The Diamond Collapse—and the Dangerous Myth of “Safe” Assets The diamond price collapse offers a warning about government bonds and the danger of trusting an asset’s reputation to protect your wealth. internationalman.com/article…

The 10-year Treasury yield is perhaps the most important financial benchmark in the global fiat system, as it drives valuations and market trends worldwide. It is widely—and erroneously—regarded as the risk-free rate of return. The 10-year Treasury yield can be thought of as a key barometer of the US dollar-based fiat system—a critical measure akin to its beating heart. Bond yields move inversely to bond prices. When bond prices fall, bond yields rise. A rising 10-year Treasury yield signals trouble for the US dollar because it means investors are selling Treasuries, which pushes up the US government’s borrowing costs. That is why the 10-year Treasury yield is a major pain point for the US government. The 10-year Treasury yield was 3.97% in late February 2026. Now it is around 5.26%, an increase of roughly 129 basis points. 129 bps might not seem like much, but with over $40 trillion in debt and growing, every basis point matters. At today’s debt levels, every 1 basis point increase in the government’s average borrowing cost adds roughly $4 billion in annual interest expense. So a 129 bps rise is not trivial—it translates to nearly $516 billion in additional yearly interest costs, materially widening a budget deficit that was already around $1.8 trillion. We expect the 10-year Treasury yield to keep climbing over the coming weeks and months—until it forces the Fed’s hand. At that point, the intervention will be sold as “stability,” but the mechanism will be familiar: suppress yields by debasing the currency. That feedback loop could become one of the defining investment stories of the years ahead.

America Looks Richer Than Ever. What Happens When the Fed’s Asset Bubble Bursts? The Fed’s asset bubble has pushed household wealth beyond income growth, widened the wealth gap, and put decades of paper gains at risk. internationalman.com/article…

On February 15, 2006, Congressman @RonPaul delivered a little-known but prophetic speech on the floor of the House of Representatives called “The End of Dollar Hegemony.” He identified the signal investors should watch for: “The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value. We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or euros. The sooner the better.” We discussed this subject with Ron Paul at an investment conference years ago. He stood by that assessment. His point was simple. Watch the oil producers. The day they start moving away from dollars and toward gold—or a monetary system that gives them access to gold—the foundation beneath the dollar-based financial system starts to crack. We may now be approaching that point.

Could Israel and the US Nuke Iran? Faced with the bleak prospects of a successful ground invasion, the US or Israel could resort to the ultimate weapon: nuclear bombs. Iran understands that possibility and has spent decades preparing its government and military to survive attacks on its leadership and command structure. The threat of a nuclear strike would also give Tehran an overwhelming incentive to acquire its own nuclear deterrent before its enemies could destroy it. Russia and China would also have strong incentives to prevent the US or Israel from crossing the nuclear threshold against Iran. They could respond by extending security guarantees, deploying forces, or taking other steps designed to deter an attack. The danger goes far beyond Iran. If the US or Israel used nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear adversary, they would shatter a taboo that has held since 1945. Other nuclear powers would have to reconsider the assumptions underlying their own deterrence strategies. Could Russia conclude that nuclear weapons had become legitimate tools of war in Ukraine or Europe? Could China reach the same conclusion over Taiwan? What would it mean for India and Pakistan? We discussed this risk on a private call with a former US Army Special Forces veteran who has extensive experience with the region. His concern was that once one side crosses the nuclear threshold, nobody can guarantee where the escalation ends. Nuclear powers facing the possibility of further strikes could confront a “use it or lose it” calculation over parts of their arsenals. That is the problem with the idea of a “limited” nuclear war. The people who start one do not get to decide where it ends. Using nuclear weapons against Iran in the hope that the conflict would remain contained would amount to rolling the dice with civilization itself. We do not consider that the base-case scenario. Mutually assured destruction still gives the major nuclear powers enormous incentives to avoid crossing that threshold. But the possibility matters because the consequences would dwarf every other geopolitical risk. And even a nuclear attack would not guarantee the outcome Washington or Israel wants. Iran covers roughly 1.6 million square kilometers—about 40 times the size of Switzerland—with mountain ranges that provide natural protection and strategic depth. A nuclear strike could destroy military installations, command centers, and cities without eliminating every element of the Iranian government or its ability to retaliate. Any surviving Iranian forces would have powerful incentives to inflict as much damage as possible before losing that capability. Israel’s nuclear complex at Dimona would represent an obvious potential target. Iran could also target the vulnerable infrastructure that keeps the Gulf monarchies functioning: refineries, ports, pipelines, power plants, and desalination facilities. Even the use of nuclear weapons would not guarantee that the US and Israel could eliminate Iran’s ability to threaten the regional order. Iran could survive with enough military capability to inflict catastrophic damage on Israel and destabilize Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf monarchies. And if those monarchies fall—or conclude that Washington can no longer protect them—the consequences would reach far beyond the battlefield. The petrodollar system itself could become another casualty. In that sense, Iran does not need nuclear weapons of its own to possess a form of strategic deterrence. Its ability to threaten the infrastructure underpinning Israel and the Gulf states gives it the potential to produce unconventional consequences with conventional weapons. That is why we think Iran will retain substantial leverage over Hormuz regardless of how much damage the US and Israel inflict on the country. And if that happens, the consequences could shake the foundations of the US-led world order.

The Permission Grid: A Blueprint for a Permanent Slave Class Digital identity tied to internet access, carbon tracking proposals, and the removal of cash, privacy tools, and VPNs form the architecture of permission-based participation. internationalman.com/article…

Investing in rare earth elements (REEs) is not straightforward. Some large multinational mining companies produce small amounts of REEs. But their exposure to the industry is insignificant. They’re nowhere close to pure REE plays. Investing directly in the underlying elements is not practical for the average investor either. The best way to get exposure to rising REE prices is to invest in shares of REE-related companies. Unfortunately, there isn’t a large menu of quality companies. Most publicly traded companies producing REEs are listed in mainland China, making them difficult for outside investors to access, often with opaque financials. Further, the US government could decide to sanction or somehow restrict investment in Chinese stocks—as it did with Russian equities in the wake of the Ukraine war, which are still frozen to this day. That’s a big risk to individual Chinese REE stocks, even if you could find a way to access them. The REE companies listed outside China are also vulnerable because they must compete with Chinese counterparts that benefit from subsidies and other support from Beijing. China has bankrupted foreign REE companies by driving prices down before, and it could do so again. In short, REE stocks—Chinese and non-Chinese—carry a high level of risk. That’s why a broad, diversified approach is best. It allows investors to capture the tremendous upside potential of REEs and strategic metals while minimizing the significant risks of investing in any individual company. Full article here: The Rare-Earth Arms Race—and How Investors Can Position internationalman.com/article…

Why the AI mania could punish technology investors while rewarding the owners of the scarce energy and infrastructure beneath it. internationalman.com/article…

The Builders and the Parasites The AI infrastructure boom could leave ordinary investors absorbing the losses while governments acquire the data centers, compute, and surveillance power at a discount. internationalman.com/article…