Something's Going to Break Bad

12/16/24 • 9 min

Paul Grant Truesdell, J.D., AIF, CLU, ChFC, RFC
Founder & CEO of The Truesdell Companies
The Truesdell Professional Building
200 NW 52nd Avenue
Ocala, Florida 34482
352-612-1000 - Local
212-433-2525 - New York

Truesdell Consulting, Inc.
Truesdell Insurance, Inc.
Truesdell Wealth, Inc.

Due to our extensive holdings and that of our clients, you should assume that we have a position in all companies discussed and that a conflict of interest exists. The information presented is provided for informational purposes only.

North Korean Troops in Ukraine: A Significant Escalation in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict

In a remarkable development in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky revealed on December 14, 2024, that Russia has deployed North Korean soldiers in combat positions within the Kherson Oblast region. According to Zelensky, a considerable number of North Korean troops have been integrated into Russian military units, primarily serving in offensive operations. This revelation adds a new layer of complexity to the already volatile conflict and highlights the growing international dimensions of the war.

Deployment Details and Tactical Involvement

North Korean forces, reportedly operating in conjunction with Russian troops, are being utilized as infantry assault units. They have sustained significant casualties during operations, raising questions about their long-term effectiveness. Zelensky emphasized that while these forces are currently concentrated in the Kherson region, there is potential for their redeployment to other front-line areas in the future. This deployment not only intensifies the conflict but also signals a deeper alliance between Moscow and Pyongyang.

The involvement of North Korean troops in direct combat was first hinted at in reports from Russian military bloggers, colloquially referred to as "milbloggers." These bloggers had speculated on North Korean activity as early as November 5, 2024, citing small-scale clashes in southern Kherson. By December 12 and 13, these reports became more detailed, alleging that North Korean special forces had independently conducted operations to capture a village in the region. Some accounts suggest a joint effort with Russian forces, while others claim the operations were led entirely by North Korean personnel.

Independent verification of these claims remains elusive. However, the reported presence of approximately 40 North Korean infantry personnel, corroborated by both Ukrainian officials and Russian sources, suggests a substantive, albeit unverified, role for these troops in the conflict.

Training and Integration with Russian Units

Reports from Russian sources indicate that military units, including the 1427th Motorized Rifle Regiment, have been training North Korean soldiers for weeks. Observers note that the tactics employed by these troops mirror the attritional warfare style favored by Russian forces, which has often led to high casualty rates.

Questions arise regarding the North Koreans' ability to adapt to modern combat conditions and sustain their involvement given the losses incurred. Observers speculate whether these forces will develop independent tactical capabilities or remain reliant on Russian leadership. Such reliance, combined with Russia's historically high attrition rates, casts doubt on the long-term viability of North Korean contributions to the war effort.

Implications for North Korea

The deployment of North Korean troops to Ukraine introduces significant domestic and international ramifications for Pyongyang. North Korea’s cultural emphasis on family unity and loyalty, deeply rooted in Confucian values, complicates the state’s ability to manage the fallout from casualties. The potential return of deceased soldiers—or the lack thereof—could pose challenges for the regime.

1. Cultural and Familial Repercussions:
In North Korea, the death of a family member carries profound societal and familial consequences. The regime’s practice of holding entire families accountable for the actions of individual members further underscores the potential impact of combat casualties. If the bodies of fallen soldiers are repatriated, families may begin questioning the state's decision to involve their loved ones in a foreign conflict with little direct relevance to North Korean interests.

2. Propaganda and Narrative Control:
North Korea’s tightly controlled media landscape allows the regime to suppress information about casualties and redirect public attention. However, cracks in this system are not unprecedented. Should families fail to receive confirmation of their loved ones' deaths or remains, resentment and quiet dissent could fester. While Pyongyang has historically suppressed dissent with brutal efficiency, incremental dissatisfaction could er...

Truesdell Consulting, Inc.
Truesdell Insurance, Inc.
Truesdell Wealth, Inc.

North Korean Troops in Ukraine: A Significant Escalation in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Deployment Details and Tactical Involvement

Training and Integration with Russian Units

Implications for North Korea

Previous Episode

Social Security Trust Fund Runs Dry by 2034. Now What?

Truesdell Wealth on YouTube

Eirinn Abu and Tunnel to Towers Foundation Concert Fri, Feb 28, 2025 @ 7:00PM Circle Square Cultural Center, 8395 SW 80th Street, Ocala Florida - Join Eirinn Abu and two of his Miami Sound Machine band members for a wonderful concert in support of the Tunnel to Towers Foundation. The event theme is a night of music and movies.
https://eirinnabu.com/event/5760795/695871447/eirinn-abu-and-tunnel-to-towers-foundation-concert

Corporate Sponsors: Truesdell Wealth, Truesdell Consulting, and Truesdell Insurance.
https://truesdell.net/

Truesdell Consulting, Inc.
Truesdell Insurance, Inc.
Truesdell Wealth, Inc.

Rough Transcription - Show Notes

https://www.youtube.com/@truesdellwealth

Social Security Trust Fund Runs Dry by 2034. Now What?

I’ve been discussing the challenges facing Social Security for decades—since the 80s, in fact. Back then, the warning signs were there. People said, “The government will fix it.”

Back in the 1980s, when the cracks in Social Security’s foundation started becoming impossible to ignore, President Ronald Reagan and Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill came together in a rare bipartisan effort to save the program. Their solution, the Social Security Amendments of 1983, included a mix of tax increases and benefit adjustments. They taxed Social Security benefits for higher-income recipients for the first time and gradually increased the retirement age from 65 to 67 for those born after 1938. These measures bought the program time, but they also set a precedent for the idea that adjustments could—and would—be made when the system reached a breaking point.

