Macro Butler’s Laurent Lequeu just solved that problem with a great post on what a currency reset is, why it’s imminent, and how it might be implemented. Here’s an excerpt:

Reset in Peace?

The Macro Butler

October 31, 2026

Every fiat currency is a promise. Every promise has an expiry date. History has never once failed to collect.

A currency reset is the moment a monetary system is forced to admit what markets already know: the money in circulation is worth far less than the promises denominated in it.

It is the accounting reconciliation between two ledgers. On one side sit the state’s liabilities: bonds, pensions, deposits, entitlements. On the other side sits the real economy’s capacity to honour them: energy, food, metals, labour, productivity. When the first ledger outgrows the second for long enough, one of them must be marked down. It is never the real economy.

A reset can take several forms, often in combination:

• Devaluation. The currency is cut against gold or a reserve currency. Roosevelt in 1934, Nixon in 1971, Argentina in 2002.

• Redenomination. Zeros are removed and a new unit is issued. Germany’s Rentenmark in 1923, Brazil’s Real in 1994, Venezuela three times since 2008.

• Conversion at a haircut. Savings are exchanged into the new money at a punitive rate. West Germany in 1948, Argentina’s “pesificación” in 2002.

• Regime change. The anchor itself is replaced. Gold standard to Bretton Woods in 1944; Bretton Woods to pure fiat in 1971.

• Default or restructuring. The state simply stops paying or pays in a currency worth less. Russia 1998, Argentina nine times, Greece 2012.

The common thread is a transfer of wealth. Those who hold claims on money pay. Those who hold things are redenominated and survive. A reset is not a destruction of wealth so much as a violent relocation of it, from creditors to debtors and from savers to owners.

The second common thread is denial. No finance minister has ever announced a reset in advance. The pattern is always the same: “There will be no devaluation,” followed by a long weekend.

Currency resets are not rare accidents. They are the normal ending of fiat experiments, and history offers a long, repetitive catalogue. The table below lists the major episodes, the mechanism used and the trigger behind it.

Read the table from the bottom up and a pattern emerges. Rome clipped coins to pay legions. France printed assignats to fight Europe. America printed Continentals, then Greenbacks, then broke from gold twice. Germany printed to pay reparations, then rebuilt on a new mark. The monetary unit changes, the costume changes, the plot never does.

Three observations matter for investors:

Read the rest of Laurent’s post here.

Subscribe to Macro Butler here.

Amazon and Alphabet reported, respectively, $9 billion and $42 billion of negative free cash flow, as AI hit a financial wall:

Housing rolled over as inventory spiked and buying plunged

Gasoline prices rose by 9%, sending inflation up at an annualized 6% rate

France —and several of its neighbors — descended into chaos as riots spun out of control

The US and Iran prepared for an escalation that threatens what’s left of the Middle East’s energy infrastructure

US mid-term election polls suggested that Democrats will gain control of both the Senate and House, resulting in paralyzed government

A major crypto platform was hacked, calling the safety of stablecoins into question:

The $6.3 Billion Binance Hack

(HealthRanger) - The world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange just suffered what may be the single largest heist in financial history. Early reports point to a staggering $6.3 billion in losses, and the fallout is still being tallied.

Binance insists it will “cover all losses” and that user funds are safe. The self-insurance works this time only because the stolen sum, however colossal, represents less than 5% of the exchange’s total assets. That is the entire game: you are protected not by your own security, but by the exchange’s balance sheet being large enough to absorb a catastrophic loss. If the next hack is bigger, or if the exchange’s assets shrink, that guarantee may not be as strong.

I have watched this movie before. BlockFi froze client withdrawals the moment FTX collapsed ^[3]. Bitmart suspended withdrawals after hackers stole $196 million ^[4]. Each time, the lesson is identical: centralized crypto custody is not ownership. It is a promise that can be broken overnight. I believe this Binance event is the final warning that digital asset storage must be rethought from the ground up.

Whew

October, in short, was a brutal month ending with a singularly bad day for commodities stocks. Now the question becomes: Was this a sharp but temporary correction or the end of the commodities bull market?

