• Saudi Military Thwarts Houthi Attack On Oil Tankers In Red Sea
  Saudi Military Thwarts Houthi Attack On Oil Tankers In Red Sea

  Saudi Arabia and UAE media are reporting that Saudi forces thwarted an “imminent and hostile” attack that threatened oil tankers south of the Red Sea, in a coalition statement first reported in state-run SPA.

  The attempted attack reportedly involved a pair of booby-trapped boats being launched toward the tankers by Yemeni Houthi militants, from the direction of Hodeida port after the tankers crossed the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. The boats were intercepted and destroyed, according to the Saudi military.

  

  “The Houthi militia is escalating its hostile attacks to target energy sources and the vein of global economy,” the statement, also reported in Al-Arabiya, said.

  On Sunday multiple drone and missiles launched from Yemen targeted a Saudi liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant, as well as an oil facility, power station, and other key infrastructure. While there were no casualties reported from the wave of projectiles, a fire broke out at an Aramco facility in Jeddah. The “limited fire” was quickly brought under control.

  For years the Houthis – who are covertly backed by Iran and who control most of northern Yemen, including Hodeidah – have threatened Red Sea shipping, also as much of the country has been under a brutal blockade by the Saudi-UAE-US coalition, which has in turn triggered what the UN has called the “world’s worst humanitarian crisis”. 

  At a moment the Biden administration is desperate to tap more oil amid an aggressive Western sanctions regimen targeting Russia’s exports, Riyadh is urgently asking for more US weapons, particularly anti-air defense missile systems.

  

  At the start of this week, following Sunday’s Houthi attacks, The Wall Street Journal detailed that “The Biden administration has transferred a significant number of Patriot antimissile interceptors to Saudi Arabia within the past month, fulfilling Riyadh’s urgent request for a resupply amid sharp tensions in the relationship, senior U.S. officials said.”

  “The transfers sought to ensure that Saudi Arabia is adequately supplied with the defensive munitions it needs to fend off drone and missile attacks by the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in neighboring Yemen, one of the officials said,” the report said.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 02:45

• Ukraine Says Forest Fires Near Chernobyl Have Sparked Radiation Concern
  Ukraine Says Forest Fires Near Chernobyl Have Sparked Radiation Concern

  Authored by Lorenz Duschamp s via The Epoch Times,

  Energoatom, a Ukrainian regulatory agency that operates nuclear power plants in the country, warned earlier this week that forest fires near Russian-held Chernobyl have raised radiation concerns.

  

  In a March 21 statement, the Ukrainian parliament said that at least seven different fires were spotted near the plant by satellite images of the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Sentinel-2 satellite.

  Though the now-defunct plant no longer produces nuclear power, the radiation at the site is consistently monitored, especially after a catastrophe in 1986 – when an explosion at the plant became one of the world’s worst nuclear accidents.

  Russian forces captured Chernobyl, which is located along the Ukraine–Belarus border and about 60 miles north of Kyiv, just days after Russian troops launched what Moscow calls “a special military operation” in Ukraine on Feb. 24.

  Early on Monday, management of the Chernobyl plant carried out a “partial rotation” of personnel who had been working non-stop at the nuclear plant since the Russian take-over, allowing about half of the previous shift to return home. Nearly 50 other workers have volunteered to replace them and perform their duties to ensure the functioning of the enterprise.

  Authorities said 64 people at the station were evacuated, including 50 Chernobyl shift personnel and nine members of the Ukrainian National Guard.

  “It will be recalled that the staff spent about 600 hours at work, heroically performing their professional duties and maintaining an adequate level of safety,” officials said.

  

  The Sarcophagus of the Chernobyl Nuclear Reactor number 4 in Chernobyl, Ukraine, on Jan. 25, 2006. (Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images)

  Ukraine has accused Russia of starting the fires and stressed that firefighters available in the region are unable to “perform their functions in full” to protect the forests tainted by decades of radioactivity due to the presence of Russian forces.

  “Probably the fire was caused by the armed aggression of the Russian Federation, namely the shelling or arson,” officials said.

  According to the statement, the criteria for fires in the exclusion zone should not exceed a volume of 0.02-0.08 square miles, but in the current state of the fire zone, these figures are ten times higher. This means the radiation risks increase within a radius of about 6 miles around the Chernobyl nuclear power plant.

  Energoatom said in a statement obtained by Reuters that the system monitoring radiation levels in the 19-mile so-called exclusion zone in the forests around the plant is currently not working,

  “There is no data on the current state of radiation pollution of the exclusion zone’s environment, which makes it impossible to adequately respond to threats,” it said. It added that seasonal forest fires pose a particular threat as the zone’s forest fire service was currently unable to work.

  “Radiation levels in the exclusion zone and beyond, including not only Ukraine, but also other countries, could significantly worsen,” the country’s regulatory agency warned.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 02:00

• China's Belt-And-Road Comes To America's Heartland, Part 1: The Peculiar Story of Fufeng Group And Grand Forks
  China’s Belt-And-Road Comes To America’s Heartland, Part 1: The Peculiar Story of Fufeng Group And Grand Forks

  Authored by Fortis Analysis via Human Terrain,

  

  The onset of the global COVID-19 pandemic in 2019 has exposed numerous structural weaknesses in how the nations of the world provide food, energy, water, and consumer goods for their people. In the main, these supply chain disruptions are tightly correlated to the manufacturing and export capacity of a single nation – the People’s Republic of China. In the United States, this is especially true for amino acids, specifically of the type used in animal feed. Though little-known amongst the general population, synthetic amino acids such as lysine and threonine play a crucial role in managing animal health and growth. Relatedly, as the use of soybean meal for a primary protein source has increased in feed rations, amino acids become even more important.

  These products, generally produced from corn (though cassava root and sugarcane may also be used), require substantial investment into a complex manufacturing process built around fermentation of the corn’s starch. It is also energy intensive, requiring high heat to produce and dry the product. Given the constant attention paid to its food security, China leads the world in research, subsidies, and investment into manufacturing these critical components in the food supply chain, with control of up to 65% of global market share in lysine, perhaps the most widely-used and critical of the amino acid complex.

  As many in the feed industry are aware, the most recent bio-fermentation plant proposed in the US is to be built and controlled by Fufeng Group, one of China’s dominant players in the amino acid sector. In the recent past, Fufeng Group has looked at opening production facilities for their bio-fermented products (MSG, xanthan gum, lysine, threonine, tryptophan, valine, isoleucine) in Ukraine, India, and several other countries – as of yet, with no success. These countries are attractive for their generally low energy costs and abundance of starchy raw material. And given the exploding transportation costs for energy and grain commodities worldwide, the need is greater than ever for a manufacturer to locate close to supplies of both. After these failed attempts, it seems Fufeng has now found fertile soil in the city council of Grand Forks, North Dakota, and the state’s governor Doug Burgum.

  

  Initially reassured by positive signals received in 2020 from Governor Burgum – who has been featured in Chinese media outlet China Daily crowing about North Dakota’s egg exports to China in 2018, and who is rated as “Friendly” towards China as of November 2021 by the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) United Front propaganda arm – Fufeng hired an American by the name of Eric Chutorash in March of 2020 to assess the viability of opening a full-scale amino acid plant in the United States. In the intervening months, Fufeng has settled on Grand Forks, North Dakota to open their new plant.

  The new plant is estimated to consume 25,000,000 bushels of corn for less than one hundred jobs – 250,000 bushels (or 14,000,000 pounds) of American corn per year, per job. Moreover, the Grand Forks City Council and CCP-favorite Governor Burgum are promising to build and subsidize a $150 million natural gas pipeline, and will spend an additional tens of millions of dollars to subsidize construction of Fufeng’s new plant. Fufeng Group will also be offered a “temporary” tax break for years (or decades) to come. Rather than boosting the local economy, the plant will be leeching from it.

  One might wonder if Fufeng Group’s founder and chairman, Li Xuechun, shared with the North Dakota luminaries his intention to convert most of the plant’s production to export sales no later than 2025, only a few months after anticipated conclusion of the plant’s buildout? American-made amino acids being sent at the lowest profitable cost possible to feed the swine, beef, and poultry industries of Mexico, Canada, and Brazil, all of whom are much friendlier to China with regard to finished meat exports than the United States is. It’s a canny strategic maneuver, and as is unfortunately typical of our political leadership, the short-term promise of profits, fundraising, and (perhaps) future jobs is a leash with which Chinese companies manipulate their American running dogs.

  The bad news continues. Chinese Communist Party personnel overlap with management in Fufeng Group. Founder and Chairman of the Board, Li Xuechun, served as deputy to the Shandong Province 12th People’s Congress starting in 2003 (see page 80) while also being named as the “Model Labour” of the province in the same year. Fufeng itself further exists as a vector of CCP policy. In remarks delivered to the 16th People’s Congress of Qiqihar on 26 December 2017, Mayor Li Yugang emphasized the Party’s role in building and operationalizing Fufeng’s wet corn mill in less than a year, while reinforcing the Party’s commitment to “accelerate” Fufeng’s plans to expand production capacity of amino acids at the plant to consumer more than 3 million metric tons per year of corn. In his annual report issued on 7 January 2020, Mayor Li reiterated that Fufeng is a “national key leading enterprise” in ensuring food security for China.

  Also troubling is Fufeng’s plausible connections to the use of forced labor in Xinjiang Province. The primary arm of Fufeng in the province is Xinjiang Fufeng Biotechnologies Co. Ltd, with its manufacturing hub located just west of the Urumqi Export Zone. This site is responsible for a reported $21 million in vitamin and amino acid sales directly to the United States for the first six months of 2021, according to a disclosure filed by Fufeng Group on 28 December 2021 in response to President Biden signing the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act on 23 December 2021.

  Curiously, Fufeng’s production facility in the Toutunhe District sits less than two miles from Toutunhe Facility #2, a Tier-4 detention, forced labor, and re-education camp focused on subjugating the Uyghur population in the area. The approximate location of Fufeng’s manufacturing plant is also very near to where a Ugyhur neighborhood was razed to the ground, including a mosque and other cultural sites. Given the $21 million haul in the first half of 2021, and how demand and prices both spiked throughout the second half of the year, it’s not unlikely that Fufeng likely generated in excess of $40 million in trade with the US from this site in 2021. Per Fufeng’s financial reports, the average profit margin for their products averaged 17% in 2020, or $6.8 million if the same margin held into 2021. However, with prices more than doubling for multiple months in the back half of 2021, it’s plausible that sales to the U.S. from the
  Xinjiang site exceeded $9 million in profit.

  

  Lastly, it must be a very curious coincidence indeed that Fufeng Group zeroed in so quickly on Grand Forks, ND. The nearby US Air Force installation, Grand Forks AFB, is a critical component in the USAF’s strategic basing network for ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance) assets. Further, the base is home to the 10th Space Warning Squadron, a major node in the U.S’ early warning and detection network for ballistic missile threats against North America. It’s also a key element in the USAF Space Surveillance Network, which is tasked with monitoring targets and potential threats in space. Such a short line of sight to the base from Fufeng’s proposed location on the northwest side of Grand Forks makes signal intercept a relatively simply task using low-observable technology mounted unobtrusively to the plant’s superstructure. Perhaps we could consider this a fluke, except another recent high-profile situation would argue that CCP-aligned assets intend to acquire land and infrastructure directly adjacent to important U.S. military installations for purposes potentially ranging from digital snooping to outright sabotage.

  It’s frankly astonishing that given the data laid out here, Governor Burgum and the Grand Forks City Council have continued to press ahead with bringing in a CCP-aligned entity to co-opt American resources and families in pursuit of China’s hegemonic goals.

  Here, then, is the new Chinese modus operandi: externalize their energy consumption into the US and exploit more readily-available raw materials for China’s benefit. Such a model drives the local prices of energy up long-term, another indirect subsidy paid by North Dakota’s taxpayers, while ensuring that China’s foreign partners have access to exported feed ingredients at the expense of the United States’ meat producers. Even more, the location of Fufeng’s intended site is at best an extremely worrisome coincidence, given many viable alternatives that make more sense from a supply chain standpoint. Taken together, this absolutely follows the playbook of China’s ongoing expansions of the Belt and Road Initiative, and perhaps for the first time, represents a stealth implementation of the project on the United States’ own soil.

  American corn.

  American energy.

  American labor.

  American subsidies.

  All the raw materials needed for repatriated Chinese profits and export of American food and national security.

  *  *  *

  Subscribe to Human Terrain

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 23:40

• Automated Trucks Could Displace Half Million US Jobs 
  Automated Trucks Could Displace Half Million US Jobs 

  Automation is flooding into the trucking industry as a nationwide shortage of drivers persists. Self-driving trucks are already on America’s highways, currently in the testing phase, as a new study warns up to a half-million jobs are at risk of being displaced by robots. 

  Researchers at the University of Michigan and Carnegie Mellon University published a new study, revealing the proliferation of automation in long-haul trucking could replace 94% of human truck drivers, the equivalent of approximately 500,000 jobs.  

  “Our results suggest that the impacts of automation may not happen all at once,” said study co-author Parth Vaishnav, assistant professor of sustainable systems at the University of Michigan. 

  “If automation is restricted to Sun Belt states (including Florida, Texas and Arizona)—because the technology may not initially work well in rough weather—about 10% of the operator hours will be affected,” Vaishnav said. 

  Researchers developed several automated trucking deployment scenarios, including deployment in southern states, deployment for journeys more than 500 miles, and widespread deployment across the country. 

  “Our study is the first to combine a geospatial analysis based on shipment data with an explicit consideration of the specific capabilities of automation and how those might evolve over time,” said lead author Aniruddh Mohan, a doctoral candidate in engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon.

  Depending on the scenario, they found the rollout of automation may have a 10% to 94% impact on long-haul operator-hours, equivalent to 30,000 to 500,000 jobs that could be displaced. 

  

   Researchers also interviewed trucking companies, logistical experts, and tractor-trailer operators to develop a roadmap of the automation rollout within the trucking industry. 

  “A key finding was just how economically attractive this technology would be and the fact that everyone, including truckers, agreed that the interstate part of the job could be automated,” Vaishnav said. 

  “Ultimately, societal and political choices can determine the mode of deployment of automated tracking capabilities, as well as the winners and losers of any shift to automation of long-haul trucking,” he said. 

  One of the most significant hurdles for automated trucks is infrastructure. Researchers created a schematic showing the future of trucking driving. The automation part will mainly be on highways. 

  

  The rollout of automated trucks could be a few years away as San Diego-based TuSimple tested the first class 8 vehicle (otherwise known as a trailer tractor) on a highway without human intervention. The test was conducted on Dec. 22 on an 80 mile stretch of road between Tucson, Arizona, and Phoenix. 

  

  Trucks move 70% of U.S. freight in weight, and labor and fuel costs pressure logistics companies’ margins, forcing them to raise shipping rates or face margin compression. 

  Today’s high inflationary environment (some say stagflation is imminent) could push more and more companies into eventually firing human truck drivers for robot ones to cut down on costs.  

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 23:20

• Frequent Interactions Between Clinicians And Big Pharma A Conflict Of Interest: Expert
  Frequent Interactions Between Clinicians And Big Pharma A Conflict Of Interest: Expert

  Authored by Marina Zhang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  An expert in pharmaceutical policy has said that the frequent interactions between pharmaceutical companies and health professionals can pose a conflict of interest for clinicians.

  

  Prof. Barbara Mintzes told The Epoch Times that research has demonstrated that there was a corollary between health professionals receiving a low price meal while being promoted a drug and the rate of the professional then prescribing that medication compared to generic alternatives of similar quality.

  Mintzes said a common example is pharmaceutical companies sponsoring events to provide food and drinks for health professionals.

  “If you survey doctors, they will say, I can’t be bought for the price of a pizza or I can’t be bought for the price of a sandwich,” Mintzes said but she noted that research in the US found physicians that receive a meal promoting the drug of interest, averaging less than $US20 ($AU29), had a significantly higher rate of prescribing that medication compared to generic alternatives of similar quality.

  The study also found a dose-response where “the more meals provided; the more likely doctors are to prescribe the product.”

  Mintzes noted that while the decision may not be conscious, “we’re all human and there is a tendency to reciprocity whether we’re conscious of it or not.”

  “You would also expect that the companies are also looking at the returns on investment on their marketing activities and would not continue with marketing activities that were ineffective in terms of stimulating sales.”

  Prior to 2015, Medicines Australia required its member companies to publicise each event they had sponsored, including information of the event such as the number of health professionals and who had attended, how much money was spent and what was spent on with spending on food and drinks by far the most common.

  Additionally, from Medicines Australia’s data from 2011 to 2015, Mintzes’s team found that on average, corporate sponsored events for pharmaceuticals were being held at hospitals and universities over 600 times every week, averaging 30 attendees per event.

  However, since October 2015, Medicines Australia changed its codes of conduct from requiring food and drink payments being reported to have companies only listing clinicians they provided funding for.

  Whilst this enhanced transparency around the identification of individual health professionals, subsequent studies led by the University of Sydney also observed a 34.1 percent reduction in disclosed spending in 2016 and decreased expenditure reports in the year following.

  Underreporting of Conflicts of Interests in Pharmaceutical Studies

  Despite Medicines Australians change in 2015, Mintzes’s recent co-authored study on underreporting of conflicts of interests by health professionals has raised further questions about the limitations of a self-reported system.

  The team examined Medicines Australia’s public data and found that nearly half of pharmaceutical trials with Australian authors had omitted or incomplete conflicts of interest declarations when the research team received commercial funding.

  “It certainly seems that it’s not a situation where there are just like one or two bad apples, who are hiding their conflicts of interest, it seems more of a situation where it’s quite widespread,” she said.

  Mintzes suggested that there may be a lack in “understanding” of the importance of the full disclosure of conflicts of interests in the entire scientific and publication process” and encouraged more attention by authors and journal editors.

  “Now that we have these databases available publicly, where companies are reporting their payments, authors should also be systematically checking themselves in the database to make sure that they have fully reported,” she said.

  “This is just an important component of trust and integrity in science,” and reporting industry funding is a “standard throughout medical research.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 23:00

• People Are 3D-Printing What Appears To Be Fully-Functional RPG-Like Launchers
  People Are 3D-Printing What Appears To Be Fully-Functional RPG-Like Launchers

  In just a decade, 3D-printed guns have come a long way from the single-shot “The Liberator” pistol published online for the world to download in 2013 by Cody Wilson’s Defense Distributed to a fully functional 3D-printable semiautomatic pistol carbine entirely printed at home to what now appears to be a rocket launcher-like device. 

  Journalist Jake Hanrahan reports Deterrence Dispensed, an online group that promotes and distributes open-source 3D-printed firearm blueprints, has developed what appears to be a recoilless launcher. 

  

  Hanrahan said it’s a “66mm recoilless launcher with shoulder rest attachments, allowing it to convert to a mortar on the go.” 

  Deterrence Dispensed, the controversial 3D-printed weapons syndicate (co-founded by JStark), has recently released a new project.

  This is a 66mm recoilless launcher with shoulder rest attachments, allowing it to convert to a mortar on the go. pic.twitter.com/esdUxNJD7g

  — Jake Hanrahan (@Jake_Hanrahan) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Many of you were confused by the crater that appeared under the long range soda delivery cannon (Canzerfaust). This is what we call a recoilless. pic.twitter.com/7tpbRaAh0m

  — CTRLPew (@CtrlPew) March 24, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Hanrahan shows another video as the recoilless launcher is propped up on what appears to be a bipod serving as a mortar. 

  Deterrence Dispenses have dubbed it “The CANzerfaust”, claiming it’s only purpose is for launching drinks cans… pic.twitter.com/9Z8GMAM433

  — Jake Hanrahan (@Jake_Hanrahan) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  He said Deterrence Dispensed called the device “The CANzerfaust.” They’re claiming the recoilless launcher only launches “drink cans…” 

  Last year, the online group of 3D-printed firearms enthusiasts developed a fully functional 3D-printable semiautomatic pistol caliber carbine for $350, including the printer’s cost. 

  YouTubers have taken 3D-printed firearms to the shooting ranges to test their durability. Surprisingly, these unserialized weapons worked pretty well. 

  One of the creators of Deterrence Dispensed, known as JStark, mysterious died of a heart attack after police raided his home in Germany last fall. 

  The Biden administration and the ATF are panicking about “ghost guns,” or in their eyes, 80% lower receivers. They’re likely to announce regulation on 80% lowers in the coming weeks, if not months. As for 3D-printing weapons at home, that’s going to be a challenge for the ATF to regulate. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 22:40

• Universities Follow The Politics, Not The Science
  Universities Follow The Politics, Not The Science

  Authored by Daniel Nuccio via The Brownstone Institute,

  At the start of 2022, both Rachel Fulton Brown, an associate professor of history at the University of Chicago, and Donald J. Boudreaux, an economics professor at George Mason University, fed up with the draconian dictats and bureaucratic overreach of their respective institutions, published letters openly calling out their universities for their intellectual and moral failures in how they responded to the Covid pandemic.

  

  Fulton Brown’s letter to UChicago president, Paul Alivisatos, and provost, Ka Yee C. Lee, lamented her school’s failure to lead the charge against fashionable Covid mitigation policies, while exhorting the institution to change course, celebrate those who exhibited the courage to “stand for SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY over POLITICAL GRANDSTANDING,” and acknowledge they have “students intelligent enough to see through the gaslighting and fear to the real questions we should be asking about what it means to be a great school.”

  Boudreaux’s memo to GMU president, Gregory Washington, highlighted the intellectual bankruptcy and logical inconsistencies of GMU’s then newly announced booster mandate, specifically addressing GMU’s failure to acknowledge natural immunity, the fact that Covid vaccination does not stop the spread of the virus, and that members of the GMU community still freely interacted with the unvaccinated and unboosted off-campus. 

  By the time Fulton Brown and Boudreaux released their respective letters, both the University of Chicago and George Mason University had been operating with the standard suite of online classes, social restrictions, mask mandates, and vaccine requirements for nearly two years. Both schools justified their policies as being guided by science.

  Teaching in the Pandemic Era: masked lectures under hot lights in empty auditoriums

  In separate phone interviews, Fulton Brown and Boudreaux related some of their personal experiences teaching under these policies, and how they sometimes found themselves butting heads with administrators at their respective institutions.

  At the University of Chicago, Fulton Brown, upon agreeing to teach in-person one semester, initially did so maskless. She was skeptical of the school’s mask policy to begin with. She found something cultish about the practice. She also found it difficult to effectively communicate in one when teaching in a “giant lecture hall” containing approximately eight people in an otherwise empty building. 

  Furthermore, students generally found it difficult to understand her when she lectured in a mask in that setting. 

  As one student, Declan Hurley, personally attested in an op-ed for one of UChicago’s student newspapers, The Chicago Thinker, this was especially true for those who were hearing-impaired.

  Fulton Brown saw nothing dangerous about what she was doing. For practical reasons, it also made sense. But, before long, Fulton Brown was reprimanded. “The University of Chicago has a policy that people could report infractions,” she explained. “Someone saw me from the hallway and reported me and I got emails from both the dean of my division and the college.” 

  Fulton Brown’s maskless attire got her called into the principal’s virtual office.

  At George Mason University, Boudreaux, who taught online from the start of the pandemic through the end of the 2020-2021 school year, returned to in-person teaching in the summer of 2021, at which time the school did not require him to wear a mask. 

  However, just before the start of the fall semester, GMU announced a mask mandate regardless of vaccination status. 

  Given that he teaches large auditorium classes at night under hot stage lights for three hours straight, Boudreaux said, “The thought of teaching with a mask on was just unbearable.” Given that he also has high blood pressure, Boudreaux’s physician also thought it would be ill-advised.

  Subsequently, Boudreax requested that GMU administrators let him take the risk as a fully vaccinated adult and teach without a mask. His request though was denied. 

  Once more, Boudreaux found himself teaching online.

  Navigating vaccine mandates and vaccine mandate backlash

  Like many universities, both UChicago and GMU issued vaccine mandates in 2021. 

  UChicago provost, Ka Yee C. Lee, and executive vice president, Katie Callow-Wright, claimed, “The University has determined based on expert guidance that widespread COVID-19 vaccination is the best way to contribute to greater immunity, reduce the likelihood of sudden clusters of COVID-19 on campus, minimize the risk imposed by new variants, and help protect members of our community who are at the highest risk of developing serious illness from the virus.”

  GMU president, Gregory Washington stated, “Because we will come together as COVID-19 continues to circulate, we have an obligation to maintain a safe environment in which to study, work, and live.”

  Both UChicago and GMU also weathered lawsuits over these decrees.

  The former was sued by Fulton Brown and another plaintiff with the help of the Health Freedom Defense Fund to secure religious exemptions. 

  As Jamie Green, a rep from the HFDF, explained in an email, “once we filed, the university was very open to discussions. The university backed down from enforcing the mandate on the plaintiffs.” 

  However, Green said, UChicago “required a signature to statements with which the plaintiffs did not agree. What was being required was, in essence, compelled speech in order to obtain a religious exemption.”

  Among other things, the statements pertained to the purported safety and effectiveness of the vaccines, and the dangers of Covid-19. 

  Ultimately though, Green stated, “[T]he university allowed the plaintiffs to edit the statement as they wished and sign that.”

  At the latter, GMU law professor Todd Zywicki and the New Civil Liberties Alliance successfully challenged GMU’s vaccine requirement, with the university settling before trial, granting him an exemption based on his personal medical history. The settlement, however, did not extend to anyone other than Todd Zywicki.

  Both universities also eventually came to issue booster mandates. 

  UChicago claimed, “[We] rely on consultation from experts from the University of Chicago Medicine, the City, and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC),” to justify their decision. 

  GMU assured, “Public health experts have advised that vaccines are still the most effective tools to combat COVID-19.” 

  Both ultimately incited even greater resistance.

  Before long, Fulton Brown and Boudreaux released their respective letters.

  The editorial team at The Chicago Thinker published a scathing op-ed which garnered national attention as it excoriated the university for forcing students to receive an “experimental vaccination” despite seemingly limited benefits and potential risks to students.

  Boudreaux at GMU found himself fed up, saying “I just basically lost it. I’m not boosted. I had no interest in getting boosted. I don’t want to get boosted as a condition for keeping my job.”

  Like Fulton Brown and his GMU colleague, Todd Zywicki, Boudreaux was ready to take his university to court. “I was all prepared to be a plaintiff to resist the booster mandate,” he said. 

  A lawyer with the NCLA had offered to represent him, Boudreaux stated. 

  However, before Boudreaux’s case could be brought to court, the issue became moot.

  A divergence in policy: GMU reluctantly inches closer to normal while UChicago stays the course

  The reason Boudreaux’s legal case became moot was because newly elected Virginia governor Glenn Youngkin signed an executive order prohibiting Covid vaccine requirements for state employees. 

  Shortly thereafter, Virginia attorney general, Jason S. Miyares, issued a non-binding opinion stating, “Public institutions of higher education in Virginia may not require vaccination against Covid-19 as a general condition of students’ enrollment or in-person attendance.” 

  Although nonbinding, it did effectively nullify the opinion of the previous attorney general, Mark R. Herring, which was supportive of such mandates. Hence it was sufficient to get several state universities in Virginia, including GMU, to rescind vaccine requirements for students.

  Whatever GMU officials actually believed about the science backing their mandates and vaccines being “the most effective tools to combat COVID-19”, it would appear the politics of state leadership superseded all else.

  UChicago, located in Illinois where Governor J. B. Pritzker issued an executive order in September 2021 requiring faculty and students at universities to be vaccinated for Covid or undergo weekly testing, still maintains its vaccine and booster mandates.

  Whether the continuation of the policy is on account of expert guidance or the executive order remains unknown. What UChicago will do if and when this order is dropped remains uncertain.

  In response to an email sent to President Paul Alivisatos of the University of Chicago regarding whether the school intended to maintain its vaccine and booster requirements into the Fall of 2022 and beyond, Gerald McSwiggan, the school’s associate director for public affairs, replied on March 8, “The University has made no announcements on COVID-19 policies for the 2022-23 academic year.”

  Whatever UChicago decides to do, its reputation as a university of contrarian free thinkers has definitely taken another hit. 

  As Hurley from The Chicago Thinker had previously declared with a headline, “In Ending Mandates, George Mason University Picks Up UChicago’s Forfeited Crown.”

  Universities follow the politics, not the science

  The imagery evoked by Hurley’s headline, although not without its appeal, may give too much credit to the administrators at GMU, however.

  The trajectories of Covid policies at the University of Chicago and George Mason University are more similar than they are different. Furthermore, the paths they followed seem all too representative of how most universities responded to Covid.

  They were quick to shut down. They imposed authoritarian policies on faculty and students when they reopened. They added additional restrictions when fashionable or mandated by local or state political leaders, with few exhibiting the courage to “stand for SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY over POLITICAL GRANDSTANDING,” or acknowledge they have “students intelligent enough to see through the gaslighting and fear to the real questions we should be asking.”

  When restrictions were lifted, it was often only because they were nudged (or required) to do so by politicians – or when said politicians lifted their own orders upon realizing their policies might be costing them politically, as was the case with masks at many schools, including UChicago and GMU.

  Throughout the pandemic, many universities claimed some moral or intellectual high ground as they wrapped their decrees and their actions in the language of science and safety.

  However, in reality, over the past two years many of these universities revealed themselves to be little more than political actors as intellectually bankrupt as they are morally corrupt.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 22:20

• Goldman: How China's COVID Lockdowns Could Disrupt Global Supply Chains
  Goldman: How China’s COVID Lockdowns Could Disrupt Global Supply Chains

  As China continues to struggle with its worst COVID outbreak since the virus first emerged in Wuhan more than two years ago, one of the biggest questions on the minds of American companies (not to mention investors) is how badly the lockdowns ordered by the CCP will disrupt production in the country’s factories, which form a critical link in the global supply chain.

  

  Unsurprisingly, investment banks have been peppered with questions about the economic backlash stemming from China’s ‘zero tolerance’ approach to combating COVID (and this latest omicron-driven outbreak in particular). As COVID cases continue to climb (with Shanghai recording a record case tally this week that’s inspired a wave of panic buying), Goldman estimates that lockdowns have impacted population centers responsible for roughly 30% of China’s GDP.

  Overall, daily cases have declined slightly from their peak on March 20. But that doesn’t mean the outbreak is over.

  

  In its latest sell-side research report on the issue, a team of Goldman analysts “assess potential disruptions to China’s supply chains from intermediate goods, exports, final output and logistics perspectives, mainly through analyzing provincial level input-output tables.”

  Here’s what they found: the greatest impact from the lockdowns will be on China’s chemicals, transportation equipment and timber/wood product”.

  Furthermore, Goldman’s analysis suggests that “Jiangsu, Jilin, Guangdong, Shaanxi and Shanghai are more important among the virus-impacted provinces in terms of their roles in nationwide supply chains.”

  The Goldman team breaks down the potential impact of lockdowns on various industries across several of the worst-hit Chinese provinces and/or cities.

  

  The report also cites “anecdotal evidence” to suggest that regions with mid-to-high risk districts are indeed facing delivery delays or production suspensions to various degrees that could have a cascading impact.

  While CCP policymakers have taken steps to mitigate the impact of lockdowns on China’s economy (the most recent example would be the reopening of factories in Shenzhen, as well as its port), they have continued to stress a “people first, lives first” approach.

  Taken together, all of this suggests a couple of potential outcomes: Possible implications: “1) overall supply chain might be more resilient than before given the same outbreak severity, as policymakers are moving more swiftly to resume production once local Covid situation appears to be under control; 2) structural imbalances between large and smaller companies might further increase, as major production/investment projects, which are usually handled by large companies, might be given the “green light” and resume production ahead of other projects when policymakers relax restrictive policies.”

  Moving beyond the most heavily impacted industries, the Goldman team also analyzed the impact of supply chains on other critical industries like computer components, paper  and paper products (including the toilet paper that memorably disappeared from American supermarkets during the early days of the pandemic). The chart below reflects the current impact of lockdowns on these industries.

  

  Finally, Goldman also published an analysis examining the most vulnerable industries to Chinese lockdowns.

  

  Using the past as a guide, Goldman also charted the impact on deliveries via the ports.

  

  As the CCP switches from broad-based lockdowns to more “targeted” measures, Goldman expects the impact will be worse for smaller firms as opposed to larger enterprises with more flexible and robust supply chains.

  

  Goldman’s analysis concluded that should 30% of the Chinese economy experience a COVID shutdown lasting a month, it would reduce annual GDP growth by a whole percentage point.

  But the bigger question is: as these issues cascade throughout the global economy, what might the impact be for the US?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 22:00

• Dr. Collins Caught Flat-Footed By First Questions On 'Takedown' Email
  Dr. Collins Caught Flat-Footed By First Questions On ‘Takedown’ Email

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Dr. Francis Collins, a top U.S. health official, was caught off-guard when he was asked for the first time about a report issued by members of Congress that revealed new information, including the email Collins sent urging a “takedown” of the Great Barrington Declaration, according to an email obtained by The Epoch Times.

  

  Collins, the head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) until Dec. 19, 2021, called for a “quick and devastating published takedown” of the declaration, which called for a more balanced approach to combating the COVID-19 pandemic, in an email in October 2020.

  The email, sent just days after the document was authored by three epidemiologists, was made public by a congressional panel near the end of 2021.

  In an appearance on Fox News just hours after the panel’s report was released, Collins was confronted about the email for the first time. Host Neil Cavuto asked Collins about the report’s claims that the White House under President Donald Trump made attempts to “undermine the COVID response.”

  Collins, now a senior investigator at the NIH and a top adviser to President Joe Biden, said he was “trying to stay out of the political side of this” and declined to comment before Cavuto asked about the “takedown” email.

  “Well, OK, if it’s that specific,” Collins said.

  “Yes, there were people, particularly Dr. Scott Atlas, that said don’t worry about this business of putting on masks or asking people to isolate themselves or stay physically distanced, ‘just let it rip’ and let this virus run through the country until everybody has had it, and then we’ll have herd immunity,’” he added. “But the consequence of that would have been hundreds of thousands of additional deaths. That didn’t make sense to me.”

  Atlas was a top health adviser to Trump.

  The declaration doesn’t contain the words “let it rip,” two of its authors have noted. The document noted that lockdowns had a devastating impact on the United States and other countries and urged officials to implement more focused policies that protected the elderly and other people more vulnerable to COVID-19 while letting others live their lives.

  Collins wasn’t expecting to be questioned about the email he sent to Drs. Anthony Fauci, Clifford Lane, and Lawrence Tabak, according to the email obtained by The Epoch Times from a Freedom of Information Act request.

  “Apologies for the ambush,” Emma Wojtowicz, an NIH spokeswoman, told Collins in the missive.

  “The producer said the interview would focus on Omicron and your time as director,” she added.

  

  Wojtowicz sent a link to the congressional panel report and pasted the section relating to Collins.

  Renate Myles, another NIH spokeswoman, told The Epoch Times in an email that Collins was surprised during the interview.

  “His surprise was that the issue of the Great Barrington Declaration, which arose in 2020 and about which he has made his position clear on many occasions, was being raised in 2021 as if it were a new issue because of the release of a year-old email,” Myles said.

  Collins spoke out publicly against the declaration in October 2020. The NIH has previously said people who want to learn about why Collins has described the declaration as “dangerous” should read Wikipedia.

  Myles didn’t respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment about whether Collins was aware his email had been made public before the interview.

  Fox News didn’t respond to requests for comment.

  Atlas, the former government adviser, meanwhile, said Collins’s comments during his appearance weren’t factually correct.

  “I never once advised the president or anyone else during my time in Washington to let the infection spread without mitigation,” Atlas told The Epoch Times in an email, adding that he advised in various settings “to increase protection, especially for high-risk individuals and settings, and I repeatedly stated in the media and in writing to follow recommended mitigations.”

  At the same time, the more targeted approach advocated for by Atlas and the declaration “would have saved a massive number of lives while avoiding the death and destruction that ensued,” he said.

  “The broad lockdowns advised by Collins, Fauci, and Birx were contrary to science, and they failed to stop the spread, they failed to protect the elderly from dying, and they killed and destroyed millions. It was the biggest failure of health policy in modern history.”

  Fauci heads the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which is part of the NIH. Dr. Deborah Birx was a top health adviser during the Trump administration. They and Collins have defended the support for harsh restrictions imposed during the pandemic, including the forced closure of schools and so-called non-essential businesses.

  Other emails obtained by The Epoch Times showed Collins writing to Fauci and Gregg Gonsalves, a professor at the Yale School of Public Health who has criticized the Great Barrington Declaration, or GBD.

  Gonsalves told Collins and Fauci that he was reading the congressional report and how some people were circulating it as “‘proof’ of a conspiracy against the Great Barrington Declaration.”

  “All I can say is thank you for your service, truly. The GBD has had a noxious effect on the American response to the pandemic and it doesn’t surprise me that you two were fighting back behind the scenes,” Gonsalves said.

  “It’s interesting that an effort to call out genuinely dangerous recommendations from the GBD is called a conspiracy,” Collins responded. “Truth itself seems to have become a conspiracy in many minds.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 21:40

• Shanghai Authorities Urge Calm Amid Surge In Panic-Buying Stoked By Lockdown Fears
  Shanghai Authorities Urge Calm Amid Surge In Panic-Buying Stoked By Lockdown Fears

  As we reported yesterday, the situation in Shanghai, China’s financial capital, is growing increasingly tense, as the local population has grown increasingly restive in the face of the city’s restrictions on movement, and its mass-testing requirements.

  And as millions fear the yoke of the city’s COVID restrictions may soon be further tightened, perhaps with another full-on lockdown like those that have been implemented in Jilin Province and elsewhere, Shanghaiers are swamping online grocery platforms with orders as citizens panic-buy stockpiles of food for fear that they may soon face a punishing lockdown that will confine them to their residential compounds for days, if not weeks, the AFP reports.

  

  Shanghai has seen record-high numbers of confirmed COVID cases over the past week, with 981 cases reported on Wednesday alone, a figure that’s substantially larger than any earlier daily tally. The figure marked the sixth straight daily increase of case numbers in the city.

  So far, the city has responded to the outbreak with “targeted” residential lockdowns where cases have been confirmed. Schools in the city have also been shuttered for the past two weeks. But as the case numbers grow, many fear that the CCP could soon move to impose a lockdown on the entire city of 25M (China’s largest city by population).

  Locals have taken to social media to voice their grievances about the local authorities’ response to the outbreak, complaining about vague government messaging and alarmist warnings about more required testing. Footage that circulated on social media yesterday showed restive locals pushing back against the mandatory testing measures, and the restrictions on movement in parts of the city.

  In response to this public outcry, authorities in the city have tried to smooth things over by denying rumours of a city-wide lockdown. But the fear of being locked inside a residential compound for days without sufficient food has led many to discount these reassurances, instead opting to plan for the worst-case scenario.

  Online shopping platforms have collapsed under the strain, prompting many to complain on social media about being unable to fill their orders.

  Chen Ying, a spokeswoman for online grocery platform Dingdong Maicai, acknowledged that the company was face serious pressure as online demand surged.

  As of March 22, mainland China had reported 137,231 cases with confirmed symptoms, including both local ones and those arriving from outside the mainland. There were no new deaths, leaving the death toll at 4,638.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 21:20

• Navy Veteran, 66, Lives An 'American Horror Story' Since His Arrest On Jan. 6 Seditious-Conspiracy Charge
  Navy Veteran, 66, Lives An ‘American Horror Story’ Since His Arrest On Jan. 6 Seditious-Conspiracy Charge

  Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times,

  “Abba, Father! Please don’t let them murder my wife!”

  After more than two decades in the U.S. Navy and assignments around the world, Thomas E. Caldwell thought he knew the meaning of horror.

  

  That all changed in the predawn hours of Jan. 19, 2021.

  Minutes after being jostled awake, Caldwell found himself outside in the freezing cold in his undershorts and a T-shirt. In handcuffs attached to a belly chain, he was dragged across the lawn by FBI agents and thrown onto the hood of a government sedan.

  Caldwell looked back at the porch of his farmhouse and saw Sharon, his wife of 22 years, standing in her nightgown, with arms extended. She clutched a sock in each hand.

  

  Laser dots appeared on her face and chest, beamed from the carbine barrels of an FBI SWAT team. In an instant, Caldwell saw it all, just a finger twitch from unspeakable tragedy.

  “That was moral terror,” the white-haired 66-year-old Caldwell told The Epoch Times.

  “I would rather that they had shot me between the eyes than to threaten her like that.”

  “I will never forget that image, because she looked like an angel in a white nightshirt, standing in her bare feet on that cold concrete, with her arms extended to her side in compliance to them,” Caldwell recalled, choking back tears.

  “That was the moment I learned what real horror was,” he said. “Because I’m looking at that and I said, ‘Abba, Father! Please don’t let them murder my wife! Please don’t let them kill my wife!’ ”

  ‘The Lowest Point in My Life’

  Life over the past 14 months has been full of challenges, tragedy, and miracles for the retired Navy intelligence officer from Berryville, Va.

  His trip to Washington D.C. to see President Donald Trump on Jan. 6 morphed from a patriotic outing with his wife into an FBI raid, 53 days in jail, near bankruptcy, and a federal indictment accusing him of seditious conspiracy, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, conspiracy to prevent an officer from discharging duties, and tampering with a document or proceeding—aiding and abetting.

  

  Prosecutors accuse him of working with members of the Oath Keepers to prevent Congress from certifying the Electoral College votes from the 2020 presidential election. Caldwell allegedly recommended a hotel for members of an Oath Keepers “Quick Reaction Force” that was to be stationed near Washington to aid other Oath Keepers attacking at the Capitol.

  Prosecutors said Caldwell asked his contacts for help securing boats that could be used to ferry men and weapons across the Potomac River.

  “Can’t believe I just thought of this: how many people either in the militia or not (who are still supportive of our efforts to save the Republic) have a boat on a trailer that coud (sic) handle a Potomac crossing?” Caldwell wrote in one message, according to the criminal complaint. “If we had someone standing by at a dock ramp (one near the Pentagon for sure) we could have our Quick Response Team with the heavy weapons standing by, quickly load them and ferry them across the river to our waiting arms…”

  Caldwell says federal prosecutors have gotten it badly wrong, mixing up or intentionally twisting bluster among retired military men into some kind of sinister conspiracy.

  “I have now reviewed mountains of messages, photos, etc. in the huge volume of discovery provided by the government in this case, and I have not seen one iota of evidence that anyone had a plan or an intention to invade the Capitol, or to stop the peaceful transition of the Presidency, or to do anything of an unlawful nature,” he said. “My personal intentions related to January 6 were to hear President Trump and enjoy a safe and peaceful day with my wife and other American citizens.”

  Caldwell plans to go to trial in search of exoneration and restoration of his reputation. His trial was scheduled to begin July 11 in U.S. District Court in Washington, but it now appears the date will be moved back to Sept. 26. Defense attorneys are working through terabytes of evidence, including more than 24,000 video files turned over by the Department of Justice.

  “A lot of the things that they’re saying are horrible and seditious are mocking and jibing and poking fun with friends—in private conversations—sometimes was one person in a text message, or two people,” he said. “In fact, some of these things are with guys that are 75 miles away in Virginia, who are at their farms, drunk as lords, as they say, watching stuff on TV.”

  

  A Farm for Freedom

  Caldwell’s legal fight has already come at a steep price. The Caldwells sold their farm equipment and animals to help pay legal bills. He worries his multi-generation Shenandoah Valley farm will soon be lost, and has turned to internet crowd-funding for help.

  Through it all, the physical and psychological assault on his family that brisk morning is what sticks with him. He has difficulty talking about seeing his wife literally in the crosshairs of the FBI.

  “I will never forget it. It is seared into my memory. In my nightmares, it plays again and again and again,” Caldwell said. “Not them kicking me; it’s that image. It is the lowest point in my life. And yet, it might be the greatest miracle of my life that she was spared.”

  As he stood on the windswept porch staring into a sea of what looked like klieg lights, he was dumbfounded at the combat-strength force arrayed against him and his wife.

  An armored vehicle with a battering ram stood ready to punch through the side of the house. Agents in full tactical gear lit Caldwell up like a Christmas tree with the piercing laser beams from their rifle sights. He figured they were fully automatic M4 carbines aimed at his head and center mass.

  After throwing him down on the car hood, Caldwell said, one of the agents kneed him hard in the small of the back, right where metal hardware remained from surgeries. Agents put him in the back of a car, where he sat wondering if Sharon was still alive.

  

  Agents used a handheld battering ram to smash their way into the stand-alone garage where Caldwell used to store his 1963 Ford Thunderbird convertible. The T-Bird is gone, sold to pay for his legal defense. Agents broke into the barn, ripped things off the walls, and then “ransacked the house,” Caldwell said.

  After a while, Caldwell was taken back into his home and questioned. He spent two and a half hours explaining his trip to the Capitol, how he was not now, nor had ever been, a member of the Oath Keepers. He said there were lots of assumptions behind the questions, but few facts.

  “I had asked them five separate times, ‘What am I being charged with? What am I being charged with?’ They finally said, ‘Trespassing.’ I said, ‘Are you out of your mind? You come here and point guns in my wife’s face for trespassing? Where am I supposed to have trespassed?’ They said, ‘Well, you went into the Capitol.’”

  As it turns out, Caldwell never went into the Capitol. After Trump’s speech at the Ellipse was finished, he and Sharon slowly made their way to the Capitol grounds. Trump told supporters to peacefully go to the Capitol, so the Caldwells thought perhaps Trump was going to make remarks there.

  They got as far as the Peace Monument before Caldwell had to sit. He said his legs and back were causing terrible pain. So they spent about an hour snapping photos, chatting with the crowd, and admiring the 44-foot-high Carrara marble monument set on a Maine blue granite base.

  ‘You Can’t Believe the View!’

  Reports started to trickle down the 300-some yards from the West Front of the Capitol, where the president-elect takes the oath of office every four years. “People were up there and they were taking selfies and folks were coming down (by the Peace Monument) saying, ‘You can’t believe the view!’” Caldwell said.

  The Caldwells wanted to see for themselves. They slowly made their way up the stairs, with Tom pressing his hip against the railing for support. They walked through the giant scaffolding set up for inauguration, up near the platform where so many famous speeches have been made.

  “We did go up on … the inauguration balcony and we took a selfie,” Caldwell said. “Again, no police saying, ‘Don’t do it.’ No sign saying, ‘Don’t do it.’ And a crush of people doing it. And so you might say, ‘Well, maybe you shouldn’t have done that.’ Well, maybe so, but it didn’t seem like there was any deterrent to it at all.”

  

  Caldwell said he did not notice any rioting or violence while at the West Front of the Capitol. After a while, the couple began the trek back down toward the Peace Monument. After a rest, they continued the walk up Constitution Avenue to their car. By then, reports were circulating that Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser declared a curfew for that night due to events at the Capitol, just as Caldwell was near his vehicle.

  Caldwell said despite the contention in federal charging documents, he is not a member of the Oath Keepers, was never recruited for the group, and had no plans to join. He knows veterans who are Oath Keepers. His private text messages with friends were twisted into something they were not, he said.

  He told the lead FBI agent that morning that his opinions and speech were the real targets.

  “I said, ‘Look, it looks like there’s people in the government who want to prosecute me for bombast with a friend and private text message or something like that. This is all about things I think, and things I say.’ And he said, ‘Nobody’s going to lock you up or prosecute you for words.’ And I said, ‘We’ll see.’ That’s on tape. So it looks like I was right.”

  ‘Hell on Earth’

  The next chapter in Caldwell’s Jan. 6 saga took place in the Central Virginia Regional Jail in Orange, Va. His experience there was similar to reports from other Jan. 6 detainees in facilities including the DC jail who said they were subjected to brutal beatings, denial of food, and banishment to solitary confinement, a practice condemned by Amnesty International as “cruel and all too usual.”

  Caldwell said he became convinced he would not live to see the outside world again. He said he spent 49 of his 53 days in solitary confinement. He was denied his prescription medications, which led to him having seizures on the concrete floor of his cell and soiling himself. The guards seemed to enjoy it, he said.“I’d have seizures on the concrete floor of my dungeon, and the guards looking through the little bulletproof glass laughing, laughing at me as I’m messing myself,” he said. “And I’m thinking, ‘I’m never getting out of here.’

  “This is hell on earth. It really is hell on earth, 24 hours a day, no visitors, no medicines, no exercise. And my entire world was reduced to a 7-by-12-foot concrete dungeon with a huge steel door on one end.”

  The inhumane treatment started upon arrival. Caldwell said he underwent some kind of full body scan. He was subjected to an anal probe before and after the scan. “I guess it’s just to show that they can dehumanize you,” he said.

  One day a guard struck him hard in the lower back where his surgery had been. With the double handcuffs attached to a belly chain, he had no way to break the fall.

  “So I did kind of a face plant, I turn my head sideways,” he recalled. “And then someone stepped between my ankles and kicked me in the groin. Repeatedly. …I can now win (at) Double Jeopardy. If the question is, ‘How many times can you be kicked in the groin before you pass out?’ So I know the answer that I hope no one else finds out. But I have the answer to that question.”

  What happened next sticks with Caldwell, seared permanently in his memory.

  “The guy that was the kicker said to me, he said, ‘Where’s your Sky Daddy? Where’s your Sky Daddy? Gonna come down here and help you?’ He was referring, of course to Jesus Christ. I never want to forget it. I never want to forget it.”

  Occasionally Caldwell was allowed to take a phone call from Sharon. The phone was stuck through a hole in the bars, so he had to kneel to use the receiver. They prayed together.

  “It was just like an angel speaking from heaven,” he said. “And she would remind me of the importance of presenting my prayers and petitions to God with thanksgiving. So it’s not just, ‘Here’s my Christmas wish list, God.’ It’s like, ‘Thank you for another day. Thank you for my lovely wife, thank you for the chance that maybe I’ll get out of here someday.’

  “One time I couldn’t come up with anything,” Caldwell said. “When I first started, I said:

  ‘Thank you, God, that I haven’t been beaten yet today. But the day isn’t over, Lord.”

  One day Caldwell saw a guard with a cart full of newspapers and other reading materials. He spotted a thick book that he suspected was a Holy Bible, and asked if he could have it. The guard said, “No man, I can’t give you anything.”

  “I felt embarrassed. And yet I believe that God put the words in my mouth. And I said, ‘Hey, it’s just a Bible, man.’ I was embarrassed because it’s the word of God. But it was the thing he needed to hear. He moved the newspapers and by golly, it was a tattered Bible.”

  Caldwell snatched the Bible when the guard placed it between the bars. He never felt so alone. He felt hated, despised. “Nobody knows what’s going on and nobody’s doing anything,” he thought. Then God spoke to him as the Bible opened to the Book of Psalms.

  “I sat down on the cold floor and I just opened the Bible,” he said. “I just held it in my hands and it flopped open to Psalm 109: ‘The mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful man is opened against me. They have spoken against me with deceitful tongues.’”

  “I said, ‘God knows what I’m going through! He knows. I’m not alone.’ And I thought, I told him many times, I said, ‘I just want to come home if this is all that’s here for me. I give up. I want to come home. I’ll come home to you right now. Let’s do it.’ And then I said, ‘But you know what, I’d love to see Sharon just one more time.’”

  Just a bit later in Psalm 109, it reads: “Help me, O Lord my God; save me according to Thy mercy. And let them know that this is Thy hand: and that Thou, O Lord, hast done it. They will curse and Thou will bless: let them that rise up against me be confounded: but Thy servant shall rejoice.”

  A few days later, Caldwell had a hearing before U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta. Attorney David Fischer argued convincingly that Caldwell needed to be released from incarceration.

  “Judge Mehta, I believe he saved my life,” Caldwell said. “Because I was broken physically. I had no self respect, no nothing. I was drained. The only thing I had was just just a shred of faith that Jesus was there with me.

  “You know what, I saw it. I saw the light,” he said. “Just a couple of days later, I fell into my wife’s arms in the dark in that parking lot, on March the 12th of last year.”

  

  Hand of Providence

  Caldwell said he saw the hand of divine providence many times during his ordeal. He believes Fischer was sent to him by God, to rescue him from prison and defend him from the criminal charges.

  “He drove down and talked to me through bulletproof glass for about a half-hour,” Caldwell said. “He finally said to me, ‘Mr. Caldwell, look, I defend a lot of people in the federal system. I have some people lie to me for a living. You’re innocent.’ I said, ‘Yeah, that’s what I’ve been trying to tell everybody.’”

  It took Caldwell weeks at home to stop shivering from the cold cell. One of his ankles was raw and swollen from the steel ankle restraints. He began to heal. First the physical wounds. The psychological damage is likely permanent.

  “It’s like, I am a human being. I am not a thing that you could put in a box and shove me away and lock me up. You know, I have worth and I’m a person,” he said. “And this is not right. And yet it happened, and is happening.

  “And I am just so fortunate, so fortunate that God brought me out, I don’t know why. I’m forever grateful. I feel like I was born again.”

  Caldwell said he worries about the other Jan. 6 defendants still in jail, held without bail for more than a year. He knows what they face, day after day.

  “They’re going to be emotionally scarred by post-traumatic stress disorder,” he said. “I would tell you I had PTSD before they threw me in there. Now I tell people I’ve just got stress disorder, because there ain’t no post. This is part of it. The pressure is on every single day.”

  ‘Evil All Around Me’

  Caldwell said he was not part of any Oath Keepers plan to do anything at the Capitol on Jan. 6. He and Oath Keepers founder Elmer Stewart Rhodes III met very briefly at a local Virginia political rally the weekend after the 2020 presidential election, Caldwell said. Caldwell had just stepped off a hay wagon after making some remarks.

  “I’m approached by this guy with an eyepatch, and this was Stewart Rhodes,” he said. “He introduced himself …’You’re a nice guy, love what you said.’ And that is how I met Stewart Rhodes.

  “I’ve told you before, I know but it really needs emphasis, because the government has consistently fibbed about this,” Caldwell said. “I am not a member of the Oath Keepers. He did not attempt to recruit me. Nobody rushed me like Tau Kappa Epsilon at the University of Louisville, none of that.”

  As he works with his wife and attorney on his defense, Caldwell has had time to reflect on the past 14 months. Even with the passage of time, he said, his experience is still unbelievable. He calls it his “American Horror Story.” It is not something he ever imagined taking place in America.

  “I love our country. I can’t see how this is happening here. This is, this is Nazi Germany in the 30s. This is Josef Stalin,” Caldwell said. “This is Venezuela. This is Cuba. You know, in a way, it’s a little bit like the way Ferdinand Marcos operated in the Philippines. This is Pol Pot. It’s absolute evil. There was evil all around me.”

  As he works to regain his health and his good name, Caldwell turns his attention to holding onto the family legacy.

  I hope we don’t end up losing our farm. It’s the last thing that we have of monetary value,” he said. “Sharon and I are not rich people who moved to the country and got a farm and a McMansion. This is property that I worked as a child beside my parents who are in heaven, and my widowed sister.”

  

  With stakes this high, Caldwell admits there have been times he was ready to throw in the towel, take a plea and save the family farm.

  “This is where our family memories live. This is where our heart lives. And they really don’t have the right to take this from us,” he said. “But as Sharon tells me, she says, ‘You’re not pleading anything.’ And I said, ‘Yes I am.’

  “She says, ‘You’re not taking a plea deal. I don’t care if we’re living in the back of a car. We’re gonna fight all the way.’

  “And what more could you ask for than a beautiful, soulful Christian woman who feels that way?”

   

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 21:00

• Newsom Wants To Give $400 Debit Cards To California Car Owners Because Putin Invaded Ukraine
  Newsom Wants To Give $400 Debit Cards To California Car Owners Because Putin Invaded Ukraine

  California Governor Gavin Newsom on Wednesday proposed an $11 billion package he says will help residents grapple with the most expensive gasoline in the country – which has soared to a statewide average of $5.98 per gallon.

  

  Included in the proposal would be a $400 tax refund in the form of a debit card – which would only apply to the registered owners of vehicles, and would be capped at a maximum of $800 per person for those who own more than one vehicle.

  For those who don’t own cars, Newsom would make rail and mass transit free for three months.

  In a Wednesday statement, Newsom blamed the Russian invasion of Ukraine for the soaring prices.

  “We’re taking immediate action to get money directly into the pockets of Californians who are facing higher gas prices as a direct result of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine,” said the governor, ignoring both basic economics and the fact that gasoline began climbing in price long before Putin invaded.

  

  NEW: we’re proposing $11 BILLION in relief, including a $9 billion tax refund for rising gas prices.

  – $400 per registered car
  – 3 months of free public transitpic.twitter.com/XsAn0kuokP

  — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Newsom’s proposal would apply to all Californians regardless of income, which could (will) undoubtedly spark a fierce debate among state legislators – some of whom have called for capping the rebates to those with incomes below $250,000, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, which notes that the proposal comes roughly two weeks after Newsom said California needs to break free “once and for all from the grasp of petro-dictators,” whatever that means.

  Newsom needs lawmakers’ support to approve the rebate plan as part of the state budget, so the payments could start by July. But that prospective delay sparked sharp criticism from Republicans, who’ve demanded the state provide both a rebate and more immediate relief by suspending the 51 cent per gallon gas tax.

  “July? Seriously?” Assembly Republican Leader James Gallagher of Yuba City (Sutter County) said in a statement. “Californians are struggling and Capitol Democrats are dragging their feet. How could it possibly take that long?”

  In January, Newsom called for giving residents “a gas tax holiday” by freezing, for one year, the inflationary adjustment to the state’s gas tax, which was set to take effect July 1, saving drivers about $523 million total. -SF Chronicle

  Newsom’s Wednesday proposal includes $9 billion for tax refunds, as well as several additional areas of relief, including $750 million granted to rail and transit agencies to provide free transportation for Californians for 90 days.

  Not everyone’s so sure.

  I voted for you but this is just a no. It’s a waste of tax payer dollars. No one is going to use public transit, we don’t have time for that. Also $400 is a short term solution that helps briefly. We need a long term solution. Go back to the drawing board Governor.

  — Michael (@iAmSchuck) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

   

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 20:40

• Pentagon Scrambles To Restock Weapons Sent To Ukraine As Arms-Makers Cash-In
  Pentagon Scrambles To Restock Weapons Sent To Ukraine As Arms-Makers Cash-In

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The Pentagon is scrambling to replenish stocks of Javelin and Stinger missiles the US and its allies have sent to Ukraine as US defense contractors are cashing in on Washington’s support for Ukraine’s war against Russia.

  According to open-sourced data examined by Politico, it is estimated that the US has sent Ukraine 1,400 Stinger anti-aircraft missile systems and 4,600 Javelin anti-tank missiles since January. US allies such as Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and the Netherlands have also sent either Stingers or Javelins to Ukraine that the Pentagon is looking to replace.

  

  Javelin missiles are made through a partnership between Lockheed Martin and Raytheon Technologies. Stingers are produced solely by Raytheon, the former employer of Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, who served on the board of the weapons maker before taking his post at the Pentagon.

  Congress has already handed the Pentagon $3.5 billion to replenish its weapons stocks as part of the $1.5 trillion omnibus spending bill that President Biden recently signed. Sources told Politico that the Pentagon faces some hurdles in getting the missiles produced as quickly as they want and is considering invoking the Defense Production Act.

  The Defense Production Act would allow arms makers such as Raytheon and Lockheed to cut the line and receive necessary components ahead of other domestic manufacturers. Pentagon spokesperson Jessica Maxwell told Politico that the Pentagon hadn’t made a decision on invoking the law.

  For now, Javelins and Stingers are still being made, and a source told Politico that Lockheed and Raytheon will ramp up production once funding from the government comes through. Back in January, Raytheon CEO Greg Hayes said the company could benefit from the tensions in Eastern Europe and elsewhere around the world.

  #Ukraine: Rare footage of actual combat use of the FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank missile system by the Ukrainian army. pic.twitter.com/lGJGIG7bMi

  — 🇺🇦 Ukraine Weapons Tracker (@UAWeapons) March 19, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  “[W]e are seeing, I would say, opportunities for international sales. We just have to look to last week where we saw the drone attack in the UAE, which have attacked some of their other facilities. And of course, the tensions in Eastern Europe, the tensions in the South China Sea, all of those things are putting pressure on some of the defense spending over there. So I fully expect we’re going to see some benefit from it,” Hayes said.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 20:20

• Eat Lentils? One-Third Of US Workers Make Less Than $15 An Hour 
  Eat Lentils? One-Third Of US Workers Make Less Than $15 An Hour 

  A new study reveals a shocking truth bomb that tens of millions of Americans are struggling to survive in Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ economy as inflation tears apart working poor households.  

  Researchers from left-leaning Economic Policy Oxfam America, an anti-poverty advocacy group, published a study Tuesday titled “The crisis of low wages in the US” and found 31.9% of the US workforce, or about 51.9 million workers, are earning less than $15 an hour, equivalent to less than $31,200. 

  “It’s shameful that at a time when many US companies are boasting record profits, some of the hardest working people in this country — especially people who keep our economy and society functioning — are struggling to get by and falling behind,” Kaitlyn Henderson, the study’s author and senior research adviser at Oxfam America, told CNN. 

  Oxfam America points out soaring food, gasoline, and housing inflation has made it difficult for the working poor to survive on low wages. They advocate increasing the federal minimum wage to approximately $15 an hour, above the current $7.25 an hour, where it has been since 2009. 

  Even if Oxfam America were to get lawmakers on Capitol Hill on board with their plan to increase wages, today’s impact of the biggest energy supply shock since the 1970s has pushed nominal wages higher, though, on a real – or inflation-adjusted basis – earnings have failed to keep up with inflation. 

  

  The Biden administration and ‘friendly’ economists have certainly shifted the blame for these stagflationary conditions on Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. However, much of the inflation was already at a four-decade high before the attack in late February.

  Meanwhile, last week, the Marie Antoinettes at Bloomberg published an op-ed telling the vast majority of America’s working poor to give up driving and eat lentils to survive the inflation storm. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 20:00

• China Stands With Russia In Controversial UNSC Ukraine Resolution That Doesn't Reference "Invasion"
  China Stands With Russia In Controversial UNSC Ukraine Resolution That Doesn’t Reference “Invasion”

  On Wednesday there was another showdown at the UN Security Council, where a vote on a Russian-written resolution which sought to acknowledge the growing humanitarian crisis in Ukraine was overwhelmingly defeated, with 13 Abstentions and only 2 Yes votes.

  The resolution did not mention the Russian invasion as causing the crisis, and thus was easily shot down by Western powers – though most interesting is that China was Russia’s only other “yes” vote. 

  Russia’s UN ambassador, Vassily Nebenzia, had claimed that the proposed resolution represented a statement addressing the Ukraine conflict that “is not politicized”; however US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield rejected that assertion, charging that the resolution was all about Russia “attempting to use this council to provide cover for its brutal actions.”

  

  Here’s now the vote broke down according to The Washington Post:

  To be adopted, Russia needed a minimum of nine “yes” votes in the 15-member Security Council and no veto by one of the four other permanent members — the U.S., Britain, France and China. But Russia got support only from its ally China, with the 13 other council members abstaining, reflecting Moscow’s failure to get widespread backing for its war in Ukraine, which marks its one-month anniversary Thursday.

  Further, according to the Post, “Russia introduced its resolution on March 15. A day earlier, France and Mexico decided to move their proposed humanitarian resolution blaming the Russian invasion for the humanitarian crisis out of the Security Council, where it faced a Russian veto. The are no vetoes in the 193-member General Assembly.”

  So it’s at this point clear that as the UNSC attempts to draft a statement condemning the ongoing Russian assault on Ukraine, China is emerging as a major obstacle. 

  As Reuters notes, for it to pass a “Security Council resolution needs at least nine votes in favor and no vetoes by Russia, China, Britain, France or the United States to be adopted” – meaning that UNSC gridlock on Ukraine will inevitably remain for the foreseeable future.

  With Washington now calling out China for its alleged behind-the-scenes cooperation with Russia on possible weapons transfers and sanctions evasion (according to the Biden administration allegations), Beijing is likely only to dig in its heels deeper in quiet support of Moscow at the UNSC.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 19:40

• Chicago Should Brace For A Cold Winter: City Counsil Bans Fossil-Fuel Investments
  Chicago Should Brace For A Cold Winter: City Counsil Bans Fossil-Fuel Investments

  With record commodity prices, rolling power shortages, widespread demand destruction and gas stations that are about to run out of diesel, Europe is learning the hard way why leaving your energy policy in the hands of a petulant Swedish teenager is a terrible idea. Now it’s the turn of that other liberal disaster zone: Chicago.

  On Wednesday, just as the world is realizing that picking ESG over fossil fuels is a great idea until the electricity bill arrives, the Chicago City Council voted to ban city investments in coal, oil and gas companies in an effort to combat climate change.

  The measure was of course supported by Chicago’s “well-endowed” mayor Lori Lightfoot…

  According to a lawsuit, Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot often claims she has the biggest dick in Chicago. https://t.co/RDl5L5EoOA

  — Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) March 3, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  … and Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin, who manages investments for the city as well as its pension funds and oversees $9 billion in assets. The city plans to create a list of companies that are coal, oil, and gas-reserve owners, ranked by potential carbon emissions. The treasurer won’t invest any city funds and will divest securities or other obligations of the companies on the list, according to the ordinance.

  While this may sound like a brilliant idea to clueless and woke liberal snowflakes, it is catastrophic over the long run because it is precisely the “evil” fossil fuel energy sector that is the only green sector in 2022 and will likely outperform the rest of the market in coming years as capital flows out of such ridiculous contraptions as ESG and into the only sector that keeps humanity warm and moving. In fact, even Bloomberg staffers are starting to make fun of the “green” virtue signaling that gripped Wall Street over the past 5 years, and which has now cost most fund managers bigly as they all underperform the energy sector.

  pic.twitter.com/x9BOJHGwx5

  — Athanasios Psarofagis (@tpsarofagis) March 22, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Alas, logic and reason do not work well in liberal fecal zones best known for their record daily shootings among blacks (which the liberal media conveniently ignores because Black Lives Matter… except when it comes to Chicago), and so instead of thinking at least 2 moves ahead, the city council ordnance came up with the perfect example of opposite day, warning that “the consequences of climate change stand to make Chicago a less desirable place to live and work, negatively affecting the fiscal and social health of the city.” It said that divestment will take place “as soon as practicable or in accordance with the written investment policy.”

  The nation’s third-most populous city is the latest government to take steps to wield its investment policy to fight climate change. Thirty-eight U.S. cities have divested from fossil fuels companies, according to the ordinance. Maine last year enacted a law requiring divestment from fossil fuels, the first U.S. state to do so. In other words, instead of being invested in names like XOM or PXD which have soared in the past year, their retirees and public workers have their money invested in toxic garbage memes and “growth” stonks which have lost more than 50% in recent months.

  Of course, stupidity is not confined to Chicago – in October, New York City’s pension funds pledged to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions across investment portfolios by 2040. That followed the New York State Common Retirement Fund, which announced in late 2020 that it may divest from the riskiest oil and gas companies by 2025.

  And now we wonder how long until widespread energy rationing due to shortages of raw commodities – courtesy of the sanctions imposed on Russia – will force the “riskiest oil and gas companies” to retaliate and leave such beacons of liberal virtue signaling as Chicago and New York in the dark and cold.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 19:20

• Pharmaceutical Companies Expanding mRNA Technology To Treat Influenza
  Pharmaceutical Companies Expanding mRNA Technology To Treat Influenza

  Authored by Meiling Lee via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Unlike other vaccines, influenza shots are administered yearly, yet offer generally lower protection than most routinely recommended vaccines, from as low as 10 percent to as high as 60 percent. This season’s flu jab was only 16 percent effective, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

  

  Scientists had hoped to develop a universal flu vaccine that could fight against many strains of the flu and be given every five or 10 years, eliminating the need for annual shots. They said it could take eight to 10 years for the universal flu vaccine to be available, but over a decade later, the research did not bear fruit.

  Now, major pharmaceuticals are hoping to change the shot’s underwhelming protection and the current flu manufacturing process with the messenger RNA (mRNA) technology platform.

  If the companies are able to succeed in this, the “new flu jabs could prove lucrative or help maintain standing in a global market projected to exceed US$10 billion by decade’s end,” according to an article published in Nature.

  Dr. Robert Malone, who helped invent the mRNA vaccine technology, said that flu shots are a “significant commercial market in the United States” that is annually recommended to “drive a market need so that the manufacturing plants can be kept running and certified” in the possibility that an outbreak similar to the 1918 influenza pandemic should occur.

  “The government wants to be able to ensure that they always have enough influenza capacity in case the bad thing happens,” Malone told The Epoch Times. “So the way they do that is they create market incentives for manufacturers to produce seasonal influenza vaccines, even though we don’t really need them.”

  

  Fortune Business Insights, offering market studies and consultation services, reported that the flu vaccines generated about $5.86 billion in 2020 and $6.59 billion globally in 2021, and is projected to grow to $10.73 billion in 2028 at a CAGR [compound annual growth rate] of 7.2 percent.

  “The coronavirus pandemic naturally impacted the routine immunization programs and campaigns conducted worldwide in developing and developed countries,” the company said in its report. “However, Flu vaccination rates have gone up considerably during the pandemic owing to factors such as push from health experts/health departments as well as extension/expansion of various government programs that provide free vaccination against the flu.”

  Seqirus, one of the largest manufacturers of flu shots in the world and owned by CSL Limited, experienced a sales growth of its vaccines despite the pandemic, with the company’s chief executive officer reporting (pdf) total revenue of “over $1.7 billion, up 30% at constant currency” for the fiscal year 2021 that was “driven by the very strong sales growth in seasonal influenza vaccines of some 41%.”

  Differentiating itself from its competitors, Seqirus is developing flu vaccine candidates based on the next generation of mRNA technology, self-amplifying messenger RNA (sa-mRNA).

  Like mRNA vaccines that instruct the cells in the body to make a protein that stimulates the immune response to build up immunity, sa-mRNA also “instructs the body to replicate mRNA, amplifying the amount of protein made.”

  “This could enable vaccine manufacturers to potentially develop more effective vaccines with a smaller dosage and with lower rates of reactogenicity, underscoring the application in both pandemic and seasonal settings,” the vaccine maker announced in a press release in August 2021.

  Seqirus said it would begin clinical trials of its seasonal and pandemic flu vaccine candidates in the second half of 2022.

  Pfizer, Moderna, and Sanofi began testing their mRNA flu vaccines in adults 18 and older in 2021, while Curevac announced last month it was conducting a small Phase 1 trial in Panama.

  Moderna released interim data for the Phase 1 trial of its quadrivalent (four-strain) seasonal flu vaccine candidate, mRNA-1010 in December 2021, and announced that its two-dose vaccine produced robust antibody titers with “no significant safety concerns” observed, even at the lowest dose of 50 micrograms.

  

  While Moderna’s vaccine candidate may have shown it produced antibodies after two doses, it was not as robust in the older patients who were given the available one-dose traditional flu vaccine from Sanofi, Fluzone. After a presentation of its data to investors, Moderna’s shares tumbled 10 percent after a sharp selloff of its shares that same day, according to Reuters.

  In addition to the inferior antibody productions, all three various doses of Moderna’s vaccine elicited more adverse events compared to placebo in both the 18 to 49 age group and those 50 and older.

  In the 100 microgram dose (which is the same dose used in its COVID-19 vaccine), Malone said that “90 percent of the people in this study developed adverse events compared to 30 percent in the control group. Of those adverse events, a large fraction of them was grade 3 out of 4, grade 4 being deaths or hospitalizations.”

  He added, “So what we learned was that the toxicity associated with the mRNA tech that’s being deployed globally right now, it’s not just due to the spike protein … but it’s also due to the underlying components.”

  A former Sanofi executive, Gary Nabel, told Nature that mRNA may be a “tool that offers some upside potential” but the “big stumbling block is safety.”

  The lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) that encapsulate mRNA so that it can successfully enter cells have been shown to be highly inflammatory in a study by researchers from Thomas Jefferson University and published on Cell Press (pdf).

  “Overall, the robust inflammatory milieu induced by LNPs, combined with presentation of the vaccine-derived peptides/protein outside of antigen-presenting cells, might cause tissue damage and exacerbate side effects,” the authors wrote. “Because self-antigen presentation in an inflammatory environment has been linked to autoimmune disease development, this merits further investigation.”

