• A Myth Is Born: How CDC, FDA, & Media Wove A Web Of Ivermectin Lies That Outlives The Truth
  A Myth Is Born: How CDC, FDA, & Media Wove A Web Of Ivermectin Lies That Outlives The Truth

  Via RESCUE with Michael Capuzzo Substack,

  New Mexico officials admit they were wrong: Two people died from covid. NOT from ivermectin. Yet the CDC generated the nation’s highest health alert and a thousand fake headlines on false cases.

  Linda Bonvie  and Mary Beth Pfeiffer

  When a Texas cattleman, seventy-nine, died last September in New Mexico after contracting covid, his family never anticipated the worldwide headlines that would ensue.

  In a ballyhooed press conference, New Mexico Human Services Secretary Dr. David Scrase, the state’s top health chief, announced New Mexico’s first ivermectin “overdose,” soon adding a second fatality allegedly from “ivermectin toxicity.”

  

  An ornament with a photo of the Texas cattleman, whose death was falsely attributed to ivermectin and used as part of a deliberate effort to make that perfectly safe drug appear to be highly dangerous, is lovingly hung on the family Christmas tree by his daughter. 

  Now, Scrase has acknowledged that his repeated, what he called “offhand,” assertions were groundless. Two deaths were not caused by ivermectin, a long-used generic drug that was emerging as a covid treatment. Instead, he said that the pair died because they “actually just delayed their care with covid.” 

  That is a big difference.

  Scrase backpedaled on December 1 in a little-noticed online press briefing and only after we pressed his agency to provide evidence for its claims of so-called “ivermectin deaths.” Officials had repeatedly said they were awaiting a toxicology report on the cattleman’s death. Yet we learned that the report was never even ordered or done, and, moreover, the man’s death was ruled by the state’s coroner as being from “natural” causes.

  Not a single media outlet reported Scrase’s admission, even as dozens, including the The Hill and The New York Times, had eagerly covered his original assertions about ivermectin, an anti-parasitic drug awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 2015.

  “I don’t want more people to die,” read one early headline, quoting Scrase. “It’s the wrong medicine for something really serious,” Scrase said in the Times article.

  Doctors, scientists, and toxicologists worldwide were puzzled by the assertions, because ivermectin is an extraordinarily safe, FDA-approved drug. A fixture on the WHO’s list of 100 essential medicines all hospital systems are recommended to carry, nearly four billion doses have been given in four decades.

  New Mexico became a key player in a broad pattern of governmental deception late last summer to portray ivermectin as dangerous, in tandem with three related developments. Research strongly supported the drug’s efficacy against covid; prescriptions were soaring; and public health officials were single-mindedly focused not on treatment but on vaccination.

  We previously reported that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s tweeted warning last August against using ivermectin meant for livestock was prompted by incorrect—and unverified—information from Mississippi. Health officials there had posted an alert suggesting the state’s poison control center was deluged with hundreds of calls over ingestion of livestock ivermectin; in reality, we found, four reports were received.

  But, fueled by bits of contorted evidence like this, the anti-ivermectin train was unstoppable. We have now learned that, in the rush to bury a drug described as “astonishingly safe” and long used globally to quell animal and human parasites, FDA was not alone.

  Emails we obtained from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control show that an influential August 26 national health alert on ivermectin was spurred, like the FDA tweet, by a sliver of evidence: just three cases of alleged ivermectin side effects, two involving animal formulations. No patient died; one appeared to have been hospitalized, and one declined any medical help.

  Nonetheless, those three reports, obtained by Atlanta-based CDC from the Georgia poison control center, sealed the decision to issue the nation’s highest-level health warning, according to the emails. 

  

  Shortly after learning of three cases, CDC’s Michael Yeh writes, “we have evidence of significant toxicity.”

  Referring to planning for the health alert, “the consensus was that unless we’re seeing bad adverse effects from ivermectin, we’d hold off,” wrote a CDC medical toxicity officer, Dr. Michael Yeh, in an August 17 email. “Now it sounds like we have evidence of significant toxicity.”

  That email was written seventy-two minutes after brief information on three reports arrived in a separate email.

  While CDC’s intention might have been to protect people, the alert is emblematic of what had become a national obsession: Portray an early treatment for covid—whether in the animal or human form—as potentially toxic.

  CDC hopped aboard.

  In an email later that day, Yeh laid out the evidence. The most serious case involved a man, seventy-seven, who had was said to have taken a dose of ivermectin “apparently meant for an 1800 lb. bovine.” He had “hallucinations and tremors, which improved but he was eventually diagnosed with COVID-19” for which he needed only supplemental oxygen, Yeh notes.

  In two other cases, a woman who took the human form of the drug was said to have suffered “some confusion.” Another woman had “subjective visual disturbances” after taking “a product meant for sheep” but declined medical help. These side effects are in keeping with what the National Institutes of Health calls a “well-tolerated” anti-parasitic drug with such adverse effects as “dizziness, pruritis, nausea, or diarrhea.”

  French researchers published a review last March of 350 ivermectin articles in the medical literature and found adverse effects to be “infrequent and usually mild to moderate.” The study, by the French drugmaker MedinCell, noted that no deaths were reported even after accidental overdoses or suicide attempts.

