What’s Next After $5,000 Gold?
What’s Next After $5,000 Gold?
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) January 27, 2026
In the year 578 AD, a Korean immigrant named Shigemitsu Kongo arrived in Japan at the invitation of the royal family. Buddhism was flourishing, and the Japanese needed someone who knew how to build temples. Kongo was their man.
He founded a construction company—Kongō Gumi—that would go on to build some of Japan's most iconic Buddhist temples. And, somewhat miraculously, the company stayed within the same family for over fourteen centuries.
That's roughly 40 generations. The company lived through the rise and fall of the samurai, the Meiji Restoration, two World Wars, and the atomic bomb.
But in 2006, after 1,428 years of continuous operation, Kongō Gumi went bankrupt.
What’s Next After $5,000 Gold?
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) January 27, 2026
In the year 578 AD, a Korean immigrant named Shigemitsu Kongo arrived in Japan at the invitation of the royal family. Buddhism was flourishing, and the Japanese needed someone who knew how to build temples. Kongo was their man.
He founded a construction company—Kongō Gumi—that would go on to build some of Japan's most iconic Buddhist temples. And, somewhat miraculously, the company stayed within the same family for over fourteen centuries.
That's roughly 40 generations. The company lived through the rise and fall of the samurai, the Meiji Restoration, two World Wars, and the atomic bomb.
But in 2006, after 1,428 years of continuous operation, Kongō Gumi went bankrupt.
Japan experienced a legendary financial bubble in the 1980s; asset prices exploded. And, like many Japanese companies during that decade, Kongo Gumi borrowed heavily to invest in real estate.
But eventually the bubble burst. Asset prices crashed. And all that remained was the debt... which Kongō Gumi could not repay.
The world's oldest company— which had survived 1400+ years of war, natural disaster, and literally even two nuclear strikes, was undone by too much debt.
It's a powerful reminder: it doesn't matter how long you've been around. What matters is your current financial reality. History doesn't protect you from math.
And this same principle applies to sovereign nations.
Japan has the worst debt-to-GDP ratio on the planet—256%— more than double the United States.
But, like the US, the Japanese government has gotten away with this insane debt level for a long time.
Part of the reason was that their central bank (the BOJ) held interest rates at near zero so that the government could borrow at almost no cost.
If interest rates are 0%, in theory you could borrow unlimited quantities of money without any consequences... but ONLY as long as interest rates remain at zero.
Unfortunately for Japan, the bond market looks like it has finally had enough.
On January 19th, Japan's new Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi announced a 21.3 trillion yen (about $140 billion) stimulus package. The bond market's response was immediate... and visceral.
Within days, Japan's 40-year government bond yield soared to 4.24%—a record high, and the first time a Japanese sovereign maturity has breached 4% in over three decades.
The 30-year yield surged to nearly 4%. Even Japan’s 10-year government bond hit 2.38%, the highest since 1999.
Higher rates are a five-alarm fire for any heavily-indebted country. And we've seen this movie before.
In October 2022, British Prime Minister Liz Truss announced a tax-cut plan that would have resulted in a higher budget deficit. The bond market wasn’t having any of that. Government bond yields skyrocketed, and the British pound plummeted.
It was so bad that the Bank of England had to launch emergency interventions, and the Prime Minister resigned after just 49 days in office— the shortest tenure in British history.
You can probably see the pattern. Bond markets first revolted in Britain, the world’s sixth largest economy. Now it’s revolting in Japan, the world’s fourth largest economy.
How long until bond markets start to revolt against the world’s largest economy?
Billionaire investor Ken Griffin connected these dots explicitly when he said last week, "What happened in Japan is a very important message to the [US] House and to the Senate. . . You need to get our fiscal house in order."
We've been saying this for years: politicians in Congress think that, because America is the largest economy with the world’s reserve currency, the rules don’t apply to them... and that they can run endless, outrageously high deficits without any consequence.
This is completely delusional.
If the US doesn’t get its fiscal house in order, the dollar won’t be the world’s reserve currency for much longer. In many respects this shift is already happening.
Just look at China: right before the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, China held less than $500 billion of US government bonds— roughly 5% of the total US national debt at the time.
By 2011, just three years later, they had increased their holdings to $1.3 trillion—nearly 10% of total US government debt.
But China has been selling off its Treasury holdings rapidly over the past two years. They've cut their position by roughly 50%, down to about $682 billion, or less than 2% of the national debt.
To be clear, I'm not rooting for China to own a larger share of the US national debt. I'm rooting for a lower national debt.
But that ultimately requires Congress to be sensible and realistic.
And it’s not like cutting the deficit is some impossible task.
A 23-year old YouTuber was able to singlehandedly uncover billions of dollars of fraud in just one city. All Congress has to do is stop it.
But they are unwilling to do so.
With such unserious, low IQ politicians in Congress, foreign governments and central banks are thinking twice about investing in US Treasury bonds. Many (like China) are selling and starting to diversify in other asset classes... including gold.
In fact, rising demand from governments and central banks around the world has been one of the key drivers in gold’s rising price.
But it's not just central banks anymore. Pension funds and insurance companies have been increasing their gold allocations as a long-term asset.
And this makes sense. Pension funds and insurance companies traditionally invest in very long–term bonds (like the 30-year) because they have to match their assets to long-term policy liabilities (like life insurance).
Clearly these companies are worried that after adjusting for taxes and inflation, owning US government bonds for THREE DECADES is simply too risky. So they’re turning to gold instead.
I don’t know where gold prices are going today, tomorrow, or next month. But the long-term trend is pretty clear: as long as Congress continues to be unserious about fixing the deficit, gold will keep going higher.
And that means companies in the real asset (especially gold) business are primed to do extremely well.
To your freedom, James Hickman Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC
Taxing Everything That’s Nailed Down
Taxing Everything That’s Nailed Down
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) January 22, 2026
In the ancient town of Casinum—modern-day Cassino, Italy—parts of a Roman amphitheater still stand after nearly 2,000 years. Carved into the stone, in Latin, is an inscription that translates to: "Ummidia Quadratilla, daughter of Caius, built the amphitheatre and temple for the people of Casinum at her expense."
Ummidia Quadratilla was a wealthy Roman businesswoman who funded multiple public works, all out of her own pocket. Her name was carved in stone for eternity. When she died, she was respected enough that the younger Pliny wrote admiringly about her.
Taxing Everything That’s Nailed Down
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) January 22, 2026
In the ancient town of Casinum—modern-day Cassino, Italy—parts of a Roman amphitheater still stand after nearly 2,000 years. Carved into the stone, in Latin, is an inscription that translates to: "Ummidia Quadratilla, daughter of Caius, built the amphitheatre and temple for the people of Casinum at her expense."
Ummidia Quadratilla was a wealthy Roman businesswoman who funded multiple public works, all out of her own pocket. Her name was carved in stone for eternity. When she died, she was respected enough that the younger Pliny wrote admiringly about her.
The Romans (and Greeks before them) called this practice euergetes—wealthy citizens funding infrastructure projects in exchange for public recognition. Rich people actually competed with one another to see who could give more since public generosity elevated one’s status.
The most generous would have parades thrown in their honor— though naturally they would have to pay for the parade.
Today’s attitudes towards taxpayers are entirely different. Politicians are constantly inventing new ways to extract more and more from people, and then publicly shame the people who pay the most money.
They call their biggest tax payers “greedy” for following the very tax code that politicians write, and then demand they pay their "fair share" without ever defining how much that is.
In tax year 2022 (the most recent data that the IRS has published), the top 0.001% of taxpayers in America paid, on average, nearly $60 million each. The top 0.0001% (about 150 people) paid in the hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars each.
(By comparison, the average taxpayer contributes about $7,333.)
You’d think that politicians would be grateful and supportive of people who write such enormous checks to the government. I mean, they ought to name an aircraft carrier for someone who consistently pays billion-dollar tax bills.
Yet, again, politicians vilify and shame them. This is a bizarre, almost cannibalistic approach. Any private business would treat its top customers with respect and dignity. At a minimum they wouldn’t vilify the individuals who pay the most money.