  Effectiveness

  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that this season’s flu vaccine offered very little protection against mild to moderate influenza illness.

  In a study of 3,636 children and adults in seven states from October 2021 to February 2022, the CDC said that the vaccine was only 16 percent effective, a rate that the health agency considers “not statistically significant.”

  The effectiveness of the flu shot has typically been around 40 percent to 60 percent since the CDC first began estimating and tracking it in 2004.

  Breaking it further down, however, we see that of the 18 seasons that the CDC has been tracking vaccine efficacy, only one season (2010–11) was 60 percent. Whereas in eight seasons, it was around 40 percent to 56 percent, and seven seasons saw lower than 40 percent effectiveness, with the lowest being 10 percent in 2004–05.

  The CDC did not publish a report for the 2008–09 season but claimed that the vaccine effectiveness was 41 percent, and for 2020–21, the federal agency said it did not estimate the effectiveness of the shot because there was “low flu virus circulation” during that season.

  This season’s flu shot has been updated to include four different virus components that are either inactivated or live-attenuated. Two of the components consist of subtypes of the influenza A virus, and the other two are lineages of the influenza B virus.

  Experts say that this season’s low vaccine efficacy stems from a mismatch between the vaccine virus components and the circulating viruses. Yet Moderna shows that even in “well-matched years (≥90% matching), efficacy for all subjects ranges from 38-60%” noting that lower efficacy values less than 40 percent may be due in part to egg-adaptations.

  

  Despite this, the CDC says that as long as the flu season is not over, people 6 months and older should still get vaccinated, except when contraindicated, because it may “prevent serious outcomes.”

  Flu season usually runs from October to May and peaks between December to March in the United States. There has been a slight uptick in flu activity across the country with at least 2.7 million illnesses, 26,000 hospitalizations, and 1,500 deaths reported thus far for this season but still below baseline, according to the CDC.

  Evolution of Flu Vaccines

  The flu vaccine was initially developed for American soldiers in the 1940s and upon its approval in 1945, it became available for the general public a year later. But it wasn’t until 1964 when the vaccine was specifically recommended by federal health authorities to individuals at high risk for flu complications. Flu shots were later expanded to include people in contact with high-risk patients in 1986.

  By 2010, the flu vaccine was recommended for every healthy American 6 months and older, a move that was claimed to be based on “expert and organizational opinion” rather than on solid clinical data, according to an in-depth 2012 report (pdf) by scientists at the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.

  “The movement toward a universal recommendation for vaccination did not occur primarily as a result of a preponderance of newly published evidence; rather, changes were made in part on the basis of expert and organizational opinion,” the authors wrote.

  “Furthermore, the ACIP [Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices] have not always accurately reflected the evidence used to support the recommendations and routinely have cited studies with suboptimal methodology (eg. that use serology as an endpoint for infection among [trivalent inactivated vaccine] recipients) as supportive,” they added.

  ACIP, established in 1964, is a committee within the CDC, consisting of experts from the medical and public health fields, that makes recommendations on how to use vaccines.

  The 2012 report was not the first study to comment on the shortcomings of the flu vaccine. A 2010 Cochrane review analyzing data that looked at the effects of administering healthy adults with the flu vaccine, found that “vaccination had a modest effect on time off work and had no effect on hospital admissions or complication rates.” In addition, it also found that “inactivated vaccines caused local harm and an estimated 1.6 additional cases of Guillain‐Barré Syndrome per million vaccinations. The harms evidence base is limited.”

  In an updated 2018 review, the Cochrane authors examined 52 studies of over 80,000 participants but only focused on data from 25 clinical trials after they were not able to “determine the impact of bias on about 70% of the included studies due to insufficient reporting of details.”

  The authors found that the flu vaccine probably had a “small protective effect against influenza and ILI [influenza-like illness] (moderate-certainty evidence), as 71 people would need to be vaccinated to avoid one influenza case, and 29 would need to be vaccinated to avoid one case of ILI.”

  They also added, “Vaccination may have little or no appreciable effect on hospitalizations (low-certainty evidence) or number of working days lost.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 19:00

• Watch: Beverly Hills Smash-And-Grab Robbers Steal "Millions" From Jewelry Shop 
  Watch: Beverly Hills Smash-And-Grab Robbers Steal “Millions” From Jewelry Shop 

  After a series of high-profile ‘smash and grabs’ by organized retail crime in San Francisco’s Union Square and wealthy suburbia Walnut Creek retailers last year, the latest was caught on video in Beverly Hills.

  On Tuesday afternoon, brazen smash and grab thieves hit a Beverly Hills jewelry store and stole a whopping “$3-5 million in stolen watches and necklaces,” tweeted NBC Los Angeles’ Robert Kovacik. Accompanying the tweet was a video of the robbers smashing the street-facing window of the Luxury Jewels of Beverly Hills shop.

  #BREAKING #BeverlyHills: Owner of Luxury Jewels of Beverly Hills tells me the smash and grabbers got away with 3 to 5 million in stolen watches and necklaces pic.twitter.com/3W4zsaVXjX

  — Robert Kovacik (@RobertNBCLA) March 22, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The smash and grab occurred in the middle of the day. Local news KTLA said police received multiple calls about the robbery around 1345 local time. Bystanders watched in disbelief as five people used what appeared to be hammers to break the jewelry shop window. 

  Peter Sedghi, the store’s owner, said he was in his office when he heard the sound of smashing windows. 

  “It literally sounded like gunshots, so I told my staff, I yelled out, ‘everyone down on the floor,'” Sedghi said.

  The retail industry has been decimated by the wave of smash and grabs in the liberal state, where progressive lawmakers have downgraded retail theft from a felony to a misdemeanor (via Proposition 47). Even with tens of millions of dollars of retail thefts in the last year, state lawmakers still don’t have a plan to address the crime wave. 

  Earlier this month, state Republicans failed to repeal Proposition 47 after an hour of debate and testimony. It looks like the smash and grab wave will continue this year. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 18:40

• 'Just Trust Us': Politicians Of The World Unite!
  ‘Just Trust Us’: Politicians Of The World Unite!

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

  Vladimir Putin has given an address to the Russian nation that urged his country to be patient with the current pain. He said he is working to restructure economic life to deal with the ongoing disaster in employment, goods access, productivity, technology, and inflation. It’s transitory, he explained, a result of the war sanctions, and all the fault of the West. 

  He has this totally under control, he says. Just trust the government. 

  Many people do. People in cities are skeptical but he remains widely popular in rural areas. Meanwhile the government works to silence dissent, punish those who protest, and control the media. 

  This story sounds strangely familiar, doesn’t it?

  

  Biden’s White House daily urges this country to be patient with the current pain.

  They are working on ways to address the ongoing mess with inflation, declining financials, goods shortages, supply-chain woes, mail that barely functions, and a medical system that is throttled, distorted, and wildly expensive. It’s all the fault of Putin for invading Ukraine, thus necessitating severe economic sanctions and driving up the cost of everything. 

  It’s the price we pay for freedom! All we are supposed to do is trust the government. Biden has this totally under control. People are skeptical but he remains popular in some circles, mostly in large blue-state cities. People are suffering but it’s another country’s fault. Meanwhile, the government works to silence dissent, punish those who protest, and control the media. All this control is getting worse. 

  It’s getting creepy how government policies are increasingly copying each other. It’s not unlike the final global equilibrium in Orwell’s 1984: three large states that are indistinguishable in despotic ambitions, constantly trading places to demonize the other and urge their citizens to do the same. There’s always a scapegoat. 

  After the end of the Second World War, we had a sense that governments of the world were competing over economic and social systems. Which had the most freedom? Which nations were rich vs. poor? What kinds of policies do nations have and which policies are best at promoting economic growth, human rights, and peace?

  There was of course the Cold War, which pitted the “free world” against captive nations and an evil empire. What an innocent time that was! It lasted 40 years, which in retrospect seemed like mostly pretty good years for the West. We had a sense of what we were and what we were not. We had a model of what we never wanted to become, and that was a tyrannical communist state. 

  The changes from 1989 and forward fundamentally altered that perception. Communism went away and even the remaining communist empire of China itself opened up its economy to trade, ownership, and enterprise. That binary world was blown apart. Our lizard brains that look for easy stories were challenged by new forms of what not to be. Terrorism fit the bill for some years but it couldn’t last. 

  As we now look at the large world alliances — dominated by Russia, China, and the US and their respective allies — it is increasingly difficult to distinguish their policies in principle. There is a push in the US/NATO for a China-style social credit system. Russia uses brutal tactics for suppressing dissent that it copied from China. China copies the US system of industrial subsidies and fiscal and monetary stimulus. The US copies China in its lockdown strategy for virus mitigation. 

  Each government aspires to the same: total political and social control, while allowing just enough freedom to keep the wealth machine running to provide the revenue. Each country has its political elites and its administrative apparatus.

  What burned this copycat system in place were the lockdowns of 2020. They began in China, expanded to Italy, and were quickly copied by the US. That was a devastating moment because it told the world: this is good science! If the Bill of Rights and the Constitution in the US was not enough to stop this from happening, surely this virus could kill us all! Very quickly after that, most states adopted that very system. 

  They also copied the wild spending, the monetary expansion, the police state tactics, the vaccine mandates, the surveillance, the travel restrictions, and the demonization of dissent. All governments in the world blew up in size and scope. They have stayed that way. Now we are left with the results of massive and ubiquitous authoritarianism plus rampant inflation and debt, along with slow economic growth and goods shortages. 

  All these nations too have kept media empires that reflect the prevailing line plus a small dissident press that is barely tolerated and often fighting for attention and even existence. 

  What states in the world resisted? There were only a few. Sweden. Tanzania. Nicaragua. Belarus. South Dakota. Later, the most open states in the world were in the US: Georgia, Florida, Texas, South Carolina, Wyoming. These are now the outliers in the world, actual places of freedom. Other quasi-rational places are Denmark, Norway, and The Netherlands. 

  So far as I know, ten years ago, there were zero predictions out there that these would be the new free lands in the whole planet Earth. 

  In Orwell’s book, there are three superstates that forever rule the world: Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia. Is this our future? Maybe. I actually doubt it. What we actually see happening is a global awakening for freedom. It’s happening. Slowly, but it’s out there. A major factor here is just how poorly the elites have performed. Their plans have failed and they have only generated poverty and chaos. The orthodoxy of control has generated too many anomalies to maintain public credibility. 

  Biden, Putin, and the CCP all face the same problem: they preside over systems that are underperforming and generating enormous unrest at all levels. The leaders blame each other while the people in all countries are left to suffer. We are just at the beginning, but this strategy of deflection could end very badly for the arrogant political class that imagines no limit to their power. 

  The great hope that freedom lovers have is in the replacement of one set of political leaders with a different group. That is essential and will likely happen, but it is only the beginning of a solution. We’ve learned in the last two years that the real problem is much deeper. 

  The political leadership in these countries has become a veneer of a problem over which citizens have very little if any control: the administrative state that is unelected and deeply entrenched in its management of the well-funded bureaucratic state. This state mostly ignores the comings and goings of political leaders; in fact, it has disdain for them. It is this machinery that has taken full control in most countries of the world. Any political change worthy of focus needs to deal with this quickly and completely. 

  What’s more, this administrative state has figured out a fabulous trick for getting around the legal limits on state action: it has developed a close relationship with the biggest players in the private sector, which can justify any level of surveillance or censorship based on the technical truth that they are merely private actors and therefore not subject to the rules that restrict governments. 

  This new system is a dramatic challenge to the liberal cause, which is now surrounded by enemies on all sides. The key battle of our times is not only about limiting the power of government, which has metastasized in every direction all over the world, but also its allies in industry and media. The liberal cause has very little experience in this area. The solution likely rests with a dramatic change in public philosophy: the replacement of the lust for power with the love of liberty itself. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• US & NATO See Signs Belarus To "Soon" Join War In Ukraine
  US & NATO See Signs Belarus To “Soon” Join War In Ukraine

  Speculation over just how deeply involved Lukashenko’s Belarus is in Russia’s military operations in Ukraine has been a constant since the war kicked off just under a month ago. After Russia amassed tens of thousands of troops within Belarussian territory for what was dubbed “training exercises” – those same units invaded Ukraine, clearly with the pre-authorization of Lukashenko.

  And now CNN reports, based on US and NATO defense officials, that Belarus is expected to “soon” join the war in a formal capacity, sending tanks and troops to assist the Russians, who by many accounts are loosing more troops and equipment than expected at this stage.

  

  The report says there are indicators that Belarus is building up forces in preparation for entering Ukraine, which follows Minsk last month attracting the condemnation of the West after it invited Russia to place nuclear weapons on its territory.

  According to some of the unnamed defense officials cited by CNN:

  It is increasingly “likely” that Belarus will enter the conflict, a NATO military official said on Monday. 

  “Putin needs support. Anything would help,” the official explained. 

  …A senior NATO intelligence official said separately the alliance assesses that the Belarusian government “is preparing the environment to justify a Belarusian offensive against Ukraine.”

  The reference to “preparing the environment” seems to echo prior Biden administration allegations of ‘false flag’ preparations, including involving chemical weapons, which have been a constant charge since even before the Feb.24 invasion.

  Further, CNN cited “A Belarusian opposition source said that Belarusian combat units are ready to go into Ukraine as soon as the next few days, with thousands of forces prepared to deploy. In this source’s view, this will have less of an impact militarily than it will geopolitically, given the implications of another country joining the war.”

  One official was quoted as saying, “Involvement would destabilize Belarus” – but that it’s ultimately what Putin wants, and in view of the ‘Union State’ principles between Moscow and Minsk. 

  This comes as Russian troop deaths thus far may be as much as 10,000 – according to a now deleted Russian media story.

  The Russian Defense Ministry has just reported the staggering figure of 9861 Russians killed & 16,153 injured in Ukraine. That’s 379 dying every day, 1000 a day being taken off the battlefield – or between 1/4-1/3 of their committed combat forces 1/3

  — Liz Sly (@LizSly) March 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Forbes details, “A Russian tabloid newspaper published and subsequently deleted a report claiming nearly 10,000 Russian soldiers had died since the country first invaded Ukraine last month—a far greater number than the 498 deaths acknowledged by the Russian Ministry of Defense almost three weeks ago, and one that more closely aligns with third-party estimates, as Russia remains tight-lipped about its military losses in Ukraine.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 02:45

• Ukraine Crisis Accelerating Rise Of Central Bank Digital Currencies
  Ukraine Crisis Accelerating Rise Of Central Bank Digital Currencies

  Authored by Kit Knightly,

  A joint project between the Central Bank of Canada and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology will be researching the possibility of an entirely digital Canadian dollar, it was announced last week.

  The digital dollar would be a state-issued cryptocurrency, or “central bank digital currency” (CBDC). (For more detail on CBDCs and how they work, you can read our previous article here.)

  It’s not just Canada – countries from all around the world appear to be accelerating the research and implementation of CBDCs as we enter the second quarter of 2022.

  In our New Years post, OffG hypothesized that the introduction of central bank digital currencies would be a major news thread of 2022, and that prediction looks to be coming true before winter has even turned into spring.

  CBDC pilot schemes were already active in the Bahamas and Nigeria before the end of 2021, and Jamaica is rolling out their own later this year after a pilot scheme last year.

  Dozens of others are not far behind, including the US, UK and the entire Eurozone. Sweden’s “e-Krona” is currently in the testing phase. Joe Biden has called research into CBDCs a matter of “highest urgency”.

  Ukraine is right at the forefront of CBDC research and has been prepping for such since 2016. There were plans to implement one later this year, though it’s possible the war has changed them.

  The Russian central bank was developing a “digital ruble” before the invasion of Ukraine, and it is now being suggested as a way to circumvent Western sanctions.

  China was already leading the race to total digitalization of their currency, and have used the “vulnerability to Western sanctions” as an excuse to push ahead even harder.

  India, South Africa, Malaysia…the list goes on and on.

  In short, pretty much the whole world has been at least considering the move to entirely digital money.

  Why should this concern you?

  

  Well, because a digital currency would mean every single transaction you make can be monitored and recorded by the state, as well as your bank.

  The implications for the right to privacy are obvious, but privacy is the least of it.

  Much of the research being done on CBDCs concerns making them programmable.

  Meaning either the state issuing the money, or the company paying it as wages, could put controls on how or where it is spent.

  To quote a Telegraph article from last Autumn:

  Digital cash could be programmed to ensure it is only spent on essentials, or goods which an employer or Government deems to be sensible.

  As I wrote in October last year:

  Governments and employers making sure the money they issue can only be used on “sensible” things, and not be used in “socially harmful” ways? It doesn’t take much imagination to see just how this system could evolve and re-shape society into a truly dystopian nightmare.

  …and that was before.

  It “wasn’t hard to imagine” then, now we don’t need to imagine. They have shown us exactly how they would use that power.

  Just a month ago, the government of Canada was tracking down Freedom Convoy protesters – and even those who just donated money to the protests – and ordering banks to freeze their assets.

  Consider how much easier an entirely digital currency would make that process.

  Not only would it be easier to seize people’s assets, but you could stop people donating to the “wrong” causes in the first place by changing the “programming” of your digital money.

  Reader funded alternate news sites – very much including OffG – could find themselves branded “harmful misinformation”, and placed on the “funding blacklist”.

  People who refused the vaccines, or don’t publicly denounce Russia (or any passing enemy of the moment), could have sanctions placed on their bank accounts.

  Western governments are currently declaring financial war on dozens of private citizens who have not been charged – let alone convicted – of any crime, just because of their nationality. It’s being done under the guise of “punishing dirty Russians”, but what can be done to an oligarch can be done to anyone.

  Essentially, anyone who doesn’t support current thing would be living under the threat of financial ruin.

  The possibilities are as endless as they are terrible. Central Bank Digital Currencies are a death knell for the very idea of individual freedom.

  It’s almost impossible to overstate the important of this.

  As I said in my recent interview on Perspectives with Jesse Zurawell, if you’re only concerned about one thing this year, it should be this.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 02:00

• The Future Is Here: Dystopian Movies Fit For A Dystopian World
  The Future Is Here: Dystopian Movies Fit For A Dystopian World

  Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “The Internet is watching us now. If they want to. They can see what sites you visit. In the future, television will be watching us, and customizing itself to what it knows about us. The thrilling thing is, that will make us feel we’re part of the medium. The scary thing is, we’ll lose our right to privacy. An ad will appear in the air around us, talking directly to us.”

  – Director Steven Spielberg, Minority Report

  We have arrived, way ahead of schedule, into the dystopian future dreamed up by such science fiction writers as George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, Margaret Atwood and Philip K. Dick.

  

  Much like Orwell’s Big Brother in 1984, the government and its corporate spies now watch our every move.

  Much like Huxley’s A Brave New World, we are churning out a society of watchers who “have their liberties taken away from them, but … rather enjoy it, because they [are] distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing.”

  Much like Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, the populace is now taught to “know their place and their duties, to understand that they have no real rights but will be protected up to a point if they conform, and to think so poorly of themselves that they will accept their assigned fate and not rebel or run away.”

  And in keeping with Philip K. Dick’s darkly prophetic vision of a dystopian police state—which became the basis for Steven Spielberg’s futuristic thriller Minority Report which was released 20 years ago—we are now trapped into a world in which the government is all-seeing, all-knowing and all-powerful, and if you dare to step out of line, dark-clad police SWAT teams and pre-crime units will crack a few skulls to bring the populace under control.

  Minority Report is set in the year 2054, but it could just as well have taken place in 2022.

  Seemingly taking its cue from science fiction, technology has moved so fast in the short time since Minority Report premiered in 2002 that what once seemed futuristic no longer occupies the realm of science fiction.

  Incredibly, as the various nascent technologies employed and shared by the government and corporations alike—facial recognition, iris scanners, massive databases, behavior prediction software, and so on—are incorporated into a complex, interwoven cyber network aimed at tracking our movements, predicting our thoughts and controlling our behavior, Spielberg’s unnerving vision of the future is fast becoming our reality.

  Both worlds—our present-day reality and Spielberg’s celluloid vision of the future—are characterized by widespread surveillance, behavior prediction technologies, data mining, fusion centers, driverless cars, voice-controlled homes, facial recognition systems, cybugs and drones, and predictive policing (pre-crime) aimed at capturing would-be criminals before they can do any damage.

  Surveillance cameras are everywhere. Government agents listen in on our telephone calls and read our emails. Political correctness—a philosophy that discourages diversity—has become a guiding principle of modern society.

  The courts have shredded the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. In fact, SWAT teams battering down doors without search warrants and FBI agents acting as a secret police that investigate dissenting citizens are common occurrences in contemporary America.

  We are increasingly ruled by multi-corporations wedded to the police state. Much of the population is either hooked on illegal drugs or ones prescribed by doctors. And bodily privacy and integrity has been utterly eviscerated by a prevailing view that Americans have no rights over what happens to their bodies during an encounter with government officials, who are allowed to search, seize, strip, scan, spy on, probe, pat down, taser, and arrest any individual at any time and for the slightest provocation.

  All of this has come about with little more than a whimper from an oblivious American populace largely comprised of nonreaders and television and internet zombies, but we have been warned about such an ominous future in novels and movies for years.

  The following 15 films may be the best representation of what we now face as a society.

  Fahrenheit 451 (1966). Adapted from Ray Bradbury’s novel and directed by Francois Truffaut, this film depicts a futuristic society in which books are banned, and firemen ironically are called on to burn contraband books—451 Fahrenheit being the temperature at which books burn. Montag is a fireman who develops a conscience and begins to question his book burning. This film is an adept metaphor for our obsessively politically correct society where virtually everyone now pre-censors speech. Here, a brainwashed people addicted to television and drugs do little to resist governmental oppressors.

  2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). The plot of Stanley Kubrick’s masterpiece, as based on an Arthur C. Clarke short story, revolves around a space voyage to Jupiter. The astronauts soon learn, however, that the fully automated ship is orchestrated by a computer system—known as HAL 9000—which has become an autonomous thinking being that will even murder to retain control. The idea is that at some point in human evolution, technology in the form of artificial intelligence will become autonomous and human beings will become mere appendages of technology. In fact, at present, we are seeing this development with massive databases generated and controlled by the government that are administered by such secretive agencies as the National Security Agency and sweep all websites and other information devices collecting information on average citizens. We are being watched from cradle to grave.

  Planet of the Apes (1968). Based on Pierre Boulle’s novel, astronauts crash on a planet where apes are the masters and humans are treated as brutes and slaves. While fleeing from gorillas on horseback, astronaut Taylor is shot in the throat, captured and housed in a cage. From there, Taylor begins a journey wherein the truth revealed is that the planet was once controlled by technologically advanced humans who destroyed civilization. Taylor’s trek to the ominous Forbidden Zone reveals the startling fact that he was on planet earth all along. Descending into a fit of rage at what he sees in the final scene, Taylor screams: “We finally really did it. You maniacs! You blew it up! Damn you.” The lesson is obvious, but will we listen? The script, although rewritten, was initially drafted by Rod Serling and retains Serling’s Twilight Zone-ish ending.

  THX 1138 (1970). George Lucas’ directorial debut, this is a somber view of a dehumanized society totally controlled by a police state. The people are force-fed drugs to keep them passive, and they no longer have names but only letter/number combinations such as THX 1138. Any citizen who steps out of line is quickly brought into compliance by robotic police equipped with “pain prods”—electro-shock batons. Sound like tasers?

  A Clockwork Orange (1971). Director Stanley Kubrick presents a future ruled by sadistic punk gangs and a chaotic government that cracks down on its citizens sporadically. Alex is a violent punk who finds himself in the grinding, crushing wheels of injustice. This film may accurately portray the future of western society that grinds to a halt as oil supplies diminish, environmental crises increase, chaos rules, and the only thing left is brute force.

  Soylent Green (1973). Set in a futuristic overpopulated New York City, the people depend on synthetic foods manufactured by the Soylent Corporation. A policeman investigating a murder discovers the grisly truth about what soylent green is really made of. The theme is chaos where the world is ruled by ruthless corporations whose only goal is greed and profit. Sound familiar?

  Blade Runner (1982). In a 21st century Los Angeles, a world-weary cop tracks down a handful of renegade “replicants” (synthetically produced human slaves). Life is now dominated by mega-corporations, and people sleepwalk along rain-drenched streets. This is a world where human life is cheap, and where anyone can be exterminated at will by the police (or blade runners). Based upon a Philip K. Dick novel, this exquisite Ridley Scott film questions what it means to be human in an inhuman world.

  Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984). The best adaptation of Orwell’s dark tale, this film visualizes the total loss of freedom in a world dominated by technology and its misuse, and the crushing inhumanity of an omniscient state. The government controls the masses by controlling their thoughts, altering history and changing the meaning of words. Winston Smith is a doubter who turns to self-expression through his diary and then begins questioning the ways and methods of Big Brother before being re-educated in a most brutal fashion.

  Brazil (1985). Sharing a similar vision of the near future as 1984 and Franz Kafka’s novel The Trial, this is arguably director Terry Gilliam’s best work, one replete with a merging of the fantastic and stark reality. Here, a mother-dominated, hapless clerk takes refuge in flights of fantasy to escape the ordinary drabness of life. Caught within the chaotic tentacles of a police state, the longing for more innocent, free times lies behind the vicious surface of this film.

  They Live (1988). John Carpenter’s bizarre sci-fi social satire action film assumes the future has already arrived. John Nada is a homeless person who stumbles across a resistance movement and finds a pair of sunglasses that enables him to see the real world around him. What he discovers is a world controlled by ominous beings who bombard the citizens with subliminal messages such as “obey” and “conform.” Carpenter manages to make an effective political point about the underclass—that is, everyone except those in power. The point: we, the prisoners of our devices, are too busy sucking up the entertainment trivia beamed into our brains and attacking each other up to start an effective resistance movement.

  The Matrix (1999). The story centers on a computer programmer Thomas A. Anderson, secretly a hacker known by the alias “Neo,” who begins a relentless quest to learn the meaning of “The Matrix”—cryptic references that appear on his computer. Neo’s search leads him to Morpheus who reveals the truth that the present reality is not what it seems and that Anderson is actually living in the future—2199. Humanity is at war against technology which has taken the form of intelligent beings, and Neo is actually living in The Matrix, an illusionary world that appears to be set in the present in order to keep the humans docile and under control. Neo soon joins Morpheus and his cohorts in a rebellion against the machines that use SWAT team tactics to keep things under control.

  Minority Report (2002). Based on a short story by Philip K. Dick and directed by Steven Spielberg, the film offers a special effect-laden, techno-vision of a futuristic world in which the government is all-seeing, all-knowing and all-powerful. And if you dare to step out of line, dark-clad police SWAT teams will bring you under control. The setting is 2054 where PreCrime, a specialized police unit, apprehends criminals before they can commit the crime. Captain Anderton is the chief of the Washington, DC, PreCrime force which uses future visions generated by “pre-cogs” (mutated humans with precognitive abilities) to stop murders. Soon Anderton becomes the focus of an investigation when the precogs predict he will commit a murder. But the system can be manipulated. This film raises the issue of the danger of technology operating autonomously—which will happen eventually if it has not already occurred. To a hammer, all the world looks like a nail. In the same way, to a police state computer, we all look like suspects. In fact, before long, we all may be mere extensions or appendages of the police state—all suspects in a world commandeered by machines.

  V for Vendetta (2006). This film depicts a society ruled by a corrupt and totalitarian government where everything is run by an abusive secret police. A vigilante named V dons a mask and leads a rebellion against the state. The subtext here is that authoritarian regimes through repression create their own enemies—that is, terrorists—forcing government agents and terrorists into a recurring cycle of violence. And who is caught in the middle? The citizens, of course. This film has a cult following among various underground political groups such as Anonymous, whose members wear the same Guy Fawkes mask as that worn by V.

  Children of Men (2006). This film portrays a futuristic world without hope since humankind has lost its ability to procreate. Civilization has descended into chaos and is held together by a military state and a government that attempts to keep its totalitarian stronghold on the population. Most governments have collapsed, leaving Great Britain as one of the few remaining intact societies. As a result, millions of refugees seek asylum only to be rounded up and detained by the police. Suicide is a viable option as a suicide kit called Quietus is promoted on billboards and on television and newspapers. But hope for a new day comes when a woman becomes inexplicably pregnant.

  Land of the Blind (2006). In this dark political satire, tyrannical rulers are overthrown by new leaders who prove to be just as evil as their predecessors. Maximilian II is a demented fascist ruler of a troubled land named Everycountry who has two main interests: tormenting his underlings and running his country’s movie industry. Citizens who are perceived as questioning the state are sent to “re-education camps” where the state’s concept of reality is drummed into their heads. Joe, a prison guard, is emotionally moved by the prisoner and renowned author Thorne and eventually joins a coup to remove the sadistic Maximilian, replacing him with Thorne. But soon Joe finds himself the target of the new government.

  All of these films—and the writers who inspired them—understood what many Americans, caught up in their partisan, flag-waving, zombified states, are still struggling to come to terms with: that there is no such thing as a government organized for the good of the people. Even the best intentions among those in government inevitably give way to the desire to maintain power and control at all costs.

  Eventually, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, even the sleepwalking masses (who remain convinced that all of the bad things happening in the police state—the police shootings, the police beatings, the raids, the roadside strip searches—are happening to other people) will have to wake up.

  Sooner or later, the things happening to other people will start happening to us.

  When that painful reality sinks in, it will hit with the force of a SWAT team crashing through your door, a taser being aimed at your stomach, and a gun pointed at your head. And there will be no channel to change, no reality to alter, and no manufactured farce to hide behind.

  As George Orwell warned, “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/23/2022 – 00:05

• Visualizing The Number Of Nuclear Warheads By Country Since 1945
  Visualizing The Number Of Nuclear Warheads By Country Since 1945

  Despite significant progress in reducing nuclear weapon arsenals since the Cold War, the world’s combined inventory of warheads remains at an uncomfortably high level.

  As Visual Capitalist’s Anshool Deshmukh details below, towards the late 1980s, the world reached its peak of stockpiled warheads, numbering over 64,000. In modern times, nine countries – the U.S., Russia, France, China, the UK, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea—are estimated to possess roughly 12,700 nuclear warheads.

  The animated chart above by Visual Capitalist creator James Eagle shows the military stockpile of nuclear warheads that each country has possessed since 1945.

  Nuclear Warheads Currently in Possession by Countries

  The signing of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) brought about a rapid disarmament of nuclear warheads. Though not immediately successful in stopping nuclear proliferation, it eventually led to countries retiring most of their nuclear arsenals.

  As of 2022, about 12,700 nuclear warheads are still estimated to be in use, of which more than 9,400 are in military stockpiles for use by missiles, aircraft, ships and submarines.

  Here’s a look at the nine nations that currently have nuclear warheads in their arsenal:

  

  The U.S. and Russia are by far the two countries with the most nuclear warheads in military stockpiles, with each having close to 4,000 in possession.

  Timeline: Key Events in the Nuclear Arms Race

  At the dawn of the nuclear age, the U.S. hoped to maintain a monopoly on nuclear weapons, but the secret technology and methodology for building the atomic bomb soon spread. Only 10 countries have since possessed or deployed any nuclear weapons.

  Here are a few key dates in the timeline of the nuclear arms race from 1945 to 2022:

  August 6 & 9, 1945:

  The U.S. drops two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, decimating the cities and forcing the country’s surrender, ending the Second World War.

  August 29, 1949:

  The Soviet Union tests its first nuclear bomb, code-named First Lightning in Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan. It becomes the second country to develop and successfully test a nuclear device.

  October 3, 1952:

  The UK conducts its first nuclear test at Montebello Islands off the coast of Western Australia, and later additional tests at Maralinga and Emu Fields in South Australia.

  February 13, 1960:

  France explodes its first atomic bomb in the Sahara Desert, with a yield of 60–70 kilotons. It moves further nuclear tests to the South Pacific, which continue up until 1996.

  October 16–29, 1962:

  A tense stand-off known as the Cuban Missile Crisis begins when the U.S. discovers Soviet missiles in Cuba. The U.S. intiaties a naval blockade of the island, with the crisis bringing the two superpowers to the brink of nuclear war.

  October 16, 1964:

  China becomes the fifth country to test an atomic bomb in 1964, code-named Project 596. The country would conduct an additional 45 atomic bomb tests at the Lop Nor testing site in Sinkiang Province through 1996.

  July 1, 1968:

  The NPT opens for signatures. Under the treaty, non-nuclear-weapon states agree to never acquire nuclear weapons, and nuclear powers must make a legal undertaking to disarm.

  May 18, 1974:

  India conducts an underground nuclear test at Pokhran in the Rajasthan desert, code-named the Smiling Buddha. Since conducting its first nuclear test, India has refused to sign the NPT or any subsequent treaties.

  September 30, 1986:

  Through the information provided by Israeli whistleblower and nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu, The Sunday Times publishes a story that leads experts to conclude that Israel may have up to 200 nuclear weapons.

  October 9, 2006:

  After previously signing onto the NPT, North Korea breaks from the treaty and begins testing nuclear weapons in 2006. It has since gathered 20 nuclear warheads, though the actual number and their efficacy are unknown.

  Though the threat of nuclear weapons never left, the latest growing tensions in Ukraine have brought the topic back into focus. Even as work towards disarmament continues, many of the top nuclear states hesitate to fully reduce their arsenals to zero.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 23:45

• US Ramps Up Patriot Missile Transfers To Saudis As Biden Seeks To Ease Oil Prices
  US Ramps Up Patriot Missile Transfers To Saudis As Biden Seeks To Ease Oil Prices

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The Biden administration has sent a significant number of Patriot missile systems to Saudi Arabia in recent weeks to help the kingdom intercept Houthi attacks, a US official told The Associated Press.

  In 2021, the US removed some Patriot and THAAD missile systems from Saudi Arabia as part of its effort to focus its military posture on countering Russia and China. Over the past few months, Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia have increased as the US-backed Saudi-led coalition has escalated its air war in Yemen.

  

  Amid the spike in violence, Saudi Arabia asked the US to provide more Patriot missiles, and the deployment of US Patriot systems comes as the Biden administration is looking to Riyadh to help ease oil prices.

  Saudi Arabia and the UAE have been pushing for the US to support them more in the war in Yemen. According to a report from The Wall Street Journal, the de facto leaders of the two Gulf states declined calls with President Biden amid the Ukraine crisis as he was looking to contain oil prices.

  Sources told the Journal that Saudi Arabia and the UAE shared concerns about the US’s “restrained” response to Houthi attacks. After the Houthis hit targets in Abu Dhabi back in January, the US started helping the UAE intercept missiles and sent a squadron of F-22s to the Gulf nation.

  But the support wasn’t enough, as the UAE is also pushing for the US to redesignate the Houthis as a “foreign terrorist organization.”

  Mending fences with missiles.
  The Biden administration sends Patriot missiles to Saudi Arabia hoping Riyadh will increase oil production to ease gas prices.
  Problem is there’s bad blood between Biden and Crown Prince #MBS…and bad blood is apparently thicker than crude. pic.twitter.com/iypJzurdI9

  — Daniel Cohen (@DanielCohenTV) March 22, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The UN and aid groups have warned that the designation would only increase the suffering of Yemen’s starving civilian population by making it more difficult to deliver aid and import food.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 23:25

• What 'Vibrancy': NYC Hit By Surprisingly High Jobless Rate As Workers Fail To Return
  What ‘Vibrancy’: NYC Hit By Surprisingly High Jobless Rate As Workers Fail To Return

  The percentage of white-collar workers in New York City office buildings remains abysmal. Workers aren’t returning, and it’s crushing the local economy.

  NYC’s 7.6% unemployment rate is shockingly high compared with the rest of the country (nationwide average of 3.8%) as an economic recovery is slow to materialize, according to Bloomberg. There could be a muted recovery without five-day-a-week commuters because their impact on the local economy is substantial. 

  Keycard swipes tracked by security company Kastle Systems show NYC offices are about 36% occupied, far below pre-COVID levels. Even as companies announced return-to-office dates, many implemented a hybrid work model that allows white-collar workers to work remotely part of the time. Some companies have entirely reduced their corporate footprint and enforced remote working for some employees. 

  

  According to the latest survey by The Partnership for New York City business group, only 16% of top NYC firms say daily attendance in their Manhattan office was above 50%. The poll showed that about 75% of employers delayed return-to-office plans due to a spike in COVID infections year, and 22% said they don’t have a timeline on when offices will be full again. 

  On Oct. 29, 2020, we noted that NYC’s recovery will be a “long slog” from here as the downturn will last well into 2023 and lag the rest of the nation. It seems we’re right, and the source of a lackluster recovery is directly related to workers that aren’t returning to offices. 

  Mark Vitner, a Wells Fargo senior economist, said the city is “enduring a slower recovery because it is so dependent on the office and entertainment sectors.” 

  “Cities that were quicker to reopen following the initial lockdowns at the start of the pandemic have also tended to see stronger recoveries,” Vitner said. What may have damned the metro area were public officials and their inability to lift health mandates that crippled the local economy, forcing tens of thousands of people, if not more, out of the area and to suburbia or Florida. 

  Newly elected Mayor Eric Adams has argued that remote and hybrid work situations are crushing service-oriented businesses in the city that solely rely on white-collar workers, such as the food and entertainment industry. 

  Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages data shows there are 275,000 fewer paychecks in just Manhattan compared to pre-COVID times. Manhattan jobs account for a whopping 57% of the city’s overall economy. 

  “Manhattan is an enormous economic and social driver,” said Andrew Rigie, the New York City Hospitality Alliance executive director.

  Manhattan’s unemployment rate is the lowest among the boroughs. The Bronx has had the slowest employment growth. 

  

  As firms fled Manhattan during COVID to places like Florida and Texas, the borough’s financial industry has likely seen another peak in jobs. Also, factor in the increasing amount of automation in the financial sector, and the job situation in Manhattan looks even bleaker. 

  

  NYC leads the way in lackluster employment gains.

  

  Meanwhile, the Manhattan housing market has been on fire as the number of sales spike and median rents soar. 

  

  An economic revival in NYC will lag the rest of the country as long as remote work persists. So what happens to all the empty commercial-office buildings? 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 23:05

• "The Tragedy Is Our System" – Iowa Governor Becomes Voice Of Reason On Gun Control
  “The Tragedy Is Our System” – Iowa Governor Becomes Voice Of Reason On Gun Control

  Submitted by The Machine Gun Nest (TMGN).,

  Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds has become a rare voice of reason on gun control after a March 7 school shooting in Des Moines.

  Democrat legislators and gun safety advocates immediately started using the tragedy to justify tightening Iowa’s gun control laws in response to the shooting. It is important to note that according to official reporting, the firearms used in the shooting were not accessed legally.

  Amazingly, Gov. Reynolds responded with some common sense, reportedly saying: “I think the tragedy is our system — our educational system — is letting these kids down. They should have been in school. We should be figuring out resources to help them stay there and to help them get an education and a life where they can take care of themselves and their families.”

  

  This criticism of the education system is the cold hard truth, as much as it’s hard to hear for gun control advocates.

  The anti-gun lobby would have you believe that passing more and more strict gun control laws will somehow decrease gun crime. The issue with this theory is that criminals do not follow laws. So, passing more and more gun control only hurts law-abiding citizens. Cities like Chicago and Baltimore serve as examples of these failed gun control policies, with murder rates that rank them among some of the most violent cities in the world up there with Rio and Caracas.

  Also, with the massive amount of new gun owners throughout 2020 & 2021, there has been a shift in opinion on gun control. Many Americans now support the enforcement of current laws instead of creating new gun control.

  Gov. Reynolds brings up the thing that so many anti-gun politicians hate to hear. The problem isn’t the firearm. It’s an education system that fails those in it. Of course, fixing our broken education system here in the United States would take actual work with real solutions, and we know for a fact that the anti-gun lobby isn’t after solutions.

  In fact, the anti-gun lobby only seeks to disarm law-abiding citizens, to create new, never-ending problems with firearms until the United States resembles other restrictive, repressive states like Australia or England.

  To hear a Governor speak out on one of the real causes of gun violence is exceptionally refreshing. The anti-gun local Iowa politicians didn’t think so, though. Iowa Democrats immediately began to criticize the governor’s response, saying Gov. Reynolds was “blaming the educational system for a tragedy.”

  

  But was she? Many studies done over the years indicate that poor education leads to crime and violence. Democrats themselves cite the same studies when lobbying for public school funding! Why are these same points discredited in the context of gun control? Could it be that there are ulterior motives at work here?

  Hopefully, other governors will follow in Gov. Reynold’s example and bring awareness to the fact that gun violence is a highly complex issue.

  If we as a society collectively stopped looking at the firearm as the problem and looked at the root causes of violence, we may find that there are solutions to the issues at hand. In no other instance do we blame and regulate the tool of violence instead of punishing the person who committed the crime. Drunk driving is often cited as an example of this hypocrisy, as we do not blame the car for drunk driving; we blame the driver.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 22:45

• Used Car Prices Fall As Goldman Points Out Supply Chain Alleviation 
  Used Car Prices Fall As Goldman Points Out Supply Chain Alleviation 

  U.S. companies has struggled with supply chain congestion, bottlenecks, and the inability to adequately re-stock certain items that roiled the automotive industry. As a result, new car production has been hindered as consumers panic bought used cars, sending prices sky-high. 

  On Feb. 9, we outlined a major inflection point for the Manheim Used Vehicle Value Index, a wholesale tracker of used car prices, possibly topping as peak supply chain constraints had passed and more parts would be readily available for automakers to restart and or increase output for new vehicles. At the time, we said this could reverse used car prices. However, we also noted that this inflection point might lead to false positives if supply chain congestion persisted.

  More than a month has passed by since we noted the inflection point. And to possibly validate peak supply chain constraints is Goldman Sachs’ Jordan Alliger, who told clients Monday that high frequency weekly supply-chain data for the week ending Mar. 14 shows signs of bottleneck relief. 

  As bottlenecks subside, the Manheim Used Vehicle Value Index declined 3.8% in the first 15 days of March compared to the full month of February. The used car index is still up 24.1% compared to March 2021 at around 222.4. Though momentum and rate of change indicators show soaring used car price trends are drastically slowing as supply chains crunches resolve. 

  

  Goldman’s Alliger reveals high frequency weekly supply-chain data improved last week to a score of 5, versus 7 after holding 8 for the prior two weeks. The weekly index has declined 11.6% sequentially

  

  “While a 6 still indicates a bottlenecked supply chain environment (marked by demand greater than transport capacity, and still hyper-elevated shipping rates), the recent trendline continues to point in the right direction,” Alliger said. 

  The analyst did say there’s possibility congestion will “re-emerge as inbound traffic arrives in March into a still congested U.S. logistics system; and container shipping rates – which are part of the index – could see some impact from the Russia/Ukraine conflict,” though supply chain congestions are subsiding.  

  Similar to JP Morgan’s belief in early February that supply chain constraints have passed their climax, Goldman’s analyst points out peak congestion might have passed as well. 

  

  “While our base case for more extended supply-chain easing does not arise until sometime midyear-2022 (at the earliest), we do think some slight easing on the ocean side is possible as we move further into 2022, as we approach seasonal post-peak shipping for container ships due to the length of time it takes to move from Asia to the U.S.,” Alliger said. 

  There’s already an improvement in the number of container ships waiting to dock, significantly down from the highs observed earlier this year. A sign port congestion is improving. 

  

  Another sign the logistical nightmare over the last two years is abating are international shipping rates that have not just peaked but are coming off their highs. 

  

  So if supply chain fluidity is improving, automotive manufacturers will begin to receive the much-needed parts they’ve been craving: semiconductor chips. In return, new car production may increase, which would flood the car market with news ones and could lead to more downside for used car prices. 

  What remains of interest is how supply chains will be impacted after Russia invaded Ukraine. For now, used car prices are falling. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 22:25

• Japan Scrambles To Avoid Tokyo Blackout After First Ever Power Crunch Alert
  Japan Scrambles To Avoid Tokyo Blackout After First Ever Power Crunch Alert

  One day after the Japanese government issued its first-ever electricity supply alert on Monday for the Tokyo area under a system implemented after the 2011 Fukushima disaster, Japan scrambled to keep the lights on in Tokyo on Tuesday as frigid weather and power plant outages from last week’s earthquake put the nation’s capital at risk of blackouts. Government officials warned power supply is expected to fall short of demand Tuesday evening, and officials at the infamous TEPCO (Tokyo Electric Power Co.) said there could be partial outages if the supply squeeze continues.

  According to Tepco, unplanned disruptions across the Tokyo and Tohoku regions could begin from 8 pm local time and plunge between 2 to 3 million buildings into darkness until around 11 pm. The utility best known for covering up the full severity of the Fukushima disaster, said its pumped hydro facilities will stop operating in the evening when reservoirs are drained, curbing power output.

  As a result, Trade Minister Koichi Hagiuda said that households and businesses should reduce power consumption as much as possible, as conservations measures may need to continue through this week.

  

  The Japanese government is not at the moment considering the use of rolling blackouts as the country faces an electricity shortage, Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Seiji Kihara told a news conference on Tuesady. Kihara also said that Japan unlikely to seek power conservation from Wednesday onward due to a decrease in demand.

  Tepco echoed Kihara, saying that it currently isn’t planning to implement a series of managed, rolling blackouts that could ease strain on the grid, arguing there’s not enough time to warn customers. Meanwhile, temperatures in central Tokyo were below average on Tuesday, while cloudy weather significantly reduced output from solar panels.

  While the stated culprit for the energy shortage and the reason why Japan’s power supplies have been stretched thin, is last week’s strong earthquake which struck in the northeast and took several power plants offline, the reality is that Japan has had very limited power reserves for far longer, as utilities retire older oil-powered plants and most nuclear reactors remain shut after Fukushima. And in light of the Russia escalating sanctions, Japan’s energy shortages will only going to get worse.

  Though unplanned outages would be mostly random, key infrastructure like hospitals have installed backup generators since 2011, meaning they will be able to continue operations for hours after the grid goes dark.

  Meanwhile, Japan’s transport ministry and industry ministry have asked JR and other train operators to save energy, TV Asahi reports, with Railway operators said to be cooperating and have halted some ticket machines as well as electronic billboards.

  Japan has ordered most of the nation’s regional utilities to send spare power supplies to the Tokyo area, according to a statement  from the grid coordinator. Tepco was scheduled to receive nearly a gigawatt of capacity through midnight. The grid coordinator also ordered power sharing for Tohoku Electric Power, which services the area next to Tokyo and is facing a similar power crunch. Tohoku Electric expects to see power reserves drop to as low as 1%, and has also asked its users to conserve power. 

  

  In total, Japan’s electricity network coordinator ordered 7 utilities including Chubu Elec. and Kansai Electric to supply Tepco with energy amid a crunch today; as a result the utility will receive up to 1.42m kw to help avoid a shortage, with the following utilities set to provide power:

  • Tohoku from 7am to 4pm, up to 817,800kw
  • Chubu 7am to 4pm, 300,000kw
  • Hokuriku 7am to 4pm up to 300,000kw
  • Kansai 7am to 4pm up to 221,000kw
  • Chugoku 8am to 12:00pm up to 100,000kw
  • Shikoku 8:30am to 10am up to 100,000 kw

  A spokesman for JFE Holdings’s steel-making unit said that the company has been asked by Tepco to conserve electricity and increase output from its own power generation facilities in Chiba and Kanagawa prefectures. The company has not been asked to reduce production and will maintain operations and delivery, the spokesperson said. Tepco has also asked Nippon Steel Corp. to boost output at its own power generation facilities, some of which are now operating at full capacity, a spokesperson for the steel producer said.

  Japan’s tech giants such as Softbank and Rakuten Group, are reducing power consumption but don’t see an immediate impact on their business. A spokesperson for the Tokyo Stock Exchange said that the bourse isn’t experiencing any issues at the moment from the power crunch, and is well-prepared for any incidents.

  While Japan is hopeful that the power shortage will be resolved soon, thermal power plants in Japan that have been halted following last week’s strong earthquake could take as long as a few weeks to a few months to restore, Kyodo reported, citing industry minister Koichi Hagiuda speaking in parliament.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 22:02

• JBS Expects 'Meatflation' To Remain Stubbornly High Ahead Of Midterms
  JBS Expects ‘Meatflation’ To Remain Stubbornly High Ahead Of Midterms

  The world’s largest meat producer said beef prices would remain stubbornly high throughout 2022 despite President Biden’s attempt to arrest price increases ahead of the midterms elections this fall. 

  On Tuesday, Andre Nogueira, chief executive of Brazilian meat company JBS SA’s U.S. division, told investors that high U.S. beef prices would be sticking around amid robust domestic demand, high overseas shipments, and lower cattle supplies. 

  Nogueira ruined hopes that beef prices would decrease in the coming months as consumer inflation is at a four-decade high, and food prices are at record levels. He said beef prices for U.S. consumers are high because retailer margins are above historical levels.

  Despite high beef prices, Nogueira pointed out consumer behavior has yet to change, suggesting prices must go even higher to reach the threshold of demand destruction. 

  

  Strong demand for beef has allowed JBS to pass on higher grain costs to consumers. A labor shortage is still a lingering problem for the company even two years after the virus pandemic. 

  On Monday, JBS SA’s CEO GilbertoTomazoni said the main drivers of cost surges include everything from fuel to animal feed to packaging to transportation and labor shortages. 

  Gilberto Tomazoni said the invasion of Ukraine has disrupted global supply chains and triggered added cost pressures. 

  “We are focusing on things that we are able to control,” he said. “Costs have risen significantly.”

  Tomazoni is right about soaring costs as a commodity shock was felt just weeks ago. 

  

  Even though JBS reported record revenue in the fourth quarter, beating the Bloomberg consensus estimate, the cost of doing business skyrocketed. 

  According to consolidated earnings released Monday, production costs increased 21% in the quarter from a year earlier, while sales expenses soared 40%. The U.S. division for beef saw costs in the quarter jump 40% per head. 

  Meanwhile, the Biden administration takes no blame for higher inflation. They blame soaring meat prices on meat processors and soaring gas prices on Putin. The press has been quiet when it comes to the incompetence of the Biden administration as they fail to cap inflation as it crushes the working poor households the hardest. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 21:45

• Why Are So Many People Bleating Like Sheep?
  Why Are So Many People Bleating Like Sheep?

  Authored by Marie Hawthorne via TheOrganicPrepper.com,

  As soon as the blue states began winding down Covid restrictions, the invasion of Ukraine gave us something else to panic about. It’s like the origins of the Covid virus: in the early days, when most of the authorities in the press were insisting that it had natural origins, I remember thinking, “There’s a Level 4 Virology lab in this city, and the press says it’s a coincidence?” 

  No. That wasn’t a coincidence, and I don’t think the timing of the Ukraine invasion was a coincidence either.

  I think it has to do with Mattias Desmet’s theory of mass formation psychosis. 

  

  Organic Prepper published an article a few months ago about mass formation psychosis as it related to Covid policies, but I think it’s worth revisiting the concept in the context of what’s going on in Ukraine right now.

  We cannot forget the lessons of the past.

  If you listen to Mattias Desmet’s interview with Chris Martenson on the Peak Prosperity podcast, he discusses the distinction between ordinary dictatorships and true totalitarian states. Dictatorships based on rule by the most powerful have been typical throughout history. Totalitarian states, where a seemingly insane portion of the population dictates reality for everyone else, is a very specific phenomenon. Desmet cites Rousseau’s Reign of Terror and Nazi Germany as examples of societies that have undergone mass formation psychosis. 

  Desmet also cites four specific conditions that need to be met in order to transform otherwise peaceful societies into societies capable of mass atrocities. They are:

   Prolonged isolation

  1. Lack of meaning
  2. Free-floating anxiety
  3. Free-floating aggression and frustration without options

  Isolation has been spreading for years.

  It’s easy to point to the lockdowns as the source of “prolonged isolation,” but the truth is that individuals within modern society have been increasingly isolated for years.

  For most of us, countless examples of modern loneliness readily come to mind. All I can really add is that America’s history as a nation full of people that have picked up and left something makes us exceptionally prone to isolating ourselves. From Laura Ingalls Wilder, to Jack Kerouac, to the popularity of modern travel blogs, we romanticize moving on to greener pastures. And I’ve certainly done my share of traveling! It’s not all bad. But, when you move every few years, you need to be very intentional about maintaining relationships if you don’t want them to dissolve. We need to ask ourselves, how good are we at that?

  Spending time with a set of coworkers that changes every few years may be fun and interesting in its own way, but nothing compares to the richness and meaning of solid family relationships or decades-long friendships.

  This brings us to Desmet’s second condition: lack of meaning.

  How many of us have spent time in jobs that we felt were a waste of time? I know I have. So much pressure exists to find the perfect career. We’re expected to move all over the place, plan our families and rearrange our lives for the sake of careers. And some people do find exceptionally rewarding careers.

  But that’s the exception, not the rule. And the concept of a “career” is fairly recent anyway. Most people through history have had boring, poor lives by modern standards. But was misery universal until two hundred years ago? How did people find meaning in their lives before widespread material wealth and institutional gratification? 

  They did so through patriotism, familial relationships, and healthy communities. The pride of jobs well done. Being able to produce a well-made item not intended for the landfill is uniquely rewarding. This leads to emotional stability, identity, and self-worth. But having an honest trade and a stable community life is almost universally mocked. Most Americans are familiar with Mike Rowe; he has been writing insightfully about American work culture for years. But you can also look back at works by C.S. Lewis, written 80 years ago, on the trend toward dismissing anything outside government and big business as not “the real world.” 

  Like loneliness, the feeling of meaninglessness has intensified during the past two years, but the seeds were planted a long time ago.  

  (Make sure to check out our free QUICKSTART Guide on how to starve the beast.)

  Weak relationship bonds and work dissatisfaction lead to free-floating anxiety, Desmet’s third condition for mass formation psychosis.  

  The spread of free-floating anxiety

  How could many of us not experience constant anxiety? Those of us with school-age children watched as a huge part of the social contract was broken two years ago when the schools shut. A large part of the workforce found itself declared “unessential.” Nobody is “unessential,” but how are you supposed to believe that when you’re not allowed to pursue your vocation? The people that were declared essential were subjected to constant messaging about how dangerous it was to interact with others. Outside of government employees, I don’t know anyone who has escaped significant job-related stress. 

  Add into this mix the divisiveness of jab mandates and you’ve got your fourth condition: free-floating aggression and frustration without options. 

  Society soon turns to the punching bag

  Daisy’s written about the “Othering” of the unvaccinated, and for a while, I thought that was the end game. I thought the Covid response was a combination of a money and power-grab by Big Pharma and Big Government, respectively. I thought all the proposed passports and tracking schemes were a way to identify who was compliant and who was not. I thought that the proposed narrative was to turn public sentiment firmly against anyone with a contrarian bent. 

  In the previously mentioned podcast, Desmet explains how the public’s free-floating aggression and frustration without options lead to the emergence of a villain, usually suggested by government figures and regularly presented through the media. He explains that as the stressors (in 2020’s case, the pandemic) continue, people look for ways to connect their anxiety and frustrations. The media distributes a narrative, connecting the existing problem to a proposed villain. As 2021 brought the jab rollout, it became clear that the media presented the unjabbed as the ready-made villain. Desmet states that, as the narrative takes hold, a new identity emerges within society. In the case of the past two years, it would be the social bonds of those who followed all the CDC protocols vs. those that didn’t. 

  I don’t have a crystal ball. I didn’t know how all this was going to play out. The harshness of the penalties imposed upon the Canadian truckers seemed completely out of line. The freezing of bank accounts and holding nonviolent protest organizers without bail had me wondering what was coming next. 

  And then a lot of the mandates disappeared. I live in a blue state. Even the biggest die-hards seemed done with the pandemic. Worldwide, it looks like most countries are done. Even Germany and Austria, who had been considering some fairly extreme mandates, announced that they would be ending most restrictions as of March 20. It seemed like a bad joke when, within a week of finally being able to attend church unmasked, we had something new to worry about.

  I couldn’t believe it when, overnight, we were expected to hate Russia passionately. 

  

  Casting Russia as the Joker to the United States’ Batman has been going on for nearly 80 years now. My parents (Boomer generation) grew up under the assumption that one day, the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. were going to nuke each other into oblivion. That wasn’t the stuff of conspiracy theories – it was a soberly accepted fact. When my parents attended college in the 70s and 80s, the progressives wanted to work with and learn from the Soviets. It was the less cultured, less sophisticated crowd that was aggressively pro-American.

  After the Berlin Wall fell in 1989 and the Soviet Union disintegrated, people my age (I’m a Gen X’er) laughed at all the crazy anti-commie stuff. Obviously, the sophisticated liberals were right. The Russians weren’t that bad, and we could all live together happily in the new global economy. To people my age, the Cold War tensions became a big joke. I personally never thought it was such a joke. I was born in the shadow of the Berlin Wall, and my parents went back in 1990 to get a piece of it. The tension had been real. The East Germans weren’t screwing around. 

  And now, the generation of sophisticated liberals that grew up giggling at all the crazy, tin-foil hat anti-commie people instantly hates the same Russians that the older generations grew up fearing. Hating the Russians was silly ten years ago. Now, if we don’t hate the Russians, we’re traitors.

  The turnaround should be shocking, but it falls into the behavior predicted by Desmet’s model of mass formation psychosis. The stress of the past two years has been extreme for a large part of the population. People are looking for someone to blame, and the powers that be are more than happy to give us various objects for what feels like our weekly “Two Minutes Hate.” The public was burning out on hating “anti-vaxxers.” We needed a new object, so they gave us the Russians.

  As nations began to relax pandemic restrictions, the Great Reset crowd needed a new excuse for retaining state control. There’s nothing like war for those who love big government. Zelensky has been begging Western governments to impose a no-fly zone, which, as the Organic Prepper recently noted, would shove us a lot closer to another World War. 

  I don’t like being told whom to hate. I can figure that out on my own. I especially don’t like being told to hate groups of foreigners. For twenty years, Americans were told that the terrorist groups in Afghanistan posed such a threat to the United States that it warranted sending off our family members to die, keeping insurgents busy over there. Then we just walked away.

  And we didn’t even walk away in a nice, orderly fashion as the Soviets did back in 1989. We ran off in the middle of the night, leaving behind literally billions of dollars worth of equipment for our enemies to use. We screwed up Afghanistan so badly. Do we really trust our leadership not to screw up Ukraine too?

  Fear is in the air, and there are some big, powerful actors trying to make use of it.

  Don’t let them. If World War III comes, it comes, and most of us can’t do anything about it. We’ll deal with that problem when it gets here. For now, all we can do is hope for the best and prepare for the worst. 

  Daisy often says that we need to prepare, not out of fear, but out of hopefulness that we’ll be around for what comes next, and I can’t agree more. And situational awareness plays a large part in prepping. We need to know what other people are up to. Events of the past two years have been unlike anything I ever imagined. Fortunately, people like Mattias Desmet have provided tools for understanding big social movements in history. Forewarned is forearmed. 

  So prepare in what way best suits you and your loved ones.

  None of us have exactly the same situation. Some are close to nuclear targets. Some have many children and/or elderly relatives to prepare for. No matter your situation, there are a lot of resources available to help you set priorities and organize your thoughts. 

  Be prepared but not fearful. Don’t let hateful feelings take hold of you. Fear, anger, and frustration lead to stupid mistakes. I know this from experience. Learn what you need to know to protect your family. Do whatever you can to maintain inner peace. Be content knowing that you’ve done all you can. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 21:25

• Large Twister Rips Through New Orleans 
  Large Twister Rips Through New Orleans 

  A massive tornado ripped through the Lower Ninth Ward Tuesday evening, the National Weather Service New Orleans confirmed. 

  Video: A confirmed large tornado is on the ground in the Lower Ninth Ward and is moving East. You need to take shelter now. >> https://t.co/PtQ7lopwKs pic.twitter.com/JlWl8QRCte

  — wdsu (@wdsu) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Possible track of the twister. 

  

  Shocking footage shows the tornado moving through the metro area. 

  Lower 9 tornado safe places now pic.twitter.com/ySxdBWKOYU

  — Jay Gallé (@JayGalle) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  LARGE tornado in New Orleans on ⁦@wdsu⁩ sky camera: pic.twitter.com/XqUyq2FwmF

  — Trevor Birchett ⚡️ (@weathertrevor) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Videos of the damage have been posted on Twitter. 

  Damage from on the ground in the 9 pic.twitter.com/QENddKwYbT

  — JD Carrere (@jdcarrere) March 23, 2022

  Really bad situation in Arabi Heights houses destroyed… #NOLA pic.twitter.com/b4r6fGqRVc

  — Peter C. Cook (@petercook) March 23, 2022

  Insane pictures from the incident area. 

  

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  From @reggieart on Insta. I didn’t take this video. Here’s a direct link to IG https://t.co/Fl8c7sVCLT #nola #tornado pic.twitter.com/lKWXelANh6

  — Tim Ballisty (@IrishEagle) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  More damage from New Orleans. 😭 pic.twitter.com/AF9n69TKwk

  — Kaden M’s weather photography (@Weathergeek051) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Damage in Arabi.
  The National Weather Service confirmed a ‘large and extremely dangerous tornado located over Arabi, #Louisiana around 7:32 p.m.#tornado #ArabiHeights #destroyed #NewOrleans #NOLA #Storm #TornadoWatch #Lightning pic.twitter.com/w4HdPz8pwT

  — Chaudhary Parvez (@ChaudharyParvez) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Damage in (9th) of new #Orleans..
  The National Weather Service confirmed a ‘large and extremely dangerous tornado located over Arabi, #Louisiana around 7:32 p.m.#tornado #ArabiHeights #destroyed #NewOrleans #NOLA #Storm #TornadoWatch #Lightning pic.twitter.com/73KtoJFaPj

  — Chaudhary Parvez (@ChaudharyParvez) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Power outages are already being reported.  

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  A view at Energy power outages show the track of the East New Orleans tornado. Some sporadic damage on the south shore of the River, and then larger outages in Arabi, then across the intracoastal into the Michoud area. pic.twitter.com/eaHmLzJf9D

  — U.S. Tornadoes (@USTornadoes) March 23, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  *developing

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 21:15

• Bridgewater Reportedly Launching Crypto Fund
  Bridgewater Reportedly Launching Crypto Fund

  Nearly one year after Ray Dalio revealed that he had purchased “some bitcoin” (although he thinks ethereum is more efficient), Dalio’s Bridgewater Associates, the world’s largest hedge fund, is finally preparing to back its own crypto fund, according to a CoinDesk report.

  Sources familiar with Bridgewater’s plans said the firm plans to launch the fund by mid-2022, although the fund’s PR team is officially keeping the project under wraps (at least, for now).

  

  According to CoinDesk, the size of the firm’s investment is “minuscule” compared with its total AUM.

  Bridgewater isn’t the first hedge fund to stand up its own crypto fund: Marshall Wace, Brevan Howard and Steve Cohen’s Point72 have all reportedly stood up similar crypto investing operations.

  News of Bridgewater’s plans comes just one day after Goldman Sachs revealed that it had carried out its first over-the-counter crypto derivatives trade, a business that the bank expects will grow substantially as more hedge funds look to either own crypto, or hedge their exposure.

  While details of the Bridgewater fund were scant, CoinDesk’s sources agreed on a ‘rough timeline’ for the fund’s launch.

  “Bridgewater is in a first-half plan this year,” said one of the people in February. “They’re planning on having a small slug of their fund deployed directly into digital assets.”

  Hedge funds’ growing desire to embrace crypto as a hedge against the dollar’s fading hegemony come at a particularly auspicious time; even Goldman Sachs is saying that Saudi Arabia’s decision to consider accepting the Chinese yuan as payment for oil would deal a serious blow to the petro-dollar system which is one of the most important underpinnings of the dollar’s global reserve status.

  As we have pointed out many times before, nothing lasts forever…

  

  …with this in mind, it’s not too hard to see why Bridgewater and other hedge funds are increasingly turning to crypto; Dalio said last year that he would rather own bitcoin than bonds.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 21:05

• Biden's Oil Polices Are "Bat-Shi*t Crazy", Creating "Turmoil" In Markets: USF Geology Professor
  Biden’s Oil Polices Are “Bat-Shi*t Crazy”, Creating “Turmoil” In Markets: USF Geology Professor

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

  America’s energy policies, specifically those centered around oil and gas, are “bat shit crazy” and the Biden administration is doing nothing but creating “turmoil” in the oil markets, according to geologist and fossil fuel expert Dr. Marc J. Defant.

  I’m excited to be welcoming my friend Marc back to the podcast in early April. But for now, his expertise in the world of oil and gas is so deep, I thought my readers would benefit from a preview of his takes on the current state of energy globally, the oil crisis that Europe and the U.S. are heading toward, the effects of Ukraine/Russia and the dollar on oil prices and the effects of Biden Administration policies on the price of oil.

  

  Dr. Marc J. Defant is a professor of geology/geochemistry at the University of South Florida. He worked for Schlumberger Well Services and Shell Oil for three years, with two years at Shell working as an exploration geologist.

  He has been funded by the National Science Foundation, National Geographic, the American Chemical Society, and the National Academy of Sciences, and has published in many internationally renowned scientific journals including Nature. He has written a book entitled Voyage of Discovery: From the Big Bang to the Ice Age and published several articles for general readership magazines such as Skeptic and Popular Science and appeared on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast. You can reach him via this contact form.

  I had a chance to pick Dr. Defant’s brain this week about the rising cost of energy and his thoughts on what is exacerbating the situation. What follows is Dr. Defant’s take on our country’s oil crisis.

  This blog post is being published without a paywall because I believe its content to be far too important not to share. If you have the means, and would like to support my work, you can subscribe here: Subscribe Here

  Q: Hi, Marc. Can you start by giving a primer on how oil at the pump is priced and address the claims of “price gouging” by oil companies?

  A: Oil is traded in US dollars and the price of oil is highly sensitive to the value of the dollar. Gasoline sold at the pump is made in refineries from crude oil. Therefore, the price of gasoline is directly impacted by the price of oil. Oil prices are set on the futures market, so speculation becomes very important in what we pay at the pump. It is a highly volatile market, as we have recently seen.

  

  Oil prices increase when supply is negatively impacted. That is, demand by traders, not the oil companies, forces price fluctuations. Traders are highly influenced by what they perceive the future availability of oil will be. No sense selling oil today for low prices if they can wait and get higher prices. In other words, sellers ask higher prices when they perceive the supply will be low and the demand high.

  The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) consists of 13 countries and produces about 40 percent of the world’s oil. They are considered by many to be a cartel because of their important influence on the price of oil and gas. In other words, they can impact supply which moves the price of oil. A few notable members are Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Venezuela. Russia has worked on and off with OPEC to control supply particularly when oil prices were low.   

  

  There are two types of futures buyers – those that wish to hedge their bets and those that speculate in pricing. Hedgers are usually oil companies that buy futures to make sure they will not be negatively impacted by the volatile fluctuations in oil prices. On the other hand, oil speculators are traders that hope to make money on the change in oil price fluctuations.

  Let’s take a look at an example.

  US fracking (which I will discuss in detail) increased the amount of oil available between 2011 and 2014 from about 1 million to 4.8 million barrels per day (B/D). The market became gutted with oil and the price fell to $27 per barrel (/B). I might add that no one claimed the oil companies were gouging the public during these low prices. If the oil companies had control on the price of oil, why would the price fluctuate so extensively? Only when prices rise does anyone point fingers at the oil industry. But obviously, the oil companies have very little control over the price of oil, which is set by the futures market.

  

  By 2019, due primarily to fracking, the US became the number one producer of oil and gas in the world. In fact, we became a net exporter of oil and gas.

  Prior to Biden entering office, oil production of oil shales reached over 12 million B/D. but fell more than 1 million B/D during 2021. During this time, Russia became the world’s largest exporter of oil which helped fund their war effort in the Ukraine.

  How did Biden’s policies impact the lower production of oil and gas?

  Under Obama, the government came up with a dollar value called the social cost of carbon. It is supposedly an estimate by the government as to the environmental damage from everything from rising sea level to wildfires and floods from the release of one ton of carbon dioxide via fossil fuel burning. But scientists are still completely uncertain about the direct impact the burning of fossils fuels may have on the environment. I hope this causes you to suspect the number may be related to magic.

  But that never stopped the Obama administration from coming up with a solid amount of $57. Trump reduced the number to $7, but Biden revised the number to $51. The number is important because it gave the Biden administration the leverage to restrict oil and gas production based on supposed environmental and economic threats from greenhouse gasses (i.e., reduce permitting on federal lands).

  

  As might be expected, gas-producing states fought back by challenging the social cost of carbon in court, and a judge issued an injunction preventing the administration from using the metric. But rather than submit to the judge’s ruling, the Biden administration simply decided to stop new permits on federal lands blaming the judge for the action – sigh. But Biden has been slow-walking permitting since he became President. He is the only President in 20 years not to have an onshore lease sale in a given year (2021).

  We should not be surprised by Biden’s actions. During his campaign he promised to end drilling on federal lands to fight climate change. As much as 25% of oil and gas production comes from federal lands.

  

  Finally in November of last year, the Department of the Interior, which is required by law to have quarterly lease sales, opened its first Gulf of Mexico oil lease auction which generated $190 million from oil companies. But alas, a green Obama-appointed judge vacated the auction after [environmentalists] Earthjustice out of San Francisco sued.

  The ruling effectively ended new drilling in the Gulf, where some of the world’s environmentally friendly oil resides. There are some state representatives that claim the Biden administration went ahead with the auction knowing full well it would be vacated. As you might imagine, the Department of the Interior will need a great deal of time to review the environmental impact of drilling in the Gulf (wink wink).

  Bloomberg reported that an oil executive mused:

  “Biden is signaling that his environmental goals trump energy security and consumer prices… that’s not lost on public companies or banks they rely on.”

  Ultimately, investment in the oil industry increases when roadblocks to making a return on investment are removed. Biden’s actions have scared off many potential investors further reducing oil production. Press Secretary Jen Psaki’s oft repeated statement that 9.000 leases have been permitted is at the very least disingenuous considering the impediments to drilling the Biden administration has created.

  

  Psaki frequently claims that the Keystone XL Pipeline has no impact on oil prices because it will take two years to complete (only one year now if they had not shut it down). But Psaki is undermining (purposely in my opinion) the importance of the supply chain.

  For example, the oil that would come through the pipeline has to be shipped by train. Recent train crashes demonstrate the danger of transporting oil via this method. And it obviously costs a lot more to ship via rail. But in a real head scratcher, Biden waved sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline from Russia to Germany. Why is this acceptable, but the XL is not? Russian oil is notoriously dirty (high sulfur content).

  One would think Biden would be doing everything he could to send American oil and gas to Europe rather than making them more dependent on Russian oil. Ultimately, the Biden administration has intentionally raised significant barriers in permitting supply of oil to the US. Infrastructure is extremely important to the supply of cheap and clean oil to the American economy.

  The production of oil and gas in America is highly regulated – it’s the cleanest in the world both in lack of contaminants like sulfur which pollute and the way the industry protects against leaks.

  The invasion of Ukraine by Russia created fears about the future of oil supplies which, in turn, pushed oil prices to record highs. And although the US buys less than 10 percent of its oil from Russia, Biden’s decision to stop buying oil from Russia, created more turmoil in the markets.

  But perhaps the most irrational decision ever made by a President is Biden’s pursuit of [the] Iranian (and Venezuelan) nuclear deal to get access to Iran’s oil. They are the foremost sponsor of terrorism in the world and yet we are willing to sign a very one-sided treaty with them to gain oil which is extremely dirty (high sulfur).

  We will pay them just as Obama did, with the helicopter carrying billions of dollars. And those payments will make it easier to develop delivery systems once they finally develop a nuclear bomb. On top of this, we are helping them build an nuclear power plant that will give them clean energy but not us.

  Finally, I ask you to remember, gasoline prices were rising quickly way before the war in Ukraine broke out not only due to Biden’s interference in our oil production but the inflation caused by his huge spending bills. Now we are going to buy oil from Iran instead of enabling our own industry to supply America’s needs. It is the very definition of “bat-shit crazy.”

