The Dow-to-Gold Ratio (DJI/XAU) Collapses: Get Ready for Tangible Assets

The Dow-to-Gold ratio (DJI/XAU) measures how many ounces of gold are needed to buy the Dow Jones Industrial Average. It is used as a long-term indicator of monetary confidence, where a falling ratio shows a shift in real value away from paper assets (cash, bonds, stocks) towards tangible assets like gold, silver, platinum, palladium, rhodium, copper (metals), oil, lumber (energy), and real estate.

Dow-to-Gold Ratio (DJI/XAU) from 1897 to 2025 (quarterly bars, log scale; chart credit: Francis Hunt.)

 Although the Dow has gained roughly 250% in dollar terms since 2000, by Q4 2025, 

its real value has declined by about two-thirds when measured in gold.

 

Over the last century, the Dow-to-Gold ratio has oscillated between periods of equity confidence and monetary stress. In 1929, the ratio peaked at roughly 18.63 before collapsing below 2 during the Great Depression. It reached about 28 in 1966, then fell below 1 in 1980 amid high inflation and currency instability. 

 

Dow-to-Gold Ratio (DJI/XAU) from 1800 to 2020 (quarterly values, log scale).

 
At the 1999–2000 peak, the Dow equaled approximately 45 ounces of gold—its highest in over a century. As of October 2025, the ratio is near 12, a decline of about 73% from that peak. The drop was steep from 2000 to 2011 (reaching a ratio near 6), followed by a rebound to about 20 by 2018, and renewed erosion thereafter. Over that period, gold has outperformed equities in real terms.

 

Dominant 120-Trading Day Cycle (≈174 calendar days) in the daily Gold chart.

 

China is preparing for something.

Mexico's Economic Rise Shifts Power from the US | Richard D. Wolff

Mexico, often viewed as dependent on the US, holds a significant edge in the global economy, with the US relying more on Mexico than most Americans realize. Beyond avocados and automobiles, Mexico is a vital hub for US supply chains in electronics, pharmaceuticals, automotive, aerospace, medical devices, textiles, consumer goods, and information/communications technology. As the US depends on Mexico, Mexico has strategically built leverage, shifting focus from politics to economics.

 

The Power Problem: Nearshoring and Mexico’s energy sector.

Mexico’s rise as an economic powerhouse challenges its subordinate image. Its leverage in trade, energy, and geopolitics makes it vital to the US. Rising labor and environmental demands could disrupt supply chains. The era of US dominance is fading, replaced by interdependence, and Mexico wields unprecedented influence. A fracture in this delicate relationship could swiftly impact the US. 

 

Mexico, once a trade partner, is now a force reshaping trade and energy policies, catching the US unprepared. The US has long focused on migration and border security, overlooking intricate economic ties. Mexico is a cornerstone of US production, driven by cost-effective labor and trade agreements like the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA, 2020).

 

Mexico’s Manufacturing Momentum: Many well-established industrial clusters.

 

This dependency stems from lower wages and proximity, but this corporate strategy has created vulnerabilities. US companies’ reliance on Mexico’s manufacturing gives Mexico significant leverage. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA,1994) boosted trade but moved US factories to Mexico for cheaper labor, eroding American jobs. USMCA preserved this structure. Mexico, no longer just a low-cost hub, has diversified into energy, consumer markets, and geopolitics, prioritizing labor rights and domestic growth, threatening the cheap labor model and US supply chains.

 

 Puerto Manzanillo, Mexico's new trade hub on the Pacific, bypassing the Panama Canal.

 

US policies, like subsidized agricultural exports, have displaced Mexican farmers, driving migration. US firms’ job relocation to Mexico exploits low-wage workers, creating an underclass on both sides of the border, with migration as a symptom of economic disparities.

Mexico, a key US oil supplier, is asserting control over its energy resources, nationalizing and tightening oversight, challenging US corporations. Its push into renewables diversifies its portfolio, enhancing global leverage. Prioritizing domestic energy could disrupt US imports, forcing a strategic shift.

 Mexico has surpassed China as the top US trade partner.