But guess what? Successful people are extremely mobile. It’s 2026, not 1026. No one is a medieval serf anymore, tied to the land.
California is learning this lesson the hard way. The state already has one of the highest income tax rates in America—13.3% at the top bracket.
Wealthy people have long tolerated California’s high income taxes as the price they pay for living in a place with great weather.
Yet now California voters are considering a ballot measure to impose a "one-time" 5% wealth tax on billionaires—a levy on their total assets, retroactive to January 1, 2026.
And that was finally enough. Billionaires are getting out of Dodge, because they’re not dumb enough to think that this tax will be a “one-time” thing.
The United Kingdom is experiencing something similar.
For over 200 years, the UK had a "non-dom" regime that allowed wealthy foreigners living in Britain to avoid UK taxes on their overseas income. It was one of the few things remaining in recent years which made Britain attractive to international wealth.
In March 2024, the Conservative government announced they would abolish it. The Labour government confirmed the change after winning the July election, and the regime officially ended in April 2025.
The mere announcement triggered an exodus. Over 10,000 millionaires left the UK in 2024, and thousands more followed in 2025.
They brought their money with them. No more big spending, no more employees, no more economic activity.
So what does a desperate government do when the wealthy flee?
They tax everything that's nailed down.
Here’s a great example: Britain’s Labour government recently announced plans to double the tax rate on local bars and pubs.
These establishments are already being squeezed from every direction. The government charges duty on beer, plus VAT, plus special taxes on every pint sold.
Now the Labour government is raising those tax rates by 30 to 70%, starting this April.
The response? Over 1,000 pubs have banned Labour MPs from their establishments. Prime Minister Keir Starmer got barred from one of his local pubs in London. Signs reading "No Labour MPs" are appearing in windows across the country.
But I wouldn't count on this changing anything. Remember, the UK government couldn't even be bothered to investigate the years-long grooming gang scandal until public outrage forced Prime Minister Starmer's hand—he'd initially dismissed calls for an inquiry as a 'far-right bandwagon.'
It’s all so insulting.
Bear in mind that the British government is re housing 36,000 asylum seekers in hotels at £145 per night—all at taxpayer expense.
Plus, local councils spent £52 million on diversity and inclusion officers over the past three years. Britain is still sending foreign aid to India—a country with its own space program.
Meanwhile 10 million pensioners, i.e. actual British people, lost their winter fuel payments so that the government could save £1.5 billion.
It really boggles the mind. Before raising taxes, shouldn't governments examine how they're spending the money they already take in?
The fundamental problem is that government programs, once created, are almost impossible to end. There's never an honest reckoning; spending just keeps rising, forcing governments to keep searching for new revenue.
Naturally they always want to tax the rich... But eventually “the rich” skip town, so the government starts taxing every that can’t relocate. Pubs. Property. Small businesses. The middle class.
This is why tax mitigation is part of any sensible Plan B.
It's not unpatriotic to expect the government to spend money wisely. Any rational person—not even as a Plan B, but as a Plan A—should explore legal means to minimize their tax burden.
That could mean moving from a high-tax state like California or New York to a no-income-tax state like Texas or Florida.
Maximizing retirement account contributions—a self-directed Solo 401(k) alone lets you shelter up to $69,000 per year.
For Americans willing to live abroad, the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion can shield up to $132,900 from federal taxes.
Banning politicians from the local pub might feel good. But the most rational way to respond— when the government isn’t even willing to stop funding outright fraud— is to follow the rules of their own tax code to minimize the amount of your money that they’ll waste.
To your freedom, James Hickman Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC
Ex-Treasury Secretary Compared US to Third World Countries
Ex-Treasury Secretary Compared US to Third World Countries
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) January 19, 2026
Former Fed Chair and ex-Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen finally told the truth.
In recent remarks at the American Economic Association, she told the audience that US finances are in worse shape than most third-world countries. She said specifically that America's “needed belt tightening is significant—larger than in most programs supported by the International Monetary Fund."
Let that sink in for a minute. Remember, the International Monetary Fund provides emergency bailout funding for countries who are on the verge of bankruptcy. And naturally this IMF funding comes with strings attached: recipient countries are required to cut spending and tighten their belts.
Ex-Treasury Secretary Compared US to Third World Countries
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) January 19, 2026
Former Fed Chair and ex-Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen finally told the truth.
In recent remarks at the American Economic Association, she told the audience that US finances are in worse shape than most third-world countries. She said specifically that America's “needed belt tightening is significant—larger than in most programs supported by the International Monetary Fund."
Let that sink in for a minute. Remember, the International Monetary Fund provides emergency bailout funding for countries who are on the verge of bankruptcy. And naturally this IMF funding comes with strings attached: recipient countries are required to cut spending and tighten their belts.
Greece is the classic example of what happens when the IMF shows up.
By 2010, Greek debt had spiraled to 130% of GDP and climbing. No one was willing to lend them money anymore... forcing the IMF to swoop in with a "rescue" package that came with brutal strings attached.
Pensions were slashed by 40%. Public sector wages were frozen, then cut. Over 150,000 government workers were laid off. State assets—airports, ports, utilities—were sold off at fire-sale prices to foreign investors.
Greece's economy contracted by 25%. Youth unemployment hit 60%. An entire generation was hollowed out.
Argentina has been through the IMF wringer multiple times; in fact in in 2018, Argentina received the largest bailout in IMF history: $57 billion.
The conditions? Currency controls. Spending freezes. Slashed subsidies. Inflation still ripped past 50%. Poverty rates surged past 40%. The middle class was gutted. (These conditions are what ultimately led to the election of Javier Milei).
Sri Lanka is the most recent cautionary tale.
In 2022, after years of fiscal mismanagement, the country defaulted on its debt. The IMF demanded fuel subsidy cuts, electricity price hikes, and tax increases. Inflation hit 70%. Riots erupted, culminating in protesters storming the Presidential palace.
Pakistan, Egypt, Ukraine, Ecuador, Zambia—the list goes on. Whenever the IMF shows up, a nation loses its sovereignty. Foreign bureaucrats start dictating your tax rates, your spending priorities, your pension formulas.
And here's Janet Yellen—former Fed Chair, former Treasury Secretary—calmly, academically stating that America needs a bigger fiscal adjustment than most of these countries that the IMF bailed out.
She said the quiet part out loud (though coincidentally failed to admit that she was complicit in engineering this crisis).
Now, there are several critical differences between the US versus Greece, Sri Lanka, etc.
The US has a highly robust and productive economy with far more growth potential.
America also possesses (for now) the world's reserve currency.
If Sri Lanka runs out of money, they have no choice but to accept whatever terms the IMF dictates. But the US has the luxury of ‘printing’ its own money to finance the deficit.
And that's exactly what's happening: the Federal Reserve has quietly started buying Treasuries again—expanding reserves and injecting money into a system where inflation is already climbing.
The problem is, ‘printing’ money only works as long as the world keeps accepting dollars. Foreign creditors need to trust they'll be paid back—and that the dollars they receive will still be worth something.
When that confidence erodes, they start to diversify into other assets. And we’re seeing that play out now.
Central banks around the world have been aggressively dumping US dollars and buying gold—hence why the gold price surged over 60% last year. Foreign central bankers are not waiting around to see how America’s debt challenge plays out.
The US government is running out of time to demonstrate to the world that they are serious about cutting spending. And it’s not like there isn’t plenty of fat to trim.
Yet nothing ever happens. Just look at the Minnesota welfare fraud as an example: you’d think the entire country would be united against stopping the fraud.
Instead, apologists have downplayed it. They call critics “racist” and claim that there’s plenty of fraud elsewhere, so why is everyone so focused on Minnesota daycare facilities..?
The President tried to cut funding, and he immediately got sued. Then some activist masquerading as a federal judge ruled against the President, ensuring that the fraud would keep flowing.
If there is to be any change, it’s ultimately going to come down to Congress and its extremely cumbersome appropriations process.
Bear in mind, we’re talking about an institution that can’t even agree to a basic budget without threatening a full-blown government shutdown. So I wouldn’t hold my breath that they’re going to suddenly cut out fraudulent spending.