  ---

  This blog post is being published without a paywall because I believe its content to be far too important not to share. If you have the means, and would like to support my work, you can subscribe here: Subscribe Here

  For a preview of my upcoming podcast, here’s Marc explaining why the U.S. was the largest oil and gas producer in the world in a 30 minute presentation:

  ---

  Dr. Marc J. Defant has also been Editor of Geology and an Associate Editor of the Journal of Geophysical Research. He was also invited by the Chinese Government to be a keynote speaker at a symposium on the continental crust and has given invited talks at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Columbia University, Universitè de Bretagne (Brest, France), University of California at Los Angeles, University of Georgia and Tennessee, and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, as well as many others. Defant was one of the first American scientists allowed to work on volcanoes in the isolated and militarily sensitive area of Kamchatka, Russia, when it was still part of the old Soviet system through a cooperative joint grant between the Soviet Academy of Sciences and the National Science Foundation. He has presented a TedX talk on Why We are Alone in the Galaxy. He has also done research on volcanoes in Costa Rica, Greece, Indonesia, the Lesser Antilles, Panama, and the Philippines. Defant has been a consulting geologist on diamonds and gold for de Beers, Placer Dome, Falconbridge, Anglo American, Aurcana Gold, Diamond Fields, along with several others in West Africa and the Soviet Union/Russia.

  He can be reached via this contact form.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 20:45

• Early Screening Data Show New COVID Subvariant Gaining Ground In US
  Early Screening Data Show New COVID Subvariant Gaining Ground In US

  In keeping with a longstanding pattern of US COVID cases trailing the numbers out of Europe with a delay of a few weeks, infections stemming from the BA.2 omicron subvariant have continued to rise in recent days, Bloomberg reports.

  While data released by the CDC and Johns Hopkins don’t go into much detail about the variant type, a San Diego-based genomics firm called Helix has been watching the BA.2 variant since it first popped up in the US in early January. Although it was initially slow to take hold, Helix now estimates that 50% to 70% of all newly confirmed COVID cases across the US have been caused by BA.2.

  

  Helix’s variant surveillance research is funded by the CDC and its data is one of many inputs that the agency takes into account when creating its weekly “Nowcast” estimates.

  As we reported earlier this month, Western Europe has already seen an uptick in new cases caused by the variant. In the UK, BA.2 surpassed the 50% mark of overall cases. Although so far, the variant appears to be no more severe than the initial omicron strain. Still, there’s concern about its ability to reinfect people, as well as potential links to “long COVID”.

  Overall, the number of newly confirmed cases has continued to decline in the US, but experts (including Dr. Fauci) have warned that the decline could easily reverse, leading to a “bump” in new cases as COVID restrictions are largely abandoned.

  Also, cases have been rising in population centers like NYC, a trend that sewage data predicted weeks ago.

  If you have been waiting to get your booster shot…

  NOW is the time to get it. Here’s why:

  Covid cases in NYC over past week (7-day avg)
  * Sun 647
  * Mon 662
  * Tue 815
  * Wed 882
  * Thu 905
  * Fri 900
  * Today 1,048https://t.co/vpCxAcY4FU

  — Mark D. Levine (@MarkLevineNYC) March 19, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The CDC has yet to update its variant surveillance data for this past week, but the agency has reported BA.2 nearly doubling in prevalence each week since early February.

  Still, cases in the US remain well below the numbers in Hong Kong, which has seen its death rate from the virus soar since the start of the year as the city struggles with its worst outbreak since the virus first emerged.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 20:25

• Next Inflation Shock Comes From Resource Nationalism
  Next Inflation Shock Comes From Resource Nationalism

  By Valerie Cerasuolo, Bloomberg Markets Live commentator and reporter

  First there was supply-chain disruption brought on by the coronavirus, then war in Ukraine further rocked commodity markets. The next bout of inflation via raw material prices will be brought on by resource nationalism.

  While the cost pressures brought on by the difficulty in moving goods in a world in lockdown are fading, other factors are more enduring.

  For instance, the post-Cold War spread of e-commerce allowed companies to treat the world as both factory floor and marketplace. Comparative advantage, strategic partnerships and the success of globalization led to growth and prosperity. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine jarred that dynamic and has set in motion a series of quasi-isolationist responses.

  What started as economic sanctions on Russia has tipped the balance: we are no longer in a uni-polar world. We have entered into a multi-polar one where traditional economic superpowers can no longer call the shots. Service-driven economies are price takers and have far less leverage over those producing raw materials.

  The geopolitical landscape has changed and economic incentives along with it. The growing emergency that sanctions on Russia have caused over energy supply security will be inflationary for years to come. Nowhere is this more evident than in Europe, given its direct exposure to Russia energy, with individual countries prioritizing domestic energy security as a first port of call.

  The European Union entered an era of energy inflation given its commitment to address climate change and fossil fuel dependence by “greening” the economy. Such aims create price pressure, and has led to discussion at the European Central Bank on whether its inflation target should be adjusted.

  

  Russia and Ukraine are two of the globe’s top grain producers. Conflict has triggered panic and price squeezes on everything from fertilizer to cooking oil, and has also led nations to rethink their approach to national stockpiling.

  Energy security pulls into focus security of other commodities. The list of countries restricting agriculture exports is growing. It includes Indonesia, Hungary, Argentina, and Turkey. China’s begun stockpiling corn and soybeans while sources mention state refiners are considering pausing exports of gasoline and diesel in April.

  Effectively, every resource a nation produces has the potential to become a bargaining chip. There is a price to meet security of resources. As more economies step away from globalization that cost will get steeper as isolationist tendencies produce greater trade frictions.

  The process is unlikely to extend to a fear-driven mania. Consider it more of a purposeful step-change in both governments’ and corporations’ mental accounting and future planning, increasing both cost and scarcity to ensure resource security.

  Nations cannot adopt a complete isolationist approach — it’s impossible to fully unwind decades of economic integration. However, lack of supply reliability results in additional inflation premia, regardless of the war’s outcome or duration.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 20:05

• GOP-Led Maryland And Georgia Suspend Gas Taxes As Democrats Ironically Embrace Similar Federal Cuts
  GOP-Led Maryland And Georgia Suspend Gas Taxes As Democrats Ironically Embrace Similar Federal Cuts

  It looks as though progressives have finally been smacked over the head with reality long enough to realize that tax cuts are actually beneficial to American families and the economy. And just think – all it took was $7/gallon gas! 

  Republican led states like Maryland and Georgia are working out ways to try and provide relief at the pump for consumers by suspending their respective states’ gas taxes. The move comes at the same time that Capitol Hill is trying to pass similar federal legislation, according to a new report by Insider. 

  The temporary gas tax holiday for both states was announced late last week, as gas prices in the U.S. continue to surge as a result of both the Biden administration’s energy policies and geopolitical tensions and sanctions related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. 

  The current average price of gas was $4.26 as of Sunday, but had hit as high as $4.33 per gallon on March 11, the report notes. Crude prices nearly doubled from their Winter 2021 lows over the last few weeks, with WTI touching higher than $120/barrel at one point.

  

  As the world continues to choke off Russian oil supply, many – including Russian government officials – are predicting that energy prices will continue to soar higher. 

  Government in the U.S. is working to try and pass a gas tax holiday that would lower the price of gas by 18.4 cents per gallon. Ironically, it is Democrats that are trying to push for the tax cut while Republicans have called it a “non-solution” – which, of course, is correct. Whatever tax “cuts” are made on gas will have to be replaced elsewhere and price controls, the government’s likely next forthcoming “solution”, will only stand to further disrupt supply and demand. 

  In keeping with embracing asinine solutions, the government was also reportedly considering sending out gas cards to Americans, but the idea was rejected by Democrats due to “expense and inflation” concerns.

  17 states in total are considering legislation to reduce costs. “State gas taxes have ranged from $0.08 per gallon in Alaska to $0.58 per gallon in Pennsylvania,” Insider wrote. 

  Maryland Republican Gov. Larry Hogan said: “As we continue to stand in solidarity against Russian aggression in Ukraine and as Marylanders face the impact of surging inflation with the average price of gas rapidly rising, this bipartisan action will provide some relief from the pain at the pump.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 19:45

• China Has Fully Militarized 3 South China Sea Islands: US Indo-Pacific Commander
  China Has Fully Militarized 3 South China Sea Islands: US Indo-Pacific Commander

  By Frank Fang of the Epoch Times

  China has fully militarized at least three of the islands that the regime built in the disputed South China Sea, Adm. John Aquilino, commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, said on March 20.

  “I think over the past 20 years, we’ve witnessed the largest military buildup since World War II by the PRC [People’s Republic of China],” Aquilino told The Associated Press. “They have advanced all their capabilities and that buildup of weaponization is destabilizing to the region.”

  China has equipped Mischief Reef, Subi Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef with anti-ship and anti-aircraft missile systems, laser and jamming equipment, and aircraft hangers, Aquilino said. The missile systems could easily target any civilian and military planes flying over the disputed waters, he added.

  “So that’s the threat that exists, that’s why it’s so concerning for the militarization of these islands,” Aquilino said. “They threaten all nations who operate in the vicinity and all the international sea and airspace.”

  

  Currently, Aquilino said his mission is to “prevent war” through deterrence and promote peace and stability, in efforts that include working with U.S. allies and partners.

  “Should deterrence fail, my second mission is to be prepared to fight and win,” Aquilino said.

  As commander of U.S. forces in the Indo-Pacific, Aquilino oversees the largest combatant command, including 380,000 soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen, guardians, Coast Guardsmen, and civilians working for the Pentagon.

  China’s ruling communist regime is currently locking horns with Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Taiwan in a territorial dispute over reefs, islands, and atolls in the South China Sea.

  While the United States isn’t a claimant to the disputed islands, it has deployed warships through the region in what it calls freedom of navigation missions.

  A 2016 international ruling rejected the Chinese regime’s “nine-dash line” claim to about 85 percent of the South China Sea’s 2.2 million square miles. The ruling said that China’s claims had no historical basis and Beijing had violated the sovereignty of the Philippines by asserting territorial claims with its artificial islands built on reefs and sea rocks.

  

  The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has rejected the ruling. It has deployed coast guard ships and Chinese fishing boats, which sometimes have fishermen with military training aboard, to intimidate foreign vessels, block access to waterways, and seize shoals and reefs.

  Aquilino applauded the Philippines for taking the territorial dispute to international arbitration, saying it was a good template to resolve the dispute peacefully.

  The interview with the AP was conducted while Aquilino was aboard a U.S. Navy reconnaissance aircraft P-8A Poseidon, while the plane flew near China-held outposts in the Spratly archipelago.

  China has seven outposts in the Spratly Islands and 20 in the Parcel Islands, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank.

  During the flight, the U.S. Navy plane was repeatedly warned by Chinese callers, telling the plane to leave what they said was China’s territory.

  “China has sovereignty over the Spratly islands, as well as surrounding maritime areas. Stay away immediately to avoid misjudgment,” one of the Chinese radio messages said in a veiled threat.

  In response, a U.S. pilot on the Navy plane radioed back to the Chinese, saying, “I am a sovereign immune United States naval aircraft conducting lawful military activities beyond the national airspace of any coastal state.”

  “Exercising these rights is guaranteed by international law and I am operating with due regard to the rights and duties of all states.”

  In January, the U.S. State Department released a study (pdf) on the legality of China’s maritime claims in the South China Sea. It concluded that the claims are “inconsistent with international law.”

  “In the name of enforcing its expansive and unlawful maritime claims in the South China Sea, the PRC is interfering with rights and freedoms, including navigational rights and freedoms, that are due to all states,” said Constance Arvis, acting deputy assistant secretary for oceans, fisheries, and polar affairs, during a briefing following the publication of the study.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 19:25

• Largest California Refinery Hit With Strike Amid Record-High Gas Prices
  Largest California Refinery Hit With Strike Amid Record-High Gas Prices

  Hundreds of Chevron Corp. refinery workers in the San Francisco Bay Area went on strike Monday following a breakdown in talks between the oil major and the United Steelworkers (USW) union on a contract agreement. 

  At least 500 workers at a gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, and lubricating oils refinery owned by Chevron in the San Francisco Bay Area city of Richmond began striking at local time 12.01 am, the union said in a statement. According to AP News, this followed USW workers voting down a contract offer from Chevron and the company refusing to return to the bargaining table. 

  

  The strike’s timing is “very unfortunate” as refinery capacity in California is tight, Severin Borenstein, a UC Berkeley professor, told local news KTVU. 

  Refinery worker on the picket line sends this video of Chevron flaring hours after the strike began. pic.twitter.com/9bJw4exHZh

  — Ted Goldberg (@TedrickG) March 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Chevron announced in a statement the strike has yet to affect operational capacity at the refinery. 

  “Chevron Richmond is fully prepared to continue normal operations to safely and reliably provide the products that consumers need. We anticipate no issues in maintaining a reliable supply of products to the market. Chevron remains committed to safe operations for our workers and communities.”

  The heart of the problem is USW’s push to increase pay for workers by another 5%, on top of the national agreement to raise pay by 12%, purely based on the cost of living in the Bay Area is unbearable for blue-collar workers.

  “The cost of living in the Bay Area, as any blue-collar worker knows, has gotten to the point that makes it hard to live,” USW Local 5 First Vice President B.K. White, told local news ABC7. “Our workers have to live 45 minutes to an hour out. We are just asking for a little bit of relief.”

  He also said, “A cost of living increase for the Bay Area it’s not for us to get rich. Our medical, Kaiser, went up 23 percent this year and the company did not contribute another penny to it.”

  A prolonged strike could impact refining capacity as Californians pay some of the highest gasoline prices in the country. Here’s what Americans are paying on average at the pump for regular gas. 

  

  Ken Medlock, director of the Center for Energy Studies at Rice University’s Baker Institute, told AP the refinery is likely running a skeleton crew during the strike. He doesn’t believe the strike would lead Chevron to shutter capacity or the facility as a whole. 

  Let’s hope USW and the company can resolve their differences quickly, or the largest refinery in California could experience output disruptions. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 19:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Where The Crypto Hype Is Taking Over
  Where The Crypto Hype Is Taking Over

  The hype around cryptocurrencies is spreading around the world, with blockchain-based currencies like Bitcoin, Ethereum or Binance piquing the interest of more and more people – at least in some countries.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz notes, according to the Statista Global Consumer Survey, India, South Korea, the U.S. and Germany are countries where the number of crypto users and owners increased significantly between 2019 and 2021.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  In India, for example, the number of those “invested” in crypto more than doubled from 7 percent to 18 percent over that time span.

  In other countries, on the other hand, interest in cryptocurrencies more or less stagnated between the two years in question.

  Those countries included Brazil and Mexico. Modest gains could be seen in China and Spain.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 02:45

• Ukraine Can Hold Out As Long As West Keeps Supplying Weapons: Former UK Intelligence Chief
  Ukraine Can Hold Out As Long As West Keeps Supplying Weapons: Former UK Intelligence Chief

  By Alexander Zhang of The Epoch Times,

  Ukraine may be able to withstand the Russian invasion for “as long as we can supply them” with weaponry and “for as long as their morale holds up,” the former head of the UK’s Defence Intelligence has said.

  

  Air Marshal Philip Osborn said on March 20 that the Ukrainians have been “amazing” in their resistance so far. He told Sky News: “We need to bear in mind that they have been preparing for this. This, for most of the West started three weeks ago. For Ukraine, this started nearly a decade ago. They have had time to prepare and think. They have also got a strength of will and the application of good weaponry.

  “Frankly, I think they will hold out as long as we can supply them and for as long as their morale holds up, and those are two very easy things to say but really challenging to do.”

  

  He added, “Focusing on supporting a brave people to do what is right for them has to be one of those things that the West does to show strength and resolution.”

  In contrast to Ukraine’s resistance, Osborn said, Russia’s military campaign is “pretty demoralised, pretty stuck, and pretty stalled.”

  Russian forces are “demoralised because they were poorly prepared and proven to be inadequate,” and are now stalled because they have “lost momentum.”

  He added: “We are seeing them pull resources and manpower from across Russia, even from Syria, and that is not a good indication for a supposed superpower. They are stalled because they are running out of options. “Really what is left to them now is to double down on brute force to put pressure on the Ukrainian government.”

  According to the latest intelligence update from the UK’s Ministry of Defence (MoD), Russian forces made only “limited progress” in capturing a number of cities in Eastern Ukraine.

  “Instead, Russia has increased its indiscriminate shelling of urban areas resulting in widespread destruction and large numbers of civilian casualties,” it said.

  Olha Stefanishyna, Ukraine’s deputy prime minister for European and Euro-Atlantic integration, told Sky News that the situation in her country is becoming “more and more severe.”

  “Russia has committed nearly all possible war crimes which humanity has seen over the Second World War,” she said.

  She said Ukrainians are continuing to fight for their country but “it’s absolutely clear that only a Ukrainian army, and only a Ukrainian president, will not be able to withstand it alone.”

  She called on political leaders from around the world, including the United States, the European Union, and Asia, to establish an anti-war coalition.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 02:00

• McMaken: We Must Now Learn The Lesson Of 1914, Not The Lesson Of 1938
  McMaken: We Must Now Learn The Lesson Of 1914, Not The Lesson Of 1938

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  With proponents of military intervention and war, it’s always 1938, and every attempt to substitute diplomacy for escalation and war is “appeasement.” 

  

  Last week, for example, Ukrainian legislator Lesia Vasylenko accused Western leaders of appeasement during Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, stating, “This is the same as 1938 when also the world and the United States in particular were averting their eyes from what was being done by Hitler and his Nazi Party.” The week before that, Estonian legislator Marko Mihkelson declared, “I hope I’m wrong but I smell ‘Munich’ here. “

  These, of course, are references to the notorious Munich conference of 1938, when UK prime minister Neville Chamberlain (and others) agreed to allow Adolf Hitler’s Germany to annex the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia as a means to avoid a general war in Europe. The “appeasement,” of course, failed to prevent war because Hitler’s regime actually planned to annex much more than that. 

  Ever since, the “lesson of Munich” for advocates of military intervention is that it’s always best to escalate international conflicts and meet all perceived aggressors with immediate military force rather than embrace compromise or nonintervention. 

  Americans have made similar references, with pundits from Larry Elder to Peter Singer peppering their musings on the Ukraine war with the Munich analogy. One need only enter “Munich” and “1938” into a Twitter search to receive an apparently endless number of tweets from newly minted American foreign policy experts about how anything less than World War III is Munich all over again. Historically, countless American politicians have used the analogy as well. Cold Warriors of the 1980s denounced Ronald Reagan’s efforts to limit nuclear weapons as Munich-style appeasement. Republicans routinely claimed Barack Obama’s Iran diplomacy was the same thing. 

  But it is not, in fact, the case that every act of diplomacy or compromise designed to avoid war is appeasement. Moreover, we can find countless examples in which nonintervention and a refusal to escalate a situation was—or would have been—the better choice. 

  In other words, it’s not always 1938. Rather than fixating on the “lesson of 1938” the better lesson to learn is often the “lesson of 1914” or perhaps even the lessons of 1853, 1956, or 1968. In all these cases, military escalation was—or would have been—the wrong response. Moreover, in the age of nuclear weapons—something that did not exist in 1938—the world is a different place, and confrontation with a nuclear power could potentially bring about the end of human civilization. Casually bandying about demands for a “no-fly zone”—which would mean war with Russia—is both irresponsible and the sort of rhetoric fit for a nonnuclear world that ceased to exist many decades ago. 

  The Foundations of the “Lesson of Munich”

  The supposed lesson of Munich is based on two basic pillars. The first is the assumption that any act of military aggression will lead to many more acts of military aggression if not forcefully countered. It is basically a variation on the domino theory: if one nation submits to conquest by an aggressive neighbor, other nations will soon be forced to submit as well. This assumes every allegedly aggressive state has the same motivations as Nazi Germany and can plausibly seek a large, region-wide chain of military conquests across numerous states. 

  The second pillar of the lesson of Munich is that since every aggressive military act is likely to lead to many more, the only realistic option is to meet aggression with escalation and a no-compromise response. 

  This is precisely why Western advocates of military adventurism repeatedly equate every foreign leader Western elites don’t like with Hitler. Or, as noted at The Conversation:

  This kind of parallelism is not new; it is used every time there is a new enemy the public opinion should focus on. In recent years, according to Western rhetoric, Adolf Hitler has already been apparently reincarnated several times—as Saddam Hussein, Mohammad Qaddafi, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and more besides.

  In 2022, Putin is the new Hitler, which necessarily means to some that any failure by the West to respond to the Russian invasion with a full-blown military escalation is a Munich-style appeasement. 

  The fact that the events of 1938 are so well known by so many has helped considerably in pushing the narrative that compromise or nonintervention is appeasement. For most Americans, it’s likely the only event in the history of diplomacy they actually know anything about. Never mind the fact that the lesson of Munich has often been proven quite inapplicable to the modern world. As noted by Robert Kelly at the hardly noninterventionist publication 1945: 

  This frightening image of falling dominoes is not actually historically common though, thankfully. It was in the 1930s, but it was not, for example, in the Cold War. Aggressors do not always read one victory in place to mean they can automatically push on other “dominoes.” Deterrence is structured by local and historical factors; some commitments are much more credible than others. So even though the US lost in Vietnam, North Korea or East Germany did not attack South Korea or West Germany, just as the US did not attack Cuba or Nicaragua after the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan.

  In Ukraine that means that Western reticence to fight directly against the Russians in Ukraine does not automatically mean that Putin will test NATO’s collective security commitment or that China will attack Taiwan.

  But none of this matters when the public believes what it’s told by politicians and the media about how every rogue state is the equivalent of Nazi Germany. There is no foreign policy lesson to learn except that of opposing each new “Hitler.”

  The Lesson of 1914 

  Yet there are competing lessons to be learned. Lessons can be found, say, in the lead-up to the Crimean War in 1853 or the July Crisis of 1914. (Ask the average American about either of these, and you will probably receive a blank stare.)

  In both of these cases, regimes claimed they were countering aggression by foreign states and protecting either “allies” or oppressed minorities in the lands being subjected to conquest. 

  The lead-up to the First World War provides an especially cautionary tale about rushing to intervene in the name of supporting allies. The Austrian regime issued an ultimatum to the Serbians, and the Russians—with the support of France, Europe’s biggest democracy—mobilized in support of traditional ally Serbia. The Germans then mobilized in support of Austria-Hungary. Later, the regimes in the United Kingdom and the United States employed propaganda about alleged German war crimes in Belgium to ensure their respective countries entered the war. British politicians also claimed they must intervene to assist Britain’s Entente allies in resisting aggression. Four years of preventable and utterly pointless bloodshed ensued. Thanks to calls to oppose aggression and defend allies, what should have been a regional war in the Balkans became a major Europe-wide war. Even worse, with the Treaty of Versailles and the inclusion of the absurd “War Guilt” clause against Germany, the war set the stage for the far more destructive Second World War. 

  Yet the war was a result of regimes doing—from their own perspectives—what the “lesson of Munich” dictates: rush to war, immediately escalate, and confront “enemies” with military force in the name of countering aggression.

  The lesson of 1914 is certainly instructive today. Escalation is extraordinarily unwise, especially if there is the potential of turning limited wars into megascale disasters. Moreover, in the case of the United States, the complexity of the war’s causes meant there was no justifiable reason at all for the United States to enter. There was no “good guy” in the war, and American participation only further extended the bloodshed. 

  Fortunately, in spite of its pretensions of being the global guarantor of freedom always and everywhere, the United States has, at least twice, behaved as if it had learned the lesson of 1914. The first time was in 1956, when Soviet tanks rolled into Hungary when the Hungarian regime—an ostensibly sovereign state—became too uppity to suit Moscow. So, Soviet military might moved in to ensure Hungary remained sufficiently under Moscow’s control. Thousands of Hungarians were killed. Did the North Atlantic Treaty Organization mobilize against this aggression? Did Dwight Eisenhower ready America’s bombers? No.

  Then, in Prague in 1968, Czechoslovakian resistance to Moscow led to an invasion of two hundred thousand foreign troops and twenty-five hundred tanks from the pro-Soviet regimes of the Warsaw Pact. Again, the United States took no action. 

  This, of course, was the right decision on the part of the US and NATO. Heeding the Lesson of Munich, on the other hand, would have meant direct confrontation between NATO and the Soviet Union—a de facto confrontation between the United States and the USSR. This would have greatly increased the likelihood of global nuclear war.

  Naturally, some anti-Soviet activists cried “Appeasement!” at the time. Fortunately, they were ignored. A curious difference between 1956 and now, however, is that at the time, most of the critics of American inaction were on the anti-Soviet Right. Today, it is mostly the Left where we find those howling about Munich and blithely pushing for a US-Russia war while downplaying the risk of a nuclear apocalypse. But those who are now demanding World War III are a cautionary example of what happens when we obsess over the lesson of 1938 and ignore the lesson of 1914. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 23:40

• WEF Issues Ominous Warning Over Coming Food Crisis, Recommends 'More Sustainable Diets'
  WEF Issues Ominous Warning Over Coming Food Crisis, Recommends ‘More Sustainable Diets’

  Did you see the ratio Bloomberg just earned for a tweet which recommends getting used to lentils instead of meat, switching to public transportation, and avoiding buying things in bulk?

  

  The piece, written by economist Teresa Ghilarducci, recommends that families earning under $300,000 per year consider switching to public transportation, embracing a veggie diet, and “rethink those costly pet medical needs.”

  The intellectual heavyweight oddly retweeted someone slamming her advice.

  

  Which is being parodied throughout social media…

  pic.twitter.com/jy1kY2R51Y

  — Sid Prabhu (@sidprabhu) March 20, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Unsurprisingly, Ghilarducci and the far-left “New School for Social Research” she works for is affiliated with the World Economic Forum (WEF) – which, in addition to bragging about having ‘infiltrated‘ various world governments – infamously suggested that people get used to eating bugs due to inevitable food shortages, and

  

  Yes, this WEF:

  

  Which brings us to the WEF’s latest – warning of an impending food crisis kicked off by the war in Ukraine.

  Key points:

  • More people around the world will go hungry as a result of the pandemic, high fuel prices and the conflict in Ukraine.
  • Russia and Ukraine are also major producers and suppliers of fertilizers and their raw materials.
  • Existing logistical issues with moving grain and food are likely to worsen.
  • Disruptions will put further pressure on this year’s harvest and lead to higher food prices.
  • Even before the pandemic, the FAO estimated that 690 million people or 9% of the world’s population, were facing food insecurity.

  In short, the Ukraine war is accelerating the existing problem of inflation and food shortages, so hold on to your hats and consider a ‘more sustainable diet’ because things are about to get much, much worse.

  We are currently witnessing the beginning of a global food crisis, driven by the knock-on effects of a pandemic and more recently the rise in fuel prices and the conflict in Ukraine. There were already clear logistical issues with moving grain and food around the globe, which will now be considerably worse as a result of the war. But a more subtle relationship sits with the link to the nutrients needed to drive high crop yields and quality worldwide.

  …

  In this context, calling for an immediate government intervention to the market is therefore the natural thing to do. Yet government budgets are severely stretched after COVID, leaving little room for direct monetary support and contribution. In view of the recent promises to remove all Russian oil and gas from our imports, there will be some tough decisions ahead for governments, farmers and consumers alike.

  In the medium term, it highlights the need to transform our food system, using more green energy. We should also be encouraging more sustainable diets, which contain fewer grain fed animal products; and regenerative agricultural practices, which improve soil health and the efficiency of nutrient use by the crop. -WEF

  So… eat the bugs and be happy?

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 23:20

• The Takeover Of America's Legal System
  The Takeover Of America’s Legal System

  Authored by Aaron Sibarium via Common Sense with Bari Weiss,

  If you are a Common Sense reader, you are by now highly aware of the phenomenon of institutional capture. From the start, we have covered the ongoing saga of how America’s most important institutions have been transformed by an illiberal ideology—and have come to betray their own missions.

  Medicine. Hollywood. Education. The reason we exist is because of the takeover of newspapers like The New York Times.

  Ok, so we’ve lost a lot. A whole lot. But at least we haven’t lost the law. That’s how we comforted ourselves. The law would be the bulwark against this nonsense. The rest we could work on building anew.

  But what if the country’s legal system was changing just like everything else?

  Today, Aaron Sibarium, a reporter who has consistently been ahead of the pack on this beat, offers a groundbreaking piece on how the legal system in America, as one prominent liberal scholar put it, is at risk of becoming “a totalitarian nightmare.”

  This is a long feature on a subject we think deserves your time. Save it, share it, or print it to read in a quiet moment And please support stories like this one by subscribing today.

  

  In 2017, the super lawyer David Boies was at a corporate retreat at the Ritz-Carlton in Key Biscayne, Florida, hosted by his law firm, Boies, Schiller and Flexner. Boies was a liberal legend: He had represented Al Gore in Bush v. Gore, and, in 2013, successfully defended gay marriage in California, in Hollingsworth v. Perry, paving the way for the landmark Supreme Court ruling two years later.  

  On the last day of the retreat, Boies gave a talk in the hotel ballroom to 100 or so attorneys, according to a lawyer who was present at the event. Afterwards, Boies’s colleagues were invited to ask questions.

  Most of the questions were yawners. Then, an associate in her late twenties stood up. She said there were lawyers at the firm who were “uncomfortable” with Boies representing disgraced movie maker Harvey Weinstein, and she wanted to know whether Boies would pay them severance so they could quit and focus on applying for jobs at other firms. Boies, who declined to comment for this article, said no.

  That lawyers could be tainted by representing unpopular clients was hardly news. But in times past, lawyers worried about the public—not other lawyers. Defending communists, terrorists, and cop killers had never been a crowd pleaser, but that’s what lawyers had to do sometimes: Defend people who were hated. 

  When congressional Republicans attacked attorneys for representing Guantanamo detainees, for example, the entire profession rallied around them. The American Civil Liberties Union noted that John Adams took pride in representing British soldiers accused of taking part in the Boston Massacre, calling it “one of the best pieces of service I ever rendered to my country.”

  But that’s not how the new associates saw Boies’s choice to represent Weinstein. They thought there were certain people you just did not represent—people so hateful and reprehensible that helping them made you complicit. The partners, the old-timers—pretty much everyone over 50—found this unbelievable. That wasn’t the law as they had known it. That wasn’t America.

  “The idea that guilty people shouldn’t get lawyers attacks the legal system at its root,” Andrew Koppelman, a prominent liberal scholar of constitutional law at Northwestern University, said. “People will ask: ‘How can you represent someone who’s guilty?’ The answer is that a society where accused people don’t get a defense as a matter of course is a society you don’t want to live in. It’s a totalitarian nightmare.”

  ---

  ‘Operating in a Panopticon’

  The adversarial legal system—in which both sides of a dispute are represented vigorously by attorneys with a vested interest in winning—is at the heart of the American constitutional order. Since time immemorial, law schools have tried to prepare their students to take part in that system.

  Not so much anymore. Now, the politicization and tribalism of campus life have crowded out old-fashioned expectations about justice and neutrality. The imperatives of race, gender and identity are more important to more and more law students than due process, the presumption of innocence, and all the norms and values at the foundation of what we think of as the rule of law.

  Critics of those values are nothing new, of course, and certainly they are not new at elite law schools. Critical race theory, as it came to be called in the 1980s, began as a critique of neutral principles of justice. The argument went like this: Since the United States was systemically racist—since racism was baked into the country’s political, legal, economic and cultural institutions—neutrality, the conviction that the system should not seek to benefit any one group, camouflaged and even compounded that racism. The only way to undo it was to abandon all pretense of neutrality and to be unneutral. It was to tip the scales in favor of those who never had a fair shake to start with.

  But critical race theory, until quite recently, only had so much purchase in legal academia. The ideas of its founders—figures like Derrick Bell, Alan David Freeman, and Kimberlé Crenshaw—tended to have less influence on the law than on college students, who by 2015 seemed significantly less liberal (“small L”) than they used to be. There was the Yale Halloween costume kerfuffle. The University of Missouri president being forced out. Students at Evergreen State patrolling campus with baseball bats, eyes peeled for thought criminals.

  At first, the conventional wisdom held that this was “just a few college kids”—a few spoiled snowflakes—who would “grow out of it” when they reached the real world and became serious people. That did not happen. Instead, the undergraduates clung to their ideas about justice and injustice. They became medical students and law students. Then 2020 happened. 

  All of sudden, critical race theory was more than mainstream in America’s law schools. It was mandatory. 

  Starting this Fall, Georgetown Law School will require all students to take a class “on the importance of questioning the law’s neutrality” and assessing its “differential effects on subordinated groups,” according to university documents obtained by Common Sense. UC Irvine School of Law, University of Southern California Gould School of Law, Yeshiva University’s Cardozo School of Law, and Boston College Law School have implemented similar requirements. Other law schools are considering them. 

  As of last month, the American Bar Association is requiring all accredited law schools to “provide education to law students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism,” both at the start of law school and “at least once again before graduation.” That’s in addition to a mandatory legal ethics class, which must now instruct students that they have a duty as lawyers to “eliminate racism.” (The American Bar Association, which accredits almost every law school in the United States, voted 348 to 17 to adopt the new standard.)

  Trial verdicts that do not jibe with the new politics are seen as signs of an inextricable hate—and an illegitimate legal order. At the Santa Clara University School of Law, administrators emailed students that the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse—the 17-year-old who killed two men and wounded another during a riot, in Kenosha, Wisconsin—was “further evidence of the persistent racial injustice and systemic racism within our criminal justice system.” At UC Irvine, the university’s chief diversity officer emailed students that the acquittal “conveys a chilling message: Neither Black lives nor those of their allies’ matter.” (He later apologized for having “appeared to call into question a lawful trial verdict.”) 

  Professors say it is harder to lecture about cases in which accused rapists are acquitted, or a police officer is found not guilty of abusing his authority. One criminal law professor at a top law school told me he’s even stopped teaching theories of punishment because of how negatively students react to retributivism—the view that punishment is justified because criminals deserve to suffer.

  “I got into this job because I liked to play devil’s advocate,” said the tenured professor, who identifies as a liberal. “I can’t do that anymore. I have a family.”

  Other law professors—several of whom asked me not to identify their institution, their area of expertise, or even their state of residence—were similarly terrified.

  Nadine Strossen, the first woman to head the American Civil Liberties Union and a professor at New York Law School, told me: “I massively self-censor. I assume that every single thing that is said, every facial gesture, is going to be recorded and potentially disseminated to the entire world. I feel as if I am operating in a panopticon.” 

  This has all come as a shock to many law professors, who had long assumed that law schools wouldn’t cave to the new orthodoxy.

  At a Heterodox Academy panel discussion in December 2020, Harvard Law School Professor Randall Kennedy said that, until recently, he’d thought that fears of law schools becoming illiberal—shutting down unpopular views or voices—had been overblown. “I’ve changed my mind,” said Kennedy, who, in 2013, published a book called “For Discrimination: Race, Affirmative Action, and the Law.” “I think that there really is a big problem.”

  The problem has come not just from students, but from administrators, who often foment the forces they capitulate to. Administrators now outnumber faculty at some universities—Yale employs 5,066 administrators and just 4,937 professors—and law schools haven’t been spared the bloat. Several law professors bemoaned the proliferation of diversity, equity, and inclusion offices, which, they said, tend to validate student grievances and encourage censorship. 

  The distinction between DEI and the rest of the administration is often wafer thin. At Yale Law School, the Office of Student Affairs told students in an email last week that they could “swing by” the office to grab a “Critical Race Theory T-Shirt!” The T-shirt repeated the phrase “reparations & prison abolition” five times, Bart Simpson-style, before delivering the kicker: “critical race theory & yale law school.”

  

  Law school deans have further entrenched this culture. In 2020, 176 of them petitioned the American Bar Association to require “education around bias, cultural competence, and anti-racism” at all accredited law schools, which led to the new ABA standards this February. 

  As the new ideology has been institutionalized, the costs of disobeying it have grown steeper, both for faculty and for students. ​​

  At the University of Illinois Chicago, for example, a law professor’s classes were cancelled and his career threatened for including a bleeped out “‘n____’” on an exam in a hypothetical scenario about employment discrimination. (He had used the same scenario for years without incident.)

  A Harvard Law professor told me that students face “social death” if they buck the consensus. Students at other law schools—including Yale, NYU, Boston College, Georgetown, and Northwestern—told me much the same thing. “You want to have friends, so you don’t want to say anything controversial,” one Georgetown Law student explained. 

  At Boston College Law School this semester, a constitutional law professor asked students: “Who does not think we should scrap the constitution?” According to a student in the class, not a single person raised their hand.

  Those students and organizations who do dissent often encounter a tsunami of hate. When members of Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law’s Federalist Society chapter invited the conservative writer Josh Hammer to campus in October 2021, the law school’s all-student listserv lit up with invective. 

  “I’d be completely unsurprised (and in fact, willing to bet) that Joshie Hammer fucks (or at least tries to fuck—he probably was rejected repeatedly) we the trannies in his free time,” one student emailed. “Or—more likely—he just wants (and needs) to get just fucked in the ass . . . Maybe our lovely, idiotic FedSoc board is experiencing a similar dilemma within their own psychosexual selves.”

  That was nothing compared to what happened at Yale Law School earlier this month, when the school’s chapter of the Federalist Society hosted a bipartisan panel on civil liberties. More than 100 law students disrupted the event, intimidating attendees and attempting to drown out the speakers. When the professor moderating the panel, Kate Stith, told the protesters to “grow up,” they hurled abuse at her and insisted their disturbance was “free speech.”

  The fracas caused so much chaos that the police were called. After it ended, the protesters pressured their peers to sign an open letter endorsing their actions and condemning the Federalist Society, which they claimed had “​​profoundly undermined our community’s values of equity and inclusivity.”

  “I’m sure you realize that not signing the letter is not a neutral stance,” one student told her class group chat. She was upset that the panel had included Kristen Waggoner of the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal nonprofit that’s won a slew of religious liberty cases at the Supreme Court.

  As similar messages clogged listservs and Discord forums, nearly two-thirds of Yale Law’s student body wound up signing the letter.

  Stith, the professor who was lambasted for telling students to “grow up,” doesn’t see the pile-on as an isolated incident. 

  “Law schools are in crisis,” she told me. “The truth doesn’t matter much. The game is to signal one’s virtue.”

  ---

  The Associates Want to ‘Burn the Place Down’

  We don’t need to speculate about how temper tantrums in New Haven will reshape American institutions. The ideas underlying these outbursts have already spread to boardrooms and government agencies. 

  Last year, NASDAQ demanded that companies listing shares on its exchanges meet racial and gender quotas. Uber and Postmates waived delivery fees from black-owned restaurants. Montana and Vermont gave non-white residents priority access to Covid-19 vaccines. 

  Some high-profile initiatives have been blocked—for example, the Biden administration’s attempt to prioritize minority-owned restaurants while doling out pandemic relief. But the legal guardrails that once ensured against this sort of tipping of the scales are coming undone.

  That was the lesson of Rebecca Slaughter, one of the five commissioners who run the Federal Trade Commission.

  In a Twitter thread in September 2020, Slaughter declared: “#Antitrust can and should be #antiracist.”

  Then she added: “There’s precedent for using antitrust to combat racism. E.g., South Africa considers #racialequity in #antitrust analysis to reduce high economic concentration & balance racially skewed business ownership.”

  Here was a prominent government official—educated at Yale Law School, formerly senior counsel for Senator Chuck Schumer—proposing that a federal agency jettison its mandate (protecting consumers, ensuring competition) in the service of a political goal (narrowing the racial wealth gap) that no one had debated or voted on. 

  In practice, several attorneys said, that meant a company with a majority-white board could be penalized for something that a company with a majority-black board might not be. The government might even block a merger if the resulting conglomerate would be insufficiently diverse—something that has actually happened in South Africa, the country Slaughter held up as a model. Jobs, plants, investments, market share: all of it was on the line.

  “That’s hugely corrosive,” said a corporate lawyer in Virginia, who, like most attorneys contacted for this article, would not go on the record for fear of losing his job. “You see it in all of the worst things we see in Donald Trump. ‘The law means what I say it means. The election was stolen because I lost.’ Once you depart from the idea that we’re all people under the law, it really matters who is in power. That starts to feel like the rule of man, not the rule of law.” 

  Two weeks after posting her thread, Slaughter appeared on CNBC. “I want to be working to promote equity, rather than reinforce inequity,” she said. She had come to the conclusion that “it isn’t possible to really be actually neutral, nor should we be neutral in the face of systemic racism and structural racism.” 

  Slaughter’s statement was not a one-off. It captured the zeitgeist not just of post-Floyd progressivism, but of an increasingly large chunk of the legal profession. The idea that lawyers can’t be neutral, that confronting injustice must supersede all else, has eroded the norm that legal representation—like the ability to obtain medical care or buy a train ticket—is something every American deserves.

  “Partners are being blindsided by associates who they think are liberals in their own image,” an attorney in Washington, D.C., told me. “But they’re not. The associates want to burn the place down.”

  Lawyers at top law firms in New York, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles said they fret constantly about saying the wrong thing—or taking on the wrong client.

  “It’s much worse than McCarthyism,” Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law, told me. “McCarthyism was a reflection of dying, old views. They were not the future. But the people today who are imposing litmus tests for who they represent—they are the future.”

  When Dershowitz was accused, in 2014, of sexual relations with an underage girl at Jeffrey Epstein’s various residences, he said he had trouble finding representation. (A federal judge eventually struck the allegations from the record.)

  Law firms have been known to avoid unpopular clients—Big Tobacco, for example—but the scope and frequency of these evasions have increased, dozens of lawyers interviewed for this story agreed. That’s partly because young lawyers, like the one who accosted David Boies, see representing someone as tantamount to endorsing them. 

  ​​“It used to be that most lawyers could work for Catholic hospital system even if they were pro-choice,” a recently retired lawyer told me. “But now people just say, ‘I oppose this client, so I can’t work for them.’” (The lawyer had planned to stay at his law firm—one of the largest in the US—for a long time. He told me he retired in 2020 after the firm’s culture became “simply unbearable,” with younger associates excoriating him for being “old and white, and part of the reason we have systemic racism in America.”)

  Law firms also worry about losing their corporate clients, which, like many American institutions, have grown more stridently ideological in recent years. “I knew of and heard of clients protesting cases we were taking,” the recently retired lawyer said. “If you were going to do a gun rights case, you would incur the wrath of other clients.”

  Since 2011, law firms have been pressured to drop or turn down a long list of clients: fossil fuel companies, foreign universities, a GOP-controlled House of Representatives, employers challenging Biden’s vaccine mandate, and, of course, Donald Trump.

  These pressures—both internal and external—have had a chilling effect. If defending anti-vaxxers can cost you business, law firms reason, imagine the blowback of defending a transphobe or a racist. 

  “It doesn’t even occur to people to take controversial cases,” one lawyer in Washington, D.C., said. Religious liberty cases, for example, are “totally off the table. I wouldn’t even think to bring it up.” 

  Another lawyer, who specializes in First Amendment litigation, described being forced to turn away a client with far-right views because the firm thought that any association with the client—even if the claims advanced were meritorious—would be bad for business.

  The problem, Strossen said, is that rights mean nothing without representation. “ANYONE who doesn’t have access to counsel in defending a right, as a practical matter, doesn’t have a meaningful opportunity to exercise that right,” the former ACLU chief told me in an email. “Hence, undermining representation for any unpopular speaker or idea endangers freedom for ANY speaker or idea, because the tides of popularity are constantly shifting.”

  Ken Starr, the former solicitor general who led the 1998 investigation of Bill Clinton, agreed. “At a time when fundamental freedoms are under assault around the globe, it is all the more imperative that American lawyers boldly stand up for the rule of law,” Starr said. “In our country, that includes—especially now—the representation of controversial causes and unpopular clients.”

  ---

  Undermining the Impartial Judiciary 

  Another cornerstone of the rule of law is an impartial judiciary. Some judges, however, have begun to see themselves not as impartial adjudicators, but as agents of social change—believing, like Slaughter, that they cannot be neutral in the midst of moral emergencies.

  During the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, for example, Massachusetts Superior Court judge Shannon Frison vowed on Facebook to “never be silent or complicit again, in any courtroom or any context.” “As the very keepers of justice,” she said, judges “not only stand with the protesters—we fall with them.” 

  The Washington State Supreme Court put out a statement recognizing “the role we have played in devaluing black lives,” and encouraged judges to strike down “even the most venerable precedent” if it is “incorrect and harmful.”

  Such statements are not mere virtue signaling. They reflect sincerely held beliefs with real-world consequences. 

  Case in point: the case of Montez Terriel Lee, Jr.

  On May 28, 2020, Lee, Jr., then 25 years old, broke into the MaX it PAWN Shop, in Minneapolis. It had been three days since George Floyd had been murdered by a white police officer, about ten blocks south, and the city had been engulfed by riots. As looters grabbed whatever they could find, Lee poured lighter fluid all over the pawn shop. Then, he set it on fire. Outside, Lee raised his arm and clenched his fist. In a video, he can be seen saying, “Fuck this place. We’re gonna burn this bitch down.”

  At the time, Lee was unaware that Oscar Stewart, Jr., a 30-year-old father of five, was trapped inside and that he would die of smoke inhalation and excessive burns. A little over two weeks later, police arrested Lee, who pleaded guilty to arson. 

  Usually, this sort of crime, according to federal sentencing guidelines, would have landed Lee in prison for up to 20 years. But the prosecutor, Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Calhoun-Lopez, only asked for 12 years. 

  In his pre-sentence filing, Calhoun-Lopez portrayed Lee not as a rioter but a protester. “Mr. Lee was terribly misguided, and his actions had tragic, unthinkable consequences. But he appears to have believed that he was, in Dr. King’s eloquent words, engaging in ‘the language of the unheard.’”

  The judge, Wilhelmina Wright, appeared to buy that argument. On January 14, she handed down a sentence of just 10 years—even fewer than the prosecution had asked for. 

  “Motivation is a relevant factor in sentencing, and it was appropriate for the prosecutor and judge to consider the fact that the defendant did not intend to kill anyone when he set fire to the store,” Rebecca Roiphe, a professor of legal ethics at New York Law School, said in an email. But, she added, “Rewarding someone for having the correct beliefs is almost as bad as punishing someone for having the wrong ones. More importantly, a criminal justice system that does the former likely does the latter as well.”

  Strossen was more pointed: “For anyone who might applaud the Minneapolis situation, I would ask: ‘How would you feel about a judge who has religious objections to abortion giving a lighter sentence to a pro-life crusaders who attacks clinic property or personnel?’”

  Judge Wright’s willingness to tip scales didn’t come out of nowhere. When she was a student at Harvard Law School, she’d taken a class with Derrick Bell, the founder of critical race theory, who asked students to submit written reflections on the assigned readings.  Bell published many of the reflections—including Wright’s—in a 1989 article for UCLA Law Review: “Racial Reflections: Dialogues in the Direction of Liberation.” 

  In one reflection, Wright said that “American liberalism”—especially the liberal “notion that property is neutral”—was “equally” as “damaging” as overt “racial supremacy.” Her chambers are eight miles away from the MaX it PAWN Shop, one of 1,500 businesses—many minority-owned—that were damaged or destroyed in the record-setting riots of 2020.

  ---

  ‘The Anti-Innocence Project’

  Minneapolis is a microcosm of a larger trend. As progressives have set about repurposing the law, they seem to have lost sight of the people they insist they’re saving: the poor, the vulnerable, the indigent—including many racial minorities.

  Consider the movement to abolish the right to eliminate members of a jury pool. 

  The so-called peremptory strike allows attorneys, in a trial case, to toss out potential jurors they deem biased. Peremptories, as criminal-defense attorneys see it, offer their least sympathetic clients—those against whom all the cards have been stacked—a glimmer of hope. 

  The problem, as progressives see it, is peremptory strikes have also been used to disproportionately exclude potential black jurors. Supreme Court Justice Steven Breyer was among the most prominent to call for an end to peremptories, arguing in a 2005 opinion that they magnify racial bias in the legal system. But it wasn’t until the last year or so that the cause gained momentum. 

  In August, the Arizona Supreme Court announced that the state would no longer allow peremptory challenges at civil and criminal trials. This came after a pair of Arizona judges launched a petition arguing that peremptories perpetuate “discrimination.” The New Jersey Supreme Court is considering a similar move.

  It hasn’t gone over well with defense attorneys.

  “This is the stupidest fucking thing in the world,” Ambrosio Rodriguez, a criminal-defense attorney in Los Angeles, said. “Is my voice clear just how pissed off I am about this thing?” Rodriguez noted that the peremptory is one of the few tools at his disposal to help “level the playing field.”

  “Suppose a woman married to a police officer says she can be fair,” Josh Kendrick, a criminal-defense attorney in Columbia, South Carolina, told me. “I won’t be able to strike her from the jury, even though we all know she can’t really be fair.”  

  Then there’s the erosion of the principle that one is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. “The Anti-Innocence Project,” one criminal-defense attorney in San Francisco joked.

  ​​Progressive lawyers have become more determined to turn a blind eye to certain defendants while cracking down with even greater than usual fervor on certain crimes. “The same people who are anti-incarceration for some defendants will support life plus cancer for others,” said Scott Greenfield, a criminal-defense attorney in New York. “Good people—which in practice means blacks and Hispanics, regardless of what they did—should be free. Bad people—which in practice means sex offenders and financial criminals—should go to jail.” 

  In 2019, for example, the American Bar Association nearly passed a motion urging state legislatures and courts to adopt a new definition of “consent” in cases of sexual misconduct that would flip the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused—despite fierce criticism of the standard from legal scholars, and despite some evidence that it has unfairly hurt black, male students on college campuses.

  The motion was expected to pass but failed at the last minute, after key attorneys withdrew their support. Even so, nearly 40 percent of ABA delegates voted for it. 

  This sort of progressive carceralism isn’t confined to sexual assault. After the Rittenhouse verdict, in November, some left-wing legal scholars zeroed in on the definition of “self-defense.” Changing that definition—insisting that whoever was the first to point his gun was the presumptive aggressor—would have made it harder for Rittenhouse to have been acquitted. It would also preempt future Rittenhouses. 

  Kendrick, the criminal defense attorney, was skeptical. “These reforms aren’t going to be weaponized against white males or the GOP,” he said. “They’re going to be weaponized against criminal defendants.”

  Criminal defendants like Stephen Spencer.

  In July 2017, Spencer, a black man, endured a series of racist taunts at a bar. When he went outside, a group of white men followed him and shouted: “We’re going to get you, n—–!” Taking them at their word, Spencer turned around, pulled out his gun, and fired, killing one of his pursuers. 

  A jury acquitted Spencer on all counts. But under a different definition of self-defense—one reverse engineered to put the Rittenhouses of the world in jail—the case could easily have gone another way.

  “There’s a real risk Stephen Spencer would be a convicted murderer instead of a free man, because he displayed a lawfully possessed firearm when he was menaced by a racist mob,” a prominent second-amendment lawyer told me.

  ---

  Brave New World

  The old-school liberals, those who have been around for three or four decades, say that none of this was supposed to happen.

  Several attorneys called FTC commissioner Rebecca Slaughter’s thread—and her almost off-the-cuff reference to South Africa—deeply unsettling. Of all places, they said, South Africa? Did she know what was going on there? (Slaughter and her assistant did not return calls and text messages.) 

  In July, there had been rioting, looting, Molotov cocktails, people pulled from their cars and families hacked to death in their homes. The demonstrations had been sparked by the arrest of former President Jacob Zuma, now serving a 15-month sentence for contempt of court. But the real causes had been percolating for decades: a faltering economy, corruption, and the deeply divisive policies of the ruling African National Congress, which Slaughter held up as a model of “#racialequity.”

  It started in 1998 with the Competition Act, an antitrust law that effectively required businesses to be partly black-owned. The act was an early example of “Black Economic Empowerment”—race-conscious policies aimed at lifting black South Africans out of poverty.

  It was a disaster. Soon, companies were being forced to cede large chunks of their equity to black shareholders, many of whom were well-connected to the ANC. Foreign investment dried up—the regulations imposed huge costs on businesses—and corruption and unemployment soared. 

  By 2009, Moeletsi Mbeki, a black South African political economist, was warning that South Africa’s race-conscious policies would “collapse” the country. By 2021, South Africa’s unemployment rate was 44%, the highest in the world. 

  All this had culminated in the riots that killed 300 people and destroyed scores of businesses. This was the country a U.S. antitrust official wanted to emulate. 

  At stake, said Noah Phillips, also an FTC commissioner, was not just trade or competition but the American justice system itself. How we govern ourselves. What we mean by democracy and the rule of law.

  “We should strive to meet the promise that is literally chiseled into the stone of the Department of Justice and courthouses across the country,” Phillips told me. “That is: the law should be applied equally. Deliberately attempting to apply the law in an unequal fashion, based on the preferences of those in power, is inimical to the rule of law.”

  On November 12, the FTC released a draft strategic plan for the next five years. One of its main objectives: use the agency’s power to “advance racial equity.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 23:00

• US Angered After Syria's Assad Makes Historic Visit To UAE
  US Angered After Syria’s Assad Makes Historic Visit To UAE

  Since it became clear that the Assad government emerged victorious after the decade-long proxy war to effect regime change in Damascus sponsored by the West and Gulf powers, there have been slow but consistent efforts by Arab countries to normalize relations with Syria once again. 

  On Friday, for the first time since the war began in 2011, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad visited an Arab state to meet with its leader. It was none other than US and Saudi ally UAE. After long being branded an international ‘pariah’ it was a shock for some to see Assad in photographs speaking warmly to Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan.

  

  The UAE sheikh “stressed that Syria is a fundamental pillar of Arab security, and that the UAE is keen to strengthen cooperation with it”, according to UAE state news. Assad also met with prime minister of the UAE, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum.

  The Associated Press called it “clear signal” of Assad’s coming reengagement with the Arab world as he “comes in from the cold” – with the likelihood of Syria eventually rejoining the Arab League.

  And The Wall Street Journal wrote, “The Emirates, Egypt and Jordan are trying to bring him back into the Arab diplomatic fold—a move that could unlock trade benefits for all sides and reduce Iran’s influence. U.A.E. Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed met with Mr. Assad in Damascus in November, making him the most senior Emirati official to visit Syria since the start of the civil war.”

  Perhaps to be expected, Washington was angered by UAE authorizing and welcoming the visit, slamming it as an “apparent attempt to legitimize” Assad.

  “We are profoundly disappointed and troubled by this apparent attempt to legitimize Bashar al-Assad, who remains responsible and accountable for the death and suffering of countless Syrians” said State Department spokesman Ned Price said of the visit.

  The UAE’s normalization effort isn’t new. But to roll out the red carpet for Assad on a symbolic anniversary for Syrians, and while his Russian ally is in the midst of waging war on Ukraine… well, that’s quite a message https://t.co/cniRtkcrET

  — Gregg Carlstrom (@glcarlstrom) March 19, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  He also warned countries wanting to deal with Syria about US-led sanctions, saying they must “weigh carefully the horrific atrocities visited by the regime on the Syrians over the last decade,” according to the statement. He said the US won’t lift sanctions or provide waivers for anyone doing business with Damascus “until there is irreversible progress toward a political solution, which we have not seen.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 22:40

• Jan. 6 Suicide Victim Was Told 'He Would Not Receive A Fair Trial In This Town'
  Jan. 6 Suicide Victim Was Told ‘He Would Not Receive A Fair Trial In This Town’

  Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The 14-month ordeal battling charges from his time at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, had put so much stress on Matthew L. Perna that he began throwing up blood.

  

  When the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) asked to delay his sentencing and announced that it would seek more prison time, it was a bridge too far. Perna took his own life on Feb. 25 in Sharon, Pennsylvania. He was 37.

  “Worry, anxiety, stress had worn him down,” Geri Perna, his aunt, said at a Capitol Hill news conference on March 17. “He suffered constant nightmares and began throwing up blood. He was no longer comfortable leaving his home.

  “One setback after another took its toll on him. And he just wanted it to be over. His attorney encouraged him to plead guilty by telling him that he would not receive a fair trial in this town.”

  Perna stood in driving rain near the steps of the Capitol, alongside three members of Congress, to decry the treatment of Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach defendants by the DOJ, much of society, and influencers on social media.

  ‘A Feeling of Shame’

  Collectively, they sounded the alarm that U.S. society is at a precipice, close to losing the freedoms that have been taken for granted for so long.

  “Matt walked through an open door into this Capitol building, a monument that has been called the People’s House,” Geri Perna said. “Standing here in front of this building does not give me a sense of pride, but instead [it] is replaced by a feeling of shame.”

  Matthew Perna had pleaded guilty to one felony count of obstruction of an official proceeding, the congressional certification of the presidential election results. He also pleaded guilty to three misdemeanor charges.

  He spent about 20 minutes inside the Capitol on Jan. 6. After his sentencing was initially scheduled for March 3, prosecutors announced that they sought to add penalty enhancers that would have meant 41 to 51 months in prison.

  “Although Matthew Perna may have taken his last breath on Feb. 25, his death began in January 2021 after he was arrested and a nightmare like no other began,” Geri Perna said. “It affected everyone in our family, but we stood by his side proudly.”

  Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) ripped the DOJ for the sentencing delay.

  “The Department of Justice wasn’t sure they had beat up on this guy enough,” Gohmert said.

  He lauded Matthew Perna for a life of service, including a mission trip to hurricane-ravaged Haiti.

  

  “This is not an insurrectionist that does these kinds of things. He didn’t break, touch, or steal anything,” Gohmert said. “He didn’t harm anyone. And yet the Biden Department of Justice sought to throw the book at him for what really was a mistake, that now … led to the end of his life, a life he used to serve others.”

  Gohmert asked where today’s DOJ prosecutors were in June 2016, when Democrats staged a sit-in on the House floor and prevented regular business from being conducted for more than 12 hours.

  “If the Biden administration cared so deeply about sending a message that you should never obstruct an official session of Congress, they had much that they could have gone after the Democrats who sat on the floor,” Gohmert said. “I knew at the time they were violating many House rules. I didn’t realize at the time they were committing federal felonies.

  

  “How long did they sit in jail? How long were they in pretrial confinement? Did they have a DOJ prosecutor that said, ‘Wait a minute, I want to make sure every one of these Democrats gets 41 months in prison,’ like he felt the gentleman named Matt Perna should have? No. No, they didn’t do any of that.”

  He accused the DOJ of trying to exact political revenge.

  “This is a very dangerous policy that this Department of Justice, this administration is pursuing in pursuing vengefulness,” Gohmert said. “Republics don’t last much longer when they get like this. They need to be careful that they’re not leading us into a dark chapter of our country.”

  The DOJ has refused to comment on the Perna case, although it did dismiss the charges after Perna’s death.

  Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) criticized the DOJ for not living up to legal obligations to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to defense attorneys.

  “At this time, the Department of Justice is still withholding hundreds of thousands of FBI records from defense attorneys,” Greene said. “They’re not allowing them to have the records to prepare their cases. Trials are starting and defendants still don’t have all of their discovery. They deserve this to be able to defend themselves.”

  ‘Two-Tiered Justice System’

  Greene opened her remarks by blasting federal judges in the District of Columbia Circuit for holding so many Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach pretrial defendants in jail without bond.

  “I’d like to start by saying shame on every single judge that is using their courtroom to persecute pretrial Jan. 6 defendants,” she said. “This should never happen in our country. We have a two-tiered justice system in America today. And it’s wrong.”

  Greene also shamed her congressional colleagues for not speaking out more about the issue.

  

  “There are very few Republicans, very few members of Congress that are willing to speak out and stand up for these people’s due process rights,” she said. “Do they even believe in America and a fair justice system? Shame on them! Shame on everyone that will not speak out against this outrage. It’s enough.”

  Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, said the Department of Justice “really wanted to make an example of Matthew Perna.”

  ‘Some of Them Have Been Tortured’

  Biggs said many of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach defendants who have been jailed for 14 months have experienced extended periods in solitary confinement.

  “Solitary confinement for more than two weeks in international law is considered torture,” he said. “These individuals, some of them have been tortured. That’s what’s going on here.”

  Biggs called out judges, “particularly the judges who’ve been biased because of political reasoning.”

  “Just stop it. This is America. You have to grant due process,” Biggs said. “The persecution that Matt Perna underwent by the mob on social media is too great for him to bear. We must correct it. We are a self-governing people. We can fix this, and we must fix this. This should never, ever be a situation again.”

  Geri Perna said the mistreatment that her nephew experienced will lead to more victims if something doesn’t change.

  “I agreed to come to this press conference today because I do not want Matthew Perna’s name forgotten,” she said. “There are hundreds of other people just like him, standing in his shoes. I do not know how much more they can take.

  “Still I promise you that if something is not done to stop this evil torture that is being inflicted upon these people who have not even been convicted of a crime, more are going to make the choice that Matthew Perna made.”

  Geri Perna said the silence from most of Congress is revealing.

  “Their silence speaks volumes. Shame on everyone who has a voice and could have intervened,” Perna said. “Maybe this tragedy would never have occurred. We are disappointed and angry. And we are seeking justice for Matthew Perna.

  “I stand here today only because my nephew is dead. No one cared about Matthew Perna’s sufferings at the hands of this Justice Department when he was alive. And now it is too late to help him. But anyone who knew Matt would say that he would want others to receive the help that he himself was denied.”

  Despite the hate mail directed at Matthew Perna’s father and other family members, Geri Perna said the family believes that Matthew is in Heaven.

  “He’s finally free. But the people responsible for this tragedy, they will stand before God someday for the part they played,” she said. “But there is an evil surrounding these same people, and I do not think that they are hoping to enter the gates of Heaven anyway.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 22:20

• Oil Price Spike Has Yet To Spark Gasoline Demand Destruction 
  Oil Price Spike Has Yet To Spark Gasoline Demand Destruction 

  Worries about demand destruction for gasoline appear overblown. Consumers are tolerating record-high prices at the pump as demand continues to rise. 

  US Energy Information Administration (EIA) data show gasoline prices are up a staggering 51% from a year ago, averaging around $4.32 a gallon on a national level.

  

  Record-high prices at the pump trigger fear that demand destruction is imminent, but that’s not what the data shows in the first half of March. 

  EIA noted gasoline consumption is up 6% over the year, to 8.9 million barrels per day for the week ending March 11. Demand was 2.3% higher than the two weeks prior. Over the last month, average weekly US gasoline consumption is up 8.6% versus the prior year, to 8.8 million barrels a day. 

  

  Skyrocketing fuel prices and significant inflationary pressure have yet to crimp demand as consumers appear to tolerate high prices as they must drive to work, drop off their kids at school, and run errands. Yes, millions of Americans are furious with the Biden administration about soaring costs but being irate and actually cutting back are two separate things. 

  “Higher oil and gasoline prices are certainly crimping consumer pocketbooks, but they are not yet causing a decline in demand,” research firm DataTrek said. 

  On Sunday, Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis for Gas Buddy, verified the trend and said weekly gasoline demand “surged to highest since last summer.” 

  Weekly US gasoline demand surges to highest since last summer… data incoming

  — Patrick De Haan ⛽️📊 (@GasBuddyGuy) March 20, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  DataTrek continued: “Given more workers commuting back to the office and incremental employment, we expect demand to continue to improve as the year continues. It always amazes us that the US uses the better part of 10 million barrels/day of gasoline…” 

  Consumers are reducing their discretionary spending to offset high gas prices. For instance, BofA’s research analyst Sara Senatore points out all restaurant spending through the week ending March 12 decelerated. The decline in restaurant spending coincides with the spike in fuel prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in late February. 

  

  Other indications consumers are paring back discretionary spending comes from consumer goods companies who said their ability to continue raising prices has likely hit the ceiling. Macy’s Inc. CEO Jeff Gennette recently told WSJ that price increases on mattresses and sofas were met with fierce consumer pushback. Clothing brand Bella Dahl hiked shirt prices by $20 and immediately saw sales crater. “There was a revolt,” said Steven Millman, Bella Dahls’ brand officer. “If we go any higher, we’ll do half the sales.”

  The good news is Americans’ average monthly wage share for fuel costs is by far the least among all OECD countries. This means the wage share can increase though discretionary spending will decrease. 

  

  Gas is a necessity, and even though consumers complain about soaring prices, they are belt-tightening and reducing spending elsewhere to offset their driving needs. Prices might have to rise much higher to reach the demand destruction threshold. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 22:00

• Stockman Slams Zelenskyy's Hyperbole: Pearl Harbor My Eye!
  Stockman Slams Zelenskyy’s Hyperbole: Pearl Harbor My Eye!

  Authored by David Stockman via AntiWar.com,

  We were already getting sick and tired of this Zelensky clown, but the sheer chutzpah of comparing Ukraine’s predicament with Pearl Harbor or 9/11 is just fricking outrageous. To paraphrase Senator Lloyd Bensten’s famous retort to Dan Quayle in the 1992 VP debate: We knew the United States of America and Ukraine isn’t any United States.

  To the contrary, it is a cesspool of corruption, mal-governance and rank stupidity on the foreign policy front. For crying out loud, its situation is comparable to the drug cartels taking over Mexico, demanding the return of the Gadsden Purchase and then seeking to join a Russian-led anti-American treaty organization.

  That is to say, Ukraine brought the Russian attack on itself by poking the bear in its eyes repeatedly since the 2014 coup. Yet now its leader has the gall to petition the US Congress to start WWII via standing-up a No Fly Zone in lieu of the obvious solution: Namely, Zelensky should resign and make way for a collaborationist government that will sue for peace on the following basis:

  • Recognize that Crimea is Russian territory and always has been since it was purchased by Catherine the Great in 1783;

  • Permit the separation of the Donbass Republics from Ukraine because the overwhelmingly Russian speaking populations there has been part of “New Russia” for more than 300 years and do not wish to be ruled by the anti-Russian fascists and oligarchs who control Kiev;

  • Amend the constitution of the rump state of Ukraine to prohibit its joining NATO or any similar western alliance, while reducing its military to a domestic law enforcement agency.

  Those terms may seem harsh, but it’s the only alternative to the complete destruction of Ukraine and an eventual Russian win anyway. The fact is, the NATO cavalry simply ain’t coming no matter how many standing ovations are stumped up by the armchair warriors of the US Congress.

  That’s because even the bully boys of Washington and Brussels aren’t ready to trigger WWIII over the broken remnants of a country that never had been a country historically until Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchev made it an administrative district of the Soviet Empire – the latter being a stain on mankind that thankfully disappeared into the dustbin of history 31 years ago.

  Yet without direct US/NATO engagement with the Russian military forces now occupying growing segments of Ukrainian territory the expedient of sending arms – even highly advanced lethal anti-air and anti-tank weapons – is futile. Russia now has total air superiority over Ukraine’s skies, meaning that incoming NATO weapons (and the so-called “foreign legion” fighters, too) will be destroyed long before they can make a difference.

  So for god’s sake Washington needs to stop standing on ceremony and leading the hapless Ukrainian government down the primrose path to national destruction. There is no way out of the current catastrophe except for Washington to:

  • concede that recruiting Ukraine to join NATO and potentially putting NATO missile bases within one minute’s cruise missile flight time from Moscow was an egregious mistake; and

  • that its demonization of Putin as a modern day Hitler on a quest to revive the Soviet Empire is just plain War Party hogwash and is no justification for its sweeping Sanctions War, most especially if Kiev capitulates to Moscow’s terms.

  The truth, in fact, is more nearly the opposite. That is, there really are not two distinct nations there, one invading the other. Russia and Ukraine have never been neighboring independent states like Germany and France or Spain and Portugal or Columbia and Peru. To the contrary, they have been an intermingled territory and peoples for the last 1300 years with borders, governing arrangements episodic external invasions all over the lot.

  The Ukrainian language itself is testimony to that history and geography. The dialects spoken in the Donbas (brown and yellow areas) are a mixture of Ukrainian and Russian; the old Galician territories of Western Ukraine centered in Lviv (red areas) are heavily influenced by Polish, Slovakian and Rumanian vocabularies.; and the blue areas of the North present dialects heavily influenced by Belarusian.

  What is also true is that these segmented populations have never been united under a common polity except by communist arms between 1922 and 1991; then between 1991 and 2014 by tenuous and continuously shifting electoral balances after the Ukrainian administrative entity was arbitrarily disgorged from the old Soviet Union; and finally after the February 2014 coup by dint of a Kiev government based on central and western Ukraine that essentially declared a civil war on Crimea (which seceded) and the eastern, Russian-speaking Donbas regions that have tried to do the same.

  So again, what’s wrong with partition? At the end of the day, Zelensky stood before Congress and had the gall to demand WWIII in behalf of an abortion of a nation that has virtually no chance of long-term survival in its present form. Yet the knuckleheads from both parties are in such war heat that they vociferously applauded the unctuous rantings of a clown who should have stuck to the comedy business.

  

  Still, for want of doubt about the madness of defending Ukraine by economic warfare now, and military confrontation with Russia if the warmongers get their way, just recall how the arbitrary borders depicted above got here. If this mongrel merits all out defense in behalf of the “rule of law,” then the rule of law be damned.

  Kiev Is the Ancestral Homeland of Russia

  In the first place, Putin is essentially correct when he says that Russia and much of the Ukrainian territory have been one through long stretches of history. Ironically, therefore, the Kiev today being laid to waste by the Russian army is actually the birthplace of Russia!

  As an excellent Washington post history recently explained,

  The “Rus” – the people whose name got tacked on to Russia – were originally Scandinavian traders and settlers who made their way from the Baltic Sea through the marshes and forests of Eastern Europe down toward the fertile riverlands of what’s now Ukraine. Other Viking adventurers journeyed to Constantinople, the great capital of the Byzantine Empire, to find their fortune – sometimes as hired muscle.

  The first major center of the “Rus” was at Kiev, established in the 9th century. In 988, Vladimir, a prince of the Kievan Rus, was baptized by a Byzantine priest in the old Greek colony of Khersonesos on the Crimean coast. His conversion marked the advent of Orthodox Christianity among the Rus and remains a moment of great nationalist symbolism for Russians. Putin invoked this older Vladimir in a speech when justifying his annexation of Crimea.

  

  However, successive Mongol invasions beginning in the 13th century subdued Kiev’s influence, and led the Russians to eventually migrate north. That led to the rise of other Rus settlements including Moscow, while the Turkic descendants of the Mongol Golden Horde formed their own Khanate along the northern rim of the Black Sea and Crimea.

  During the next several centuries the Ukrainian territory was a no man’s land, hosting successive invasions and occupations by external forces. The land that’s now Ukraine lay on the margins of competing empires, making it a region of permanent contest and shifting borders.

  At length, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which, at its peak encompassed a huge swath of Europe, dominated much of the land. But over the centuries Ukraine would also see the incursions of Hungarians, Ottomans, Swedes, bands of Cossacks and the armies of successive Russian czars.

  By the late 17th century after much of Europe had congealed into today’s borders, there was still no nation of Ukraine. Instead, as these meandering borders appeared and disappeared repeatedly, Russia and Poland (Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth) eventually split much of the territory of what’s now Ukraine along the Dnieper River, as shown in the map below. Approximately 355 years ago (1667), to be exact, the areas to the east of the Dnieper, which now include the Donbas, were acquired by Russia and incorporated into the Russian State.

  So, yes, the current day rebel provinces in the Donbas, which were giving partial autonomy from Kiev by the Minsk Agreements of 2015, have actually been “Russian” for more than three and one-half centuries and “Ukrainian” for about 31 years. Or as Secy Blinkey would say, because it’s borders.

  The Rise of New Russia

  Russia’s advance continued a century later during the 18th century rule of Catherine the Great, who proclaimed her domains along the Black Sea constituted “Novorossiya” or “new Russia.” Back then, the Russian court even harbored dreams of collapsing the Ottoman empire entirely, extending Moscow’s reach to Istanbul and even Jerusalem.

  The infamous architect of Catherine’s imperialism, Grigoriy Potemkin, thus told his sovereign:

  Believe me, you will acquire immortal fame such as no other sovereign of Russia ever had,” when offering the empress counsel in 1780 on plans to wrest Crimea away from Ottoman suzerainty. “This glory will open the way to still further and greater glory.”

