Tuesday, 18 June 2024

By Brian Chu Editor, Gold Stock Pro and The Australian Gold Report

[11 min read]

Dear Reader,

Who can you trust in society to look after your best interests?

Many of us would rank the following to be high on the list: firemen, nurses, doctors, and pharmacists.

They all have something in common. Our personal safety depends on them.

There’s also another that’s high up, too. This one is more obscure.

They’re actuaries.

An actuary is an expert in measuring financial risk, determining their likelihood and impact using past data and models.

When you buy an insurance policy, actuaries review the statistics to estimate the premium you should pay the insurance company.

Your retirement savings may have actuarial input, too. Those who are in older retirement plans and pay fixed benefits have actuaries sign off on their accounts every year. And if you have life insurance and income protection cover attached to your accumulation fund, there is actuarial input.

In short, the actuarial profession worldwide enjoys a longstanding reputation as being masters of number-crunching.

When the number crunchers failed their job

Actuarial science is near and dear to me.

I studied this at university, completed two degrees, and taught for over 15 years at different levels in this discipline.

Furthermore, I was involved in the Australian professional body, the Actuaries Institute, serving in several capacities in actuarial education as a Course Instructor for their professional qualification examinations in finance and investments, as a member of the Education Council Committee reviewing curriculum and assessments, and sitting on accreditation panels to review university actuarial programs.

I aspired to educate the next generation of actuaries.

However, I stepped back three years ago when I became increasingly concerned about the Institute’s official stance on lockdowns and vaccine mandates.

Their support for enforcing lockdowns to reduce the burden on hospitals and their willingness to believe without hesitation in the efficacy of the experimental mRNA drugs was a little too enthusiastic. There was no questioning of the data or leaving room for scrutiny.

Given my background in actuarial analysis, I had long questioned how data may be inappropriately used to support conclusions and policies adopted by governments and other authorities.

Moreover, as experts in calculating the financial impact of risk, actuaries should be starkly aware such mandates could damage the entire economy, down to each individual.

Lockdowns have not only caused multi-billion dollars of lost productivity, but they have also likely set the clock back a decade on many industries and businesses.

One profession could have been the voice of reason in a world gripped by fear and hysteria: the actuaries.

They had access to the cold, hard statistics that was increasingly pointing to the virus as contagious yet would only cause few deaths for the working population. Therefore, the damage of continuing lockdowns on the economy would far outweigh the benefits of preventing deaths and infections.

I believed the Institute was equipped to take that stance. There was enough doubt for them to take the stand against damaging the economy further.

However, this type of prudence actuaries were renowned for was clearly absent.

So strong was my opposition to their views I chose not to renew my membership in 2021.

An agreement to disagree

Maybe I was being a little hyperbolic…

With the snap lockdowns, the enforcement of the mRNA drugs en-masse and the Omicron outbreak of 2021 behind us, perhaps 2022 onwards would coax me to be the prodigal son returning home.

I hoped that the Institute would change its stance and call out the unintended consequences of economic damage, excess injuries and deaths and other matters as troubles emerged over these years.

That didn’t happen.

What prompted me to act was the Institute's publication of a report in July 2023 titled ‘How COVID-19 Affected Mortality in 2020 to 2022’ to address the growing issue that the number of deaths in Australia since 2020 has increased despite the waning outbreak.

The following statement made in the Executive Summary was particularly concerning:

‘In this context, we note that vaccination is highly unlikely to be a cause of excess mortality in 2022. Indeed, given the well-documented reduction in COVID-19 mortality risk conferred by vaccination, the 14 confirmed vaccine-caused deaths that had occurred by June 2023 are a fraction of the lives saved by vaccination’

Recall that a Senate Inquiry on Vaccine Mandates last August questioned this claim.

The Senate Panel put the Therapeutic Goods Administration, responsible for approving medication and drugs for public use, on notice to respond to why it overrode the findings of more than 1,000 doctors and coroners on deaths caused by adverse reactions from the mRNA drug.

You can watch the Parliamentary Inquiry video here.

I recall when I was an undergraduate student, there were lectures where we learnt about the major scandals of Equity Funding in the UK (conjuring up phony life insurance policies, immortalised by the movie ‘The Billion Dollar Bubble’) and the collapse of HIH Australia, etc.