For perspective, ask yourself the following questions:

• Will governments keep living beyond their means and borrowing the difference?

• Will the interest on this mountain of debt keep rising?

• Will the only solution be to inflate away that debt?

• Will other crypto exchanges be hacked going forward?

If you answered “yes” to these questions, then the underlying fundamentals remain positive for physical assets in general and precious metals in particular:

If You Don’t Have Self-Custody, You Don’t Own It

(HealthRanger) - When you leave crypto on an exchange, you do not control your assets -- the exchange does. As I have explained in my own broadcasts, the entire point of peer-to-peer technology is to eliminate the trusted intermediary; atomic swaps, for instance, allow cross-chain trading “wallet to wallet, without a trusted intermediary like an exchange” ^[5]. The moment you deposit your coins into a custodial exchange, you have rebuilt the very middleman that decentralized money was designed to remove. You hold a database entry, not a key.

And the threat landscape is accelerating beyond human defenders. AI-enabled cyber attacks are making exchanges increasingly vulnerable, because malicious code can be generated and deployed at scale -- far faster than security teams can patch. The data race to amass digital information has not escaped the notice of attackers looking to profit by hacking into that data ^[6]. An exchange is a single, enormous honeypot, and now the attackers have machine-speed tools. I believe the age of trusting a centralized exchange with meaningful wealth is over.

Physical gold and silver are different in kind, not just in degree. Gold and silver have no counterparty. No server can be drained, no wallet can be compromised, no login can be phished. A gold coin in your hand cannot be digitally stolen because it does not exist as data. The great virtue of precious metals is that they are money you can hold, verify, and hide -- honest money with no permission layer. In a world where billions can vanish from a website in a single night, that physical reality is not nostalgia. It is a security architecture.

Portfolio

Volatility creates opportunities. So view October’s carnage as our favorite assets going on sale, and respond with low-ball bids on high-quality commodity stocks.

Read more

This is especially true for the copper miners, since — unlike gold and silver, which have corrected hard recently — copper’s price remains near its all-time high. So the “bull market saves the day” story is set to continue at least through Q4.

Here’s how it went for one of our Portfolio’s core holdings:

Read more

Where are Americans now? Apparently we’re as optimistic as we’ve ever been, with more than $3 of equities for every dollar in cash, up from the historic average of around $2.

But Not All — Or Even Most — Americans

Those with the 10% highest incomes own virtually all publicly traded stocks, while the top 1% own about 75% of the total. Add several trillion dollars in soon-to-be IPOed AI companies — currently owned by the super-rich — and the concentration becomes even more extreme.

So rather than saying “Americans are optimistic,” let’s say America’s super-rich are euphoric. As for the rest, well, they’re not part of the emotional/financial equation.

A Global Perspective

The charts above may actually understate wealth concentration. Consider this, from Global Research’s Eric Buesing:

The Super-Entity That Owns the World

(Global Research) - In October 2011, three systems theorists at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich published “The Network of Global Corporate Control.”³ Its authors called it the first investigation of the architecture of the international ownership network.⁴ Most people have never heard of it.

The Map

Stefania Vitali and her coauthors James Glattfelder and Stefano Battiston set out to put numbers on a suspicion many people already held: that a handful of corporations dominates the global economy.⁵ They started with Orbis 2007, a commercial database of about 37 million companies and investors. From it they pulled 43,060 transnational corporations in 116 countries, which are companies that operate in more than one country. Then they traced the ownership chains running into and out of those companies. The result was a network of about 600,000 entities joined by just over one million ownership ties.⁶

Ownership runs in loops. Say Company A owns shares in Company B, and Company B owns shares back in Company A. Control flows up through links like that, and some shareholders end up very powerful.⁷ The researchers built a new method so the loops wouldn’t inflate the totals.⁸

Who Holds the Control

The network formed a giant bow tie. At its center sat a very small, very dense core of 1,318 companies out of 43,060.⁹ Each core member was tied to about 20 others, and about three quarters of the ownership of core firms stayed with other core firms.¹⁰

Inside that core sat 147 firms the authors called an economic super entity. They held nearly 40 percent of the control over the economic value of all the transnational corporations in the study, measured by operating revenue, which is the money a company earns from its business. They also had almost full control over themselves.¹¹ That’s 147 companies out of more than 43,000. In Glattfelder’s words, less than 1 percent of the companies controlled 40 percent of the network.¹² The concentration held under all three models the authors used to estimate control.¹³

Read the rest here.