  Meanwhile, the partitions of Poland in the late 18th century led to the city of Lviv– once a major regional hub and a center of Jewish culture in Eastern Europe – falling under the rule of the Austro-Hungarian empire. So even in the west there was still no state of Ukraine, but as the Washington post further noted,

  It was there in the mid-19th century where Ukrainian nationalism began to take hold, rooted in the traditions and dialects of the region’s peasants and the aspirations of intellectuals who had fled the stifling rule of Russia rule further to the east.

  

  The State the Commies Made

  The striking thing is that as of 1900, when much of Europe was fully formed albeit in part under the rubric of the Hapsburg’s empire, there was still no nation called Ukraine. In the east, Russia and today’s Ukrainian territories were one, while in the west the Galician territories were part of the Hapsburg Empire.

  Needless to say, World War I and the Bolshevik revolution in 1917 triggered more traumas and upheaval in the areas that now constitute Ukraine. The new Bolshevik government was desperate to end hostilities with Germany and its allies and signed a treaty in the town of Brest-Litovsk in 1918 . As the Washington Post further amplified, the treaty ceded,

  ….some of Russia’s domains to the Central powers and recognized the independence of others, including Ukraine.

  The terms of the treaty were nullified by Germany’s defeat later in the year, but the genie of Ukrainian nationalism was out of the bottle. Independence movements of various stripes sprung up in cities like Lviv, Kiev and Kharkiv, but were eventually all swept away amid the wider struggle for power in Russia.

  

  That struggle was mightily fueled at the misbegotten Versailles “peace” conference where the long dead nation of Poland was revived by Woodrow Wilson. The latter nearly single-handedly resurrected the nation of Poland, doing so with a keen eye not to the historic maps of Europe but to the polish vote in Cleveland, Detroit and Chicago.

  Soon thereafter a revived Poland reclaimed Lviv and a chunk of what’s now western Ukraine on the grounds that this was sacred Polish, not Ukrainian, territory.

  In any event, the region became a key battleground of the Russian Civil War, which pitted Bolshevik forces against an array of White Russian armies, led by loyalists to the old czarist regime as well as other political opportunists. After a lot of bloodshed – and other battles with Poland – the Bolsheviks emerged triumphant and officially declared the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic in 1922.

  At long last, therefore, the maps of the world now at least had something that roughly resembled modern Ukraine – even if it was wrested by Bolshevik rifles.

  The years that followed, however, would be even more traumatic. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, Ukraine suffered heavily under the rule of Soviet despot Josef Stalin. A vast segment of Ukraine’s rural population was displaced and dispossessed by Stalin’s aggressive collectivization policies. A man-made famine (the Holodomor) in 1932-3 led to the deaths of some three million people.

  To make up the numbers, Russian speakers from elsewhere immigrated to eastern Ukraine’s hollowed out towns and cities, leaving a demographic footprint that defines Ukraine’s divisive politics to this day.

  As shown in the map below, the tiny principality of Ukraine as of 1654 (dark blue area) had not been much to write home about until the Russians – Czars and Commissars, alike – bestirred themselves with nation-building. Russian nation-building, that is.

  The yellow areas being the winnings of Catherine the Great and other Russian Czars over 1654-1917, while the added territories seconded by Lenin’s Red Army are represented by the purple area of the map below. These were historic “new Russia” territories added to the Ukraine administrative entity for ease of Communist rule.

  Later came the rest of Ukraine proper via added gifts from Stalin’s Red Army (light blue area, 1939-1945) . These territories were stolen from the modern artificial state of Poland confected at Versailles. And the previously mentioned gift of Crimea (red area) was added by Khrushchev in 1954.

  In short, it needs be recalled that America’s borders were established by democratic politicians and have stood the test of 167 years of time during which they have been perfectly fixed. By contrast, today’s Ukraine depicted below is the handiwork of tyrants and commies, which changed by the decade.

  So the question recurs. Who in their right mind would select the historical mongrel depicted below to bring the world to the brink of nuclear war in order to establish the purported universal rule of law and sanctity of borders?

  

  Indeed, we’d say it’s only folks who have lost their minds to the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). This entire imbroglio, in fact, is not about the nation of Russia, the rule of law, foreign policy or the genuine safety and liberty of the American homeland.

  To the contrary, it’s about a single member of the 7 billion-strong human race – the utterly demonized, vilified and reviled Vladimir Putin. The Biden mainstream of the Dem party is still not over the shock of November 2016, and apparently mean to do battle permanently with the ogre of Moscow whom they falsely hold accountable for their own self-inflicted defeat.

  As it happens, their endlessly repeated mantra that Putin’s expansionist intentions were revealed when he “seized” Crimea in 2014 tells you all you need to know. That claim is so hypocritical, threadbare and tendentious that only minds possessed with TDS would even dare to peddle it.

  That’s because it amounts to saying is that the dead hand of the Soviet presidium must be defended at all costs – as if the security of North Dakota depended upon it!

  As previously mentioned, however, the allegedly “occupied” territory of Crimea was actually purchased from the Ottomans by Catherine the Great in 1783, thereby satisfying the longstanding quest of the Russian czars for a warm-water port. Over the ages, Sevastopol then emerged as a great naval base at the strategic tip of the Crimean peninsula, where it became home port to the mighty Black Sea Fleet of the czars and then the Soviet commissars, too.

  For the next 171 years Crimea was an integral part of Russia (until 1954). And that’s a fact that you can look up in the Google/CIA archives!

  In fact, that span equals the 170 years that have elapsed since California was annexed by a similar thrust of “Manifest Destiny” on this continent, thereby providing, incidentally, the United States Navy with its own warm-water port in San Diego.

  While no foreign forces subsequently invaded the California coasts, it was most definitely not Ukrainian rifles, artillery and blood that famously annihilated The Charge of the Light Brigade at the Crimean city of Balaclava in 1854, either: The defending combatants were Russians fighting for their homeland against invading Turks, French and Brits.

  At the end of the day, security of its historical port in Crimea is and long has been Russia’s Red Line, and thereby none of Washington’s business.

  Unlike today’s feather-headed Washington pols, even the enfeebled Franklin Roosevelt at least knew that he was in Soviet “Russia” when he made port in the Crimean city of Yalta in February 1945.

  Maneuvering to cement his control of the Kremlin in the intrigue-ridden struggle for succession after Stalin’s death a few years later, Nikita Khrushchev allegedly spent 15 minutes reviewing his “gift” of Crimea to his subalterns in Kiev.

  As it happened, therefore, Crimea became part of the Ukraine only by writ of the former Soviet Union:

  On April 26, 1954 The decree of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet transferring the Crimea Oblast from the Russian SFSR to the Ukrainian SSR. Taking into account the integral character of the economy, the territorial proximity and the close economic and cultural ties between the Crimea Province and the Ukrainian SSR….

  So, yes, there is every reason for a Kiev government which finally sues for peace to return Crimea to Russia, which owned it all along; and in which Ukrainians accounts for less than 15% of the predominant Russian speaking population. For Washington to claim otherwise and encourage Zelensky to hold out is tantamount to a naked case of hegemonic arrogance.

  After all, during the long decades of the Cold War, the West did nothing to liberate the “captive nation” of Ukraine – with or without the Crimean appendage bestowed upon it in 1954. Nor did it draw any red lines in the mid-1990s when a financially desperate Ukraine rented back Sevastopol and the strategic redoubts of Crimea to an equally pauperized Russia.

  In short, in the era before we got our Pacific port in 1848 and even during the 170-year interval since then, America’s national security has depended not one whit on the status of Russian-speaking Crimea and the Donbas regions of eastern Ukraine. The fact that the local population of the former in March 2014 chose fealty to the Grand Thief in Moscow over the ruffians and rabble that have seized Kiev amounts to a giant, “So what?”

  Still, it was this final aggressive drive of Washington and NATO into the internal affairs of Russia’s historical neighbor and vassal, Ukraine, that largely accounts for the current dangerous confrontation. Likewise, it is virtually the entire source of the false claim that Russia has aggressive, expansionist designs on the former Warsaw Pact states in the Baltics, Poland and beyond.

  The latter is a nonsensical fabrication. In fact, it was the neocon meddlers from Washington who crushed Ukraine’s last semblance of democratic governance when they enabled ultra-nationalists and crypto-Nazis to gain government positions after the February 2014 coup, which threw-out Ukraine’s legitimately elected, Russia-leaning president.

  In this context, moreover, the history of the 1930s and 1940s must never be forgotten. As indicated above, Stalin decimated upwards of 15% of the Ukrainian population during the Holodomer (starvations) and then moved huge numbers of Russian-speakers into the Donbas to safeguard its chemical, steel and armaments industries from the defiant locals who were sent to Siberia.

  Thereafter, when Hitler’s Wehrmacht came charging through Ukraine on its way to the bloody battle of Stalingrad, it had no trouble recruiting hundreds of thousands of vengeance-seeking Ukrainian nationalists to its ranks to do its dirty work: That is, the brutal liquidation of Jews, Poles, Gypsies and other untermenschen.

  In fact, during the fall of 1941 began the mass killings of Jews that continued through 1944. An estimated 1.5 million Ukrainian Jews perished, and over 800,000 were displaced to the east; at Baby Yar in Kyiv nearly 34,000 were killed in just the first two days of massacre – and all of these depredations were assisted and often executed by local Ukrainian nationalists.

  Then, of course, the tide turned and the Red Army came marching back though the rubble of Ukraine on its way to Berlin. After their victory over the Germans at the Battle of Stalingrad in early 1943, the Soviets launched an equally brutal scorched earth counteroffensive westward, searching high and low for traitors and collaborators among the Ukrainian population who had allegedly aided the Wehrmacht.

  The Germans thus began their slow retreat from Ukraine in mid-1943, leaving wholesale destruction in their wake. In November the Soviets reentered Kyiv, where guerrilla activity intensified amid bloody revenge killings which claimed huge numbers of civilian victims. By the spring of 1944 the Red Army had penetrated into Galicia (western Ukraine), and by the end of October Ukraine was a bloody wasteland, once again under Red Army control.

  So it may be fairly asked: What Washington lame brains did not understand that triggering “regime change” in Kiev in February 2014 would reopen this entire blood-soaked history of sectarian and political strife?

  Moreover, once they had opened Pandora’s Box, why was it so hard to see that an outright partition of Ukraine with autonomy for the Donbas and Crimea, or even accession to the Russian state from which these communities had originated, would have been a perfectly reasonable resolution?

  Certainly that would have been far preferable to dragging all of Europe into the lunacy of the current military showdown and further embroiling the Ukrainian factions in a suicidal civil war.

  Needless to say, Zelensky gets none of this in the slightest – even though as a native and Russian speaking son of southeastern Ukraine, he actually grew up in a part of modern Ukraine that had been Russian for 370 years!

  That’s right. He’s just the perennial short guy feasting on his 15 minutes of fame. But enough is enough already. In a rational world this double-talking creep should have been sent packing this morning by the US Congress, but these war-obsessed nincompoops can’t see the handwriting on the wall.

  So once again, here it is. This is where the story ends – even as Washington wages Sanctions War on the entire global economy and thereby the American people as well.

  How Ukraine Will Be Partitioned After Kiev Capitulates

  

  In any event, a TV actor who has no script other than that handed to him by his Washington/NATO overseers is one thing. And at the end of the day, it small potatoes compared to the grotesque negligence and misdirection of Sleepy Joe’s own keepers.

  That is to say, Secy Blinkey and Snake Sullivan should be bent over the above map in earnest conversation with their Russian counterparts as to the fine points of the partition, and the meaning of “neutrality,” “de-nazification” and “demilitarization” of the green area of the map, which is to become the future “Ukraine,” if there is to be anything left at all.

  Needless to say, they are not even talking to the Russians. They are, in fact, so red in tooth and claw with the blood of economic warfare that they would drive the global economy to collapse rather than acknowledge that they – and they alone – brought this horrendous situation to the doorstep of the world.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 21:40

• Elon Musk Says Starlink Internet Access Is Ready In Ukraine
  Elon Musk Says Starlink Internet Access Is Ready In Ukraine

  It looks as though Elon Musk has officially activated Starlink internet service in Ukraine. Over the weekend, the Tesla CEO said that SpaceX had activated the service after officials in Kyiv lobbied for stations. 

  Musk heard the call, and Tweeted this weekend: “Starlink service is now active in Ukraine…more terminals en route.”

  Ukrainian Minister of Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov had lobbied for Musk’s help immediately after his country was invaded by Russia, a new report from Yahoo News says. 

  “While you try to colonize Mars — Russia try to occupy Ukraine! While your rockets successfully land from space — Russian rockets attack Ukrainian civil people! We ask you to provide Ukraine with Starlink stations,” he pleaded with Musk on Twitter. 

  

  Additionally he asked Musk “to address sane Russians to stand” against Russia’s invasion. The country has seen a “series of significant disruptions to internet service”, according to internet monitor NetBlocks.

  Curiously, an unlisted video appeared on the internet about a week and a half ago showing how to set up and use the Powerwall as a mobile power station. The video appeared after Tesla sent equipment to Ukraine to try and help ensure uninterrupted internet, Tesmanian wrote.

  The video shows how you can deploy a mobile power station in minutes without actually taking the equipment out of the box. To do this, you need to get the cables and connect them together in the appropriate order. The video also demonstrates how solar panels can be easily connected to the Powerwall, which will charge the battery, so you can get an independent power source even in the field.

  Starlink is hoping its more than 2,000 satellites will help not only Ukraine, but the rest of the planet, have access to internet. 

  Here’s a copy of the unlisted YouTube setup video. It has been viewed almost 14,000 times:

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 21:20

• Volatile Commodities Force Investors To Sell
  Volatile Commodities Force Investors To Sell

  By Tatiana Darie, Bloomberg Markets Live commentator and analyst

  Nickel’s blowout and oil’s roller-coaster this year show commodities have become more volatile across the asset class. That’s a problem because volatility begets volatility as investors are forced to rein in exposure or pay higher hedging costs.

  In the five years before Covid-19 struck markets, the Bloomberg Commodity Index saw daily moves larger than two-standard deviations on average about 14 times per year. Then, in the past year, we suddenly had 33.

  The index’s absolute daily average move has increased by 38% over the past year. Its standard deviation rose to 1.2% from 0.8% during March 2015-2020.

  Looking under the hood also reveals that 16 out of 23 components in the index had a similar dynamic: they’ve moved above or below two-standard deviations more often in the past year than pre-pandemic. Also, 17 out of 23 commodities have seen their absolute average daily move increase since 2021 versus the prior period.

  

  Big swings make it harder to trade and also make hedging more expensive. It forces money managers targeting a certain level of volatility across portfolios to cut exposure. Greater volatility also creates higher hedging costs via options pricing.

  That’s part of the reason why hedge funds have been selling in recent weeks, taking some steam out of the sector’s rally, according to Saxo Bank’s head of commodity strategy Ole Hansen. And that’s also why oil slumped last week.

  That, coupled with the fact that a quick jump in prices tends to hurt demand, could spell risks for the best performing major asset class this year and the most crowded long trade, per Bank of America’s latest global fund survey for the week ending March 10.

  

  A breakdown of the most volatile commodities shows natural gas, aluminum and soybean oil at the top, seeing nearly three, four and six times more two-sigma events over the past year versus the average of the pre-pandemic period. What used to be a two-standard deviation move for soybean oil, one of the most used in cooking, has become the norm, being exceeded in almost every fourth session since March 2021.

  Surprisingly, nickel, Brent and crude oil have been among the more stable commodities, seeing fewer outsized moves. Brent has actually seen its average absolute daily move slip to 1.58% over the past year from 1.60% seen pre-pandemic. At 1.71%, WTI’s is largely unchanged.

  Other resources that have seen large moves less frequently than in the past include: gasoline, lean hogs, sugar and live cattle.

  The study analyzed futures daily price movements to look at how many times a given commodity moved outside of its pre-pandemic two-standard deviation derived from March 9, 2015 to March 9, 2020. It then applied it to the past year starting March 9, 2021.

  As market observers like to say, commodities are their own worst enemies when they jump in price as quickly as they did in March. They’ve proved to be a great bet for investors this year so far, but only for those who’re able to handle the stomach-churning gyrations.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 21:00

• Microsoft "Investigating" Potential Breach Of Internal Systems By Group Known For Demanding Bizarre Ransom
  Microsoft “Investigating” Potential Breach Of Internal Systems By Group Known For Demanding Bizarre Ransom

  Microsoft is in the midst of investigating whether or not a “extortion-focused hacking group” has gained access to its internal systems, according to a Monday morning report from Vice. 

  The group in question, LAPSUS$, had formerly compromised companies like Ubisoft and Nvidia. In the case of Nvidia, the group made ransom demands of asking the company to “unlock aspects of its graphics cards to make them more suitable for mining cryptocurrency”. 

  So far, the group has not made any demands of Microsoft, the report says.

  But over the weekend the group put up images of what Vice says “appeared to be an internal Microsoft developer account to their Telegram channel”. The shot appeared to be from an Azure DevOps account and showed projects called “Bing_UX”, “Bing-Source” and “Cortana.”

  

  The terms  “mscomdev,” “microsoft,” and “msblox,” were also included in the screenshot. 

  The image was deleted shortly after it was posted, with an administrator of the channel writing: “Deleted for now will repost later.”

  Microsoft has commented that they are “aware of the claims” and are “investigating”. 

  The group said earlier this month that it was recruiting employees inside of companies like Microsoft. They also listed Apple and IBM as companies where they were looking for insiders to work with. 

  In the last 3 months alone, the group has “breached the Ministry of Health of Brazil, a slew of Brazilian and Portuguese companies, and then Nvidia and Samsung”, the report wrote. They also took credit for breaching Ubisoft earlier this month. 

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 20:40

• Peters: In The Decades To Come, Nuclear Weapons Will Be Thing Protecting Putin From 1.4 Billion Chinese On His Southern Border
  Peters: In The Decades To Come, Nuclear Weapons Will Be Thing Protecting Putin From 1.4 Billion Chinese On His Southern Border

  By Eric Peters of One River Asset Management

  “War is the continuation of politics by other means,” explained The Commander, quoting Carl von Clausewitz, the famous Prussian general and military theorist. “Von Clausewitz advocated that you continue to pound your enemy, you don’t stop a fight until you negotiate an end to it,” he added. “We tend to pause our military actions during negotiations, but Russia is doing as von Clausewitz advised. Putin is continuing to attack even as talks with Ukraine are taking place,” said The Commander. “All military leaders and strategists study von Clausewitz. And we all know our adversaries have internalized his work. Our weapons are more brutal today, but the theories are the same as when he wrote On War in the early 1800s.”

  

  “War is the realm of uncertainty; three quarters of the factors on which action in war is based are wrapped in a fog of greater or lesser uncertainty,” wrote Carl von Clausewitz in the early 1800s. “A sensitive and discriminating judgment is called for; a skilled intelligence to scent out the truth,” continued the Prussian general and military theorist. Like so many of our greatest thinkers, von Clausewitz trained his sights on the essence of what it means to be human. He narrowed that focus to how we behave in times of conflict, which is to say, much of the time. Even now, with a full-scale war underway in Ukraine, a lesser battle has begun over inflation, and a long-simmering conflict over the dollar’s prominence as the global reserve currency is heating up. The backdrop to these conflicts is the internal division we see throughout much of the West, and this is set against the world’s authoritarians who are tightening their grip, attempting to consolidate power. These issues are inextricably woven. All times are unique, and what makes this one unlike others is the degree to which we are all connected, our world shrinking. It both raises the costs of failure and presents new opportunities, possibilities. “No one starts a war – or rather, no one in his senses ought to do so – without first being clear in his mind what he intends to achieve by that war and how he intends to conduct it,” wrote Clausewitz. And we are left to imagine exactly what the protagonists in the conflicts now underway over Ukraine, inflation, and the dollar, intend to achieve and what they are willing to undertake to claim their objectives. “If the mind is to emerge unscathed from this relentless struggle with the unforeseen, two qualities are indispensable,” wrote Clausewitz. “First, an intellect that, even in the darkest hour, retains some glimmerings of the inner light which leads to truth; and second, the courage to follow this faint light wherever it may lead.”

  Military Minds: Carl von Clausewitz’s thoughts on war: – There are times when the utmost daring is the height of wisdom. – Theory must also take into account the human element; it must accord a place to courage, to boldness, even to rashness. – Everything in war is very simple, but the simplest thing is difficult. – There are very few men, and they are the exceptions, who are able to think and feel beyond the present moment. – If we read history with an open mind, we cannot fail to conclude that, among all the military virtues, the energetic conduct of war has always contributed most to glory and success.

  Military Minds II: – The backbone of surprise is fusing speed with secrecy. – If the leader is filled with high ambition and if he pursues his aims with audacity and strength of will, he will reach them in spite of all obstacles. – If we have made appropriate preparations, taking into account all possible misfortunes, so that we shall not be lost immediately if they occur, we must boldly advance into the shadows of uncertainty. – The Statesman who, knowing his instrument to be ready, and seeing War inevitable, hesitates to strike first is guilty of a crime against his country.

  Strength: “Powell developed a doctrine of projecting overwhelming force,” said The Commander, referring to Colin the General, not Jerome the Chairman, who fired last week’s tiny 25bp warning shot at a raging 7.9% inflation advance. “The idea is that there are people in the world who understand one thing, and that is power,” said The Commander. “Powell believed that the best way to avoid conflict was by making it clear to our adversaries that an act of aggression would be met with devastating force.” The Powell Doctrine led to the military buildup ahead of the 1990-91 Gulf War and emphasized ground forces together with widespread public support.

  Weakness: “Kind-hearted people might of course think there was some ingenious way to disarm or defeat an enemy without too much bloodshed and might imagine this is the true goal of the art of war,” wrote Carl von Clausewitz. “Pleasant as it sounds, it is a fallacy that must be exposed; war is such a dangerous business that the mistakes which come from kindness are the very worst,” continued the Prussian. “If our opponent is to be made to comply with our will, we must place him in a situation which is more oppressive to him than the sacrifice which we demand; but the disadvantages of this position must naturally not be of a transitory nature, at least in appearance, otherwise the enemy, instead of yielding, will hold out, in the prospect of a change for the better.”

  Action: “For political and social as well as for military reasons the preferred way of bringing about victory was the shortest, most direct way, and that meant using all possible force,” wrote Clausewitz. “The truth is that there are goons in this world, and they respect only one thing – strength – that’s it,” explained The Commander. “It is tempting to believe we’ve evolved past that kind of thinking, but it is wrong, we haven’t,” he said. “And this can at times create friction between politicians and military leaders, because politicians often seek to avoid conflict in the early stages, while military leaders understand that it is generally best to shut down conflict before it has even started, or at least in its earliest stages. Politicians and military commanders have the same goals, but different experiential perspectives.”

  Anecdote: “Clausewitz taught that we must dismantle our enemy’s center of gravity to achieve victory,” said The Commander. “Each nation has strengths and weaknesses, and it’s natural to capitalize on weakness,” he added. “But it is critical to pick apart the strengths that make up the center of gravity,” explained The Commander. “In the case of the US, our core strengths are superior communications, logistics, and our carrier fleet.” Added to this would undoubtedly be our control of the global reserve currency and payments systems. “So it should not be a surprise that China has invested heavily in offensive space capabilities to target our communications. And they are very focused on hypersonic weapon development to neutralize our carriers.”

  Efforts to unseat the dollar and create an alternative global payments system is also targeting our center of gravity. “In Putin’s case, his center of gravity in this conflict is his proximity. His supply lines are short, so it’s particularly devasting for him that his army failed so badly without anyone else’s help when it came to logistics,” said The Commander. “He miscalculated Ukrainian resistance, but worse still was the misjudgment of his own forces. And what you can now see is that his army is out of practice, and perhaps the worst thing is that it lacks agility,” he said. “In business and markets, I’m sure you understand the importance of agility. Well, in warfare, agility is vital to victory. And the US has the resources to train regularly. A modern army is incredibly complex and requires regular training, exercises.”

  The Russians don’t have these resources and haven’t fought a major war in too long. “Putin understands his many weaknesses. He has no real ability to project force on a global basis other than nuclear. So that is why he’s directed his limited resources to those capabilities.” In the decades to come, they will be the only thing protecting his vast territories and shrinking population from 1.4bln Chinese on his southern border. “And the risk now, learning from Clausewitz, is that the weakness of Putin’s conventional force leads him to abruptly jump to a nuclear conflict. He’s a cornered rat. I wouldn’t rule anything out.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 20:20

• Aviation Experts Baffled By Crash Of China Eastern Airlines Flight MU5735
  Aviation Experts Baffled By Crash Of China Eastern Airlines Flight MU5735

  Monday’s devastating crash of a Boeing 737 operated by China Eastern Airlines has gripped the US aviation industry (aka Boeing) in what’s shaping up to be another major scandal barely a year after the plane manufacturer had finally managed to move beyond the disastrous rollout of the 737 MAX 8, which left hundreds dead as a design flaw led to two crashes, one in Ethiopia and the other in Indonesia.

  Those crashes prompted global groundings and an extensive investigation which revealed that the FAA had essentially abdicated its oversight responsibility – while one internal Boeing email blasted the MAX 8 for being designed by “clowns who were overseen by monkeys”.

  

  As if the crash itself wasn’t embarrassing enough for the jet-maker, footage of the incident showing the plane essentially falling out of the sky has been seen by thousands, if not millions, of people, many of whom are already hoping for answers.

  Chinese airlines haven’t bought any new Boeing planes for years at this point, and Monday’s crash raises the possibility that Boeing could be barred from the world’s second-largest market for air travel.

  Local Chinese media reported shortly afterward that the crash had been caused by an electrical failure, but whether this is actually true remains unclear. At this point, little is known for certain about the circumstances surrounding the crash (and it will take investigators days, if not weeks, to examine the data from the plane’s “black box”, which must be recovered from the crash site in a mountainous region in Guangxi Province.

  

  But as the investigation begins, the only thing we know for certain is that China’s first passenger airline crash in a decade is extremely unusual as far as plane crashes go. Why? Because, as the video below shows, the plane essentially dropped out of the sky, with the nose of the plane declining at an extreme angle.

  According to experts quoted by Bloomberg, this gives the incident an extremely unusual profile.

  While there have been a handful of crashes in which an airliner plunged from cruising altitude, few, if any, fit the extreme profile of the Boeing Co. 737-800 as it pointed steeply toward the ground, according to veteran crash investigators and previous accident reports.

  “It’s an odd profile,” said John Cox, an aviation safety consultant and former 737 pilot. “It’s hard to get the airplane to do this.”

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Just look at the angle of the plane seen in footage of the crash, which has been circulating on social media.

  Dashcam footage of the China Eastern MU5735 crash. pic.twitter.com/H1MRgBWaAl

  — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) March 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Aviation experts were shocked by the angle of the descent, which was essentially straight down…

  

  …as the plane went from cruising altitude to dropping out of the sky in under two minutes, according to data from flight-tracking services.

  

  The National Transportation Safety Board has already appointed a senior air safety investigator to investigate the incident (although given the pandemic-related travel restrictions still in place in China, it’s unclear how long it will take for US investigators to arrive on scene).

  But as the investigation begins, aviation experts are already saying that the footage of the crash and the data cited above raises more questions, while offering few answers.

  #Chinacrash — It’s often pretty clear in the hours after an airliner crash what the outlines of the failures were. I don’t feel that way at all in this case. #ChinaEastern https://t.co/u9nxqEUJ73

  — Alan Levin (@AlanLevin1) March 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  And as the world waits to learn more, here’s what we know so far.

  • Flight MU5735 was flying at an altitude of about 29,000 feet roughly 100 miles from its destination, about the point at which the pilots would begin the process of descending, when it started plunging at a far greater rate than normal. Instead of gradually dropping by a few thousand feet per minute, the plane began falling at more than 30,000 feet per minute within seconds, according to tracking data logged by Flightradar24.

  • Flight-tracking data show that the plane dropped by 26,000 feet in the span of one minute, 35 seconds.

  • In an unusual twist, the plane’s dive appeared halt for about 10 seconds, and it climbed briefly, adding an unusual twist to the scenario, before resuming the plunge. “It’s very odd,” said Jeff Guzzetti, the former accident investigation chief for U.S. Federal Aviation Administration.

  • While there are some precedents in which passenger planes suddenly dropped from cruising altitude, most of these cases have important differences. For example, Air France Flight 447, which went down in the Atlantic Ocean on June 1, 2009, fell much slower and more erratically after speed sensors iced up and pilots became confused. All 228 people aboard that flight died.

  • Another similar crash occurred on Dec. 19, 1997, when a pilot with Silk Air 737-300 carrying 104 people dove into a river in Indonesia, killing everyone on board. That plane plunged at more than 38,000 feet per minute, according to Indonesian regulators, who concluded that the pilot likely crashed the plane deliberately.

  • Is that what happened in this case? Well, it’s unclear. The 737-800, like most other jetliners, is designed so that it won’t normally dive at steep angles. Forcing the plane to do so would likely require an extreme effort by a pilot, or a highly unusual malfunction.

  • It’s possible the pilot could have suffered a heart attack or some other medical emergency and slumped onto thte control column, lowering the nose.

  Earlier this evening, Boeing CEO David Calhoun sent a message to all employees:

  We are deeply saddened by the news of the accident involving a China Eastern Airlines 737-800 airplane. The thoughts of all of us at Boeing are with the passengers and crew members on Flight MU 5735, as well as their families and loved ones.

  We have been in close communication with our customer and regulatory authorities since the accident, and have offered the full support of our technical experts to the investigation led by the Civil Aviation Administration of China.

  I will keep you apprised of information about the accident as investigation protocols allow. In the meantime, trust that we will be doing everything we can to support our customer and the accident investigation during this difficult time, guided by our commitment to safety, transparency, and integrity at every step.

  Dave

  Answers will likely be forthcoming, although we suspect, given the crash occurred in China, may not be timely. But one thing is clear: something must have gone seriously wrong for the nose of the plane to have declined at such an extreme angle.

  “You need something to hold the nose down,” said Benjamin Berman, a a former NTSB investigator who has experience flying 737s.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 20:00

• One Week After Calling Them "Uninvestable", JPMorgan Says Chinese Stocks Are A Buy
  One Week After Calling Them “Uninvestable”, JPMorgan Says Chinese Stocks Are A Buy

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live commentator and analyst

  Depending on whom you listen to at JPMorgan Chase, some Chinese stocks are either “uninvestable” or a screaming buy. While it’s not unusual for different teams at the same bank to have opposite calls, this episode of “JPMorgan versus JPMorgan” shows how divided the markets have become when it comes to China. One thing is for sure: For the markets to recover, Beijing has to back up its words with actions to shore up the economy.

  Chinese stocks lost some momentum Monday after exhibiting the start of a V-shape recovery last week. The State Council pledged stronger monetary policy support for the economy, but also cautioned against flooding the market with liquidity. Top leaders’ vow to stabilize the market has stopped the panic, but investors are waiting for concrete steps to address key concerns, including potential delistings from U.S. exchanges, geopolitical risks and Covid outbreaks.

  The tug-of-war between fear and hope is on full display among JPMorgan’s strategists. JPMorgan analyst Alex Yao caused a splash last week with aggressive cuts to price targets for Chinese internet stocks, contributing to the panic selling last Monday. Saying global investors are undergoing a “regime shift” for pricing in China’s geopolitical risks, Yao recommended his clients avoid the whole sector because the market has become too unpredictable.

  The changes to his calls were almost epic. His price target for Alibaba, for instance, was slashed from $180 to $65. It’s the lowest among analysts surveyed by Bloomberg, and implies another 37% decline from the current level.

  

  Yet just days later, Marko Kolanovic, JPMorgan’s co-head of global research in New York and a widely followed quant guru, came out with a call to buy “beaten-up” stocks, including Chinese, EM, tech, biotech and small caps. “We think tail risks related to China will not materialize,” he wrote in a note published Monday.

  

  Meanwhile, adding to the confusion, his colleagues on the equity team maintain an “overweight” rating on China, saying they are “increasingly confident that a China macro policy pivot will produce strong GDP growth acceleration” and they see “meaningful equity risk premium priced in.”

  To be sure, Kolanovic didn’t specify Chinese internet stocks per se, and he’s been optimistic on China for a while. But given the heavy weighting of tech stocks, it’s hard to have a bullish view on China with a doomsday view on the sector.

  In any case, for Kolanovic to trump his colleague in Hong Kong, he needs Beijing to deliver what’s been promised.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 19:40

• April 2020 But In Reverse: One Bank Warns We Are About To Witness A Historic Short Squeeze Eruption In Oil
  April 2020 But In Reverse: One Bank Warns We Are About To Witness A Historic Short Squeeze Eruption In Oil

  We have repeatedly warned that Cushing balances would be tight in coming months due to limited crude oil production growth and strong refinery and export demand…

  WTI Soars Back Above $95 As “Tank Bottoms” Are Close At Cushing https://t.co/Dpev2jL1Vy

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  … and now, the Ukraine conflict clearly presents the risk of even greater tightness as report after report from various bullish Wall Street banks warn. Indeed, as BofA’s commodities team writes in a must read note titled “Cushing’s Cushion Wears Thin” published today (available to professional subs), WTI timespreads soared to decade highs ($11.70 for WTI 1-3 spread) recently and have since settled down at still elevated levels, discouraging oil storage. As a result, inventories at Cushing hub have drawn roughly 13 million bbl ytd, reaching 24mn bbl last week, the lowest seasonal level in the shale era. Now, storage levels are likely near operational minimum levels, or “tank bottoms.”

  

  According to BofA, given current backwardation levels, a good portion of these inventories are likely used for blending operations and as a backstop for pipeline flows. Thus, they may not be eligible for delivery against the WTI contract.

  Making matter worse, as inventories trend near operational minimum levels, nearly every price signal is discouraging oil flows to Cushing and will likely limit resupply. To wit: Midland WTI is fetching a $1.50/bbl premium over Cushing, limiting northbound flows to Cushing. Meanwhile, Bakken-WTI spreads of $5/bbl suggest that Bakken barrels may be more likely to bypass Cushing and flow directly to the USGC market. Recent strength in WCS (Cushing) vs WTI spreads, coupled with rich Bakken and Niobrara differentials should also discourage blending to WTI spec.

  

  Finally, WTI-Brent spreads hit multi-year lows of -$9.20/bbl recently and are currently trading near -$5/bbl, which should encourage higher, “potentially record” crude oil exports over the coming weeks.

  

  While refinery turnarounds should offer Cushing some short term relief…

  Refining turnarounds globally are expected to be light this spring, with outages averaging 4.3mn b/d during March and April, compared 6.8mn b/d on average for the same period during 2015-19. In the US, outages are expected to be even lighter (Exhibit 24), averaging about 500k b/d in March and April versus 1.3mn b/d during the same period in 2015-19 (Exhibit 25). However, refining outages north of Cushing (PADD 2, PADD 4, Alberta, and Saskatchewan), which should affect inbound flows to the hub, are expected to average 600k b/d in March and April versus about 475k b/d during the 2015- 19 (Exhibit 25). All else equal, these turnarounds suggests that more barrels will be making their way south, either to Cushing or to the USGC this month and next, which should help lift Cushing inventory levels over the near term.

  

  … balances will likely still be tight post maintenance.

  Historically, Cushing inventories have tracked WTI timespreads with a lag of about 2 months (Exhibit 26). While this relationship may appear linear during periods of normal inventory levels, timespreads should theoretically increase at a parabolic rate (more backwardation) as inventories fall towards tank bottoms and fall at a parabolic rate (more contango) as Cushing nears tank tops (Exhibit 27).

  

  All this means that “front month WTI at risk of a melt-up in 1H22″, similar to what was observed on April 20, 2020 when WTI traded down to negative $40/bbl as there was no place to store the deliverable contract amid the global economic shutdown, and when holders of the front contract were willing to pay others to take the obligation of delivery (which is what sent the price negative). Only in the opposite direction.

  As a reminder, unlike Brent, the WTI contract has a physical delivery mechanism, which forces convergence between the physical market and futures market every month. In April 2020, this convergence was on full display ahead of the May WTI contract expiry, as longs with no ability to take delivery were forced to liquidate their positions at negative prices. Now, BofA cautions, “the market setup has reversed.”

  In other words, with inventories at very low levels there is likely a reduced ability to make delivery against the WTI contract. As a result of limited US supply growth over 1H22 and limited incentives to send barrels to Cushing, inventories will likely scrape  along at low levels.

  Meanwhile, given the market is desperately short barrels in the near term –  and this ignores the record 1 billion barrels in oil futures that were sold and/or shorted in the past month…

  

  … BofA sees “increased risk of a short squeeze as WTI moves towards expiry each month” while also seeing risk that WTI strengthens relative to other North American grades to encourage more oil to flow to the hub.

  In short, in a mirror image of the historic events in April 2020, which saw oil prices freefall to negative prices for the first time ever due to forced liquidations, in the coming weeks we may see the opposite: a historic meltup as shorts scramble to obtain product but can’t find it at any price.

  The full report is available to pro subs in the usual place.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 19:20

• Stockman: Why Markets Always Beat Central Bankers And Presidents
  Stockman: Why Markets Always Beat Central Bankers And Presidents

  Authored by David Stockman via InternationalMan.com,

  Goodness me, even the Wall Street Journal is catching on. In a piece about the inflationary rebound theory of a former UK central banker named Charles Goodhart, it actually tees-up the possibility of high inflation for a decade or longer due to an adverse, epochal shift in the global labor supply.

  He argued that the low inflation since the 1990s wasn’t so much the result of astute central-bank policies, but rather the addition of hundreds of millions of inexpensive Chinese and Eastern European workers to the globalized economy, a demographic dividend that pushed down wages and the prices of products they exported to rich countries. Together with new female workers and the large baby-boomer generation, the labor force supplying advanced economies more than doubled between 1991 and 2018.

  He got that right. Now, however, the working-age population has started shrinking for the first time since World War II in developed economies, compounded by an ever more generous banquet of Welfare State free stuff that is shrinking the available labor pool even further. At the same time, China’s working force is expected to contract by a staggering 20% over the next three decades.

  Needless to say, as global labor becomes more scarce, developed world workers will finally have bargaining leverage to push up their own previously stagnant wages. In the US leisure and hospitality sector, for instance, where worker shortages are most acute, Y/Y wage gains have averaged 15% for the last three months running.

  And that’s not a “base effect”, either. On a two-year stacked basis, the gain from the February 2020 pre-Covid peak was 7.3% per annum. That’s nearly triple the average annual gain during much of the last decade.

  Y/Y Change In Hourly Earnings of Leisure And Hospitality Workers, 2012-2022

  

  But on the margin it is the draining of China’s rice paddies of subsistence labor that is fueling the now unfolding epochal change in the global labor cost curve and supply chains. As China’s workforce continues to shrink and fewer rural workers have moved to cities, its domestic labor costs have predictability risen.

  U.S. manufacturing wages, in fact, are now less than four times as much as those in China, compared with more than 26 times when China joined the WTO in 2001, according to recent research by investment firm KKR. And that’s just the warm-up: China’s workforce is expected to shrink by about 100 million over the next 15 years—an economic pile-driver that will cause the deflationary “China Price” of the past three decades to morph into the inflationary “China Price” in the years ahead.

  Moreover, this was all already well underway owing to the natural, baked-in demographics of the global labor market. But now that Washington has jumped the shark with its rabid Sanctions War against the global trading and payments system, the shift is likely to be sharply aggravated.

  That is to say, the 26:1 labor cost advantage China possessed in the early 21st century when the supply chain was globalizing at break-neck speed was even then off-set in part by all the non-labor factors that go into global sourcing of goods. These include transportation costs, insurance costs, extended inventory pipelines, quality control, product delivery and availability risks, periodic premium costs for expedited shipping and much more. Yet on balance the former well outweighed the latter, causing delivered product prices to systematically fall.

  As we have frequently pointed out, the proof of the pudding is in the PCE deflator for durable goods, which got massively off-shored into the low-cost nooks and crannies of the global supply chain during the “inflation sabbatical” of 1995-2019. As it happened, the index dropped by a staggering 40% during that period—a one-time deflationary plunge that has no precedent in economic history.

  PCE Deflator For Durable Goods, 1995-2022

  

  Now, however, the potential upside of all these non-labor supply chain costs and risks have increased dramatically. In a word, global supply chains are going to get reeled-in and shortened dramatically because in many instances the labor differential will no longer profitably offset these associated costs.

  Stated differently, the “lowflation” canard was always a statistical mirage, but under the double-whammy of rising global labor costs and soaring supply chain expense, there will now be no doubt. Substantial, persistent inflation in the cost of goods will become the order of the day, leaving the easy money central bankers of the world no choice except to finally shutdown their printing presses.

  Needless to say, this will leave the permabulls of Wall Street in a world of hurt and for years to come. That’s because the corollary of the now ending Inflation Sabbatical of 1995-2019 was the massive off-shoring of America’s productive economy, tracked by the relentlessly plunging deficit on goods and services.

  The recent release of the January 2022 trade balance leaves little to the imagination, recording a record deficit of $89.7 billion for that month alone. Moreover, this figure includes credit for the $19.2 billion surplus on services, meaning that the actual deficit in merchandise goods taken separately was nearly $109 billion. That’s an annualized run rate of $1.3 trillion!

  Of course, when global goods prices climb steadily higher under the aforementioned double-whammy of rising labor costs and de-globalization of supply chains this massive exposure to imports will whoosh through the US economy like green grass through the proverbial goose. As it does, our clueless Keynesian central bankers will be proverbial too, as is in deer in the headlights.

  That is to say, what we have is an economic boomerang. When the supply chain was going out to the cheapest corners of the global labor market, deflationary forces came flowing back. But the inverse is now happening: Supply chains are reeling back in toward the domestic cost structure, meaning that inflation will come ripping back, as well.

  US Trade Deficit On Goods And Services, 1990-2022

  

  Actually, however, the true picture is more dire than suggested by the chart above. That’s because the non-petroleum share of the trade deficit has ballooned even more egregiously during the last three decades than the overall figure.

  As shown by the red line in the chart below, the ex-petroleum trade deficit was just $8 billion per month in 1998 and now stands at nearly $90 billion per month owing to the fact that the fracking revolution has reduced the petroleum deficit (black line) to zero. This means that the inflationary whirlwind bearing down on the merchandise goods accounts will be all the more virulent.

  

  And while we are on the topic of energy trade and so-called energy independence, now might be as good a time as any to correct that shrill Fox News drumbeat that the Donald got America energy independent and then Sleepy Joe blew it in less than a year.

  The fact is, presidents don’t determine the output level or the trade balance for any sector of the US economy—the forces of supply, demand and investment/disinvestment incentives do. The peak level of domestic crude oil production reached in February 2020 of 13.1 million barrels per day, therefore, was a consequence of the global petroleum price and investment cycle, not the Donald’s arm-waving, including the attempted revival of the Keystone Pipeline.

  The latter was simply a cheaper way than rail to get Canadian tar sands to the refinery markets on the US gulf coast; it would have meant higher netbacks (prices received after transportation and other delivery costs) to Canadian oil sands producers, not more production or lower prices for American consumers.

  Likewise, the Donald’s more sensible public lands leasing policies were clearly superior to those of Obama, but given the long lead-time between lease awards on public lands and actual new production, the impact was irrelevant in the time frame under discussion.

  So what happened is what usually happens: The domestic petroleum production cycle had exactly nothing to do with four-year presidential terms. On that matter, the history is dispositive.

  For example, during the freeze-in-your-cardigan-sweater term of Jimmy Carter, domestic oil production rose from 8.1 million barrel per day in January 1977 to 8.6 million b/d in January 1981, a gain of 5%. By contrast, during the 12-years of Reagan/Bush, where policy clearly was to dismantle Jimmy Carter’s price controls and unleash domestic production, oil output dropped steadily to 6.9 million barrels per day by January 1993, thereby marking a 18% decline in annual production.

  Self-evidently what was at work was not the policy virtue or vice of the temporary Oval Office occupants during these periods, but the global petroleum cycle.

  Likewise, during the pro-production term of Bush the Younger, domestic production declined from 5.9 million barrel per day in January 2001 to 5.2 million barrels per day during January 2009. By contrast, the opposite happened during Obama’s eight years, notwithstanding that the administrator was crawling with anti-fossil fuel types and environmentalist wackadoos.

  Thus, by January 2017 domestic production averaged 8.9 million bbls/day, representing a gain of 70% from the level when ex-oilman Dubya left office. Again, however, this wasn’t presidential policy at work, but the global petroleum price, investment and production cycle.

  And one obvious feature of that is the lag-time between when world oil prices peaked at $150 per barrel in July 2008 and the mobilization of investment and production technology in the US shale patch that brought domestic production roaring back.

  Needless to say, that trend continued unabated during the Donald’s term, meaning that he was riding the inherited wave toward energy independence, not willing it into being through his Oval Office arm-waving and minor pro-production policy initiatives.

  Accordingly, domestic crude oil production peaked at a historic high of 13.1 million bbls/day in February 2020, and then was monkey-hammered like rarely before under the combined impact of the worldwide crash of demand owing to the Covid Lockdowns and the fact that in the spring of 2020, the world oil price actually crashed to below $20 per barrel.

  In the case of the US shale patch, that was an instantaneous death knell for new drilling. Yet owing to the deep and rapid decline rates of shale wells, lack of drilling translates into a plunge of production rates only a few quarters down the road.

  So what Sean Hannity and the other Fox screamers don’t tell you is that by September 2020, domestic production had plunged to 10.7 million bbls/day or by a stunning 18%. That is to say, the retreat from energy independence happened on the Donald’s watch, long before Sleepy Joe ambled into the Oval Office.

  In fact, by January 2021 production had remained plateaued at just above the September bottom at 10.9 million bbls/day. By January 2022, however, it had recovered to 11.5 million barrels per day, thereby digging out further from the hole dug at the end of the Donald’s term.

  US Crude Oil Production Ain’t Got Anything To Do With Presidential Terms

  

  Again, that had nothing to do with Biden’s canceling the Keystone Pipeline (again!) or leases in the Arctic Wildlife Range. To the contrary, it was just the global petroleum cycle doing its thing, again.

  Moreover, now that oil has again hit $130 per barrel and Washington’s madcap Sanctions War is likely to keep it there or higher, we can expect a new burst of drilling and production in the US shale patch. That prospect, in turn, has every probability of causing domestic crude production to top the Donald’s 13.1 million barrel per day record in the not too distant future.

  So perhaps Sean Hannity and the GOP energy independence howlers should be careful of what they wish for.

  *  *  *

  The Fed has already pumped enormous distortions into the economy and inflated an “everything bubble.” The next round of money printing is likely to bring the situation to a breaking point. If you want to navigate the complicated economic and political situation that is unfolding, then you need to see this newly released video from Doug Casey and his team. In it, Doug reveals what you need to know, and how these dangerous times could impact your wealth. Click here to watch it now.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 19:00

• Shanghai Reports Record Surge In COVID Cases
  Shanghai Reports Record Surge In COVID Cases

  Shanghai, China’s financial center, reported a record surge in daily COVID infections on Monday despite the CCP’s best efforts to contain the ongoing COVID outbreak, which is the worst outbreak in China since the virus first emerged in Wuhan more than two years ago.

  

  The country’s determined efforts to contain growing outbreaks despite the “mild symptoms” reported led to lockdowns that affected more than 50 million people at their peak; but the deleterious impact on China’s economy has led the CCP to ease some restrictions, particularly in the southern tech hub of Shenzhen.

  Shanghai reported 24 new domestically-transmitted cases with confirmed symptoms on Monday and another 734 local asymptomatic infections, which Wu Jinglei, director of Shanghai Health Commission, attributed to rounds of mass screening in the city last week, according to the SCMP.

  “Shanghai is standing the test of a severe epidemic,” Wu said, referring to the mass testing carried out from last Wednesday to Sunday.

  Across mainland China, 1,947 new locally transmitted cases and a further 2,384 asymptomatic infections were reported on Monday, continuing the run of high infection rates. China has reported more than 37,000 local infections this month. Up until February, the number was slightly more than 100K cases.

  Liang Wannian, head of the expert panel leading China’s COVID response, defended China’s tough approach to outbreaks

  “Ideally, we would achieve zero COVID patients in society but the specificity of the coronavirus that causes Covid-19 means we can’t achieve that for the moment,” Liang told state broadcaster China Central Television.

  “The dynamic zero-Covid approach means we need to swiftly identify the outbreaks and cut the transmission chain to go towards the direction of zero COVID, or the transmission will be continuous and connected, causing a large-scale rebounding of cases.”

  More than 95% of COVID patients in the outbreaks this month showed only mild symptoms or none at all and less than 0.1 percentage point of the 29,127 cases confirmed over the past month were in a severe or critical condition. This includes the elderly, patients with comorbidities and the unvaccinated, according to Jiao Yahui, an official with the National Health Commission.

  Meanwhile, the northern province of Jilin, which accounts for most of the cases reported over the past month, confirmed another 2,091 infections, with and without symptoms, on Monday.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 18:40

• US Unexpectedly Sanctions China Officials Hours After Demanding Beijing Condemn Russia
  US Unexpectedly Sanctions China Officials Hours After Demanding Beijing Condemn Russia

  Apparently not content with diplomatic war on one front with Russia, the Biden administration appears ready to escalate with China following on the heels of last week’s persistent accusations that Beijing was mulling cooperation with Moscow on weapons resupplies for its Ukraine operation, as well as assistance on Western sanctions evasion.

  Monday afternoon Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced more visa restrictions on Chinese officials related to prior charges that state authorities are overseeing the ethnic cleansing of Uighurs. It’s certainly interesting timing in terms of pulling out the the human rights card, given that throughout last week the admin’s China criticisms seemed exclusively focused on its “fence-sitting” over Ukraine.

  Perpetrators of human rights abuses must continue to face consequences. The United States has taken action to impose visa restrictions on PRC officials for attempting to intimidate, harass, and repress dissidents and human rights defenders inside and outside of China.

  — Secretary Antony Blinken (@SecBlinken) March 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Blinken called on China to “end its ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, repressive policies in Tibet, crackdown on fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong, and human rights violations,” as cited in Bloomberg.

  “The United States rejects efforts by (Chinese) officials to harass, intimidate, surveil, and abduct members of ethnic and religious minority groups, including those who seek safety abroad, and U.S. citizens, who speak out on behalf of these vulnerable populations,” Blinken said. “We are committed to defending human rights around the world and will continue to use all diplomatic and economic measures to promote accountability.”

  It’s unclear as yet which and how many Chinese state officials will be impacted by the new visa restriction measures, which will effectively ban them from travel into the United States, and it’s an expansion of prior Trump restrictions.

  Earlier, the White House issued a statement saying – like UK prime minister Boris Johnson’s words over the weekend – that Beijing must condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and stop downplaying it.

  WHITE HOUSE SAYS U.S. WANTS TO HEAR CHINA CONDEMN RUSSIA’S ACTIONS ON THE GROUND IN UKRAINE

  Childish

  — The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) March 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Meanwhile, here’s commentary from Rabobank on the implications of how China figures into the Ukraine crisis…

  * * *

  But next up must surely be many in markets. On Friday, I argued if the Biden-Xi call went well, markets would take it as positive; if it went badly, markets would take it as a huge negative; and yet what we were told happened on the call might not be the whole story. Markets saw the bullet points released by the Chinese side *before the call was even over*, which had key words like “peace” and the need for good US-China relations,…. and fell for it hook, line, and stinker even though the US readout was short and brusque.

  That’s a very bad call call. It’s as bad as Eurasia Group’s Ian Bremmer calling for President Biden to visit Kyiv, when if a bomb hits him it’s WW3; or one on Twitter from an Asian hedge fund player (although in truth I find it hard to tell if they are a parody account or not) which says: “Seems initial reaction to Xi – Biden call was positive, as expected, but let’s see how Western media ‘interprets’ it. US and China= BFFs?” And, when someone pushes back, the response being: “…not everyone’s view counts equally. The view of those participating in the capital markets matters disproportionately more, this is why the US runs the world.” Which is ironically what this is all about, while still being completely wrong.

  Geopolitical analysts, including ones who cover markets too, note that underneath the algo-triggering headlines the reality was that Beijing:

  1. Blamed the US for the crisis by expanding NATO, rather than Russia expanding Russia;

  2. Stated the US would have to resolve it using a Chinese idiom;

  3. That this includes addressing Russian security needs too, and linking this all back to Taiwan;

  4. Saying China would help if the US backs off on trade war, tech war, AUKUS, the Quad, etc.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Europe Can Survive Throughout Summer Without Russian Gas
  Europe Can Survive Throughout Summer Without Russian Gas

  Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

  • WoodMackenzie: European gas storage levels will likely be within the five-year range by the end of this winter.

  • If Russian flows continue, the European Union (EU) and the UK will end this winter’s heating season with 27 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas in storage.

  • Increasing imports from Norway, Algeria and LNG may help to compensate lower gas flows from Russia.

  If Russian gas flows to Europe were interrupted now, Europe would have enough gas to last it through the end of this winter and the following summer without having to curtail demand, energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie said on Friday.

  

  European gas storage levels will likely be within the five-year range by the end of this winter, thanks to mild weather, more arrivals of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and sustained imports from Norway, according to WoodMac.

  If Russian flows continue, the European Union (EU) and the UK will end this winter’s heating season with 27 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas in storage, which is a level within the five-year range.

  Although energy exports are not part of the sanctions against Russia currently, there is a risk that Moscow could stop flows as a countermeasure to intensifying sanctions over the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

  “If Russian flows stop in the middle of March, gas in store would be sufficient for the rest of this winter and summer, without demand curtailment,” said Kateryna Filippenko, principal analyst on Wood Mackenzie’s Europe gas and LNG team.

  While this winter and the summer could be easier for Europe without Russian gas, some demand curtailments in the 2022-2023 winter will be inevitable, according to WoodMac’s Filippenko.

  Higher natural gas imports from Norway and Algeria, more LNG, slowing the phase-out of coal, and delaying maintenance shutdowns on nuclear power plants could also free up some gas for the power generation sector, perhaps as much as 13 bcm until the end of October 2022, according to Wood Mackenzie.

  The EU is overhauling its energy strategy following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the European Commission unveiled last week a plan to make Europe independent from Russian fossil fuels well before 2030, starting with gas. The EU will seek to diversify gas supplies, speed up the roll-out of renewable gases, and replace gas in heating and power generation—all this can reduce EU demand for Russian gas by two-thirds before the end of the year, the Commission says. In addition, the Commission will propose that by October 1, gas storage in the EU has to be filled up to at least 90%. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 02:00

• Latest Edition Of Psychiatry's "Bible" Labels "Excessive Grief" A Mental Disorder
  Latest Edition Of Psychiatry’s “Bible” Labels “Excessive Grief” A Mental Disorder

  The latest edition of the DSM, psychiatry’s “bible” of mental disorders, features an entirely new one: excessive grieving for a deceased loved one.

  

  The NYT reported over the weekend that the inclusion of the new “disorder” marks an end to a prolonged debate within the field of mental health, prompting researchers and clinicians to view intense grief as a target for medical “treatment”, aka the prescribing of psychiatric medication, which would likely lead to a financial windfall for pharmaceutical companies. The disorder’s inclusion in the DSM-5, the latest edition of the manual, means insurers can be billed for the medication.

  The new diagnosis, prolonged grief disorder, was designed to apply to a narrow slice of the population who are incapacitated, pining and ruminating a year after a loss, and unable to return to previous activities.

  Its inclusion in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders means that clinicians can now bill insurance companies for treating people for the condition.

  Psychiatrists have been pushing for recognition of this “grief disorder” since the 1990s. And some of the experimental treatments under consideration involve drugs that have previously mostly been used for the treatment of alcoholism and opioid use disorder.

  It will most likely open a stream of funding for research into treatments — naltrexone, a drug used to help treat addiction, is currently in clinical trials as a form of grief therapy — and set off a competition for approval of medicines by the Food and Drug Administration.

  Since the 1990s, a number of researchers have argued that intense forms of grief should be classified as a mental illness, saying that society tends to accept the suffering of bereaved people as natural and that it fails to steer them toward treatment that could help.

  Some examples of individuals suffering from grief disorder include widows or widowers who never overcome the loss of a spouse, and parents who struggle to overcome the loss of a child.

  A diagnosis, they hope, will allow clinicians to aid a part of the population that has, throughout history, withdrawn into isolation after terrible losses.

  “They were the widows who wore black for the rest of their lives, who withdrew from social contacts and lived the rest of their lives in memory of the husband or wife who they had lost,” said Dr. Paul S. Appelbaum, who is chair of the steering committee overseeing revisions to the fifth edition of the D.S.M.

  “They were the parents who never got over it, and that was how we talked about them,” he said. “Colloquially, we would say they never got over the loss of that child.”

  Unsurprisingly, many psychiatrists oppose the inclusion of this “grief disorder” in the DSM-5, arguing that it will inevitably lead to many “false positives”, since distinguishing between normal and abnormal levels of grief will be difficult.

  Throughout that time, critics of the idea have argued vigorously against categorizing grief as a mental disorder, saying that the designation risks pathologizing a fundamental aspect of the human experience.

  They warn that there will be false positives – grieving people told by doctors that they have mental illnesses when they are actually emerging, slowly but naturally, from their losses.

  So once again, the field of psychiatry is putting the interests of drug makers and insurance companies over those of patients, many of whom will now be prescribed drugs to treat “grief”, a  normal – and for all people, inevitable – facet of life.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 22:20

• From Record Selling To Panic Buying: A Week For The Hedge Fund History Books
  From Record Selling To Panic Buying: A Week For The Hedge Fund History Books

  If one had to describe last week’s turmoil in the hedge fund world it would be just two words: “sheer chaos”, because we have finally reached a point where smart investors have given up trying to predict what comes next and instead are merely trying to react (as fast as possible) to the newsflow.

  As Goldman’s Prime Brokerage explains, “the desk has witnessed the increasingly high level of difficulty in terms of navigating this market (10 out of 10 difficulty?). Indeed, the most recent GS PB flows data suggests that “investors are now chasing trends – buying on rallies, selling on selloffs – instead of anticipating what comes next, as that has become virtually impossible.”

  Witness the latest out of GS PB over recent sessions

  • Prime Flow for Mar 11-14thth (SPX -2.03%) — Largest $ net selling since early January
  • Prime Flow for Mar 15th (SPX +2.14%) — Largest $ net buying in 3 weeks
  • Prime Flow for Mar 16th (SPX +2.24%) — Largest $ net buying since late January
  • Prime Flow for Mar 17th (SPX +1.23%) — Overall book slightly net bought (1-Yr Zscore +0.2)

  The numbers in terms of actual hedge fund activity are even more remarkable:

  • Net selling from Friday (3/11) and Monday (3/14) combined was the 3rd largest over any 2-day period in the past decade (behind late Dec ’18 and early Jan ’22).
  • Fundamental LS -6.0% (alpha -2.0%) vs MSCI TR -3.7%. Fundamental LS managers experienced negative alpha performance in 9 of the 11 trading days MTD.
  • Fundamental LS Gross leverage has fallen -7.6 pts MTD – the 3rd largest decrease over any 10-day period behind Mar ’20 and Dec ‘18.

  

  • Fundamental LS Net leverage has fallen -7.5 pts MTD – the largest decrease over any 10-day period on record (since Jan ’16).

  

  It is this phenomenon of extreme swings that has underscored a “short gamma” market (however, as we noted on Friday, dealers are now slightly long gamma so the volatility may finally quiet down)…

  

  …. which results in one thing: buyers higher, and sellers lower.

  The same can now be said for the systematic crowd as well – with the moves over the past 48hrs, Goldman estimates that CTAs are decent buyers of global equities over the next week and next month…

  

  … a shift we haven’t seen in some time.

  The relentless, trendless rollercoaster in stocks, explains why yet again, hedge funds are painfully underperforming their benchmarks, with Equity L/S managers down -10% YTD on an asset-weighted basis and down around -6% on a simple average basis.

  

  The problem is that with hedge fund positioning the lowest in two years both gross and net… 

  

  … any continued ramp higher will lead to another panicked, frenzied chase higher. Of course, if instead we see a reversal of last week’s furious stampede, brace for the selling as hedge funds – already shellshocked – resume their liquidating ways.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 21:37

• The Great Depression II
  The Great Depression II

  Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

  Whenever a movie has been a huge hit, the film industry tries to follow it up by doing a sequel. The sequel is almost invariably far more costly, as there’s the anticipation by those who create it that it will be an even bigger blockbuster than the original.

  

  The Great Depression of the 1930’s is seen by most people to be the be-all and end-all of economic catastrophes and there’s good reason for that.

  Although the economic cycle has always existed, the period leading up to October 1929 was unusual, as those in the financial sector had become unusually creative.

  Brokers encouraged people to buy into the stock market as heavily as they could afford to. When that business began to level off, they encouraged people to buy on margin. The idea was that the buyer would only put up a fraction of the money for the purchase and the broker would “guarantee” full payment to the seller. As a condition to the agreement, the buyer would have to relinquish to the broker the right to sell his stock at any point that he wished, should he feel the need to do so to get himself off the hook in the event of a significant economic change.

  Both the buyer and the broker were buying stocks with money that neither one had. But the broker entered into the gamble so that he could charge commissions, which he would be paid immediately. The buyer entered into the gamble, as he had been promised by the broker that stocks were “going to the moon” and that he’d become rich.

  Banks got into the game, as well. At one time, banks took money on deposit, then lent that money out at interest. They would always retain a percentage of the deposited money within the bank to assure that they could meet whatever the normal demand for withdrawals might be. But, eventually, bankers figured out that, if they were prepared to gamble, they could lend out far more money – many times the amount that they had received on deposit. As long as very few loans turned bad, they would eventually get the money back, with interest.

  And so, in the 1920’s, they loaned money to people so that they could buy into the stock market more heavily. From that point forward, an investor who was tapped out and couldn’t afford to buy more stock, then bought on margin. When he was no longer able to even afford to buy on margin, he borrowed money from the bank to buy on margin.

  That meant that only a tiny percentage of the “money” that passed hands actually existed. The great majority of investment funds only existed on paper.

  Of course, the very existence of this absurd anomaly depended upon a market that was thriving and moving steadily upward. If for any reason, there were a sudden loss of confidence in the banks, large numbers of depositors would demand to withdraw their deposits and there would be bank failures, as the banks had been playing with money that did not exist.

  Likewise, if that loss of confidence were to take place with regard to the stock market, large numbers of stockholders would try to sell at the same time and the market would collapse, as the brokers had been playing with money that did not exist.

  In the 1920’s, fortunes were being made by those who ran banks and brokerage houses – at a rate that greatly exceeded anything that had ever existed.

  Unfortunately, they’d created the greatest financial bubble in history and, when it popped, as all bubbles do, it popped in a very big way.

  Thousands of banks were wiped out. Thousands of brokerage houses were wiped out. And millions of investors were wiped out.

  Not surprising that laws were then passed to assure that such a disaster could never occur again. Of particular importance was the Glass Steagall Act.

  Then, in 1999, Glass Steagall was repealed. This was done under the advice of Fed chairman Alan Greenspan, and was accepted readily by then-president Bill Clinton, as he was assured that the repeal would mean a dramatic increase in investment, which would assure a shining legacy for him as he left office.

  My own first reaction to the repeal was that, over the ensuing years, we’d see irrational investment in the real estate market, made possible through bank loans. This would lead to a crash in real estate, followed by a crash in the stock market. I believed that this debacle would be papered over by governments, eventually leading to a further crash, and that the latter crash would be of epic proportions.

  But, why should this be? Why should the second crash be so much greater?

  Well, the magnitude of a crash tends to be equal to the magnitude of the economic abnormality that preceded it. The crash of 1929 was greater than previous crashes, because bankers and brokers had found new ways to inflate the bubble beyond anything that had existed before.

  Likewise, they’ve become even more creative this time around and have inflated the bubble far beyond what existed in 1929. The level of debt far exceeds anything the world has ever seen.

  The 2008 crash was, in effect, a mini-crash. No correction ever took place. Instead, it was papered over by massive increased debt, assuring that, when the inevitable big crash did occur, the severity would be far beyond any other crash in history.

  The sequel to the 1929 crash will be much like movie sequels. With movies, the producers invest more money into the sequel than they spent on the original movie, in the belief that, if they just throw enough money at it, it will somehow be better and make them even more money than the original.

  Likewise in economic events, the assumption is that, if a great deal of money had been made in the buildup to the last major collapse, surely, by creating even more debt this time around, the profit to be made will be far greater than before.

  And this has proven to be true. Financial institutions have entered into an era of profit that has historically been without equal. The original was a monster and the sequel will prove to be an even bigger monster.

  Of course, there’s a difference between movies and economic events. With movies, the producers cash in when the moviegoers pay their admissions fee. With economic crises, the producers make their fortunes in the lead-up to the crash. The crash itself simply passes the bill for the disaster to the moviegoers.

  The question that’s always asked prior to any crash is, “When will it happen?” Unfortunately, although crises can be analyzed and predicted beforehand, the date is more uncertain. The decisive factor is the loss of confidence by the general public. When they collectively get weak knees about the economic future – when they withdraw their deposits from banks and sell their shares in the market, the bubble will suddenly pop.

  And so, the actual screening of this particular epic could be a year from now, or it could be next week. So, it might be premature to buy your box of popcorn now, but, when crashes come, they come suddenly and without warning.

  Since it’s not possible to predict an exact date, those who don’t wish to be casualties of the collapse may wish to prepare for it – to get free of debt, to liquidate assets that will be devalued in a crisis, to turn the proceeds into real money (precious metals) and to relocate to a place that’s likely to be less impacted by the monetary and social crisis that will ensue.

  *  *  *

  How will you protect yourself in the event of an economic crisis? New York Times best-selling author Doug Casey and his team just released a guide that will show you exactly how. Click here to download the PDF now.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 21:10

• "Criminal Tourists" Target Wealthy American Neighborhoods 
  “Criminal Tourists” Target Wealthy American Neighborhoods 

  A starling new development reveals South American criminal tourists are on home invasion sprees targeting wealthy neighborhoods across the US, according to Daily Mail. 

  South American thieves exploit the US’ immigration system for travel as they target multi-million dollar homes in liberal-controlled areas with relaxed criminal justice laws. 

  Police from around the country report some of these criminal tourists are from Colombia and elsewhere in South America. They have ransacked mansions in California, New York, Virginia, Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.

  

  Law enforcement experts say these professional burglars exploit a 2014 visa waiver program intended to promote tourism. Called the Electronic System for Travel Authorization, it’s an automated system that determines the eligibility of visitors to travel without obtaining a visa. 

  Earlier this year, the FBI busted one of these gangs in Virginia who stole an estimated $2 million worth of goods from mansions owned by Asian and Middle Eastern families. Officials said those homes were targeted because they had lots of high-value jewelry and cash. 

  The thieves chose Virginia because of the state’s lax bail laws and could skip bail and exit the country with the loot. The thieves were also connected to burglaries in Carolinas, Georgia, Texas, and a brazen $1.2 million jewelry heist in Southern California. 

  Police in Nassau County, New York, arrested criminal tourists from Chile who broke into multi-million dollars homes and stole jewelry and cash. 

  In the San Francisco suburb of Hillsborough, where a home’s average price is $5.4 million, a group of criminal tourists from Chile and Colombia looted homes in multiple neighborhoods. One of the incidents was caught on cameras as the thieves emptied a house.

  Professional thieves from abroad have found a ‘sweet spot’ in exploiting a travel program on top of relaxed criminal justice laws that have made targeting wealthy Americans very enticing without limited repercussions because they can easily flee the States if caught. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 20:50

• Some Bad Ideas Just Won't Die
  Some Bad Ideas Just Won’t Die

  Authored by Michael Maharrey via SchiffGold.com,

  This may be the dumbest thing you read today. Not my words, but this CNN article I’m about to tell you about.

  Americans are struggling under the weight of inflation. The official CPI for February came in at 7.9%. Measured honestly, CPI is above 15%. So, what’s the best way to help consumers deal with rising prices?

  

  More stimulus!

  That’s the idea floated by Mark Wolfe in his CNN op-ed.

  The fastest and most effective way to protect vulnerable citizens from the impacts of global economic instability is to provide a direct payment through the IRS, similar to the three stimulus checks that were sent to families during the height of the pandemic.”

  I told you it was dumb.

  By the way, this guy is an “energy economist.”

  Now, I’m sure a lot of Americans would get on board with another round of stimulus checks. They enjoyed all three rounds of stimulus during the pandemic.

  But you know what they’re not enjoying?

  Paying for those stimulus checks.

  Because that’s exactly what they’re doing today through these soaring prices.

  So, Wolfe wants to address the inflation problem by literally creating more inflation.

  Dumb.

  Now, he would probably tell you that the rising prices we’re seeing today are the result of the pandemic, or supply chain issues, or maybe even Russia. These are certainly factors in the rising prices of some goods. But at the core, the general rise in prices is the result of the Federal Reserve printing trillions of dollars out of thin air and the US government handing out that money in the form of stimulus checks.

  When you have more dollars chasing the same amount of goods and services, prices generally rise. This is economics 101. (Except apparently at whatever school Wolfe went to.) The government lockdowns during the pandemic exacerbated the problem by constricting supply. So, while supply shrank, demand actually increased because everybody had more dollars in their pockets even though they weren’t going to work. In effect, we had more dollars chasing fewer goods and services. Prices went up. This is entirely predictable — unless you are an energy economist.

  Now, you’ll hear a lot of pundits telling you that inflation is the result of increased demand. That’s not entirely wrong.  But what created the demand? Stimmy checks! In fact, it was by design. Stimulus is meant to stimulate demand. That’s the whole point.

  My point is that yesterday’s stimulus checks were a major factor in today’s inflation problem.

  Now, our intrepid energy economist wants the government to hand out more money that it doesn’t have to help Americans cope with the cost of handing out money that it didn’t have over the last couple of years.

  Of course, that will necessitate more borrowing, meaning the US government will have to sell more bonds.

  And who is going to buy those Treasuries?

  Over the last two years, the Fed has been one of the biggest buyers. It prints money to buy these bonds. And that — by definition — is inflation.

  Do you see? Wolfe’s “solution” is really the root of the problem.

  The Fed has launched a war on inflation that is supposed to include shrinking its balance sheet. But how does the Fed shrink its balance sheet when the US government needs it to keep buying bonds to create the artificial demand necessary to continue funding its massive deficits?

  Here’s a truth you should always remember – whatever the government puts in your left pocket, it took from your right pocket. You ultimately pay for every government action. You might pay through direct taxation. Or your kids might pay if the Treasury borrows the money. Or, you’ll pay through the inflation tax. Regardless, you’re going to pay.

  Americans are paying for coronavirus stimulus today. If Wolfe has his way, you’ll pay for inflation relief with more inflation in the years to come.

  It’s dumb.

  But so much that is dumb is politically viable, so I wouldn’t be surprised if this notion gains steam.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 20:20

• Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Hospitalized With Infection
  Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Hospitalized With Infection

  With the confirmation battle for Justice Stephen Breyer’s nominated successor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, about to begin, longtime conservative Justice Clarence Thomas has reportedly been hospitalized with an infection, according to media reports.

  

  Thomas, the most senior associate justice on the nation’s highest court, is being treated with intravenous antibiotics, according to a spokesperson for the court. His symptoms are easing and he’s expected to recover, they said.

  Officials said Thomas was admitted to Sibley Memorial Hospital in Washington DC on Friday evening after experiencing flu-like symptoms. Court officials said they expect Thomas to be released in a day or two.

  According to USA Today, SCOTUS was set to hear oral arguments on Monday, but the court indicated that Thomas wouldn’t take part (remotely or in person). Instead, he would rather “participate in the consideration and discussion” through court records and audio of the arguments.

  Thomas was nominated by President George H.W. Bush to serve on the Supreme Court in 1991. His nomination led to a contentious confirmation battle after Anita Hill accused him of sexual misconduct while he was her supervisor at the Department of Education and on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 19:35

• The "Wealth Effect" Is Failing As A Key Fed Policy Driver
  The “Wealth Effect” Is Failing As A Key Fed Policy Driver

  Authored by Bruce Wilds via Advancing Time blog,

  In a world where optimism and hope have dominated the investment landscape for over a decade, we should be prepared for reality to raise its ugly head. This time is not different and debt does matter. As pointed out by many economists over the years, low-interest rates and easy money, do not always result in a strong vibrant economy. Japan’s failure to recover from its bubble bursting decades ago remains proof of this.

