But, Prof G never answered the question of why stock markets are at a record high? Is Scott shorting the market or not? Or has his February high tech boycott already done too much damage?
Hogwash. If the case, a thoughtful approach then would be to develop a comprehensive military plan with allies. As has been war games by previous administrations starting with Reagan. Or perhaps utilize the diplomatic route that would hold Iran to below 5% uranium enrichment and require IAEA inspectors on the ground to verify. And maybe even have the Iranian Ayatollah issue a religious fatwa banning the development of a nuclear weapon. Like we had with JPCOA
Exactly - by killing the only Iranian leader who expressly issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons both Israel and US only strengthened the hardliners against the many millions of everyday people that are suffering. US intervention in Afghanistan against the Soviets is exactly how the Taliban came to power and again common people suffered. Looking at Ukraine and Russia it becomes clear that giving up nuclear deterrence is kicking the can down the road. It's the only way for middle powers to put up a 'do not disturb' sign.
Ah yes, the classic “everything is about to collapse” thesis—always a crowd favorite. If you read this piece too quickly, you’d think we’re about three missed container shipments away from returning to bartering goats and arguing over sacks of grain.
Let’s inject a little reality.
First, global markets—those cold, profit-driven, hyper-informed machines—are not exactly panicking. In fact, they’re brushing this off like a minor inconvenience. That’s not because traders are clueless; it’s because they’ve seen this movie before. Supply shocks happen. Routes reroute. Prices spike, then normalize. The system bends—rarely breaks.
Second, the idea that one chokepoint disruption equals global famine ignores something important: adaptation. Fertilizer doesn’t magically disappear—it gets repriced, redirected, and substituted. Same with helium, plastics, shipping, you name it. Painful? Sure. Apocalyptic? Hardly.
Third, invoking the French Revolution every time food prices tick up is a bit theatrical. Yes, food insecurity can destabilize regions—but jumping from “higher fertilizer costs” to “global conflict spiral” is like predicting a house fire because someone lit a candle.
And this “end of globalization” angle? We’ve heard it after every crisis—2008, COVID, Ukraine. Yet here we are, still trading, still shipping, still optimizing.
Bottom line: this isn’t a “slow-motion famine machine.” It’s a messy, uneven, but ultimately resilient global system doing what it always does—adjusting under pressure.
"Forms of political messaging and campaigning need to be created and sustained that make populism’s failures in government feel more important to more people, and that connect these failures more clearly to populism’s fundamentals – its fantasies about restoring lost golden ages, its delusions that foreigners are always to blame. In short, populism needs to be held to account." Read the whole article, Rightwing populism is littered with broken promises. Its opponents need to make those failures count by Andy Beckett at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/24/rightwing-populism-littered-broken-promises-trump-farage-immigration
I'd bet my salary that the Pentagon has had a plan for going to war with Iran for 80 years. And that strategy constantly updated. And I'd be my house that that strategy included contingencies for the closure of the straits (or gays) of hormuz.
So, this isn't Trump. And maybe the strategy is playing out exactly as it's planned. (I might bet $100 on this...Not more)
But some people have the need to react quickly to slow moving events and miss the bigger picture
What’s interesting is that “freedom of navigation” gets framed as a neutral principle, but in practice it looks a lot like selective enforcement by the actors with the capability to enforce it. The idea is universal, the application isn’t.
That creates a real tension. When a dominant power conducts these operations, is it upholding a rules-based system or reinforcing its own version of it? Smaller states benefit from open sea lanes, but they also have no say in how or when those rules get tested.
The uncomfortable question is whether this system actually depends on asymmetry. If no single actor had the capacity to enforce these norms, do they persist or do they slowly erode into de facto territorial control?
Scott. You do a great job describing the problem and always lean into ripping the admin. What I don’t read is any suggestion about how you or someone you like would deal with the problems we have. To think Iran IIRG is someone you or anyone you know can negotiate with is an illusion! They want us ( all Americans) dead. Full stop.
Please suggest a solution after identify the problems. Every can and does write endlessly about the mistakes others make. It’s rare to read any well thought out solutions.
I'm struck by the disconnect: you are so articulate about systematic oppression, yet you refuse to apply that insight to Israel’s campaign in Gaza and the West Bank. Or it's action in this conflict.
The underly narrative that Iran acted in a vacuum ignores the prior "act of war" that provoked its response. Ironically, this was taken to preempt the acquisition of the very weapons the US/Israel now threaten to use. Legally, the Strait of Hormuz is Iranian territorial water, not international. Iran is within its rights to blockade hostile vessels. The US "rules-based order" has been a farce to most people in the global south and Europe and Canada are waking up to this reality.
This piece is thinly veiled jingoism, manufacturing consent for a broader, potentially nuclear conflict by casually justifying the mass killing of civilians, children, pets and the erasure of culture and history in a mushroom cloud. Go to Hiroshima if you have not already and feel it for yourself.
Lastly - killing diplomats, political leaders and their families is not policing; it's gangsterism. Perhaps instead of preaching it is time for Americans and Israelis to have some introspection: what will it take for people to come out and demand regime change?
Thank you Scott, I become more and more of a fan. What you said in that last paragraph was powerful, and I appreciate it. Especially since you held judgment on the War in Iran for awhile before getting to this place. Speaks to thinking slow.....
Scott, as an aging man who relies heavily on MRIs, helium balloons at grandkid birthdays, and the occasional squeaky-voice gag to stay relevant, I take this helium news personally. Between the strait and my prostate, nothing flows like it used to.
But, Prof G never answered the question of why stock markets are at a record high? Is Scott shorting the market or not? Or has his February high tech boycott already done too much damage?
