{"id":419,"date":"2023-12-28T16:32:41","date_gmt":"2023-12-28T16:32:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/advisor.wellington-altus.ca\/catalyst\/?page_id=419"},"modified":"2024-03-25T15:56:01","modified_gmt":"2024-03-25T15:56:01","slug":"newsroom","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/advisor.wellington-altus.ca\/catalyst\/newsroom\/","title":{"rendered":"Newsroom"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Newsroom <\/h1>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tMay Market Insights: Mastery and the Terror Premium\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Mastery of energy, again<\/p>\n

Winston Churchill, as first lord of the Admiralty, tied Britain\u2019s fate to Persian oil. United States President Donald Trump\u2019s war in Iran, centred on Operation Epic Fury, could do the same for the West by removing Iran\u2019s nuclear shadow, resetting oil toward US$60, and finally unlocking a modern peace dividend.<\/p>\n

\u201cMastery itself was the prize of the venture.\u201d Winston Churchill\u2019s 1912\u201313 case for converting the Royal Navy from coal to oil\u2014enshrined in historian Daniel Yergin\u2019s The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power captured the brutal clarity of a great power energy strategy: accept dependence to command the seas. That wager framed the last century. In 2026, as Epic Fury grinds through the Gulf and Brent trades above US$100, the question is no longer whether oil confers mastery, but who holds it: a revolutionary theocracy astride the Strait of Hormuz, or a West intent on stripping the terror and nuclear risk now priced into every barrel out of the energy system\u2014finally collecting a long\u2011deferred peace dividend.<\/p>\n

Churchill\u2019s shift bound Britain\u2019s prosperity to distant wells and narrow waterways, welding energy supply to national survival. He understood that control of energy was not an adjunct to power, it was the metric. In April 2026, with Hormuz contested and Iranian missiles demonstrating reach beyond the Middle East, the same dilemma confronts policymakers and markets. Does the West still want that prize, and what is it prepared to stake to reclaim it from a regime that has spent half a century turning oil, terror, and nuclear brinkmanship into interchangeable tools of coercion? Assume Trump\u2019s campaign does what it is now on course to do: not merely reopen a chokepoint, but neutralize a nascent tactical nuclear threat which, left intact, would hardwire a doomsday premium into global energy prices for a generation.<\/p>\n

Iran\u2019s war with the West has done what decades of shocks, embargoes, and \u201cmaximum pressure\u201d could not: it has made the hidden tax on energy legible even on a Bloomberg screen. Strip out the terror and nuclear\u2011risk premiums in a post\u2011Trump\u2011Iran settlement, and Brent does not belong north of US$100; it sits much closer to the US$60 level implied by underlying supply and demand and pre\u2011war bank research. The gap between where oil trades in a world held hostage by a nuclear\u2011ambitious theocracy at Hormuz and where it would trade if flows were secure and de\u2011weaponized is more than a volatility surface. It is the unclaimed peace dividend of globalization, the energy market analogue of the windfall that followed the end of the Cold War, when the removal of an existential nuclear standoff released capital, confidence, and capacity back into the real economy.<\/p>\n

The choice now facing the West is whether to lock in that outcome. Ending the Cold War removed the Sword of Damocles that had hung over every investment decision for half a century; a successful conclusion to Iran\u2019s nuclear extortion would do something similar for the 21st\u2011century economy, collapsing a structural risk premium that has quietly taxed households, corporates, and sovereigns alike. The question, as Churchill would have recognized, is whether the West is prepared not just to win on the battlefield but to consolidate that victory into a new era of energy mastery, and to treat the potential verified removal of Iran\u2019s enriched stockpile and fuel\u2011cycle capabilities as a security gain on the scale of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty or the dissolution of the Soviet arsenal.<\/p>\n

For Europe, the stakes are not abstract. Iranian missiles and drones have already shown that European Union territory and NATO logistics hubs sit uncomfortably close to the new strike envelope, shattering the illusion that Gulf risk could be quarantined to energy prices alone. The deeper reckoning is with Europe\u2019s own energy strategy. The choice by many Western governments to anchor industrial policy primarily on climate targets while neglecting cheap and secure supply\u2014is now coming home to roost. Prosperity in an artificial intelligence (AI)\u2011driven economy rests on abundant, reliable energy rather than on cheap consumer imports, echoing Churchill\u2019s insight that mastery of energy is mastery of power. That logic points north as well as east: Canada with its hydrocarbons, hydropower, and critical minerals\u2014looks less like a peripheral supplier and more like a potential resource superpower if it can cut through regulatory thickets and build the infrastructure to deliver secure barrels, electrons, and metals to allied markets.<\/p>\n