  In view of ivermectin’s well-established safety profile, our request for CDC documents under the Freedom of Information Act sought the rationale for the health alert and specifically asked for the data CDC used from the American Association of Poison Control Centers, to which state centers report. (AAPCC had refused to provide it.)

  In response to the FOIA request, CDC asserted, quite remarkably, that it “no longer possesses or has access to the data” because its “licensing agreement” with AAPCC had lapsed. The data might have specified, for example, just how many calls were related either to animal or human formulations; the alert instead lumps all reports together, making it difficult to fathom the extent of livestock ivermectin use.

  

  The CDC asserts in a letter to us that it no longer possesses the data on which a national health alert was based.

  An increase in ivermectin calls to poison control centers in 2021 is not in dispute, especially as doctors learned of studies showing fewer deaths, shorter hospitalizations, and outpatient success. Poison control centers often see upticks in calls when new drugs come into use, with many callers seeking only information. Centers also field calls on old, long-established medications. Acetaminophen alone generated 47,000 reports in 2019 and led to 164 deaths, according to the AAPCC.

  This context, of course, was missing from CDC’s alert. Calls to poison control centers for use of animal and human ivermectin grew five- to eight-fold from “pre-pandemic levels,” the alert ominously reported. At the same time, it said, ivermectin prescriptions had soared twenty-four-fold—in a perfectly legal trend led by physicians but one the CDC clearly found unacceptable and alarming.

  No distinction was made between animal and human formulations in the alert, which was peppered with phrases like “ivermectin misuse and overdose;” “seizures, coma, and death;” “sheep drench,” “severe illness,” and “rapid increase.” The message: Don’t use either form, even as seventy-one studies show 64 percent of 50,180 patients improved after taking ivermectin for covid.

  Despite the alert and New Mexico’s unfounded pronouncements, no one has died from ivermectin poisoning among 2,112 cases logged by AAPCC from January 1 to December 14, 2021. Two percent of those reports, about forty-two, involved a “major” effect, an AAPCC bulletin states. Seventy percent were dismissed as having no effect, “nontoxic exposure,” and the like.

  One category of those calls might rightfully have been classified as anti-ivermectin hysteria. New Mexico, for example, urged citizens to report any known ivermectin use to the state’s poison control center, even if  “someone you know has taken it.” 

  We asked Dr. Paul Marik, a founder of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, his thoughts on the effort to vilify ivermectin as dangerous.

  “Ivermectin is one of the safest medications on this planet; far safer than aspirin or acetaminophen,” he said.

  “This is a fairy tale. Disney could not come up with a better fairy tale.” 

  But it was no kind of fantasy for the cattleman’s family when he got sick. It was a painful experience with a politicized health system.

  A “Very Puzzling” Phone Call

  It wasn’t a secret that a cattleman, who died while in New Mexico from covid, took an animal formulation of ivermectin. It is a drug he was well versed in using, having routinely administered it to his herds in Texas.

  Others in the family also used Ivomec, a liquid formulation of ivermectin for cattle, since news spread of ivermectin’s effectiveness against covid. “Practically everyone I know takes it,” we were told by a close family friend and business associate of the Texan. (We are withholding the man’s name at the family’s request.)

  Ivermectin is just one of 167 drugs tested for safety and approved by the FDA for both animals and humans. Yet those who take either form of ivermectin for covid have been characterized as being anti-science and influenced by “misinformation.”

  The Texan is one of two individuals who, according to repeated statements from New Mexico officials, died from “ivermectin toxicity.” While their identities were not revealed by the department of health, a source familiar with the cases released them to us during this investigation.

  Documents and interviews with those knowledgeable about the death of the rancher tell a different story than the narrative put forth by New Mexico health officials.

  When the cattleman arrived at the ER on the evening of September 2 with his wife, he was soon diagnosed as suffering from acute dehydration as well as being covid positive.

  His daughter arrived at the hospital several hours later.

  In an interview, she told of the surprise eightieth birthday party for her dad the weekend before, where eight of the eleven family members attending ended up with covid. Everyone seemed to have mild symptoms, she recalled.

  With her dad in New Mexico and not feeling well, she suggested he be checked out. “My father was not very good at keeping himself hydrated,” she said, and at that point he didn’t seem to be drinking at all.

  He arrived at the hospital dehydrated to the point that his kidneys had become damaged, doctors told the family. Lacking a proper dialysis machine at the Lincoln County Medical Center, the family was told that they were trying to locate another hospital to send him to. Unfortunately, he never made it out of Ruidoso, dying on September 3.

  But what happened while his wife and daughter anxiously waited outside the ICU, soon after being informed that the Texan was likely going to pass away, struck them as most peculiar.  

  His daughter recalled a “very puzzling” phone call her mother received—so disturbing, in fact, that she felt like “yanking the phone from her.”

  An unknown man was on the line asking if her father took ivermectin. It was the only time she remembers that particular drug being discussed in the hospital.

  “I feel like they were pushing her. It was really irritating,” she said, adding, “it was not a doctor or nurse, but mom cannot remember who it was or what they represented.”