  

  Much of the rationale behind QE has been that it creates what the Fed calls a “Wealth Effect.” For years this has been a key driver of central bank policy. This view is firmly embedded in the macroeconometric models used by the Fed. The notion, widely adopted by central bankers, is that by inflating asset prices to make the wealthy (the asset holders) even wealthier, these people will spend more of what they see as free money from asset price inflation. The premise is that this additional spending will create additional demand for goods and services thus providing jobs for the masses. 

  Sadly, several times over the years the wealth effect formula has slid off the tracks and most likely will again. Consumption does not create wealth, it creates debt. The example that stands out in the minds of most people is from back in 2008. By loaning money against homes with little scrutiny as to the borrower’s ability to repay them the Fed created a financial bubble with broad implications. It could be argued that since 2008, Fed policy has never really addressed that mess but attempted to paper over it by printing money and expanding debt through quantitative easing.

  

  Wealth Effect Policies Have Failed To Generate Enough Growth

  Looking back at how pursuing policies that breed the Wealth Effect can slide off track or lose their effectiveness, we see it always centers on the risk they create. At some point, the combination of easy-to-borrow money at low-interest rates tends to morph into a high-risk environment of increased speculation and leverage. In short, savers and investors seeking a return on their savings are forced out of traditional accounts because such investments get ravaged by inflation.

  

  Many Consumers Bought Into This

  The 2008 financial crisis resulted in the worst economic disasters in modern times and caused the biggest recession since the great depression of 1930. It is also referred to as the global financial crisis (GFC). Over the last several years, the Fed has been getting a great deal of well-deserved bad press for driving inequality and fracturing society. Since 2008 it has become apparent the Fed has created an unfair system that is broken, unfair, and corrupt. This has affected different generations in rather specific ways.

  It is again becoming very apparent the wealth effect policies are failing. Not only have they failed to create a healthy economy but they have brought the financial system to the brink of collapse. Following the GFC the Federal Reserve and the Bush administration spent hundreds of billions of dollars to add liquidity to the financial markets. They worked hard to avoid a complete collapse. They almost didn’t succeed. Today we are spending not billions, but trillions of dollars to keep the same corrupt policy moving forward. 

  History shows investors should treat the wealth effect with caution because it is susceptible to reversals. Since the GFC, attempt after attempt has been put forth to change the tide, but still, we have watched the middle class shrink. The elephant in the room when it comes to growing the economy is how “the broken window theory” is spun and interpreted. The gist of this theory is that if a window is broken, the subsequent repair expenditure will have no net benefits for the economy. Still, it is not uncommon to see destruction touted as a good thing because it promotes spending. In truth, the idea destruction is good discounts several facts. 

  One has to do with where the money is coming from but whether it is from an insurance company or someplace else, it still means the money is diverted from being used on another purchase. Repairing a broken window is maintenance spending which doesn’t improve growth because it doesn’t improve productivity. This expenditure would have occurred anyway. The only thing a broken window does is  cause maintenance spending to occur earlier and lower the useful life of the window. Maintenance spending may keep the economy going it doesn’t provide a boost. Instead, it is better to invest the money in something which creates wealth by increasing productivity.

  Many people and even economists have real misconceptions as to how the economy works. Where money flows and who it enriches is a key component of economics. The failure to consider this is a blind spot many people have. Years of being told everything revolves around spending has diminished the important role savings plays in the scheme of a balanced economy. Fans of Keynesian economics that encourage government spending to stabilize the economy during a downturn tend to discount the importance that where and how money is spent matters a great deal. 

  

  Wealth Effect Policy Has A Poor Record

  In the end, this all comes back to the fact current policies are presenting us with diminishing returns while increasing risk. Sadly, financial corruption has played a huge role in getting us here. Never before in our history have Presidents, Fed Chairs, and politicians in general been able to exploit their power and gained massive wealth following their time as so-called public servants. A big part of our current problems is the elite top-down efforts to control our society has created a permanent government. Today an army of government workers, most un-elected have been empowered to nibble away at our rights.  

  Bubbling up to the surface is the recognition the Fed has to shoulder a huge responsibility in pushing inequality higher. Powell has even gone so far as to claim there was little demand for loans below $1 million. Sadly, the same policies that dump huge money into larger businesses because it is an easier and faster way to bolster the economy give these concerns a huge advantage over their smaller competitors.

  The long-term ramifications of destroying smaller businesses will hurt America in the long run. It eliminates competition, reduces opportunity, and over time fuels inflation. This drives my angst directed at companies such as Amazon and big tech. The policy of making people feel better so they spend more than they can afford is part of voodoo economics.  So is sending jobs abroad and increasing our consumption of imported goods which has resulted in a massive trade deficit. Good economic policy encourages personal responsibility and is rooted in saving not spending. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 19:30

• Turkey Says Ukraine, Russia "Close To An Agreement" As Moscow Delivers Ultimatum To Surrender Mariupol
  Turkey Says Ukraine, Russia “Close To An Agreement” As Moscow Delivers Ultimatum To Surrender Mariupol

  Another day, another glimmer of hope there we may soon see a ceasefire in the Ukraine war: on Sunday, Turkey said that Russia and Ukraine had made progress on their negotiations (ostensibly the same negotiations which, if they fail, could lead to World War 3 according to Zelensky) to halt the invasion and that the two warring sides were close to an agreement.

  “It’s not easy to negotiate while the war is ongoing, or to agree when civilians are dying. But I want to say that there is momentum,” Turkey Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said from the southern Turkish province of Antalya, AFP reported. “We see that the parties are close to an agreement.”

  Cavusoglu this week visited Russia and Ukraine as Turkey, which has strong bonds with the two sides, has tried to position itself as a mediator. The foreign minister, who hosted his peers from Russia and Ukraine this week,  said Turkey was in contact with the negotiating teams from the two countries but he refused to divulge the details of the talks as “we play an honest mediator and facilitator role.”

  In an interview with daily Turkish newspaper Hurriyet, presidential spokesman Ibrahim Kalin said the sides were negotiating six points: Ukraine’s neutrality; disarmament and security guarantees; the so-called “de-Nazification”; removal of obstacles on the use of the Russian language in Ukraine; the status of the breakaway Donbas region; and the status of Crimea, annexed by Russia in 2014.

  Turkey’s pro-government Hurriyet newspaper reported that the two countries were edging towards agreement on Kyiv declaring neutrality and abandoning its drive for Nato membership, “demilitarizing” Ukraine in exchange for collective security guarantees, what Russia calls “denazification” and lifting restrictions on the use of Russian in Ukraine.

  Two people familiar with the discussions said it was likely a compromise would involve token concessions from Kyiv on what Russia calls “denazification”. But Linda Thomas-Greenfield, US ambassador to the UN, accused Moscow of failing to fully participate in the talks. “The negotiations seem to be one-sided,” she said. “The Russians have not leaned into any possibility for a negotiated and diplomatic solution.”

  Hopes that an agreement is close were dashed, however, after the Russian military delivered an ultimatum for the surrender of Mariupol, the besieged city in southern Ukraine and the scene of some of the heaviest fighting since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine more than three weeks ago, according to the National Defense Control Center of the Russian Federation as cited by Tass.

  Colonel-General Mikhail Mizintsev said all armed units of Ukraine must leave Mariupol from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. local time on Monday, according to Tass, after which any fighters remaining would “face a military tribunal.” It said humanitarian convoys would deliver food, medicine and other essentials to the city.  The Russian statement demanded a written response from Ukraine’s government by 4 a.m. Kyiv time.

  The eastern port city has been devastated by relentless shelling, with whole neighborhoods reduced to piles of smouldering rubble. Electricity, gas and water have been cut off and trapped residents are without food.

  Ukraine’s armed forces said the situation in Mariupol which located in mostly Russia controlled territory around Donetsk, was “difficult: there is famine in the city, street fights, people are trying to leave”. Local authorities in Mariupol said “civilians are still under the rubble” after the school bombing.

  

  Russia’s advance in Mariupol came after Kyiv said it had been cut off from the strategically important Sea of Azov, a conduit to the Black Sea. Capturing Mariupol would give the Russians control of a swath of Ukraine’s southern coast.

  Kyiv also accused Moscow of using its new hypersonic missiles against civilian areas elsewhere in Ukraine, in the first confirmation that the Kremlin had deployed the weapons in the conflict. Moscow said it used the Kinzhal, which it claims can travel at 10 times the speed of sound, twice in the past three days: to destroy a fuel depot in southern Ukraine and to target a munitions storage facility in the country’s west.

  Russia said Andrei Paliy, deputy commander of its Black Sea fleet, had died during the battle for Mariupol. Paliy’s death makes him the seventh high-ranking Russian officer Ukraine claims to have killed during the war.

  Kyiv and its western allies fear Russian president Vladimir Putin could be buying time in peace talks to replenish Moscow’s forces and launch a broader offensive.

  Meanwhile, as the FT notes, Mariupol’s status is a sticking point in the ongoing Turkey-mediated peace talks because it is part of the Ukrainian-held territory claimed by Moscow-backed separatists, according to two people briefed on the peace efforts.

  Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky said the talks were worth pursuing even if they had a “1 per cent chance of success” and warned a failure of negotiations would risk “a third world war.” “We have demonstrated the dignity of our people and our army . . . But unfortunately our dignity is not going to preserve lives. So I think we have to use any format, any chance, in order to have the possibility of negotiating,” he told CNN. Zelensky said western leaders had told him Ukraine would not be allowed to join Nato or the EU although “publicly, the doors will remain open”. 

  US president Joe Biden will visit Europe this week to attend Thursday’s Nato summit in Brussels, but will not travel to Ukraine, the White House said on Sunday.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 19:00

• Escobar: The 'Rules-Based International Order' Is Unraveling Much Faster Than Expected
  Escobar: The ‘Rules-Based International Order’ Is Unraveling Much Faster Than Expected

  Authored by Pepe Escobar,

  The “rules-based international order” – as in “our way or the highway” – is unraveling much faster than anyone could have predicted.

  

  The Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) and China are starting to design a new monetary and financial system bypassing the U.S. dollar, supervised by Sergei Glazyev and intended to compete with the Bretton Woods system.

  Saudi Arabia – perpetrator of bombing, famine and genocide in Yemen, weaponized by U.S., UK and EU – is advancing the coming of the petroyuan.

  India – third largest importer of oil in the world – is about to sign a mega-contract to buy oil from Russia with a huge discount and using a ruble-rupee mechanism.

  Riyadh’s oil exports amount to roughly $170 billion a year. China buys 17% of it, compared to 21% for Japan, 15% for the U.S., 12% for India and roughly 10% for the EU. The U.S. and its vassals – Japan, South Korea, EU – will remain within the petrodollar sphere. India, just like China, may not.

  Sanction blowback is on the offense. Even a market/casino capitalism darling such as uber-nerd Credit Suisse strategist Zoltan Pozsar, formerly with the NY Fed, IMF and Treasury Dept., has been forced to admit, in an analytical note:

  “If you think that the West can develop sanctions that will maximize the pain for Russia by minimizing the risks of financial stability and price stability for the West, then you can also trust unicorns.”

  Unicorns are a trademark of the massive NATOstan psyops apparatus, lavishly illustrated by the staged, completely fake “summit” in Kiev between Comedian Ze and the Prime Ministers of Poland, Slovenia and the Czech Republic, thoroughly debunked by John Helmer and Polish sources.

  Pozsar, a realist, hinted in fact at the ritual burial of the financial chapter of the “rules-based international order” in place since the early Cold War years: “After the end of this war [in Ukraine], ‘money’ will ‎never be ‎the same.” Especially when the Hegemon demonstrates its “rules” by encroaching on other people’s money.

  And that configures the central tenet of 21st century martial geopolitics as monetary/ideological. The world, especially the Global South, will have to decide whether “money” is represented by the virtual, turbo-charged casino privileged by the Americans or by real, tangible assets such as energy sources. A bipolar financial world – U.S. dollar vs. yuan – is at hand.

  There’s no surefire evidence – yet. But the Kremlin may have certainly gamed that by using Russia’s foreign reserves as bait, likely to be frozen by sanctions, the end result could be the smashing of the petrodollar. After all the overwhelming majority of the Global South by now has fully understood that the backed-by-nothing U.S. dollar as “money” – according to Poznar – is absolutely untrustworthy.

  If that’s the case, talk about a Putin ippon from hell.

  It’s gold robbery time

  As I outlined the emergence of the new paradigm, from the new monetary system to be designed by a cooperation between the EAEU and China to the advent of the petroyuan, a serious informed discussion  erupted about a crucial part of the puzzle: the fate of the Russian gold reserves.

  Doubts swirled around the Russian Central Bank’s arguably suicidal policy of keeping assets in foreign securities or in banks vulnerable to Western sanctions.

  Of course there’s always the possibility Moscow calculated that nations holding Russian reserves – such as Germany and France – have assets in Russia that can be easily nationalized. And that the total debt of the state plus Russian companies even exceeds the amount of frozen reserves.

  But what about the gold?

  As of February 1, three weeks before the start of Operation Z, the Russian Central Bank held $630.2 billion in reserves. Almost half –

  $311.2 billion – were placed in foreign securities, and a quarter – $151.9 billion – on deposits with foreign commercial and Central Banks. Not exactly a brilliant strategy. As of June last year, strategic partner China held 13.8% of Russia’s reserves, in gold and foreign currency.

  As for the physical gold, $132.2 billion – 21% of total reserves – remains in vaults in Moscow (two-thirds) and St. Petersburg (one-third).

  So no Russian gold has been frozen? Well, it’s complicated.

  The key problem is that more than 75% of Russian Central Bank reserves are in foreign currency. Half of these are securities, like government bonds: they never leave the nation that issued them. Roughly 25% of the reserves are linked to foreign banks, mostly private, as well as the BIS and the IMF.

  Once again it’s essential to remember Sergei Glazyev in his groundbreaking essay Sanctions and Sovereignty: 

  “It is necessary to complete the de-dollarization of our foreign exchange reserves, replacing the dollar, euro and pound with gold. In the current conditions of the expected explosive growth in the price of gold, its mass export abroad is akin to treason and it is high time for the regulator to stop it.”

  This is a powerful indictment of the Russian Central Bank – which was borrowing against gold and exporting it. For all practical purposes, the Central Bank could be accused of perpetrating an inside job. And subsequently they were caught flat-footed by the devastating American sanctions.

  As a Moscow analyst puts it, the Central Bank “had delivered some volumes of gold to London in 2020-2021. This decision was motivated by a high price of gold at that time (near $2000 per ounce) and could hardly be initiated by Putin. If so, this decision can be qualified as very stupid, or even part of a diversionist tactic (…) Most of the gold delivered to London was not stored but sold and transferred into foreign currency reserves (in euro or pounds) which were frozen later.”

  No wonder a lot of people in Russia are livid. A quick flashback is in order. In June last year, Putin signed a law canceling requirements for the repatriation of foreign exchange earnings from gold exports. Five months later, Russia’s gold miners were exporting like crazy. A month later, the Duma wanted to know  why the Central Bank had stopped buying gold. No wonder Russia media erupted with accusations of “an unprecedented [gold] robbery”.

  Now it’s way more dramatic: RIA Novosti described the American-dictated freeze as – what else – a “robbery” and duly predicted global economic chaos.  As for the Central Bank, it’s back on the gold buying business.

  None of the above though explains some “missing” gold that de facto is not under the possession of the Russian Central Bank. And that’s where a somewhat shady character such as Herman Gref comes in.

  Let’s check this out with State Duma deputy Mikhail Delyagin, who had a few things to say about the gold-exported-to-London bonanza:

  “This process has been going on for the past year. Exported, according to some estimates, 600 tons. [Head of Russian Central Bank] Nabiullina said – whoever wants to sell gold to get cash, or if you mine gold and trade it, keep in mind that the state, in my person, will not buy gold from you at a market price. We will take it at a big discount. If you want to get honest money for it, please export it. The world center of gold trading is London. Accordingly, everyone began to export and sell gold there. Including Mr. [Herman] Gref. The head of the formally state-owned Sberbank sold a huge part of his gold reserves.”

  Look here for fascinating details about Sberbank’s Gref shenanigans.

  Watch for the gold-backed ruble

  It may be a case of too little too late, but at least the Kremlin has now established a committee – with authority over the Central Bank nerds – to handle the serious stuff.

  It boggles the mind that the Russian Central Bank does not answer to the Russian constitution as well as to the judicial system, but in fact is subordinated to the IMF. A case can be made that this cartel-designed financial system – implying zero sovereignty – simply cannot be tackled head on by any nation on the planet, and Putin has been trying to undermine it step by step. That includes, of course, keeping Elvira Nabiullina on the job even as she duly follows the Washington consensus to the letter.

  And that brings us back to the ultra high stakes possibility that the Kremlin may have wanted from the start to go no holds barred, forcing the Atlanticists to reveal their true hand, and exposing their system in a “The King is Naked” spectacular for a worldwide audience.

  And that’s where the EAEU/China new monetary/financial system comes in, under Glazyev supervision. We can certainly envision Russia, China and vast swathes of Eurasia progressively divorcing from casino capitalism; the ruble reconverted to a gold-backed currency; and Russia focused on self-sufficiency, productive domestic investment and trade connectivity with most of the Global South.

  Way beyond its confiscated foreign reserves and tons of gold sold in London, what matters is that Russia remains the ultimate natural resource powerhouse. Shortages? A little austerity for a little while will take care of it: nothing as dramatic as the national impoverishment under the neoliberal 1990s. And extra boost would come from exporting natural resources at premium discount prices to other BRICS and most of Eurasia and the Global South.

  The collective West has just fabricated a new, tawdry East-West divide. Russia is turning it upside down, to its own profit: after all the multipolar world is rising in the East.

  The Empire of Lies won’t back down, because it does not have a Plan B. Plan A is to “cancel” Russia across the – Western – spectrum. So what? Russophobia, racism, 24/7 psyops, propaganda overdrive, cancel culture online mobs, that don’t mean a thing.

  Facts matter: the Bear has enough nuclear/hypersonic hardware to shatter NATO in a few minutes before breakfast and teach a lesson to the collective West before pre-dinner cocktails. There will come a time when some exceptionalist with a decent IQ will finally understand the meaning of “indivisibility of security”.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 18:30

• Shenzhen Scrambles To Ease Lockdown As Port Congestion Persists
  Shenzhen Scrambles To Ease Lockdown As Port Congestion Persists

  The CCP continued to ease lockdown restrictions on Shenzhen over the weekend as the municipal government claimed that the spread of COVID in the city is “overall controllable.”

  Shenzhen’s municipal government said it would resume normal operations and production, according to a notice posted to its WeChat account on Friday.

  

  As factories reopen, citywide bus and subway services will also resume, according to the notice, which said the reopening would be effective starting March 21 through March 27.

  The city’s COVID situation is still grim, but it’s overall controllable, according to the notice. The move follows a partial lift of restrictions for five districts of Shenzhen on Friday, as President Xi Jinping said.

  The reopening comes as China seeks to minimize the economic and social disruption to the economy from its COVID zero policy.

  But the city’s reopening hasn’t been quick enough to prevent a backlog at Shenzhen’s critical ports. Cargo ships are accumulating at one of the busiest ports in the country after another COVID outbreak shut down factories and warehouses, raising the prospect of a new round of bottlenecks that could push up freight rates and slow deliveries.

  There are more than 35 ships waiting to dock in Shenzhen and another 30 farther north in Qingdao, according to shipping brokers. The Port of Shenzhen, which serves a major manufacturing and export hub, includes the Yantian terminal, which handles about 25% of all US-bound Chinese exports. Manufacturing plants and warehouses in the city were ordered to close this past week, while another container load is falling fast as fewer trucks are arriving.

  “I’ve got a load of bicycles, but stuck 16 kilometers on the highway coming into the port for almost two days,” said Wei Wu, a truck driver moving boxes for a European container and logistics operator. “Very little moves in Shenzhen. You need to test repeatedly, and I don’t know if the ship will be allowed to come in.”

  The lockdown in Shenzhen was partially lifted Friday after President Xi Jinping told a Politburo meeting that while sticking to its COVID-zero policy, the government should “minimize the impact” of the pandemic on the country’s economy.

  According to WSJ, the Danish boxship company AP Moller-Maersk said that although terminals in Shenzhen are operational, the shipping giant had come up with contingency plans that could divert ships if the COVID restrictions there remain.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 18:00

• Grains Cheatsheet, Part 3: The Corn And Soybean Spread
  Grains Cheatsheet, Part 3: The Corn And Soybean Spread

  The final, part 3 out of 3 in a weekly miniseries, by Macro Ops Substack, Part 1 can be found here; Part 2 can be found here.

  The Corn and Soybean Spread

  Corn and Soybeans compete for the same acreages area. Ultimately farmers must decide how much of their space they are going commit to plant Corn, and therefore how much Soybean they will put into the ground.

  The ratio is Soybeans over Corn, and it tracks how much money a farmer receives for their Soybean crop relative to their Corn crop.

  It’s usually around 2/1. Whenever it’s over 3/1, it means that it pays more to grow Soybeans over Corn. For every ton of Soybeans a producer sells he will have to sell at least 3 tons of Corn to get the same amount of income.

  It’s important to realize that corn yields are bigger than soybean yields. That means that an acreage of Corn gives more bushels than an acreage of Soybeans. Since farmland is a limited resource that can’t be quickly scaled up or down, it’s important to pay attention to this indicator.

  It gives you an insight on how the producers could decide to plant for the year.

  Weather Is THE Real Risk Factor, it doesn’t have to materialize… the rumor is enough.

  For Macro Ops narratives are important. And it’s no different for grain markets. The concept of Weather Premium is an important one to understand in order to trade grains. Whenever the crops are on the ground, they are really sensitive to bad weather conditions. Volatility tends to go up.

  If you add a rumor about bad weather that COULD have a negative impact on yields, prices will go up. This higher price is known as Weather Risk Premium. The reason being is that now there are concerns that supply won’t be enough for everybody.

  Some key players absolutely need corn for their operations. They are price acceptant which means that no matter the price they have to purchase the corn.

  This type of player is willing to buy at a higher price just to secure its operative needs (think of Kellogg’s for example). 

  This type of behavior is what brings prices up.

  Now, if we fast-forward to harvest time, and the Weather wasn’t as bad as previously thought. (The genetically modified seeds are pretty resilient by the way.) Then prices should go lower as the weather premium is no longer baked in anymore. 

  The point to take home here is bad weather didn’t become a reality, nevertheless the rumor was enough to make some key players take action, and this ended up influencing prices. So, pay attention to Weather Narratives and try to identify when you are in a Weather Risk Premium Market.

  Weather has an asymmetric effect.

  The real reason why markets are willing to pay a Premium for weather risk is because weather has an asymmetric effect on yields and therefore on the supply.  Bad weather has the potential to literally destroy a year’s crop potential (that’s why insurance for farmers exists). 

  There are many ways horrible weather conditions could mess up crops. If it’s too dry or too wet while the grains are in the ground it has a negative effect on yields. Too much rain when it’s planting season means a slower planting pace. There’s a critical window of opportunity for planting corn and soybeans. If they are not planted in the right moment yields will suffer.

  On the other hand, during harvest season if there is too much rain it also slows the pace and could lead to quality issues. Grains must have a standard dryness otherwise they are considered lower quality.

  A storm could mess up piers and ships and create distribution worries. In South America where infrastructure isn’t so great, heavy rains imply bad muddy roads which makes some farms impossible to reach.

  Good weather on the other hand, doesn’t have the same effect… it just helps yields to some degree, but only if everything else was done properly, and that’s pretty much it.

  If you are trading Soybeans, China’s New Year Holidays matter.

  Check your calendar around February. China’s holiday celebration lasts a week. That means that all physical operations for Soybeans stops during this time of the year, If there aren’t any other relevant news on the market like a weather story, prices tend to go down as a result of the lesser demand while the East is asleep.

  By the same logic, when the festivities are over they tend to come back with a buying frenzy so it’s good to be aware of this behavior.

  It’s easy to pinpoint this trend in China’s Soybean Imports report. February tends to be the smallest month of all. 

  Commitment of Trader Reports though a lagging indicator is an important one.

  The COT is a really useful indicator to understand the structure of the market you’re in. It divides all market players into 3 key classifications, Commercials, Managed Money and Speculators. Commercials will be guys like ADM, Cargill, or Kellogg’s. They use the futures market not to speculate but to hedge out the risk that commodities prices have on their physical operations.

  Managed Money will be hedge funds with big amounts of money. They are the so called “Smart Money.” Speculators are all the small players like you and me.

  If you take each group’s long contracts minus their short contracts you will be able to pinpoint whether they are Net long or Net short.

  Commercials tend to be net short almost all the time.

  Managed Money can be both net short or net long. If they switch positions from a very net short position, like 150.000 contracts, to net long 50.000 contracts this should tell you that the “smart money” is now bullish on that commodity and betting on higher prices.

  Referencing how long or how short the funds and the commercials are relative to their previous positions gives tremendous insight on the market.

  Speculators have a tendency to be on the wrong side of the trade consistently, OUCH! (Don’t be one of them).

  Unlike other bigger markets. Fund money is big enough to move prices on the grains futures market. It’s important to track their actions. A good way to keep an eye on their activities is to take their net position and divide that by the open interest.

  The Open Interest

  Open Interest is an indicator that confuses a lot of stock traders since it’s exclusive to derivative markets. 

  Here’s a simple example: 

  If you go long 5 contracts of Corn, you have raised the volume indicator by 5 contracts. If by the end of the day you decided to take profits and close 2 contracts, you will have to sell two corn futures.

  The volume will end up being 7 contracts for the day. 

  But since you closed out two contracts you are only left with 3 contracts overnight. The open interest indicator will show 3 contracts. 

  Open Interest tracks how many futures are still open at the end of the day. Every time you short or go long on a futures contract you will add one point to Open Interest. You will “create” one contract. When you offset the position by making a closing trade, you will eliminate the contract thus reducing the OI.

  The higher the OI the more contracts are created. Therefore more people are trading that particular futures contract. 

  If OI starts to trend lower it usually means traders are starting to roll their exposure over to the next month’s contract. Liquidity will dry up in the expiring contract and flow into the new contract.   

  The Forward Curve: Contango and Backwardation

  The forward curve is simply the chart representation of all the tradable futures contracts in any point in time. Futures contracts are available in most months. The forward curve will plot all the prices on Y axis, thus giving you a picture on how the market is pricing the contracts from today until many months into the future.

  

  In this example prices went up from yesterday. The spread between different contracts remains the same, because otherwise there’ll be arbitrage opportunities.

  When the front month is the cheapest one, and contracts further out in time are higher in price, you are in a Contango Market.

  When the front month is the most expensive one, and contracts further out in time are lower in price, you are in a Backwardation market.

  Calendar Spreads and the Grain Elevators Business

  A calendar spread is a trading strategy which consists of profiting from a movement in price on the same underlying asset with two different expiry dates. 

  When we were discussing the Corn to Soybeans ratio, we were trying to get into a farmer’s head and play the game just like he would.

  Whenever you are talking about calendar spreads we are entering in the domains of the Grain Elevators. Their business focuses on this.

  They receive the grain from the farmers when it is abundant and cheap, store it, and then sell it when it’s scarce and expensive. They didn’t add value, they just keep it in the same conditions they received it. The idea is only to profit later on when prices are higher.

  When you are trading calendar spreads you are working in a similar fashion. All you are saying is that the prices of Corn in May should go higher relative to the Corn in September or vice-versa. 

  Forward Curve and the Storage Theory

  It always intrigued me how the market could figure out how to price Corn futures so many months in advance, especially when nobody knows how future events will unveil. To understand why the Corn market is usually in Contango we are going to need two additional concepts: Storage costs and Arbitrage.

  Let’s say today’s Corn is priced at 350 cents per bushel and the futures with delivery 3 months from now are trading at 400 cents. If someone is able to buy the corn today at $3.50 and store it with a cost of 5 cents per month, he will end up with a price of 3.50+0.15= 3.65 per bushel three months into the future. 

  So what this opportunist needs to do is to buy the Corn at today’s prices, sell the 3 month futures contract for 4.00 and wait three months. At the end of it, he will end up with a profit 0.35 (4.00 – 3.65= 0.35) per bushel.

  The point here is that there wasn’t any risk, no matter what happens to prices he’ll end up with a profit. That’s an Arbitrage trade.

  If the contango curve is too steep it means that prices are too high between one contract and the next forward. Many people will be able to do a similar arbitrage trade like the one we just described. This brings down the prices on the further out futures until the arbitrage disappears.

  I like to think about the forward curve in this way. If the Sep Contract is trading at 350 and the December Contract is trading at 355, then it probably costs 5 cents to store that corn from September to December. Otherwise there will be an Arbitrage Opportunity. It’s important to get a feeling of how steep the forward curve should be. If it gets too high maybe there’s an opportunity! 

  Backwardation Case

  When prices are in Backwardation it’s not possible to do the same arbitrage trade we just described.

  When prices are at backwardation it usually implies that there are supply concerns and people need their grain NOW. 

  But if the prices of the closest futures get too high, people just will stop buying altogether. They will postpone their purchase plan and try to take advantages of cheaper prices in the future. 

  This two cases should give you an idea on how the market is able to maintain a reasonable Forward Curve. Of course new information could mess up with these relationships, and that is where opportunities arrive!

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 17:30

• Wall Street's 'King Of Block Trades' Targeted In DoJ Investigation
  Wall Street’s ‘King Of Block Trades’ Targeted In DoJ Investigation

  A few weeks have passed since the investing public received an update on the SEC block trading probe that had captured Wall Street’s attention before the market ructions that briefly sent the Nasdaq into a bear market earlier this month emerged. As we learned earlier this year, the probe had ensnared Morgan Stanley and a handful of buy-side clients, most (if not all) of whom had some kind of connection to ex-Morgan Stanley executive Pawan Passi, who ran the bank’s equity syndication desk for years.

  

  So far, Morgan Stanley has appeared to be the nexus of the investigation, as DoJ and SEC investigators examine whether the bank illegally tipped off clients about impending block trades (a practice that was once described by Bloomberg as “a grey area”).

  But on Friday, Bloomberg revealed that another firm has been inextricably wrapped up in the probe: CaaS Capital Management, a New York-based hedge fund with more than $4 billion AUM led by Frank Fu, a longtime Wall Street operator. To hear Bloomberg tell it, CaaS has made its money mainly off the types of block trades that the SEC/DoJ are trying to criminalize. Fu and his firm have become so closely associated with this trading strategy, that Bloomberg informally dubbed him Wall Street’s “king of block trading”.

  What’s more, business has been good. According to Bloomberg, the firm achieved a return higher than 70% during its first year.

  His CaaS Capital Management would focus on block trading, one of the last bastions of old Wall Street, where big slugs of stock are sold through person-to-person negotiation, even cajoling, rather than electronic venues. Many practitioners are bro-y – the type who played college football. For Friday happy hours, Fu’s colleagues unzip their CaaS puffer vests and break out chess boards in a conference room.

  Yet Fu, 39, soon managed to establish close ties with investment banks including Morgan Stanley, the juggernaut of the equities world. His pitch: CaaS would “partner” with them, positioning itself for preferential treatment. Prospective investors say CaaS has boasted to them of quickly becoming one of the biggest U.S. funds dedicated to block trading, getting a first look at deals and gaining entry to virtually every IPO in the country. In the firm’s first full year Fu posted a jaw-dropping 76% return.

  Fu has enjoyed a charmed career, starting off trading options at Susquehanna, before pivoting to an entirely different style of trading: block trades that required a high-contact approach involving the humans on either side of the trade. His personal relationship with Passi quickly established him as one of the first individuals to “get the call”.

  In his early career, Fu focused on types of trading that depend more on math than networking. Born in Shanghai, he came to the U.S. to study at Cornell University in the early 2000s, earning a bachelor’s degree in operations research and industrial engineering and a master’s in financial engineering in 2006, after which he landed at Susquehanna International Group, where he spent two years trading options.

  Fu parlayed his reputation and growing influence to launch his own firm, with the backing of Wall Street giants like BlackRock.

  Fu set up his own shop with early backing from BlackRock Inc. and New Holland Capital. He told investors he planned to position himself as an aide to banks, which after the 2008 financial crisis weren’t able to pile on big blocks of stock like they used to. In more recent months, CaaS has told prospective investors it had ties to about 30 banks.

  “Due to the breadth and strength of these relationships, CaaS has earned a reputation in the market as the firm that receives an early, if not first, call,” the firm wrote in a recent marketing presentation.

  Fu wasn’t flashy with his growing wealth. One associate described him as one of the cheapest dinner meetings on Wall Street, typically ordering just an entree and a Diet Coke. He bought investment properties in Weehawken, New Jersey, and surrounding areas and started a foundation with his wife, which has donated to Cornell and Horace Mann, a private school in the Bronx.

  He quickly became one of the best-known buyers of blocks of shares, which he used computer modeling to analyze to ensure his firm bought shares at a reasonable price. Regulatory filings show that CaaS was there to hoover up blocks of shares dumped by prime brokers on Archegos’s behalf. Typically, CaaS holds positions anywhere from a few days, to a few months.

  But some of Fu’s counterparties have noticed what they described as ‘irregularities’ in his trading style.

  Not every bank took up Fu’s offer. One banker, speaking on the condition that he and his employer not be named, said his firm twice sold Fu a block of shares from its own book, but each time noticed a drop in the public price before the transaction was finished, reducing the bank’s proceeds. Suspicious that the drops might not be coincidental, the banker made a personal decision a few years ago to stop trusting Fu with new business.

  Now, Fu and Morgan Stanley’s Passi are reportedly two among a group of more than a dozen Wall Street executives who have found themselves in investigators’ crosshairs. As one lawyer who spoke with BBG acknowledged, the line between what’s legal and illegal is nebulous, at best.

  “The definition of material nonpublic information is pretty broad,” and can be murky, said Dan Viola, a partner overseeing law firm Sadis & Goldberg’s regulatory and compliance practice. “Funds shorting after such calls are taking an aggressive stance. Regulators appear to be concerned about a banker giving confidential information to preferred customers at the expense of the person who is selling the big block.”

  The big question now: can prosecutors actually convince a jury that Fu, Passi and others intentionally violated laws governing the dissemination of material non-public information?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 17:00

• What Is The Strike Price Of The Powell Put?
  What Is The Strike Price Of The Powell Put?

  Authored by MN Gordon via EconomicPrism.com,

  The Federal Reserve, through a multi-decade series of shady practices, finds itself in a very disagreeable place.  Policies of extreme market intervention have positioned the economy and financial markets for an epic bust.

  

  Price inflation.  Unemployment.  Interest rates.  Stock market valuations.

  These metrics are presently situated in such a way that the “Powell put” will be impossible to successfully execute for the foreseeable future.

  Price inflation is at a 40 year high.  The unemployment rate is 3.8 percent, which is near its low.  The 10-Year Treasury note is yielding 2.15 percent.  While this key interest rate is certainly trending higher, it’s still near a historical low.

  And for all the wild price swings and gnashing of teeth over the last two months, the S&P 500 has hardly slipped.  In fact, as of market close on Thursday March 17 of 4,411, the S&P 500 is down only 7.83 percent from its all-time record close of 4,786 reached on January 3.  It still has another 12.17 percent to fall before reaching official bear market territory.

  Moreover, the ratio of total market capitalization over GDP is currently 185 percent.  This is considered significantly overvalued.

  By our estimation the S&P 500 has much, much further to fall in 2022.  And given current price inflation, unemployment, and interest rates, the Powell put won’t likely be executed with the clockwork certainty that investors have grown accustom to over the last 35 years.

  We posit that a 50 percent decline in the S&P 500 and an unemployment rate over 10 percent would be needed before the Fed can bailout Wall Street again.  That, and massively higher interest rates will first be required to contain raging consumer price inflation.

  Quite frankly, 25 basis point rate hikes to the federal funds rate won’t cut it.  We’ll explain why in just a moment.  But first, some context is in order…

  Extreme Intervention

  When Alan Greenspan first executed the “Greenspan put” following the 1987 Black Monday crash, financial markets were well positioned for this centrally coordinated intervention.  Interest rates, after peaking out in 1981, were still high.  The yield on the 10-Year Treasury note was about 9 percent.  There was plenty of room for borrowing costs to fall.

  The unstated mechanics of the Greenspan put are extraordinarily simple.  When the stock market drops by about 20 percent, the Fed intervenes by lowering the federal funds rate.  This typically results in a real negative yield, and an abundance of cheap credit.

  This tactic has a twofold effect of seen and observable market distortions.  First, the burst of liquidity puts an elevated floor under how far the stock market falls.  Thus, the put option effect.  Second, the interest rate cuts inflate bond prices, as bond prices move inverse to interest rates.

  As of the late 1980s, thanks to the Greenspan put, the Fed has been running an implicit program of countercyclical stock market monetary stimulus.  Ben Bernanke then ratcheted up the Fed’s extreme market intervention via quantitative easing (QE) in the aftermath of the 2008-09 financial crisis.  That’s when things really got nuts.

  QE, remember, involves creating credit out of thin air and then loaning it to the Treasury.  The Treasury then injects the fake money into the economy through government spending programs.  QE can also involve bailing out the big banks by swapping the Fed’s fake money for toxic securities.

  In short, U.S. financial markets have been rigged for at least three decades.  The unintended consequences have infected every sector of the economy.  And now, with the resulting effect of both massive asset price inflation and massive consumer price inflation, the next time the stock market cracks, it will be impossible to exercise the Powell put without also further inflating consumer prices.

  The implications for buy and hold investors are bleak…

  What is the Strike Price of the Powell Put?

  The official CPI is currently 7.9 percent.  When calculated using methodologies from the 1980s, the rate of inflation is double.

  This week the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) hiked the federal funds rate by 25 basis points.  The FOMC also promised to hike the federal funds rate six more times this year.

  Some in the financial press reported this as “hawkish,” which is an absolute joke.  But who knows?  Maybe the Fed will get serious and hike by 50 basis points next time.

  Regardless, it’s too little too late.  Inflation is on the loose and the Powell put is seriously compromised.

  According to the BofA Global Fund Manager Survey, the Fed put for the S&P 500 is now at 3,636.  But what do they know?

  As far as we can tell, participants in the FMS suffer from a serious lack of imagination.  In fact, just a little abstract thinking tells another story.

  For example, what if there’s a bear market yet consumer price inflation spikes to 10 percent (officially)?  How could the Fed bailout Wall Street when consumer prices are inflating by double digits?

  What if the economy contracts yet inflation rises…and the stagflation misery index – the unemployment rate plus the CPI – goes through the roof?

  What then would be the strike price of the Powell put?

  Scenarios like these have become increasingly likely.

  Over the last two years, somewhere on the order of $6 trillion in fake money has been vomited into the U.S. economy.  This is the primary reason for raging consumer price inflation.  Despite what President Biden says, it’s not Vladimir Putin’s fault.

  Here’s the point, the Fed will have to contain inflation before it puts a floor under the stock market and acts to further stimulate the economy.  It can’t do both at the same time.

  Any path that involves juicing the stock market or stimulating the economy before inflation is snuffed out would ensure that inflation continues to rage higher.

  So how far will the S&P 500 fall – and unemployment and interest rates have to rise – before Powell can fire off the monetary bazookas?

  Would 2,500 cut it?  What about 2,000…or lower?

  In reality, Powell or his successor will fire them off long before then…and the misery index will eat us alive.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 16:30

• Morgan Stanley: We Could Be In A Downturn 5-10 Months From Now
  Morgan Stanley: We Could Be In A Downturn 5-10 Months From Now

  by Michael Wilson, chief US equity strategist at Morgan Stanley

  A year ago, we published a joint note with our economics and cross-asset strategy teams arguing that this cycle would run hotter but shorter than the prior three. Our view was based on the speed and strength of the economic and earnings rebound following the 2020 recession, the return of inflation after a multi-decade absence, and an earlier-than-expected pivot to more hawkish Fed policy. On Friday, we published an update that shows developments over the past year support this call – US GDP and earnings have surged past prior cycle peaks and are now decelerating sharply, inflation is running at a 40-year high, and the Fed has executed the sharpest pivot in policy we’ve ever witnessed.

  Meanwhile, just 22 months after the end of the last recession, our cross-asset team’s US cycle model is already approaching prior peaks. This indicator aggregates key data to help signal where we are in the economic cycle and where headwinds/tailwinds exist for different asset classes, styles, etc. The latest rebound has been unusually fast. The model is currently in the ‘expansion’ phase (data above trend and rising – i.e., mid-to-late cycle). At this pace, the indicator could peak in 2-4 months and move to ‘downturn’ 5-10 months from today.

  

  With regard to US equities, earnings, sales, and margins have all surged past prior cycle highs. In fact, earnings recovered to the prior cycle peak in just 16 months, the fastest rebound going back 40 years. The early-to-mid-cycle benefits of positive operating leverage have come and gone, and US corporates now face decelerating sales growth coupled with higher costs. As such, our leading earnings model is pointing to a deceleration in EPS growth toward zero over the coming months, and higher-frequency data on earnings revision breadth are trending lower – driven by cyclicals and economically sensitive sectors – a set-up that looks increasingly ‘late’ cycle.

  

  Another key input to the shorter-cycle view was our analysis of the 1940s as a good historical parallel. Specifically, excess household savings unleashed on an economy constrained by supply set the stage for breakout inflation both then and now. Developments since we published our report in March last year continue to support this historical analogue – inflation has surged, forcing the Fed to move off the zero bound aggressively in a credible effort to restore price stability. Assuming the comparison holds, the next move would be a slowdown and ultimately a much shorter cycle. While the end – i.e., recession – does not appear to be imminent, the slowdown in earnings we’ve been expecting looks incrementally worse than it did when we first published our ‘fire and ice’ narrative last fall.

  Further analysis of the post-World War II evolution of the cycle (1947-48) reveals another interesting similarity to the current post-Covid phase – unintended inventory build from over-ordering to meet an excessive but unsustainable pull-forward of demand. Regular readers of our research should be familiar with this as a dynamic we have written about. In short, we think the risk of an inventory glut is growing this year, particularly in areas of the economy that experienced well above-trend demand like Consumer Discretionary and Technology goods.

  Now, with the Fed raising rates this past week and communicating a very hawkish tightening path over the next year, our rates strategists are looking for an inversion of the yield curve in 2Q. Curve inversion does not guarantee a recession, and our economists don’t expect one. However, it does support our view for sharply decelerating earnings growth and is one more piece of evidence that says it’s late cycle.

  In terms of our US strategy recommendations, we continue to lean defensive and focus on companies with operational efficiency and high cash flow generation. This leads us to names with more durable earnings profiles that are also attractively priced. Pharma, Insurance, Real Estate, Utilities, Food/Beverage/Tobacco, and Telecom all screen relatively well – i.e., defensive cohorts. Growth stocks may benefit as the curve flattens, but such a move should be faded before 1Q earnings season begins and more companies come to the confessional. This same analysis also supports our underweight in Consumer Discretionary goods, with Retailing and Consumer Durables & Apparel screening poorly. Cyclical Technology stocks also look vulnerable to the payback in demand that has yet to fully play out.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 16:00

• Will The New York Times Apologize To Sen. Cotton?
  Will The New York Times Apologize To Sen. Cotton?

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Every recovery program starts with the mantra that the first step in dealing with a problem is to admit that you have a problem.

  That cathartic moment seems to have escaped the editors of the New York Times in denouncing a cancel culture that they helped spread in the media. Many of us were both bemused and bothered by the editorial in the New York Times opposing cancel culture. The Times has not been some dedicated antagonist of this culture but rather one of its most unabashed ambassadors. 

  Indeed, one of the most outrageous acts of cancellation by the media was the treatment of Sen. Tom Cotton over his 2020 Times editorial.

  

  Given its history, the most striking aspect of the Times editorial was the utter lack of self-awareness.  The editors wrote:

  “In the course of their fight for tolerance, many progressives have become intolerant of those who disagree with them or express other opinions, and take on a kind of self-righteousness and censoriousness that the right long displayed and the left long abhorred.”

  As with the recent admission of the Times that the Hunter Biden laptop and emails are authentic, there was no effort to address its own leading role in spreading viewpoint intolerance and censorship.

  The treatment of the Cotton column shocked many of us.

  It was one of the lowest points in the history of modern American journalism. During the week of June 6, 2020, the Times forced out an opinion editor and apologized for publishing Cotton’s column calling for the use of the troops to restore order in Washington after days of rioting around the White House.

  While Congress would “call in the troops” six months later to quell the rioting at the Capitol on January 6th, New York Times reporters and columnists denounced the column as historically inaccurate and politically inciteful. The column was in fact historically accurate, even if you disagreed with the underlying proposal (as I did).

  Reporters insisted that Cotton was endangering them by suggesting the use of troops and insisted that the newspaper should not feature people who advocate political violence. Writers Taylor Lorenz, Caity Weaver, Sheera Frankel, Jacey Fortin, and others also said that such columns put black reporters in danger and condemned publishing Cotton’s viewpoint.

  Critics never explained what was historically false (or outside the range of permissible interpretation) in the column.

  In a breathtaking surrender, the newspaper apologized and not only promised an investigation into how such an opposing view could find itself on its pages but promised to reduce the number of editorials in the future:

  “We’ve examined the piece and the process leading up to its publication. This review made clear that a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an Op-Ed that did not meet our standards. As a result, we’re planning to examine both short term and long term changes, to include expanding our fact-checking operation and reduction the number of op-eds we publish.”

  One of the writers who condemned the decision to publish Cotton was New York Times Magazine reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones.  Hannah-Jones applauded the decision of the Times to apologize for publishing such an opposing viewpoint and denounced those who engage in what she called “even-handedness, both sideism” journalism. (Notably, Hannah-Jones herself later tweeted out a bizarre anti-police conspiracy theory that injuries and destruction caused by fireworks was not the fault of protesters but actually part of a weird police conspiracy. There was no hue and cry over accuracy).

  Opinion editor James Bennet reportedly made an apology to the staff.  That however was not enough. He was later compelled to resign for publishing a column that advocates an option used previously in history with rioting.

  What was particularly galling was the open hypocrisy of the editors as they continued to publish authors with violent viewpoints and anti-free speech agendas.

  For example, the newspaper had no problem in publishing “Beijing’s enforcer” in Hong Kong as Regina Ip mocked freedom protesters who were being beaten and arrested by the government.

  Likewise, the New York Times published a column by University of Rhode Island professor  Erik Loomis, who defended the murder of a conservative protester and said that he saw “nothing wrong” with such acts of violence.  (Loomis has also been ridiculed for denouncing statistics, science, and technology as inherently racist).

  In truth, there is a reason to publish all of these authors as part of a diverse set of viewpoints in a newspaper. The problem is that the Times only moved against one: Sen. Cotton.

  When confronted by the very mob described in the recent editorial, the Times let them in and rushed to join them in cleansing its pages and editorial staff.

  Everyone loves a redemptive sinner and I would be the first to applaud the New York Times in rescinding its earlier position on the Cotton editorial.  However, absent that recognition, the Times is just another member of the mob haunted by its own lack of courage.

  If the Times has decided to truly oppose the anti-free speech movement, it can start with an apology to Senator Tom Cotton.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 15:30

• Oil Tycoons Have Seen Their Net Worth Explode Higher Since Russia Invaded Ukraine
  Oil Tycoons Have Seen Their Net Worth Explode Higher Since Russia Invaded Ukraine

  Sometimes, the irony is just wonderful.

  The very same ultra-rich oil tycoons that the left absolutely loves to hate (because not only are they rich, but rich from oil) are benefitting the most from the left insane economic policies that have helped to drive up the price of the commodity.

  According to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, oil and gas industrialists now share a collective net worth of $239 billion, which is up 10% higher since Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24. The rise in wealth is directly tied to the spike in energy prices over the last few months.

  Since Russia invaded Ukraine, Brent prices have risen as much as 32% and finished last week at about $106, Bloomberg wrote. While the price spikes have sent other industries into chaos, it has translated to pure profit for those in the business of producing or transporting fossil fuels. 

  Continental Resources Inc. co-founder Harold Hamm, for example, moved up 28 places on the BBI to 93rd and now has a fortune of over $18 billion dollars. Richard Kinder, of Kinder Morgan, has seen his net worth move to $8.5 billion. 

  

  Even before the invasion of Ukraine, oil prices in the U.S. were being pushed higher by post-Covid demand. And it was mostly private companies, not public, who seized the opportunity of higher prices the most, the report says. 

  Andrew Dittmar, a director at energy-analytics and software firm Enverus, told Bloomberg: “On the private side, those pressures from shareholders aren’t nearly as acute. It makes good economic sense for private firms to invest in growing production.”

  The founder and sole owner of Lafayette, Louisiana-based Hilcorp Energy, Jeffery Hildebrand, now sports a net worth of more than $12 billion as a result. Autry Stephens, founder of Endeavor Energy Resources, has seen his net worth move higher to $5.2 billion. 

  Michael Smith, who owns about 63% of Freeport LNG, saw his wealth rise to $6.2 billion after the company sold 25% of itself to a Japanese company that valued Freeport at $9.7 billion.

  Talon Custer, a Bloomberg Intelligence analyst, concluded: “Michael Smith’s bet on the U.S. gas industry has paid off. And they have options to grow.”

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 15:00

• "Disinformation": China Says They're Not Providing Weapons To Russia, Instead Hopes To 'De-Escalate Crisis'
  “Disinformation”: China Says They’re Not Providing Weapons To Russia, Instead Hopes To ‘De-Escalate Crisis’

  China’s top Ambassador has vowed Beijing “will do everything” to de-escalate the war in Ukraine, and insisted that his country’s relationship with Russia is “not part of the problem,” according to Bloomberg.

  

  In a Sunday appearance on CBS‘s “Face the Nation,” Ambassador Qin Gang said “There’s disinformation about China providing military assistance to Russia,” adding that China isn’t currently sending “weapons and ammunitions to any party.”

  MARGARET BRENNAN: So President Biden asked Beijing not to provide any kind of support to Russia. Is it your intent to go ahead and give a lifeline to Vladimir Putin?

  AMB. GANG: On Friday, President Xi Jinping and the president, Biden, had a video call. It was candid, deep and constructive. President Xi Jinping gave China’s position very clear, that is China stands for peace, opposes war. China is a peace-loving country. We hate to see the situation over Ukraine come to today’s, you know, like this and we call for immediate ceasefire and we are promoting peace talks and we are sending humanitarian assistance to–

  MARGARET BRENNAN: –Will you send money and weapons to Russia, though?

  AMB. GANG: Well, There’s a disinformation about China providing military assistance to Russia. We reject that– 

  MARGARET BRENNAN: –You won’t do so, Beijing will not?

  AMB. GANG: What China is doing is send foods, medicine, sleeping bags and the baby formula– 

  MARGARET BRENNAN: –That’s– 

  AMB. GANG: –not weapons and ammunition to any party and we are against a war, as I said, you know, we will do everything to dis-escalate the crisis.

  Watch:

  The interview comes as China attempts to balance its relationships with the US and Russia – with Qin claiming that its “common interests” with Russia are “not a liability.”

  “China is part of the solution, it’s not part of the problem,” he added, citing Chinese President Xi Jinping’s phone call with Putin shortly after the Russian invasion in which the Chinese leader urged Putin to negotiate with Ukraine.

  When asked if China would condemn Russia, Qin said: “Don’t be naive, condemnation doesn’t solve the problem. I would be surprised if Russia will back down by condemnation.”

  Why can’t you condemn this as an invasion?” @margbrennan asks China’s Ambassador to the U.S., Qin Gang of Russia’s Ukraine invasion.

  “Don’t be naive. Condemnation doesn’t solve the problem,” he says. pic.twitter.com/Oe47GsJSTC

  — Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) March 20, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Nothing like a hostile interview in the US press to promote healthy US-China relations, right?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 14:30

• Life In The 1970s
  Life In The 1970s

  Submitted by Nicholas Colas, founder of DataTrek Research

  The economic history of the 1970s and early 1980s is getting a lot of attention these days as an analog to today’s period of soaring inflation (see our post from October “Is Stagflation Here: Comparing The 2020s With The 1970s“). For his latest Story Time note, DataTrek’s Nick Colas offers up 3 personal anecdotes to fill in some of the gaps on that fateful decade: food inflation was a huge issue, especially in the early 1970s. Second, unemployment was actually higher in the early 1980s than during the Financial Crisis. Third, Fed policy ran very differently from today, targeting money supply growth with dramatic swings in Fed Funds rates.

  Some more details from Colas on Life in the 1970s:

  #1: Going to the supermarket.

  Once I turned 10 (which was in 1974), one of my household chores was to run errands to the local grocery store. My family lived in New York City, and the market was a short walk from our apartment. My mom gave me a list of things to buy, some cash, and sent me on my way.

  On one such trip – I think it would have been 1975 – I got to the cash register with my items and a $10 bill. The cashier rang them up. The total was $11 and something.

  “What do you want to put back?” the cashier asked. I had no idea. I had never come up short before. In the end she chose the lowest ticket items that would bring the bill down to below $10.

  I walked home in shock. My family was not wealthy, but we had always had enough money to buy food and get change back from the transaction. What had just happened? Was it my fault?

  That was my introduction to inflation. When I got home my parents thought I had been mugged, because I was so upset. They explained prices were going up a lot lately, and that’s just the way things were.

  The chart below shows US CPI food inflation from 1970 to the present, and it shows just how different the world has been since then. The cost of food has risen most years since the early 1980s, but only in a band of 0 to 5 percent. Now, however, food inflation is 7.9%. That may not be back to the 1970s/early 1980s, but it is outside of the historical band since then.

  

  Takeaway: when people say, “if you didn’t experience 1970s inflation, you don’t know how bad it can be”, food inflation is a big part of what they mean. Wages went up in the 1970s (+6-9 percent annually), just as they are now (+6-7 percent). But wages did not keep up with food prices then, and they are not doing so now. It is frightening, as a child or adult, to wonder if food prices will rise so quickly that you will only be able to afford the basics or even less. “What do you want to put back?” is an awful question to hear.

  * * *

  #2: “Your father is going to be a consultant, working for himself. He got fired.”

  While the 1970s/early 1980s are now best known for inflation, they were also a period of very high unemployment and job insecurity. My own family went through that in the late 70s, when my father lost his job. He picked up work as he could, and we were OK eventually.

  This chart shows just how bad US unemployment was in the 70s – early 80s. It never fell below 5.7% and was 8 – 11 percent during the 3 recessions of the period. At its worst in late 1982, unemployment got to 10.8 percent, higher even than the Great Recession.

  

  Takeaway: with US unemployment now at just 3.8 percent, we are a long way from the 70s-early 80s experience. I do wonder how this will affect the Federal Reserve’s efforts to reduce inflation without causing a recession. At yesterday’s press conference, Chair Powell made it clear that his goal is to reduce the current labor market imbalance between openings (companies’ desire to hire) and unemployed workers (available labor supply). Cooling the economy through rate hikes should do that, but he and the Fed will have to strike a fine balance. The central lesson of then-Fed Chair Paul Volcker’s early 1980s rate hikes is that recession is the fastest way to reduce high inflation.

  * * *

  #3: “Watch the money supply”.

  I first became interested in capital markets listening to the news in the morning before going to school. The local NYC station featured a fellow named Larry Wachtel at 7:55am every weekday morning. He was a market strategist before that was a popular job title, and he made the markets intelligible and even interesting to my teen aged ears.

  Larry would focus on the US money supply data to get an edge on market action. This was because in October 1979 Paul Volcker had made it a central focus of his fight against inflation. Back then, Fed policy was much more opaque. No post-meeting communiques, no press conferences, and no Fed-head interviews. Volcker needed to give investors a simple roadmap to explain the Fed’s goals. He chose the supply of money. Slow its growth, and lower inflation should follow.

  This translated into both very high, but also very volatile, Fed Funds rates as the chart below shows. Volcker’s Fed, free of the communication requirements of today’s institution, moved Fed Funds aggressively and frequently to manage the supply of money by changing its cost as needed. It was shock therapy for the US economy, and it eventually worked.

  

  Takeaway: where Paul Volcker’s Fed managed to a number (money supply) that it could directly influence by changing interest rates, Jay Powell’s Fed has chosen to strictly adhere to the “dual mandate” of measured inflation and unemployment. In 2020 – 2021, Chair Powell was fond of saying that the Fed has a great playbook for reducing inflation. Paul Volcker wrote that playbook, and it is expressed in the above chart. How much today’s Fed will follow it remains an open question. For clients interested in this topic, I recommend the link below. It summarizes Volcker’s inflation-fighting strategies and their costs on the US economy.

  Sources: Paul Volcker and the US Money Supply: https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/anti-inflation-measures

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 13:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Chris Hedges: Waltzing To Armageddon
  Chris Hedges: Waltzing To Armageddon

  Authored by Chris Hedges via ConsortiumNews.com,

  The Dr. Strangeloves, like zombies rising from the mass graves they created around the globe, are once again stoking new campaigns of industrial mass slaughter.

  

  The Cold War, from 1945 to 1989, was a wild Bacchanalia for arms manufacturers, the Pentagon, the C.I.A., the diplomats who played one country off another on the world’s chess board, and the global corporations able to loot and pillage by equating predatory capitalism with freedom. In the name of national security, the Cold Warriors, many of them self-identified liberals, demonized labor, independent media, human rights organizations, and those who opposed the permanent war economy and the militarization of American society as soft on communism. 

  That is why they have resurrected it.

  The decision to spurn the possibility of peaceful coexistence with Russia at the end of the Cold War is one of the most egregious crimes of the late 20th century. The danger of provoking Russia was universally understood with the collapse of the Soviet Union, including by political elites as diverse as Henry Kissinger and George F. Kennan, who called the expansion of NATO into Central Europe “the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era.” 

  This provocation, a violation of a promise not to expand NATO beyond the borders of a unified Germany, has seen Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, Croatia, Montenegro and North Macedonia inducted into the Western military alliance.

  This betrayal was compounded by a decision to station NATO troops, including thousands of U.S. troops, in Eastern Europe, another violation of an agreement made by Washington with Moscow. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, perhaps a cynical goal of the Western alliance, has now solidified an expanding and resurgent NATO and a rampant, uncontrollable militarism. The masters of war may be ecstatic, but the potential consequences, including a global conflagration, are terrifying. 

  Peace has been sacrificed for U.S. global hegemony. It has been sacrificed for the billions in profits made by the arms industry. Peace could have seen state resources invested in people rather than systems of control. It could have allowed us to address the climate emergency. But we cry peace, peace, and there is no peace. Nations frantically rearm, threatening nuclear war. They prepare for the worst, ensuring that the worst will happen. 

  

  “The Butcher’s Cut,” illustration by Mr. Fish.

  So, what if the Amazon is reaching its final tipping point where trees will soon begin to die off en masse? So what if land ice and ice shelves are melting from below at a much faster rate than predicted? So what if temperatures soar, monster hurricanes, floods, droughts, and wildfires devastate the earth? In the face of the gravest existential crisis to beset the human species, and most other species, the ruling elites stoke a conflict that is driving up the price of oil and turbocharging the fossil fuel extraction industry. It is collective madness.

  The march towards protracted conflict with Russia and China will backfire. The desperate effort to counter the steady loss of economic dominance by the U.S. will not be offset by military dominance. If Russia and China can create an alternative global financial system, one that does not use the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency, it will signal the collapse of the American empire. The dollar will plummet in value. Treasury bonds, used to fund America’s massive debt, will become largely worthless. The financial sanctions used to cripple Russia will be, I expect, the mechanism that slays Americans, if not immolation in thermonuclear war.

  Washington plans to turn Ukraine into Chechnya or the old Afghanistan, when the Carter administration, under the influence of the Svengali-like National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, equipped and armed the radical jihadists that would morph into the Taliban and al Qaeda in the fight against the Soviets. It will not be good for Russia. It will not be good for the United States. It will not be good for Ukraine, as making Russia bleed will require rivers of Ukrainian blood.

  Pandora’s Box of Evils

  The decision to destroy the Russian economy, to turn the Ukrainian war into a quagmire for Russia and topple the regime of Vladimir Putin will open a Pandora’s box of evils. Massive social engineering — look at Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya or Vietnam — has its own centrifugal force. It destroys those who play God.

  The Ukrainian war has silenced the last vestiges of the Left. Nearly everyone has giddily signed on for the great crusade against the latest embodiment of evil, Vladimir Putin, who, like all our enemies, has become the new Hitler.

  The United States will give $13.6 billion in military and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine, with the Biden administration authorizing an additional $200 million in military assistance. The 5,000-strong EU rapid deployment force, the recruitment of all Eastern Europe, including Ukraine, into NATO, the reconfiguration of former Soviet bloc militaries to NATO weapons and technology have all been fast tracked.

  Germany, for the first time since World War II, is massively rearming. It has lifted its ban on exporting weapons. Its new military budget is twice the amount of the old budget, with promises to raise the budget to more than 2 percent of GDP, which would move its military from the seventh largest in the world to the third, behind China and the United States.

  

  German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, left, visits NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, on right, Dec. 11, 2021. (NATO)

  NATO battlegroups are being doubled in size in the Baltic states to more than 6,000 troops. Battlegroups will be sent to Romania and Slovakia. Washington will double the number of U.S. troops stationed in Poland to 9,000. Sweden and Finland are considering dropping their neutral status to integrate with NATO.

  This is a recipe for global war. History, as well as all the conflicts I covered as a war correspondent, have demonstrated that when military posturing begins, it often takes little to set the funeral pyre alight. One mistake. One overreach. One military gamble too many. One too many provocations. One act of desperation. 

  Russia’s threat to attack weapons convoys to Ukraine from the West; its air strike on a military base in western Ukraine, 12 miles from the Polish border, which is a staging area for foreign mercenaries; the statement by Polish President Andrzej Duda that the use of weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical weapons, by Russia against Ukraine, would be a “game-changer” that could force NATO to rethink its decision to refrain from direct military intervention — all are ominous developments pushing the alliance closer to open warfare with Russia.

  

  Polish President Andrzej Duda, left, and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at the Lask air base in Poland on March 1. (NATO)

  Once military forces are deployed, even if they are supposedly in a defensive posture, the bear trap is set. It takes very little to trigger the spring. The vast military bureaucracy, bound to alliances and international commitments, along with detailed plans and timetables, when it starts to roll forward, becomes unstoppable. It is propelled not by logic but by action and reaction, as Europe learned in two world wars.

  Staggering Hypocrisy

  The moral hypocrisy of the United States is staggering. The crimes Russia is carrying out in Ukraine are more than matched by the crimes committed by Washington in the Middle East over the last two decades, including the act of preemptive war, which under post-Nuremberg laws is a criminal act of aggression. Only rarely is this hypocrisy exposed as when U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield told the body: 

  “We’ve seen videos of Russian forces moving exceptionally lethal weaponry into Ukraine, which has no place on the battlefield. That includes cluster munitions and vacuum bombs which are banned under the Geneva Convention.”

  Hours later, the official transcript of her remark was amended to tack on the words “if they are directed against civilians.” This is because the U.S., which like Russia never ratified the Convention on Cluster Munitions treaty, regularly uses cluster munitions. It used them in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and Iraq. It has provided them to Saudi Arabia for use in Yemen. Russia has yet to come close to the tally of civilian deaths from cluster munitions delivered by the U.S. military.

  The Dr. Strangeloves, like zombies rising from the mass graves they created around the globe, are once again stoking new campaigns of industrial mass slaughter. No diplomacy. No attempt to address the legitimate grievances of our adversaries. No check on rampant militarism. No capacity to see the world from another perspective. No ability to comprehend reality outside the confines of the binary rubric of good and evil. No understanding of the debacles they orchestrated for decades. No capacity for pity or remorse.

  

  March 24, 1986: President Ronald Reagan, right,  meeting with Elliott Abrams, center, about a trip to Central America. John Whitehead on left. (Reagan White House, Wikimedia Commons)

  Elliott Abrams worked in the Reagan administration when I was reporting from Central America. He covered up atrocities and massacres committed by the military regimes in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and by the U.S.-backed Contra forces fighting the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. He viciously attacked reporters and human rights groups as communists or fifth columnists, calling us “un-American” and “unpatriotic.” He was convicted for lying to Congress about his role in the Iran-Contra affair. During the administration of George W. Bush, he lobbied for the invasion of Iraq and tried to orchestrate a U.S. coup in Venezuela to overthrow Hugo Chávez.

  

  Jan. 25, 2019: Elliott Abrams, left, with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, addressing the media on Venezuela. (State Department)

  “There will be no substitute for military strength, and we do not have enough,” writes Abrams for the Council on Foreign Relations, where he is a senior fellow:

  “It should be crystal clear now that a larger percentage of GDP will need to be spent on defense. We will need more conventional strength in ships and planes. We will need to match the Chinese in advanced military technology, but at the other end of the spectrum, we may need many more tanks if we have to station thousands in Europe, as we did during the Cold War. (The total number of American tanks permanently stationed in Europe today is zero.) Persistent efforts to diminish even further the size of our nuclear arsenal or prevent its modernization were always bad ideas, but now, as China and Russia are modernizing their nuclear weaponry and appear to have no interest in negotiating new limits, such restraints should be completely abandoned. Our nuclear arsenal will need to be modernized and expanded so that we will never face the kinds of threats Putin is now making from a position of real nuclear inferiority.” 

  Putin played into the hands of the war industry. He gave the warmongers what they wanted. He fulfilled their wildest fantasies. There will be no impediments now on the march to Armageddon. Military budgets will soar. The oil will gush from the ground. The climate crisis will accelerate.

  China and Russia will form the new axis of evil. The poor will be abandoned. The roads across the earth will be clogged with desperate refugees. All dissent will be treason. The young will be sacrificed for the tired tropes of glory, honor and country. The vulnerable will suffer and die.

  The only true patriots will be generals, war profiteers, opportunists, courtiers in the media and demagogues braying for more and more blood. The merchants of death rule like Olympian gods.  And we, cowed by fear, intoxicated by war, swept up in the collective hysteria, clamor for our own annihilation.

  *  *  *

  Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for 15 years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning News, The Christian Science Monitor and NPR. He is the host of the Emmy Award-nominated RT America show “On Contact.” 

  This column is from Scheerpost, for which Chris Hedges writes a regular column. Click here to sign up for email alerts.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 23:30

• Where The World Regulates Cryptocurrency
  Where The World Regulates Cryptocurrency

  Some countries declare Bitcoin to be official legal tender while others announce outright bans on cryptocurrency. The world map below, created by Statista’s Katharina Buchholz – based on data collected by the Law Library of the U.S. Congress – shows where countries have been trying to stop the cryptocurrency hype and where crypto has been given more or less free reign.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  One example of a country embracing cryptocurrency is El Salvador, where Bitcoin was declared an official currency in September of 2021 by populist president Nayib Bukele. The country also taxes and otherwise regulates cryptocurrency. El Salvador is in a special position because it does not have its own currency and instead relies on the U.S. dollar, like some other countries in the region.

  Other countries which are applying laws to regulate digital currencies probably wouldn’t go as far as El Salvador. Rather, these places – which are most typically developed countries – have been investing in projects to launch their own central bank digital currencies. This is arguably a very different approach to using blockchain technology than that of original cryptocurrencies, which are explicitly independent of any state control, but can be very volatile as a result. Among those exploring the concept are the U.S., European countries, Russia and Australia. India and Thailand, both of which are also broadly regulating cryptocurrency, already have more concrete plans to issue their own digital currencies.

  Ukraine was also among the countries which have been regulating cryptocurrency, but the nation went one step further on Wednesday when legislating a framework for the cryptocurrency industry in the country. The nation made the move after it received donations in crypto following its invasion by Russia. Rules like having to register or acquire a license for a crypto exchange also exist in the EU, the UK, Canada, the U.S., Mexico, Chile, Japan and Korea, among others.

  China was the first major economy to start issuing its national currency on the blockchain in early 2021. The country has taken a more extreme approach to regulating cryptocurrency by issuing an absolute ban on it. According to the Law Library of Congress, nine countries had so far taken this measure, while many more were implicitly banning the use of cryptocurrency through their other laws. This practice was most common in Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 23:00

• 2020 Election Nullification, Audit Bills Dead Or Dying In State Legislatures
  2020 Election Nullification, Audit Bills Dead Or Dying In State Legislatures

  Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Nine of 10 bills filed in six states seeking to audit 2020 election results—including three that would have nullified Joe Biden’s victory—have fallen by the wayside as legislative sessions wind down.

  

  Seven bills seeking 2020 general elec­tion audits were filed in four states, Flor­ida, New Hamp­shire, South Caro­lina, and Tennessee. Only a New Hampshire measure proposing a review of one county’s 2020 results remains on the docket.

  Lawmakers in New Hampshire, Arizona, and Wisconsin filed 2022 legislation demanding the nullification of 2020’s election results with an audit to determine the winner. Only the embattled Wisconsin effort has a heartbeat.

  New Hampshire’s House Bill 1484, sponsored by Rep. Tim Baxter (R-Seabrook) advanced, got a hearing before the House Election Law Committee but, on March 12, the panel issued an “inexpedient to legislate” verdict, essentially killing it for the session.

  Under HB 1484, New Hampshire would hire an independent third party to conduct a full statewide forensic audit of ballots cast in the 2020 election, with the multimillion-dollar cost covered by private donations.

  Failed Resolution

  While HB 1484 is dead, another bill seeking only to audit election results in Merrimack County has secured one committee approval and remains viable.

  Arizona Rep. Mark Finchem’s (R-Oro Valley) House Concurrent Resolution 2033 seeking to nullify the state’s 2020 election was buried at introduction when House Speaker Rusty Bowers (R-Mesa) assigned it for approval to all 12 House committees. It has not been heard by one.

  The resolution calls on Congress to “set aside the results of the Maricopa, Pima, and Yuma County elections as irredeemably compromised and reclaim the 2020 Presidential Electors due to the irredeemably flawed nature of these elections that prevent the declaration of a clear winner of said presidential electors.”

  He said, “They can’t see to bring themselves to consider the evidence that has been laid before them.”

  Finchem said Bowers told him he was essentially killing the resolution because “he hadn’t seen the evidence and hadn’t seen the supporting jurisprudence. Well, I found the evidence and now that’s not good enough.”

  Last year, Finchem survived two election recalls in part for his outspoken support for a failed resolution seeking to block the state’s 11 electoral college votes for Biden and instead accept “the alternate 11 electoral votes” for Trump.

  “It is a case where if you don’t like the message, even if the message is right, you kill the messenger,” he said, calling for a ”show up or shut up public debate” with those who oppose a 2020 election audit.

  “We have a great place, the Hyatt Regency downtown [Phoenix]. They have a ballroom that will accommodate 800 people,” Finchem said. “On the stage, pros and cons making their case. The problem is there are no cons who want to come, none have the spinal fortitude to show up, The pros will show. All I have to do is pick up the phone and tell them when to be there. This is who the cons are—they’re afraid they will be found out.”

  As lawmakers, he said, it is their “solemn responsibility” to “safeguard the Constitution” and the sanctity of citizens’ votes. But not everybody agrees, he said.

  No Basis in Law

  “The people who fill the institutions, they love the status quo because this protects their power,” Finchem said, adding as far as he knows, Arizona is one of only “two states that recognize the Constitution and the pertinent judicial prudence and have received evidence—formally received evidence,” that the 2020 election should be nullified.

  That other state is Wisconsin where, on March 1, the Legislature’s Office of the Special Counsel published a 136-page report that calls for decertifying the 2020 election; providing a method for private citizens to challenge the state’s voter rolls; giving the power to certify elections to a “politically accountable body” rather than the governor and the elections commission; creating a way for presidential candidates to “assemble alternative slates of electors” and allowing post-certification challenges to election results.

  Despite the report, Joint Resolution 120, filed by Rep. Timothy Ramthun (R-Campbellsport) which calls for “reclaiming the electoral ballots for President and Vice President that were certified under fraudulent intent and purpose” has not advanced since it was filed Jan. 25 and referred to the House Rules Committee.

