is there any further advice or pointers you can share to help me on my path out of debt?”

My Response: Thanks for reaching out and for being so candid about your situation. I think there is a lot you can do to get back on track and start enjoying the benefits of your talents, your concerns, and your ambitions. One thing I’m going to do is have one of my books – The Pledge – sent to you. It’s about starting over. And it’s very pragmatic. After you’ve had a chance to read it, we can have a chat… either just the two of us or maybe make it something we can share with others.

From KW re my article about “Growers and Tenders” in last week’s issue: 

“Growers and Tenders… interesting concept. I have always considered myself an efficiency guy (Tender). I realized early on in my corporate career that I am not the visionary type. However, if you want to turn around your unprofitable company/division, I am your guy. That’s the way I always thought of this concept. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!”

My Response: I agree. If you are an “efficiency guy,” I’d say you are a Tender. And as you say, as someone who thinks (and prioritizes your work) as a Tender, you can contribute to the business by paying attention to how all the many parts of your business are running – repairing broken parts; streamlining protocols, processes, and procedures that are no longer running as well as they once did; eliminating processes, protocols, and procedures and firing or establishing different objectives for employees who are no longer contributing positively to the bottom line.

Growers can sometimes get obsessed with growing revenues. And when they do, they need a Tender around to take care of the bottom line, which is ultimately more important to the future of the company.

A Question from KJ, a fellow BJJ enthusiast:

“What made you start your martial arts journey in 1998 in BJJ? Was it UFC 1 winner Royce Gracie? For me, it was the podcasters ex-Navy Seal Jocko Willink and Joe Rogan.”

My Response: My father, who was a literature professor and had no interest in sports, once told me that a good grappler will beat a good boxer. That stuck with me. When my boys were old enough to wrestle, I began looking for places they could do that. (Their school didn’t have a wrestling team.) One day I was driving down Federal Highway in Boca Raton and noticed a new storefront business: “Reylson Gracie Jiu Jitsu.” I knew that Jiu Jitsu was largely a grappling art and that the Gracie family had somehow brought it to a new level down in Brazil.

I enrolled my three boys, and the owner, Reylson Gracie, persuaded me to take lessons, too. I did. And I fell in love with it. My boys eventually dropped it, but I’m still practicing nearly 30 years later.

I agree with you about UFC 1. Nobody outside of the BJJ and UFC world today knows who Royce Gracie is. The name Jocko Willink is known to at least a million people. Joe Rogan? Half a billion?

An “Excellent” Grade on My Dec. 27 Post-Election Analysis 

“Excellent Mark! To sum it up, I believe that the public in general was fed up with being bullshit to. From the state of Biden’s mental acuity to all of the phony social ills that required fixing. As A. Lincoln said, ‘You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.’ I think the vote was a scream of ‘Enuf!’” – JM

“You were definitely right about the key issues. And right about the outcome. The Democrats spent most of their TV time and money advertising all the risks of a Trump re-election but provided very little detail about what they were going to do. That’s a cardinal sin in marketing. We still don’t know what their theory of ‘securing the border’ was. We don’t know how a $25K first homeowner down payment grant would reduce grocery prices. Lousy campaign.” – CA

“Very well done, Mark! And I rarely use ‘very.’ For me, I gave up on The New York Times and Washington Post, CNN, PBS, and NBC eight years ago. Not because I don’t trust them, but because I concluded they were irrelevant. They neither reflected nor changed the opinions of most Americans. That conclusion was reinforced by the last election. You well explain the reasons why they lost relevancy. Thank you for that.” – SL

“Does it seem like Big Corporations get on and off the ‘social’ bandwagon when the timing seems right? Do they ever give a damn about the cause? DEI and ESG were losers from the beginning. Are Big Corps stupid? I think not. Are they Greedy? For sure. Does owning Big Corporation Stocks make me a hypocrite? Maybe, yes…” – JS

From BG: Praise for My Books 

“I’ve been following your writing for years and I’m a huge fan! I’ve read at least a dozen of your books on business and investing, and – since I’m an aspiring copywriter – all of your books on advertising. I read Great Leads twice!”