  They were most interested, she recalled, in grilling her mother about her dad’s use of Ivomec.

  At the very next press briefing, Dr. Scrase announced that a “reliable source” reported the state’s “first death” from someone who took ivermectin. While he hedged his bets about the role of ivermectin—and mentioned delayed care—he nonetheless repeatedly characterized the man’s death and one other as specifically being caused by ivermectin.

  However, the cattleman’s death certificate, filed at the end of September, says otherwise. It stated he passed away from “natural” causes. His death was not listed as requiring any type of “pending investigation,” and the medical examiner’s office confirmed the fact that no autopsy or toxicology report was done.

  But Dr. Scrase’s original tale proved to be very popular with the media. USA Today liked it so much the paper released several versions.

  “Two die of ivermectin poisoning,” it announced the same day the death certificate was officiated. Five days after that, a headline in The Hill trumpeted, “New Mexico reports two deaths from ivermectin.”

  The New Mexico Department of Health has yet to respond to any questions about why a straightforward correction was not made to the media early on regarding the two deaths that were erroneously attributed to ivermectin. It is also not clear why at a recent press briefing the agency was continuing to perpetuate this fallacy even after admitting it was untruthful, rather than correcting the record—and why they have alleged another ivermectin-related death, again without offering any evidence to that effect.

  The second supposed ivermectin death involved a thirty-eight-year-old woman from Cuba, New Mexico, reportedly of Navajo heritage. An autopsy was done, but the results have yet to be released.

  While Scrase has acknowledged that the two deaths were from covid, not ivermectin, he nonetheless announced what he called yet a “third” ivermectin death at his December 1 briefing.

  The new death, Scrase said, is a “60-year-old man who took a horse preparation. This gentleman took 150 milligrams, [suffered] liver failure, kidney failure and actually died from the ivermectin without the covid.” 

  As with the first two cases, the cause of death remains to be seen.

  According to Dr. Marik, 150 milligrams of ivermectin can be safely tolerated. “I do not know of a single case of liver failure and organ failure due to ivermectin,” he wrote in an email.

  Both the CDC and New Mexico Department of Health declined to answer questions for this article.

  

  Despite ongoing requests by the New Mexico Department of Health for residents to report any ivermectin use, as this slide displayed during a December 1 press conference shows, only 29 calls came into the state’s poison control center for most all of 2021. The graphic also states that ivermectin caused three deaths in the state, despite the fact that during that very same press briefing it was acknowledged that the first two of the alleged deaths were due to covid, not ivermectin (with no evidence released to support the third claim).

  The CDC emails suggest it took very little to convince the agency to issue a national warning about the use of ivermectin. Details on those three cases are scant, the emails show. 

  Ivermectin dosages are missing or, in one case, described as “concentration unknown.” One woman “was sent to the hospital, but her baseline mental status was unclear.” Another woman was to be contacted for follow-up after declining aid, but there is no indication this was done.  

  These anecdotal bits are the threads from which a mythical tapestry about so-called “ivermectin toxicity” has been woven. This myth lives on in easily accessed online articles.

  Among them:

  • Mississippi’s health alert on August 19 said 70 percent of poison-control calls were for ingestion of livestock ivermectin. The actual figure was 2 percent; it was not corrected for forty-six days.

  • FDA claimed last March to have “received multiple reports” of injury and hospitalization after people took livestock ivermectin. In reality, the agency relied on four reports, a spokesperson said in an email. CDC officials referenced the FDA “consumer warning” when planning their own contribution to the myth of ivermectin harm.

  It matters little that false Mississippi figures were corrected (at our behest) by The New York Times, twice, and The Washington Post. What matters is the hurricane of fear, whipped up by New Mexico, Mississippi, the FDA, and CDC—and abetted by media—made ivermectin into something it was not.

  So where do we stand as vaccines fail and cases rise?

  On October 28, WisPolitics.com reported the case of a family that failed to convince a court to give FDA-approved ivermectin to their dying loved one.

  “There have been multiple reports nationally,” the website reported, “of people taking the version of the drug intended for animals to combat COVID-19 and sickening themselves in the process.”

  Unsupported in the medical literature, the false image of ivermectin convinced doctors in that case to suggest that “the prescribed dosage may be lethal.”

  Indeed, the invented peril, rather than promise, of ivermectin has become ingrained in the national media and consciousness.

  That is the story that lives.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 23:15

• Defiance Grows In Face Of Another COVID Christmas
  Defiance Grows In Face Of Another COVID Christmas

  Most of us probably thought, or at the very least hoped, that Christmas 2020 was going to be a one-off – a festive period which for many was devoid of the usual social gatherings and traditions we look forward to and treasure.

  Alas, as Statista’s Martin Armstrong notes, here we are in December 2021 with Covid cases in a large number of countries rising drastically and many people facing renewed restrictions or even another dose of full lockdown.