 » In fact, the most direct and simplest way for the US to reindustrialize would be to 

militarily occupy Mexico and use it as a substitute for China in its economic system. «  

Mexican labor movements demand better wages and conditions, undermining the cheap labor model, potentially raising US consumer prices. Environmental activists push for sustainable practices, challenging resource exploitation.

 

Amid the US-China trade war, Mexico is a nearshoring hub, benefiting from USMCA and proximity. China’s investments in Mexico create a trade triangulation, with Chinese components assembled in Mexico for US export, bypassing tariffs. Mexico negotiates favorable terms with both powers, gaining strategic autonomy.

Reference:
Richard D. Wolff (September 17, 2025) - Mexico Is About to Change Everything for the US. (video)

 

 

Richard D. Wolff, American Marxist economist known for works like "Democracy at Work,"

is teaching at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and The New School.

 

See also:
TPR (January 24, 2025) - Mexico's Strategic Position in China's Maritime Silk Road of the Americas.

TPR (September 12, 2024) - Failed US Regime Change Attempt in Mexico. 

TPR (August 18, 2024) - Mexico Pivoting Away From Washington’s Grip. 
Andrés Manuel López Obrador (May 8, 2024) - The US is in Decline and Desperate Need to Modernize.

China's Preparations for Reunification With Taiwan Around 2027 | Jin Canrong

The Chinese government has consistently avoided setting a timetable for resolving the Taiwan question, emphasizing instead President Xi’s call for peaceful reunification with patience, sincerity, and effort. Despite this, American analysts frequently forecast 2027 as the likely point of resolution. Their view is shaped by China’s large strategic reserves, new industrial measures, and visible military procurement, all of which they interpret as signs of preparation for decisive conflict.

Jin Canrong (金灿荣), leading scholar of China–US relations, American politics, and foreign policy;

CCP strategist; Professor and Associate Dean at the School of International Studies, Renmin University of China.

From a military perspective, China faces few obstacles. A Taiwan operation could be carried out through blockade or direct combat, and success would likely come quickly. US intervention is not considered probable, making the true challenges economic and political rather than military or diplomatic. China’s main vulnerabilities are its dependence on imported resources, its lack of a fully unified domestic market, and the influence of elites with assets or family ties abroad. By contrast, Russia’s economy, though smaller, is buffered by its abundant resources, allowing it to withstand sanctions more effectively.

Among many other heads of states, Putin, Kim Jong Un, Park Geun-hye, ex-President of South Korea, and Masoud

Pezeshkian, President of Iran, joined Beijing’s historic victory parade on September 3, marking 80 years since

Japan’s WWII surrender, where China showcased its hypersonic missiles and nuclear triad. 
 

The government is taking steps to address these weaknesses. Grain reserves now exceed two years thanks to improved storage and expanded farmland. By 2027, new oil and gas discoveries together with Central Asian pipelines are expected to reduce import dependence. Coal-to-oil conversion and the spread of new energy vehicles will further narrow the energy gap. The more difficult issue lies in market access, as domestic circulation remains weak due to provincial barriers. Efforts to expand the Belt and Road initiative continue, though China lacks the military and cultural instruments historically used by the West to protect overseas investments.

» US intervention is not considered probable. «

Jin Canrong's complete discourse video.

 

Diplomatically, a resolution of the Taiwan issue would have far-reaching effects. ASEAN countries, seeing the United States as unreliable for security, would likely align with China, turning the South China Sea into an inland sea. Japan and South Korea, highly dependent on maritime trade and external resources, would also face strong pressure to yield. Once the Taiwan Strait and the South and East China Seas are secured, Shanghai and the eastern seaboard would be protected, creating what could be the safest period in Chinese history.

Welcome to the Eurasian Century.

 

Historically, China’s threats came from the north, but industrialization eliminated that danger. Today, the principal threats come from the sea, the heartland of Western industrial power. Once Taiwan is reclaimed and the maritime approaches are secure, China can focus entirely on internal development and raising living standards. The most serious obstacles to this outcome are economic fragility and political complications, not military or diplomatic resistance. The year 2027 therefore stands out as the most likely turning point, a moment that could bring short-term hardship but ultimately mark the beginning of a new and safer era for China.