Yet while it’s doubtful that Congress will suddenly grow a brain, a conscience, and a backbone, it is still possible that you as an individual can sidestep the risks.
Real assets—precious metals, energy, agriculture, productive businesses—hold value regardless of what politicians do to the dollar. And if fiscal instability finally forces the reckoning Yellen warned about, these are the assets that benefit most.
We've been positioning for exactly this environment in our real assets investment research service Strategic Assets.
For example, we've identified gold miners that are now up over 400% since we first highlighted them—plus producers still trading at single-digit earnings multiples despite making money hand over fist with exploding margins at $4,000+ gold.
Last week we released our latest issue, which includes this analysis in full, plus specific undervalued opportunities positioned for the chaos ahead— a core American food producer, a gold mining services company, and a miner that has cornered the market on an industrial metal necessary for all technology. We’re offering a free, full, unredacted issue of Strategic Assets as a sample.
To your freedom, James Hickman Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC
Why The Biggest “Threat To Democracy” Is The US National Debt
Why The Biggest “Threat To Democracy” Is The US National Debt
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) January 12 2026
On September 1, 1575, a royal courier from King Philip II of Spain arrived to the banking house of Niccolò de Grimaldi in Genoa. The Grimaldi bank had loaned Philip quite a sum of money, and the Italian bankers already knew that the king’s finances were on shaky ground. So when they opened the royal letter, it probably wasn’t much of a surprise: King Philip II of Spain was suspending all debt payments. Effective immediately.
Amazingly, this was Philip’s third bankruptcy in less than two decades—he’d already defaulted in 1557 and 1560.
Why The Biggest “Threat To Democracy” Is The US National Debt
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) January 12 2026
On September 1, 1575, a royal courier from King Philip II of Spain arrived to the banking house of Niccolò de Grimaldi in Genoa. The Grimaldi bank had loaned Philip quite a sum of money, and the Italian bankers already knew that the king’s finances were on shaky ground. So when they opened the royal letter, it probably wasn’t much of a surprise: King Philip II of Spain was suspending all debt payments. Effective immediately.
Amazingly, this was Philip’s third bankruptcy in less than two decades—he’d already defaulted in 1557 and 1560.
Bear in mind that Spain wasn’t some struggling backwater in the 1500s; this was the richest nation on Earth.
Spanish galleons transported 180 tonnes of silver annually from the Americas. The empire spanned four continents. Its army was Europe’s most feared military force.
Yet the King couldn’t pay his bills.
Philip’s treasury officials knew exactly what needed to be done: cut spending on endless wars, reform the tax system, reduce royal court expenses, stop borrowing at rates up to 40%.
But all of that was politically impossible. There were too many entrenched interests. Spain’s nobility controlled parliament, so naturally they refused to pass any new taxes (as they would be the ones paying!)
The Church owned vast estates and wielded enormous influence… so touching Church revenues was out of the question.
Military spending was non-negotiable— there were simply too many foreign powers threatening the empire, not to mention war in the Netherlands, skirmishes with the Ottomans, brewing conflict with England.
Every constituency had a reason why their particular spending was essential. Every reform threatened someone’s interests. So nothing changed.
They could have made reforms voluntarily. But it was easier to simply keep borrowing and make the problem worse every year.
Thing is, this approach of kicking the can down the road only lasts for so long… because, sooner or later, the creditors stop lending more money.
Why would they? Why would Italy’s Grimaldi bank keep sending money to Philip knowing that he would not pay them? No lender wants to sink money into a financial black hole.
What often happens in these situations is that foreign creditors do come back to the table. But not as bankers or lenders or bond investors.
No. Once a nation defaults (or is on the brink of default), creditors come back when they can essentially take control of the government… when they can oversee and approve expenses, tax revenues, and even legislation.
We’ve seen this multiple times even in the 21st century. In the aftermath of the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, many European nations (like Greece) were forced into ‘austerity’ programs whereby their domestic economic agenda was dictated by foreign creditors.
In 2022, the British Prime Minister was forced to resign because the bond market didn’t like her tax plan.
All of this ultimately constitutes a loss of sovereignty.
The same thing happened to Spain in the 1500s; suddenly Italian bankers had veto power over Spanish military campaigns… meaning that Philip was a king in name only, and the Spanish Empire ultimately became a subsidiary of the banks.
Within 100 years, Spain had gone from dominant superpower to a weak, second-tier player—economically exhausted and militarily overextended.
Spain had everything needed to remain a great power: vast resources, global trade networks, military strength, and smart administrators who understood what needed to be done.
What it lacked was the political will to make changes before a crisis forced those choices upon them, in a way entirely outside their control.
A similar trend is taking place in America today… though, again, it’s not too late.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently stated that he believes up to 10%—roughly $600 billion—of the US government budget is fraud. Not waste. Not inefficiency. Fraud of the sort that recently came to light in Minnesota.
And that’s not even counting the ‘legitimate graft’—the type we wrote about last week in California, where Gavin Newsom has given away nearly $100 billion to pointless Leftist initiatives.
The US still has absurdly strong economic potential. The key to reining in this future debt crisis is to cut spending, i.e. freeze the budget in place and spend the same amount of money more wisely. Stop the bleeding.
On top of that, take a hatchet to America’s bureaucratic regulatory maze. If 10% of the US budget is fraud, I’d expect at least 25% (and probably much more) of the United States Code of Federal Regulations is outright destructive.
Those two things would boost real economic growth, generate more tax revenue, substantially reduce the deficit, and bring inflation under control.
There are many paths forward, and a number of creative ways to make this happen. The problem is time. The window is still open. America still has agency over how this plays out.
But actually doing it requires political will that has been absent for decades.
And that’s the point. Staying on this trajectory—the one they’ve been on for years—is a guaranteed problem.
There are signs that some powerful people want off this ride. The fact that Bessent is even talking about $600 billion in fraud publicly is notable.
But if that doesn’t translate into action—it ultimately comes down to Congress finding the will and the courage to freeze spending… or voters becoming smart enough to elect representatives who will get the job done.
We’ve been hearing over and over again for the past several years about various ‘threats to democracy’. The legacy media seems to always be howling that some politician or some legislation is a threat to democracy.
Realistically, the biggest threat to American democracy is actually the US national debt.
Because if voters don’t wake up and demand that their Congressional representatives fix this problem, then sooner or later the bond market is going to be calling the shots— tax policy, defense spending, Social Security— voters’ wishes be damned.
And that’s about as far from ‘democracy’ as it gets.
To your freedom, James Hickman Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC
Some Clear Thinking About This Weekend’s Strike In Venezuela
Some Clear Thinking About This Weekend’s Strike In Venezuela
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) January 5, 2026
It’s hard to imagine America being intimidated by a guy named “Little Turtle”. And yet, in the year 1790, he was about as terrifying as it could get.
Little Turtle was the war chief of the Miami nation, one of the Algonquian-speaking tribes in the Great Lakes region, and he had made a name for himself fighting against the United States during the Revolutionary War.
Some Clear Thinking About This Weekend’s Strike In Venezuela
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) January 5, 2026
It’s hard to imagine America being intimidated by a guy named “Little Turtle”. And yet, in the year 1790, he was about as terrifying as it could get.
Little Turtle was the war chief of the Miami nation, one of the Algonquian-speaking tribes in the Great Lakes region, and he had made a name for himself fighting against the United States during the Revolutionary War.
(At one point he literally butchered his captives after a lopsided battle.)
More than a century before, Little Turtle’s people had waged a long war against the Iroquois over control of the land in what is today Indiana and western Ohio. So, when the American Revolution was over, he continued fighting against settlers that he felt were encroaching on his tribe’s territory.
Roughly 1500 American settlers were killed between 1784 and 1789. And when it finally became clear to the US government in 1790 that the violence would not stop, they sent an expedition under the command of General Josiah Harmar to fight the Miami.
Little Turtle was ready. And on October 21 at the Battle of Kekionga in northeastern Indiana, Little Turtle vanquished American forces.