How Should We Respond?

Two possible conclusions can be drawn from the above:

1. The global elites who own everything control the markets, and won’t let stock prices decline. So we should follow their lead and load up on equities. Or…

2. When the next (long overdue) recession hits, the 1% will all head for the exits at once, causing a crash for the record books. And we should be on the sidelines when that happens.

Which is right? Number 2, obviously. This is a game that normal people shouldn’t play. Stay as far away from it as possible.

Unreported Government Bond Losses

US banks hold nearly $5 trillion of government paper. Over the past year, rising interest rates have driven bond prices down.

That leaves banks with massive unreported losses on their balance sheets. Eventually, those losses will migrate to earnings reports, potentially spooking depositors and causing bank runs.

The higher interest rates go, the bigger these unreported losses become.

Sub-Prime Auto Loan Delinquencies

Car prices are rising, and various bank-like entities have been more than willing to put low-quality borrowers into new cars through “car mortgages”—loans with terms that approximate the car's expected life.

Total US auto debt is now a record $1.71 trillion, and subprime loans are going bad at a rate exceeding that of the Great Recession.

Empty Office Buildings

The value of US commercial loans held by banks is twice what it was in 2007.

Some commercial real estate sub-sectors are healthy, and some are not, with one already in “bust” territory. Office buildings never recovered from the pandemic remote-work spasm. Occupancy rates are low, cash flow isn’t covering debt service, and delinquencies now exceed GFC levels.

AI Causes Banking “Security Nightmare”

Unauthorized AI agents are reportedly already accessing US bank accounts

(Engadget) Unauthorized third-party AI agents are accessing US bank accounts, according to a report by Axios. Some of these agents are even taking actions that appear to be independent of user instructions, though this is based on unnamed sources within several banking institutions.

Many AI agents, including the cute and cuddly Muse, can access a user’s bank account to perform actions on their behalf. This is already a security nightmare, as most banks mandate that humans log in to their own accounts. The problem is compounded when these agents start to buy things or shift money around. The potential for scams and fraud is off the charts.

Private Credit AI Bubble

This is the big one. As the AI boom took off, the debt needed to build hundreds (maybe thousands?) of data centers caused mainstream banks to shy away.

So private credit companies — unregulated, unmonitored “shadow” banks — stepped in. They bought or created insurance companies and took most of the new AI debt onto their balance sheets.

Along the way — in what might, in retrospect, come to be seen as an epic blunder — mainstream banks helped fund the private credit companies. This put the banks back on the hook, one step removed, for the AI bubble.

Now various marginal players in the AI space are encountering financial turbulence. See:

CoreWeave’s market confidence erodes as bond yields spike and stock sinks

Credit stress is threatening to unwind the AI bull. All eyes are on Oracle to hold the line

And this:

Big Tech’s AI Debt Deluge Might Be Even Worse Than Previously Reported

(Daily Caller) - Big Tech could be carrying substantially more financial exposure tied to artificial intelligence than investors realize, S&P Global warned Monday as concerns mounted over the debt financing Wall Street’s AI boom.

Technology companies are increasingly relying on outside investors, financial guarantees and complex financing arrangements to fund their enormous data center expansion. Those arrangements can leave substantial obligations outside conventional debt disclosures, making it difficult to determine who ultimately bears the risk if anticipated AI profits fail to materialize.

S&P Global’s head of digital infrastructure, Mark Habib, warned that interconnected financing arrangements could conceal additional liabilities.

“It is safe to assume that there is more (debt) out there that we are not seeing,” Habib said during a Monday roundtable in London.

