A Short Preview:

Theme: Corruption Ain’t What It Used To Be

Ask Catherine will be posted on Friday here.

Interview: A 21st-Century Approach to Energy, Part III – What Can I Do? with Charlie Stephens

Take Action

Please login to see stories, charts, and subscriber-only content.
Not a subscriber yet? You are invited to join here!


154 Comments

  1. Actionable Request/suggestion: please tally up the number of times Catherine and John say “Right”.

    For John: please [replace] 80% [Right] with [What makes you say that/can you tell me more about that / how does that tie in to [what people need to know/the big picture/what we should be doing in our own lives/Etc]

    Please [replace] 15% [right] with “yes and the reason why…/how does that work?]

    For Catherine: please [replace] 50% of “right” with [and you know what else…/what most people don’t realize about that/ here’s how that works]

    Please eliminate “Let’s keep it moving”

  2. I’ve been a subscriber since 2015 and it has taken a year for me to get to this point.

    I know this format feels good to you both but the utility for me (and it sounds like many others) is greatly diminished from prior. I no longer look forward to M&M.

    Whereas I used to check anxiously to see if it had posted. I no longer try to recruit subscribers; whereas M&M used to be the main thing where I was like “you gotta join!!”

    It feels like we’re being excluded rather than included from the conversation.

    And I’m sick of John cutting Catherine off—it’s always when she’s starting to say something interesting that actually helps me understand what is going on.

    Perhaps a less knowledgeable co-host could help draw out the type of conversation and questions that will help the rest of us dummies understand what’s going on.

    Every time you say “right” and Just move on—and have not explained what’s going on and many of us have NO IDEA why that’s “right’—it’s zero value add to us unenlightened masses—and if it’s so obvious that it doesn’t warrant dissection and explanation—perhaps it’s not worthy of highlighting on M&M.

    1. Angela:

      Thanks for the feedback. Will think about what John and I can do to improve the presentation.

      I can not remember any time when I had a point to make that I thought was important that I did not make. We are trying to make M&M shorter, it gets quite long and there are times I do not add more, because the length is IMO too long.

      I enjoy working with John very much. We don’t always agree – for some that is fun to hear. Others disapprove. So no desire to find another co-host.

      Catherine

      1. Really appreciate this response and understand the time constraints.

        One idea might be to not try to cover so much ground?

        Meaning—perhaps only discuss a few of the most important stories highlighted that week? And help us really understand the context. It hasn’t been entirely missing; but sparse and maybe it’s a crapshoot on if the hour+ I spend on M&M’s will leave me better prepared and informed than prior.

        Another possible way on how to reallocate the time to allow for deeper discussion would be to spend less time reading the articles to us?

        Sometimes the reading or videos *is * definitely crucial to understanding.

        But back in the old days, you didn’t read them all to us. You posted the articles and quoted or read chunks of them when it was needed to really emphasize the point. I remember specifically being like “oh need to make sure to go read the article she’s referring to”

        1. I like the idea of doing less stories and going deeper on the important ones. We did that this week. We have cut the stories down from 25 to 19-20 in the hopes of achieving what you are describing. I like the idea of cutting them down more. There were three stories that were the most important this week. Treasury market melt down, Israel, and the rise in all cause mortality – and IMO deeply interrelated. So we spent the lionshare of the time on those. To get there more than 100 stories hit the cutting room floor.

        2. You might also consider moving M&M to Fridays so that you are up-to-date with the news. Fridays, end of week, are big event days. Then we have to wait a week for “old news.”

      2. See (36:12) for a recent example of when you didn’t complete your thought. While you may unaware of these moments, they loom large for us. We always wonder what you would have said. Afterall, we pay $30/month for the Catherine Austin Fitts’ Solari.com subscription.

  4. John: “Count me out on Russell”
    Right there with you John. There’s just something…not…quite…right about him. My gut is telling me to watch this guy. Kind of like a Jordan Petersen, over-emotive in approach…

    1. A lot of good points about Russell have been posted. Helped me improve my perspective on his work.

      1. Some say Russell has had a change “of heart” since this interview took place pre-C19. I say BS!…Politician’s continuously have changes of heart throughout their career…
        I have similar GROWING concerns with RFK Jr…

  7. I still don’t get the standing ovation in the Canadian parliament for the Nazi war criminal. What was that all about? What did they want to achieve? I am sure it didn’t happen spontaneously or by accident. It took planning and organising. But Why? What was the purpose? What was the message? What was the point?

    1. I could engage in conjecture. BUT I determined when it happened that whatever the reason, the important thing was to figure out what it was that it was distracting us from.

Comments are closed.