Reference:
Awakening Richard (September 3, 2025) - Famous Chinese Professor on China's progress regarding war preparation. (video)

 

See also:

Samim Aktar (March 4, 2025) - Trump 2.0 and the China Containment Strategy.

How the US Destroyed the German Economy | Cyrus Janssen

"To be an enemy of the US is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal." This famous quote from Henry Kissinger is now unfolding in real time: Germany, Europe's largest economy and its industrial powerhouse, is now collapsing. Last year, Germany posted the worst performance among all major global economies, with its economy being the only one to actually shrink by 0.3%. Just last month, Germany's economic minister, Robert Habeck, stated that the German economy is performing "dramatically badly." Yet, the Western media has concealed the true cause.

 

» NATO's purpose is: Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down. «
Lord Hastings Lionel Ismay, NATO's first Secretary General, 1952.

 » Fuck the European Union! «
Victoria Nuland, US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, 2014. 

 

Even worse, this bleak situation shows no signs of improving. There were high hopes that 2024 would turn things around and be a comeback year for Germany. Until recently, the German government projected a growth rate of 1.3%. However, shockingly, they have now been forced to slash this forecast to a mere 0.2%. The scariest part is that most economists and business leaders agree: this isn't just a temporary recession, but a deeper structural problem with the German economic model. If you think this is an exaggeration, consider that, by now, an astonishing two in three German companies have left Germany or at least partially relocated abroad, with most citing sky-high energy prices, inflation, over-regulation, and endless political debates as their reasons for leaving. What or who is causing this catastrophic collapse of Germany's long-standing economic and industrial prowess?

 

   » Halting Russian supplies can well create a systemic crisis that would be devastating

for the German economy and, indirectly, for the entire European Union. «

 RAND Corporation, 2022.

 

Germany has been played by the United States and continues to score own goals in tackling this economic crisis. The country's dire situation is caused by three main factors: first, the sky-high energy prices; second, reduced exports to Russia and China; and third, increased military expenditure.

 

   » China called the Nord Stream pipeline blast an act of international terrorism,
and an act of war against Germany and Russia. «

Hans-Benjamin Braun, 2023.

[...] As much as the US is to blame here, astonishingly, almost all of Germany's political elite, mainstream media, and general population have eagerly obeyed America's wishes to demonize and decouple from Russia and China. This is absolutely bizarre and frankly foolish, as numerous experts and German business leaders have repeatedly warned that decoupling would destroy the German economy. The sad truth is that much of Germany's political and media establishment has a long history of blindly accepting US-formed policy narratives at face value—even when they themselves are the ones getting harmed. The best recent example of this is the bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline, whose sole purpose was to transport natural gas from Russia to Germany and the rest of Western Europe.
 

 » Germany's establishment has been one of the biggest cheerleaders for severing its energy ties with Russia.

You seriously can't make this stuff up. «

Cyrus Janssen - March 12, 2024.

[...] After the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Germany and the EU introduced sanctions against Russia, while Russia responded by sharply decreasing its delivery of natural gas to Europe. This caused Germany's energy prices to skyrocket and severely damaged its economy. Before the invasion, Germany imported a staggering 55% of its gas from Russia, and it was precisely this cheap Russian gas that enabled Germany to become an economic and industrial powerhouse. Of course, sanctioning your main energy supplier was never the smartest choice to begin with. The fallout cannot be understated: in the same year the war started, the market price for natural gas increased more than tenfold.

 Biden vows that the US will 'bring an end' to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline if Russia invades Ukraine, and German vassal Chancellor Scholz simply agrees. - February 7, 2022.

 

But it's not just ordinary Germans who have suffered. An astonishing 70% of Germany's mechanical engineering, industrial goods, and automotive sectors have relocated abroad, making it clear why Germany's economic and industrial power has collapsed so rapidly. The US role in Germany's energy crisis is much larger than merely taking advantage of the Germans. Not only did the US openly wish to eliminate Germany's energy relationship with Russia, but it also shares significant blame for causing the war in Ukraine, which led to Germany's crisis in the first place. However, once again, Germany shares the blame: the country's establishment is in virtual lockstep with the United States and has been one of the biggest cheerleaders for severing its energy ties with Russia. You seriously can't make this stuff up.