In the 1990s, under President Bill Clinton’s administration, the focus shifted to further tax adjustments. Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin helped craft changes that increased the taxable wage base for Social Security, meaning higher earners would contribute more to the system. These adjustments provided additional revenue but also underscored the growing strain on the program as the Baby Boomer generation began approaching retirement. Meanwhile, the gradual increase in the full retirement age continued to phase in, further signaling that future generations would bear a heavier burden to keep the program afloat.

Each of these changes was designed to shore up Social Security in the short term, but they came at a cost—higher taxes, reduced benefits, and longer working lives for many Americans. Despite these efforts, we’re now facing yet another crisis, one that underscores the need for every retiree to plan for the possibility—if not the likelihood—of reduced benefits in the near future.
In the 90s, it was the same story—“Oh, they’ll never let Social Security fail.” In the 2000s, we had a financial crisis, wars, and mounting debt, but still, people ignored the warnings. Now, here we are in the 2020s, staring down the barrel of reality: the Social Security trust fund will run out of money by 2034.

Let that sink in. One hundred years after its implementation, Social Security will only be able to pay out about 75% of promised benefits. That means a 20 to 30% cut for you, your spouse, and everyone relying on it.

The Numbers Don’t Lie
First, let’s get personal: How much of your household income comes from Social Security? For many retirees, it’s over 50%, and for some, it’s closer to 90%. Take that number and imagine it slashed by 25%. Could you survive? Could your spouse survive?

Here’s where it gets even more critical—this isn’t just about one spouse. It’s about both of you. If one spouse passes away, the surviving spouse loses one Social Security check entirely. So now, you’re dealing with two income hits: a reduction in benefits across the board and the loss of a second check. It’s a financial double whammy.

Now think about this: who tends to live longer? Women. Ladies, this is especially important for you. Statistically, you’ll outlive your husband, often by several years. Will you be left scrambling, selling your home, or downsizing just to get by? It happens more often than you think. Retirement communities are filled with women who were blindsided by this reality. It’s embarrassing, it’s a struggle, and...

Next Episode

Navigating the Future of Transportation: Why Pragmatism Trumps Ideology

YouTube
LinkedIn
x.com - @TruesdellWealth
Truesdell Wealth Events
Eirinn Abu Concert - Sponsored by The Truesdell Companies

Ocala Events: January 8th - Casual Breakfast Conversation / February 19th - Casual Cocktail Conversations (Beer, Wine, Mixed Drinks)

Online & On-Demand - January 1 through January 11th: Why Bundling Could Kill You -
Energy and transportation policies are often steeped in political rhetoric, driven by idealistic aspirations that frequently overlook pragmatic realities. Whether the propulsion system relies on fossil fuels, electricity, hydrogen, or even nuclear power, the essence of transportation technologies lies in using the right tools for the right jobs under the right circumstances. Managing expectations is crucial, and we must resist the urge to apply one-size-fits-all solutions to complex problems. This is not about ideology but about proportionality and practicality. The concept is akin to building the Panama Canal: small tools like shovels were as indispensable as massive dredgers. Similarly, transportation technologies must align with specific needs and contexts.

Take electric vehicles (EVs) as an example. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), heralded as the largest climate policy in U.S. history, is projected to generate $3 trillion in direct and induced spending. While such investments might sound promising, it’s worth noting the disingenuous nature of legislative titles. Much like internet memes, names such as the “Save the World Act” or “We Love Babies Legislation” often obscure the actual outcomes. The IRA’s aggressive push toward EVs, coupled with government subsidies, illustrates a recurring challenge: policy decisions frequently prioritize political optics over engineering economics.

And as a reminder, this podcast is sponsored by the Truesdell companies, which include Truesdell Wealth, Truesdell Insurance, Truz Consulting, Truesdell Media, Truesdell Law, and Truesdell Real Estate. For more information, visit truesdell.net, and for a listing of our upcoming events, visit truesdellwealth.com/events.

The widespread adoption of EVs brings into question their effectiveness in achieving the intended environmental goals. Proponents claim that EVs will significantly reduce oil dependence and carbon emissions. However, the practical reality is far less straightforward. Manufacturing EV batteries requires intensive mining for rare-earth elements, while charging them demands electricity that, in many regions, still comes predominantly from fossil fuels. Moreover, as we observe collapsing growth rates in EV sales in both the U.S. and Europe, it’s clear that market saturation and logistical constraints are beginning to hinder the electrification narrative.

Contextual suitability is key to understanding the limitations of any propulsion system. For example, slow-moving vehicles like golf carts are ideal for retirement communities such as The Villages or Sun City. These neighborhoods often have separate roadways or shared spaces for such vehicles, making EVs a sensible choice in these controlled environments. However, even here, these vehicles rely on asphalt roads—a product derived from petroleum. The paradox is clear: the production, transportation, and maintenance of infrastructure for EVs still depend on fossil fuels. This begs the question of whether the touted environmental benefits truly outweigh the costs.

Another critical factor is the engineering and logistical demands of emergency services. Consider helicopters used for medical evacuations. Transitioning these vehicles to electric propulsion in their current technological state would drastically reduce their operational range and effectiveness. Similarly, ambulances, which require substantial power for their onboard medical equipment and high-speed transport capabilities, cannot yet be reliably powered by batteries. Imagine waiting for a battery to charge during a life-threatening emergency; the consequences would be catastrophic. The same applies to nuclear-powered ships and submarines, which provide unmatched endurance and operational range for critical missions. These technologies exist because they are optimally suited to their specific roles.

And as a reminder, we are speaking on four topics on January 8 at the Stone Creek Grill. At 9:45 AM, we begin with an unlimited breakfast buffet, and everyone who has previously attended will have the first opportunity to make a reservation for the February 19 afternoon conversation over cocktails, which includes beer,...