The common element in these scandals was greed, and the way to reveal the crime was to look into the numbers.

This is exactly what actuaries should dig into.

Prompted by the Senate Inquiry, I wrote a letter to the Actuaries Institute Council and the Secretariat pointing out the key statements it made in the report, highlighting the evidence it used to back the claims was under scrutiny.

I intended the Institute to exercise its expertise in data to take a more reserved stance, as I expected the manipulated data and cover-up will reveal itself in time. On that day, the Actuaries Institute would then be able to hold its head high as it had moved to sit on the right side of history.

I had several exchanges with a council member regarding my letter, but our views were different. While he recognised that it was possible for pharmaceutical companies to engage in dishonest practices to market their product, he didn’t agree with the premise that there were issues with the official statistics.

Moreover, he even claimed that the growing number of people holding anti-vaccination perspectives was dangerous to society.

It is worth noting a key position held by those in the top echelons of the Institute is to unquestionably support vaccinations. A leading figure in the working party that publishes the Actuaries Institute reports on excess mortality, Karen Cutter, is a vocal opponent of such people.

We went away from this exchange agreeing that we’d disagree over the matter.

Rigged numbers exposed…lock in your bets

Some of you may recall my article in late March, in which I highlighted a paper revealing how Pfizer played the US Food and Drug Administration when applying for the Emergency Use Authorisation for their drugs.

Last Thursday, the Australian Medical Professionals Society (AMPS) delivered a concise explanation of this rig to the Senate Inquiry on Excess Mortality. You can find it here on X.

With this bombshell released publicly, it’s a little too late to change sides to save your reputation.

This isn’t the only instance where there were shenanigans in the numbers. And some were hiding in plain sight.

This bombshell should place the Actuaries Institute in a particularly awkward position because for the same Inquiry, it made a submission that included the following claim:

It had gone all in for these drugs, without seeing the manufacturers rigged the results. It is a serious case of corporate fraud.

These experts chose to close their eyes and turn the other way.

It is a sad day in our society.

In case you’re wondering whether this is the end of the saga, I have an even more salacious twist to share.

But I’ll leave it here for this week.

There’s something more I want to talk about briefly before I go.

Who can you trust? Use your judgment!

Besides sharing this exclusive story with you, I want to remind you just how important it is now to make sure you prepare for what’s ahead.

The combination of economic mismanagement, corrupt governments, the lockdowns and armed conflicts is making life more challenging.

The availability of jobs is falling, income is rising slower than living costs, and there’s less welfare to go around.

This period of challenge could last far longer than most expect.

But don’t be disheartened.

You can take matters into your own hands.

Keep an eye on our inbox as we’ll provide you with a chance to learn about how to deal with ‘the decade of decimation’.

In times like these, you need to stand strong and we’re here to help with a plan!

God bless,

Brian Chu,
Editor, Gold Stock Pro and The Australian Gold Report

Brian Chu is one of Australia’s foremost independent authorities on gold and gold stocks, with a unique strategy for valuing big producers and highly speculative explorers. He established a private family fund that only invests in ASX-listed gold mining companies, possibly the only such fund in Australia, putting his strategy and research skills to the test under public scrutiny. He currently writes two gold-focused investment advisories.

In his Australian Gold Report, Brian shows you a strategy for building long-term wealth in physical gold, along with a select portfolio of hand-picked stocks, mainly producers with proven revenue streams, chosen for their balance of risk and reward.

In his more specialised Gold Stock Pro service, Brian helps readers trade some of the most exciting, speculative gold mining plays on the ASX. He uses his proprietary system — based on the famous Lassonde Curve model, which tracks the life cycle of mining stocks. His aim is to help you get ready to trade the next phase of gold and silver’s anticipated longer-term bull market for opportunities to benefit.

By Bill Bonner Editor, Fat Tail Daily

[3 min read]

Dear Reader,

Just before we left Ireland, one of the magnificent old oak trees on the other side of the road toppled over. There it lay, branches broken, jumbled together on the ground... its rotten roots in the air, for all to see. 