In terms of casualty percentages, it was one of the worst defeats in US history. More importantly, given how small America’s military was at the time, the defeat became a national security nightmare. The US essentially didn’t have an Army after the battle.
In response, Congress passed a series of laws known as the “Militia Acts”, which, among other things, federalized state militias for use by the federal government.
But the new laws also gave the President sweeping authority to take command of these forces under certain circumstances, including invasion or threat of invasion “from any foreign nation or Indian tribe”.
Fast forward more than two centuries, and these Militia Acts are among the foundational legal arguments in favor of the Trump administration’s actions in Venezuela over the weekend.
Now, tremendous amounts of ink have already been spilled over Venezuela in the past 48-hours.
What I found so interesting, however, is that most of the legacy media articles, not to mention social media commentary, devolved into typical ignorant tribalism, i.e. people are frequently for/against something based on whether or not they’re for/against the person doing it.
In this case, the Left is predictably howling that the President’s use of the military was illegal and unconstitutional-- an assertion that is being repeated and reposted by millions of people.
TO CONTINUE AND TO READ MORE:
Why A Desperate America May Soon Annex Its 51st State
Why A Desperate America May Soon Annex Its 51st State
Notes From The Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) December 22, 2025
Today we’re continuing our look back at past articles that foresaw today’s headlines years in advance. Last week, we highlighted three early pieces tracing the decline of US credibility—its unsustainable debt path, the erosion of reserve currency privilege, and the rising global demand for real assets like gold.
Today we look back at this podcast I recorded on March 31, 2023. I laid out a theory that Venezuela—sitting on the world’s largest oil reserves—might one day be absorbed into the US sphere of influence, not through war, but through corporate proxies.
Why A Desperate America May Soon Annex Its 51st State
Notes From The Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) December 22, 2025
Today we’re continuing our look back at past articles that foresaw today’s headlines years in advance. Last week, we highlighted three early pieces tracing the decline of US credibility—its unsustainable debt path, the erosion of reserve currency privilege, and the rising global demand for real assets like gold.
Today we look back at this podcast I recorded on March 31, 2023. I laid out a theory that Venezuela—sitting on the world’s largest oil reserves—might one day be absorbed into the US sphere of influence, not through war, but through corporate proxies.
Drawing parallels to the East India Company and the US-backed creation of Panama, the idea was that a private entity could step in amid Venezuela’s chaos, secure its oil, and quietly serve American strategic interests.
Now, with tensions escalating, the threat of an invasion could be the method of securing this kind of control. Maduro has discussed terms for stepping down, and recently US authorities seized a Venezuelan oil tanker.
And Venezuela’s opposition leader, María Corina Machado, is now openly pitching the country’s energy sector as “a $1.7 trillion opportunity,” promising, “We will open all [oil], upstream, midstream, downstream, to all companies.”
It felt like the right time to revisit this episode.
At the center of Sovereign Man’s core ethos is the indisputable view that the United States is in decline.
I take absolutely zero pleasure in writing that statement. But it’s incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to objectively appraise the bountiful evidence at hand and not reach the same conclusion.
Consider the following:
US government finances are appallingly bad. The national debt exceeds 100% of GDP, annual deficits run into the trillions of dollars with no end in sight, and major trust funds for Social Security and Medicare will soon run out of money.
Political incompetence is mind-blowing; politicians fail to be able to even identify problems, let alone understand them, let alone reach compromises to solve them.
Ditto for central bank incompetence. These people simply cannot understand how, by keeping interest rates at zero for nearly a decade and conjuring trillions of dollars out of thin air, they engineered record high inflation. And they also fail to understand how their actions to ‘fix’ inflation are causing widespread havoc in the economy and financial system.
Social divisions across the country are extreme. Censorship and cancel culture prevail, and corporations now wag their fingers at their own customers to “be better”.
The education system is in pitiful shape, with many politicians and school board officials turning classrooms into activist training camps.
The population is terribly unhealthy. Obesity and drug addiction are epidemics. Plus there’s an obvious mental health crisis that drives far too many people to commit horrific acts of violence on innocent people, including children.
National security is in decline. Military readiness is down, yet top officials seem more concerned about diversity and inclusion rather than the ability to prevail in war.
The rule of law has been perverted, including for political purposes and self-aggrandizement. We just saw another example of this yesterday.
Even the national fertility rate continues plummeting-- an indication of the rising cost of living and social apathy.
The Wall Street Journal recently published a series of polls indicating that most Americans doubt their children will have a better future; pessimism is strong.
They also found that certain values which once defined American culture, including a sense of community, hard work, and civility, are no longer important to the majority of people.
This is all happening at a time when adversaries are circling. And that includes China.
Now, usually whenever I bring up China, there are always people who are quick to assert that China cannot possibly replace the US as the dominant superpower because they have just as many problems.
And it’s true that China has a ton of problems. They have their own debt issues, financial system chaos, and economic problems. They have social challenges, a major demographic crisis, and even a serious issue with childhood obesity.
But no civilization or empire throughout history has ever been problem-free.
Ancient Rome, even during its early republic days, had enormous problems.
They had to deal with constant revolts, civil war, the genocidal dictatorship of Sulla, famine, war, plague, and more.
Yet there’s an enormous difference between taking on challenges while you’re on the rise… versus succumbing to them while on the way down.
Rome was able to deal with its challenges and continue its rise to become the dominant superpower. China may be able to do the same.
The US finds itself in a precarious position where they have a mountain of compounding problems… and no ability to even slow them down, let alone solve them.
I’ve written before about what I call the “Four Forces of Decline”, which I define as:
1) Forces of History-- the inevitable, cyclical nature in the rise and fall of Empire. No empire, no civilization in human history has ever retained the top spot forever, and most tend to experience similar challenges on the way down.
2) Forces of Society-- the vicious way in which a society eats itself from within, vanquishing the ability and inclination to solve complex problems.
3) Forces of Economy-- the debilitating toll that enormous debts, deficits, and currency inflation take on a nation and its people.
4) Forces of Energy-- when energy is cheap and abundant, prosperity reigns. When energy is expensive, prosperity wanes. The relationship couldn’t be more clear.
Today’s podcast puts all of these together, with a particular focus on #4, Forces of Energy.
Part of being the dominant superpower in our modern world means having access to abundant energy. Yet the US government has spent the last few years trying to destroy its energy (oil and gas) industry.
They’ve been pretty successful. The President of the United States hardly misses an opportunity to bash oil companies. Politicians pass new rules and taxes to punish them. The media beats up on them. Investors have pulled funding for them.
So it shouldn’t be a surprise that US oil production, while not in terminal decline, is failing to keep up with growing demand.
Shale oil is especially problematic given that most of the highest quality “tier 1” sites have already been drilled. Many are already in decline.
This is a big deal. Shale oil is the reason why the US achieved near energy independence. With shale in decline, the US will be forced to import a LOT more energy (which, again, is critical for prosperity) from places where they have an increasingly adversarial relationship.
Russian oil is obviously off the table. So is Iranian oil. Saudi Arabia is rapidly becoming cozy with China; in fact the Saudis are now publicly considering to sell their oil in Chinese currency, the renminbi.
This is an enormous threat to the US. Saudi Arabia has been selling oil in dollars for decades; they’ve even had their currency, the riyal, pegged to the US dollar since 1986.
This concept of selling oil in US dollars is known as the petrodollar, and it’s one of the key reasons why the US dollar is the global reserve currency.
Anyone who wants to buy oil needs to own US dollars. And that pretty much includes every country on the planet. So foreigners are forced to stockpile dollars, and by extension, US government bonds… simply because they need dollars to buy oil.
As a result the US government is able to get away with the fiscal equivalent of murder. They can run multi-trillion dollar deficits every year. They can wage expensive wars in foreign lands. They can go into debt to pay people to stay home and NOT work…
… and they’ve always had a bunch of suckers overseas-- foreigners who have no choice but to buy US government bonds, simply because oil is priced in US dollars.
But what if Saudi Arabia started selling oil in renminbi?
Most likely a LOT of foreigners would dump at least some of their dollars and start holding renminbi as part of their official reserves.