S&P estimates that Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, Oracle, Meta and SpaceX will collectively spend more than $7 trillion on AI-related capital expenditures between 2025 and 2030. The agency also projected negative free operating cash flow for the group in 2026 and 2027 as investment outpaces internally generated funds.

Goldman Sachs projected that global hyperscaler debt issuance would reach $420 billion in 2027, more than 60% above its 2026 estimate. The bank also found that hyperscalers accounted for just 40% of AI-related credit issuance, suggesting the industry’s borrowing extends far beyond the technology giants themselves.

And Then There’s Europe

France and Germany are home to some of the world’s biggest banks. And, well, how to put this…Europe is committing cultural/financial suicide, and its banks are looking a lot less secure.

Catherine Austin Fitts recently posted a warning about US banks, which ended with:

And the situation in Europe is even worse.

Société Générale: -27%
BNP Paribas: -24%
Barclays: -23%
Deutsche Bank: -21%

Read more

Does that mean we should avoid the sector altogether? Or are there other companies that thrive along with AI, without the massive uncertainty of the AI companies themselves?

According to energy analyst Doomberg, whichever AI companies survive the current financial storm will need massive amounts of energy. And the natural gas companies will be there to provide it. Here’s a video that fleshes out this thesis, followed by a partial transcript:

Partial Transcript

Doomberg: The reason why natural gas is dirt cheap in the US is because oil is expensive. Oil and natural gas are largely co-produced together from the same well across the big shale patches in the US. So when the price of oil spikes, all those shale patch drillers start drilling huge volumes because they want that expensive crude. And they’ll give away the natural gas to get that crude.

We wrote a piece on this called “generational arbitrage” a couple of years ago. One of the ways this arbitrage is going to close is a boom in [gas-powered] data center construction in the US.

Host: Fascinating dynamics there, and I think that actually dovetails nicely with something that you said in 2024, where you described data centers as buildings where natural gas goes in one side and data comes out the other, and you predicted that sitting right on top of natural gas fields would be an inevitable choice for where to build data centers. Two years later, we’re seeing Chevron and Microsoft planning a 2.7 gigawatt project in the Permian. And SoftBank has a 9 gigawatt gas build-out in Ohio.

So, just an open question to you. If you could add one energy sector to an AI investor’s portfolio today, what would it be?

Doomberg: We just did a deep dive for our premium tier on midstream companies that build pipelines, get paid largely by volume, not by the price of the underlying commodity. So if pipelines are constraining to connect gas fields to data centers, they build them and they collect a “vig” for every molecule that passes through their pipeline. They’re wonderful companies, very well-run. They have a little bit of leverage. Fortress balance sheets. These are capital compounders, classic steady 8, 10, 12% per year dividend payers.

Our deep dive found 10 interesting companies to look at.

Nat Gas Recommendations Coming

Our Portfolio holds only one pipeline stock. But I’ll add a couple more pretty soon. In the meantime, suggestions would be welcome.

One thing they’re watching closely is the drill results of successful explorers. The more metal a given explorer finds, the higher the odds that a cash-rich senior will swoop in with a compelling offer.

The following explorer is becoming this kind of takeover candidate. It’s up about 200% since it joined our Portfolio, and — based on its most recent batch of drill results — that might be just the beginning.

The details:

Read more

And then there’s this company, which is doing things that are as interesting as they are unusual. Speaking for many of its investors, I’m happy but not always 100% sure why.

So let’s explore the moving parts that together make this stock a “buy”:

Read more

The tech-heavy KOSPI stock index soared as chip demand exploded — and is now tanking as AI hits a financial wall.

CoreWeave’s Debt Implodes

From leading AI “neocloud” to aggressive junk bond issuer to imminent default risk.

The Dollar Really Is Collapsing

U.S. Producer prices just came in hot — again. Which should be no surprise given the dollar’s brutal (ongoing) decline in this decade:

The Fed Stands Aside

So will the Fed tighten to limit inflation, or stand aside while financial market volatility does the tightening for it? The odds now favor the latter.

Bad Breath = Bad Times

Will tech turmoil spread to the broader economy? Market concentration says “probably”.