 

Quoted from:
Cyrus Janssen ( March 12, 2024) - How America Destroyed the German Economy. (video)

 » Ukraine's victory: whatever it takes, as long as it takes. «

German vassal chancellor Scholz - May 7, 2024.

See also:

Martin Armstrong (May 1, 2024) - Will Russia Push the Button?

Martin Armstrong (May 1, 2024) - It Is Unlikely That We Can Avoid A Third World War.
Timofey Bordachev (February 19, 2024) - Western Europe could become the new Ukraine.
Hans-Benjamin Braun (August 6, 2023) - Nord Stream Pipeline Blast By US-Nuke.

RAND Corporation (January 25, 2022) - Crush Europe and Strengthen the US.

Crush Europe and Strengthen the US | RAND Corporation

January 25, 2022.

Confidential.

Distribution:

WHCS, ANSA, Dept. of State, CIA, NSA, DNC 

 

Executive Summary

[...] The current German economic model is based on two pillars. These are unlimited access to cheap Russian energy resources and to cheap French electric power, thanks to the operation of nuclear power plants. The importance of the first factor is considerably higher. Halting Russian supplies can well create a systemic crisis that would be devastating for the German economy and, indirectly, for the entire European Union. The French energy sector could also soon begin to experience heavy problems. The predictable stop of Russian-controlled nuclear fuel supplies, combined with the unstable situation in the Sahel region, would make French energy sector critically dependent on Australian and Canadian fuel.

 

"A reduction in Russian energy supplies - ideally, a complete halt of such supplies -
would lead to disastrous outcomes for German industry." - RAND Corporation, Jan 25, 2022.

 

[...] The only feasible way to guarantee Germany's rejection of Russian energy supplies is to involve both sides in the military conflict in Ukraine. Our further actions in this country will inevitably lead to a military response from Russia. Russians will obviously not be able to leave unanswered the massive Ukrainian army pressure on the unrecognized Donbas republics. That would make possible to declare Russia an aggressor and apply to it the entire package of sanctions prepared beforehand. Putin may in turn decide to impose limited counter-sanctions - primarily on Russian energy supplies to Europe. Thus, the damage to the EU countries will be quite comparable to the one to the Russians, and in some countries - primarily in Germany - it will be higher.

 

The prerequisite for Germany to fall into this trap is the leading role of green parties and ideology in Europe. The German Greens are a strongly dogmatic, if not zealous, movement, which makes it quite easy to make them ignore economic arguments. In this respect, the German Greens somewhat exceed their counterparts in the rest of Europe. Personal features and the lack of professionalism of their leaders - primarily Annalena Baerbock and Robert Habeck - permit to presume that it is next to impossible for them to admit their own mistakes in a timely manner.

 

Thus, it will be enough to quickly form the media image of Putin’s aggressive war to turn the Greens into ardent and hardline supporters of sanctions, a ‘party of war’. It will enable the sanctions regime to be introduced without any obstacles. The lack of professionalism of the current leaders will not allow a setback in the future, even when the negative impact of the chosen policy becomes obvious enough [...] This will ensure a sufficiently long gap in cooperation between Germany and Russia, which will make large German economic operators uncompetitive.

"The prerequisite for Germany to fall into this trap is the leading role of the German Greens."

[...] A reduction in Russian energy supplies - ideally, a complete halt of such supplies - would lead to disastrous outcomes for German industry. The need to divert significant amounts of Russian gas for winter heating of residential and public facilities will further exacerbate the shortages [...] A complete standstill at the largest in the chemical, metallurgical, and machine-building, plants is likely, while they have virtually no spare capacity to reduce energy consumption. It could lead to the shutting down of continuous-cycle enterprises, which would mean their destruction.

The cumulative losses of the German economy can be estimated only approximately. Even if the restriction of Russian supplies is limited to 2022, its consequences will last for several years, and the total losses could reach 200-300 billion euros. Not only will it deliver a devastating blow to the German economy, but the entire EU economy will inevitably collapse. We are talking not about a decline in economy growth pace, but about a sustained recession and a decline in GDP only in material production by 3-4% per year for the next 5-6 years. Such a fall will inevitably cause panic in the financial markets and may bring them to a collapse.