A Grinchy Happy New Year from Regular Contributor AS 

“Certain things will happen this new year, and I can’t wait. The deluge of advertisements for gyms and health clubs will fill our TVs, and tax return savings from H&R Block are coming.

“Weather forecasters will tell us, ‘Unless it’s completely necessary, stay home today because a giant snowstorm is upon us,’ and then we will get pounded by a half-inch of snow.

“Ozempic and Wegovy are making up 10% of all pharmaceutical drugs being sold in the US. Due to the high cost of these drugs, the rich and famous will not only remain rich and famous but will also have great figures. The rest of us will continue to bounce from one failed diet craze to the next, join health clubs this new year but stop going by Feb. 10, and search for pants that are too small for our chubby bodies but stretch just enough for us to button them.

“The new year will be marked by dozens of awards shows. We will be filled with panic as we try to watch all the movies, streaming series, short films, and television shows that are up for awards BEFORE the awards are presented. There are rumors of a new awards show. That show will hand out awards to the participants of the awards shows themselves.

“The three celebrities who do not receive awards will be placated by the joy they feel from their recent weight loss.

“Republicans beware. Jan. 20, the Democrats are set to storm the Capitol, armed with pea shooters, wet gym towels, and the carboard inside rolls from Christmas wrapping paper. After which Congress will try to outlaw pea shooters, but the Jolly Green Giant lobby will be too powerful for that to happen.

“Happy New Year!”

The November issue – and the “plastic bottle debate”: 

“Man, the last three topics in the issue hit me like a freight train! Talk about a roller coaster of emotions!! Challenges of Charity: Kicked my ass!!! Inertia: Inspired me!!! Lifelong Lessons from Arnold: Reminder not to take things for granted!!!

“Here we go again!!!! Thank you!” – BW
“Your piece about water in plastic stuck in my highly vibrational brain. As you might recall, I’m a molecular water guy, so I advocate for glass whenever possible. Google says drinking from plastic is safe, and at the same time says: ‘Most plastic water bottles are made of PET (polyethylene terephthalate) plastic. At least 150 chemicals are known to leach from PET plastic beverage bottles into the liquid inside, including heavy metals like antimony and lead, and hormone-disruptors like BPA.’” – KM

“I’ve had a similar debate with my husband. Question: Does K approve of your solution? I would guess that she prefers the ‘guest’ bottles to be sealed.” – AC

My Response: Sorry, AC, I should have been clear. The reused bottles are strictly for me. Guests continue to drink from unsealed bottles.

I don’t want to read about politics!

“I know the political situation is on everyone’s mind these days… but, frankly, ‘both sides’ of this past election weren’t worth my time to write about [in my blog]. I know you try to focus on the ‘issues.’ I only wish they could.” – BK

My Response: I’ve tried to disassociate from politics, but I am just so drawn to the prospect of being able to irk so many readers at the same time. It’s irresistible! However, in response to similar and other comments I’ve received from readers, I’ve once again reinvented my blog in a way that I hope will be easier and more enjoyable for all.

Starting right now, I’m going to be publishing not twice a week or once a month, but once a week. Four “mini” issues per month. See “Inside This Issue,” above, for details.

Kind words about my books: 

“I wanted to reach out and personally thank you for your book Ready, Fire, Aim. It’s truly transformed my life and my approach to business. I can honestly say that much of the growth of my company has been guided by the principles I learned from this book.” – EJ

“Ten years ago, I was deeply disappointed that I had not reached my potential in business, health, relationships, and my hobby of music. After a lot of searching, I came upon Seven Years to Seven Figures and The Pledge. These books changed my life. And you are right. Reaching seven figures in net worth in seven years is totally doable. (Three and a half for me!) I wanted you to know that someone out there followed your stuff verbatim and it actually worked! I have six of your books and they have been a continued source of growth and inspiration to this day.” – RD

My Response: Thanks EJ and RD – and congratulations on your impressive success!