But those days are apparently over, as US debt surges despite low unemployment.

Since 2020, the cumulative US deficit has been a massive $14.18 trillion, while the 7-year average unemployment rate has fallen dramatically. In other words, we’re now running a structural $2 trillion annual deficit, regardless of how many of us are working.

4% Inflation?

Consumers are doing the above math, and now foresee inflation running at twice the Fed’s target rate:

So the Fed Raises Rates, Right?

With near-record deficits and rising inflation expectations, someone should probably rein in this financial system. If not fiscally, with spending cuts and tax increases, then via monetary policy, with a higher Fed Funds rate.

Nope. The odds of the Fed standing pat in October are now 85%.

The result: A US economy on autopilot, dependent on a tech bubble, an increasingly chaotic Middle East war, and crisis-level fiscal deficits. I’m sure everything will be fine.

Meanwhile, Over In Europe…

38% of French corporate bonds are now trading at lower yields than French government bonds. The implication is that civil unrest and out-of-control fiscal deficits make French government paper a suddenly very bad bet.

China Looks Much Smarter

Now contrast the above with China’s recent gold buying.

The crucial difference between its 2023 purchases and those of 2026 is price. China paid around $2,000/oz back then and is paying twice as much per ounce today. And it doesn’t seem to care.

So…Monetary chaos in the US and Europe, combined with a deep-pocketed, price-insensitive gold buyer, implies bad times for Western investors who trust their governments, and good times for those who don’t.

The plan in bullet points:

• Treasury bill stablecoins (which, under the recently passed Genius Act, must be backed 1-for-1 by T-bills) become a globally popular way to own risk-free assets as loan collateral. T-bill demand surges.

• The US Treasury issues trillions of dollars of T-bills to meet this demand.

• The Treasury uses the proceeds to buy back and retire long-dated, higher-yielding notes and bonds, pushing down long-term interest rates and lowering the government’s debt carrying costs.

• The remaining long-term paper is then backed by a promise to return principal in gold at expiration.

• And just like that, we’re back on a version of a gold standard, with low interest rates and a stable dollar.

Will It Work?

Some of the above, especially gold’s central role in the coming monetary reset, is appealing. But the plan seems to have a few serious flaws:

1. It doesn’t address fiscal policy. With the US and the rest of the developed world continuing to live way beyond their means, retiring boomers and suicidal wars will widen the already immense gap between tax revenue and government spending. The result: Total debt will keep rising, and despite lower interest rates, the government’s interest expense will stay high.

2. Shifting from long-term debt to short-term debt requires the government to continuously roll over a mountain of T-bills — no matter the state of the market.

3. “Backing” long-term bonds with a promise of gold in, say, 2055 requires bond buyers to trust the government to keep a very expensive promise three decades from now. Talk about counterparty risk…

4. The emergence of AI and quantum computing makes every link in this public/private value chain potentially hackable. Once again, massive counterparty risk.

More Likely Scenario

In 2027, another round of inflationary money printing is a lot more likely than the adoption of a stablecoin/gold standard. Consider this from Lawrence Lepard, author of The Big Print:

In a recent conversation with Adam Taggart, I made the comment that more printing is inevitable. Some have reached out and said Explain it or prove it. The point is that base money must expand to support the growth in debt. Otherwise, the debt collapses. IT IS JUST MATH! This chart from our in-process EMA Q3 Report shows what I am talking about.

My friend and co-author, James Turk, just published a peer-reviewed article explaining how we went wrong. Here’s an excerpt:

Money and federal autocracy: 1913 and the quiet inversion of the American constitutional order

James Turk, 05 October 2026

Abstract

The American Revolution affirmed that sovereignty inheres by nature in each Citizen, and collectively in the People. The Constitution completed a structure in which authority flowed from Citizens to their several State republics, and from the States to a Union holding only delegated powers. 1913 inverted that order. The Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments were procedurally valid, but substantively illegitimate. The decisive change needed no amendment: the Federal Reserve Act displaced constitutional money, removing the fiscal discipline natural money imposes unconditionally. A century of evidence confirms a trajectory towards federal autocracy. Restoring constitutional order begins with gold and silver coin, which only statute now prevents.