  

  As a survey conducted by Statista in early November shows though, there is a rising defiance in the United States and United Kingdom to not let Christmas be “cancelled” this time round.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Although the measures which their respective governments may implement is a fluid situation, around 30 percent of respondents said that they are not planning on giving up any of their Christmas traditions or activities in 2021 – a stark rise compared to the roughly 15 percent recorded by Statista in both countries last time around.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 22:30

• You'd Better Watch Out: The Surveillance State Has A Naughty List, And You're On It
  You’d Better Watch Out: The Surveillance State Has A Naughty List, And You’re On It

  Authored by John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “He sees you when you’re sleeping

  He knows when you’re awake

  He knows when you’ve been bad or good

  So be good for goodness’ sake!”

  – “Santa Claus Is Coming to Town”

  Santa’s got a new helper.

  No longer does the all-knowing, all-seeing, jolly Old St. Nick need to rely on antiquated elves on shelves and other seasonal snitches in order to know when you’re sleeping or awake, and if you’ve been naughty or nice.

  

  Thanks to the government’s almost limitless powers made possible by a domestic army of techno-tyrants, fusion centers and Peeping Toms, Santa can get real-time reports on who’s been good or bad this year. This creepy new era of government/corporate spying—in which we’re being listened to, watched, tracked, followed, mapped, bought, sold and targeted—makes the NSA’s rudimentary phone and metadata surveillance appear almost antiquated in comparison.

  Consider just a small sampling of the tools being used to track our movements, monitor our spending, and sniff out all the ways in which our thoughts, actions and social circles might land us on the government’s naughty list.

  Tracking you based on your health status. In the age of COVID-19, digital health passports are gaining traction as gatekeepers of a sort, restricting access to travel, entertainment, etc., based on one’s vaccine status. Whether or not one has a vaccine passport, however, individuals may still have to prove themselves “healthy” enough to be part of society. For instance, in the wake of Supreme Court rulings that paved the way for police to use drug-sniffing dogs as “search warrants on leashes,” government agencies are preparing to use virus-detecting canine squads to carry out mass screenings to detect individuals who may have COVID-19. Researchers claim the COVID-sniffing dogs have a 95% success rate of identifying individuals with the virus (except when they’re hungry, tired or distracted). These dogs are also being to trained to ferret out individuals suffering from other health ailments such as cancer.

  Tracking you based on your face: Facial recognition software aims to create a society in which every individual who steps out into public is tracked and recorded as they go about their daily business. Coupled with surveillance cameras that blanket the country, facial recognition technology allows the government and its corporate partners to identify and track someone’s movements in real-time. One particularly controversial software program created by Clearview AI has been used by police, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security to collect photos on social media sites for inclusion in a massive facial recognition database. Similarly, biometric software, which relies on one’s unique identifiers (fingerprints, irises, voice prints), is becoming the standard for navigating security lines, as well as bypassing digital locks and gaining access to phones, computers, office buildings, etc. In fact, greater numbers of travelers are opting into programs that rely on their biometrics in order to avoid long waits at airport security. Scientists are also developing lasers that can identify and surveil individuals based on their heartbeats, scent and microbiome.

  Tracking you based on your behavior: Rapid advances in behavioral surveillance are not only making it possible for individuals to be monitored and tracked based on their patterns of movement or behavior, including gait recognition (the way one walks), but have given rise to whole industries that revolve around predicting one’s behavior based on data and surveillance patterns and are also shaping the behaviors of whole populations. One smart “anti-riot” surveillance system purports to predict mass riots and unauthorized public events by using artificial intelligence to analyze social media, news sources, surveillance video feeds and public transportation data.

  Tracking you based on your spending and consumer activities: With every smartphone we buy, every GPS device we install, every Twitter, Facebook, and Google account we open, every frequent buyer card we use for purchases—whether at the grocer’s, the yogurt shop, the airlines or the department store—and every credit and debit card we use to pay for our transactions, we’re helping Corporate America build a dossier for its government counterparts on who we know, what we think, how we spend our money, and how we spend our time. Consumer surveillance, by which your activities and data in the physical and online realms are tracked and shared with advertisers, has become big business, a $300 billion industry that routinely harvests your data for profit. Corporations such as Target have not only been tracking and assessing the behavior of their customers, particularly their purchasing patterns, for years, but the retailer has also funded major surveillance in cities across the country and developed behavioral surveillance algorithms that can determine whether someone’s mannerisms might fit the profile of a thief.

  Tracking you based on your public activities: Private corporations in conjunction with police agencies throughout the country have created a web of surveillance that encompasses all major cities in order to monitor large groups of people seamlessly, as in the case of protests and rallies. They are also engaging in extensive online surveillance, looking for any hints of “large public events, social unrest, gang communications, and criminally predicated individuals.” Defense contractors have been at the forefront of this lucrative market. Fusion centers, $330 million-a-year, information-sharing hubs for federal, state and law enforcement agencies, monitor and report such “suspicious” behavior as people buying pallets of bottled water, photographing government buildings, and applying for a pilot’s license as “suspicious activity.”