Staying connected: 

“It’s been a while since I last reached out, but the inspiration I continue to draw from your books and emails has kept me connected to your ideas.” – JV

My Response: Thanks for your note JV. One of the rewards of writing this blog is staying connected with so many people like you that I’ve met and worked with all over the world.

“Someone you probably never heard of that made a difference in all our lives” – from GM: 

“Navajo Code Talker John Kinsel Sr. passed away at age 107. His remarkable life and contributions to both his community and the United States during World War II will forever be remembered.”

My Response: Thanks for this article, GM. Amazing story!

More on Statins:

“In case you are still evaluating this, here’s more on statins, with a few side comments on COVID-19.” – KI

My Response: Thanks, KI. This is a great summary of most of what I’ve been learning since I started researching statins and blood pressure medication.

“You inspired me!” 

“I have been following you for the past 20 years. You inspired me into entrepreneurship…. It is because of you that I now acquire companies [and] you continue to be an inspiration…. I wish you the best, Mr. Ford. The world needs more of you.” – SV

From SC: “I have a question for you…What’s holding up the collapse?” 

“For a long time now, I’ve been reading very cogent, lucid, and compelling warnings about the IMMINENT economic disaster ahead because of our massive national debt. Not only from essays by you, Bill Bonner, Doug Casey, et al, but from mainstream and not so mainstream media as well.

“I need no convincing. The arguments make every bit of sense to me. But I’ve been reading about this ‘imminent’ disaster since Reagan almost tripled the national debt. We’ve also heard the same warnings after debt increases by every president since then!

“So, here’s my question. WHAT’S HOLDING IT UP? This is not a wisecrack question. I really don’t understand why it hasn’t happened already. Is it the economic activity and growth that arises from all the borrowing? Is it possible that the debt is nothing more than red ink on a piece of paper? What and when, exactly, is the ‘breaking point?’”

My Response: I’ve been hearing predictions of another financial Armageddon since 1983, when I first got into the financial newsletter business. But just because something has or has not happened in the past does not mean it won’t or will happen in the future. The SEC reminds investors of that by making registered brokers and investment advisors state somewhere in every prediction or recommendation: “Past performance is no guarantee of future results.”

Let’s assume that I don’t contend that the Great Recession was a financial disaster of that magnitude. (Even though it resulted in a transfer of about $10 trillion from US middle-class and working-class households to the financial industrial complex and those that profit from it – the top 1%.)

Then, I’d agree with you: The case for the big reckoning – on the level of the Great Depression – has not materialized, despite the undeniably frightening facts and persuasive rhetoric.

What has happened in the past 50 years is a gradual but steady devaluation of the dollar’s buying power. Since the Nixon administration abandoned the gold standard in 1972, the dollar has lost 96% of its purchasing power.

That’s like two Great Depressions!

And that, according to economists (including the likes of Milton Friedman), is the primary reason why, in the past 50 years, the working and middle classes have become poorer while Wall Street and the top 1% have become exponentially richer.

All that said, and admitting that my knowledge of monetary theory and macroeconomics is very basic, I have two answers for you.

1. Since 1972, the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve have had a responsibility they didn’t have when the dollar was backed by gold: to try to manipulate market prices to avoid hyperinflations and recessions by adjusting the Fed’s lending rate up or down (quantitative tightening and easing). Every country that has a fiat currency (i.e., a currency not backed by gold or, say, Bitcoin) has had to do the same thing. So, when it looks like the economy is slowing and heading towards a possible recession, the Fed lowers the interest rate, which makes it more attractive for businesses to borrow money and thus “stimulate” the economy. And when it looks like the economy is “heating up” and inflation (even hyperinflation) is a risk, they raise the rate to bring inflation under control.

The problem with this approach is that the government is required to balance its books every year. And when it spends more money than it has (the money it has comes almost entirely from taxation), it must borrow money from whoever wants to buy dollars. For decades after WWII, it was Japan and Germany. Then China became the US’s principal lender. Then hedge funds. This is why federal debt went from $400 billion in 1972 to $36 trillion today.