  Ramthun maintains if the Wisconsin Legislature decertifies the 2020 results and rescinds the state’s 10 electoral votes it could begin a process that ends with Biden ousted from office. Critics, even some supporters, say the proposal has no basis in state or federal law.

  Stand Earns Punishment

  Inaction on last year’s Legislative Audit Bureau (LAB) election analysis and demands for decertification have fostered division among Wisconsin Republicans with every member of Assembly GOP leadership issuing a joint statement accusing Ramthun and a staffer of spreading misinformation among lawmakers while continuing to demand House Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) do more to overturn the 2020 election result.

  As punishment, Ramthun was denied legislative aides until Feb. 20 when legislative aide Erin Yeager was assigned to his office “20 hours a week to take care of 66,000 constituents.”

  Ramthun in February announced he would challenge “establishment” Republicans Kevin Nicholson and Rebecca Kleefisch for the party’s nod in the GOP August primary to take on incumbent Democrat Tony Evers in November’s gubernatorial race.

  There is “unfinished business” in examining issues related to the 2020 presidential election and not investigating it further is “an assault on our Constitution and it’s a national security issue,” he said in announcing his candidacy.

  Decertifying the 2020 election will be a key component of his campaign, Ramthun promised.

  “I want everything to be revisited and reviewed fully and forensic because if we’re not going to get closure in 2020 and justice, we’re going to need to continue to pursue that in every election until we get it right,” he said. “I won’t stop until we have justice so I’ll keep poking. I’m all in.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 22:30

• China Warns West's "Outrageous" Sanctions Are Forcing Nuclear-Armed Russia "Into A Corner"
  China Warns West’s “Outrageous” Sanctions Are Forcing Nuclear-Armed Russia “Into A Corner”

  On Saturday a high-ranking Chinese government official lashed out at the West’s sanctions regimen against Russia in the wake of the Ukraine invasion, blasting the far-reaching punitive measures which have also served to severely isolate Moscow as increasingly “outrageous”. 

  “The sanctions against Russia are getting more and more outrageous,” Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng told a security forum in Beijing, according to Reuters.

  

  Strongly suggesting the sanctions would only serve to harm common Russian citizens, he described that the West depriving the people of their overseas assets were ultimately “for no reason”. 

  “History has proven time and again that sanctions cannot solve problems. Sanctions will only harm ordinary people, impact the economic and financial system… and worsen the global economy.”

  He further hinted that US and EU sanctions would in the end only escalate the situation, as Reuters continues, he…

  acknowledged Moscow’s point of view on NATO, saying the alliance should not further expand eastwards, forcing a nuclear power like Russia “into a corner”.

  The unusually blunt Chinese reaction (given Beijing has appeared somewhat reluctant to weigh in too forcefully behind either side thus far, other than calling out NATO expansion) to the ratcheting Ukraine crisis comes the same day that Ukrainian President Zelensky’s office publicly urged Beijing to come out and condemn “Russian barbarism” in a public statement. 

  In a Twitter statement presidential aide Mikhailo Podolyak asserted “China can be the global security system’s important element if it makes a right decision to support the civilized countries’ coalition and condemn Russian barbarism.”

  🇨🇳 can be the global security system’s important element if it makes a right decision to support the civilized countries’ coalition & condemn 🇷🇺 barbarism. It is a chance to sit at the table as equals. The West must explain to Beijing how $1.6 trillion differs from $150 billion

  — Михайло Подоляк (@Podolyak_M) March 19, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  It seems the implication behind the Chinese vice foreign minister’s fresh remarks might also be that if Russia is feeling pushed into a corner …so is Beijing – given that the past week has seen the Biden administration bring China’s growing cooperation with Russian into its crosshairs, with Biden warning his counterpart Xi Jinping in a Friday call that serious “consequences” follow if Beijing is found to be supplying Moscow with military equipment to aid its operations in Ukraine. 

  As on Chinese state TV pundit has put it…

  Can you help me fight your friend so that I can concentrate on fighting you later?

  — CGTN LIU Xin 刘欣 (@LiuXininBeijing) March 19, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Jake Sullivan has also this week warned against any possible Chinese help given to Russia for sanctions evasion. China has notably failed thus far to even use the words “invasion”, instead opting for vaguer words like “crisis” – even as the assault on Ukraine enters its fourth week.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 22:00

• 19th Anniversary Of Iraq Invasion: US Says Troops Will Be There For More Years To Come
  19th Anniversary Of Iraq Invasion: US Says Troops Will Be There For More Years To Come

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  On the eve of the 19th anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq, the head of Central Command told Military Times that the US troop presence in the country will likely continue for years to come.

  The US invasion of Iraq started with airstrikes on March 19, 2003, and ground troops entered the country the following day. The initial “shock and awe” phase of the invasion lasted about six weeks and killed tens of thousands. According to the Iraq Body Count, about 7,400 Iraqi civilians were killed in this period.

  

  All US troops withdrew from Iraq in 2011 but returned to the country in 2014 to fight ISIS, a group that wouldn’t exist if not for the invasion and US intervention in Syria. Today, the US currently has about 2,500 troops in Iraq. At the end of 2021, the US formally changed its presence in Iraq from a combat role to an advisory one, but no troops were withdrawn.

  “As we look into the future, any force level adjustment in Iraq is going to be made as a result of consultations with the government of Iraq,” CENTCOM chief Gen. Frank McKenzie said. “And we just finished a strategic dialogue a few months ago — we believe that will continue.”

  While the US troops are in Iraq training the current government to fight ISIS, there are many factions in the country opposed to the US presence, including Iraq’s Shia militias. Most of the militias fall under the umbrella of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), a group that was formed in 2014 to fight ISIS.

  In January 2020, the US killed PMF leader Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis alongside Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani with a drone strike in Baghdad. The assassinations enraged many in Iraq, and the country’s parliament voted to expel the US forces, but they stayed, and rocket attacks on US bases increased.

  Formally ending the combat mission was an attempt to placate those opposed to the US presence. But at the beginning of 2022, when it became apparent the US wasn’t leaving, attacks on bases housing US troops spiked again, highlighting the danger of the continued presence.

  The Economist has finally found a war it doesn’t like. pic.twitter.com/Lmh3sQAycS

  — Alan MacLeod (@AlanRMacLeod) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  One reason the US doesn’t want to leave Iraq is that its bases in the country support the US occupation of eastern Syria. The US currently has about 900 troops in Syria where it backs the Kurdish-led SDF. On paper, the US presence is about fighting ISIS, but it is also part of Washington’s broader campaign against Damascus.

  The US maintains crippling sanctions on Syria that aim to prevent the country from rebuilding. The US also occupies the area where most of the country’s oil fields are, keeping the vital resource out of the hands of Damascus. Last year, Biden administration officials said that they had no plans to end the troop presence in Syria.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 21:30

• Where Governments Have The Tightest Grip On The Internet
  Where Governments Have The Tightest Grip On The Internet

  Perhaps not entirely surprising to many, according to the 2021 Freedom House Freedom on the Net index, China was the country with the most controlled internet out of 70 nations assessed, scoring only 10 out of 100 possible index points.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, some of the other least free countries on the internet are restrictive regimes like Iran, Myanmar and Cuba.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Vietnam in rank 5 has also been taking cues from its close ally China, which asserts internet control via the so-called Great Firewall, a collection of gateways that controls all internet traffic going in and out of the country, enabling the Chinese government to filter it. Iran and North Korea also employ this method.

  The idea has become popular among Southeast Asian nations, with Cambodia and Thailand recently mulling the introduction of this draconian measure of internet control.

  Tight internet controls are also common in the Middle East and North Africa, with the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Bahrain raking highly.

  Russia came in a shared 11th place out of the 70 countries in the ranking. The report states that the blocking of content and platforms, disinformation campaigns, cyber attacks and persecution of users as well as a tightening of some cyber laws were happening in the country.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 21:00

• Five Critical Factors Why Prices Will Stay High For Years
  Five Critical Factors Why Prices Will Stay High For Years

  Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

  At approximately 9am local time on February 21, 1972, a Boeing 707 airplane dubbed Spirit of ‘76 landed in Shanghai’s Hongqiao airport.

  The airplane’s main door opened, and out walked US President Richard Nixon.

  The trip shocked the world. There had been no formal communication or diplomatic ties between the US and China for 25 years. And Nixon’s voyage not only normalized relations between the two countries, but it kickstarted decades of worldwide economic growth.

  Back then, the US was the richest and most powerful economy in the world. But as a consequence of that prosperity, the US was also a very expensive place to produce.

  US companies were on the lookout for inexpensive, foreign manufacturing hubs where they could cheaply produce their products and sell them back to the US market.

  China became that cheap manufacturing hub.

  Eventually China was producing just about everything from T-shirts to antibiotics. And because the cost of production was so low in China, consumers around the world benefited.

  Combined with cheap oil, a functioning global supply chain, and relative peace and stability, cheap Chinese production helped keep prices low and constrain inflation for decades.

  But these trends are rapidly coming to an end.

  For starters, China is now an economic superpower; many of its largest cities, in fact, have a per-capita GDP that exceeds the United States and Western Europe.

  Want to ensure you and your loved ones can survive and thrive, no matter what happens next? Download our FREE Ultimate Plan B Guide now to discover fully actionable strategies you can start putting in place right now…

  Wages have increased dramatically in China over the years because of this increase in prosperity, which means that it’s no longer cheap to manufacture most lower-end products there.

  A lot of manufacturing has already shifted to cheaper places like Vietnam, Bangladesh, etc. But even those countries are quickly becoming more expensive places to produce. And they don’t have nearly enough capacity to keep up with global manufacturing demand.

  Some large companies are starting to bring their manufacturing back home. This is becoming more popular now as global stability wanes.

  Plus businesses learned during the COVID-19 lockdowns, and the resulting global supply chain dysfunction, that manufacturing at home is more reliable.

  That may be true. But manufacturing in a ‘rich’ country is also a LOT more expensive.

  So, regardless of whether a business chooses to manufacture at home or abroad, they’re almost guaranteed to suffer higher production costs. And that means consumers will be paying more.

  This trend is a massive reversal from decades of cheap foreign production that kept prices low. But it only scratches the surface of why inflation will likely persist for years to come.

  (British economist Charles Goodhart, a former central bank official, describes this phenomenon in his new book The Great Demographic Reversal. It’s definitely worth reading to understand this trend.)

  

  Historic shifts in the labor market will also be a major contributor to inflation.

  For example, there have never been more retirees in the history of the world than there are right now. And their numbers are growing.

  According to Federal Reserve data, an additional 1.5 million people in the United States retired early during the first year of the pandemic. There will likely be more to come.

  Plus US Labor Department statistics show that millions of other individuals, including young people, abandoned the idea of working altogether because of the pandemic.

  Traditionally there’s a steady balance between the number of jobs in the economy, and the number of workers in the labor force. Sometimes there are shocks, like during the Great Recession in 2008, when millions of jobs vanished, practically overnight.

  Now the converse has taken place: millions of workers have vanished, practically overnight.

  The end result is that there are 11.3 million unfilled jobs in the United States– a record high– because so many people simply quit the labor force.

  Of course, another key labor trend is that younger workers aren’t interested in most traditional jobs.

  Countless teenagers aspire to be Instagram starlets, or to live-steam themselves playing video games for a living. They have little interest in construction, transportation, or manufacturing jobs.

  So, in summary, we have former ‘low cost’ manufacturing hubs becoming a lot more expensive. Plus a constrained work force back home that limits production and pushes costs higher.

  This is all highly inflationary.

  And there’s absolutely nothing the government or central bank can do about it. Gen Z 20-somethings aren’t going to suddenly decide to start working traditional jobs just because the Federal Reserve raises interest rates by 0.25%.

  Most likely the politicians will make it much worse– which is another key factor in future inflation.

  Nancy Pelosi stated on Friday that inflation was solely Vladimir Putin’s fault and insisted that their multi-trillion dollar deficit spending is “reducing the national debt” and “not adding to inflation.”

  The President, meanwhile, has blamed inflation on “greed”, while the Federal Reserve insists that higher prices are a result of supply chain dysfunction.

  Not one of these institutions– Congress, the White House, or the Fed– seems capable of looking at their own actions.

  The Fed refuses to consider that inflation is due to their dizzying expansion of the US money supply– the largest since 1943.

  Congress refuses to consider that inflation is due to their insane deficit spending– the largest ever in US history.

  And the White House refuses to consider that inflation is due to its fetish for anti-competitive regulations and constant attacks on capitalism.

  So, when the three key institutions charged with keeping inflation in check refuse to understand why there’s a problem, it’s hard to imagine they’re going to fix it.

  There are plenty of other lingering inflation factors as well; geopolitical conflict is obviously inflationary. COVID-19 continues to be very inflationary. Environmental fanaticism is inflationary.

  And just like the challenge of increased manufacturing costs, and labor market demographic trends, these issues cannot be magically fixed by politicians or central bankers.

  In essence, policymakers are completely powerless to do anything about inflation.

  There’s an irrational hope that inflation will quickly reverse, and prices will return to 2019 levels– just as soon as Putin leaves Ukraine… and the global supply chain dysfunction works itself out.

  But this is wishful thinking.

  First, both of those resolutions could take a very long time.

  But more importantly, the trends I outlined are much larger and could keep prices elevated for years to come.

  So, if your “Plan A” is depending on the government for prosperity and price stability, it’s time to take a hard look at your Plan B.

  *  *  *

  Alternative residency or citizenship generally forms the backbone of any robust Plan B. But there are WAY more things to consider. That’s why we created our 31-page Ultimate Plan B report to help you get to grips with this topic, and you can download the full, unabridged report here – 100% FREE.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 20:30

• Flashback: World Superpowers Pledged To Avoid Nuclear War Less Than 90 Days Ago
  Flashback: World Superpowers Pledged To Avoid Nuclear War Less Than 90 Days Ago

  As Russia began amassing troops near the Ukrainian border, five of the world’s nuclear powers pledged not to use nukes in the event of a global war.

  

  “We believe strongly that the further spread of such weapons must be prevented,” reads a ‘rare’ joint statement by China, France, Russia, the UK and US, seemingly out of left field.

  “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” the statement continues – echoing a 1985 joint statement from former US President Ronald Reagan and former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev following a summit in Geneva amid the cold war.

  

  “Nuclear weapons — for as long as they continue to exist — should serve defensive purposes, deter aggression, and prevent war.”

  The curiously-timed statement by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (P5) commits that nations will “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control,” according to DW.

  The joint pledge was issued ahead of what was to be the latest review of the Treaty of the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

  The tenth review session which was scheduled to take place at UN headquarters in New York this month, was postponed to later this year.

  China’s Xinhau media agency quoted Foreign Minister Ma Zhauxu as saying that the joint agreement “will help increase mutual trust and replace competition among major powers with coordination and cooperation.”

  Russia’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement: “We hope that in the current difficult conditions of international security, the approval of such a political statement will help reduce the level of international tensions.” -DW

  The Non-Proliferation Treaty was created in the 1970s to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and related technology, with the ultimate goal of complete nuclear disarmament – while allowing for the peaceful use of nuclear power.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 20:00

• Snowden Discusses Bitcoin's Lack Of Privacy
  Snowden Discusses Bitcoin’s Lack Of Privacy

  Authored by Shawn Amick via Bitcoin Magazine,

  • “Bitcoin is not an anonymous ledger,” said Edward Snowden.

  • “You get chain analysis people and whatnot who are doing fairly devious things with it,” he added, discussing companies focused on on-chain analysis.

  • Speaking on the privacy of Bitcoin, Snowden stated that “it’s really just private to the public, but it’s public to the prominent, shall we say.”

  Edward Snowden, whistle-blower and president of the Freedom of the Press Foundation – a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to protecting journalists – recently took an interview to discuss Bitcoin, other cryptocurrencies, privacy, and nation-state influence.

  “Bitcoin is not an anonymous ledger, it is a truly public ledger, and those things are always out there,” Snowden explained as he recounted his experience with Wikileaks, in which there was a seemingly insurmountable amount of pressure from the U.S government to shut the organization and his story down.

  Bitcoin allowed “time and distance,” as Snowden said, which ultimately allowed him to communicate with and meet the necessary journalists that would eventually lead to his escape to Russia, as well as the release of his leak.

  

  Time and distance is an important distinction that is separate from the idea of safety. Possessing safety would assume Bitcoin was capable of hiding identity and traceability perpetually, however, Snowden knew this was not the case, nor was he taking extensive steps to be anonymous, as he explains in the interview.

  The mark against anonymity is not necessarily a critique, but rather a statement of fact when proper steps toward anonymity are not taken. Companies have an entire business model built on tracking Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency transactions, through which Bitcoin Magazine has reported stories on the traceability of transactions for donation causes.

  Snowden explored chain analysis companies saying, “You get chain analysis people and whatnot who are doing fairly devious things with it,” including objectives like “trying to get a financial edge out of the on-chain analysis.”

  Snowden addressed the idea of privacy as it relates to one’s capacity to discern or obtain information when compared to public capability of discerning or obtaining that exact same information.

  “When you think about Bitcoin having a public ledger, well, once a dollar enters the banking system, there is a private ledger that is available to the people who are performing financial surveillance,” he explains.

  “So it’s really just private to the public, but it’s public to the prominent, shall we say.”

  When asked why cryptocurrency and financial privacy are important for whistle-blowers, Snowden responded that “there’s this question we all have to ask ourselves: What is the role of the government in a free and open society?”

  Snowden went on to explain that it is important to examine the roles nation-states actually play in our lives, as it relates to the philosophical question of what role they should be playing. Snowden then brings to bear the consideration that an open and free society, or one that wishes to be so, must also do everything in its power to achieve its idyllic state.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 19:30

• NOAA Warns US Megadrought Will Persist; May Impact Food Supply Chains 
  NOAA Warns US Megadrought Will Persist; May Impact Food Supply Chains 

  Abnormally dry to exceptional drought conditions are expected to persist across 60% of the continental U.S. as spring in the Northern Hemisphere begins. Forecasters expect little to no rain for certain parts of the western U.S. through June.

  From April to June, above-average temperatures are expected from Southwest to the East Coast and north through the Midwest, according to a new outlook published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 

  NOAA’s map shows a greater than 50% chance of drought persistence for nearly 60% of the continental U.S. 

  

  “Severe to exceptional drought has persisted in some areas of the West since the summer of 2020, and drought has expanded to the southern Plains and Lower Mississippi Valley,” said Jon Gottschalck, chief, Operational Prediction Branch, NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center.

   “With nearly 60% of the continental U.S. experiencing minor to exceptional drought conditions, this is the largest drought coverage we’ve seen in the U.S. since 2013,” Gottschalck said. 

  The outlook also noted more than 50% of the U.S. will experience above-average temperatures this spring, with the greatest chances in the Southern Rockies and Southern Plains. 

  According to the U.S. Drought Monitor, at least 90% of nine western states are plagued with dry conditions, including all of California, Nevada, and Utah, and 99% of New Mexico. 

  

  NOAA’s latest forecast doesn’t bode well for the western U.S. farm industry as it could very well suggest the multiyear mega-drought (one of the worst in 1,200 years) could begin to impact the U.S. food supply and comes at a very inopportune time as the Russian invasion of Ukraine has choked the world of natural resources. 

  The U.S. and world are careening towards a food crisis. Perhaps it’s time to plant a garden and become independent as national and global food supply chains may begin to breakdown. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 19:00

• The Evolution Of Credit & The Growing Fiat Money Crisis
  The Evolution Of Credit & The Growing Fiat Money Crisis

  Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

  After fifty-one years from the end of the Bretton Woods Agreement, the system of fiat currencies appears to be moving towards a crisis point for the US dollar as the international currency. The battle over global energy, commodity, and grain supplies is the continuation of an intensifying financial war between the dollar and the renminbi and rouble.

  It is becoming clear that the scale of an emerging industrial revolution in Asia is in stark contrast with Western decline, a population ratio of 87 to 13. The dollar’s role as the sole reserve currency is not suited for this reality.

  Commentators speculate that the current system’s failings require a global reset. They think in terms of it being organised by governments, when the governments’ global currency system is failing. Beholden to Keynesian macroeconomics, the common understanding of money and credit is lacking as well.

  This article puts money, currency, and credit, and their relationships in context. It points out that the credit in an economy is far greater than officially recorded by money supply figures and it explains how relatively small amounts of gold coin can stabilise an entire credit system.

  It is the only lasting solution to the growing fiat money crisis, and it is within the power of at least some central banks to implement gold coin standards by mobilising their reserves.

  

  Evolution or revolution?

  There are big changes afoot in the world’s financial and currency system. Fiat currencies have been completely detached from gold for fifty-one years from the ending of the Bretton Woods Agreement and since then they have been loosely tied to the King Rat of currencies, the dollar. Measured by money, which is and always has been only gold, King Rat has lost over 98% of its relative purchasing power in that time. From the Nixon Shock, when the Bretton Woods agreement was suspended temporarily, US Government debt has increased from $413 bn to about $30 trillion — that’s a multiple of 73 times. And given the US Government’s mandated and other commitments, it shows no signs of stabilising.

  This extraordinary debasement has so far been relatively orderly because the rest of the world has accepted the dollar’s hegemonic status. Triffin’s dilemma has allowed the US to run economically destructive policies without undermining the currency catastrophically. Naturally, that has led to the US Government’s complacent belief that not only will the dollar endure, but it can continue to be used for America’s own strategic benefits. But the emergence of rival superpowers in Asia has begun to challenge this status, and the consequence has been a financial cold war, a geopolitical jostling for position, particularly between the dollar and China’s renminbi, which has increased its influence in global financial affairs since the Lehman crisis in 2008.

  Wars are only understood by the public when they are physical in form. The financial and credit machinations between currency-issuing power blocs passes it by. But as with all wars, there ends up a winner and a loser. And since the global commodity powerhouse that is Russia got involved in recent weeks, America has continued its policy of using its currency status to penalise the Russians as if it was punishing a minor state for questioning its hegemonic status. The consequence is the financial cold war has become very hot and is now a commodity battle as well.

  Bringing commodities into the conflict is ripe with unintended consequences. Depending how the Russians respond to US-led sanctions, which they have yet to do, matters could escalate. In the West we have comforted ourselves with the belief that the Russian economy is on its uppers and Putin will have to either quickly yield to sanctions pressures, or face ejection by his own people in a coup. But that is a one-sided view. Even if it has a grain of truth, it ignores the consequences of Putin’s military failures on the ground in Ukraine so far, and his likely desperation to hit back with the one non-nuclear weapon at his disposal: Russia’s commodity exports.

  He may take the view that the West is damaging itself and little or no further action is required. And surely, the fact that China has stockpiled most of the world’s grain resources gives Russia added power as a marginal supplier. Putin can afford to not restrict food and fertiliser exports, blaming on American policy the starvation that will almost certainly be suffered by all non-combatant nations. He could cripple the West’s technology industries by banning or restricting exports of rare metals which are of little concern to headline writers in the popular press. He might exploit the one big loophole left in the sanctions regime by supplying China with whatever raw materials and energy it needs at discounted prices. And China could compound the problem for the West by restricting its exports of strategic commodities claiming they are needed for its own manufacturing requirements.

  While everyone focuses on what is seen, it is what is not seen that is ignored. Commodities are the visible manifestation of a trade war, while payments for them are not. Yet it is the flow of credit on the payment side where the battle for hegemonic status is fought. The Americans and their epigones in Europe have tried to shut down payments for Russian trade through the supposedly independent SWIFT system. And even the Bank for International Settlements, which by dealing with both Nazi Germany and the Allies retained its neutrality in the Second World War, is siding with the West today.

  But step back for a moment to look at how broadly based the West’s position is in a global context, because that will be a factor in whether the dollar’s hegemony will survive this conflict. We see America, the EU, Japan, the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand on one side. In population terms that’s roughly 335, 447, 120, 65, 38, 26 and 5 million people respectively, totalling 1,036 million, only 13% of the world population. This point was made meaningfully by the Saudis who now want to talk with Putin rather than Biden. As long ago as 2014, this writer was informed by a director of a major Swiss refinery that Arab customers were sending LBMA 400-ounce bars for recasting into Chinese four-nine one kilo bars. The real money saw this coming at least eight years ago.

  Even if the US’s external policies do not end up undermining the dollar’s global status, it is becoming clear that the King Rat of currencies is under an existential threat. And the Fed, which is responsible for domestic monetary policies, in conjunction with the Biden administration is undermining it from the inside as well by trying to manage a failing US economy by accelerating its debasement.

  A betting man would therefore be unlikely to put money on a favourable dollar outcome. Whether the dollar suffers a crisis or merely an accelerated decline, just as Nixon changed the world’s monetary order in 1971 it will change again. That the current situation is unsatisfactory is widely recognised by multiple commentators, even in America, calling for a financial and currency reset. And it is assumpted that the US Government and its central bank should come up with a plan.

  There are two major problems with the notion that somehow the deck chair attendant can save the ship from sinking by rearranging the sun loungers.

  • The first error is insisting that money is the preserve of only the state and is not to be decided by those who use it. It was the underlying fallacy of Georg Knapp’s State Theory of Money published in 1905. That ended with Germany printing money to arm itself in the hope that it would win: it didn’t and Germany ended up destroying its papiermark.

  • The second error is that almost no one understands money itself, as evidenced by the whole financial establishment, from the governments down to junior fund managers, thinking that their currencies are money. Commentators calling for a reset are themselves in the dark.

  Events will deal with the fallacies behind the State Theory of Money and whether it will turn out to be an evolution or revolution. But at least we can have a stab at explaining what money is for a modern audience, so that the requirements and conditions of a new currency system to succeed can be better understood.

  What is money for?

  The pre-Keynesian classical economic explanation of money’s role was set out in Say’s Law, otherwise known as the law of markets. Jean-Baptiste Say was a French economist, who in his Treatise on Political Economy published in 1803 wrote that,

  “A product is no sooner created than it, from that instant, affords a market for other products to the full extent of its own value.”

  And

  “Each of us can only purchase the productions of others with his own productions — and so the value we can buy is equal to the value we can produce. The more men can produce the more they will purchase.”

  Money or credit is the post-barter link between production and consumption facilitating the exchange between the two. What to produce and what is needed in exchange is a matter for those involved in individual transactions. And the medium of exchange used is a decision for each of the parties. They will tend to use a medium which is convenient and widely accepted by others.

  Say’s Law was incorrectly redefined and trashed by Keynes to “…that the aggregate demand price of output as a whole is equal to the aggregate supply price for all volumes of output is equivalent to the proposition that there is no obstacle to full employment.” This has subsequently been shortened to “supply creates its own demand”. Keynes’s elision of the truth was leading to (or was it to justify?) his erroneous invention of mathematical macroeconomics. It is simply untrue.

  All Say was pointing out is we divide our labour as the most efficient means of production for driving improvements in the human condition. That cannot be argued with, even by blinkered Keynesians. Money, or more correctly credit has two roles in this division of labour. The first is as the medium for investment in production, because things must be made before they can be sold and there are expenses in the form of presale payments that must be made. And the second is to act as the commonly accepted intermediary between the sale of products to their buyers. Instead of opining that supply creates its own demand, if we say instead that people make things so they can buy the products and services they don’t make for themselves, it is so obviously true that Keynes and his self-serving theories don’t have a leg to stand on. And importantly, full employment has nothing to do with it.

  The money involved is always credit. Even the act of lending gold coins to an entrepreneur to make something is credit because it is to be repaid. If gold coins are the payment medium between production and consumption, they are the temporary storage of production before it is spent. In this very narrow sense, they represent the credit of production which will be spent. The principal quality of gold, which when it is at rest is undeniably money, is that it has no counterparty risk and is to be parted with last.

  The point is that money in circulation is a subsection of wider credit and is the very narrowest of definitions of circulating media. But even under a gold standard, it is hardly ever used in transactions and rarely circulates. This is partly due to a Gresham’s Law effect, where it is only exchanged for inferior forms of credit as a last resort, and partly because it is less convenient than transferring banknotes or making book entries across bank ledgers. By far the most common forms of circulating media are credit in the form of banknotes issued by a central bank, and transferable credit owed by banks to depositors.

  But in our estimate of a practical replacement of the current fiat currency-based system, we must also acknowledge that credit is far broader than that recorded as circulating by means of the banking system. We are increasingly aware of the term, “shadow banks” most of which are pass-through channels of credit rather than credit creators. But doubtless, there is expanded credit in circulation originating from shadow banks, the equivalent of officially recorded bank credit, which is not captured in the money supply statistics. But there are also wider forms of credit in any economy.

  Defining credit

  To further our understanding of credit, we must define the fundamental concept of credit:

  Credit is anything which is of no direct use, but which is taken in exchange for something else, in the belief or confidence that we have the right to exchange it away again.

  It is the right to a future payment, not necessarily in money or currency. It is not the transfer of something, but it is a right to a future payment. Consequently, the most common form of credit is an agreement between two parties which has nothing to do with bank credit per se.

  Bank credit is merely the most obvious and recorded subset of the entire quantity of credit in an economy. And the whole world of derivatives, futures, forwards, and options, are also credit for an action in time, additional to bank credit. Global M3 money supply is said to be $40 trillion equivalent, about 3% of investments, derivatives, and cryptocurrencies, all of which are forms of credit: rights and promises to future payments in credit or currency. And this is in addition to private credit agreements between individuals and other individuals, and between businesses and individuals, which are extremely common.

  The commonly stated position among sound money advocates of the Austrian school is that bank credit should be replaced by custodial deposit-taking banks and separate arrangers of finance. But given the broad definition of credit in the real world, eliminating bank credit appears untenable when individuals are free to offer multiple amounts of credit and the vast bulk of credit creation is outside the banking system.

  Consider the case of a bookie accepting wagers for a horse race. Ahead of the event, he takes on obligations many times the capital in his business, in return for which he is paid in banknotes or drawings on bank credit by his betting customers. When the race is over, he keeps the losers’ stakes and is liable for payments to holders of the winning bets. He has debts to the winners which are only extinguished when the winners collect. While there are differences in procedures and of the risks involved, in principal there is little difference between a bookie’s business and that of a commercial bank; they are both dealers in credit. Arguably, the bookie has the sounder business model.

  The restriction imposed on an individual providing credit to others is his potential liability if it is called upon. The unfairness in the current system is not that bank credit is permitted, but that is permitted with limited liability. Surely, the solution is to ensure that all providers of credit are responsible for the risks involved. Licenced banks and their shareholders should face unlimited liability. It is even conceivable that listed capital in an overleveraged bank might trade at negative values if shareholders face a risk of unlimited calls on their wealth. That should promote responsibility in bank lending. It will not eliminate the cycle of bank credit expansion and contraction, but it will certainly lessen its disruptive impact.

  Variations in the purchasing power of a medium of exchange

  A proper consideration of credit, the all-embracing term for mediums of exchange to include future promises, shows that government statistics for money supply are a diminishingly small part of overall credit in an economy. We must take this fact into account when considering changes in the official quantity of money on the purchasing power of units of the medium of exchange (that is credit in the form of circulating banknotes and commercial bank credit — M1, M2, M3 etc.).

  A downturn in economic activity must be considered in the broader sense. If, for example, I say to my neighbour that if he arranges it, I will cover half the cost of fencing the boundary between our properties, I have offered him credit upon which he can proceed to contract a fencing supplier and installer. However, if in the interim my circumstances have changed and I cannot deliver on my promise, the credit agreement with my neighbour is withdrawn and the fence might not be installed.

  A father might promise his son an allowance while he attends university. That is a credit agreement with periodic drawdowns lasting the course. Later, the father might promise help in buying a property for his son to live in. These are promises, whose values are particular and precarious. And they will be valid only so long as they can be afforded. If there is a general change in economic conditions for the worse, it is almost certainly driven more by the withdrawal of unrecorded credit agreements between individuals and small businesses such as corner shops, and not directly due to bank credit contraction.

  An appreciation of these facts and of changes in human behaviour which cannot be recorded statistically explains much about the lack of correlation between measures of credit (i.e., broad money supply) and prices. The equation of exchange (MV=PQ) does not even capture a decent fraction of the relationship between the quantity of credit in an economy and prices. Our understanding of the wider credit scene goes some way to resolving a mystery that has bedevilled monetary economists ever since David Ricardo first proposed the relationship over two centuries ago. In theory, an increase in the quantity of measurable credit (that is currency in the banking system) leads to a proportionate increase in prices. Even allowing for statistical legerdemain, that is patently not true, as Figure 1 illustrates.

  

  Figure 1 shows that over the last sixty years, the broadest measure of US dollar money supply has increased by nearly seventy times, while prices have increased about nine. The equation of exchange explains it by persuading us that each unit of currency circulates less so that the increase in the money quantity somehow leads to less of an effect on prices. This interpretation is consistent with Keynes’s denial of Say’s Law. The Law tells us that we all make profits and/or earn salaries, which in the time-space of a year means we can only spend and save once. That is an unvarying velocity of unity. Instead, the mathematical economists have introduced a variable, V, which simply balances an equation which should not exist.

  That is not to say that credit expansion does not affect the purchasing power of a currency. Logic corroborates it. But an understanding of the true extent of credit in an economy confirms that the sum of currency and recorded bank credit is just a small part of the story – only one eighth as indicated by the divergence between M3 and consumer prices — all else being equal.

  It brings us to the other driving force in the credit/price relationship, which is the public acceptability of the currency. Ludwig von Mises, the Austrian economist, who lived through the Austrian inflation in the post-WW1 years and whose advice the Austrian government was reluctant to accept, observed that variations in public confidence in the currency can have a profound effect on its purchasing power. Famously, Mises described a crack-up boom as evidence that the public had finally abandoned all faith in the government’s currency and disposed of all of it in return for goods, needed or not.

  It leads to the sensible conclusion that irrespective of changes in the circulating quantity, the purchasing power is fully dependent on the public’s faith in the currency. Destroy that, and the currency becomes valueless as a medium of exchange. If confidence is maintained, it follows that the price effects of a currency debasement may be minimised.

  This brings us to gold coin. If the state backs its currency with sufficient gold which the public is free to obtain on demand from the issuer of the currency, then the currency takes on the characteristics of gold as money. We should not need to justify this established and ancient role for gold, or silver for that matter, to the current generations of Keynesians brainwashed into thinking it’s just old hat. Though they rarely admit it, central bankers fully committed to their fiat currencies still retain gold reserves in the knowledge that they are no one’s liability; that is to say, true money while their currencies are simply credit.

  Given what we now know about the extent of credit beyond the banking system and the role of public confidence in the currency when it is a credible gold substitute, we can see why a moderate expansion of the currency need not undermine its purchasing power proportionately. While the cycle of bank credit expansion and contraction leads to the boom-and-bust conditions described by Von Mises and Hayek in their Austrian business cycle theory, the effects on prices under a gold standard do not appear to have been enough to destabilise a currency’s purchasing power. Figure 2 illustrates the point.

  

  Admittedly there are several factors at work. While the increase in the quantity of currency in circulation was generally restricted by the gold coin standard, the bank credit cycle of expansion and contraction led to periodic bank failures. Then as now, the quantity of bank credit relative to bank notes was eight or ten times, and so long as the note-issuing bank remained at arm’s length from the tribulations of commercial bank credit the overall price effects were contained.

  Britain abandoned the gold standard in 1914, and just as the abandonment of the silver standard in the 1790s led to an increase in the general price level, a dramatic increase occurred during the First World War. This was due to deficit spending by the state driving up material costs at a time when imported factors of supply were limited by the destruction of merchant shipping.

  The end of the war restored the supply/demand balance and saw a reduction in military spending. Prices fell and then stabilised. A gold bullion standard at the pre-war rate of exchange was re-established in 1925, only to be abandoned in 1931. The Second World War and subsequent lack of any anchor to the currency led to an inexorable rise in prices before America abandoned the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1971. And since then, the sterling price of gold has risen even further from £14.58 when the Agreement ceased to £1,470 today. Measured in true money the currency has lost over 99% of its purchasing power over the last fifty-one years.

  Both logic and the empirical evidence point to the same conclusion: price stability can only be achieved under a working gold coin standard, whereby ordinary people can, should they so wish, exchange banknotes for coin on demand. Despite making up most of the circulating medium, fluctuations in bank credit then have less of an effect on prices, for the reasons stated above.

  Can cryptocurrencies replace gold?

  The reason gold is relatively stable in purchasing power terms is that through history, above ground stocks have expanded at similar rates to population growth. A very gradual increase in gold’s purchasing power comes from manufacturing, technological, and competitive production factors. In other words, the price stability clearly demonstrated in Figure 2 above between 1820—1914 is evolutionary.

  Whether cryptocurrencies or central bank digital currencies might have a stabilising role for prices in future is highly contentious. We can readily dismiss yet another version of state-issued currencies as being a worse form of credit than failing fiat currencies. The aim behind them is communistic, to enable the state to allocate credit resources wherever and to whomsoever its political class may desire. It is with the intention of reducing the vagaries of human action on the state’s intended outcome. Just as every replacement currency for failing fiat in the past has failed, if CBDCs are introduced they will fail as well. It is unnecessary to comment further.

  Cryptocurrencies, particularly bitcoin, are seen by a small minority of enthusiasts as the money of the future, being outside the state’s printing presses. But as observed above, in reality, sound money is augmented by fluctuating quantities of credit in far larger quantities. So long as sound money provides price stability, circulating credit inherits those characteristics.

  Bitcoin, the leading claimant to being future money, lacks both world-wide acceptance and the flexibility required for long-term stability and therefore economic calculation. Imagine an entrepreneur planning to invest in production, a project which from the drawing-board to final sales takes several years. His nineteenth century forebears had a reasonable idea of final prices, so could calculate costs, sales values, and therefore the interest cost of the capital deployed over the whole project to leave him with a profit. No such certainty exists with bitcoin because final prices cannot be assumed. Furthermore, central banks do not have bitcoin as part of their reserves, and by embarking on plans for their own CBDCs have signalled that they will not have anything to do with it. But in most cases central banks or their government treasury ministries possess gold bullion, which as a last resort they can deploy to stabilise a failing currency.

  While there will undoubtedly be future benefits from their underlying technologies, it is impossible to see how cryptocurrencies can have a practical role in backing wider credit.

  Conclusion

  The evolution of fiat dollars which dates from the abandonment of the Bretton Woods Agreement is coming to an inevitable conclusion: fiat currencies come and go and only gold goes on forever. Whoever wins the financial battle now raging with increasing intensity over commodity prices, the US dollar as the King Rat of fiat currencies is losing its assumed superiority over the renminbi, and possibly the rouble if the Russians can stabilise it. The old-world population backing the dollar is heavily outnumbered by the newly industrialising Eurasia as well as its commodity and raw material suppliers in Africa and South America.

  Not mentioned in this article is the Federal Reserve Board’s commitment to sacrifice the dollar to support financial values — that ground has been well covered in earlier Goldmoney articles. But it is a repetition of John Law’s policies in 1720 France, now underway to stop the global financial bubble from imploding. And just as the Mississippi Company continued after 1720 when the French livre collapsed entirely that year, we see the same dynamics in play for the entire fiat currency system today.

  John Law’s policies of credit stimulation for the French economy were remarkably like those of modern Keynesians. This time, the expansion of money supply on a global basis has been on an unprecedented scale, encouraged by the subdued effect on prices measured by government-compiled consumer price indices. Undoubtedly, much of the lack of price inflation is down to statistical method, but from Figure 1 we have seen that over the last sixty years the quantity of currency and credit captured by US dollar M3 has grown about seven and a half times more rapidly than prices. We have concluded that this disparity is partly due to not all credit in the economy being captured in the monetary statistics.

  Understanding the relationship between money which is only physical gold coin, currency which is bank notes and credit which includes bank credit, shadow bank credit, derivatives, and personal guarantees, is vital to understanding what is required to replace the fiat-currency system. It also explains why a relatively small base of exchangeable gold coin in relation to the overall credit in an economy is sufficient to guarantee price stability.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 18:30

• Interest In NFTs Has Plummeted
  Interest In NFTs Has Plummeted

  While many of us have been forced to at least try to understand what an NFT is over the last year or so, the latest figures from Google Trends suggest that this research has not led to a sustained interest in the topic.

  For those that haven’t as yet attempted to get to grips with the phenomenon, here’s Wikipedia to the rescue:

  “A non-fungible token (NFT) is a non-interchangeable unit of data stored on a blockchain, a form of digital ledger, that can be sold and traded. Types of NFT data units may be associated with digital files such as photos, videos, and audio.”

  Still not clear? Then have fun delving down this particular rabbit hole.

  Though, as Visual Capitalist’s Martin Armstrong notes, if the trend shown by Google’s search data continues, that might turn out to be a monumental waste of your time.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  One place where the demise of the NFT is by no means being predicted however, is at LimeWire.

  The popular file-sharing platform from the early 2000’s (largely facilitating illegal download of films and music) announced this week that it will be returning as a “mainstream-ready, digital collectibles marketplace for art and entertainment, initially focusing on music.”

  The service is expected to go live in May.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 18:00

• Teachers' Union Teams Up With Steven Brill's NewsGuard To Flag "Misinformation" For Children
  Teachers’ Union Teams Up With Steven Brill’s NewsGuard To Flag “Misinformation” For Children

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Under the leadership of Randi Weingarten, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) has long been criticized by conservatives for its support of far left policies and support for Democratic candidates. Nevertheless, as a union, it is entitled to be political and most unions favor the Democrats due to their pro-union policies.

  However, the concern over the AFT’s agenda become far greater when it announced that it would team up with NewsGuard to start to flag news sources deemed “misinformation.”

  NewsGuard is co-founded by Steve Brill who has been accused of bias against Republicans and conservatives. Conservative sites have previously tagged NewGuard as “heavily skewed” in favor of the left. The “misinformation” label has been used extensively by liberal media to kill stories like the Hunter Biden laptop stories as unreliable.

  Indeed, Brill is under fire for being one of the voices falsely claiming that the Hunter Biden laptop was likely false Russian disinformation. His company will now put “traffic lights” on information for children on what sources they rely upon.

  

  The ratings of NewsGuard have long been criticized by conservative sites as favoring liberal sites like The Nation (with a 93 percent rating) over more conservative sites like Fox News (at 66 percent).

  The timing of the announcement could not be worse after the New York Times finally recognized that the Hunter Biden laptop story was legitimate and the controversial emails authentic.

  For two years, some of us have been hammered as spreading “Russian disinformation” and false allegations in raising concerns over the raw influence peddling by the Biden family. Steven Brill was one of those voices flagging the story as likely “disinformation.”

  Brill assured viewers on CNBC that this was likely all untrue:

  “My personal opinion is there’s a high likelihood this story is a hoax, maybe even a hoax perpetrated by the Russians again.”

  The media campaign to bury or block the story worked. The Biden family had long been accused of special dealing and influence peddling. The emails were potentially devastating with references to millions from foreign sources, including shady Chinese, Russian, and Ukrainian interests while Joe Biden was Vice President. The media actively participated in shielding the Bidens from the scandal.

  In fairness to Brill, he opposed efforts to block the story and did not support moves like Twitter to bar references to the story before the election. (After Biden was elected, Twitter admitted it was a mistake by Democrats then demanded more censorship). I agree with him entirely that the solution is to allow readers to decide by comparing news sources.

  However, the interview had an interesting element. Brill’s objections to Twitter and FaceBook killing the story was that they are not qualified to make that decision on what, in his words, is likely a Russian “hoax.”

  That is what NewsGuard does in flagging unreliable sources. He is clearly referring to himself as one of those qualified to make that decision. Yet, he was entirely wrong. At the time, many of us were noting that Biden did not deny that this was his laptop, that it was seized by the FBI in an ongoing criminal investigation, and some recipients of the emails had confirmed their authenticity.  Nevertheless, Brill still thought it was all a hoax.

  Weingarten has declared using Brill’s NewsGuard will be a “game changer” in preventing students from being “misled” by news sources. It may well be. It would allow the AFT and school districts to teach students to distrust certain news sources like Fox News, which is given a lower rating by NewsGuard. (For full disclosure, I appear on Fox as a legal analyst).

  Conservative and independent sites continue to bedevil many on the left. The laptop story shows how advocacy journalism is now the norm in many newsrooms. Viewers and readers were told by most media figures, including Brill, that the story was likely Russian propaganda and untrue.

  The unsupported hoax claim (which contradicted readily available authenticating evidence at the time) raises the specter of a type of de facto state media. The problem is that such an echo chamber is only fully successful if there is no alternative source of information. Yet, Fox and New York Post continued to cover the story as did some of us as columnists.

  The most extreme effort was a letter from Democratic members to pressure companies like AT&T to reconsider whether viewers should be allowed to watch Fox News and other networks. It does not matter that Fox News is the most popular news cable station and even has a greater percentage of Democratic viewers than CNN. The members insisted that “not all TV news sources are the same” and called on these companies to protect viewers from “dissemination” of false viewpoints.

  Other members have sought to create algorithmic interventions to steer people away from certain stories or books, including the current NUDGE Act being proposed by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.).

  The AFT is now seeking a much earlier intervention with children by getting Brill’s NewsGuard to rate reliable and unreliable sources of news. Weingarten has declared that, with Brill’s help, children and families will no longer be “drowning in an ocean of online dishonesty.”

  It is unlikely to be reassuring for many that the children instead will be swimming in a pool carefully maintained by the AFT and NewsGuard.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 17:30

• Bill Gross Warns Fed Rate Hikes Will "Crack" US Economy And Housing Market
  Bill Gross Warns Fed Rate Hikes Will “Crack” US Economy And Housing Market

  Bill Gross, the PIMCO founder and longtime “Bond King” of Wall Street, has likely grown accustomed to critical portrayals in the press, following his widely publicized dispute with a Laguna Beach neighbor (Gross published his own account of the aftermath which is definitely worth a read for the entertainment value alone), and after the recent publication of a book called “The Bond King” – which prompted him to pen his own memoirs to counteract what he feared would be a negative portrayal. Now comfortably ensconced in retirement, the PIMCO founder has taken a break from managing his own portfolio (which has recently included winning options bets against GME and AMC) to share his concerns about the Fed’s rate-hike plans with the FT‘s top business editor.

  

  Gross fears that if the Fed follows throuogh with its plans to hike rates by 25 basis points at each successive meeting this year, it will “crack” the US economy and the housing market, sending the US careening into a recession.

  As we shared on Wednesday, the Fed’s median projection as expressed in the latest “dot plot” shows 7 rate hikes in 2022, which would leave the Fed funds rate, the central bank’s benchmark interest rate, at a peak of 2.75%.

  Raising the benchmark rate to this terminal level would cause the US economy to “crack”, Gross said, causing a recession and “breaking” the housing market (which has been caught in a torrid buying frenzy).

  “I suspect you can’t get above 2.5 to 3 per cent before you crack the economy again,” he said. “We’ve just gotten used to lower and lower rates and anything much higher will break the housing market.”

  Gross’s commentary isn’t that far-fetched, considering that the Fed expects it will need to cut rates later in 2024 to accommodate the slowing economy.

  

  before the central bank later starts cutting rates to accommodate an economic slowdown later in 2024.

  Of course, Gross’s commentary stands in stark contrast to that of St. Louis Fed President James Bullard, who has called for the Fed to hike rates by 50bp per meeting to reach the 2.75 percentage point terminal rate before the end of 2023. Otherwise, the central bank would risk “losing credibility”.

  Gross’s commentary is interesting considering that he has railed against low interest rates for years.

  “It destroys the savings function,” he said. “Meme stocks and NFTs [non fungible tokens], all of this nonsense in my mind has developed from the inability to earn a decent return in your 401k” retirement plan.

  After initially taking losses, Gross said that his bets against GME and AMC have yielded some profits.

  In the past 18 months, he has been putting his personal money where his mouth is, by using options to bet against GameStop and AMC, the most prominent meme stocks to have seen their share prices driven up by retail enthusiasts. Although he initially took enough losses that he stopped sleeping and closed some of his positions, he says he has been vindicated by rapid tumbles in both company’s shares. “Maybe I’m an old fart…but in total, I’m up maybe $15mn to $20mn.”

  Gross has also profited from investments in partnerships that in turn have invested in natural gas pipelines.

  Gross has also profited handsomely from a decision to buy partnerships that invest in natural gas pipelines. He freely admits his interest was piqued by their tax structure — dividends are reinvested and not taxed until the holding is sold. Now the position is benefiting from sharply higher energy prices owing to the emergence from the pandemic and the war in Ukraine.

  The scrutiny he has faced in the press has led Gross to reflect on his insecurities and the combative temperament that led to his ouster from PIMCO.

  The process has forced him to recognise his own shortcomings and insecurities. In his last days at Pimco, when he famously feuded with other top executives, “I was too sensitive and that was disruptive,” he said. “It’s probably the best thing that I left. At 72, you do start to lose it, and at 77 you lose it even more.”

  He also said he misses the PIMCO investment committee, which met daily.

  “I missed the Pimco investment committee” which met daily, he said. “This was a company of bond kings and queens. I had some responsibility for hiring and keeping them at the firm. But these people are good.”

  The interview seems to mark the start of a new, more reflective period for Gross. Being nearly 80, Gross joked that living in what he calls “the death zone” has led him to live more “in the moment”.

  Although he remains estranged from the child he had with his second wife, Gross has remarried and he is close to his two older children. “When you get to your late 70s and early 80s, it’s like the death zone,” he said. “You just wait for the prostate cancer. But it also allows you to be more happy in the moment.”

  Although he is now retired (following what was by all accounts a disastrous stint at fund manager Janus) Gross said he still wakes up early (around 0500PT) to spend 5 hours a day at his Bloomberg terminal (he was gifted a lifetime subscription by Michael Bloomberg himself).

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 17:00

• Soaring LNG Demand Creates Traffic Jam At Gulf Of Mexico Ports
  Soaring LNG Demand Creates Traffic Jam At Gulf Of Mexico Ports

  Authored by Charles Kennedy via OilPrice.com,

  • Gulf Coast liquefaction facilities are operating near capacity thanks to strong demand.

  • Europe is rushing to replenish its exhausted gas reserves.

  • Eikon: 27 LNG tankers were either on their way to Gulf Coast export terminals or already there.

  

  Close to a record number of liquefied natural gas tankers are crowding Gulf Coast export terminals as U.S. exports of the superchilled fuels run at record rates.

  Reuters reported that Gulf Coast liquefaction facilities are operating near capacity thanks to strong demand, especially from Europe, which is currently trying to replenish its exhausted gas reserves.

  Citing data from Refinitiv Eikon, Reuters wrote that some 27 LNG tankers were either on their way to Gulf Coast export terminals or already there. As a result, liquefied natural gas exports could reach 6.47 million tons this month, according to Kpler, beating the previous monthly record of 6.3 million tons set in January.

  Europe has morphed into the biggest market for U.S. liquefied natural gas over the past three months, as concern about the geopolitical tensions around Ukraine prompted the EU to seek alternatives to Russian gas in case Moscow turned off the taps, even though Moscow has repeatedly said that it has no such plans.

  As a result of the surge in demand for U.S. LNG, the country overtook Qatar to become the world’s largest exporter of the commodity. U.S. LNG is one of the European Union’s preferred alternatives to Russian pipeline gas, whose consumption the union is trying to cut by two-thirds within a year.

  Last week, the chief executive of the largest U.S. natural gas producer, EQT, said the United States could easily replace Russian gas, which last year accounted for 45 percent of total EU gas imports.

  “We’ve got the ability to do more, the desire to do more,” EQT’s Toby Rice told the BBC, estimating that the United States had enough gas to quadruple current output by 2030.

  However, environmentalists have been quick to protest the increase in LNG exports, with a coalition of more than a hundred organizations calling on banks to stop financing LNG export terminal projects. Environmentalist protests, according to a Reuters report, have led to the shelving of an interagency review on ways to boost LNG exports to Europe.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 16:30

• Another Lost Decade Ahead? 60/40 'Balanced' Books Suffer Worst Streak Since 2008
  Another Lost Decade Ahead? 60/40 ‘Balanced’ Books Suffer Worst Streak Since 2008

  Since the “Powell Pivot” was unleashed on global markets, precious metals have strongly outperformed so-called safe-haven portfolios…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  …and in fact, as Bloomberg reports, the classic 60/40 portfolio – a strategy named for the share allocated to equities and high-grade debt, respectively – is down more than 10% this year, leaving it on pace for the worst drubbing since the financial crisis of 2008.

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  In fact, for the first time on record, Bonds (TLT) and Stocks (SPY) are both down over 10% in Q1 together…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  And on a 50-50 Bonds/Stocks basis, Q1 looks set to be the worst quarter on record…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Why? Why the sudden shift for a portfolio mix that is – by name – defined as ‘balancing’ risk, rather than aggregating it.

  The answer is both simple and terrifying for the world’s central planners (and commission-takers) – Stagflation is back.

  Unlike the last major crisis of faith in 60/40 books in 2008, though, the current environment is not driven by just a growth scare. Assets are being hammered by the double whammy of the risk that a stagnant economic expansion and fears of out-of-control ‘non-transitory’ inflation (a combination that could cause poor returns, or even losses, to extend for some time to come).

  With rising stagflation risks, Goldman warns that investors face lower real returns and higher risks from 60/40 portfolios. There is pressure for higher equity allocations given the prospect of poor returns and less diversification potential from bonds. But while higher equity allocations increase the potential for attractive real returns in the long run, they increase the risk of large and fast drawdowns in the near term.

  “You cannot count on the sort of investment returns seen over history for a period of time,” said Chris Brightman, chief investment officer at Research Affiliates.

  “Bond yields, dividend and earnings yields are at a low starting point and it means future returns will be low when compared to history.”

  During the the so-called “lost decade” of the 2000s, the “60/40 portfolio generated a meager 2.3% annual return and investors would have lost value on an inflation-adjusted basis,” Goldman Sachs Asset Management’s Nick Cunningham, the vice president of strategic advisory solutions, wrote in October.

  “The very good returns of the past decade mean that is important for investors to establish more realistic return expectations,” said Izabella Goldenberg, U.S. head of portfolio strategy at Goldman Sachs Asset Management. She said that may involve seeking returns in global equities and “in principle being diversified for the long term.”

  Andrew Patterson, senior economist at Vanguard Group Inc., said markets are verging on a period of low gains for the 60/40 portfolio.

  He estimated that annual returns over the next 10 years will be “south of 5% and our estimates have been grinding down in recent years, mainly driven by equities.”

  Equity and bond prices falling together may be a feature of the inflation shock. In past eras of supply-driven inflation, government bonds failed to offset equity losses, as prices in both markets moved together, said Jean Boivin, head of the BlackRock Investment Institute.

  “Investors will have to live with higher inflation and that will challenge the role of government bonds in a portfolio,” he said.

  “Central banks will find it harder to contain inflation and also harder to ease if economic growth slows materially.”

  Markets have further repriced risk of stagflation, boosted by the commodities rally due to the Russia/Ukraine crisis – US 10-year breakeven inflation has reached the highest level since the 1990s, while real yields remain near all-time lows, resulting in a similar gap to that in the 1970s.

  

  This points to little optimism on long-term real growth and material concerns on inflation risk.

  

  For those looking for alternatives, Goldman suggests a combination of allocations to commodities, real estate, infrastructure, more international diversification as well as value, high dividend yield stocks and convertibles could help to reduce the risk of another 60/40 ‘lost decade’. Private markets might offer more opportunities to gain exposure to these themes.

  During the 1970s stagflation there were material benefits from broader diversification…

  

  PIMCO recently recommended shifting a portion of 60/40 portfolios into in commodities to hedge against elevated inflation.

  “When inflation increases, asset values generally fall,” and “even a small allocation to commodities may materially improve the inflation protection of a traditional 60/40 stock/bond portfolio,” it said.

  We already saw that Gold has outperformed dramatically as the stagflation fears rise.

  And finally, Goldman has a lower conviction suggestion for those struggling with ‘balanced’ bond-stock portfolios… add some Bitcoin…

  Our analysis suggests that just a small allocation to Bitcoin in a standard US 60/40 portfolio would have enhanced risk-adjusted returns materially since 2014 (while Bitcoin prices are available from mid-2010, we use prices since 2014 as Bitcoin was not easily accessible to investors before then), even as balanced portfolios performed strongly on their own. The strong risk-adjusted performance of Bitcoin was due to strong returns rather than to low risk.

  

  But Goldman warns that Bitcoin’s history is too short to cover several business cycles or a period of high inflationary pressures, so it is unclear how Bitcoin would behave during a period of stagflation. Additionally, Bictoin’s high relative volatility can quickly come to dominate the diversified book’s performance.

  Given its limited and known supply, the price of Bitcoin should primarily depend on investor demand and its perceived value. But investor demand so far seems to be linked to the asset itself rather than macro factors; adoption by retail investors – and recently some institutions – has boosted prices while regulatory and tax concerns, as well as positioning, have driven sharp setbacks. Without more clarity on these idiosyncratic drivers, assessing Bitcoin’s future risk/reward and role in balanced portfolios remains difficult.

  Since the GFC, many of these alternative strategies have had mixed success due to low and anchored inflation, but Goldman believes that in the Post-Pandemic Cycle they are likely to enhance risk-adjusted returns for a balanced portfolio.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 16:00

• Putin: Destined To Hang Or Drown?
  Putin: Destined To Hang Or Drown?

  Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

  As we end this third week of World War III it’s becoming clear that the West’s end-game strategy is now regime change in Russia. As the money and weapons pour into Ukraine the Ukrainian Flag further morphs into the 21st century’s version of ‘Old Shoe,’ all around the Twittersphere.

  

  Zelenskyy’s even been invited to the Oscar’s for pity’s sake.

  If you were ever in doubt about this, just watch Senator Lindsey Graham (Neocon – SC) triple-down on assassinating a world leader.

  Speaking at a press conference, Graham said “I hope he will be taken out, one way or the other,” adding “I don’t care how they take him out. I don’t care if we send him to The Hague and try him. I just want him to go.”

  “It’s time for him to go,” Graham further said of Putin, echoing Joe Biden’s blurted remarks that “He’s a war criminal.”

  “I wish somebody had taken Hitler out in the ’30s. So yes, Vladimir Putin is not a legitimate leader. He is a war criminal.” Graham declared.

  Graham further proclaimed that Russia is “going to have zero future” under Putin, adding “I think the world is better off without Putin – the sooner the better, and I don’t care how we do it.”

  This is called Saying the Quiet Parts Out Loud.

  Even Paul Craig Roberts is trying to figure out why Putin isn’t treating his enemies more ruthlessly. We awake Americans have a real sense of the depravity that our leaders carry and at times I think we get carried away with our own insights here.

  As I said would happen, Russia’s go-slow war has played 100% into their enemies’ hands. Russia needed a quick victory to forestall a devastating psyops campaign against her and to intimidate further NATO expansion. What the Kremlin achieved by  believing that the West would respect  humanitarian intentions is infamy.  Instead of discouraging provocations of Russia that will eventually lead to nuclear war, the Kremlin’s liberal goody-goodly war policy, which the West sees as  irresolution, has encouraged more provocations 

  Dr. Roberts’ thesis is one I’ve heard from multiple people, including from my friend Dexter White on two recent podcasts we did (here and here). Putin’s slow rolling the Ukraine operation has further emboldened Neocon crazies whose whole being is focused on interpreting every action by their enemies as a weakness to exploit.

  This analysis further solidifies my conclusion that they are left-brain possessed, betraying all the attributes of someone psychologically unbalanced to the point of madness. They become paranoid psychotics seeing everything in terms of their enemy.

  It’s the most popular refrain of desperate globalists, “Putin did it.”

  It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. What matters is keeping people in that suggestible state. It’s easy to do since they, themselves, are there too.

  Lindsey Graham likes to play tough guy. So does Biden. Neither of these men have ever been in a real fight with their bodies on the line in their life. They’ve never really been in a life-threatening situation. For them their fear is far worse, it’s reputational which means fear of exposure.

  They hide behind cameras, their positions, and their egos.

  They live in fear of being shamed.

  It’s easy to dismiss Graham as a buffoon, because he is. But he’s also a very important cog in the machine. So, when he speaks it’s important. Don’t be flip about these statements, they absolutely mean something.

  If you look around D.C. you see the same psychological projection of inner rot every time one of these war mongers gets in front of a camera to manufacture consent. They are also fearful of the shame of exposure which drives them to madness like Lindsey displays now on a nearly daily basis.

  This push for regime change in Russia, however, begs a very important question: “Why have they gone this far? Why do they think they can get regime change when Putin has 70+% support?”

  Is it because they really are scared of the emerging facts on the ground, that Russia is grinding out, inevitably and inexorably, a victory in Ukraine on Russian terms that isn’t a reflection of bad military strategy and/or poor intelligence and logistics?

  Or is it something deeper.

  Something Darker

  Alistair Crooke and I talked about this in our latest podcast. Russia’s collective psyche is a reflection of Putin’s. You’ll see that their anger and frustration is now real and complete. The West hates Russia and Russians with a burning passion that is irrational.

  The fear of loss of potency has made war-mongers out of way too many folks because they refuse to blame themselves for this mess:

  • That they allowed Biden to take the White House

  • That they believed all the crude propaganda about Trump and Putin

  • That they still wear their masks, now with Ukrainian Flags on them, to show their wisdom over those who are now clearly traitors.

  • That their paychecks are getting smaller by the day.

  When you see a push poll by Pew that states more than one-third of Americans are willing to risk nuclear war to stop Putin in Ukraine, you know something has gone way off the rails, and it ain’t the Russians.

  It’s not fear that makes the Russian people and Putin angry, it’s disappointment at having their hand of friendship consistently slapped away so thoroughly in the post-Soviet era.

  What goodwill that existed in the West towards Russia in the 1990’s, seeing them as victims of a terrible evil to be pitied, has morphed into disgust for following a man into war for threatening their comfortable existence behind their iPhones.

  When Putin speaks now he is visibly, viscerally angry. He’s been systematically, for years, cutting Russia off from the influences of the ill-liberalism of the West.

  Putin knows he’s been pushed into this by people who are powerful but psychologically small. And the Russian people have been deeply disrespected to the point of war. That’s why his poll numbers rise while Bidens’ barely budge.

  That all leads to regime change as the end-game because it may be the only option, which implies continued escalation to the point of something unthinkable.

  And it makes perfect sense that’s what they are planning, not just regime change, but a wider war (see the buildup of NATO troops) to grind Russia into a paste and atomize it, Russian culture and the Russian people.

  

  That said, Davos has very little human intelligence on the ground to actually make that happen. All the sanctions and expelling diplomats helped Russia’s and Putin’s security.

  The U.S. Embassy in Moscow has less than 50 people in it.

  While that is a sad state of affairs and means there is little to no hope of diplomacy, it also means there isn’t any infrastructure to do what Lindsey is so desperately saying… Someone take him out, anyone!

  That’s a sign of creating the new narrative while simultaneously betraying helplessness, in my view.

  Now, unfortunately that leads me into an ever darker place. They don’t just want regime change and some kind of negotiated settlement for Ukraine. That’s actually way off the table now.

  They see the writing on the wall for their financial system which has failed. The only option they see now is making open preparations for WWIII thinking they still have the materiel and the manpower to enforce their Great Reset, which was always leading to war.

  Lindsey Graham’s job is to build up the propaganda war to justify NATO’s entrance into Ukraine in the next few weeks.

  The program now is WWIII, possibly with nukes and the abject humiliation of Russia and its eventual destruction.

  And ours.

  I begged off ‘working’ yesterday because of this realization. I was drained to the point of exhaustion and planned on sleeping my depression off. I re-watched part I of Oliver Stone’s The Putin Interviews from 2016.

  I recommend everyone watch these films, they are an enlightenment.

  If you want to know your enemy, you should study him. Demonizing him may win you friends at the water cooler, but it will cost you your soul. About 20 minutes in, during their first conversation, Stone brings up the multiple assassination attempts on Putin.

  If you watch nothing else, watch this segment (click here) to get a better understanding of Russia and Putin. The punchline is simple:

  “Do you know what they say among the Russian people? Those who are destined to hang, do not drown.”

  – VLADIMIR PUTIN

  Putin is well aware, hyper-aware of his situation. A person in his position who has been fighting this way for more than 20 years, a project he has dedicated the 2nd half of his life to, is not so stupid as to be the willing dupe of Davos nor is he blind to the capabilities or the ruthlessness of his enemies.

  This is why I hold to the positions about Putin that I do. He may fail here. War is hell and nothing ever goes according to the plan on the white board.

  But, if you are going to be led into war who would your bet on? People like Lindsey Graham could never stand in front of a camera and say what Putin said to Stone. Why?

  Because there is no there there. He’s just a shadow projector with a hand puppet up its ass.

  But if you turn the camera away from Graham and Biden and look at Putin, he’s speaking to the world now. That’s what his latest speech was about.

  It wasn’t aimed at his enemies.

  He’s done talking to them. They aren’t listening.

  That speech was aimed at everyone else including Americans and Europeans, “This is what they think of you. This is what they are willing to do to demand your obedience,” They will steal your money, take your children, burn your life to the ground.

  And it isn’t like he doesn’t have a very sound point, folks.

  If anyone was calling for regime change now, it’s Putin.

  It may have zero effect or play here in the West. In fact, I predict it will have almost zero effect. But it will resonate around the world in those places now very scared of the conflict that Biden and Davos are forcing on everyone.

  Under those circumstances clarity comes quickly. Big decisions happen fast.

  I think a global memetic collapse is in process as I type this. We can’t see it here in the West because we aren’t allowed to. But in parliaments and politburos around the that part that Davos just sees as ‘the help,’ it’s happening. The headlines are coming in almost too fast for anyone to keep up with.

  This is what happens when fearful men become cornered. Davos is cornered. The drowning man will do everything to keep from drowning, including drowning his rescuer.

  The hanged man has already accepted his fate. He is free.

  What happens next is not in his hands, it’s in ours.

  *  *  *

  Join my Patreon if you don’t want to drown

  BTC: 3GSkAe8PhENyMWQb7orjtnJK9VX8mMf7Zf
  BCH: qq9pvwq26d8fjfk0f6k5mmnn09vzkmeh3sffxd6ryt
  DCR: DsV2x4kJ4gWCPSpHmS4czbLz2fJNqms78oE
  LTC: MWWdCHbMmn1yuyMSZX55ENJnQo8DXCFg5k
  DASH: XjWQKXJuxYzaNV6WMC4zhuQ43uBw8mN4Va
  WAVES: 3PF58yzAghxPJad5rM44ZpH5fUZJug4kBSa
  ETH: 0x1dd2e6cddb02e3839700b33e9dd45859344c9edc
  DGB: SXygreEdaAWESbgW6mG15dgfH6qVUE5FSE

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 15:30

• Clip Of Biden Boasting He Proposed NATO's 78-Day Airstrikes On Belgrade Goes Viral In China
  Clip Of Biden Boasting He Proposed NATO’s 78-Day Airstrikes On Belgrade Goes Viral In China

  Both Russian and Chinese media and state officials have in the last days been widely circulating a resurfaced video from 1999 wherein then senator Joe Biden bragged about being the first US official to propose bombing Belgrade and destroying the city’s infrastructure.

  State media in Russia wrote this week while featuring the footage: “The head of Roscosmos, Dmitry Rogozin, reposted the footage on his social media account, reminding the current US President of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia that is estimated to have killed about 2,500 people, including 89 children.” Russian officials used the clip to blast Biden over his latest description of Vladimir Putin as a “war criminal” and “thug” due to the invasion of Ukraine. It’s also getting wide circulation on Chinese social media.

  “I was the one who suggested the bombing of Belgrade. I was who suggested to send American pilots and blow up all the bridges over the Danube”..
  Joe Biden, 1999 pic.twitter.com/NrkvmTqN33

  — Geo_monitor (@colonelhomsi) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  “I suggested bombing of Belgrade. I suggested that American pilots go there and destroy all bridges on the Drina,” Biden had said at the time.

  The 78 days of air strikes lasted from 24 March 1999 to 10 June 1999. The bombs kept falling even on Serbia’s Easter – called Pascha – which is the holiest day of the Orthodox Christian year.

  “I was suggesting very specific action,” Biden said while seeming to praise his own ‘muscular’ proposals which helped lead to the NATO war against the Serbs.

  China’s mission to the EU also called out prior US action over what was Yugoslavia, condemning the outrageous May NATO bombing of the Chinese embassy – which killed and injured multiple Chinese nationals and journalists.

  China to NATO: “[W]e will never forget who had bombed our embassy in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. We need no lecture on justice from the abuser of international law…”

  Wow.https://t.co/bMYHiEAPDo pic.twitter.com/FxK5e9GA1j

  — Nina 🐙 Byzantina (@NinaByzantina) March 18, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  According to a summary of the incident in The National Review, “Despite the seemingly extensive target vetting, on May 7 the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was struck by five Joint Directed Attack Munition satellite-guided bombs, delivered by U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit bombers. Three Chinese journalists—Shao Yunhuan of Xinhua, and Xu Xinghu and his wife Zhu Ying of the Guangming Daily—were killed in the attack. Twenty other Chinese nationals were injured, five seriously.”

  On Thursday China’s foreign ministry said in a statement “we will never forget” – and related it to Washington’s outrage over ongoing Russian military action in Ukraine:

  The Chinese diplomatic mission in the European Union said on Thursday that Chinese people could fully relate to the suffering of other countries because “we will never forget who bombed our embassy in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia”.

  “We need no lecture on justice from the abuser of international law,” it said. “As a Cold War remnant and the world’s largest military alliance, Nato continues to expand its geographical scope and range of operations. What kind of role has it played in world peace and stability? Nato needs to have good reflection.”

  

  While the US downplayed it as an “accidental targeting” incident, evidence later emerged that it was likely done deliberately amid accusations that Yugoslav army communications were being transmitted from the embassy.

  Biden had actually gone on to boast about his role in the NATO attack on Belgrade in multiple different venues…

  In the above archived clip, for example, he said in a fiery speech, “I will continue with every fiber in my being to keep America involved with troops that can shoot and kill….”

  “I believe it is absolutely essential for American troops to be on the ground with loaded rifles and drawn bayonets.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 15:00

• Rickards: The Last Straw
  Rickards: The Last Straw

  Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

  The U.S. and its allies in the EU and others around the world have imposed the harshest economic sanctions on Russia that have ever been used. In the past, even nations directly at war with each other would continue to pay the debts they owed each other.

  Since this war is in Ukraine, let’s look at another war that took place in present Ukraine from 1854–56, during the Crimean War.

  Britain (and France) was at war with Russia. Yet throughout the war, the Russian government kept paying interest to British holders of its debt. The British government also kept paying its debts to the Russian government.

  One British minister said that civilized nations should pay their debts, even to an enemy during wartime.

  But that was then and this is now. The U.S. and its European allies outside of Ukraine aren’t even directly at war with Russia (not yet anyway), but they’ve still imposed the most punitive economic sanctions in history.

  To a great extent, the Russian economy has been cut out of the global economy.

  The Effects Will Last for Decades

  Russia has been kicked out of the SWIFT global financial telecommunications system. A long list of Russian banks, oligarchs and major companies have been listed among those who cannot transact with Western parties. These include Gazprom (the major Russian natural gas company), among others.

  Biden has also prohibited exports of semiconductors, high-tech equipment and other technology to Russia. When you add it all up, we should expect a decline on the order of 25% in Russian GDP in the first half of 2022. That’s massive.

  Even when the kinetic war is over, probably in a month or so, the economic war will continue and the effects on the global economy (not just Russia) will last for decades. Still, Russia is not a punching bag that takes hits without hitting back.

  They’ll fight the sanctions both with retaliatory measures of their own and with inventive workarounds designed to defeat the sanctions.

  For example, Russia will be teaming up with China to roll out the Chinese credit card system (UnionPay) for Russian consumers. This comes after Visa and Mastercard ended all business with Russia. Their efforts won’t end there.

  Good Luck Sanctioning Russian Gold

  Russia is working with banks in China and India to reestablish hard currency payment channels.

  There’s now proposed legislation in the U.S. Senate to freeze gold reserves held by the Central Bank of Russia.

  Well, here’s the problem: The gold is physical, about 2,300 metric tonnes worth about $150 billion, and is stored inside Russia. It can’t actually be frozen or seized at all.

  The legislation would impose secondary boycott sanctions on any party that assists Russia in transporting or transacting in gold. But this presumed sanction would be easy to evade.