  Tracking you based on your social media activities: Every move you make, especially on social media, is monitored, mined for data, crunched, and tabulated in order to form a picture of who you are, what makes you tick, and how best to control you when and if it becomes necessary to bring you in line. As The Intercept reported, the FBI, CIA, NSA and other government agencies are increasingly investing in and relying on corporate surveillance technologies that can mine constitutionally protected speech on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram in order to identify potential extremists and predict who might engage in future acts of anti-government behavior. This obsession with social media as a form of surveillance will have some frightening consequences in coming years. As Helen A.S. Popkin, writing for NBC News, observed, “We may very well face a future where algorithms bust people en masse for referencing illegal ‘Game of Thrones’ downloads… the new software has the potential to roll, Terminator-style, targeting every social media user with a shameful confession or questionable sense of humor.”

  Tracking you based on your phone and online activities: Cell phones have become de facto snitches, offering up a steady stream of digital location data on users’ movements and travels. Police have used cell-site simulators to carry out mass surveillance of protests without the need for a warrant. Moreover, federal agents can now employ a number of hacking methods in order to gain access to your computer activities and “see” whatever you’re seeing on your monitor. Malicious hacking software can also be used to remotely activate cameras and microphones, offering another means of glimpsing into the personal business of a target.

  Tracking you based on your social network: Not content to merely spy on individuals through their online activity, government agencies are now using surveillance technology to track one’s social network, the people you might connect with by phone, text message, email or through social message, in order to ferret out possible criminals. An FBI document obtained by Rolling Stone speaks to the ease with which agents are able to access address book data from Facebook’s WhatsApp and Apple’s iMessage services from the accounts of targeted individuals and individuals not under investigation who might have a targeted individual within their network. What this creates is a “guilt by association” society in which we are all as guilty as the most culpable person in our address book.

  Tracking you based on your car: License plate readers are mass surveillance tools that can photograph over 1,800 license tag numbers per minute, take a picture of every passing license tag number and store the tag number and the date, time, and location of the picture in a searchable database, then share the data with law enforcement, fusion centers and private companies to track the movements of persons in their cars. With tens of thousands of these license plate readers now in operation throughout the country, affixed to overpasses, cop cars and throughout business sectors and residential neighborhoods, it allows police to track vehicles and run the plates through law enforcement databases for abducted children, stolen cars, missing people and wanted fugitives. Of course, the technology is not infallible: there have been numerous incidents in which police have mistakenly relied on license plate data to capture out suspects only to end up detaining innocent people at gunpoint.

  Tracking you based on your mail: Just about every branch of the government—from the Postal Service to the Treasury Department and every agency in between—now has its own surveillance sector, authorized to spy on the American people. For instance, the U.S. Postal Service, which has been photographing the exterior of every piece of paper mail for the past 20 years, is also spying on Americans’ texts, emails and social media posts. Headed up by the Postal Service’s law enforcement division, the Internet Covert Operations Program (iCOP) is reportedly using facial recognition technology, combined with fake online identities, to ferret out potential troublemakers with “inflammatory” posts. The agency claims the online surveillance, which falls outside its conventional job scope of processing and delivering paper mail, is necessary to help postal workers avoid “potentially volatile situations.”

  Fusion centers. Smart devices. Behavioral threat assessments. Terror watch lists. Facial recognition. Snitch tip lines. Biometric scanners. Pre-crime. DNA databases. Data mining. Precognitive technology. Contact tracing apps.

  What these add up to is a world in which, on any given day, the average person is now monitored, surveilled, spied on and tracked in more than 20 different ways by both government and corporate eyes and ears.

  Big Tech wedded to Big Government has become Big Brother.

  Every second of every day, the American people are being spied on by a vast network of digital Peeping Toms, electronic eavesdroppers and robotic snoops.

  As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, surveillance, digital stalking and the data mining of the American people—weapons of compliance and control in the government’s hands—add up to a society in which there’s little room for indiscretions, imperfections, or acts of independence.

  In an age of overcriminalization, mass surveillance, and an appalling lack of protections for our privacy rights, we can all be considered guilty of some transgression or other.

  So you’d better watch out—you’d better not pout—you’d better not cry—‘cos I’m telling you why: this Christmas, it’s the Surveillance State that’s coming to town, and you’re already on its naughty list.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 21:45

• "I'll Be Vaxxed For Christmas" & Other COVID Carols
  “I’ll Be Vaxxed For Christmas” & Other COVID Carols

  This season, it’s important to focus on the true meaning of Christmas: compliance. 

  

  Christmas caroling, once a holiday tradition of family and friends spreading joy and cheer to neighbors and communities, is now illegal, and rightfully so.

  We are – and will forever be – in the midst of a dangerous pandemic, and nothing spreads lethal viruses more virulently than through friends, family, singing, and joy.

  Dismay not! The Babylon Bee – as usual – has come to America’s aid…

  You can still find a sliver of Christmas cheer while isolated in your sanitized home, double-masked and quadruple-vaccinated, by listening to some of these COVID-19 Christmas Carols:

  “I’ll Be Vaxxed for Christmas” – A merry, joyful reminder that only the vaxxed are allowed to enjoy Christmas.

  “It Came Upon A Mandate Clear” – Sing this beautiful carol and remember your first mandate. Precious memories…

  “Baby, There’s COVID Outside” – That’s a billion times worse than it being cold outside! 

  “Silent Media” – The Wuhan Virology Lab released a virus upon the world… and the media fell reverently silent.