1 INTRODUCTION

The Citizens of the 13 American colonies that broke from British rule in 1776 did not merely secure their independence. They founded State governments on two principles of natural law, the first application of them in a written constitution.¹ Sovereignty inheres in each Citizen and collectively in the People, not the Crown. From that sovereignty flows the second principle: that government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed.

The 1777 Articles of Confederation extended that consent beyond the individual State, as the first compact of America’s independent State republics. The Articles established a Union that derived its authority from the States, each of which derived authority from its Citizens. Throughout this article, ‘Union’ carries that original constitutional sense, and ‘Citizen’ is capitalised to denote the individual in whom sovereignty inheres by nature, as distinct from status conferred by statute.

The Union was the States’ instrument, created by them to act on their behalf within a strictly limited sphere. Later generations, with no lived experience of what those limits prevented, let that understanding fade, and the deliberate reframing that followed the war begun in 1861 hastened that loss. The machinery enforcing the limits survived. What 1913 changed was the machinery itself, making it, not 1861, the operative break.

The 1913 transformation came without a shot fired and without a declaration. A series of constitutional and legislative changes quietly altered America’s founding governmental structure, enabling expansion of the Union’s authority beyond what Citizens had delegated.

I argue that two amendments in 1913, though procedurally valid, were substantively illegitimate because they inverted the natural law principles of sovereignty the Constitution was designed to protect. The decisive change was made by statute: the Federal Reserve Act.² No amendment conferred the monetary power that statute asserted. That power removed the constraint that natural money had imposed on the Union’s spending, creating the conditions for federal autocracy.

2 THE REVOLUTIONARY RECOGNITION OF SOVEREIGNTY

The American Revolution was not simply a rebellion against colonial rule. What made it revolutionary was a transformation in the very nature of political authority. Before 1776, the dominant political order in the Western world rested on monarchy and aristocracy, with authority flowing from rulers by divine right or hereditary privilege. Drawing on Enlightenment natural law philosophy (Locke, 1689), the founders argued that sovereignty inheres in the People by nature, precedes all government, and cannot be legitimately extinguished by it.

Sovereignty has two interdependent dimensions: the collective right of the People to consent to the form of government under which they live, and each individual’s possession of inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property. The Declaration of Independence (1776) expressed sovereignty with precision: that all men “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”, and that people have the right “to alter or to abolish” a government that fails to protect their natural and inalienable rights.³ The two dimensions work differently. The collective dimension settles the form of government; the individual dimension fixes the limits that no form of government, however lawfully constituted, can cross. What changed when peace came in 1783 was not the existence of those rights, but the formal end of a power that had denied them.

Inalienable rights belong to persons by virtue of their humanity, independently of what any government enacts or any court upholds. John Locke argued that reason itself reveals them (Locke, 1689, §§4–6). The logic is straightforward: because no person is by nature the ruler of another, authority over any person can arise only from that person’s consent. No government can legitimately extinguish inalienable rights, regardless of what procedures it follows or what majorities it commands. America’s founders did not invent this argument; they applied it, placing Citizens at the foundation of the constitutional order they created.

With the 1783 Treaty of Paris, King George III acknowledged each former colony by name, from New Hampshire to Georgia, “to be free sovereign and Independent States”, relinquishing all claims to their “Government, Propriety, and Territorial Rights”, and binding his “Heirs & Successors”. This acknowledgement came not to a single central government but to the People of each State through their several State governments.

‘Propriety’ then meant ownership, the exclusive right of possession, which the King relinquished (Webster, 1828). Under English common law all land was ultimately held from the Crown, even fee simple, the highest form of private ownership it recognised. Blackstone stated the doctrine: “all the land in the kingdom is supposed to be holden, mediately or immediately, of the king”, and, on Coke’s authority, that “in the law of England we have not properly allodium” (Blackstone, 1766, pp. 59–60).