The US is the most indebted country (and economy) in the world, by a longshot. In a free-market environment (the environment in which Americans do business, earn a living, and buy things), the credit rating of potential borrowers determines whether money will be lent to them. Before you or I can borrow money from a bank or any lending institution to buy a car or a house or get a business loan, we must first prove that we are creditworthy. If we are not, we will not get the loan. (This rule was cleverly abandoned by unethical mortgage lenders and the government’s Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the years prior to the real estate debacle of 2008. It was that – lending billions upon billions of dollars to borrowers that were not credit “worthy” – that was the cause of the crash.)

If, then, increasing the debt by a factor of nearly 100 ($400 billion to $36 trillion) is a bad thing for the US economy – if it has turned us into the nation with the greatest debt in human history, even greater in relative terms than the Roman Empire’s before it collapsed in 476 – why haven’t we seen the predicted big collapse?

That brings me to my second answer…

2. Until very recently, countries that, for whatever reason, had a budget surplus and wanted to safeguard their money against economic risks such as inflation, had to buy dollars. The US government may have been sinking further into debt, but what choice did they have? After WWII, in the Breton Woods agreement, the US managed to contrive after-war policies, including the invention of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, to make the US dollar the default global security. (There is a great book – The Wealth of Shadows – that does a fantastic job of detailing this. See my review of it, above.)

And so, in 1978, when China changed its economy from a totally centrally controlled one to one that allowed for a substantial free market within it, and went from being the world’s poorest large country to the second-richest, it safeguarded all the trillions of dollars it was acquiring by buying US Treasuries. The same with Germany and Japan and a hundred other smaller countries that were producing budget surpluses. By 1972, the leaders of these countries had figured out the game. If they wanted to continue to grow their wealth by selling their cheap labor to the US, they had to buy the materials needed for that great economic expansion in dollars. And that continued until just recently.

What is different now is that half a dozen superpowers whose combined GDPs are larger than those of the US and England, France, and Germany decided that it was time to replace the dollar as the world’s global currency. China began the process by buying up gold. The second thing China has done was desist, as much as possible, from borrowing US dollars, and to pay for its needs using its gold stores (which further debases the strength of the dollar). The third thing China has done, along with oil-rich Arab nations like Saudi Arabia and with Russia, is move towards trade agreements that will allow them, as a group, to trade with one another using a new currency of their devising – probably a dollar-backed currency.

If they do that, the dollar will collapse. Big time. And the doomsayers will finally be right.

Here’s more info on why the dollar’s days are numbered.

As I said, I don’t consider myself to be an expert on macroeconomics or monetary theory. What I laid out above is what I came to after asking myself the same questions you asked me.

I’m publishing it here so I can be fact-checked by my readers who still believe that Maynard Keynes had it right. If they correct me, I’ll make adjustments. But for the moment, this is the only explanation that makes sense to me.

From PL re my recommended list of “how-to-succeed-in-business” books in the Sept. 3  issue: 

“Several of the books on your list definitely had a profound effect on my life. For instance, Think and Grow Rich and How to Win Friends and Influence People.

“Another one that dramatically changed my life but didn’t make your list was The Magic of Thinking Big by David Schwartz. It is the one that made me realize that what I needed to do was find something that I truly enjoy doing and have the courage to believe that I could get my slice of the pie. So, if you do happen to make an updated list, I thought I would bring this one to your attention for consideration.”

From CA re my Aug. 30 essay on “The State of Our Economy”: 

“Check out the Aug. CCI (Consumer Confidence Index). Although people with jobs naturally have more confidence than those without, the overall trend is slightly up. That’s not typically what we see heading into a recession. However, economists generally agree that all bets are off for the future if the presidency is won by the candidate who wants to impose huge tariffs on most of the things poor people buy every day. See this link.”

My Response: Thanks for the note, CA. I am aware that there are some polls out there suggesting that, as you say, “consumer confidence” has marginally improved. If you take the stock market as an indicator, it’s more than marginal.