  “Do You Fear What I Fear” – If it’s not COVID, you’re killing Grandma. 

  “What Variant is This?” – Yeah, we lost track too. 

  “Have Yourself A Lonely Little Christmas” – OR ELSE. 

  “God Rest Ye Boosted Gentlemen” – The only gentlemen who have a right to rest are the ones who are boosted.

  “mRNA In a Manager” – Remember the birth of the savior: mRNA. 

  “Fauci Baby” – As sung by Brian Stelter. 

  “Carol of The Bell’s Palsy” – Completely unrelated to the vaccine, Pfizer assures us. 

  “It’s Beginning to Look a Lot Like Wuhan” – Unsurprisingly, this carol is illegal in Wuhan.

  “Santa Claus Is Staying at Home” – “He sees you defying lockdowns, he knows when you’re not vaxxed, he is not coming anyway, so stay home and wear a mask!”

  “All I Want For Christmas Is Ivermectin” – A conservative favorite.

  “Jab to the World” – Who needs “joy” when you got that jab? 

  “Fauci the Vaxman” – Why hasn’t he melted away yet? 

  “Ave Moderna” – AAAAAVVVEE MO-DERRRRRR-ERRRRR-NAAAAAA

  “Have an Omi-Cron-y Christmas” – The hit single of 2021 is raging through the world after its South Africa debut!

  “Good King Brandon” – Let’s go Brandon! 

  “Grandma Got COVID By A Cuomo” – An unsettlingly peppy song. 

  “Variant Both Meek And Mild” – As pretty much all the variants were…

  “Christmas (Baby Please Stay Home)” – We highly recommend the version recorded by The National Karens Choir.

  “Mary Did You Know (About the Vaccine Mandate)” – Sometimes a Christian holiday mansplainer is needed to spread the joy of mandates.

  “Masked Christmas” – This Christmas pop song will have you singing along in your own muffled, sad way.

  “Sanitize The Halls” – “Fa-la-la-la-la-la wash your hands!”

  “O Come, O Come, Dr. Fauci” – This old classic choral number sings reverence to our Lord and Savior and director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

  Jingle Bells, Biden Smells: Fauci laid an egg!

  Now sing some carols, and have yourself a safe, socially distanced, vaxxed, masked, remote zoom call little Christmas! 

  *  *  *

  NOT SATIRE: If Big Tech censorship worries you, The Patriot Post is your relief. The left will censor this, but they can never stop the message. For 25 years we have equipped Patriots to save America’s future. Take advantage of our free resources and rest easy knowing we have your back.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 21:00

• Saudi Arabia Is Building Ballistic Missiles With China's Help
  Saudi Arabia Is Building Ballistic Missiles With China’s Help

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  CNN reported on Thursday that US intelligence agencies have concluded Saudi Arabia is now actively manufacturing its own ballistic missiles with the help of China.

  As the world’s largest importer of arms, Saudi Arabia has purchased ballistic missiles from China in the past but has not previously had the ability to manufacture them.

  

  Unnamed sources told CNN that US officials at several agencies have been briefed in recent months on “on classified intelligence revealing multiple large-scale transfers of sensitive ballistic missile technology between China and Saudi Arabia.”

  In a statement to CNN, China’s Foreign Ministry said the two countries are “comprehensive strategic partners” and “have maintained friendly cooperation in all fields, including in the field of military trade.”

  “Such cooperation does not violate any international law and does not involve the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,” the statement said.

  Saudi Arabia is entirely reliant on the US to continue waging war in Yemen. While the US is still supporting the war, there have been efforts in Congress to cut off arms sales to Riyadh, which likely motivated the Saudis to look elsewhere for weapons.

  

  CNN wrote in its in-depth report:

  New satellite images obtained by CNN indicate the Saudis are already manufacturing ballistic missiles at a site previously constructed with Chinese assistance, according to experts who analyzed the photos and sources who confirmed they reflect advancements that are consistent with the latest US intelligence assessments.

  Satellite photos taken by Planet, a commercial imaging company, between October 26 and November 9 show a burn operation occurred at a facility near Dawadmi, Saudi Arabia, according to researchers at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, who told CNN this is “the first unambiguous evidence that the facility is operating to produce missiles.”

  So, U.S. “ally” Saudi Arabia started building ballistic missiles with China and didn’t even tell us? WTAF. Clown Prince MBS (Mr. Bone Saw), call your office. https://t.co/FEu2TOreO1 Big scoop by @ZcohenCNN

  — Josh Rogin (@joshrogin) December 23, 2021

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

  The US has not been happy about the relationship between China and other Middle East allies. The UAE recently threatened to pull out of a $25 billion arms deal that includes F-35 fighter jets over security requirements the US wants in order to protect the technology from China. The US has also repeatedly warned Israel against doing business with China.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 20:30

• Beijing Influence Expands After Solomon Islands Accepts Chinese Offer For Riot Police Help
  Beijing Influence Expands After Solomon Islands Accepts Chinese Offer For Riot Police Help

  In the latest Asia-Pac domino piece to quietly fall in China’s favor on Christmas eve, Chinese police officers and equipment will soon be sent to Solomon Islands to help defuse months of civil unrest, a move that is already causing anxiety for Australian officials. 