U.S. hard power, the security backstop European, Canadian, and the United Kingdom economies long treated as a law of nature, now looks more contingent, more politically conditional, and more thinly spread across theatres. One could easily imagine Washington reverting to a post\u2011First World War stance, turning inward to rebuild its real economy, and no longer willing or able to offer security as a global public good. A successful Trump\u2011led settlement that removes both the nuclear overhang and the Hormuz chokepoint as instruments of coercion would not only stabilize Atlantic world energy supply but also underwrite a more credible NATO deterrent at lower long\u2011run cost\u2014replacing the ersatz \u201cpeace dividend\u201d of underfunded defence with a genuine one built on reduced threat rather than wishful budgeting.<\/p>\n

For investors, a decisive outcome in Iran would not just redraw maps in the Gulf; it would refashion term premia. As the nuclear and terror discounts bleed out of the curve, gilt yields and U.S. Treasuries alike would begin to reflect lower expected inflation and slimmer risk premia rather than recurring energy shocks. Credit spreads-particularly for energy\u2011intensive sectors and fragile sovereigns\u2014would compress as balance of payments and default risks ease. Equity markets would reprice in turn: structurally lower input costs and a thinner geopolitical risk layer would lift margins in manufacturing, transport, and consumer names, even as oil majors and defence stocks surrender some of their crisis rent. For the Square Mile and Wall Street, the real prize is not another trade on US$120 Brent; it is the re\u2011rating that comes when a structural doomsday premium is finally taken out of the system and the peace dividend\u2014deferred since the end of the Cold War and repeatedly eroded by Iran\u2014at last starts to be paid in cash flows rather than communiqu\u00e9s.<\/p>\n

Churchill\u2019s ghost at Hormuz<\/p>\n

On the first day of April 2026, as Brent traded just above US$100, the world was relearning what Churchill meant when he called mastery the prize. As first lord of the Admiralty, he forced the Royal Navy off domestic coal and onto Persian oil, then secured that lifeblood by buying control of Anglo\u2011Persian Oil. He knew the bargain: oil conferred speed and reach, but at the price of dependence on distant fields and fragile sea lanes. Hence his warning to Parliament in 1913 that \u201con no one quality, on no one process, on no one country, on no one route, and on no one field must we be dependent\u201d and his insistence that safety and certainty in oil lay \u201cin variety, and in variety alone.\u201d<\/p>\n

That decision created the modern energy system and placed Iran at its centre. Four decades later, as prime minister, Churchill confronted the second act of his own gamble when Iran\u2019s prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh nationalized Anglo\u2011Iranian Oil Company\u2019s assets. The 1953 coup that restored the Shah was less a morality play than a confirmation that control over Iranian oil would be contested by empires, nationalists, and, eventually, revolutionaries. Churchill\u2019s instinct to secure supply at the source and to dominate the sea lanes that connected it to Britain established a strategic architecture with a simple premise: mastery of energy flows was indistinguishable from mastery of global power.<\/p>\n

The twist came in 1979, when that architecture was seized by those it had previously constrained. The Iranian Revolution toppled the Shah and installed Ayatollah Khomeini\u2019s theocracy\u2014a regime that viewed the U.S. as the \u201cGreat Satan,\u201d embraced terrorism as statecraft, and sat astride the Strait of Hormuz. Oil workers struck, production collapsed, and prices more than doubled. The world discovered that the geographic fulcrum Churchill had chosen could just as easily be pulled by a revolutionary fist. From that moment, the markets began to price an Iran terror premium. It was distinct from OPEC\u2019s cartel pricing power or conventional war risk. It recognized that a state sponsor of terrorism\u2014with a web of proxies and control over the narrow channel through which roughly a fifth of seaborne oil must pass\u2014would periodically weaponize that position. Each tanker attack in the 1980s \u201cTanker War,\u201d each Hezbollah bombing, each missile launched at a Gulf facility added a sliver to that premium. Over time, slivers hardened into a slab.<\/p>\n

Churchill\u2019s maxim was inverted. Variety still existed geologically, with new barrels from the North Sea, Alaska, and deepwater, but strategically the system was again anchored on a single actor most willing to turn energy into a cudgel. Where Churchill had sought safety through variety, the world lived with uncertainty concentrated in one revolutionary capital. And where he had seen mastery as the prize of bold, deliberate ventures, mastery of energy risk quietly migrated to a regime that treated terror as an operating model.<\/p>\n

How terror became a line item<\/p>\n

The terror premium is no longer an academic calculation; it is a visible spread. In calmer phases of the cycle, geopolitical risk barely nudges price forecasts. In crisis, as in early 2026, the gap between pre\u2011war expectations for oil and the levels seen when Hormuz is threatened yawns wider, and futures curves kink as traders try to price the possibility of disruption. Even if part of that is fear and temporality, the underlying message is obvious. There is a structural surcharge on every barrel to account for the probability that Tehran or one of its proxies will, at some point, take terrorist action.<\/p>\n