Thomas Jefferson inverted that presumption. Writing in 1774, he argued that feudal holdings were “exceptions out of the Saxon laws of possession, under which all lands were held in absolute right”, so that those laws remained the groundwork of the common law wherever the feudal exception had not reached. It had not reached America, which “was not conquered by William the Norman, nor its lands surrendered to him, or any of his successors” (Jefferson, 1774).⁴ Land in America was therefore allodial by nature.

Jefferson’s argument does not rest on Saxon precedent alone. Its premise is natural law: men possess “a right which nature has given to all men, of departing from the country in which chance, not choice, has placed them, of going in quest of new habitations” and of establishing new societies under laws of their own choosing. With their emigration to Britain, the Saxons exercised that right; so did the colonists. Jefferson’s conclusion that occupancy of vacant land alone gives title is also Locke’s (Locke, 1689, §§25–32). Allodial title therefore is not a peculiarity of English legal history, but the form ownership takes when no superior has been interposed between the owner and the land.

On this argument the Revolution did not create allodial title in America; it removed a fiction that had obscured it. The Treaty of Paris severed the feudal chain in law, and the States confirmed by constitution and statute what Jefferson had claimed was true from the beginning. Pennsylvania, by its 1776 constitution and accompanying legislation, and other States in following years, abolished feudal tenures and established allodial title, free of any superior claim including the State’s.⁵ The feudal lord’s superiority was replaced by the equal rights of neighbours and fellow citizens under the common law. In allodial title the natural sovereignty the Revolution had been fought to achieve found its practical legal expression.

Property, in the understanding the founders applied, extended beyond land. Locke had argued in the Second Treatise of Government that “every man has a property in his own person: this nobody has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his” (Locke, 1689, §27). James Madison gave this principle its most precise American expression, arguing that a man has property not only in his land and goods but equally in “the free use of his faculties and free choice of the objects on which to employ them” (Madison, 1792). Labour and its fruits were therefore property by natural law, prior to and independent of any government, as fully beyond the reach of a superior’s claim as the land freed by the abolition of feudal tenure.

3 THE CONSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF INDEPENDENT REPUBLICS

There’s a lot more. Read it here.

Metals & Miners’ Gary Bohm is developing a mining stock research app called MineVantage. I’ve tried the beta version and am blown away by its potential.

In the article below, Gary illustrates the kind of in-depth analysis we might all be doing soon.

TUDOR GOLD IS PRICED LIKE A SMALL STORY. THE RESOURCE IS HUGE: A Tier-1 Gold System in the Golden Triangle, Copper in the Ground, Sprott on the Cap Table & Intrinsic Value At A Fraction!

Metals and Miners

October 5, 2026

This article shows how the Metals and Miners research app, MineVantage, breaks down and analyzes a mining stock. In this case the stock is Tudor Gold. MineVantage is currently in BETA, and access is limited to Metals and Miners Founders-level subscribers only. If you want in on the BETA, visit metalsandminers.substack.com/subscribe and upgrade to Founders.

Tudor Gold is a junior gold mining company with a very large gold resource, sitting in British Columbia’s Golden Triangle, trading near the bottom of its 52-week range. The shares last sat near $0.57, against a 52-week high of $1.30 and a low of $0.53.

MineVantage’s read is high conviction and high risk. The resource cited in filings is about 27.9 million indicated gold-equivalent ounces, with about 24.9 million ounces of total in-ground resources also in the grounded facts.

That is Tier-1 scale for a junior. The same ground also has copper. Treaty Creek is the flagship. Newer drilling has added a copper-gold porphyry at Perfectstorm and more gold-silver intervals at Treaty Creek.

When the next gold leg higher begins, a company moving from a defined resource toward developer work is in the right window, and that is Tudor Gold. A system this large, in a district that already has mines and infrastructure at the ready, is also the kind of asset a larger producing mining company seriously looks at for acquisition. The stock does not yet price that in.

How the Smart Money Is Paying Attention

• Why does a Tier-1 gold resource, plus copper, in the Golden Triangle matter much more than the current $0.57 share price?

• Why do nearby roads, power, and other mines make it easier to move this project forward, and what still has to be built?