America’s biggest privilege and benefit-- its reserve currency-- would vanish, practically overnight.
Suddenly the US government wouldn’t be able to run multi-trillion dollar deficits. It wouldn’t be able to go into debt to pay people to stay home and NOT work.
They’d have to be like almost every other country-- act with some fiscal responsibility.
Think about it-- if the President of Mexico shook hands with thin air, investors would be rightfully terrified and panic-sell Mexican government bonds. If South Korea ran a multi-trillion dollar deficit, its currency would probably plummet.
Back in September we saw the British pound and UK government bonds practically collapse… and the Prime Minister of one of the world’s largest democratically elected sovereign governments was forced to resign... simply because investors didn’t like her economic revival plan.
These issues are all linked. If the US continues to demonstrate incompetence and weakness… if they continue to subvert and destroy the energy industry… and if Saudi Arabia starts selling oil in renminbi…
… the consequences will be life-changing.
This is one of the biggest stories of our lives. It’s easy to miss because it’s playing out over a period of years. It gets lost in the day-to-day noise and the crisis du jour.
But rest assured this is happening in front of our very eyes; it’s a slow motion crash that’s already started.
The outcome isn’t inevitable yet. But nothing about these people’s actions demonstrate that they have the slightest clue what’s going on.
Join me in today’s podcast as we dive further into this… and I outline my “51st state” theory-- a ‘solution’ that I wouldn’t be surprised to see in the near future.
To your freedom, James Hickman Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC
READ MORE AND ACCESS POD CAST HERE:
Flashback: $2,000 Gold Is Just The Beginning Here’s What Might Happen Next–
Flashback: $2,000 Gold Is Just The Beginning Here’s What Might Happen Next–
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) December 17, 2025
Today we’ll continue to look back at past articles that have become especially relevant, as many of the trends we warned about are now playing out in real time.
Yesterday we talked about how, back in 2022, we encouraged readers to move into real assets at a time when the dollar was irrationally strong. Gold was cheap, interest rates were near zero, and most people were still drinking the Kool-Aid.
It was one of those rare moments when the writing was on the wall, but the price tags hadn’t caught up yet.
Then in November 2023, gold crossed $2,000 for the first time. And we said: this is just the beginning.
Flashback: $2,000 Gold Is Just The Beginning Here’s What Might Happen Next–
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) December 17, 2025
Today we’ll continue to look back at past articles that have become especially relevant, as many of the trends we warned about are now playing out in real time.
Yesterday we talked about how, back in 2022, we encouraged readers to move into real assets at a time when the dollar was irrationally strong. Gold was cheap, interest rates were near zero, and most people were still drinking the Kool-Aid.
It was one of those rare moments when the writing was on the wall, but the price tags hadn’t caught up yet.
Then in November 2023, gold crossed $2,000 for the first time. And we said: this is just the beginning.
Not because we’re gold bugs or speculators—but because we saw the early signs of the US dollar's 80 year reign of global dominance starting to shift. We were pointing to the long-term, systemic forces driving it. Out-of-control debt, eroding trust in institutions, and the creeping de-dollarization of global finance.
We said, “we could easily see central banks around the world ditching their US dollars and loading up on gold as part of a new, de-dollarized global financial system.”
“This could potentially trigger trillions of dollars worth of capital inflows into the gold market, causing a surge in gold prices.”
We said $2,000 was the beginning. Now with gold trading over $4,300, we’re not going to say this is the beginning. But it’s certainly not the end.
Public Law 93-373 was supposed to be so boring that Congress didn’t even bother to give it a name.
You know how most laws passed by Congress have some fancy name-- like the “Inflation Reduction Act” or the “USA PATRIOT Act” or some such nonsense?
Well, on November 7, 1973, US Senator James Fulbright introduced a very short bill-- it was only ONE page-- that didn’t even have a name. But Fulbright’s unnamed bill ended up being one of the most important pieces of legislation in US history.
By the time Fulbright introduced his bill, it had been two years since the legendary “Nixon Shock” of 1971. That was when US President Richard Nixon implemented wage and price controls, and canceled the US dollar’s convertibility into gold.
Nixon famously promised the American public that there wouldn’t be any negative consequences from his actions. Yet inflation hit 3% the following year, in 1972. Then 4.7% in 1973. Then 11.2% in 1974.
Simultaneously, gold prices around the world were surging… from $35/ounce before the Nixon Shock, to more than $170 in 1974.
But individual Americans weren’t allowed to benefit from those gains thanks to a forty year old executive order that had been signed in 1933 by then President Franklin Roosevelt.
Roosevelt’s Executive Order 6102 criminalized the private ownership of more than $100 worth of gold in the United States. Roosevelt also gave Americans just 25 days to turn over their gold to the Federal Reserve… or else face up to ten years in prison.
Naturally, plenty of Americans were outraged, and a number of lawsuits were filed claiming that Roosevelt’s order was unconstitutional.
Roosevelt was rightfully worried that the Supreme Court would overturn his order. And at a certain point he considered packing the court, i.e. appointing several sympathetic judges to the Supreme Court to ensure his victory. He also considered issuing another order which would make it illegal to sue the federal government.
Fortunately for Roosevelt, however, he didn’t have to implement any of those actions; the Supreme Court very narrowly ruled in his favor, and his Executive Order stood as law of the land for four decades… until Senator Fulbright’s no-name law was finally passed on August 14, 1974.
It went into effect the following year, and Americans were suddenly free once again to exchange their rapidly-depreciating US dollars for gold.
Unsurprisingly, gold prices started rising dramatically in the second half of the decade... from about $180 in 1975, to a whopping $850 in January 1980.
And the declining dollar was just one reason for gold’s popularity; remember, the United States suffered a deluge of troubles during the 1970s and early 1980s.
The world found out that the US President was a criminal during the Watergate scandal of 1974. Then there was the humiliating US withdrawal from Vietnam in 1975, complete with a helicopter evacuation of the American embassy in Saigon.
Iran seized 52 US citizens in 1979 and held them hostage for more than a year.
Inflation raged, peaking at 13.6%. The economy stagnated and fell into recession. Troubles in the Middle East (including conflict with Israel) led to energy shortages and rising fuel prices.
Civil unrest and ‘mostly peaceful’ protests were a constant problem in the 70s and 80s. Meanwhile, criminals rampaged across American cities, and the murder rate soared. Major cities like New York, LA, and Chicago became synonymous with violent crime.
The world stopped making sense. And gold became a safe haven from that chaos.
There’s an old saying (originally a Danish proverb) suggesting that if history doesn’t repeat, it certainly rhymes. And I think it’s obvious that we’re facing many of the same challenges today.
There are major problems in the Middle East. Energy is becoming scarce (especially in Europe). The US military suffered a humiliating withdrawal from Afghanistan. Civil unrest and crime rates are totally unacceptable. Inflation continues to rage. And the President, a.k.a. “the Big Guy” appears suspicious A.F.
Just like in the 1970s, gold represents a safe haven from this chaos. And even though it’s hovering at a near-record around $2,000, I think that there is still a long way for gold to rise.
The US national debt is now $33.7 trillion; that’s up more than HALF A TRILLION just in the month of October.
The people in charge have absolutely zero fiscal restraint. Zero responsibility.
Zero sense of how destructive their actions are. They spend money and go deeper into debt as if there will never be any consequences, ever, until the end of time. They’re disgustingly ignorant, and dangerous.
The truth is that there are serious consequences to all of this debt. And we don’t have to guess what they are.
The Congressional Budget Office is already projecting that, by 2031, the US government will spend 100% of its tax revenue just on mandatory entitlements (like Social Security) and interest on the debt.
This means that, after 2031, the funding for literally everything else in government-- from the US military to the light bill at the White House-- will have to be funded by more debt.
That’s only 7 years away.
Then, two years later in 2033, Social Security’s primary trust fund will run out of money; this will cost the government an additional $1 trillion in additional spending each year to keep the program running. Naturally they’ll have to borrow that money too.
Eventually the national debt will become so large that simply paying interest each year will consume more than 100% of tax revenue.