The euro will inevitably, and most likely irreversibly, fall below the dollar. A sharp fall of the euro will consequently cause its global sale. It will become a toxic currency, and all countries in the world will rapidly reduce its share in their forex reserves. This gap will be primarily filled with dollar and yuan.

 

"NATO's purpose is "keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down",
as Lord Hastings Lionel Ismay, NATO's first Secretary General, put it.

Another inevitable consequence of a prolonged economic recession will be a sharp drop in living standards and rising unemployment (up to 200,000-400,000 in Germany alone), which will entail the exodus of skilled labour and well-educated young people. There are literally no other destinations for such migration other than the United States today. A somewhat smaller, but also quite significant flow of migrants can be expected from other EU countries.

 

Since 1871 the prime U.S. geopolitical foreign policy doctrine for Europe is:
"Keep Germany and Russia separate and in conflict."
Or as Victoria Nuland put it in 2014: "Fuck the EU!"

The scenario under consideration will thus serve to strengthen the national financial condition both indirectly and most directly. In the short term, it will reverse the trend of the looming, economic recession and, in addition, consolidate American society by distracting it from immediate economic concerns. This, in turn, will reduce electoral risks.

In the medium term (4-5 years), the cumulative benefits of capital flight, re-oriented logistical flows and reduced competition in major industries may amount to USD 7-9 trillion. Unfortunately, China is also expected to benefit over the medium term from this emerging scenario. At the same time, Europe's deep political dependence on the U.S. allows us to effectively neutralise possible attempts by individual European states to draw closer to China [...]

Quoted from:
RAND Corporation (Jan 25, 2022) - Executive Summary: Weakening Germany, Strengthening the U.S.

See also:

Hans-Benjamin Braun (Apr 07, 2023) - Nord Stream Pipeline Blast by US-Nuke. 

Michel Chossudovsky (Aug 30, 2023) - Niger’s Military Junta is Supported by the Pentagon.

Washington’s Unspoken Objective: “Remove France from Africa”.

Max Blumenthal & Aaron Maté (2023) - German Greens, the world's most hypocritical party? (video)

 Bruno Maçães (2018) - Greater Eurasia: Russia’s New Energy Gamble.

Greater Eurasia | Russia’s New Energy Gamble

Bruno Maçães (Apr 2018) - In October 2017, Rosneft Chief Executive Officer Igor Sechin took the unusual step of presenting a geopolitical report on the “Ideals of Eurasian integration” to an audience in Verona, Italy. One of the maps projected on the screen during the presentation (HERE) showed the supercontinent—what Russian circles call “Greater Eurasia”—as divided between three main regions. For Sechin, the crucial division is not between Europe and Asia, but between regions of energy consumption and regions of energy production. The former are organized on the western and eastern edges of the supercontinent: Europe, including Turkey, and the Asia Pacific, including India. 

Between them we find three regions of energy production: Russia and the Arctic, the Caspian, and the Middle East. Interestingly, the map does not break these three regions apart, preferring to draw a delimitation line around all three. They are contiguous, thus forming a single bloc, at least from a purely geographic perspective. 

Sechin’s map has a number of other interesting elements. As noted already, Turkey is left on the European side of the line delimiting the energy production core in the west. The same is true for Ukraine, which although unavoidable in this context is still an unusual inclusion in a map sanctioned by the highest echelons of Russian state power. If one looks at the world through the prism of energy geopolitics, then Ukraine is a European country—a consumer, not a producer. 

[...] The map illustrates an important point about Russia’s new self-image. From the point of view of energy geopolitics, Europe and the Asia Pacific are perfectly equivalent, providing alternative sources of demand for energy resources. Russia has been struggling to abandon its traditional orientation toward Europe, hoping to benefit from the flexibility of being able to look both east and west to promote its interests. It seems that Sechin and Rosneft can place themselves in that position much more effortlessly. 