We had no idea it was dying; until the roots were exposed, we saw only the healthy leaves and majestic, spreading limbs.  

The politics of the 2024 election are simple enough. 

The Republicans are behind their man Trump. They’d probably prefer a different champion, but Trump has strong appeal among a large part of their voters. He’s not a conservative... but then, neither are Republican voters.  

The Democrats are behind their man Biden. They too would prefer to have a different standard bearer. But for better or worse, Biden is what they’ve got. 

Trump seems like a con man. Biden, like a doddery old fool. 

The press is eagerly trying to catch one or the other in a ‘senior moment.’ The Telegraph: 

‘Another off-day seemed to take place during this week’s G7 summit in Italy when he [Biden] appeared to wander off during a photoshoot with world leaders. As the president, who once again appeared to be completely frozen, turned to face the wrong direction, Italian prime minister Georgia Meloni intervened to usher him back in the direction of the photographer. Some may think that it’s cruel to point out these obvious frailties — but surely it is even more cruel to let him run again in his current state?’ 

The Mirror fires back: 

‘Donald Trump grips railing for dear life in embarrassing video as he walks down stairs.’

Both rascals are too old. Neither has a strong sense of where the country should go or a coherent agenda to get it there. Neither is likable or personally attractive. Neither seems very smart. Neither has a sense of history... nor a solid grasp of economics. Neither is suited to the challenge of the White House. 

But both are perfect for the mega-political challenge... helping the US towards its rendezvous with catastrophe.  Great empires rise…and fall.  And when the time comes, leaders must step up to the challenge.  Corruption and dysfunction get worse.  They must not stand in the way.  Arguably, America’s two geriatric nincompoops are just what history needs.   

We sympathise with Biden. He’s only six years older than we are. But there’s a time to lead, and a time to let others lead. After watching a few video clips of Biden, appearing to be ‘out of it,’ we are left with the impression that the democrats will probably try a switcheroo before the election. At this stage, Biden is probably a negative for them.  

Nobody has a bumper sticker with a heart and ‘I love Biden’ on it. Democratic voters just want him to win, either because they distrust Trump... or because they want to see the elites’ agenda continue without interruption. 

A real leader

A real leader would have original ideas. He would suggest new approaches. He would propose solutions to the nation’s problems. He might go into a meeting and say ‘here’s what I think we should do’. While we have never been in a meeting with Joe Biden, we have a hard time imagining him doing that.  

Biden, the man, is just a cut-out... a place-holder. We’ve never heard an original thought pass his lips, nor an insight worth remembering. Instead, his pensée is just much-rehearsed blah-blah, sticking with whatever talking points his handlers suggest.  

After 50 years of blah-blah, Biden can do it without thinking. He may be fine in the presidential debates, for example, ‘a battle of wits between two unarmed opponents,’ where no honest thoughts are allowed. But there are times when something unexpected happens and you have to think; one of those times is bound to come sooner or later...  

And if we’re right, Democratic party insiders won’t want Biden, the man, getting in the way of Biden, the sham. So, they must be looking for some relatively obscure, vaguely presentable substitute — much like Obama in 2008 — who will reliably keep the grift going without stumbling down the steps.  

They needn’t worry. Donald Trump had four years to ‘drain the swamp’ and balance the budget. Instead, the swamp got deeper than ever... and the budget was never more out of balance. No agencies or departments or programs were shut down. Not a dollar of spending was cut.  

The Donald cut taxes (a cut the Democrats now preserve) but did nothing to diminish the power or wealth of the Imperial City. 

At least Trump is what he appears to be — a genuine sleazeball. He craves attention and power... but has no idea what to do with it. No ideology. No philosophy. No plan. That’s what makes him acceptable, in a mega-political sense, to the elites of both parties. He has no ideas that will get in the way.

Yes, dear reader, both candidates are corrupt impostors.  One promises more of the same.  The other promises something different.  But both, witlessly or willingly, will keep the jig up — more war overseas, more spending at home — transferring even more money and power to key, elite lobbies.   

The stock market looks healthy. GDP is positive. Unemployment is low. 

And the roots rot. 

Regards,

Bill Bonner,
For Fat Tail Daily