  

  On Thursday Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare’s besieged government announced it would accept Beijing’s offer of assistance to strengthen its anti-riot policing capabilities, Australia’s ABC News reported.  In a statement, the government said it was “mindful of the urgent need to strengthen Royal Solomon Islands Police Force capability and capacity to respond to future unrest”.

  “The government has agreed to accept the Peoples’ Republic of China’s offer of riot equipment and six Police Liaison Officers to equip and train Royal Solomon Islands Police Force with the skill sets complimenting ongoing training received under existing bilateral assistance,” it said.

  Last month we reported that 73 Australian Federal Police and 43 Australian Defence Force personnel were dispatched to the troubled Pacific nation following days of rioting against Sogavare’s government. A decision by Solomon Islands to switch diplomatic allegiances from Taiwan to China in 2019 is one of the factors blamed for unhappiness with the Pacific nation’s government. 

  Sogavare has blamed “external factors” for the recent unrest in his country and the Premier of Malaita Province, Daniel Suidani, has been outspoken in his opposition to the national government’s decision to back Beijing rather than Taipei.

  Following November’s riots, the federal government was relieved that the first call for help came to Canberra, rather than Beijing, but Prime Minister Scott Morrison insisted Australia was taking no part in “internal issues of the Solomon Islands”.

  Defense and diplomatic sources have told the ABC they believe Solomon Islands is the first government in the Pacific to accept this level of Chinese help specifically for anti-riot for domestic policing, and there are concerns more assistance will be sought from Beijing in the future.

  Over recent days Australia’s police-led deployment to Solomon Islands has been gradually reduced, but 40 AFP members, 15 ADF personnel and three Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) staff remain there. In a statement, a spokesperson for DFAT said it was aware that China was sending reinforcements.

  “Australia, together with our Pacific family partners Fiji, Papua New Guinea and New Zealand, responded swiftly and effectively to the 25 November request from Solomon Islands government to help Royal Solomon Islands Police Force (RSIPF) restore calm in Honiara following civil unrest,” the spokesperson said.

  “Since that time, Australia and Pacific family partners have successfully supported the RSIPF to maintain a stable and calm situation.

  “We are aware of China’s expected engagement in the security sector in Honiara. This is a matter for the Solomon Islands government.”

  For China’s part, the country’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said Beijing was helping Solomon Islands respond to “grave” anti-government riots: “At the request of the government of Solomon Islands, China will provide a batch of emergency riot equipment for the police and send an ad-hoc police advisory team,” he told reporters on Thursday.

  “The Chinese supplies and personnel will arrive in Solomon Islands soon and are expected to play a constructive role in enhancing the ability of the Solomon Islands police.

  “China firmly supports the government of Solomon Islands in defending the country’s stability, resolutely safeguards the relations between China and Solomon Islands and the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese citizens there, and strongly condemns any illegal and violent action.”

  The Australian government is yet to directly respond to Solomon Islands’ decision to accept Chinese policing assistance.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 20:00

• US Navy Intercepts Huge Cache Of Arms From Iran Near Yemen On "Stateless Ship"
  US Navy Intercepts Huge Cache Of Arms From Iran Near Yemen On “Stateless Ship”

  This week the US Navy announced that it seized some 1,400 AK-47 assault rifles and 226,600 rounds of ammunition from a “stateless” fishing vessel after it was intercepted in the North Arabian Sea based on suspicious activity, which led to a “flag verification boarding”. 

  The illicit weapons and ammunition were then transferred to the guided-missile destroyer USS O’Kane. The five passengers were reportedly Yemeni nationals. Subsequent reports suggested it may have been an Iranian smuggling operation into war-torn Yemen, where Tehran-backed Shia Houthi rebels have for a half-decade been battling the Saudi-UAE coalition which has also long enjoyed the support of the Pentagon.

  

  The Associated Press on Thursday described that the large cache of weapons were being “smuggled by a fishing ship from Iran likely bound for war-ravaged Yemen.”

  This after the Navy’s Bahrain-based 5th Fleet issued an unusually blunt statement that pointed to finger directly at the Iranians, given the vessel sailing along a route “historically used to traffic weapons unlawfully to the Houthis in Yemen,” according to the US military statement.

  “The direct or indirect supply, sale or transfer of weapons to the Houthis violates U.N. Security Council Resolutions and US sanctions,” the 5th Fleet added.

  Once the cargo and crew were removed, with the Yemeni nationals reportedly transported back to their home country, the vessel was declared a potential hazard to commercial shipping in the area and was sunk. 

  Meanwhile, despite Biden White House promises to try to end the war in Yemen, which the UN has over the past two years dubbed the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, given the mass civilian death and starvation amid the relentless Saudi air war, fighting has ramped up over the past week. 

  Yemen’s main airport in Sana’a was bombed this week by the Saudi-led coalition that is backed by the US.