The Federal Reserve will most likely attempt to bail out government by creating trillions upon trillions of dollars. But just as we saw over the past few years, such actions will most likely result in much higher inflation.
Disgusted with their financial circumstance, voters across America will likely turn to Socialist politicians who blame all the problems on the evils of capitalism, rather than their own incompetence. And with a majority of leftists running the country, they’ll only make things worse.
I also anticipate more conflict in the world, thanks in large part to the continued decline of America’s stature and reputation for strength.
It’s also quite likely that the US dollar could lose its royal status as the world’s dominant reserve currency by the end of the decade.
I don’t necessarily believe that the dollar will simply vanish from global trade.
But it won’t be “King” dollar anymore. Perhaps more like “Earl” or “Viscount” dollar, alongside other currencies and exchange mechanisms-- including gold.
In fact we could easily see central banks around the world ditching their US dollars and loading up on gold as part of a new, de-dollarized global financial system.
This could potentially trigger trillions of dollars worth of capital inflows into the gold market, causing a surge in gold prices.
And these are just some of the reasons why gold could still have a long, long way to rise from here.
Bear in mind that I’m not thinking about the gold price next month, or even next year. I think long-term, and my views on gold are based on trends that will likely continue to unfold over the next decade.
I’m not a ‘gold bug’. I don’t have a fanatical view about anything other than my own children. I’m not a gold speculator either.
But it’s obvious to me that in an upside down world where there are such obvious long-term threats to the US dollar, it makes sense to look for real stores of value.
And that’s why $2,000 gold could just be the beginning of a much bigger story.
To your freedom, James Hickman Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC
TO READ MORE: LINK
Flashback: The US Dollar Is Irrationally Strong Right Now
Flashback: The US Dollar Is Irrationally Strong Right Now
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) December 16, 2025
As we wind down 2025, we’ve been reflecting on some of the biggest long-term shifts that defined the year.
Last week, we highlighted three: First, Charlie Kirk’s assassination —
Second, 2025 marked the start gun for the US debt crisis—with the refusal to cut the deficit, central banks rushing to dump US Treasurys for gold, and signs of stagflation.
Flashback: The US Dollar Is Irrationally Strong Right Now
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) December 16, 2025
As we wind down 2025, we’ve been reflecting on some of the biggest long-term shifts that defined the year.
Last week, we highlighted three: First, Charlie Kirk’s assassination —
Second, 2025 marked the start gun for the US debt crisis—with the refusal to cut the deficit, central banks rushing to dump US Treasurys for gold, and signs of stagflation.
And third, a bright spot: a competent, strategic approach to nuclear power from the Trump administration, finally laying the groundwork for a productivity boom fueled by cheap energy.
As we head into the holidays, we’re revisiting some of our earlier work that speaks directly to these themes—articles that warned about the direction things were heading, long before the headlines caught up.
I wrote this article in October of 2022 during a time when the US dollar was irrationally strong, interest rates were still near zero, and gold was cheap— less than $1,700 per ounce.
I suggested that readers, “think about turning at least a portion of your irrationally strong dollars into another asset that can stand the test of time.”
The message was that reserve currency status breeds arrogance. The dollar’s dominance allows Washington to behave recklessly—binge on debt, stoke inflation, and still count on foreign demand for its bonds.
But, as history shows, no reserve currency lasts forever. The Spanish real, the British pound… they all had their day. This article reminds us: so will the dollar.
By the summer of 1497, Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain were presiding over a rapidly growing empire.
Christopher Columbus had already claimed most of the Caribbean islands on their behalf. Plus Pope Julius II had awarded virtually all of the western hemisphere to Spain in the infamous Treaty of Tordesillas.
Spain was quickly on its way to becoming a global superpower. Ferdinand and Isabella knew it, and they realized that they needed a strong currency to match their strong empire.
So on June 13, 1497, they announced a major monetary reform called the Medina del Campo, named for the site of a popular medieval banking conference at the time.
The monetary reform was sweeping; they abolished most other coins in their domain, and re-established the real as the primary currency across Spanish lands.
The real was a silver coin, weighing about 0.1 troy ounces or roughly 3.2 grams. And coins were minted in denominations of ½, 1, 2, 4, and 8 real.
Over time, the 8-real coin (real de ocho) became the most popular; it was known as a “Piece of 8”, and eventually the “Spanish dollar”.
By the mid-1500s under King Charles I of Spain, the Spanish dollar had become the world’s primary reserve currency. From the Americas to Europe to Asia, global trade and commerce were quoted and often settled in Spanish dollars.
Dutch and Portuguese traders visiting Macau in the 1600s, for example, would frequently buy goods from Chinese merchants using Spanish dollars.
In 1704, Queen Anne of Great Britain decreed that the Spanish dollar would be legal tender in the American colonies. And in 1792, the newly independent United States passed the Coinage Act which defined the US dollar as equivalent to the Spanish dollar.
The Spanish dollar’s dominance in global finance was unparalleled. But like all reserve currencies that came before, it too lost its luster.
Eventually the Spanish Empire’s strength faded. The government defaulted on its debts, confiscated private wealth, and suffered embarrassing military defeats.
The Dutch guilder then began to displace the Spanish dollar in commerce and trade. And by the late 1800s, the British pound had become the world’s dominant reserve currency — matching the British Empire’s unparalleled size and economic power.
This lasted until the mid-20th century when, after World War II, the United States dollar became the world’s primary reserve currency — a status the dollar has enjoyed for decades.
Having the world’s reserve currency is an extraordinary privilege. It means that the rest of the world literally HAS to stockpile your currency.
For example, whenever a company in Peru does business with a supplier in Malaysia, that transaction is quoted and settled in US dollars. This means that the banking systems in both Peru and Malaysia HAVE to maintain substantial holdings of US dollars in order to facilitate these transactions.
This is the biggest reason why foreigners own trillions and trillions of dollars of US government bonds; bonds are the largest and most liquid financial instrument available for foreign investors who need to hold dollars.
And because of this need for foreigners to own US dollar assets, foreigners own a whopping $7.5 trillion worth of US government bonds, roughly 25% of the national debt.
This is really an enormous benefit for the US. And for an easy example, we need look no further than to the United Kingdom.
The British pound was the world’s dominant reserve currency more than a century ago. Today the UK is still a significant economy. But they no longer have the unique reserve currency advantage.
Now, you may be aware that, a few weeks ago, the British pound and British government bonds (known as gilts) began plummeting after the British government announced a series of tax cuts and economic reforms.
It turned out that the bond market wasn’t thrilled with the plan, so investors began dumping their British gilts and pounds.
It was a full blown panic. And soon, the central bank had to step in to bail out the bond market. The Chancellor was sacked. And the Prime Minister canceled her planned tax cut.
Essentially the British government had to capitulate to the demands of investors.
This is actually normal in countries that don’t enjoy reserve currency status. If a government wants to borrow money from the bond market, politicians have to appease investors and lay out a plan that will give everyone confidence.
But not in the United States.
Because the US issues the global reserve currency, the government can engage every ridiculous antic imaginable.
They can fail to pass a budget (multiple times) resulting in a government shutdown. They can lock down the entire economy and pay people to stay home.
They can pass a multi-trillion dollar spending package and insist it “costs nothing”. They can slash interest rates to zero or engineer record high inflation.
And yet foreign investors will STILL buy US government bonds. And the dollar actually becomes STRONGER.
It’s totally insane. None of that would be possible if the US dollar weren’t the world’s reserve currency.
The curse of the reserve currency, however, is that policymakers usually believe their status will last forever. Spanish, Dutch, and British leadership never envisioned that their currencies would falter and be displaced by a rising power. And yet it happened.
The same fate awaits the US dollar.
Reserve currencies are usually displaced when economic power is in decline. Given the mountain of debt owed by the US government, the stagflation surging across the US economy, and the complete ineptitude to do anything about it, it certainly looks like that decline is taking place right now.
In general it would be foolish to think that the dollar will remain the dominant global reserve currency forever. And its displacement may take place sooner rather than later.
Once that happens, things will become a LOT more difficult for the US government. They’ll most certainly have to raise taxes. The central bank will have to print more money, sparking more inflation.