But as I emphasized in my essay, my interest is not in what most people think or feel about the economy, but what the undecided voters in the swing states think. And I provided some data indicating that the sort of person that tends to be unaligned and independent when it comes to national elections would likely be more negative and even pessimistic when it comes to the economy.

A WSJ national poll last week shed some light on this. When voters were asked what issue mattered most to them in the election, the largest share (29%) picked the economy. This was followed by immigration (19%) and abortion (14%). “That is probably good news for Trump,” the WSJ said, noting that concern about immigration also favors him.

As for your statement that “economists generally agree that all bets are off for the future if the presidency is won by the candidate who wants to impose huge tariffs on most of the things poor people buy every day,” I have three things to say. First, I agree: Trump’s tariff ideas will definitely make middle- and working-class consumers poorer because they will be the ones to pay for those tariffs through higher prices. Second: You do know that Kamala has also promised to impose tariffs, right? Plus major tax increases that she falsely claims will affect only the 1%. Third: Most voters understand nothing about the economics of tariffs.

Bottom line: How will the undecided voters in swing states feel about the economy in November? They will feel that it’s worse than it was four years ago… because it is. Considerably worse.

From KW re my Aug. 28 announcement that this will be my last weekly issue:

“Well, here we are again. Here’s how you touched my life (for the good). I was a very early ETR subscriber and eagerly devoured your posts every day. (I wish I still had them all for reference.) Your insights led me to ETR conferences. Which led me to AWAI and Circle of Success. And your relationship with Agora led me to Stansberry Alliance and now Porter’s Partner Pass. And to Bonner Private Research, of course. More importantly, all of that improved my life dramatically and led me on a path that has enriched me in many ways. Thank you so much!

“I had the pleasure of speaking with you briefly at an ETR conference in Delray Beach, and I’ve made many connections through ETR and AWAI. Today, I run a small manufacturer’s rep agency which I am in the process of transforming into a sales and marketing agency. I am ever in your debt.”

My Response: Thanks, KW. Your letter made my day. This is why I have been writing blogs for 24 years, and why I will continue to publish a monthly version of this one in the future.

From RM re “My Plot for a Science Fiction Movie” in the Aug. 19  issue: 

“Your plot is interesting….

“All it takes is one! One corporate behemoth to slip by the concerned masses and become too big and too powerful. A genie whose authority eclipses the authority of the authorities… and who cannot be placed back in any bottle. So, the land of Meta will have its capital at its corporate HQ but will have territories or colonies around the world.

“We are already seeing some of these corporations create schools and towns for workers….”

My Response: After I published that piece, I realized that there were other parts of my plot that I hadn’t mentioned. For example…

I believe the digital nation-states never wanted to be integrated into the physical nations because their form of government gave them all the benefits that physical nations could offer but with better payoffs and fewer hassles. They had all the money they needed (through their form of voluntary taxation – i.e. subscription revenues) and much greater power than the physical nations in terms of influencing the thoughts and even controlling the behavior of their citizens.

Instead of using a range of forceful penalties for bad behavior that ultimately necessitates guns and prisons, the digital nation-states get their citizens to obey their laws (laws they can make up without the cost and hassle of a legislature) by the non-violent, non-force-based mechanism of issuing temporary to permanent ostracization.

And leaders of the digital nation-states can get a lot richer a lot faster than leaders of physical nations because they own their states and can take from the collective treasury whatever they want in terms of personal compensation, without answering to anybody.

Even if political leaders of physical nations are willing to enrich themselves unethically or illegally by trading on private financial information, taking bribes for “consulting” work, and making promises to their citizens that they can’t keep, they can’t get as rich as Bezos or Musk.

That’s why I believe the US-based digital nation-states were more than happy to simply pay their taxes and be left alone.

From SL re my advice to The Donald in the Aug. 23  issue:

“Enjoying your engaging, witty writing, as usual.

“But do you think Trump understands what ad hominem attacks are? Even if he does, they are his stock-in-trade. Asking him to desist from personal insults is like asking a rooster not to crow at sunrise.