Sechin’s map subtly makes one final—and decisive—point. As you consider the three areas it delimits, it becomes apparent that two of them are already led and organized by a leading actor: Germany in the case of Europe and China for the Asia Pacific. Production chains within these highly industrial regions are increasingly managed by German or Chinese companies, which tend to reserve the higher value segments for themselves. Their spheres of influence extend to all important inputs, with one glaring exception: energy. In order to address this vulnerability, the two regions of energy consumption will be attracted to the core region, where they need to ensure ready and secure access to energy resources. And their efforts may well be made easier by the fact that the core region of energy production lacks a hegemon capable of ensuring its survival as an autonomous unit in the Eurasian system.

The very same day he delivered his speech on Eurasian geopolitics, Sechin announced that Rosneft would take control of Iraqi Kurdistan’s main oil pipeline, boosting its investment in the autonomous region to $3.5 billion, despite Baghdad’s military action sparked by a Kurdish vote for independence. The move helped shield Kurdistan from increasing pressure from Baghdad. Two weeks later, Sechin went on to sign a preliminary pact with the National Iranian Oil Company, the first step before a binding deal to participate in Iran’s oil and gas projects over the next few years, with investments totaling up to $30 billion and a production plateau of 55 million tons of oil per year.

Four Russian oil companies have even begun negotiating for opportunities in Syria, a venture driven as much by politics as by commercial interest. The aim is not to explore and extract Syria’s modest petroleum reserves, of course. By actively participating in rebuilding and operating Syrian oil and gas infrastructure, Russian energy companies will be in control of a critical transit route for Iranian and Qatari oil and gas heading to Europe, bringing two rival producers closer to its orbit and tightening its stranglehold on the European gas supply. In 2009, Qatar proposed to run a natural gas pipeline through Syria and Turkey to Europe. Instead, Al-Assad forged a pact with Iran to build a pipeline from the Persian Gulf and then through Iraq and Syria and under the Mediterranean. This project had to be postponed because of the war. When it is resumed, Russia will be in control.

It is in the very nature of the Eurasian system described by Sechin that the core energy production region—provided it is sufficiently united and organized—will benefit from its central position, being able to pick and choose between east and west in order to obtain the most favorable terms. Russia and the Middle East are now part of the same geopolitical unit. It took the Russian military intervention in Syria for the world to start to come to terms with this reality.

Mimicking The Sun - Wendelstein 7-X Helium Plasma Fusion

Fusion at 150 million degrees, promising cheap,
almost inexhaustible supply of energy

Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (Dec 10, 2015) - The first test of the "stellarator" has been carried out with the Wendelstein 7-X fusion device producing helium plasma. A breakthrough, according to the press release. However, horrendously expensive fusion technology and the promise for future cheap, limitless and clean energy have been entertained ever since the 1950s. Still physicists are in a worldwide race to create stable fusion devices that could not only mimic the Sun but release abundant energy, without the volumes of toxic waste generated by nuclear fission. This time around it took scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics in Greifswald, Germany, nine years to build the EUR 1.1 billion machine, and they have spent over a year preparing for the test. Another milestone? Fusion involves placing hydrogen atoms under high heat and pressure until they fuse into helium atoms. When Deuterium and Tritium nuclei - which can be found in hydrogen - fuse, they form a helium nucleus, a neutron and a lot of energy. This is done by heating the fuel to temperatures in excess of 150 million°C, forming a hot plasma. Strong magnetic fields are used to keep the plasma away from the walls so that it doesn't cool down and loses its energy potential. These are produced by superconducting coils surrounding the vessel, and by an electrical current driven through the plasma. For energy production plasma has to be confined for a sufficiently long period for fusion to occur. Europe has a large track record in fusion: Europe’s JET (Joint European Torus) located at Culham (UK) is the world’s largest fusion facility and was so far the only one capable of working with a Deuterium-Tritium fuel mixture. Reportedly JET has reached all its originally planned objectives and in some cases surpassed them. In 1997 it achieved a world record fusion power production of 16 MW and a Q = 0.65. Europe has also been building on the knowledge accumulated through the Tore Supra tokamak in France, the first large tokamak to use superconducting magnets; the ASDEX device in Germany with ITER-shaped plasmas; the reversed pinch device RFX in Italy and the stellarators TJ-II in Spain and the W7-X in Germany.

U.S. Energy Consumption since 1776

Credits: EIA