And we’ll likely see revolts of the bond market, just like what happened in the UK; just imagine the US government forced to capitulate its sovereignty to the demands of foreign lenders.
But that’s the future. For now, the dollar is still the top dog, only because it hasn’t been displaced (yet).
In fact, at the moment, the US dollar is irrationally strong.
Despite inflation that has reached multi-decade highs, and the growing national debt, the dollar is near an all-time high against the British pound. It’s at a 20+ year high against the euro. It’s strong against many major currencies. It’s even been strong against other asset classes including precious metals, crypto, and more.
So this may be a good time to consider the future and think about turning at least a portion of your irrationally strong dollars into another asset that can stand the test of time.
To your freedom, James Hickman Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC
Some Thoughts on Silver’s All Time High
Some Thoughts on Silver’s All Time High
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) December 3, 2025
The ancient people of Uruk— who lived in modern-day southern Iraq more than 5,000 years ago— didn’t seem terribly interested in bequeathing colorful stories of their civilization to history.
Rather than memorialize abundant tales of their immense works, or chisel countless tablets embellishing stories of their military victories, the main artifacts they left behind to modern historians are rather mundane market accounts and grain prices.
Some Thoughts on Silver’s All Time High
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) December 3, 2025
The ancient people of Uruk— who lived in modern-day southern Iraq more than 5,000 years ago— didn’t seem terribly interested in bequeathing colorful stories of their civilization to history.
Rather than memorialize abundant tales of their immense works, or chisel countless tablets embellishing stories of their military victories, the main artifacts they left behind to modern historians are rather mundane market accounts and grain prices.
It would be as if the only thing to be locked into a time capsule from our own era were the stock section of the Wall Street Journal. It would hardly be a reasonable description of our time.
Nevertheless, the ancient scribes of Uruk went to great lengths to record financial and commercial transactions. And one of the things we can see from their civilization is that they used silver (and NOT gold) as the primary medium of exchange.
It’s interesting to note that they did not bother minting coins. Rather, silver was weighed in bulk— the unit of measurement eventually becoming the shekel, around 8.3 grams— and then traded for grain.
(Just imagine paying for your groceries by piling a bunch of scrap and raw silver onto a scale.)
Gold was obviously a well-known commodity and considered extremely valuable... but far too rare to be used as everyday money. So silver remained the dominant financial standard for thousands of years.
Even by the time of the ancient Greeks, and then subsequently the Roman Republic, silver coins (the Greek drachma and Roman denarius) were the primary currencies of those civilizations.
But by then there was a bi-metallic system... a fixed ‘exchange rate’ that governments set between gold and silver.
In ancient Babylon during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II, for example, cuneiform tablets show silver being exchanged for gold at a ratio of 10 to 1.
A few decades later, in the 6th century BC, King Croesus of Lydia minted the first standardized gold and silver coins, setting an official exchange rate—again, roughly 10 to 1.
The Persians under Darius the Great fixed it at 13 to 1. The Romans under Julius Caesar set it at 12 to 1.
Even as recently as 1792, the newly formed United States established a silver-to-gold ratio of 15 to 1 in the very first Coinage Act.
It wasn’t until the late 20th century—when postwar Bretton Woods gold standard was fully abandoned—that this ratio between gold and silver was finally left to the market. Since then it’s ranged from about 25:1… all the way up to 120:1.
Right now it’s somewhere in the middle of that modern range— around 73:1... and the ratio has been falling fast, primarily because silver has been on an absolute tear.
This is pretty crazy when you think about it; gold has skyrocketed this year. But silver is up even more.
And there are a lot of people who focus very heavily on this silver-to-gold ratio and believe that it will inevitably fall to its historic average of roughly 50:1. Still others think that the ratio will fall even further to 15:1, where it was originally set by Congress in 1792.
This would mean $85+ silver, or even $250+ silver.
But here’s the problem: the gold/silver ratio is meaningless. There’s no law or financial regulation requiring the ratio to be at a certain level. Just because it has historically hovered around 50:1 doesn’t mean it can’t go to 5,000:1.
Instead, in order to understand either metal’s trajectory, we should look at supply and demand.
This is why we’ve been so bullish on gold; for the past three years, central bank demand for gold has been soaring, primarily because foreign countries have been rapidly and aggressively diversifying their US dollar holdings.
And for a sovereign government, gold makes a lot of sense. It’s portable. Universally recognized. It’s a traditional strategic reserve asset.
And most importantly, unlike US government bonds or even IMF “Strategic Drawing Rights”, gold isn’t controlled by anyone... no other government, central bank, or supranational institution.
So there’s zero counterparty risk, i.e. no country has to be worried about being sanctioned or frozen out of its own gold bullion holdings.
This trend of foreign governments and central banks buying massive quantities of gold has sent the metal to its all-time high. And that extra demand has been more than enough to offset weakening gold demand in the jewelry sector.
Moreover, as we regularly argue, this trend is not going away anytime soon. As long as the US fiscal situation remains dismal, foreign countries will continue diversifying out of the dollar.
Silver, on the other hand, does not have such a strong long-term catalyst.
Central banks aren’t buying it; the market is far too small, and silver far too cheap. Foreign countries can much more easily buy $100 billion worth of gold. They just can’t do that with silver.
We’ve predicted in the past that silver would likely follow gold’s run-up— NOT because it shares the same monetary fundamentals, but because investor psychology.
Obviously there’s no telling how far this speculation can go; investors could potentially push silver prices much, much higher from here.
But without that same long-term institutional demand from central banks, silver's trajectory is much harder to predict... and to justify.
It’s also noteworthy that more than half of silver demand comes from industrial applications such as solar panels, electric vehicles, 5G infrastructure, semiconductors, and medical technologies.
According to the Silver Institute, industrial demand for silver hit an all-time high of 680.5 million ounces in 2024, the fourth straight year of growth in that category.
Importantly, total silver demand has consistently outpaced supply. The global silver market ran a structural deficit in both 2023 and 2024, meaning more silver was consumed than produced.
This created an obvious catalyst for higher silver prices.
But it’s important to understand that industrial demand is not the same as central bank demand.
When central banks buy gold, they aren’t trying to time the market or flip it for a profit. They’re diversifying reserves. It’s a long-term, strategic shift—motivated by growing mistrust in the US dollar.
In short, central banks buy gold irrespective of price.
But silver doesn’t have that kind of anchor. Industrial demand is highly cyclical. It depends on global manufacturing activity, tech infrastructure, energy-sector spending, and overall economic health.
In an economic slowdown, much of that industrial demand could dry up quickly.
If the AI bubble bursts and data centers downsize, silver demand slows. If the “green energy” push implodes, and people decide they don’t want—or can’t afford—electric vehicles and solar panels, silver demand drops.
Jewelry demand, though smaller than industrial, faces the same problem. It’s sensitive to consumer spending.
To be clear, I’m not suggesting that the silver price is going to fall. I’m saying that it’s important to understand the differences.
With gold, foreign central banks are a clear and obvious long-term driver of demand. Silver demand, on the other hand, is being driven by speculation and highly volatile (and unpredictable) global economic factors.
And I think it’s important to be clear-eyed about the differences.
To your freedom, James Hickman Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC
Meet the Guy Keeping Gold Above $4,000
Meet the Guy Keeping Gold Above $4,000
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) November 19, 2025
When you think of hyperinflation, you might picture Zimbabwe’s trillion-dollar bills, or wheelbarrows full of cash in the streets of 1920s Weimar Germany.
More recently, Venezuela’s currency collapsed under the weight of runaway printing, and Argentina has spent decades lurching from one inflation crisis to another. Throughout history, inflation isn’t an exception—it’s the norm.
Meet the Guy Keeping Gold Above $4,000
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) November 19, 2025
When you think of hyperinflation, you might picture Zimbabwe’s trillion-dollar bills, or wheelbarrows full of cash in the streets of 1920s Weimar Germany.
More recently, Venezuela’s currency collapsed under the weight of runaway printing, and Argentina has spent decades lurching from one inflation crisis to another. Throughout history, inflation isn’t an exception—it’s the norm.