Slow thinking takes into consideration why this war began and the danger of letting Iran continue to build its missiles and nuclear weapons.
Hogwash. If the case, a thoughtful approach then would be to develop a comprehensive military plan with allies. As has been war games by previous administrations starting with Reagan. Or perhaps utilize the diplomatic route that would hold Iran to below 5% uranium enrichment and require IAEA inspectors on the ground to verify. And maybe even have the Iranian Ayatollah issue a religious fatwa banning the development of a nuclear weapon. Like we had with JPCOA
Exactly - by killing the only Iranian leader who expressly issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons both Israel and US only strengthened the hardliners against the many millions of everyday people that are suffering. US intervention in Afghanistan against the Soviets is exactly how the Taliban came to power and again common people suffered. Looking at Ukraine and Russia it becomes clear that giving up nuclear deterrence is kicking the can down the road. It's the only way for middle powers to put up a 'do not disturb' sign.
Ah yes, the classic “everything is about to collapse” thesis—always a crowd favorite. If you read this piece too quickly, you’d think we’re about three missed container shipments away from returning to bartering goats and arguing over sacks of grain.
Let’s inject a little reality.
First, global markets—those cold, profit-driven, hyper-informed machines—are not exactly panicking. In fact, they’re brushing this off like a minor inconvenience. That’s not because traders are clueless; it’s because they’ve seen this movie before. Supply shocks happen. Routes reroute. Prices spike, then normalize. The system bends—rarely breaks.
Second, the idea that one chokepoint disruption equals global famine ignores something important: adaptation. Fertilizer doesn’t magically disappear—it gets repriced, redirected, and substituted. Same with helium, plastics, shipping, you name it. Painful? Sure. Apocalyptic? Hardly.
Third, invoking the French Revolution every time food prices tick up is a bit theatrical. Yes, food insecurity can destabilize regions—but jumping from “higher fertilizer costs” to “global conflict spiral” is like predicting a house fire because someone lit a candle.
And this “end of globalization” angle? We’ve heard it after every crisis—2008, COVID, Ukraine. Yet here we are, still trading, still shipping, still optimizing.
Bottom line: this isn’t a “slow-motion famine machine.” It’s a messy, uneven, but ultimately resilient global system doing what it always does—adjusting under pressure.
Doom sells. Reality adapts.
Great stuff Scott!
"Forms of political messaging and campaigning need to be created and sustained that make populism’s failures in government feel more important to more people, and that connect these failures more clearly to populism’s fundamentals – its fantasies about restoring lost golden ages, its delusions that foreigners are always to blame. In short, populism needs to be held to account." Read the whole article, Rightwing populism is littered with broken promises. Its opponents need to make those failures count by Andy Beckett at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/24/rightwing-populism-littered-broken-promises-trump-farage-immigration
I'd bet my salary that the Pentagon has had a plan for going to war with Iran for 80 years. And that strategy constantly updated. And I'd be my house that that strategy included contingencies for the closure of the straits (or gays) of hormuz.
So, this isn't Trump. And maybe the strategy is playing out exactly as it's planned. (I might bet $100 on this...Not more)
But some people have the need to react quickly to slow moving events and miss the bigger picture
What’s interesting is that “freedom of navigation” gets framed as a neutral principle, but in practice it looks a lot like selective enforcement by the actors with the capability to enforce it. The idea is universal, the application isn’t.
That creates a real tension. When a dominant power conducts these operations, is it upholding a rules-based system or reinforcing its own version of it? Smaller states benefit from open sea lanes, but they also have no say in how or when those rules get tested.
The uncomfortable question is whether this system actually depends on asymmetry. If no single actor had the capacity to enforce these norms, do they persist or do they slowly erode into de facto territorial control?
Scott. You do a great job describing the problem and always lean into ripping the admin. What I don’t read is any suggestion about how you or someone you like would deal with the problems we have. To think Iran IIRG is someone you or anyone you know can negotiate with is an illusion! They want us ( all Americans) dead. Full stop.
Please suggest a solution after identify the problems. Every can and does write endlessly about the mistakes others make. It’s rare to read any well thought out solutions.
Prof,
I'm struck by the disconnect: you are so articulate about systematic oppression, yet you refuse to apply that insight to Israel’s campaign in Gaza and the West Bank. Or it's action in this conflict.
The underly narrative that Iran acted in a vacuum ignores the prior "act of war" that provoked its response. Ironically, this was taken to preempt the acquisition of the very weapons the US/Israel now threaten to use. Legally, the Strait of Hormuz is Iranian territorial water, not international. Iran is within its rights to blockade hostile vessels. The US "rules-based order" has been a farce to most people in the global south and Europe and Canada are waking up to this reality.
This piece is thinly veiled jingoism, manufacturing consent for a broader, potentially nuclear conflict by casually justifying the mass killing of civilians, children, pets and the erasure of culture and history in a mushroom cloud. Go to Hiroshima if you have not already and feel it for yourself.
Lastly - killing diplomats, political leaders and their families is not policing; it's gangsterism. Perhaps instead of preaching it is time for Americans and Israelis to have some introspection: what will it take for people to come out and demand regime change?
Thank you Scott, I become more and more of a fan. What you said in that last paragraph was powerful, and I appreciate it. Especially since you held judgment on the War in Iran for awhile before getting to this place. Speaks to thinking slow.....
See you in San Francisco! Thanks for this analysis.
Scott, as an aging man who relies heavily on MRIs, helium balloons at grandkid birthdays, and the occasional squeaky-voice gag to stay relevant, I take this helium news personally. Between the strait and my prostate, nothing flows like it used to.
The brutal truth laid bare.
…was he worth it America?
Nope