That surcharge has a history. The 1973\u201374 oil embargo revealed how quickly geopolitics could quadruple prices, but Iran was then still an ally. The true discontinuity came with the 1979 revolution and the Iran\u2011Iraq War. The Tanker War saw mines in the Gulf, neutral shipping attacked, and U.S. naval forces drawn in to reflag and escort tankers. Washington\u2019s 1984 decision to designate Iran a state sponsor of terrorism, off the back of Hezbollah\u2019s bombing of U.S. Marines in Beirut, made explicit what markets had intuited: one of the central suppliers to the system was also its most committed saboteur.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tMay 5, 2026\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tHighlights from the 2026 Spring Economic Update\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

On April 28, 2026, Finance and National Revenue Minister Fran\u00e7ois-Philippe Champagne released the 2026
\nSpring Economic Update (the Update). This was the first spring economic update after the federal budget was
\nmoved to the fall in 2025. In the absence of a federal budget earlier this year and with the recent shift to a
\nmajority government, Canadians have been awaiting clear direction on the federal government\u2019s policy
\nfocus and anticipated initiatives. Overall, the Update introduces relatively little that had not been previously
\nannounced, while showing an improved fiscal outlook, with the projected deficit declining despite $37.5 billion
\nin net new spending.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tApril 30, 2026\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tApril Market Insights: Bretton Woods 2.0, the New Great Game, and Trump\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

U.S. President Donald Trump\u2019s second term is not just another burst of tariff theatre; it is the opening move in a new great game over energy, artificial intelligence (AI), and money. By neutralizing Iran and Venezuela, squeezing Cuba, binding Canada, and courting Russia, Washington is trying to re-anchor oil in U.S. dollars and push BRICS\u2019 [1] monetary ambitions to the margins. Layered on top are digital rails\u2014dollar-backed stablecoins, tokenized Treasuries, gold, and even a strategic bitcoin reserve\u2014designed to harden, not retire, King Dollar. If it works, Bretton Woods 2.0 will arrive not as a conference, but as the unannounced sequel to a crisis-ridden decade, with the U.S. once again writing the rules.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tMarch 31, 2026\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tInvestment Insights Spring 2026\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

The Shifting (Global) Order We are living through a period of shifting order. Global alliances are outwardly frayed, old rules have been bent, and new ones are being formed. As Prime Minister Carney reminded the world in January: \u201cThe old order is not coming back. We shouldn\u2019t mourn it. Nostalgia<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tMarch 27, 2026\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tMarch Market Insights: There is no Bronze Medal\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

\u201cThere\u2019s only two cultures that are going to win in the next year. It\u2019s going to be us or China.\u201d The subtext of Palantir CEO Alex Karp\u2019s widely cited speech from late 2025 sounds like tech\u2011bro theatre until you reflect on it. In artificial intelligence, there is no bronze medal. There will be a hegemon and a runner\u2011up. Everyone else will be a client.<\/p>\n

Markets are not pricing that reality. Investors still treat the AI build-out as marginal cloud spend or another overhyped software cycle. They debate whether Big Tech is \u201cexhausting its available capital\u201d or whether capex \u201cmust mean revert,\u201d as if infrastructure were optional and competition courteous. They are using valuation models from the wrong century for the wrong game.<\/p>\n

AI is not an app store. It is a weapon system\u2014and the operating system of the next industrial era. The capital going into it is not a bubble. It is rearmament.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tMarch 4, 2026\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tFebruary Market Insights: Fortress America and the Colony Next Door\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Historians are likely to regard Donald Trump\u2019s presidency as a pivot\u2014as significant as any in U.S. history comparable to the Jacksonian turn, the New Deal, or the Reagan Revolution. Yet Wall Street remains strangely somnolent, pricing in neither the durability nor the depth of what is unfolding. The Trump Doctrine should be seen as equal to\u2014not subordinate to\u2014the Monroe Doctrine, the 1823 U.S. policy that warned European powers against further colonization or interference in the Western Hemisphere. It represents a new organizing framework for U.S. power that blends hard power, economic nationalism, and pro-growth domestic policy.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tFebruary 4, 2026\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tJanuary Market Insights: The 2026 Market Forecast\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

History does not move in straight lines. Markets ricochet between excess and restraint in violent cycles, a truth American economist Peter Bernstein hammered home and one investors are again being forced to relearn. The foundation for the 2026 investment thesis is that with interest payments on U.S. debt now exceeding annual defense spending, the fiscal constraint has become too binding to ignore, and structural adjustment is no longer optional. We have no choice but to adjust; the system is in a state of flux.<\/p>\n

As Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has argued, the world is entering a regime shift as consequential as the post-Cold War settlement: 2026 marks the end of pandemic-era stimulus and the start of a new cycle driven by credit markets, technology infrastructure, and redesigned policy frameworks. Under U.S. President Donald Trump, the United States is pivoting toward physical production and capital formation, reviving a traditional comparative advantage that other nations are emulating\u2014much like the 1990s shift from Keynesian to supply-side economics after the Berlin Wall fell when risk assets thrived. In 2026, liquidity increases, deregulation continues, and early in the year, investors should begin increasing exposure to interest-rate-sensitive areas as equity market participation broadens.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tJanuary 6, 2026\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tInvestment Insight – Winter 2026\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

It is the end of an era: after 60 years at the helm, one of the world\u2019s most closely watched investors has stepped down as CEO.<\/p>\n

Very few people stay in one role for six decades. For context, the median tenure with a single employer dropped to 3.9 years in the U.S., while the average working life spans roughly 37 years. This puts into perspective the remarkable length of Warren Buffett\u2019s leadership of Berkshire Hathaway\u2014nearly twice the span of a typical career.<\/p>\n

Even if you don\u2019t subscribe to Buffett\u2019s investing philosophy, the scale of his accomplishments is clear. After taking control in 1965, he transformed Berkshire from a\u00a0 struggling textile mill into a multinational conglomerate holding company, growing its share price from about $19 to roughly $745,000\u2014a cumulative gain of nearly 4,000,000 percent! In 2024, Berkshire became the first U.S. non-tech company to surpass a trillion-dollar market capitalization.
\nNow 95, Buffett shared in November that he was \u201cgoing quiet\u201d and will no longer write the annual letter or speak at Berkshire\u2019s annual meeting. In his farewell, he offered reflections on both business and life.\u00a0 As we begin a new year, several insights may serve as practical reminders for our own wealth management:<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tDecember 19, 2025\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tDecember Market Insights: 2026 and the King Dollar Revival\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Rumours of the U.S. dollar\u2019s decline are as persistent as they are exaggerated. In 2025, one fact stands out: The global U.S. dollar system\u2014\u201cKing Dollar\u201d\u2014is not vanishing. The financial, legal, and institutional architecture that makes the dollar the world\u2019s indispensable currency remains at the heart of global finance. It is this systemic centrality, not its day-to-day market price, that ensures \u201cKing Dollar\u201d matters most, and it is being strategically reinforced and recalibrated for a multipolar era. After the energetic \u201cweaponization\u201d of the dollar under the Biden administration and U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, a prudent diversification of reserves by global central banks was always going to follow. Still, to declare the end of U.S. exceptionalism or the death of King Dollar is not just premature, it is strategically misguided. Yes, the counter trend rally in many currencies is coming to an end. Driven by fundamentals, the King Dollar revival is upon us; investors take note.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tDecember 4, 2025\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tHighlights from the Federal Budget 2025\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

On November 4, 2025, Finance Minister and National Revenue Minister Fran\u00e7ois-Philippe Champagne tabled the much-anticipated 2025 Federal Budget (Budget 2025). With no spring budget earlier this year, Canadians have been eager for insights into the government\u2019s fiscal priorities and economic direction. Our Advanced Wealth Planning Group has summarized the key highlights and implications from this release.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tNovember 5, 2025\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tNovember 2025 Market Insights: WEALTH IN A CAPEX SUPERCYCLE: Fuller\u2019s energy-intelligence fusion, McLuhan\u2019s tool-building refrain, and in search of the Holy Grail\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

Wealth is the product of energy times intelligence: energy channeled into artifacts that enhance human life. American visionary Buckminster Fuller\u2019s idea hints at a fire that powers value itself.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tOctober 30, 2025\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tOctober Market Insights: Trump, Carney and the Western Awakening\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t

\u201cI read in a newspaper that I was to be received with all the honors customarily rendered to a foreign ruler. I am grateful for the honors; but something within me rebelled at that word \u2018foreign\u2019. I say this because when I have been in Canada, I have never heard a Canadian refer to an American as a \u2018foreigner\u2019. He is just an \u2018American\u2019. And, in the same way, in the United States, Canadians are not \u2018foreigners\u2019, they are \u2018Canadians\u2019. That simple little distinction illustrates to me better than anything else the relationship between our two countries.\u201d \u2013 Franklin D. Roosevelt, address in Quebec, 1936<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\tRead More \u00bb\t\t<\/a>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\tOctober 1, 2025\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/article>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t