What's likely to happen next in the global economy? I'll keep it as simple as possible. Firstly, the most significant sudden shortage in energy supplies in our history will cause supply-side inflation as the prices of most everyday goods rise. The bond market parasites will demand higher yields and longer maturities, spooking governments about deficit spending, which will have to rise anyway because of increased welfare demands caused by increasingly precarious employment. Irreconcilable tension right away. Secondly, consumption and aggregate demand will fall, stalling growth and combining with inflation to cause what we used to call 'stagflation'. Skyrocketing prices will trash aggregate demand, asset prices, investment, employment and tax revenue, leading to a reversal into the realm of deflation, as experienced during the US Great Depression. Higher interest rates will further limit investment and state spending, tipping the whole shebang into a deflationary vortex. Thirdly, states will have to react. So will voters. Far-right populism could expand, so the left will have to stop pissing about with identity politics and get back to political economy. The only partially effective measures capable of pulling back deflation, preventing widespread poverty and quelling civil unrest would be price controls, defict spending, public investment and employment, nationalisation of all infrastructure and key industries, a huge shift in progressive taxation aimed at the wealthy, negative bond yields (or the elimination of the primary and secondary bond markets), tarrifs on selected imports, and strict capital exchange controls. Of course, the global creditor class would see all this as more instability and a threat to their power and free money. They would hoard their money, squeal for higher yields and interest rates and launch mass-media ideological campaigns to discredit politicians and intimidate voters. Hordes of irredeemably stupid individuals would agree with them and support the misery as an essential 'market correction'. Hours of fun on X. Sounds very messy, doesn't it? So messy, in fact, that we might as well forget the whole thing and revive the only serious antidote and alternative. It's called socialism. It's not the most easily administered system, and some of the more avaricious, narcissistic and entitled individuals would experience limits on their economic freedoms, but anything is better than the chaotic lunacy that is late-stage capitalism.

BREAKING: Reporter: “To what extent are Americans’ financial situations motivating you to make a deal? [with Iran]” Trump: “Not even a little bit…. I don't think about Americans’ financial situation”

Many small businesses will emerge from private-equity ownership as bigger and more profitable firms that better serve their customers economist.com/business/2026/…

Mafia don Trump threatens war with Iran, send his armada into the waters around Iran, builds up the support he needs from the pliant Global North. The United States can destroy bridges, but it cannot conquer any of our countries. It has been defeated before by the Vietnamese and the Afghans. It may take comfort in its long distance bombers. But it should not take comfort in its ideas of superiority.

Yeaaaah right. This is a textbook example of what you might call drip-feed disclosure or strategic normalisation: a communication strategy where information pertaining to a particularly controversial truth — in this case the fact that the US blew up Nord Stream — is released gradually rather than all at once. Instead of presenting the full reality immediately (which might provoke shock, resistance or backlash), details are introduced in small, manageable increments. Each new piece slightly adjusts expectations, reduces surprise and allows audiences to adapt psychologically and emotionally. Over time, what might initially have seemed unacceptable or radical becomes familiar and therefore more socially or politically tolerable. The process relies on habituation: repeated exposure lowers resistance. In this case, the narrative has gone through the following adjustments: – “Russia did it” – “Russia probably didn’t do it but we don’t know who did it” – “Let’s forget about the bombing, it’s not a big deal anyway” – “BREAKING: it looks like a bunch of drunken Ukrainian divers gone rogue did it, unbeknownst to everyone” - “Okay, it wasn’t just a bunch of Ukrainian drunkards, but an operation carried out by rogue elements of the Ukrainian state, unapproved by the government, of which US-Western intelligence agencies were unaware” – (“By the way, what those rogue Ukrainians did was a great act of heroism and Europeans should be thankful to them”) – “Okay, the Zelensky regime and US-Western intelligence agencies knew about it — but tried to stop it”: this is where we are know We’re getting closer and closer to the final admission: “Fine, it was a CIA operation carried out by US operatives with foreknowledge by several NATO governments. What are you gonna do about it?” The question is: will anyone care at that point?