  For example, if Russia puts 100 metric tonnes of gold on a plane and flies it to Beijing in exchange for manufactured goods, they’re not exactly going to issue a press release about it. That’s the kind of transaction that will go undetected by U.S. intelligence.

  Gold is an element, atomic number 79, and is easily melted down and re-refined into new gold bars with Chinese markings that are untraceable. The Central Bank of Russia can buy more gold from Russian miners for rubles to make up for the shipment.

  Again, that gold is untraceable (Russia and China both have numerous gold refineries). If this is the best the U.S. can do then Putin is not only on his way to winning the shooting war, but he may win the financial war as well.

  Unintended Consequences

  Russia has also implemented capital controls that will shift the pain of sanctions from Russian borrowers to Western lenders who will now suffer defaults on the Russian bonds they own. And Russia has announced that it will cut off exports of important chemicals, metals and processed gasses to any nation that has sanctioned Russia.

  These exports are indispensable to manufacturing processes including semiconductors, automobiles and agriculture. In the end, most of the economic pain will fall on Western manufacturing and farming.

  This is where the law of unintended consequences comes into play. Over 65% of the processed neon gas used to power lasers that make semiconductors comes from Ukraine. Between 35% and 50% of strategic metals, such as titanium and aluminum, used in aircraft manufacture by Boeing and Airbus come from Russia. Much of the grain that feeds the Middle East and Africa comes either from Ukraine or Russia.

  Russia also exports metals used in battery production for EVs including lithium, cobalt and nickel. The list goes on topped by oil, natural gas and coal, where Russia is the leading supplier to Europe.

  If Russia follows through, we could be looking at a shutdown of major industries around the world from semiconductors (essential for automobiles, appliances, electronics, etc.) to heavy equipment and transportation.

  The Biden administration will find out the hard way that in a globalized, densely connected world, what happens in Russia doesn’t stay in Russia. Russia may be the first victim of U.S. sanctions. But the entire world will pay the final price.

  So will the dollar…

  My Vision Is Coming to Pass

  In 2009, I facilitated and participated in the first-ever financial war game hosted by the Pentagon. This war game was conducted at the top-secret Warfare Analysis Laboratory of the United States (code name: WALRUS) located in the Applied Physics Laboratory, about halfway between Washington, D.C., and Baltimore.

  I wrote about this in 2011 in Chapters 1 and 2 of my book Currency Wars. The scenario I presented at the time was that Russia and China would accumulate large gold reserves, pool their gold and launch a new digital currency backed by gold in place of the U.S. dollar.

  Russia and China would then insist that any purchases of Russian energy or Chinese manufactured goods be paid for in the new currency. It would be a clear-cut effort to get out from under U.S. dollar hegemony and to protect themselves from U.S. dollar-based economic sanctions.

  Of course, that’s exactly what’s playing out today.

  The Last Straw for Russia and the World

  It took the U.S. dollar 33 years (1914–1944) to achieve its status as the leading global reserve currency. The dollar lost its gold link in 1971 but remained the leading reserve currency due in part to the petrodollar deal that was worked out by Nixon and Kissinger in 1974.

  The world was flooded with dollars through a combination of Fed money printing and U.S. trade deficits.

  The difficulties began in the 1990s and early 2000s when the U.S. used financial sanctions to punish enemies such as Iran, North Korea, Venezuela and, to a limited extent, Russia. The U.S. kept going back to sanctions over and over.

  Now that the U.S. has frozen the reserves of the Central Bank of Russia, this is the last straw for Russia and the world.

  

  After all, if dollar reserves are no longer a safe haven, then who needs dollar reserves? The world will demand something more dependable that can’t be frozen on U.S. whims.

  The U.S. is destroying the value of the dollar by abusing sanctions. In the future, the dollar will not be that important. It won’t happen overnight, but the unprecedented sanctions against Russia will only accelerate the process.

  Investors can prepare for the coming collapse of the dollar by increasing their allocations to physical gold. That’s the one form of money you cannot freeze or seize.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 14:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Second Amendment And The Sovereignty Of A Nation
  The Second Amendment And The Sovereignty Of A Nation

  Authored by Dania Vizzi via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  As the world watches the Ukrainian people bravely fight for their sovereignty against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of their country, I am reminded of the importance of the Second Amendment enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. The right to bear arms has been viciously attacked in the past few decades as an archaic vestige of a bygone era. However, as many Ukrainians take up arms for the first time in their lives, it serves as a stark reminder of why our Second Amendment rights at home are critical for the survival of our nation.

  

  Many Americans are familiar with the Second Amendment and how its foundation—as described by our nation’s Founding Fathers—was to grant citizens the right to defend themselves against a tyrannical government. Usually, this understanding is only applied in the case of a tyrannical U.S. government; however, Ukraine has proven that the right to bear arms can be fundamental in protecting the sovereignty of a nation against a hostile foreign government. While the value of the Second Amendment is disputed within American society, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has—in a dramatic reversal of his initial stance against the legalization of weapons—reversed his policy in the face of Russian aggression. Zelensky recently not only called on ordinary Ukrainians to take up arms in the defense of their nation, but concurrently stated that the Ukrainian government would issue weapons to any citizen who requested one.

  Though a judicious decision by Zelensky, many Ukrainians—in preparation before the conflict—had limited experience with firearms. For example, in viral images weeks before the invasion, Ukrainians were seen wielding wooden rifles in an attempt to gain as much training as possible with firearms. While honorable, this deficit in knowledge across the agrarian nation, has no doubt harmed their readiness against the Russian forces.

  While the Russo-Ukrainian conflict provides a fresh example of why Americans’ right to bear arms is so critical, there are other examples here in the United States of Americans taking up arms in order to defend their rights. For example, look no further than the Deacons for Defense and Justice. Founded in 1964, the group of Black World War II veterans armed themselves to defend against the Ku Klux Klan as black Americans marched for civil rights against the Jim Crow South. These American patriots looked tyranny in the face and took up arms in the name of liberty and justice. From the Deacons for Defense and Justice to the Battle of Athens, Tennessee, Americans have used the Second Amendment to protect against those who sought to oppress a population.

  This is why the Second Amendment is so important for the security of the American people and the prosperity of the United States. From Ukraine to within our own shores, a legally armed citizenry can serve as a deterrent to a wide array of potential threats. Many Americans recognize this and have taken the time to get proper firearms training as, according to one study, over 60 percent of American gun owners have formal training.

  So, while some Americans continue to debate the value of the Second Amendment, let us not forget the people around the world who have no such rights and cannot defend themselves against an oppressive government. Let us not take for granted the gift of our Founding Fathers that has allowed millions of Americans the right to self-defense and a formal education on how to properly use arms.

  The United States stands as one of only three nations in the world that has enshrined the right of its citizenry to bear arms, and the significance of this rare clause in the U.S. Constitution has enabled us to become the beacon of the free world. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine should serve as a reminder of the blessings we in the United States take for granted, and buttress American support for our Second Amendment rights for the sake of the sovereignty of our great nation.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 23:40

• Russia Pipeline Gas Flows To China Have Increased Since The Ukraine War
  Russia Pipeline Gas Flows To China Have Increased Since The Ukraine War

  Russia has increased gas supply to China via its Power of Siberia pipeline after its invasion of Ukraine began, ENN Energy CFO Liu Jianfeng said on the company’s earnings call.  ENN is one of China’s largest city gas utlities and purchases gas from oil majors including China National Petroleum Corp, which operates the import pipeline on its side of the border.

  The Power of Siberia pipeline ships gas from eastern Russia into northern China, and is ramping up over several years to maximum capacity of 38 bcm/year. The Power of Siberia pipeline began pumping supplies in 2019; Russia is also shipping liquefied natural gas (LNG) to China. It exported 16.5 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas to China in 2021.

  

  The Power of Siberia network is not connected to pipelines that send gas to Europe, which has faced surging gas prices due to tight supplies, one of several points of tension with Moscow. Under plans previously drawn up, Russia aimed to supply China with 38 bcm of gas by pipeline by 2025.

  Meanwhile, Gazprom, which has a monopoly on Russian gas exports by pipeline and which operates the Russian side of the pipeline, said Tuesday that exports to China continue to grow under its bilateral long-term agreement with CNPC. Flows had been increasing before the invasion, as well, with Gazprom saying in mid-February it had just set a daily record for exports to China on the pipeline.

  One month ago, Russia agreed a 30-year contract to supply gas to China via a new pipeline and will settle the new gas sales in euros, bolstering an energy alliance with Beijing amid Moscow’s strained ties with the West over Ukraine and other issues. Gazprom agreed to supply Chinese state energy major CNPC with 10 billion cubic metres of gas a year, the Russian firm and a Beijing-based industry official said.

  

  First flows through the pipeline, which will connect Russia’s Far East region with northeast China, were due to start in two to three years, the source said in comments that were later followed by an announcement of the deal by Gazprom.  The new deal, which coincided with a visit by Russian President Vladimir Putin to the Beijing Winter Olympics, would add a further 10 bcm, increasing Russian pipeline sales under long-term contracts to China.

  Russian gas from its Far East island of Sakhalin will be transported via pipeline across the Japan Sea to northeast China’s Heilongjiang province, reaching up to 10 bcm a year around 2026, said the Beijing source, who asked not to be identified. The deal would be settled in euros, the source added, in line with efforts by the two states to diversify away from U.S. dollars.

  Discussions between the two firms began several years ago after the start-up of Power of Siberia, a 4,000-km (2,500-mile)pipeline sending gas to China. Talks accelerated more recently after Beijing set its 2060 carbon neutral goal, the source said.

  “China’s coal shortage last year served as another wake-up call that natural gas has its special value, that’s why CNPC decided to top up with the new pipeline deal,” the source said.

  The pricing of the new gas deal will be similar to that of Power of Siberia, the source said, adding that both were “fairly satisfied” with that arrangement.

  The deal is expected to weigh on China’s LNG import outlook. “Piped gas from Russia can be supplied to northern China at prices that are competitive when compared with LNG,” said Ken Kiat Lee, analyst at consultancy FGE.

  Meanwhile, as Russian gas exports to China increase, those headed for Europe have slowed, and in some cases such as the Yamal-Europe pieline, been largely shut for much of 2022.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 23:20

• Mail Voting And Election Legitimacy
  Mail Voting And Election Legitimacy

  Authored by Andrew E. Busch via RealClear Politics,

  Although it had been a feature of elections in some parts of the United States for years, the phenomenon of mail-ballot voting exploded in the 2020 election. In the midst of the COVID pandemic, jurisdictions around the country expanded use of mail voting, sometimes sending ballots to every registered voter. Steps were taken to facilitate ease of mail voting, such as establishing drop boxes for returned ballots, relaxing rules regarding signature verification, and easing restrictions on “ballot harvesting,” the practice whereby paid political activists collect a large number of completed ballots and return them for counting. As a result, by some estimates, the proportion of ballots cast by mail nearly doubled from 2016 to 2020.

  

  There is, of course, an ongoing debate over whether the turn to mail-ballot voting was necessary, given the pandemic circumstances, or a partisan maneuver to advance the prospects of Democrats, who seemed to reap most of the benefits electorally. Whether or not it was necessary, the development clearly contributed in two important ways to undermining confidence in the results – and is likely to continue doing so unless legislators and election officials take corrective measures.

  First, mail-ballot voting is intrinsically less secure than in-person voting. Things might go awry at multiple points. The ballot might never be delivered, or it might be delivered to the wrong address, or to the right address but wrong person. Even if delivered into the right hands, it might ultimately be filled out by someone else or by the intended recipient under pressure; under these conditions, there is no guarantee that the secret ballot is preserved, a problem exacerbated by the activity of ballot harvesters. Once the ballot is completed, it can get lost in the mail, removed from a drop box, or otherwise compromised.

  And this is without accounting for the potential for large-scale fraud. In 2020, an unnamed political operative in New Jersey described to the New York Post how he had developed and been using for years a system for replicating ballots and submitting them on behalf of his candidates. Despite the assurances of some that voter fraud is not an issue in the United States, a number of high-profile cases in the last quarter-century prove otherwise. Since 1997, mayoral elections in Miami and Paterson, New Jersey, as well as a congressional election in the Ninth District of North Carolina, have been vacated due to proven fraud. As John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky document in their 2021 book “Our Broken Elections,” these three cases are the tip of the iceberg. Indeed, Fund and von Spakovsky note, most cases of large-scale fraud in recent years have involved mail ballots.

  There is a reason France no longer uses mail-in ballots in its elections, and why the 2005 commission led by Republican James Baker and Democrat Jimmy Carter identified mail ballots as the least secure mode of voting (though in 2020 Carter rather weakly tried to walk back that conclusion).

  Nearly a year and a half after the 2020 elections, a special counsel has charged that substantial voter fraud took place in more than 90 of Wisconsin’s nursing homes, where it appears that nursing home staff or administrators requested ballots for invalid patients, then filled out and returned those ballots, possibly forging the patients’ signatures. A private study (separate from the controversial Arizona “audit”) alleges that 200,000 mail ballots in Maricopa County were counted despite mismatched signatures.

  Overall, one does not need to accept former President Trump’s expansive claims of national voter fraud – indeed, one should not, without a great deal more evidence than he has yet offered – in order to recognize that mail-ballot voting is vulnerable to a number of problems that make it chronically less reliable than in-person voting. Moreover, perhaps as importantly, many voters recognize this fact, and as a result will consistently question the validity of close results in elections using large-scale mail balloting, at least if their candidate loses.

  Second, because of significant disparities in the political makeup of the mail-ballot electorate and the Election Day in-person electorate (in states that are not 100% mail ballot), the reporting of election results can become distorted. In the 2020 general election, we witnessed both a much-expected “red mirage” and a lesser-noted “blue mirage.” In a few states such as Texas and Ohio, mail-ballot votes were counted and reported first, leading to initial Democratic leads that were gradually wiped out through the night as Election Day votes were added to the tallies. In most major states, the reverse happened. Election Day votes were counted first, followed by mail-ballot votes. The predicted “red mirage” came to pass as President Trump took early leads in Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin before surrendering them over the next few days as the mail ballots rolled in.

  No one paid much attention to Texas and Ohio, which had their totals in relatively early, and in any case went the way they were expected to go. On the other hand, the “red mirage” states drew enormous scrutiny. They were already understood to be swing states that could go either way and would determine the election. Moreover, all had voted for Trump in 2016. Many Trump supporters went to bed on November 3 with their man seemingly headed to another surprise win, and found out on November 4 that it was slipping away in a process that was not completed for several days. That sensation, of having an election victory subsequently overridden, undoubtedly contributed to the willingness of many to embrace Trump’s “stolen election” narrative. That is an outcome we should hope to avoid in the future.

  It is possible that the partisan makeup of mail-ballot versus Election Day voters depends on circumstances. In 2020, Democratic voters may have been more afraid of COVID and hence more likely to avoid voting lines, while Republican voters were urged by their president not to trust mail voting. Perhaps other circumstances will produce different tendencies. Unless both modes of voting are utilized equally by supporters of both candidates, the potential will exist that those who lose based on late-reporting mail results will wonder whether something nefarious happened.

  The optimal solution would be to increase in-person early voting opportunities and the number of Election Day polling places, while strictly limiting mail voting to traditional absentee voting for reasons of illness, disability, or absence. However, many jurisdictions continue to be committed to widespread mail voting. It is a practice that is not going away anytime soon, so a key question is what can be done to reduce the damage that mail-ballot voting can do to confidence in electoral legitimacy.

  The two problems outlined above – inadequate ballot security and delayed vote totals – require distinct measures.

  The chief way to mitigate concerns around delayed vote totals is to enforce a strict Election Day deadline for the return of mail ballots and to require election officials to begin counting received mail ballots prior to Election Day. The other confidence-building measure would be to adopt Georgia’s new requirement that election officials must announce on Election Night the total number of votes received. This will prevent the perception that large batches of incoming votes are materializing out of thin air.

  As for ballot security, some states have already taken steps that should be adopted more broadly. These include banning ballot harvesting and improving verification techniques (possibly using the last four digits of Social Security numbers instead of signatures). Not least, state and county election offices should take more seriously their obligation to keep their voter-registration rolls updated. If election officials want voters to be confident in the legitimacy of mail-ballot elections, they need to make sure that no household is getting five extra ballots for residents who haven’t lived there in years. Unfortunately, Democrats have widely condemned such measures as “voter suppression.”

  None of these steps would prevent a nominally responsible eligible voter from casting a vote by mail, but they can help bolster confidence in our elections. If we have to learn to live with mail-ballot voting, we should be able – no, eager – to answer legitimate concerns rather than pretend that they don’t exist.

  Andrew E. Busch is Crown professor of government and George R. Roberts fellow at Claremont McKenna College. He is co-author of “Divided We Stand: The 2020 Elections and American Politics” (Rowman & Littlefield).

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 23:00

• Mapped: All The World's Military Personnel
  Mapped: All The World’s Military Personnel

  While much of the world is living in one of the most peaceful periods in history, Visual Capitalist’s Avery Koop notes that the spark of new conflicts like Russia’s invasion of Ukraine reminds us of the importance of military personnel.

  Between ongoing armed conflicts to building of defenses preemptively, many countries have amassed significant militaries to date.

  This map, using data from World Population Review, displays all the world’s military personnel.

  

  Who Has the Largest Military?

  So who has the largest military? Well, the answer isn’t so simple.

  There are three commonly measured categories of military personnel:

  • Active military: Soldiers who work full-time for the army
    Country with the largest active military:  China (over 2 million)

  • Military reserves: People who do not work for the army full-time, but have military training and can be called up and deployed at any moment
    Country with the largest military reserves:  Vietnam (5 million)

  • Paramilitary: Groups that aren’t officially military but operate in a similar fashion, such as the CIA or SWAT teams in the U.S.
    Country with the largest paramilitary:  North Korea (an estimated 5 million)

  NOTE: Of these categories of military personnel, paramilitary is the least well-defined across the world’s countries and thus not included in the infographic above.

  Which country has the biggest military? It depends who’s doing the counting.

  If we include paramilitary forces, here’s how the top countries stack up in terms of military personnel:

  

  Source: World Population Review

  When combining all three types of military, Vietnam comes out on top with over 10 million personnel.

  And here are the world’s top 10 biggest militaries, excluding paramilitary forces:

  

  Even in this case, North Korea remains near the top of the list with these much larger nations. Excluding estimates of paramilitary forces, the Hermit Kingdom has nearly 1.9 million active and reserve troops.

  Building up Military Personnel

  The reasons for these immense military sizes are obvious in some cases. For example, in Vietnam, North Korea, and Russia, citizens are required to serve a mandatory period of time for the military.

  The Koreas, two countries still technically at war, both conscript citizens for their armies. In North Korea, boys are conscripted at age 14. They begin active service at age 17 and remain in the army for another 13 years. In select cases, women are conscripted as well.

  In South Korea, a man must enlist at some point between the ages of 18 and 28. Most service terms are just over one year at minimum. There are however, certain exceptions: the K-Pop group BTS was recently granted legal rights to delay their military service, thanks to the country’s culture minister.

  Here’s a look at just a few of the other countries that require their citizens to serve some form of military service:

  •  Austria

  •  Brazil

  •  Myanmar

  •  Egypt

  •  Israel

  •  Ukraine

  In many of these countries, geopolitical and historical factors play into why they have mandatory service in place.

  In the U.S., many different factors play into why the country has such a large military force. For one, the military industrial complex feeds into the U.S. army. A longstanding tradition of the American government and the defense and weapons industry working closely together creates economic incentives to build up arms and defenses, translating into a need for more personnel.

  Additionally, the U.S. army offers job security and safety nets, and can be an attractive career choice. Culturally, the military is also held in high esteem in the country.

  Nations with No Armies

  For many countries, building up military personnel is a priority, however, there are other nations who have no armies at all (excluding the paramilitary branch).

  Here’s a glance at some countries that have no armies:

  •  Costa Rica

  •  Iceland

  •  Liechtenstein

  •  Panama

  Costa Rica has no army as it was dissolved after the country’s civil war in the 1940s. The funds for the military were redirected towards other public services, such as education.

  This is not to say that these nations live in a state of constant peace—most have found alternative means to garner security forces. Under the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, other countries like the U.S. are technically obligated to provide military services to Costa Rica, for example, should they be in need.

  The Future of Warfare

  International conflicts persist in the 21st century, but now go far beyond just the number of troops on the ground.

  New and emerging forms of warfare pose unforeseen threats. For example, cyber warfare and utilization of data to attack populations could dismantle countries and cause conflict almost instantaneously. Cybersecurity failure has been ranked among the top 10 most likely risks to the world today.

  If current trends continue, soldiers of the future will face off on very different fields of battle.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 22:40

• China Wins A Little, Loses A Lot From Russia’s War On Ukraine
  China Wins A Little, Loses A Lot From Russia’s War On Ukraine

  Authored by Charles Lipson via RealClear Politics (emphasis ours),

  The unfolding mayhem unleashed on Ukraine by Vladmir Putin carries one major benefit for China and two much larger losses, plus a boatload of secondary effects. The main benefit is geostrategic: The United States must now keep more scarce military resources in Europe, instead diverting them to the Pacific, as it had been hoping.

  

  That diversion would be costly for any president, but it is particularly costly for a Democrat, whose party habitually scales back military budgets to spend more on social programs. Biden’s budget, submitted before the war in Eastern Europe, certainly did. He proposed a 16% rise in social spending but only a 2% increase for defense, far less than the inflation rate. Those priorities are now imperiled.

  Also endangered is any reorientation of America’s defense posture, to focus almost exclusively on China. That focus, shared by Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and now Joe Biden, remains the country’s principal long-term challenge. But Putin’s aggression makes clear that the United States does not have the luxury of focusing on only one hostile (and nuclear-armed) power at a time. Russia’s war on Ukraine significantly raises the threat level in Europe and forces the Pentagon to avoid any drawdown there to fund increases in Asia. That’s true even though many of our NATO partners have finally agreed to spend 2% of their GDP on defense – a long-standing American demand. This renewed concern for Europe’s security is a potential gain for China.

  Yet, any advantage to Beijing is offset by two costs that may be as just as important. The first is that China’s only major ally is now badly damaged, economically and militarily – and a pariah in the eyes of much of the world. Putin’s position may be more vulnerable, as well. And while Beijing can drive harder bargains for Russian oil, raw materials, and capital credit, Russia’s self-inflicted damage makes Moscow a much less valuable partner as long as the crushing sanctions remain in place and Putin remains in charge.

  The second, far larger cost to China may be the deterrent effect of crippling economic sanctions. Communist party leaders, determined to seize Taiwan, must have been shocked by the scale, comprehensiveness, and devastating impact of sanctions imposed on Russia. They must have been shocked, too, by the West’s surprising unanimity in imposing them and by Germany’s swift about-face despite its dependence on Russian energy and decades of concessionary policies.

  As the CCP watches the Russian economy implode, Chinese leaders must shudder at the thought of what could happen to their own economy if it faced a similar onslaught. Although the communist regime would likely survive, given its tight control over the army and internal security services and its more robust and diverse economy, it would have to withstand a sustained, destabilizing shock with uncertain consequences. Moreover, it would face some erosion of its legitimacy, the public’s acceptance of its right to rule. The CCP’s two main sources of legitimacy are its reassertion of China’s central role in the world and, since Deng Xiaoping’s reforms, the party’s ability to grow the economy and significantly increase the living standard of most Chinese families. Any fundamental threats to that economy, now deeply embedded in world markets, would pose a significant political challenge.

  Until Russia’s economy withered under sanctions, Beijing had little reason to fear similar punishment for invading Taiwan. After all, the world’s major economies did nothing when Beijing seized Hong Kong, in clear violation of its treaty commitments. They did nothing when they learned of the Uighurs’ mass imprisonment, “reeducation,” and deaths. They did nothing to sanction China for its role in spreading the COVID pandemic, and lying endlessly about it afterward. Based on that track record, Beijing must have figured the world would do little if it seized Taiwan. No more. Xi and his aides will need to recalibrate after seeing Russia hit with swift, draconian sanctions and largely excluded from world financial markets, despite the costs to countries imposing those sanctions.

  Foreign business entities operating in China are also recalibrating. Their assessment of political risks is bound to be higher, their search for alternative sources of supply more urgent. These companies saw how quickly their Russian investments became worthless after Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. While they would lobby hard against sanctions from Washington, Brussels, Berlin, and Tokyo, regardless of China’s actions, they can’t be sure they will succeed. The most vulnerable are foreign companies that rely on the Chinese market. They will adapt to the riskier environment by trying to diversify their final markets and minimizing any fixed assets within China.

  The prospect of economic sanctions will not, in itself, block Beijing invading Taiwan. Only a military deterrent can do that. But the net effect of Russia’s troubles is to show China, with terrible clarity, that it would face grim economic costs on top of the military calculations.

  Russia’s catastrophic experience in Ukraine also underscores the oldest lesson in strategy. The best-laid plans and most optimistic projections can go horribly wrong. Taiwan and its allies will drive home that enduring lesson. Taiwan will continue buying and building defensive weapons, as many as it can afford. The U.S. will continue sending its navy through the Taiwan Straits, and the Quad (the U.S., Japan, India, and Australia) will continue strengthening their security partnership. That’s the emerging shape of a new Cold War, with dangerous, nuclear-armed fronts in both Eastern Europe and the western Pacific.

  Charles Lipson is the Peter B. Ritzma Professor of Political Science Emeritus at the University of Chicago, where he founded the Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security. He can be reached at charles.lipson@gmail.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 22:20

• Alleged Russian Intelligence Leak Says Xi Planned Taiwan Invasion For Fall
  Alleged Russian Intelligence Leak Says Xi Planned Taiwan Invasion For Fall

  A Ukraine scenario repeat, but this time in China’s backyard concerning Taiwan independence? “China has plans to invade Taiwan as soon as next fall, reported Al Jazeera in a tweet citing Newsweek on a Russian intelligence document. Traders are treating the report with skepticism,” FXStreet is noting of the latest reporting on a purported Russian intelligence whistleblower document.

  “Many geopolitical analysts had viewed recent geopolitical events regarding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as likely to dissuade China from mounting an assault on Taiwan in the near term (i.e. the strong Western response, Russia’s difficulties in achieving its military goals amid unexpectedly spirited resistance),” it comments.

  Within the past days Newsweek reported the alleged Russian intel document which indicated China’s Xi Jinping had set in motion planning that would result in a PLA army move to annex the island this next fall. The document is attributed to an “anonymous analyst with Russia’s Federal Security Service” (FSB), according to Newsweek, and says the plan is likely delayed due to Ukraine developments and collective Western mobilization against it, including far-reaching US and EU-led sanctions. The document suggested Xi believes the “window of opportunity” has passed for the time being.

  

  “The letter in question is part of a series published by France-based Russian dissident Vladimir Osechkin, a human rights lawyer who runs gulagu-net.ru, a website documenting abuses in Russian jails,” the report said of the document.

  “Osechkin claims to have received seven letters since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The FSB whistleblower has painted a detailed picture of fear and chaos inside Russia’s principal intelligence service, where apparently none but a select few were aware of Putin’s plans.”

  It allegedly emerged as part of a whistleblower’s internal leak, and key parts were translated as follows, and presented in the Newsweek report:

  “Because of the war, Russia has such a negative image for a number of countries that the United States can easily push sanctions against China, at least with the Europeans, if it risks circumventing the sanctions on Russia,” the letter read. “China depends on exports so much that, coupled with its dependence on commodity prices…this would be almost a fatal blow.”

  The whistleblower continued: “Not only that: Xi Jinping was at least tentatively considering the capture of Taiwan in the autumn—he needs his own small victory in order to be re-elected for a third term—there is a colossal power struggle among the [party] elite. Now, after the events in Ukraine, this window of opportunity has shut, which gives the United States the opportunity to both blackmail Xi and negotiate with his [political] rivals on favorable terms.”

  “China Planned Taiwan Invasion in Fall, Alleged Russian Intel Leak Claims:

  Taiwan’s top diplomat said he couldn’t speak on the authenticity of a purported Russian intelligence document…”https://t.co/20kJHM4R47 pic.twitter.com/Bi4lCMmUDB

  — Prodigal Son (@ThePr0diga1S0n) March 17, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The ‘intelligence letter’ was dated March 9, and Newsweek in the report says it can’t verify the authenticity of the document, which is being widely pushed by well-known anti-Moscow “open source” investigators like Bellingcat. 

  The fact that the document emerged from within what can be described as Russian opposition activist groups is alone enough to case severe doubt on its authenticity. Taiwan’s foreign minister also appeared to downplay the document when asked about its authenticity in a press briefing this week.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 22:00

• State Governments Shedding Millions Of Square Feet Of Office Space Amid Hybrid Work Revolution
  State Governments Shedding Millions Of Square Feet Of Office Space Amid Hybrid Work Revolution

  By Jarred Schenke and Matthew Rothstein of BisNow,

  State and local governments lease tens of millions of square feet of office space across the country, but that number is falling fast as the push for remote and hybrid work has made civil servants rethink their real estate.

  From California to Georgia and Maine to Utah, the pandemic thrust government agencies into an entirely new way of working. Two years later, many have found that offering flexible working arrangements can solve two ever-present challenges they face: attracting and retaining their workers and maximizing taxpayer dollars.

  “The savings are real,” Nebraska Department of Administrative Services Director Jason Jackson said.

  “I think future administrations are going to be hard-pressed to say, ‘We should be spending more on office space.’”

  

  At the end of 2019, state and local governments leased 22.6M SF of privately owned, corporate-grade office space across the U.S., comprising 21.6% of all government tenants, according to data compiled by JLL U.S. Office Research. By the end of last year, that total had dropped by 2M SF.

  That nearly 10% reduction may be the tip of the iceberg, said Bob Hunt, the national leader of JLL’s public institution and higher education department. Over time, state and local office footprints could shrink by as much as 25% or 30%, Hunt told Bisnow.

  The pandemic and its effects on remote work policies have prompted 87% of state governments to rethink their real estate strategies, according to a JLL survey conducted between February and April 2021. Forty percent of respondents said the rethinking would likely result in a reduction in office space, Hunt said during a November webinar with the National Association of State Facilities Administrators, while the other 60% were unsure what level of impact these considerations would have.

  “That’s a profound amount, for the vast majority [of states] to say, ‘Hey we’re thinking about doing something differently as a result of this,’” Hunt said during the webinar.

  For private companies, expenses on office space can be as much as 50% of their net income, according to a 2017 paper from The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. The equation is less straightforward for the revenues and financial outlays of state and local governments, and functions like emergency services or community-based programs have non-negotiable space requirements.

  But plenty of administrative functions have been carried out remotely since the pandemic began, and the offices they left behind represent real financial commitments.

  “My impression is that last year and two years ago, when everyone was looking at empty buildings, they saw dollar signs,” said James Burroughs, an associate professor at George Mason University’s Schar School of Public Policy. “They were paying for things they couldn’t use when they emptied out a lot of departments and agencies. Now, I think discussions have evolved to be about the broad future of work.”

  

  State officials across the country told Bisnow in recent weeks that their workers have embraced the ability to go remote, and they see a chance to redefine their real estate portfolios to tilt more toward employee attraction and retention.

  How much less space they take remains to be seen, as does how future budget impacts could play out. But the opportunity to spend more on services rather than office space isn’t lost on the civil servants making these decisions.

  “I think whenever you’re talking about several hundreds of thousands of dollars, you’re talking about money that is meaningful to Nebraskans,” Jackson said. “For us, when we’re talking about managing our real estate strategically, the total size of the opportunity there is pretty substantial.”

  California has already cut 767K SF of its 14.4M SF office footprint, providing an annual savings of $22.5M. Over the next three years, California is looking to reduce 20% of its overall leased office portfolio, which will save the state $84.7M annually, California Department of General Services Deputy Director Monica Hassan said in an email to Bisnow. By comparison, the state already expects to have a surplus of $20B in its discretionary fund for fiscal year 2022-2023.

  The Georgia State Properties Commission works with nearly 50 state agencies that occupy 12M SF of office, half of which is leased from private landlords, said Lee Nelson, GSPC’s leasing manager and assistant director of space management.

  “It seems like just about all of [the agencies] are in some stage of figuring out the proper way for us to be organizing our in-office experience going forward,” Nelson said, adding that many agencies have budgetary motivations to reduce leased space. 

  The Georgia Department of Education has already decided to shrink its footprint at its 150K SF, state-owned headquarters in Downtown Atlanta down to 70K SF, with part of the staff working from home or in remote counties, Nelson said.

  “We’ll find a state entity to backfill it,” Nelson said. “And whether that [entity] gets pulled from space that is leased from a private sector landlord hasn’t been determined yet.”

  The Maine state government recently consolidated a 180-employee department, which was spread across three office buildings, into a single space, Maine Bureau of General Services Director Bill Longfellow said during the NASFA webinar. About 75% of those 180 workers expect to work remotely three days a week as part of the arrangement, he said, which took away assigned desks.

  Nelson and Longfellow also cited cost savings as a motivation behind their respective consolidation drives.

  The state of Tennessee introduced a remote work option for employees of 16 departments starting in 2016, initially as a cost-saving measure. Tennessee Department of General Services’ former deputy commissioner, Reen Baskin, told Governing.com that the state only realized the benefits for worker retention after the fact, but well before the pandemic forced the consideration onto other jurisdictions and the private sector.

  In Nebraska before the pandemic, the concept of remote work “wasn’t even on our radar,” said Jackson, the state’s director of general services. Now 18 of 80 state agencies, accounting for 13,000 employees, continue to employ remote or hybrid work arrangements.

  “We surprised ourselves with our own capability to leverage this [situation],” Jackson said.

  The potential for budget savings is just one motivation for states to look at reducing their office usage; work flexibility has been a major factor in employee recruitment and retention, particularly in a job market increasingly defined by labor shortages.

  State and local governments are used to doing more with less, but allowing remote and hybrid work is already necessary to stop a major brain drain, Hunt and Burroughs said.

  “At the end of the day, state and local governments are employing knowledge workers, just in a different regulatory environment [from the private sector],” Hunt said. “And they had an issue with attraction and retention to begin with.”

  Figuring out how to formulate long-term work strategies is what JLL’s public sector and higher education division, led nationally by Hunt, has been focusing on since before the pandemic. His team consulted on a 2019 pilot program in the state of Utah with the goal of getting 8,000 employees to work from home part time over three years, but around 10,000 Utah employees signed up for the program in just three months, Hunt said. 

  His team is now under contract to consult with Oregon’s state government, with the assumption that hybrid work will be a permanent part of its real estate equation.

  Allowing workers to stay remote, in full or in part, is as easy as sending an email in many cases, but amounts to a triage effort for keeping workers happy, Burroughs said. For the model to be sustainable long-term, it requires a right-sizing of real estate usage and a redesign of often outmoded office spaces to the shared desks, conference and breakout rooms heavily utilized by coworking operators and private companies with permanent remote work plans, and such overhauls come with price tags.

  “No one’s going up to a legislator and suggesting a $1B plan to redesign an office so that it will eventually save money,” Hunt said. 

  The easiest and cheapest option for transitioning to a new work model is to simply let leases in private office buildings expire and move those functions either to another space with more time on its lease or one that a jurisdiction owns.

  “They’ve got to address the human problem immediately, but if you do it without addressing the design problem, ultimately you’ve got a lot of idle space,” Hunt said.

  There are very real limitations of remote work in the public sector, which go beyond the need for police stations and schools. Departments having staff available for local residents who struggle either with internet access or phone usage is key to ensuring equitable access to government services regardless of means.

  Smaller local governments have less need to radically rethink their real estate, especially since so many already own their own city halls and county complexes, said Chrelle Booker, the mayor pro tem for the town of Tryon in western North Carolina.

  For much of the pandemic, city employees came to work in person when they were allowed at Tryon Town Hall, Booker said, and public meetings were still held in person in the town of fewer than 2,000 people. 

  “The pandemic didn’t change anything for us,” Booker said. “It’s almost as if we were in another part of the world I guess. Our own little private island.”

  Booker, who is on the board of directors for the National League of Cities and is running for a seat in the U.S. Senate, said her peers in larger cities could benefit from building a one-stop shop for multiple city services. In Tryon’s case, no consolidation was necessary.

  “Our police station is part of the same building, and of course, they can’t just sit at home,” she said.

  Office footprints of bigger cities could increasingly look more like Tryon’s as they consolidate departments and lean on hybrid work. 

  Last year, Fort Worth, Texas, purchased a 20-story, 425K SF tower that had been the headquarters of Pier 1 Imports to convert into its new seat of government. The new Fort Worth City Hall will be home to 16 different departments that had occupied nine other city-owned buildings between them, Fort Worth Director of Property Management Steve Cooke told Bisnow.

  The consolidation helps especially in the case of individuals or businesses who need permits or forms from multiple departments. Whereas previously, someone might be running all over town to get the correct materials, the new City Hall can function as a one-stop shop, Cooke said.

  “We’re going to be putting that big, pretty building on the front of everything so that it becomes the face of the city,” he said. 

  The city of Fort Worth paid $69.5M for the building and initially estimated that renovations would cost around $30M, compared to the $200M it estimated new construction would cost. Unlike many other jurisdictions, Fort Worth is amenable to selling the properties it is vacating, further defraying the cost of the move.

  “We’re going to empty them and sell them for the most part. To sit here and say that it’s going to save us 30 million bucks, I can’t do that sitting here right now,” Cooke said. “But it certainly helps.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 21:40

• Food Supply Chains "Falling Apart" In Ukraine As "Imminent Famine" Risks Plague The World
  Food Supply Chains “Falling Apart” In Ukraine As “Imminent Famine” Risks Plague The World

  On Friday, Jakob Kern, an emergency coordinator at the United Nations (UN) World Food Programme (WFP), warned Ukraine’s food supply chains were collapsing as Russia bombed key infrastructures such as roads, bridges, and trains. 

  “The country’s food supply chain is falling apart. Movements of goods have slowed down due to insecurity and the reluctance of drivers,” Kern told a Geneva during a video conference from Krakow, Poland.

  “Inside Ukraine our job is in effect, to replace the broken commercial food supply chains,” he added, describing the rebuilding task as a “mammoth” one. 

  Ukraine’s top agricultural export products are corn and wheat. Before the invasion, Ukraine was the second-largest supplier of grains for the European Union and one of the largest suppliers for emerging markets in Asia and Africa. Breaking down the numbers, Ukraine produced 49.6% of global sunflower oil, 10% of global wheat, 12.6% of global barley, and 15.3% of global maize.

  Estimates via Black Sea research firm SovEcon show Ukraine’s 2022 corn harvest could plunge as much as 35% from 41.9 million tons last year to 27.7 million tons this year because of all the disruptions. Farmers are already reporting diesel and fertilizer shortages. Wheat harvests are also expected to decline. Some have even pointed total crop output in the country could be halved. 

  “With global food prices at an all-time high, WFP is also concerned about the impact of the Ukraine crisis on food security globally, especially hunger hot spots,” he said, warning of “collateral hunger” in other places like Egypt, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Turkey that rely heavily on Ukraine imports.

  All of this has fueled the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization to warn global food prices could rise another 8-20% from current levels due to the deteriorating situation in Ukraine. 

  

  The UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Michael Fakhri, also warned today, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine may cause a global surge in malnutrition and famine.

  “For the last three years, global rates of hunger and famine have been on the rise. With the Russian invasion, we are now facing the risk of imminent famine and starvation in more places around the world,” Fakhri said in a statement. 

  There’s even a spillover risk for the US (read: “Media Isn’t Warning You” That US Careening Towards Food Crisis). 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 21:20

• 6 Years Of Being Manipulated By Manufactured Waves Of Outrage… And No End In Sight
  6 Years Of Being Manipulated By Manufactured Waves Of Outrage… And No End In Sight

  Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

  Are you starting to notice a pattern by now?  For the past six years, the American people have been emotionally manipulated by what I call “manufactured waves of outrage”.  Once the corporate media identifies a trigger, it will obsessively focus on it for weeks or months on end, and the narrative that develops will be echoed and magnified by millions upon millions of social media denizens.  Before too long, much of the population is whipped up into an irrational emotional frenzy, and that frenzy is used to move certain agendas forward.

  

  To me, this new era began in 2016. 

  Donald Trump was a political candidate like no other, and the elite absolutely hated the fact that he did not follow their rules and that they could not control him.

  So when he actually won, it truly was a catastrophic event for them.

  From that moment forward, most corporate media outlets relentlessly demonized Trump.  Never before in U.S. history had a sitting U.S. president been treated in such a fashion, and we may never see anything like it ever again.

  The anti-Trump narratives which were being pumped out by the corporate media were constantly fed to social media influencers on both sides of the political spectrum, and that ultimately created extremely deep political divisions in this country which still exist to this day.

  Many on the left are entirely convinced that Trump is the devil, while many on the right believe that he is the greatest American that ever lived.

  Of course the truth is that Trump is not actually on the far end of the political spectrum that currently exists in this country.  There is a lot about Trump that liberals should actually like, and there is a lot about Trump that conservatives should actually be criticizing.

  But that is not how the debate has been framed.  If you hate Trump you are on the left, and if you love Trump you are on the right, and that is the end of the story.

  In 2020, a couple things happened that caused new manufactured waves of outrage.

  One was the tragic death of George Floyd.  His death sparked the BLM movement, and our country was whipped up into an emotional frenzy.  Protests, civil unrest and riots erupted all over the nation, and the level of violence that we witnessed shocked the entire planet.

  But if you did not support the protesters, you were suddenly a bad person.

  Instead, it was the police that were relentlessly demonized by the media, and this greatly upset a lot of us that are very supportive of the police.

  Without a doubt, the U.S. has had problems with police brutality.  And without a doubt, there is a lot of racism out there.  I have been boldly speaking out against racism for many years, and I will continue to speak out against it.  I believe that every man, woman and child on the entire planet was created equal, and I believe that every single one of us possesses immense value.

  But there were millions upon millions of us that did not agree with the political agenda of the BLM movement, and many of the specific political positions that the organization adopted were deeply alarming.

  Does that make us bad just because we don’t agree with their far left agenda?

  2020 also brought us the COVID pandemic.

  Our societal divisions became deeper than ever before as we endlessly debated about masks, vaccines, mandates and other restrictions.

  Manufactured waves of outrage about COVID dominated our national discourse for nearly two full years, but we were finally getting to a point where we were almost ready to put it all behind us.

  And then the Ukraine war came along, and now everyone has a reason to be outraged again.

  I think that Elon Musk summed things up very well in one of his latest tweets.

  pic.twitter.com/CfoJ3qdCRJ

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 14, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  You may have noticed that hordes of social media lemmings are plastering their profiles with Ukrainian flags these days.

  Next month, they may have to switch back to COVID again.

  Then in May, the hot topic may be racial injustice.

  Of course every June is reserved for the alphabet people.

  Social media has become a very clear reflection of society as a whole, and so much of what goes on in our world today is being driven by social media.

  Last week, I was stunned to learn that the Biden administration had actually conducted a briefing on the war in Ukraine for 30 key TikTok influencers…

  To get ahead of misinformation and spread its messaging, the Biden administration on Thursday briefed 30 top TikTok stars on key information regarding the war in Ukraine, The Washington Post reports.

  The online influencers received updates about the U.S.’ “strategic goals in the region” while National Security Council staffers and White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki “answered questions on distributing aid to Ukrainians, working with NATO, and how the United States would react to a Russian use of nuclear weapons.”

  Can you imagine the Reagan administration doing such a thing?

  Of course not.

  But the world has changed.

  Today, the elite need the support of influencers on social media, because those social media influencers can whip up tremendous waves of manufactured outrage.

  If you asked random U.S. social media users to tell you what caused the war in Ukraine, the vast majority of them could not give you any sort of a coherent answer.

  And the vast majority of them would not be able to point out Ukraine on a blank map of the world.

  But they do know that Russia is really bad and Ukraine is really good, and that is all that the elite really need for them to know.

  For years, I have been encouraging my readers to think for themselves.

  Because if you don’t learn to think for yourself, there are others that will be more than happy to do your thinking for you.

  That can be a tempting path to follow, but when you let others do your thinking for you it is way too easy for them to manipulate your emotions with the latest wave of manufactured outrage.

  *  *  *

  It is finally here! Michael’s new book entitled “7 Year Apocalypse” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 21:00

• A Recent History Of US Sanctions On Russia
  A Recent History Of US Sanctions On Russia

  When a direct military confrontation is off the table, how should countries respond to acts of foreign aggression?

  One tactic is sanctioning, which applies economic restrictions on a country’s government, businesses, and even individual citizens. In theory, these penalties create enough impact to dissuade further hostility.

  Today, the U.S. maintains more sanctions than any other country, and one of its most comprehensive programs is aimed at Russia. To learn more, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu compiled an overview of these sanctions using data from the Congressional Research Service and U.S. Treasury.

  

  Sanctions by Catalyst Event

  Sanctions are often introduced after a President issues an executive order (EO) that declares a national emergency. This provides special powers to regulate commerce with an aggressor nation.

  Our starting point will be Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine, as this is where a majority of ongoing sanctions have originated.

  Catalyst: 2014 Ukraine Invasion

  On March 18, 2014, Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine. This was denounced by the U.S. and its allies, leading them to impose wide-reaching sanctions. President Obama’s EOs are listed below.

  

  Altogether, these sanctions affect 480 entities (includes businesses and government agencies), 253 individuals, 7 vessels, and 3 aircraft.

  Sanctions against ships and planes may seem odd, but these assets are often owned by sanctioned entities. For example, in February 2022, France seized a cargo ship belonging to a sanctioned Russian bank.

  Catalyst: U.S. Election Interference

  The Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations have all imposed sanctions against Russia for its malicious cyber activities.

  

  Altogether, these sanctions affect 106 entites, 136 individuals, 6 aircraft, and 2 vessels. A critical target is the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian company notorious for its online influence operations.

  Prior to the 2016 election, 3,000 IRA-sponsored ads reached up to 10 million Americans on Facebook. This problem escalated in the run-up to the 2020 election, with 140 million Americans being exposed to propaganda on a monthly basis.

  Catalyst: Various Geopolitical Dealings

  The U.S. maintains various sanctions designed to counteract Russian influence in Syria, Venezuela, and North Korea.

  

  *These are recent sanctions pursuant to EOs that were issued many years prior. For example, EO 13582 was introduced in August 2011.

  These sanctions impact 23 entities, 17 individuals, and 7 vessels. Specific entities include Rosoboronexport, a state-owned arms exporter which was sanctioned for supplying the Syrian government.

  As of December 2020, Syria’s government was responsible for the deaths of 156,329 people (civilians and combatants) in the civil war.

  Catalyst: Chemical Poisonings of Individuals

  The Russian government has been accused of poisoning two individuals in recent years.

  The first incident involved Sergei Skripal, a former Russian intelligence officer who was allegedly poisoned in March 2018 on UK soil. The second, Alexei Navalny, a Russian opposition leader, was allegedly poisoned in August 2020.

  The Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991 (CBW Act) allows sanctions against foreign governments that use chemical weapons. Nine individuals and five entities were sanctioned as a result of the two cases.

  Catalyst: 2022 Ukraine Invasion

  The U.S. has introduced many more sanctions in response to Russia’s latest invasion of Ukraine.

  EO 14024, which was issued in February 2022, targets Russia’s major financial institutions and their subsidiaries (83 entities in total). Included in this list are the country’s two largest banks, Sberbank and VTB Bank. Together, they hold more than half of all Russian banking assets.

  Also targeted are 13 private and state-owned companies deemed to be critical to the Russian economy. Included in this 13 are Rostelecom, Russia’s largest digital services provider, and Alrosa, the world’s largest diamond mining company.

  Do Sanctions Work?

  Proving that a sanction was solely responsible for an outcome is impossible, though there have been successes in the past. For example, many agree that sanctions played an important role in ending Libya’s weapons of mass destruction programs.

  Critics of sanctions argue that imposing economic distress on a country can lead to unintended consequences. One of these is a shift away from the U.S. financial system.

  There is no alternative to the dollar and no export market as attractive as the United States. But if Washington continues to force other nations to go along with policies that they consider both illegal and unwise … they are likely to shift away from the United States’ economy and financial system.

  JACOB J. LEW, FORMER SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY

  In other words, sanctions can create an impact as long as the U.S. dollar continues to reign supreme.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 20:40

• Hyper-Bitcoinization Is Now Baked-In
  Hyper-Bitcoinization Is Now Baked-In

  Authored by Mark Jeftovic via BombThrower.com,

  The game theory dictates that Bitcoin will become a global reserve asset

  Some time around 2010 I took a course at the Ben Graham Center for Value Investing at UWO (University of Western Ontario, in London, Canada), taught by the eminent Dr. George Athanassakos. He was the guy who unleashed a shitstorm across corporate Canada and within the corridors the CRA ( Canada’s version of the IRS), when in 2005 he wrote in op-ed in the Globe and Mail on why Bell Canada should convert itself into an income trust. When a company does this, they no longer pay corporate income taxes, and pass income through directly to their unit holders. Doing so would save the mega-conglomerate close to $1B CAD in taxes annually. They decided it was such a good idea they went ahead and announced they would do it. Their rival Telus concurred, actually announcing their conversion even before Bell did. In fact this became somewhat of a trend across boardrooms nationwide.

  The political class went ballistic, and it culminated in a tax crackdown on income trusts by the Harper government.

  

  Burning the throne of “King Dollar”

  In that course, which was attended by investors as far away as Germany and Japan, I learned two things about conventional finance which completely astounded me at the time. Given the most recent events of this year, the ramifications have finally come home to roost.

  The first was an almost off-the-cuff remark by Athanassakos that “all short term debt eventually becomes long term debt”. Being a child of working-class European immigrants, this seemed batshit to me. A prescription for doom. I can’t remember if I mentioned it at the time but I did write it up on an old blog, that debt used to be something you actually paid off.

  I referenced a passage from an finance textbook I had from the 40’s, which emphasized the importance of implementing a plan for liquidating debt at the moment it was incurred:

  Any corporation, private or governmental, that wishes to provide for a sound and equitable continuity of its business must take steps towards the systematic retirement of debt immediately after it has been incurred. Postponement of all payment for property or priviledges by those who presently enjoy their benefits is calculated to bring uncomfortable consequences to them or those who succeed them.

  What happened? August 15th, 1971 happened. The closing of gold convertibility (temporarily) and the birth of the post-Bretton Woods era. From that moment on, debt became perpetual and it had to grow in size. That also meant that interest rates would trend down to the zero bound, and once they got there,  they’d effectively be stuck there forever.

  The other epiphany from the course was when Dr. Athanassakos was teaching us some intricacies about calculating WACC (cost-of-capital) he referenced the risk-free-rate of interest (textbooks of the day were still using 6%, if you can believe that) and this time I asked, also off-the-cuff (although I believed it on the inside) “What happens when the risk-free-rate is set by an instrument that is no longer risk free?”

  He asked me what I meant and I stammered something about unsustainable debt levels, monetary expansion and what if someday the US dollar isn’t regarded as safe enough to be the world reserve currency anymore. Dr. Athanassakos was polite about being dismissive, but I remember getting weird looks from my classmates. From then on I was the class clown.

  In hindsight, this institutionalized credulity was understandable. At the time US M2 was only $8T and it had taken an entire decade to double to $16T right before COVID hit.

  

  The situation looks a bit more pronounced when you look at the Fed balance sheet:

  

  So maybe I was a little early on the call that this was all headed for uncharted territory.

  Bitcoin had been invented by then, but I was still three years away from clueing into it.

  Q1 2022 and the End of Trust

  When Nixon closed the gold window in 1971, it was an instant in time that forever changed the global monetary order. It commenced the Post-Bretton Woods Era. One where there were no hard-backed national currencies, they would henceforth all float and jockey for position  against each other (in many cases, actually incentivized to devalue themselves).

  By Q1 2022 I had of course, fully drank the Bitcoin Kool-Aid and continue to do so. In fact, things have changed so radically in the last six weeks that I am now leaning further  toward Bitcoin maximalism, where I wasn’t before. Further, where before I was highly skeptical that Bitcoin would ever become a reserve currency, the way I see it now, it’s a lock.

  What happened over the past few weeks was nothing less than the end of the Post Bretton Woods era. That’s not me calling it, others have already done that. I’m agreeing with it. Until fairly recently, the end of the USD’s global reserve currency status simply wasn’t something spoken about in polite company. Policy makers have, through their actions, mainstreamed the idea. The risk now is of being unaware that the monetary regime that has been in place for the past fifty years just ended.

  Trudeau deputy PM: “Financial service provider will be able to immediately freeze or suspend an account without a court order [if the person supports the truckers]. In doing so, they will be protected against civil liability for actions taken in good faith.” pic.twitter.com/DFzWxkL0dL

  — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) February 14, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  (This was the foreshock of the end of the global monetary order)

  

  The moment the Post-Bretton Woods currency era ended.

  In the past I viewed Bitcoin as an emergent global “Notgeld”, a German term for “emergency money” that emerged during the Weimer Hyperinflation. As I’d written previously, every hyperinflationary event has its notgeld, whether it’s prepaid phone and gas cards in Zimbabwe, cities printing their own scrip, Venezuelans wrapping gold flakes in worthless Trillion Bolivar banknotes, there’s no end to the ingenuity (and desperation) employed.

  My theory was that in an oncoming era where all global currencies were going to hyperinflate simultaneously, Bitcoin would emerge as the global notgeld. And then, I thought, afterwards some kind of global monetary reset would occur. That would probably be some kind of SDR against a basket of hard assets, including gold, but I never imagined that Bitcoin would be a component of that basket.

  (To be clear: I still thought Bitcoin would remain important and desirable, especially as a counter-balance against CBDCs that would be inflicted upon the wealthless underclass of the world. But I didn’t think that governments globally would admit a currency that nobody could control to the inner circle.)

  Now, all of that has changed

  Thanks to Trudeau and Freeland setting precedent that a so-called Western G7 democracy can seize its citizens’ bank accounts with no due process and no appeal for the crime of demanding the reinstatement of their civil rights.

  Thanks to the US government seizing the foreign reserves of another country (Afghanistan), not to freeze them until such time as democracy returns, but to actually redistribute them to their own citizens. Those funds were the savings of ordinary Afghan citizens who live under the Taliban, not as part of them.

  And finally, thanks to the widespread weaponization of the SWIFT payment system against Russia, the seizure of Russia’s foreign reserves (approximately 100X the amount of Afghanistan’s), not to mention Russia’s implementation of capital controls against its own citizens (again, the ordinary citizens coming up on the short end of the stick).

  We have experienced a rapid sequence of events that have forever altered the monetary, financial landscape globally, to wit:

  • Citizens can’t trust their own governments to protect their property rights, and

  • Governments can no longer trust each other to respect each other’s currency reserves

  What we have here is the realization that absolutely no one can be trusted as a third-party intermediary for capital. There is really only one alternative to this situation: that is the mass adoption of a trustless, frictionless digital bearer instrument that can be accessed by everybody, everywhere, no matter what.

  And that is Bitcoin.

  The original idea of hyperbitcoinization was defined as:

  “the inflection point at which Bitcoin becomes the default value system of the world. As more individuals and groups around the world realize the advantages of a borderless, censorship-resistant and natively digital system for transacting value, a critical mass of users will eventually fuel currency demonetization and the replacement of our world’s ingrained financial institutions and world powers with a more equitable, publicly-driven system.”

  When I think of it, Bitcoin doesn’t necessarily need to achieve the status of being the default value system of the world. Whatever comes next, I’m sure it will include gold for example. But as I’ve always said, gold and Bitcoin bring different advantages to the same problem.

  It’s Bitcoin’s unassailable mobility that make it such a necessary ingredient to the coming era of hard-backed and zero counter-party reserves. People wanting to fund resistance in Ukraine right now are sending Bitcoin, not gold. The Ukraine had already spirited their gold reserves out of the country during the 2014 invasion. (Hopefully they don’t wind up with a government the US dislikes, or those reserves will be gone.)

  So while Bitcoin is now at the point where it can fund arming the resistance in The Ukraine, it’s been pointed out that contrary to the histrionics of some policy-makers, it is still too small to help a country like Russia to evade sanctions. That means in order to take its place among the new set of neutral reserve assets that are usable to sovereigns  wanting to defend their wealth, things like Bitcoin (and gold) will have to reprice dramatically in fiat terms.

  I made my call in 2010 and looked like a clown making it: the USD would not remain risk-free forever.

  I’ll make another one now since I’m used to looking crazy: when Bitcoin does reprice into its role as a global reserve asset, we aren’t going to be thinking of it in terms of BTC anymore. We’re going to be obsessing over if/when/buts of USD/satoshi parity.

  Welcome to the Post-Post-Bretton Woods era, where third party custody of your wealth is a gun pointed at your head.

  Recall the old maxim about trust: once it’s gone, it can be near impossible to regain.

  This is now true of the entire global financial system as well as the governments and institutions that prop it up.

  *  *  *

  The world is undergoing a monetary regime change. Get the Crypto Capitalist Manifesto free, when you join the Bombthrower mailing list or try our premium research service for crypto investors here. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 20:20

• Credit Agencies To Remove "Tens Of Billions Of Dollars" In Medical Debt From Reports
  Credit Agencies To Remove “Tens Of Billions Of Dollars” In Medical Debt From Reports

  It may not be student loan cancellations, but it’s good news for other debt-laden consumers looking for relief from tarnished credit reports. 

  Some of the largest credit reporting agencies are going to be removing “tens of billions of dollars” in medical debt from consumers’ credit reports, according to a new report from the Wall Street Journal.

  The change is expected to take place this summer, with Equifax, Experian and TransUnion all participating. About 70% of all medical debt is expected to be removed from credit reports, even debts in collections, as a result of the change. 

  The agencies said: “This is an important step to support consumers in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic. These changes reflect our ongoing commitment to helping facilitate access to fair and affordable credit for all consumers.”

  

  In addition to new, unpaid debts not making their way onto credit reports for a full year after being sent to collections, debts that were previously in collection and have been paid will also be removed from credit reports. Normally, they could stay on reports for up to 7 years, the report says. 

  The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has helped catalyze the change, saying in March that it was going to “hold credit-reporting firms accountable for not taking enough action against companies that report erroneous medical debts.”

  A TransUnion spokesperson told the WSJ: “As the CFPB is our primary regulator, we have continual engagement with them on a variety of issues.”

  Unpaid medical debts of less than $500 will also be removed from credit reports. 

  The CFPB says that, currently, $88 billion in medical bills is spread across 43 million credit reports. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 20:00

• Joe Biden's 'Transition Away From The Oil Industry' Is Strangling America's Economy
  Joe Biden’s ‘Transition Away From The Oil Industry’ Is Strangling America’s Economy

  Authored by Levi A. Russell via RealClear Energy (emphasis ours),

  The root causes of the economic upheaval most Americans are experiencing right now are the subject of much discussion lately. Is it the Russia-Ukraine conflict? Is it Biden’s closing of the Keystone XL pipeline? Is it the absurd energy policies of the EU? Certainly there is plenty of blame to go around, but the reality is that all of this started in October of 2020. Back then, Trump and Biden were going head to head in debates leading up to the November election. Biden famously stated “I would transition away from the oil industry.” 

  

  That statement was a clear signal to energy producers in this country that Biden’s eventual ascent to the presidency would bring unprecedented uncertainty for at least the next four years. Never willing to let a crisis go to waste, the Biden administration went straight to work dismantling the future of our oil and gas refining capacity. His statement in October of 2020 made it clear that his administration would use the massive increase in government control precipitated by the pandemic to massively curtail energy production not in the distant future, but here and now.

  Though oil production has rebounded to some extent from the demand-driven crash in 2020, refining and drilling are still well below pre-pandemic levels. The regulatory uncertainty imposed on traditional energy production is simply too great. Biden can complain that these companies aren’t throwing money away to save his poll numbers, but a lifetime politician like him is in no place to criticize those who provide essential goods and services to the American public. Biden’s insistence that his policies have no role in the pain Americans feel right now should fall on deaf ears.

  So just how severe is this pain? Carl Quintanilla of CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” shared this graph in a tweet on March 8th in an apparent attempt to put a damper on concerns about gasoline prices. Quintanilla states that the graph represents “gasoline costs, as consumer’s share of wallet” but that’s not entirely correct. For one, the graph clearly states that it takes account of other energy products and that it is computed as a share of “all consumer spending.” 

  His intended point is obvious enough: Americans shouldn’t complain about high gas prices because, as a share of total spending, gasoline is very low by historical standards. Quintanilla’s comment sounds like the author of the graph added up all the money spent on the various things we buy and compared the dollars spent on fuel to the total. That’s not the case. 

  

  A much better representation of the impact on Americans’ wallets would include information about the astronomical inflation we’ve seen in other essential products Americans buy. It would also have a concrete measure of the “wallet” Quintanilla mentions.

  The graph below uses data on average production and non-supervisory hourly wages over the past ten years as a baseline gross monthly income. The most recent data available indicates that the average wage for such workers is $26.94 per hour. I assumed that the household drove about 250 miles a week in a car with 20 miles per gallon average fuel efficiency. The blue line shows monthly gasoline expense based on these assumptions using data on conventional gasoline prices. So without regard to income and other expenses Americans have to cover, we are paying about the same now as we were during the high gas price era of Obama’s second term: just under $200 per month.

  

  But what about the total household budget? Haven’t wages risen over the past ten years, making the increased expense less onerous? Production and non-supervisory wages have risen steadily from 2012 to 2022 to the tune of about 3.75% per year. Dividing the monthly gasoline expense by gross monthly income, we get the red line. During the Trump administration, gasoline as a share of income was right around 3.25% of the budget, according to my simple calculations. In 2021, it began to rise again and currently sits as high as it has been for the past 6 years. 

  Those who are sympathetic to Quintanilla’s point might say that we have validated the graph in his tweet, that American’s aren’t as bad off as many claim. However, this analysis misses the rising cost of nearly everything else in Americans’ household budgets. Starting in mid-2021, prices of staple goods began to skyrocket. The most recent report shows that, compared to this time last year, food and beverage prices rose 7.6%, durable goods prices (such as appliances and cars) rose 18.7%, and overall energy prices rose 25.6%. 

  Inflation is too much money chasing too few goods. While the Federal Reserve contemplates decreases in the money supply to deal with the money component, the Biden administration’s regulatory chaos continues to restrict our ability to produce the things Americans need. Blaming inflation on the Ukraine-Russia conflict, which is also partly his fault, does nothing to alleviate the stranglehold Biden has on our economy.

  Levi A. Russell, PhD, is an Assistant Teaching Professor in the School of Business at the University of Kansas. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 19:40

• Egg Prices Soar As Highly Pathogenic Bird Flu Spreads Ahead Of Easter 
  Egg Prices Soar As Highly Pathogenic Bird Flu Spreads Ahead Of Easter 

  Add eggs to the growing list of food prices rising at grocery stores. The reason is a highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) spreading across the US.

  Bloomberg reports HPAI has been detected in commercial poultry operations, backyard farms, and wild flocks up and down the East Coast and across the Midwest since Jan. 26.

  

  The United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has monitored the spread rippling through the US. Standard procedures for farms where HPAI has been detected are cull infected flocks. Last week, APHIS said 2.8 million chickens and turkeys died in one month from the virus. At least one million birds were recently culled at a poultry farm in Iowa. 

  Karyn Rispoli, a poultry market analyst at commodity researcher Urner Barry, warns egg prices are beginning to rise due to lost production. She said peak demand for eggs is underway as Easter fast approaches, pushing prices even higher. 

  HPAI spreading to more farms, thus triggering more cullings, risks future supply disruptions. As wholesale prices increase, consumers are expected to notice rising egg prices, just as inflation soars to four-decade highs. 

  Urner Barry data shows wholesale eggs jumped 10 cents to $1.60 a dozen Wednesday, the most significant daily gain since the early days of the virus pandemic. The five-year average for wholesale eggs is around $1.44. 

  John Brunnquell, CEO of producer Egg Innovations, said prices would continue rising in the coming weeks, and consumers will notice. 

  “Bidding remains very strong among different egg companies, and so you’re going to see significantly higher” prices at grocery stores, Brunnquell said.

  Since the HPAI spread is recent, there’s no telling if it will abate anytime soon. The last outbreak, in 2015, resulted in the culling of 50 million laying hens across 15 states, pushing retail Grade A Egg prices to nearly $3 a dozen.​​​​​​ Prices are currently at $2. 

  

  Retail prices are at the highest in five years for this time of year.

  

  The largest concern is the spread of HPAI as wild flocks migrate across the country. Even before the emergence of the virus, the 2015 culling has resulted in declines in egg-laying chickens. 

  “When you layer that on top of that what’s going on with avian influenza, and the precedent of 2015, the impact on the market could be material,” Stephens analyst Ben Bienvenu warned. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 19:20

• Ethereum 2.0 'Merge' Imminent After Successful Test, "Will Lay To Rest" Energy Concerns
  Ethereum 2.0 ‘Merge’ Imminent After Successful Test, “Will Lay To Rest” Energy Concerns

  With over $30 billion dollars at stake (locked into Ethereum’s proof-of-stake chain), Kiln – an important test for Ethereum 2.0 – just finished and puts the blockchain closer than ever before to the “merge.”

  “It’s hard to tell right now what it is,” Tim Beiko, an Ethereum developer, told Fortune.

  But “Kiln is, we expect, the last new testnet created solely for the purpose of testing the ‘merge.’ Kiln tried to replicate what will happen [during the ‘merge’] as closely as possible.”

  The highly anticipated “merge” is the mechanism that will shift Ethereum from a proof-of-work model to proof of stake.

  

  As Fortune’s Taylor Locke notes, the Kiln testnet proves the “merge” is possible, as Kiln launched under proof of work on Monday and transitioned to a Beacon Chain running proof of stake on Tuesday.

  And while crypotoi broadly speaking has rallied this week, Ethereum has accelerate dramatically after Tuesday’s initial tests…

  

  The Ethereum Foundation writes: 

  “This merge signals the culmination of six years of research and development in Ethereum and will result in a more secure network, predictable block times, and a 99.98%+ reduction in power use when it is released on mainnet later in 2022.”

  However, as CoinTelegraph reports, it appears not everything went according to plan during testing. 

  According to Kiln Explorer, there were several errors relating to contract creation. In a follow-up tweet, Beiko said a client was not producing blocks consistently, though “the network is stable, with >2/3rd of validators correctly finalizing.” 

  Once it’s executed on the mainnet, Ethereum 2.0, now rebranded the “Consensus Layer,” will be alive and kicking. 

  

  ConsenSys CEO and Ethereum co-founder Joe Lubin is still confident that the next era of Ethereum will arrive within the next few months (“by Q2 or possibly slipping into Q3” of this year). 

  “The merge is happening, surprisingly, on that same timeframe,” said Lubin during an interview with Decrypt.

  “So my estimate stays the same. We have a team working strongly, heavily on it.”

  “The merge will lay to rest proof-of-work, will lay to rest Ethereum’s carbon or energy footprint problem, that all goes away,” Lubin said at Camp Ethereal.

  “Orders of magnitude less expensive, energetically. And another exciting thing about about moving to proof-of-stake is that proof-of-work requires a lot of issuance of ether in order to incentivize these people with heavy infrastructure, to lend their resources and validate transactions on the network. And so if you have very light infrastructure, then you can issue much less ether per block that’s constructed.”

  As a reminder, under the new mechanism, Ethereum validators, like PoW miners, are rewarded for ensuring the network is processing correct transactions. Right now, this reward pays out 5.54% in ETH to stakers, according to data pulled from Staking Rewards.   

  However, if validators get caught adding fraudulent transactions to the Ethereum blockchain, they get penalized. This penalty is monetary and gets drawn from the 32 Ethereum needed to stake in the first place in order to become a validator. 

  Bitcoin also uses a PoW mechanism and has caught global criticism for its enormous energy usage. There are no immediate plans to change this.

  “This is a major milestone and marks Ethereum’s readiness for full proof of stake,” a Beacon Chain community consultant known as Superphiz tweeted on Monday.

  “The merge will cut our energy footprint by 99.98%.”

  

  The ‘merge’ comes nine years after Vitalik Buterin dreamed up Ethereum as a way to leverage the blockchain technology underlying Bitcoin for all sorts of uses beyond currency.

  But, as TIME reports this week, the Russian-born Canadian has some warnings.

  “Crypto itself has a lot of dystopian potential if implemented wrong,”

  Buterin hopes Ethereum will become the launchpad for all sorts of sociopolitical experimentation: fairer voting systems, urban planning, universal basic income, public-works projects.

  But he acknowledges that his vision for the transformative power of Ethereum is at risk of being overtaken by greed, worrying about the dangers to overeager investors, the soaring transaction fees, and the shameless displays of wealth that have come to dominate public perception of crypto. “The peril is you have these $3 million monkeys and it becomes a different kind of gambling,” he says, referring to the Bored Ape Yacht Club, an überpopular NFT collection of garish primate cartoons that has become a digital-age status symbol for millionaires including Jimmy Fallon and Paris Hilton, and which have traded for more than $1 million a pop. “There definitely are lots of people that are just buying yachts and Lambos.”

  Above all, he wants the platform to be a counterweight to authoritarian governments and to upend Silicon Valley’s stranglehold over our digital lives, and with “Consensus Layer”, the arguments against this are fading fast.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 18:40

• Democrats Sue To Disqualify 3 GOP Congressmen From 2022 Ballot, Alleging Role In Insurrection, Election Manipulation
  Democrats Sue To Disqualify 3 GOP Congressmen From 2022 Ballot, Alleging Role In Insurrection, Election Manipulation

  Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Democratic Party activists in Wisconsin have filed a suit in federal court arguing that a pro-Trump senator and two pro-Trump congressmen should be barred from office for speaking out on 2020 election irregularities and allegedly attempting to manipulate the congressional certification of the presidential election results.

  

  The Wisconsin Republican lawmakers targeted by the suit are two-term Sen. Ron Johnson, two-term Rep. Tom Tiffany, and freshman Rep. Scott Fitzgerald. All are seeking reelection in November.

  The suit claims the lawmakers cannot serve in Congress because the disqualification clause in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment forbids it. That rarely invoked constitutional provision was enacted in the wake of the Civil War to keep former Confederates out of Congress.

  Johnson dismissed the lawsuit, telling The Epoch Times it is “total nonsense.”

  “Democrats have ignored the Summer 2020 riots and relentlessly used January 6th [2021] as a political cudgel,” Johnson said in an emailed statement. “Now, they’ve used January 6th to file a frivolous lawsuit against me, similar to the one dismissed by a court last week.”

  The lawsuit claims the lawmakers “used their public positions of authority to illegally foment an atmosphere meant to intimidate and pressure Vice President [Mike] Pence and Congress to take actions inconsistent with the facts and with their duties under the Electoral Count Act and the U.S. Constitution.”

  The lawmakers used “their powers as public officials and their respective bully pulpits to undermine public trust in the outcome of the election and to enable a criminal scheme to institute fraudulent electors (in Wisconsin and elsewhere) to manufacture a constitutional crisis on January 6, 2021, over how to count the electoral ballots.”

  The legal action claims the lawmakers illegally pressured Pence, in his role as presiding officer at the joint session of Congress certifying the 2020 electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021, to “unilaterally reject the legitimate electoral votes of Wisconsin and six other states for the Biden–Harris ticket.”

  On Jan. 6, 2021, there was a security breach at the U.S. Capitol in which supporters of then-President Donald Trump delayed the congressional certification of the 2020 presidential election results for several hours. Democrats and some Republicans characterize the disturbance, from which some elected officials took cover, as an insurrection or coup attempt aimed at overthrowing the U.S. government, a claim that has been adamantly denied by Trump and his supporters.

  Democrats have attempted to use the disqualification clause to take two other sitting federal lawmakers off the 2022 ballot for their pro-Trump activities. While the challenges to Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) and Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-N.C.) have both failed, a ruling in the Cawthorn case is under appeal.

  The 80-page legal complaint (pdf) in the case at hand, Stencil v. Johnson, court file 2:22-cv-305, was filed March 10 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Nancy A. Stencil is one of 10 plaintiffs, all of whom are registered Wisconsin voters.