Poland is among the many countries which suffered its own bout of inflation in 1989 and 1990, triggered by the same familiar mix of government mistakes: massive deficits, political dysfunction, and a central bank used as a printing press.
In 1990 alone, prices in Poland jumped 586%. The złoty, Poland’s currency at the time, collapsed. One American professor living in Poland at the time said a monthly bus ticket cost what an entire summer cottage had ten years earlier.
This was the inevitable result of decades of command-and-control economics.
After World War II, Poland remained independent in name only. Soviet troops never left. The Communist party ruled with Moscow’s blessing. Private property was abolished. Prices were fixed by decree. Farms were collectivized. Dissent was criminal.
To keep the illusion of prosperity going, the government promised everything to everyone—jobs, housing, healthcare, cheap food—and paid for it with money it didn’t have.
When tax revenues fell short, the central bank simply printed more. But paper currency can’t conjure real goods. The result was shortages, black markets, and, eventually, total currency collapse.
That’s the world Adam Glapiński—current President of the National Bank of Poland—grew up in.
Born in 1950, he watched his savings inflate away throughout his early career.
Having fought as part of the anti‑communist underground and witnessed the country’s currency unravel in the early 1990s, Glapiński isn’t simply a technocrat—he’s someone determined to protect Poland from repeating its past.
That’s why he’s gone all in on gold.
And he’s part of the reason that Poland is one of the healthier economies in Europe. (Another is that Poland is one of the only places that hasn’t sacrificed itself on the altar of multiculturalism.)
But they still have a problem: a significant portion of their strategic reserve assets are denominated in US dollars.
And Glapiński has been rightfully concerned. Because when you’ve lived through a currency collapse once, you start paying close attention to the early warning signs.
He’s looking at the United States today and doesn’t like what he sees. The deficits keep climbing. The national debt keeps exploding. Interest expense has now surpassed military spending. Social Security is projected to run dry in just seven or eight years.
And the only thing both parties can unite for is to chase anyone trying to solve these problems out of town— like Elon Musk and his work with DOGE.
Glapiński’s not stupid. He can see the Federal Reserve cutting interest rates, even as inflation ticks up. He sees it ending quantitative tightening early, and gearing up for more quantitative easing— AKA money printing.
He can also see a point—relatively soon—when the US dollar is no longer the world’s dominant reserve asset.
The endgame is clear: the value of US dollar reserves will decline.
So he’s been trying to get ahead of it.
But what other strategic reserve asset is there for a central banker to buy?
Not the Chinese renminbi—you can’t trust their lack of transparency, manipulated numbers, and massive debts.
Not the British pound—Britain’s a fiscal and political mess.
Poland will hold some euros, sure, but the euro-zone has plenty of structural problems of its own.
Gold is the best option left.
Not because Glapiński is a gold bug— this is a completely rational move.
Gold is one of the only assets with a large enough market that you can invest tens of billions of dollars. Then, you can hold it within your own borders, free of counter‑party risk. You don’t get that benefit if you’re holding another government’s bonds, which can be defaulted on, frozen, or weaponized as the US has shown.
Glapiński’s target was for the National Bank of Poland to hold 20% of its reserves in gold.
But when they hit that target, he raised it to 25%... which they also recently hit.
And now he’s pushing for 30%.
There are two main things to understand about this.
One, he’s far from alone.
Countries like Russia, China, and other usual suspects are buying literal tons of gold, largely because they don’t want to be frozen out of their US Treasury holdings.
But its not just them. It’s also Kazakhstan, Bulgaria, El Salvador— central banks around the world are buying way more gold than usual.
As recently as 2010, central banks added a grand total of just 79 tons of gold to their reserves.
In 2024, they added a cumulative 1,089 tons. And that’s been the trend—1,000 tons per year—since 2021. That’s about double the previous decade’s average.
The second thing to understand about demand from central banks is that they are relatively price insensitive.
They’re not buying gold to speculate and sell later for more dollars. They’re buying it to diversify away from the dollar.
While they may try to time certain purchases to go further, they’re not going to let $4,000 per ounce gold change their overall reserve strategy.
They know they need to continue buying gold for one simple reason: they’re losing confidence in the US government.
And that demand alone is probably enough to continue to push prices even higher.
To your freedom, James Hickman
Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC
“Oops! We’re a Major Silver Producer Now”
“Oops! We’re a Major Silver Producer Now”
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) November 20, 2025
When mining superintendent Marcus Daly arrived in Butte, Montana in the late 1870s to evaluate a cluster of silver prospects, it was a mundane business trip— the mad western gold rush was over by then.
The area was known for its patchy silver veins, and Daly’s job was to decide whether there were still any mines worth buying. All the ‘experts’ thought the boom was over. Gold and silver had fallen out of favor... and mines were selling for less than the value of the dirt.
“Oops! We’re a Major Silver Producer Now”
Notes From the Field By James Hickman (Simon Black) November 20, 2025
When mining superintendent Marcus Daly arrived in Butte, Montana in the late 1870s to evaluate a cluster of silver prospects, it was a mundane business trip— the mad western gold rush was over by then.
The area was known for its patchy silver veins, and Daly’s job was to decide whether there were still any mines worth buying. All the ‘experts’ thought the boom was over. Gold and silver had fallen out of favor... and mines were selling for less than the value of the dirt.
So when Marcus Daly went underground at a modest site called the Anaconda, he noticed the ore didn’t look like a typical silver deposit... and that something much bigger was hiding below.
Daly pushed for the property’s purchase—about $30,000 which would be about $1 million today. His reasoning? Beneath the silver veins, Daly had spotted a massive copper system.
The timing couldn’t have been better for a nation racing into an industrial age.
Telegraph lines, electrical wiring, motors, early power systems — America was devouring copper as fast as anyone could pull it out of the ground. And Daly’s discovery pushed the Anaconda operation from a forgettable silver claim into one of the engines of American industrial growth.
For years, that copper carried what became the Anaconda Copper Mining Company.
Output scaled, profits climbed, and Butte became synonymous with industrial metal.
But the silver never went away. As miners pulled the copper out of the ground, they were also extracting silver... which was sort of ‘in the way’ of the copper.
At first the silver was just an afterthought; Anaconda was a copper company, plain and simple. They just happened to mine some silver, almost begrudgingly, as an afterthought. And throughout the early 20th century and the Roaring 20s, nobody paid attention.
Then the Great Depression hit.
Copper demand—and prices—collapsed almost overnight as factories slowed, construction stalled, and electrical projects were shelved indefinitely.
Anaconda took a beating like everyone else—but it didn’t fold.
The “accidental” silver kept generating revenue even as the industrial economy stalled... and that silver revenue kept Anaconda alive when competitors were going out of business left and right.
It gave the company the diversification it needed to survive the worst phases of the worst commodity cycle — and stay standing when others didn’t.
This is far from an isolated incident—the mining industry is no stranger to these necessary pivots.
And it’s also not just a quirky footnote— it’s the kind of setup that gives investors a chance to buy into something most investors write-off.
For example, the latest edition of our premium investment research newsletter featured a company that ordinarily mines a critical industrial metal—one that’s necessary for all modern technology.
Funny thing is, this company also just happens to produce gold and silver.
They never set out to be precious metals miners. In fact, the company has been extremely successful in its core industrial metal business.
But with gold and silver prices hovering near all-time highs, the company is now minting profits from precious metals. Revenue is through the roof, but shareholders of the business are basically getting all of it for free.
That’s because, right now, the company’s stock is trading at a fairly low multiple JUST based on its industrial mining revenue... which means the market is valuing all the gold and silver production at zero. That’s completely absurd.
Overall this company trades at just FOUR times earnings. At that valuation, even if it were just an industrial producer, it would still be undervalued.
But it also produces enough silver to be close to a top 10 producer in the world.
There’s no rational reason for this business to be selling for such a cheap price. Yet the recent selloff in gold and silver prices only made it cheaper. Some mining companies fell 30%, even though they're still raking in record profits.
To your freedom, James Hickman Co-Founder, Schiff Sovereign LLC LINK