• Why do a low warrant count, high insider ownership, Eric Sprott, and the CEO’s past record sit next to a cash warning, and why does MineVantage still call the value gap large?

The ounces are big. Very big. The current price is relatively small. The infrasturcture is nearby, the right investors are in and the de-risking is well underway. When the next gold leg takes off, so does Tudor Gold. Read on to see how MineVantage analyzes this mining stock. So, let’s dig in…

The Resource Is Already Tier-1. Copper Is in the System.

Most juniors are still looking for a deposit. Tudor Gold already has one large enough to sit in MineVantage’s top size bucket, 10 million ounces and up.

The disclosed base is unusually large for a junior: about 27.9 million indicated gold-equivalent ounces on the main resource, plus about 24.9 million ounces of total in-ground resources in the grounded facts.

At this stage, size is the attraction. A deposit this large can easily draw interest from bigger mining producers.

It also implies a very large build and more capital later. For a newer investor, the point is simple. The debate is no longer “did they find something.” It is all about quality, costs, and whether it can be built.

Copper is the second metal in their story:

• On August 6, 2026, the company reported a new copper-gold porphyry at Perfectstorm, including a 0.24% copper headline.

• On September 17, 2026, it said that system had been expanded, with room for a broader gold-dominant zone.

• On September 8, 2025, drilling at Treaty Creek cut 2.57 grams per tonne gold equivalent over 54 meters.

• On July 7, 2026, a higher-grade silver breccia was reported in the CBS zone.

Those hits do not build a mine. But, they do say the district is still adding value beyond the massive gold deposit, not just resting on an old estimate. De-risking has started and is well underway. A large resource is already disclosed. An updated mineral resource estimate was announced in 2026.

The project sits in the prestigous Golden Triangle, with known mining and critical infrastructure nearby. That makes it so much easier and cheaper to get to production. The company has also pointed to a permitting overlap it views as helpful in its 2026 exploration plans.

Buyers will still want a clearer higher-grade core or a cleaner path to development, not just more ounces on the edge. In other words, show us you are building rather than just raising money. Scale gets you in the room. Studies, permits, and positive movement keep you there.

The Location Is Why a Build Is Even Discussable

Infrastructure is the unglamorous half of a mine. Tudor Gold’s ground is not in the middle of nowhere. MineVantage scores the existing mining district 9 out of 10. Other gold and copper operations sit about 8, 28, and 41 kilometers away. That is huge for Tudor Gold.

Read the rest of Gary’s post here.

The BETA version of MineVantage is here.

This is happening today:

Read more

The bond markets, as a result, are revolting. No one wants to lend money in such a chaotic market, so interest rates aren't just rising; they’re spiking. The U.S. 10-year Treasury note’s yield pierced 5% in late September and hasn’t looked back:

This translates into 7.5% mortgages, which could trigger the long-prophesied housing crash.

But soaring interest rates are not just a U.S. story. Japan’s 10-year Treasury yield has risen from zero to 3% in the past few years, while France (once a pillar of European financial stability) is suddenly just as ugly as its developed-world peers:

Commodities Crosscurrents

The combination of rising interest rates (deflationary) and energy supply chain disruptions (inflationary) has created some crosscurrents in the commodities complex, with gold and silver correcting while oil, copper, and uranium have held up reasonably well.

The result was a modest correction for our Portfolio in September. But keep things in context:

• The upcoming Q3 earnings season will show the miners continuing to generate near-record free cash flow.

• Miner M&A is shifting into high gear, which makes some of our Portfolio stocks prime takeover candidates.

• “Death spiral milestones” are coming more frequently, which is great for gold.

Portfolio

Despite September’s correction, most of our stocks are still up nicely. In other words, they’re not cheap yet. So keep accumulating opportunistically via low-ball bids, dollar-cost averaging, and put writing.

Read more

For consumer prices generally, it now takes over $11 to buy what $1 bought in the year Kerry was …

Read more

Gold and silver prices held up pretty well in Q3.

Gold and silver averaged, respectively, $4,400 and $64 per ounce in Q3, down only margina…

Read more