  According to the complaint, the lawmakers “engaged in overt acts in furtherance of a conspiracy meant to foment public distrust in the outcome of the 2020 election, undermine the rule of law, and assist an insurrection against the United States with the illegal goal of reversing the results of the election that made Joseph R. Biden the 46th President of the United States.”

  The three lawmakers’ “falsehoods … about the integrity of Wisconsin’s election procedures began even before citizens were allowed to cast their ballots in the 2020 Presidential Election and continued long after their lies were disproven.” The lawmakers “repeatedly proclaimed lies about the election and its results, and those lies increased in frequency and intensity as January 6, 2021, approached.”

  Fitzgerald also is accused in the complaint of supporting an alternate slate of Trump electors. He allegedly procured a room for “ten fraudulent electors from Wisconsin [who] met at the State Capitol on December 14, 2020, the date designated by law” for electoral votes to be cast, the complaint states.

  One of the plaintiffs’ lawyers told The Epoch Times the lawsuit isn’t frivolous.

  “Lawsuits are made up of facts and legal claims,” attorney Joseph S. Goode said by email.

  “The judge overseeing this case gets to decide how the law applies to the facts as our adversarial system provides. Every fact in our pleading is based on matters of public record. We look forward to litigating the case to fruition.”

  The legal challenge is being underwritten by the Minocqua Brewing Company Super PAC. In a March 13 statement on the left-wing political action committee’s website, founder Kirk Bangstad estimates the lawsuit “could cost $300,000 to fight over the next six months.”

  Bangstad is also the owner of the Minocqua Brewing Co., makers of “progressive beers” such as Biden Beer, Bernie Brew, AOC IPA, and Filibuster Ale.

  “This lawsuit is BY FAR the biggest thing we’ve ever done, but it’s also the most important and 100% central to our mission of getting rid of Wisconsin’s traitors,” he wrote.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 18:20

• China Eases Shenzhen Lockdown To Allow Manufacturing To Resume
  China Eases Shenzhen Lockdown To Allow Manufacturing To Resume

  Following yesterday’s revelation that the CCP – apparently worried about the economic backlash from its latest round of lockdowns (which had affected more than 50M people at the peak) – was moving to scale back COVID restrictions that had impacted manufacturing and shipping, the SCMP reported Friday that China’s southern tech hub of Shenzhen had lifted restrictions in five districts, saying the COVID outbreak is now mostly under control, as President Xi and the CCP pledged to take steps to support businesses in areas that are still under lockdown.

  

  Shenzhen is the largest (and economically the most consequential) of the Chinese cities under lockdown.

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Shenzhen reported 69 symptomatic cases and 36 asymptomatic cases on Thursday. The cases were mainly found among people in quarantine and places under restrictions. Nationwide, China logged more than 4,100 local infections for the day, which is higher than levels from a week ago, but lower than the two-year peak of 5,000+ cases recorded earlier this week.

  

  The SCMP quoted one female worker at an office in one of Shenzhen’s industrial districts said that she had been allowed to return to the office, and that restrictions on movement in the area had been lifted.

  A resident of Guangming, Shenzhen’s northwestern industrial district, said life and work is back to normal since she has been able to return to her office after working from home for four days. She noted that she still has to scan a QR code to enter her office building and participate in mass testing.

  Of course, apart from firms offering essential public services – and those ensuring daily supplies are delivered to Shenzhen and neighboring Hong Kong – all other companies will need to follow the work-from-home policy or suspend operations.

  Meanwhile, Bloomberg reports that, despite the order to ease the lockdown measures, queues of trucks have started to form at container terminals in Shenzhen as the lockdown measures continue to hamper the transportation of goods. Shipping line Hapag-Lloyd issued a customer advisory Thursday. The slowdown potentially impacted 13 container vessels at the port of Yantian, which were potentially affected by factory shutdowns and reduced availability of truck drivers as of Wednesday.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 18:00

• Lawyer For Mother Of Hunter Biden's Daughter Says He Expects President's Son To Be Indicted
  Lawyer For Mother Of Hunter Biden’s Daughter Says He Expects President’s Son To Be Indicted

  The past few weeks have been tough for Hunter Biden and, by extension, the rest of the Biden family. On March 1, news broke that Hunter Biden’s longtime business partner and friend Devon Archer was sentenced to a year in federal prison for defrauding a Native American tribe. Then just yesterday, the New York Times published an investigation revealing that although the younger Biden had paid his outstanding tax liability – which was reportedly greater than $1 million, and which required him to take out a loan to pay it off – a federal investigation into his failure to pay taxes on his earnings from overseas has continued.

  

  Much lower in the NYT story, America’s “paper of record” mentioned the laptop belonging to Hunter Biden that was reportedly abandoned at a computer repair shop, and subsequently became the heart of a NY Post story published shortly before the 2020 election (which was subsequently ignored by the MSM because of unfounded rumors that the materials had been stolen by Russian hackers, or that the laptop itself was some kind of plant). It didn’t only mention the laptop, but also confirmed that it was authentic. We previously reported on how the NYT sued to obtain copies of emails mentioning Biden and his exploits allegedly gleaned from Romanian embassy officials.

  And in the latest blow to the reputation of the president’s perennially troubled son, a lawyer for the mother of Hunter Biden’s 3-year-old daughter (who was born out of wedlock to a woman who allegedly slept with the younger Biden while working as an exotic dancer) said during an interview with CNBC that he expects the younger Biden “to be indicted” for tax fraud.

  Attorney Clint Lancaster told CNBC that his client, Lunden Roberts, had recently testified in Delaware before a federal grand jury in the criminal investigation into the 52-year-old presidential scion. The lawyer based his commentary on “what I saw” in Biden’s financial records.

  Lancaster said he and Roberts were interviewed by an assistant U.S. attorney, an FBI agent and an IRS agent — “one that carries a badge and gun” — more than a year ago about Biden in Little Rock, Ark., where Lancaster practices law.

  “I expect him to be indicted,” the lawyer said about Biden. “Just based on what I saw in his financial records, I would be surprised if he’s not indicted.”

  Lancaster later added that neither he nor his client want Hunter Biden to go to jail.

  “It’s not my goal, much to the unhappiness of many people in the Republican Party,” said Lancaster, a supporter of former President Donald Trump who in late 2020 worked on a legal challenge to results that showed Biden had won the state of Wisconsin that year.

  He also confirmed that the younger Biden hadn’t visited his 3-year-old daughter with Roberts, “which is sad because the baby looks like him, with blonde hair.” He also explained that he had come into possession of a vast trove of the younger Biden’s financial records as part of his work on Roberts’ child-support suit. When asked about the number of records, Lancaster said it was around “10 gigs of data”.

  “Oh, hell, it was a bunch,” said Lancaster when asked how many records there were related to Hunter Biden’s finances. The documents were part of the case file for an Arkansas court child-support lawsuit that Roberts filed against Biden in 2019 in connection with their daughter.

  “They’re all in electronic form,” Lancaster said. “I would estimate it was anywhere from 10 gigs of data.”

  “I saw a lot of information” that is “problematic” for Biden, he said.

  Finally, Lancaster told CNBC that his client hadn’t received immunity before testifying because she hadn’t committed any crimes. The NYT on Thursday reported that Roberts had been questioned about the provenance of the child support payments she had received from Biden. Prosecutors were apparently investigating whether the same corporate entity from which she received the payments was also used by Biden to receive payments from Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company from which he received a salary of $50K per month just for sitting on its board.

  Given all the information on the investigation that’s just come to light, we wouldn’t be surprised if the grand jury hearing the evidence is soon asked to vote on whether federal charges should be brought against the younger Biden. His father, the president, has already recused himself from the case as his DoJ has continued with the investigation. If charges are brought and Hunter Biden is convicted (or pleads guilty), his father would then have the option of pardoning him. From this vantage point, it’s not too difficult to imagine a scenario where Biden pardons his son after deciding not to seek another term in office.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 17:44

• Florida Governor Announces Additional $289 Million To 'Improve Student Achievement And Close Learning Gaps'
  Florida Governor Announces Additional $289 Million To ‘Improve Student Achievement And Close Learning Gaps’

  Authored by Patricia Tolson via The Epoch Times,

  During a 10:30 a.m. press conference at the City of Hialeah Educational Academy in Hialeah, Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis announced an additional $289 million will be set aside for “programs that will improve student achievement and close learning gaps.”

  

  One day after DeSantis signed SB 1048—a bill that transitions from Florida Standards Assessments testing into progress monitoring—and two days after the Florida Senate passed a record-breaking $112.1 billion state budget proposal, DeSantis announced a fully-funded $289 million program that will provide children with opportunities to seek career options outside of academic disciplines by offering certification programs in high-demand, high-skilled career fields such as law enforcement, nursing, and fire rescue. These are the career fields that suffered personnel losses during lockdowns imposed due to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, commonly known as the novel coronavirus. Another Florida education program, STEM, guides children toward careers in “science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.”

  DeSantis said “there’s a huge, huge demand” in nursing and anyone going into the field is going “to have a lot of opportunities as they get beyond school.”

  According to DeSantis, the new $289 million education and career program includes $105 million for “after school, weekend and summer learning camps that will help struggling students catch up.” Another $47 million will be available to purchase curriculum that falls in line with Florida’s new standards in English, math, civics, and Holocaust education. DeSantis said another $50 million is earmarked for reading intervention and professional development for reading coaches, citing how “early literacy is the key.”

  “If you have kids at third grade that are reading up to grade level, those kids are likely going to be fine” and “have a pathway to college, if that’s what they want to do,” DeSantis said. But if a child “is deficient by third grade,” their future opportunities diminish.

  As The Epoch Times reported Jan. 2, America’s education system is failing as the goals for maintaining high academic standards are being replaced with a focus on social constructs like critical race theory and social-emotional learning. Recent government data shows the average fourth grader has only a 41 percent proficiency level in mathematics. By the eighth grade, that proficiency level drops to 34 percent. By the twelfth grade, the average American student has a proficiency level of only 24 percent in math.

  STEM programs will receive $44 million, an additional $22.5 million will fund programs to help parents reinforce what’s being taught in classrooms at home, and another $5 million will help establish regional mental health resiliency teams to support districts with delivering services to students.

  “This is an example of really meeting needs that exist in a really big way,” DeSantis said.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Huge Saharan Dust Storm Covers Europe
  Huge Saharan Dust Storm Covers Europe

  A massive dust storm originating from the Sahara Desert in Africa has covered parts of Western and Central Europe this week. 

  Strong winds from Storm Celia whipped up sand from the northwest coast of Africa and blanketed much of Portugal, Spain, and France, transforming skies into eerie shades of blood orange, worsening air quality, and leaving a layer of dust on everything. 

  On Tuesday, the European Environment Agency said dust concentrations in Spain were five times over their recommended limit for air quality. 

  “Air quality is recognized as being vital to human health as high concentrations of dust can have health impacts on the respiratory systems of all people in the affected regions and add to particulate matter air pollution from local sources,” stated Copernicus, the EU’s Earth observation program. 

  Here’s where most of the dust is expected to land through Friday. 

  

  Another weather model shows how dust particles spread throughout Europe, covering roads, houses, cars, and everything else. 

  

  The World Meteorological Organization published a series of tweets showing dust-coated ski resorts in Spain and Switzerland.

  Believe it or not, this is Sierra Nevada SKI 🏂🎿resort in southern #Spain, transformed by a thick plume of #SaharanDust.
  From the station’s webcam and via @CLIMATEwBORDERS https://t.co/gHF85ut2Gx pic.twitter.com/Xg9j2vTk73

  — World Meteorological Organization (@WMO) March 15, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  A #SaharanDust storm has transformed skies and landscapes in parts of Europe today, affecting air quality.
  This is the view of the Jura mountains in Switzerland from @meteosuisse.
  Forecasts from @Dust_Barcelona https://t.co/k68I3MwGhc pic.twitter.com/Ntv157kNNk

  — World Meteorological Organization (@WMO) March 15, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  A combination of Northern Africa deserts and strong winds over the Mediterranean could mean Europe is prone to future dust events. 

  Climate alarmist Greta Thunberg has yet to unleash a tweetstorm linking European dust storms to climate change. She’s too busy telling the world to “stand with Ukraine.”

  

  So dropping bombs is the new green? 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 02:45

• Tony Blair: Promising Not To Have A Nuclear World War With Russia Is A "Strange Tactic"
  Tony Blair: Promising Not To Have A Nuclear World War With Russia Is A “Strange Tactic”

  Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

  Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair declared this week that the West ruling out a full scale war with Russia, which would almost certainly be nuclear, is a “strange tactic”.

  

  Blair, who presided over the abysmal invasion of Iraq in 2003 on false pretext of weapons of mass destruction, claims that Vladimir Putin is using NATO’s “desire not to provoke escalation” as a “bargaining chip against us”.

  In a post to his globalist think tank’s website, Blair writes “Maybe that is our position and maybe that is the right position, but continually signalling it, and removing doubt in his mind, is a strange tactic.”

  Ok, so strictly declaring world war three is off the table is a bad thing?

  “There is something incongruous about our repeated reassurance to him that we will not react with force,” Blair adds.

  Blair admits “I understand and accept that there is not political support for any direct military engagement by NATO of Russia,” but adds “we should be clear-eyed about what Putin is doing.”

  “Is it sensible to tell him in advance that whatever he does militarily, we will rule out any form of military response?” Blair further questions.

  Meanwhile, following the warnings of several other globalist figures that nuclear war is a real possibility, former Belgian Prime Minister and leading member of the European Parliament Guy Verhofstadt has declared that NATO needs reforming and that it should be done via the European Union and the creation of an EU-army.

  “We don’t need to abolish 27 national armies but we need to create on top of that a joint armed forces of the European Union,” Verhofstadt told reporters.

  He continued, “We need to establish, inside NATO a European pillar, I think NATO has to be reformed into a defence alliance of big continental organisations, a European one, a North American one, an Asian one, so like a triangle.”

  “I see a reform of NATO in a World Trade Organisation sort of way – a world defence community defending liberal democratic values,” he further emphasised.

  Kinda sounds like a… ‘new world order’?

  Really this says all you need to know about #TheGuardian, they drag out their favourite war criminal, hope we all forget about his war crimes, and pretend that he’s some sort of expert on stopping war! #CouldntMakeItUp

  — Mark McIvor 🏳️‍🌈🇮🇪🇰🇼⭐⭐ (@markmcivor1) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  You mispelled criminal

  — seamusoceara 🎩🎩 (@seamusoceara) March 15, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Isn’t his moral authority a bit tapped?

  — John’s Brain🤔 (@JohnRsBrain) March 15, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  I case you forgot, in 2003 people were called “traitors” for opposing the invasion of Iraq.

  They were accused of being “conspiracy theorists” and spreading “disinformation” for questioning the official narrative on weapons of mass destruction.

  History rhymes.

  — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Putin is doing precisely what Blair did. How curious.

  — Zadig ✝️ (@ZadigUndercover) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Blair just loves warfare it seems.

  — Sacha (@sachah46) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Yeah, because Blair likes big wars which turn everything to rubble and kill millions of people.

  — The Grumpy Hermit (@TheGrumpyHermit) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tony Blair is a sociopath who led my country into the most disastrous war in recent history.

  A war that led to a ruined country, a destabilized continent, around 1 million dead & the rise of ISIS.

  Why on earth is anyone still listening to him?https://t.co/xLxJoVG76X

  — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) January 4, 2018

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  *  *  *

  Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

  In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here. Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/18/2022 – 02:00

• The Stagflation Trap Will Lead To Universal Basic Income And Food Rationing
  The Stagflation Trap Will Lead To Universal Basic Income And Food Rationing

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  This past week during a conference discussing Biden’s “Build Back Better” scheme House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was confronted with questions on skyrocketing inflation. After referring to higher gas prices as the “Putin Tax”, she went on to offer perhaps the dumbest (or most insidious) denial on the causes of inflation that I have ever heard. She stated:

  “When we’re having this discussion, it’s important to dispel some of those who say, well it’s the government spending. No, it isn’t. The government spending is doing the exact reverse, reducing the national debt. It is not inflationary.”

  Anyone with a basic understanding of economics and how central banks operate must have felt their brains explode when they heard this, I know I did. But before I get into the numerous reasons why this claim is completely false in every way, I want to give a warning – It’s very easy in this situation to assume that Pelosi and even Biden are making these arguments because they are too stupid to grasp the fundamentals of debt creation, money velocity and fiat. That said, never mistake evil for mere ignorance.

  All higher level representatives of the White House are briefed by economic experts (spin doctors) well before they answer any questions on inflation, and the things they say have been carefully scripted. It’s possible Pelosi mixed her lies up a little bit, but the narrative the establishment is trying to promote is well planned. Asserting that money creation is a counterbalance to inflation instead of the cause is not brilliant, but it’s not designed to convince many people, only create confusion.

  Let’s not forget that only last year these same people were telling the public that inflation was purely “transitory” and that there was nothing to worry about. Now they are trying to cover their tracks and the culpability of the Federal Reserve. I believe the goal here is to simply stall for time until the stagflationary collapse unfolds. They have the perfect scapegoat as they launch an economic war with Russia (and likely China in the near term), and the effects of this war will hurt the US and Europe far more than many realize.

  To quickly break down Pelosi’s bizarre statement I will make a couple of root observations:

  • First, paying down the national debt has NOTHING to do with reducing inflation. Even if you could somehow gather enough assets to pay off the national debt without creating new dollars from thin air the current inflationary problems would persist. There would still be the matter of the tens of trillions of dollars already fabricated and floating around the global economy. Inflation is directly related to money supply and money velocity. The national debt is secondary to the issue.

  • Second, we need to ask the most obvious question: If government spending “reduces the national debt” by paying it down, then why hasn’t the national debt gone down?

  The Fed and the US government created over $6 trillion in fiat money in 2020 alone, and the national debt only went higher. In fact, the explosion of the national debt correlates DIRECTLY to the amount of dollars created by the Fed to supply various stimulus policies and bailouts over the years. The national debt in 2008 at the onset of the credit crash was around $10 trillion. It took hundreds of years to reach that level. In the span of only 14 years of Fed money creation the debt has now TRIPLED to over $30 trillion.

  I’ll say it again – Government spending and Fed stimulus has tripled the size of our national debt in less than 14 years. And, of course, inflation has spiked as the amount of dollars injected into the global system causes the buying power of our currency to decline dramatically. More fiat dollars equals less buying power. This is reality.

  Also, using Russia as a scapegoat just doesn’t hold up on the logic meter. The assertion by Pelosi, Biden and many establishment leftists has been that blocking Russian oil to the US is leading to inflation in multiple sectors of the economy, but it’s “necessary” to stop Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. One might assume that we use a lot of Russian oil. We don’t.

  Russian crude oil only makes up 3% of US imports. Therefore, there is no way that sanctions on Russian oil are the cause of rising prices, nor do these sanctions have any effect on the Kremlin. Inflation was hitting 40 year highs back in December of last year, well before the war in Ukraine. In fact, news on the Fed’s interest rate hikes moves oil markets far more than news on Ukraine.

  To summarize, I have a special message for Nancy Pelosi: Please so us a favor and shut up, you blood sucking crone. The American people are smarter than you, and your propaganda script is full of holes.

  Onward to more important issues…

  This narrative is not only about protecting the Biden Administration, it is also about protecting the Federal Reserve. As former Fed Chair Alan Greenspan once openly admitted, the central bank answers to no one, and that includes government officials. Many theorize that it is actually the central banks and international banks that make the majority of policy decisions for government, and politicians have very little say in matters. I’m inclined to agree given the number of banking elites and globalist Council on Foreign Relations members that seem to permeate every single presidential cabinet (this includes Trump’s cabinet as much as Biden’s).

  Biden is an empty shell of a man barely able to maintain a semblance of sanity, who do you think really runs the country?

  I have been writing a lot lately about how establishment elites and globalists actually benefit greatly from a stagflationary crisis, as long as they are able to divert blame to other sources and are not targeted for retribution by the public. One of these benefits includes a cover event for an agenda that the World Economic Forum calls the “Great Reset,” which is essentially just another name for “New World Order.”

  Isn’t it marvelous that the government and media hailstorm of covid fear porn that was bombarding Americans only a few months ago has now suddenly vanished? What happened? Well, the establishment was defeated, that’s what happened. With conservatives and moderates in red states in the US and in nations around the world fighting back against the lockdowns and vaccine passports the globalists must have realized the battle in the long run was lost. Suddenly all talk of passports and medical tyranny is gone.

  I realize there are some people out there that give the globalists too much credit and still argue the covid scheme was some kind of success. These people are wrong. If you want to see what success looks like go to China, where hundreds of millions are still suffering from lockdowns today and no one can do anything without an up-to-date vaccine passport and QR code. In China the vax passports are also used for tracking of the population as well as an element of their social credit scores. This is what the globalists wanted for all nations including the US, and they didn’t get it. Therefore, it’s on to the next crisis.

  The stagflation threat worries me more than any other for a number of reasons, and it’s not just because of the potential for extreme poverty. As we all know, the strategy of “order out of chaos” is about creating enough desperation within a target population that the people are willing to give up their freedoms in exchange for a semblance of safety and normalcy. But what specific controls would the establishment seek out?

  Stagflation has the ability to trigger much higher prices in necessities, while it simultaneously drags GDP down along with wages, jobs, manufacturing, etc. There is also the very real threat of government price controls, which would suffocate production and reduce the supply of goods even further. We are not quite to this point yet, but the danger is approaching fast.

  There are two initiatives within the WEF’s Great Reset agenda that parallel stagflation almost exactly and I predict we will be hearing about them often in the coming year.

  The first initiative is the concept of Universal Basic Income (UBI); we heard a lot about this a few years ago but the idea didn’t stick too well with the American public. The truth, however, is that we already had UBI for a time in the form of “covid stimulus checks.” This helicopter money was funded by over $6 trillion in central bank fiat created from nothing, and then directly injected into citizen accounts. It was barely enough for people to live on by itself, but in conjunction with other welfare programs and unemployment checks millions of people were living the easy life at home for well over a year. The money was so easy that the policy actually triggered a national labor shortage.

  This small taste of UBI might have given people the wrong impression about such stimulus programs. After the covid programs the public might be led to believe that UBI would result in a carefree life with money to go around. By themselves without the benefit of other welfare programs, the covid checks would not have been enough to keep people housed and fed; the standard of living for the average person would have to fall dramatically for UBI to work at all. Enter stagflation…

  With economic decline crushing our living standards it could be easier for the establishment to lure the public into UBI. Along with communist-style price controls across the board (and a reduced population due to starvation and poverty) the public would be able to survive, but barely. There would no longer be such a thing as “personal wealth,” only the scraps that governments and bankers are willing to throw people. On top of that, resistance to authoritarianism would be nearly impossible. Once the government takes on the role of mommy and daddy and the the only source of food and housing for the citizenry they are far less likely to stand against any abuse the establishment wants to dish out.

  UBI is a candy coated trap which breeds dependency in a population. Free money is an addictive drug, and America just had a big taste during the pandemic.

  This leads us into the second WEF Great Reset program, which is the concept of the “shared economy.” The globalists think that you should own nothing, have no privacy, and be happy about it. The initial danger here involves rationing. A government cannot institute UBI measures during a stagflationary crisis without also instituting price controls, because otherwise the fiat stimulus used to provide the UBI checks would only create MORE inflation in prices. If UBI is meant to offset inflation but it creates more inflation, then UBI becomes useless. This is another little fact that people like Pelosi will try to gloss over when they claim that money printing helps “fight inflation.”

  When price controls are implemented manufacturing will implode further, because price controls mean producers of necessities will not be able to make much of a profit (or they will make no profit at all). There will be no incentive to produce among the people that actually know how to produce, and these people are not easy to replace. The supply of goods will not be able to meet demand.

  Naturally, the government will take the opportunity to limit the amount of goods any single person or family is allowed to purchase or stockpile through rationing cards.

  

  These kinds of measures have been used in the past, usually during wartime or under communist regimes. But in this case the rationing will be digital and permanent, and it will be designed to further control food and other resources as a means to prevent rebellion by the public. If you can’t store more than a week’s worth of necessities at any given time, then your ability to defy the government is nonexistent unless you know how to live off the land or have access to black markets. All they have to do is cut off your monthly UBI checks and ration account and watch you starve.

  I will cover solutions to these problems in an article coming soon. I think it’s important that people within the liberty movement and outside of the liberty movement start thinking about the scale of the crisis we are facing. It’s not just about economic disaster and adapting to the loss of supply chains and stable currencies; it’s not just about survival. It’s also about fighting back against the inevitable government response to the crisis. They will try to take advantage of people’s pain, and use it to lure those people into slavery. This cannot be allowed to happen.

  *  *  *

  If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 23:45

• These Countries Import The Most Russian Arms
  These Countries Import The Most Russian Arms

  India is not only the biggest arms importer in the world, but, as Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, it is also the biggest customer to the Russian defense industry, data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute shows.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  India’s dependence on Russian defense technology has been identified as one of the main reasons why the country did not speak out against Russia after the country invaded Ukraine at the end of last month and instead has attempted to remain neutral.

  Between 2017 and 2021, India received almost 28 percent of all Russian arms exports. 85 percent of the country’s military equipment is believed to be Russian or Soviet, according to the Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs. Russia and India are also close on trade, with India relying on Russia for fertilizer and energy needs.

  Russia’s second-biggest customer over the past five years was China. Tension between the country and its neighbor India have been responsible for the perceived need for security in the region, tying India even closer to its arms trade partner Russia. China, on the other hand, also has a growing domestics weapons industry.

  Other countries having received large shares of Russian weapons in the past several years are Egypt and Algeria, receiving upwards of 10 percent each, as well as Vietnam, Kazakhstan and Iraq.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 23:25

• New Hampshire House Approves Over-The-Counter Ivermectin
  New Hampshire House Approves Over-The-Counter Ivermectin

  Authored by Alice Giordano via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  New Hampshire took a giant step closer to becoming the first U.S. state to offer Ivermectin without a prescription on March 16.

  

  By a 183 to 159 vote, New Hampshire’s Republican-dominated House of Representatives approved HB1022, which would allow pharmacists to dispense Ivermectin under a standing order, meaning anyone can go to a pharmacist and get the human-grade of the medication.

  NH Republican lawmaker Leah Cushman, a nurse, and the bill’s sponsor, told The Epoch Times in January that she “had absolutely no doubt lives will be saved if human grade Ivermectin was available to COVID patients.”

  “House Republicans sent a clear message today that we support expanding options for the treatment of COVID,” Cushman told The Epoch Times.

  She said its approval by the House also means people will not have to resort to buying human-grade Ivermectin from a foreign country in order to exercise their right to use the medication to treat their symptoms.

  Cushman added that the provision in the bill that safeguards doctors from any potential discipline—or an investigation by the state’s licensing board—for prescribing Ivermectin for COVID-19 takes “some of the political pressure” off them.

  The bill still has to win final approval from the Senate, but that is also Republican-controlled and so far its GOP lawmakers have shown they believe in the state’s Live Free or Die motto when it comes to treatment choices about COVID-19.

  Similar bills are pending legislative approval in Oklahoma, Missouri, Indiana, Arizona, and Alaska.

  In New Hampshire, the Ivermectin bill is one of several COVID-related proposals led by Republicans.

  The House Health, Human Services, and Elderly Affairs Committee, which narrowly voted “ought to pass” on the Ivermectin bill,  also approved a proposed ban on the enforcement of any federal vaccine mandate and rejected a bill that would have added the COVID-19 vaccine to immunization requirements for public school students.

  There has been a divide between NH Republicans and the state’s Gov. Chris Sununu, himself a Republican, over the COVID-19 virus with 13 protesters arrested last year after objecting to his push for the state to accept a total of $27 million in federal money to promote the COVID vaccine.

  Sununu, however, who gets the final say over the bill, has steadfastly remained an opponent to mandating the vaccine and was the only governor in the northeast to join a gubernatorial lawsuit against the Biden administration over its federal vaccine mandate directive.

  That called for anyone who worked at a company with 100 or more employees to be vaccinated against the virus.

  The U.S. Supreme Court blocked the directive but left in place Biden’s mandatory vaccine requirement for healthcare workers. It has also refused to decide the argument that religious exemptions should be a constitutional guarantee to the vaccine.

  Alternative treatments like Ivermectin have caused their share of controversy in New England.

  In Maine, a close neighbor to New Hampshire, the state suspended the medical license of one of the region’s—if not the nation’s—most prominent doctors for prescribing Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, and other alternative treatments to the vaccine.

  Dr. Meryl Nass, a national expert on vaccine-induced illnesses, was also initially ordered to undergo psychiatric treatment, but the state’s medical licensing board withdrew that request.

  Like the NH bill, other state bills seeking to make Ivermectin available over the counter, call for a ban of such retaliation by state licensing boards against doctors or nurse practitioners who prescribe patients Ivermectin and other alternative treatments.

  In addition to Ivermectin, Oklahoma Senate Bill 1525 also proposes making Hydroxychloroquine available over the counter.

  “It’s incredible to me that the sole focus of the current administration and the Capitol’s ‘Science’ is on a vaccine that isn’t quite as ‘safe and effective’ as they make it out to be,” said Nathan Dahm (R-Broken Arrow), the bill’s primary sponsor.

   The Food and Drug Administration along with many doctors remain opposed to the use of Ivermectin against COVID-19, arguing it has not yet been proven as an effective treatment for the virus.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 23:05

• The Science Of Nuclear Weapons, Visualized
  The Science Of Nuclear Weapons, Visualized

  In 1945, the world’s first-ever nuclear weapon was detonated at the Trinity test site in New Mexico, United States, marking the beginning of the Atomic Age.

  Since then, as Visual Capitalist’s Govind Bhutada and Mark Belan detail below, the global nuclear stockpile has multiplied, and when geopolitical tensions rise, the idea of a nuclear apocalypse understandably causes widespread concern.

  But despite their catastrophically large effects, the science of how nuclear weapons work is atomically small…

  

  The Atomic Science of Nuclear Weapons

  All matter is composed of atoms, which host different combinations of three particles—protons, electrons, and neutrons. Nuclear weapons work by capitalizing on the interactions of protons and neutrons to create an explosive chain reaction.

  At the center of every atom is a core called the nucleus, which is composed of closely-bound protons and neutrons. While the number of protons is unique to each element in the periodic table, the number of neutrons can vary. As a result, there are multiple “species” of some elements, known as isotopes.

  For example, here are some isotopes of uranium:

  • Uranium-238: 92 protons, 146 neutrons

  • Uranium-235: 92 protons, 143 neutrons

  • Uranium-234: 92 protons, 142 neutrons

  These isotopes can be stable or unstable. Stable isotopes have a relatively static or unchanging number of neutrons. But when a chemical element has too many neutrons, it becomes unstable or fissile.

  When fissile isotopes attempt to become stable, they shed excess neutrons and energy. This energy is where nuclear weapons get their explosivity from.

  There are two types of nuclear weapons:

  • Atomic Bombs: These rely on a domino effect of multiple fission reactions to produce an explosion, using either uranium or plutonium.

  • Hydrogen Bombs: These rely on a combination of fission and fusion using uranium or plutonium, with the help of lighter elements like the isotopes of hydrogen.

  So, what exactly is the difference between fission and fusion reactions?

  Splitting Atoms: Nuclear Fission

  Nuclear fission—the process used by nuclear reactors—produces large amounts of energy by breaking apart a heavier unstable atom into two smaller atoms, starting a nuclear chain reaction.

  When a neutron is fired into the nucleus of a fissile atom like uranium-235, the uranium atom splits into two smaller atoms known as “fissile fragments” in addition to more neutrons and energy. These excess neutrons can then start a self-sustaining chain reaction by hitting the nuclei of other uranium-235 atoms, resulting in an atomic explosion.

  Atomic bombs use nuclear fission, though it’s important to note that a fission chain reaction requires a particular amount of a fissile material like uranium-235, known as the supercritical mass.

  Merging Atoms: Nuclear Fusion

  Hydrogen bombs use a combination of fission and fusion, with nuclear fusion amplifying a fission reaction to produce a much more powerful explosion than atomic bombs.

  Fusion is essentially the opposite of fission—instead of splitting a heavier atom into smaller atoms, it works by putting together two atoms to form a third unstable atom. It’s also the same process that fuels the Sun.

  Nuclear fusion mainly relies on isotopes of lighter elements, like the two isotopes of hydrogen—deuterium and tritium. When subjected to intense heat and pressure, these two atoms fuse together to form an extremely unstable helium isotope, which releases energy and neutrons.

  The released neutrons then fuel the fission reactions of heavier atoms like uranium-235, creating an explosive chain reaction.

  How Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs Compare

  Just how powerful are hydrogen bombs, and how do they compare to atomic bombs?

  

  The bombs Little Boy and Fat Man were used in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, bringing a destructive end to World War II. The scale of these bombings was, at the time, unparalleled. But comparing these to hydrogen bombs shows just how powerful nuclear weapons have become.

  Castle Bravo was the codename for the United States’ largest-ever nuclear weapon test, a hydrogen bomb that produced a yield of 15,000 kilotons—making it 1,000 times more powerful than Little Boy. What’s more, radioactive traces from the explosion, which took place on the Marshall Islands near Fiji, were found in Australia, India, Japan, U.S., and Europe.

  Seven years later, the Soviet Union tested Tsar Bomba in 1961, the world’s most powerful nuclear weapon. The explosion produced 51,000 kilotons of explosive energy, with a destructive radius of roughly 60km.

  Given how damaging a single nuke can be, it’s difficult to imagine the outcome of an actual nuclear conflict without fear of total annihilation, especially with the world’s nuclear arsenal sitting at over 13,000 warheads.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 22:45

• Homeowner Suing Michigan County Over Home Equity 'Theft' Appeals To 6th Circuit
  Homeowner Suing Michigan County Over Home Equity ‘Theft’ Appeals To 6th Circuit

  Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A widow is appealing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, a court ruling dismissing her claim that local governments in Michigan seized her family’s home over a tax debt and then refused to compensate her for the home equity in the property that she lost.

  

  The unfavorable ruling came despite the fact that the Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that counties may not keep for themselves as a windfall funds left over from the sale of real property for unpaid taxes, an unconstitutional practice the property owner’s lawyers denounce, calling it “home equity theft.”

  The case is “about a city using a predatory tax law as an engine for its other government purposes, and to enrich private companies,” Christina M. Martin, a senior attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), told The Epoch Times in an interview. PLF is a Sacramento, California-based national public interest law firm that represents injured clients free of charge.

  “So the government says that since it didn’t make any money, it doesn’t have to pay these property owners anything,” Martin said.

  “But the bottom line is, the government took these homes that were worth far more than any of the homeowners owed the government. And the government should have to pay just compensation for that surplus that it took.”

  The brief in the appeal (pdf), Hall v. Meisner, court file 20-cv-12230, was filed March 7 with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. The claim was dismissed in May 2021 by Judge Paul D. Borman, a Clinton appointee, on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

  According to the brief, the county took the homes of eight appellants to satisfy tax debts in amounts far below the value of their homes, receiving “a huge windfall at the expense of the homeowners.” The only compensation they received “was forgiveness of the debts that were worth much less than their homes.”

  The case goes back several years when Tawanda and Prentiss Hall fell behind on their property taxes and set up a payment plan with their local government so they would not lose their Southfield, Michigan, home where they lived with their children. Tawanda Hall is one of the eight former property owners suing in federal court.

  But Oakland County terminated the Halls’ plan when their tax debt stood at $22,642, and foreclosed on their home.

  Instead of selling the house at public auction, paying off the debt, and returning the surplus—minus interest and penalties—to the homeowners, the county used the Halls’ money to “enrich” a private company, Southfield Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative, LLC, which is managed by City of Southfield officials.

  “Through a series of legal transactions, the county took the Halls’ home (and the homes of seven other homeowners party to this case) and transferred it through the City of Southfield to the Revitalization Initiative, which sold it for more than $300,000. The Halls received none of the difference between the debt they owed and the sales price,” PLF said in a statement.

  This public-private arrangement was established in 2016 by a city resolution. Southfield relies on a state law allowing cities a “right of first refusal” to buy foreclosed homes from the county for the cost of tax debt. “The Southfield Non-Profit Housing Corporation reimburses the city for the amount of the tax debt, and turns the properties over to the for-profit Revitalization Initiative—for $1—to be fixed up and sold,” PLF said.

  Citing a Detroit News report, PLF stated that the “company generated as much as $10 million from 138 properties from 2016 to 2019 after covering more than $2 million in tax debts to acquire the properties from the city. The former owners of these properties lost everything and received nothing from the surplus value of the properties taken from them.”

  PLF stated that one court described the system as “troubling,” “shocking to the conscience,” and stated that it “rightfully breeds distrust among the electorate.”

  The saga took its toll on the Halls. “Six months after the family was forced to move, an exhausted and overworked Prentiss died from a brain injury sustained in an on-the-job fall—he was 52,” PLF said.

  According to PLF, the case is the latest in the firm’s ongoing work to take on home equity theft across the nation. The firm’s website states that when someone miscalculates a bill, “Typically, a late fee or a strongly worded warning follows. But do you know what happens if you miscalculate and underpay your property taxes—even by just a few dollars? In at least 12 states, the government will seize your property, sell it, and leave you with nothing.”

  PLF argues that a victory in this case would finish what the firm started in Rafaeli LLC v. Oakland County, when the Michigan Supreme Court ruled unanimously to end home equity theft through government foreclosure auctions.

  The Epoch Times reported on that ruling in July 2020. That court ruled that counties in Michigan may not keep for themselves as a windfall funds left over from the sale of real property for unpaid taxes.

  Court documents in that case indicated the plaintiff, who had bought the rental property in Southfield for $60,000, owed $8.41 in unpaid property taxes from 2011, which grew to $285.81 after interest, penalties, and fees. Oakland County foreclosed on the property for the delinquency, selling it at auction for $24,500, and keeping all the sale proceeds in excess of the taxes, interest, penalties, and fees.

  Oakland County, Michigan, Treasurer Robert Wittenberg commented by email on the new appeal.

  “Although the Oakland County Treasurer’s Office does not comment on pending litigation, we place a high priority on helping our residents and business owners to retain their properties while complying with Michigan law. Our commitment—to fulfill our statutory responsibilities, prevent tax foreclosure and the loss of property ownership rights in Oakland County—is unwavering.”

  The Epoch Times also reached out to the City of Southfield for comment on the new appeal but had not received a reply as of press time.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 22:25

• World's Top-Ranked Tennis Player May Need To Denounce Putin To Play At Wimbledon
  World’s Top-Ranked Tennis Player May Need To Denounce Putin To Play At Wimbledon

  The world’s top-ranked tennis player, Daniil Medvedev, could be banned from playing at Wimbledon unless he offers “assurances” that he isn’t a supporter of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

  

  Medvedev, along with other Russian and Belarusian tennis players, has been competing as a ‘neutral athlete’ at the BNP Paribas Open this week in the wake of the invasion of Ukraine. But the UK Sports Minister Nigel Huddleston says this isn’t enough, Eurosport reports.

  Huddleston said Tuesday that the government is in talks with the All-England Lawn Tennis Club regarding their stance for Wimbledon (the tournament doesn’t begin until June 27).

  He added that “nobody flying the flag for Russia should be allowed” to play in the famous Grand Slam tournament. In fact, the ban should probably go “beyond that” and bar any Russians who refuse to denounce their president (something that could carry criminal penalties back in Russia). The Wimbledon organizers are reportedly having talks on the issue.

  Tennis has so far stopped short of banning Russian players, however Russia have been banned from certain team competitions like the Davis Cup. Huddleston says the UK is looking at how to reach a “broad global consensus” with other countries about how Russian athletes should be treated.

  “We are looking at this issue of what we do with individuals and we are thinking about the implications of it, because I don’t think people would accept individuals very clearly flying the Russian flag, in particular if there is any support for Putin and his regime.”

  Medvedev, who is set to lose the world No.1 ranking to Novak Djokovic after losing to Gael Monfils at Indian Wells, said that if he had his druthers, he would simply go on “promoting tennis” wherever he plays. As for the invasion of Ukraine, it’s “tough to talk on”, he said.

  “It’s always tough to talk on this subject because I want to play tennis – play in different countries.”

  “I want to promote my sport, I want to promote what I’m doing in my country for sure, and right now the situation is that that is the only way I can play.”

  Meanwhile, Huddleston, the UK sports minister, said he will do everything in his power to ensure that Russia will not return to the international sporting stage for the foreseeable future.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 22:05

• US State Department Thinks It's An Authority On Fake News
  US State Department Thinks It’s An Authority On Fake News

  Authored by Adam Andrzejewski via RealClear Policy (emphasis ours),

  Some say America has a fake news problem. They might be on to something.

  Americans’ trust in our media is at one of its lowest points, and social media has made disinformation easy to spread. But as America is tackling its own fake news problem, our government is pretending to be experts on it in Zimbabwe. In fact, the U.S. is sending $100,000 to Zimbabwe to help that country tackle fake news, according to a grant notice from the U.S. Department of State.

  

  The grant description states that the goal of the grant is, “To improve and promote adherence to international best practice in implementing fundamental freedom of speech and the press freedom.”

  It encourages a three-pronged approach: Strengthening public understanding of freedom of speech and press freedom, improving media literacy to combat disinformation and increasing media sustainability, innovation and professionalization.

  The idea that the U.S. is an expert on disinformation, free speech, and combating censorship, and that it should be teaching them to other countries, is absurd.

  Between domestic debates on big tech censorship, the increasing polarization of news outlets, and increasing disinformation on social media, the U.S. has no business telling other countries the right way to do such things, let alone spending tax dollars to do so.

  The #WasteOfTheDay is presented by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 21:45

• 3.5 Trillion Reasons To Brace For Tomorrow's Massive Quad-Witching Expiration
  3.5 Trillion Reasons To Brace For Tomorrow’s Massive Quad-Witching Expiration

  As Goldman’s head of FX sales Tony Pasquariello wrote last Friday, “next week is a huge one, featuring the FOMC on Wednesday and a major derivatives expiry on Friday.” And indeed, now that the Fed’s rate hike is officially a fact and in the rearview mirror, Wall Street traders are bracing for the week’s final fireworks.

  In the quarterly event known as “quad witching” (technically, it’s been “triple” since the close of OneChicago in September 2020, when single stock futures ceased trading, but for veteran traders it will always be quad), over $3.5 trillion of Index Options, Index Futures and Single Stock Options expire, either at the open of trade or at the close.

  

  Adding to the frenzy, at the same time more near-the-money options are maturing than at any time since 2019 meaning that highly caffeinated traders will actively be trading around those positions as they seek to capitalize on any drift away “pins” (we will have a full list of the stocks most likely to see significant volatility tomorrow morning).

  

  Furthermore, according to Goldman’s Rocky Fishman, investors will also be watching the ETN market given the substantial size of expiring VXX. As a reminder, the VXX – the single largest volatility-tracking ETN – has been trading at a 12% premium to its NAV since its issuer suspended creations…

  

  … and should the VXX rally strongly from its current level, its in-the-money call options would be large relative to shares outstanding.

  

  Tomorrow’s quad witching also coincides with a rebalancing of benchmark indexes including the S&P 500, a two-for-one special that leads to soaring trading volumes that rank among the highest of the year. According to an estimate from Howard Silverblatt, senior index analyst at S&P Dow Jones Indices, the rebalance in the index alone could spur $33 billion of stock trades.

  

  Traditionally, over the past year, “quad witches” have seen poor market returns, however heading into tomorrow’s option expiration, the S&P is posting the best 3-day return since the Dec 2020 election.

  

  So is the party about to end? As many contracts expire, Bloomberg notes that the key question is whether investors will rebuild their record holdings of index puts amid growth concerns and the war in Ukraine — or will they come out of their shells, and chase the market rebound with call contracts, creating a negative gamma meltup at a time when most dealers are still short gamma.

  

  Or will stocks tumble as trading desks such as JPMorgan “sell the rally” to naive investors who listen to the bank’s latest call to buy the dip.

  

  But while retail investors are confident they know how to trade tomorrow’s chaos, veteran traders are ducking for cover: “I’ve never seen an environment where you’ve had so many potential overhangs in the market that can not be controlled,” said David Wagner, a portfolio manager at Aptus Capital Advisors. “We’ll see if people can see to redeploy their puts.”

  If not, we may get an extension of the meltup as an avalanche of put closing sparks a delta cascade: exploding derivatives volume has been a fixture of the post-pandemic market — whipsawing underlying stocks in both directions, again and again. To strategists including Nomura’s Charlie McElligott, this week’s advance in the S&P 500 has again been amplified by the hedging activity of market-makers. And should we get another gamma squeeze, the S&P may soar.

  On the other hand, many of the usual catalysts for a melt up are missing: thanks to the recent surge in stocks, dealers are now flat gamma, meaning they no longer have to accentuate market trends..

  

  Meanwhile, thanks to the recent 3-day meltup, the negative delta has also been unwound faster than anticipated. Notably, as SpotGamma explains, yesterday saw a total lack of positive call deltas in the SPY & QQQ. You can see below that SPY traders were fairly heavy call sellers into the AM short-stock cover, and then after 1PM ET and through the FOMC flow was neutral. The QQQ chart was similar.

  

  Commenting on the same phenomenon, Nomura’s McElligott writes that the “Short Delta” hedge cover on the murdering of downside Puts led to move short-covering of client dynamic hedges in futures too, where for ES, the bank’s imbalance monitor showed what was the second largest day of “buy pressure” over the past month for all lot sizes, led by what looked like straight-up VWAP style buying-to-cover (slicing your order in the machine over “small lots”)

  

  Another reason why stocks could defy prevailing sentiment, which as the latest Fear and Greed index describes simply as “fear”…

  

  … is technicals and positioning. As Marko Kolanovic notes, current risk positioning is very light as a result of high and persistent volatility, and risk aversion caused by global geopolitical developments: “the AAII bull-bear indicator at -27 is near its 2020 lows and 2 standard deviations below average. Equity exposure for volatility sensitive investors – the largest and fastest group of investors (including insurance, risk parity, dynamically hedged portfolios, HF platforms, etc.) – is now in its ~5-10th percentile, and for this reason risks are skewed to the upside.” Meanwhile, with market sentiment weak and institutional-fund exposure to equities near mutliyear lows, caution in the derivatives market is everywhere. The 20-day average of the Cboe put-call ratio for equities, for example, hovers near a two-year high, which means that once again many are hedged and with little impetus to sell, stocks may simply melt up instead.

  For those asking which strikes matter the most now into Op-Ex / and what % of overall gamma is set to expire along with the current and max Gamma sensitivity, here is the answer courtesy of Nomura.

  SPX / SPY currently “pinning” btwn 4400 strike ($4.1B $Gamma), 4350 ($2.5B), 4300 ($2.4B); currently see ~43% of the $Gamma dropping-off for Friday’s expiration; currently at “Zero Gamma” level, “Max Short Gamma” at 4125 and -$17B per 1% move

  

  Source: Nomura

  QQQ $350 strike ($640mm $Gamma), $345 ($608mm), $340 ($595mm); currently see 56% of the $Gamma dropping-off for Friday’s expiration; currently at “Zero Gamma” level, “Max Short Gamma” at $314 and ~-$1.7B per 1%

  

  Source: Nomura

  IWM $200 strike ($471mm $Gamma), $205 ($274mm), $195 ($199mm); currently see 63% of the $Gamma dropping-off for Friday’s expiration; currently a modest “Short Gamma vs Spot” at -$100mm per 1% currently, “Max Short Gamma” at $192 and ~-$600mm per 1%

  

  Source: Nomura

  HYG $82 strike ($973mm $Gamma), $81 ($799mm), $80 ($477mm); currently see 58% of the $Gamma dropping-off for Friday’s expiration; currently still very “Short Gamma vs Spot” at -$1.0B per 1% move, “Max Short Gamma” at $79, -$1.2B per 1% move

  

  That is a lot of gamma to ‘unclench’.

  In any case, amid this cacophony of bullish and bearish catalysts, it is virtually impossible to come up with a coherent case for either sustained market upside or another sharp burst of selling: “We see a general trend of continued risk aversion among investors, and expectations that the stock market remains volatile,” said Steve Sears, president at Options Solutions. “There are so many major events that could change the market’s tempo that hedging and patient fortitude appears to be the message from the options market.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 21:25

• White House Wants $22.5 Billion For More COVID Funding
  White House Wants $22.5 Billion For More COVID Funding

  Authored by Philip Wegmann via RealClear Politics (emphasis ours),

  At the beginning of the pandemic, the previous president had a vision – one his scientific advisors urged him to abandon. Not only did Donald Trump want the economy back open, he said that by Easter Sunday of 2020, “you will have packed churches all over the country.” It never happened, at least not on the scale he envisioned.

  

  Two years later, after millions of vaccines have been administered and the virus has receded from its peak, things look very different. A sign of the times: After two years, the White House plans to resume regular public tours. Doors are scheduled to open on Good Friday.

  As Biden officials smile about the poetry of that rhyming calendar, the White House is dealing with a political paradox: How to secure more COVID aid from Congress as the administration pivots away from the pandemic. It’s proving to be a hard sell.

  The same morning the White House announced a return to business as usual for tourists, the administration raised the alarm about a virus they believe is on the run. Cases are down 95% since the peak of the omicron variant. Hospitalizations have similarly plunged by 85%. More than 215 million Americans are already fully vaccinated. Yet officials warned on a call with reporters Tuesday morning that their pandemic coffers could soon be empty.

  “For months, we’ve made clear to Congress, on a bipartisan basis, that the funding for tests, treatments, and vaccines was drying up and that additional funds would be needed,” the official said.

  How much money do they need? The number administration officials floated was $22.5 billion. And if they don’t get it? White House budgeteers will make trims to the request. They warn, however, that the U.S. won’t have enough boosters or variant-specific vaccines “for all Americans,” according to a fact sheet provided by the administration. They won’t be able to buy monoclonal antibody treatments, either, and the current supply is expected to run out as soon as May. Without a cash infusion, they predict that the testing capacity will collapse.

  Governors were warned late Tuesday morning that the administration would be reducing the number of monoclonal antibody treatments by 30% within a week.

  Republicans say they aren’t necessarily opposed to more COVID spending. They just want to know where all the other COVID cash went first, as Sen. Richard Shelby explained to Politico. “There’s a doubt that they need this money with a lot of us,” explained the Alabama Republican. “I’ve said this for weeks, a real accounting of the money [already spent on COVID] that the American people deserve and then go from there. If there’s no money left, and it’s not hidden somewhere, and if they show a need, then you got, maybe, a persuasive case.”

  Asked if the White House would negotiate for a lower number, a Biden official gave an emphatic “no.” And when then asked if they would accept using different funds for their COVID priorities, the official demurred, saying only that “the money they provided over a year ago has been well spent, but we defer to Congress on the specific legislative approach.”

  It is a routine kind of squabble, albeit one that comes at the tail end of a once-in-a-century pandemic. The difficulty for Biden may be that the public is moving on after he pivoted away from the virus during his State of the Union address. Masks are increasingly uncommon these days. Dr. Anthony Fauci has receded from the cable news circuit. News of a land war in Europe now eclipses COVID coverage.

  White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told RealClearPolitics that COVID funding was a necessity, despite the public’s shifting attention. “We’re in a different stage and we have a range of tools in order to fight the pandemic,” she explained, adding that in order to keep up that fight, “We need money.” A new subvariant of the virus, BA2 omicron, has already made it to American shores. It is apparently even more transmissible than the original Omicron strain, Psaki noted, but also treatable. “We need to have masks, tests, boosters, treatments for [the] immunocompromised in order to continue to treat the American people during a pandemic,” she said. “So, it remains urgent.”

  That urgency was underscored by breaking news Tuesday evening. At least nine Democrats had already tested positive for the virus after those lawmakers attended a party retreat last week in Philadelphia. The president was also at the event, but he tested negative Sunday night, Psaki told reporters. Then, Kamala Harris’ husband Doug Emhoff tested positive.

  The vice president had stood shoulder to shoulder with Biden earlier in the day at an indoor event, and she was expected to share the stage with the president at an event in the East Room of the White House to celebrate “Equal Pay Day.” The room was packed front to back, but Harris wasn’t there.

  “Earlier today, the Second Gentleman tested positive for COVID-19. Out of an abundance of caution, the Vice President will not participate in tonight’s event,” the White House announced just moments before Biden entered the room. “The Vice President tested negative for COVID-19 today and will continue to test.” The president shrugged off the news like it was routine.

  “Welcome to the White House,” Biden told the crowd that included House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and numerous members of his cabinet. “This is the biggest crowd we’ve had since we got here.” Only later, after a gaffe where he mistakenly said that “the first lady’s husband contracted COVID,” did Biden ask the mostly unmasked crowd to send to Harris “our love.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 21:05

• "Looks Like Volcano" – Smoke From Massive Walmart Fire Seen From Space 
  “Looks Like Volcano” – Smoke From Massive Walmart Fire Seen From Space 

  A monstrous plume of thick black smoke soared into the sky on Wednesday after a Walmart distribution center caught fire in Indiana. The fire could be seen from miles away — and even spotted by meteorological satellites.

  Around 1300 ET Wednesday, Plainfield, Indiana firefighters arrived at the scene of a 1.2 million-square-foot Walmart distribution center entirely engulfed in flames. 

  @WTHRcom pic.twitter.com/R4AQmTUZmx

  — annemariewthr (@AnneMarieWTHR) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  It looked like a volcano! About a quarter mile from our house. pic.twitter.com/w39Enplm1h

  — Eric Street (@EStreet112) March 17, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  A photo from 30 miles away. 

  30 miles away pic.twitter.com/8HTohPPMgA

  — Lord_Liberty (@Lord_Liberty76) March 17, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  By evening, more than 200 fight fighters from 24 agencies were battling the massive fire as millions of items, mainly consumer goods, burnt to a crisp and unleashed black smoke that could be seen from outer space.

  0710hrs – Crews have rotated throughout the overnight attempting to manage most hot spots. 24 fire departments have assisted thus far and units will remain on the scene for quite some time. Thanks to all those that have provided assistance. pic.twitter.com/QtMerIOPtd

  — Plainfield Fire (@PlainfieldFire1) March 17, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The National Weather Service Indianapolis tweeted a short GIF of one of its satellites that picked up the black smoke. 

  Visible satellite imagery showing the smoke plume from the fire in Plainfield, IN this afternoon. #inwx pic.twitter.com/PHMXJ6VUuy

  — NWS Indianapolis (@NWSIndianapolis) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Here’s a still shot of the black smoke seen from space. 

  

  “We’re thankful to local emergency crews for their quick response and for helping us account for the safety of our associates and those at the facility,” Walmart told Bloomberg in an emailed statement. “We’d like to emphasize our gratitude to first responders for their efforts in maintaining the safety of everyone at the facility.” 

  The satellite’s-eye view of the toxic plume spreading across the state is absolutely shocking.

  No details have been released on disruptions to customers stemming from the loss of a major disruption center. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 20:45

• 8-Year CIA Program Helped Provoke Russian Invasion: Report
  8-Year CIA Program Helped Provoke Russian Invasion: Report

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  CIA paramilitaries had been training Ukrainian forces on the frontlines of the Donbas war against Russian-backed separatists since 2014 and were only pulled out by the Biden administration last month, Yahoo News reported on Wednesday, citing former US officials.

  The CIA first sent a small number of paramilitaries to eastern Ukraine when the war started in 2014, which was sparked by a US-backed coup in Kyiv and the Donbas separatists declaring independence from the post-coup government.

  

  As part of the training, CIA paramilitaries taught Ukrainian forces sniper techniques, how to operate US-provided Javelin anti-tank missiles, and how to avoid being tracked on the battlefield by using covert communications and other means. The former officials said at first the CIA was surprised at the capability of Russia and the separatists compared with US adversaries in the Middle East.

  The US military held similar training programs for Ukrainian forces in western Ukraine that have been publicly acknowledged. In January, Yahoo News revealed that the CIA had also been holding a US-based training program for Ukrainian forces. A former CIA official said the US-based program was training “an insurgency” and taught Ukrainians how to “kill Russians.”

  The secret CIA program in eastern Ukraine was much more provocative than the other training programs since it essentially meant the US was involved in a proxy war on Russia’s border. The former officials told Yahoo News that during the first year of the Trump administration, National Security Officials reviewed the program, which had begun under the Obama administration.

  The CIA paramilitaries were directed to advise and train but not participate in combat. Trump administration officials feared the authorities were too broad and that the mission was too ambiguous. One former official said questions that were asked included: “How far can you go with existing covert action authorities? If, God forbid, they’ve shot some Russians, is that a problem? Do you need special authorities for that?”

  The former official said that the Trump administration discussed what Russia’s redlines could be and determined the US support for Ukrainian forces fell within historically acceptable bounds. “There was a school of thought that the Russians spoke the good old language of proxy war,” the official said.

  CIA paramilitaries soon concluded that, in Russia and its proxies, the agency was facing an adversary whose capabilities far outmatched the Islamist groups that CIA had been battling in the post-9/11 wars. “We learned a lot real quick.”https://t.co/IlSxf4wAIW

  — Zach Dorfman (@zachsdorfman) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Despite the concerns, the secret program continued for years until February. The former officials said that when a Russian invasion became “increasingly acute,” the Biden administration pulled all CIA personnel out of Ukraine, including the paramilitaries. One former official said the Biden administration was “terrified of even clandestine folks being on the frontline.”

  Although it’s hard to know what the military situation looks like in Ukraine, the US claims Ukraine is putting up a much fiercer resistance than Russia expected. The former officials who spoke with Yahoo News suggested the resistance was in part thanks to the CIA training program. The US continues to fuel the fighting as President Biden has already pledged over $1 billion in new military aid for Ukraine since the invasion started.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 20:25

• US Wastewater Data Hint At Rising COVID Cases
  US Wastewater Data Hint At Rising COVID Cases

  America’s best early detection system for COVID is once again flashing a warning that cases are rising once again as the US continues to treat the pandemic like ancient history.

  

  According to Bloomberg, a wastewater network that monitors for COVID trends is warning that cases are once again rising in many parts of the US, according to a CDC analysis of the data.

  More than one-third of the CDC’s wastewater sample sites across the U.S. showed rising COVID trends in the period ending March 1 to March 10, though reported cases have stayed near a recent low. The number of sites with rising signals of COVID cases is nearly twice what it was during the Feb. 1 to Feb. 10 period, when the wave of omicron-variant cases was fading rapidly.

  Whether this increase will precipitate another surge in cases, or be remembered as a bump on the road to defeating COVID, remains unclear.

  Warmer weather in the US is allowing people to spend more time outside, and the natural and vaccine-induced immunity in the population should act as a natural bulwark against reinfection.

  “While wastewater levels are generally very low across the board, we are seeing an uptick of sites reporting an increase,” Amy Kirby, the head of the CDC’s wastewater monitoring program, said in an email to Bloomberg. “These bumps may simply reflect minor increases from very low levels to still low levels. Some communities though may be starting to see an increase in Covid-19 infections, as prevention strategies in many states have changed in recent weeks.”

  Bloomberg also had an opportunity to analyze the CDC’s wastewater data from more than 530 sewage monitoring sites. Most of the data reported during the 10-day window from March 1 to March 10.

  Of these sites, 59% showed falling COVID trends, 5% were roughly stable, but 36% were increasing. Rises or declines are measured over a 15-day period.

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  So far, the warning provided by the sewer networks hasn’t shown up in case numbers and the number of patients being hospitalized for COVID is still near recent lows.

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  According to the CDC’s latest community levels rating, 98% of the US is in places with a “low” community level rating. Those ratings, however, are based on case numbers and hospitalizations.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 20:05

• Watch: Lindsey Graham Calls For Putin's Assassination For Third Time
  Watch: Lindsey Graham Calls For Putin’s Assassination For Third Time

  Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

  Senator Lindsey Graham has TRIPLED down on calling for Russian leader Vladimir Putin to be assassinated.

  

  Speaking at a press conference, Graham said “I hope he will be taken out, one way or the other,” adding “I don’t care how they take him out. I don’t care if we send him to The Hague and try him. I just want him to go.”

  “It’s time for him to go,” Graham further said of Putin, echoing Joe Biden’s blurted remarks that “He’s a war criminal.”

  “I wish somebody had taken Hitler out in the ’30s. So yes, Vladimir Putin is not a legitimate leader. He is a war criminal.” Graham declared.

  Graham further proclaimed that Russia is “going to have zero future” under Putin, adding “I think the world is better off without Putin – the sooner the better, and I don’t care how we do it.”

  Watch:

  Graham has called for taking out Putin three times in the past three weeks now.

  During the press conference, Graham fielded yet more questions from reporters asking why the U.S. isn’t backing a NATO enforced no-fly zone over Ukraine.

  The Senator explained that it would basically mean a direct war with Russia, a factor that appears to be completely lost on the gutter press.

  Don’t think they won’t start WWIII for clicks and dopamine.

  Fucking lunatics. https://t.co/GPA9TWqTwP

  — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Journalists are still lobbying for nuclear armageddon. Absolute gutter trash. https://t.co/XjySzWkIuR

  — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) March 17, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  *  *  *

  Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

  In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here. Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 19:45

• Shenzhen Reopens Factories As COVID Cases Retreat
  Shenzhen Reopens Factories As COVID Cases Retreat

  That was quick.

  Just days after locking down Shenzhen, China’s biggest high-tech hub, CCP authorities have decided to allow most manufacturing businesses to reopen and resume production after shutdowns created chaos in the global supply chain. As we reported the other day, factories owned by Foxconn and other major tech manufacturers were idled due to the lockdown.

  

  Huang Qiang, deputy secretary general of Shenzhen’s government, said Thursday during a citywide press conference that mass screening had gone smoothly since the start of the planned week-long lockdown began on Monday. So far, there have been fewer confirmed cases from community screening in recent days and most new cases have been found among quarantined close contacts or areas placed under restrictions.

  On Thursday, Shenzhen reported 71 symptomatic cases and 20 asymptomatic cases, as China logged more than 2,400 local infections nationwide, a number that was even lower than the 3,000+ new cases reported on Wednesday, which in turn was lower than the 5,000+ number from Tuesday (which was also the largest daily tally since the Wuhan outbreak two years ago), according to SCMP.

  

  Huang said Shenzhen still faces the risk of new imported cases, or a resurgence from the virus that’s still spreading, especially in the city’s overcrowded urban villages.

  “We will keep conducting citywide mass screening…to quickly identify the infected and cut transmission links,” he said. “At the same time, we are building a strong line of defense against cases from outside the city.”

  He also said that the government has put getting factories and businesses up and running on the agenda.

  “We will organise the resumption of work and production in an orderly manner, guide enterprises in areas such as the disinfection of factories, monitoring employees’ temperature and improving ventilation in staff canteens,” he said. “We will also provide businesses with practical help to resolve problems like manpower, capital and raw materials.”

  Meanwhile, Shenzhen is also planning on relocating some families in Tangyan village in its Futian district for a 14-day centralized quarantine, after COVID cases were found earlier in the neighborhood.

  The area will be thoroughly disinfected and residents can return ‘in an orderly manner’ after a 14-day monitoring period. Designated teams will be put in place to cater to those who need additional care, like the elderly with chronic illnesses.

  Lockdowns have rattled China’s economy, creating a major threat to GDP growth, as the following chart from Goldman shows.

  

  With this in mind, it’s easy to understand why the CCP is scrambling to get factories back up and running as quickly as possible.

  Presently, all shops and businesses are closed in Shenzhen except for supermarkets and restaurants offering takeout. The shutdowns have strained China’s economy and hammered its stocks, prompting the CCP yesterday to announce that it would take steps to buttress the stock market after several brutal days in the red.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 19:25

• Victor Davis Hanson: 10 Realities Of Ukraine
  Victor Davis Hanson: 10 Realities Of Ukraine

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via Townhall.com,

  

  One — Reassuring an enemy what one will not do ensures that the enemy will do just that and more. Unpredictability and occasional enigmatic silence bolster deterrence. But President Joe Biden’s predictable reassurance to Russian President Vladimir Putin that he will show restraint means Putin likely will not.

  Two — No-fly zones don’t work in a big-power, symmetrical standoff. In a cost-benefit analysis, they are not worth the risk of shooting down the planes of a nuclear power. They usually do little to stop planes outside of such zones shooting missiles into them. Sending long-range, high-altitude anti-aircraft batteries to Ukraine to deny Russian air superiority is a far better way of regaining air parity.

  Three — Europe, NATO members, and Germany in particular have de facto admitted that their past decades of shutting down nuclear plants, coal mines, and oil and gas fields have left Europe at the mercy of Russia. They are promising to rearm and meet their promised military contributions. By their actions, they are admitting that their critics, the United States in particular, were right, and they were dangerously wrong in empowering Putin.

  Four — China is now pro-Russian. Beijing wants Russian natural resources at a discount. Russia will pay for overpriced access to Chinese finance, commerce, and markets. Yet if Russia loses the Ukraine war, goes broke, and as an international pariah is ostracized, then China will likely cut the smelly Russian albatross from its neck  – in fear of new Western financial, cultural, and commercial clout.

  Five — Americans are finally digesting just how destructive the humiliating flight from Afghanistan was. The catastrophe signaled to Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran that Western deterrence had died.

  No surprise that Russia sent missiles into a Ukrainian base near the Polish-NATO border. North Korea in January launched more missiles than in any month in its history. Iran sent missiles into Kurdistan. China announces daily it is just a matter of time until it absorbs Taiwan. The tens of billions of dollars of sophisticated weaponry sent to Ukraine by the West are still far less than what the U.S. military handed over to the terrorist Taliban.

  Six — The Ukraine war did not cause inflation and record gas prices. Both were already spiking by early February 2022.

  The cause was the Biden Administration’s year-long radical expansion of the money supply at a time of post-COVID, pent-up consumer demand. It foolishly continued de facto zero-interest rates. Its generous COVID subsidies for the unemployed discouraged a return to work, while slashing U.S. oil and gas production and pipelines.

  Prior to Putin’s invasion, Biden was quite publicly blaming greedy corporations, oil companies, COVID, and former President Donald Trump for the inflation he had birthed in 2021. And he was claiming undeniable high prices were only temporary or mostly an obsession of the elite.

  Seven — Putin did not invade during the Trump tenure, although he had been more aggressive under previous American leadership with his prior attacks on Georgia, Ukraine, and Crimea. Russia stayed still when oil prices were low, fuel supplies in the West were plentiful, and the United States was confident. When the U.S. was neither bogged down in optional military interventions nor led by a president predictably accommodating to Russian aggressions, Russia stayed quiet.

  Putin took note of increased NATO and U.S. defense spending. He feared low global oil prices and record American oil and gas production. He was wary after unpredictable American strikes against enemies like ISIS, Abu al-Baghdadi, and the Iranian General Qasem Soleimani.

  Eight — It is not “escalation” to send arms to Ukraine. The Russians far more aggressively supplied the North Koreans and North Vietnamese in their wars against America, without spreading the war globally. Pakistan, Syria, and Iran sent deadly weapons — many in turn supplied to them by Russia, North Korea, and China — to kill thousands of Americans during the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

  Nine — Putin may never fully absorb Ukraine as long as it can easily be supplied across its borders by four NATO countries. The U.S. deadlocked in the Korean War, lost the Vietnam War, was stalled in Iraq, and fled Afghanistan in part because its enemies were easily supplied by nearby border friends on the assumption the U.S. could not strike such abettors.

  Ten — It is not “un-American” to point out that prior American appeasement under the Obama and the Biden Administrations explains not why Putin wished to go into Ukraine, but why he felt he could. It is not “treasonous” to say Ukraine and the United States previously should have stayed out of each other’s domestic affairs and politics — but still do not excuse Putin’s savage aggression. It is not traitorous to admit that Russia for centuries relied on buffer states between Europe — lost when its Warsaw Pact satellite members joined NATO after its defeat in the Cold War. But that reality also does not justify Putin’s savage attack.

  We should not rehash the past but learn from it — and thereby ensure Putin is defeated now and deterred in the future.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 19:05

• White House Appoints New COVID Czar As Cases Wane
  White House Appoints New COVID Czar As Cases Wane

  As COVID cases have declined dramatically across the US (although there have been some signs about a potential resurgence via wastewater monitoring), the Biden Administration has selected a new COVID czar who will be responsible with overseeing America’s return to the office (or at least so the Biden Administration hopes). 

  

  Public health expert Ashish Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, will take over as the White House’s top COVID advisor be tasked with helping workplaces and schools “cope with COVID” as millions of workers and students readjust to in-person work and education, while also preparing for possible future waves and variants. Jha previously led research into the Ebola virus and has regularly served as a medical expert on television shows.

  The change comes as Pfizer and Moderna push for the authorization of a fourth COVID booster for Americans.

  Jha will succeed Jeffrey Zients, a former director of the National Economic Council during the Obama Administration, as the White House coronavirus coordinator.

  President Biden thanked Zients for his service, and praised Jha as one of the country’s leading public-health experts.

  “Jeff spent the last 14 months working tirelessly to help combat COVID,” Biden said. “He is a man of service and an expert manager. I will miss his counsel and I’m grateful for his service.”

  […]

  “Dr. Jha is one of the leading public health experts in America, and a well-known figure to many Americans from his wise and calming public presence,” Biden said. “And as we enter a new moment in the pandemic — executing on my National Covid-19 Preparedness Plan and managing the ongoing risks from Covid — Dr. Jha is the perfect person for the job.”

  But as Bloomberg noted, the change comes as Western Europe and South Korea have reported case spikes in recent days, suggesting the possibility of a fresh wave of infections.

  The change comes as the White House has been plagued by recent COVID infections.

  Vice President Kamala Harris’s husband, Doug Emhoff and eight House Democrats tested positive for coronavirus infections in recent days, and Biden’s plans to celebrate St. Patrick’s Day with Irish Prime Minister Micheal Martin were thrown into turmoil when the taoiseach tested positive on Wednesday. The White House has said the president is not a close contact of any of the individuals, and that he tested negative on Sunday.

  While Dr. Anthony Fauci has been the government official most closely associated with the COVID pandemic, he is technically the president’s chief medical advisor, along with his longtime role as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

  One of Jha’s first tasks will be convincing Congress to approve new funding for the response. The administration sought $22.5 billion as part of an omnibus government funding package but talks collapsed as Republicans demanded spending offsets and questioned the need for new funds.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 18:45

• Reading Ability Of Children Plummets Compared To Pre-COVID Times
  Reading Ability Of Children Plummets Compared To Pre-COVID Times

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

  The reading ability of children has plummeted compared to pre-COVID times thanks to lockdown policies that led to the closure of schools, according to a new study.

  

  “A study by researchers from TU Dortmund has found that German children in the fourth grade of primary school are far less capable of reading than their predecessors who passed through the grade pre-pandemic,” reports Breitbart.

  A standard reading test taken by fourth graders from 2021 was compared to results using the same test from 2016.

  The number of children who had a reading level rated “good” to “very good” has dropped by 7 per cent while over a quarter of students who took the test in 2021 now have problems with reading comprehension.

  “If you express it in years of learning, the children are missing an average of half a year of learning,” said Dr. Ulrich Ludewig, who helped to lead the study.

  “If the change in the composition of the student body is taken into account, the gap while slightly smaller, the significant decline in mean reading ability remains.”

  With reading being a crucial aspect of every subject, the impact also had a knock on effect in other areas of learning.

  The study once again highlights the devastating impact that COVID lockdowns had on children and the morally vacant position of those who supported them.

  UNICEF previously warned that pandemic school closures led to a “nearly insurmountable scale of loss to children’s schooling” and that “intensive support” is needed to get kids back on track.

  As we previously highlighted, for many children, the damage could be permanent.

  Speech therapist Jaclyn Theek says that mask wearing during the pandemic has caused a 364% increase in patient referrals of babies and toddlers.

  “They’re not making any word attempts and not communicating at all with their family,” she said, adding that symptoms of autism are also skyrocketing.

  A speech therapist says her clinic has seen a “364% increase in patient referrals of babies and toddlers”.

  “It’s very important kids do see your face to learn, so they’re watching your mouth.”

  What the hell have we done?!

  End this cruel insanity. pic.twitter.com/DN6J4yQfju

  — Darren Grimes (@darrengrimes_) January 26, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  *  *  *

  Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

  In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/17/2022 – 18:25