“Will the winner be the contestant who does a better job of staying on script? If so, it looks like Kamala to me.”

My Response: Kamala could certainly win if she stays on script. She did a great job in her closing speech at the DNC. She was confident and, dare I say, presidential. Most impressive of all was how she made her six major misleading and outright false statements sound believable.

She won’t do as well if she debates Trump. He can think on his feet. She cannot. If Trump does what I “told” him to do – avoids the ad hominem attacks and hammers away with the facts – he has a better-than-even chance to win.

Dems are feeling a lot of joy and strength now. (Interesting aside: Did you know that Kraft durch Freude – “Strength Through Joy” – was a Nazi slogan in the 1930s?) But the race, as we know, will be decided by the undecided voters in the swing states, and we will see how that looks as the next few weeks pass.

Obviously, I believe a Harris presidency would be a disaster for the US. (Her proposal to levy a 25% wealth tax would destroy our economy all by itself.) However, although a Trump win would be net positive for the US economy in the short-term, his demonstrated commitment to trillion-dollar deficits will lead to a deep recession or hyperinflation, either of which will make the productive population of the US poorer. Possibly much poorer.

In offering my advice to Harris and Trump, I haven’t been thinking of what will be best for the US during what remains of my lifetime, but what will be better for my children and grandchildren. And when I think honestly about that, I have to accept the fact that my DNA gifts to the future of the US and the world will suffer regardless of who wins in November. The insane spending of both candidates and both parties will doom them equally. The only important difference being that Harris is more likely to get us into WWIII.

From CF re BJJ in the Aug. 9 issue: 

“Mark, just wanted to say I thoroughly enjoyed your piece today about your BJJ experience. Well written and relatable I think to a lot of men who have experienced the camaraderie of training and bonding with other men. I had similar experiences in boxing. I also enjoyed the stories of your partners and the lighthearted humor you peppered in those stories. Great pictures as well that really brought the whole read together. Congrats!”

From JM re the Postmodern Jukebox clip in the Aug. 13 issue: 

“Thanks for sharing Effie Passero’s interpretation of ‘Creep.’ Listened again and I’m sweating from the emotional exertion.”

From TA re the piece by Bill Bonner in the Aug. 1 issue: 

“I have been reading Bill Bonner for a few decades now. He has had more influence on how I see our government and politicians than any commentator out there. You have to get used to his doom and gloom, but what he says makes sense. I’ve really changed my view of how we wage war. I hope he keeps beating the drum. Maybe more eyes will be opened to what we’ve allowed our country to become.”

My Response: Me too!

From JS re my observations about the Japanese during my trip to Japan – specifically their attention to detail: 

“I think you may remember ISO 9000 – a set of international standards for quality control. Many of these standards were adopted by the Japanese years ago. They recruited an American, W. Edwards Deming, the most widely known proponent of statistical quality control, to teach them how to apply his theories. His premise was that persistent improvement heightens production quality and output, boosting customer satisfaction as costs decline. The big US car manufacturers made fun of Deming, figuring that since they were the top three manufacturers of automobiles in the world, they know what they are doing.

“But Deming was recruited by Japan, his theories adopted, and the rest is history.

“As you can see here, Toyota and Lexus still lead the way when it comes to the fewest vehicle defects.”

From AS re the Aug. 9 issue on BJJ: 

“I enjoyed your stories about BJJ. I especially liked how you brought up beating the young man when he was a kid.

“I used to play basketball in a neighborhood called Chagrin Falls Park. A lot of good players would show up there. One day, it was just me and an 11-year-old kid. Before the court filled up, we played a couple of games of one-on-one. I beat him in both games.

“Six years later, he was a high school star and went on to play in college. When people would bring up his name, I would casually mention that I used to beat him, one-on-one.

“After their facial expressions relaxed from the look of, ‘Wow, you must have been good’ or ‘This guy’s full of shit,” I would mention that he was 11 years old at the time, and I was 33.”