  The Biden administration has supplied nearly $1.2 billion worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia. pic.twitter.com/sOKZ0Rax4V

  — MintPress News (@MintPressNews) December 23, 2021

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

  In particular the Saudis stand charged with deliberate airstrikes on Yemen’s main international airport in the capital of Sanaa, resulting in extensive damage. However, Riyadh claims that it was a legitimate target that was being used by Houthis to stage and launch for cross-border attacks.

  In the past days there’ve been widespread reports that the Saudis ramped up their airstrikes across various parts of Yemen. Yet generally US media has been silent on the continuing air war.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 19:30

• Rudolph The Red-Nosed Reindeer's Lesson On Individualism
  Rudolph The Red-Nosed Reindeer’s Lesson On Individualism

  Via The Epoch Times,

  In 1964, NBC aired what would become one of the most beloved Christmas TV specials that has withstood the test of time with incredible stop-motion animation, sets, and colourful characters, all having been enjoyed by generations.

  

  The story and one song in particular, “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer,” teach us about how being an individualist and thinking differently from the crowd can often lead to a better outcome.

  We follow the story about Donner, Santa’s most trusted sleigh leader, and his wife when they celebrate the arrival of a new fawn which they name Rudolph. When it is discovered that Rudolph’s nose glows red, Donner becomes scared of what others will say, and tries to hide his son’s deformity.

  At the same time we meet one of Santa’s elves, Hermey, who is more interested in dentistry than in making toys.

  His boss fires him when he doesn’t keep up with his co-workers. Rudolph and Hermey accidentally cross paths when they’re running away from being rejected, mocked, and pushed away by their companions.

  The two join in a delightful duet titled “Misfits,” in which they state that their own decisions are best and that not fitting in is not a bad thing. A particular phrase that demonstrates this in the lyrics is:

  We may be different from the rest

  Who decides the test

  Of what is really best?

  This message is being forgotten amongst many of us, as governments and the school system try to stop us from thinking for ourselves.

  If you don’t have the newest iPhone, then you’re considered not worth it. Many young people of today are just reacting to others and taking in the latest trends. Peer pressure and false methods being taught by teachers push youngsters away from listening to parents and the wisdom of following a steady course in life.

  At the end of the special when the Abominable Snow Monster enters, all the others shy away except those with independent thought. In the end, we see that Rudolph is successful in life as “he goes down in history.”

  Before you watch new Christmas movies that lack a significant moral or life message, go back to the classics and you might find that they have a deeper than expected effect on your whole family, apart from being a magical experience.

  Merry Christmas!

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 19:00

• NFL's Chief Medical Officer Warns There's Almost No Indication Of Asymptomatic Spread
  NFL’s Chief Medical Officer Warns There’s Almost No Indication Of Asymptomatic Spread

  In the latest sign that “the science” promoted by Dr. Anthony Fauci and the US government as justification for scaring half the country into staying home this Christmas really, truly, no longer applies, the NFL has changed its strategy for dealing with COVID to dramatically break from federal guidelines.

  ESPN reports that the league is suppressing the latest COVID surge with an understanding that symptomatic individuals are driving transmission within the team environment, said Chief Medical Officer Dr. Allen Sills on Thursday. Apparently, the League has taken its own look at the COVID Problem, and decided that asymptomatic players actually don’t spread COVID.

  

  Well, at least not in any meaningful way.

  Again, here’s Dr. Sills:

  “I think all of our concern about [asymptomatic spread] has been going down based on what we’ve been seeing throughout the past several months,” Sills told ESPN. “We’ve got our hands full with symptomatic people. Can I tell you tonight that there has never been a case when someone without symptoms passed it on to someone else? No, of course I can’t say that. But what I can say to you is that I think it’s a very, very tiny fraction of the overall problem, if it exists at all.”

  He clarifies further:

  “Clearly if you want to look at the overall pattern and concern about transmission, it is not being driven by people who have no idea that they are infected and they are infecting scores of others. This is being driven by people with symptoms and the exposures during that symptomatic period.”

  In response to omicron, the league and the NFL Players Association agreed last week to stop weekly testing on vaccinated players and begin random testing of a sample across teams and positions.

  Vaccinated players who report symptoms are required to be tested, and unvaccinated players continue to be tested daily, as the league is still performing 1,000 tests per day for players and staff.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 18:30

• Don't Let Cancel Culture Grinches Strip Your Joy From Christmas
  Don’t Let Cancel Culture Grinches Strip Your Joy From Christmas

  Authored by John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “It’s Christmas Eve! It’s the one night of the year when we all act a little nicer, we smile a little easier, we cheer a little more. For a couple of hours out of the whole year, we are the people that we always hoped we would be! It’s a sort of a miracle because it happens every Christmas Eve… There are people that are having trouble making their miracle happen… It’s not just the poor and the hungry, it’s everybody that’s gotta have this miracle!”— Scrooged (1988)

  What a year.

  It feels as if government Grinches, corporate Scrooges, and cancel culture humbugs have been working overtime to drain every last drop of joy, kindness and liberty from the world.

  

  After endless months of gloom and doom, it can be hard to feel the joy of Christmas in the midst of rampant commercialism, political correctness and the casual cruelty of an apathetic, self-absorbed, dog-eat-dog world.

  Then again, isn’t that struggle to overcome the darkness and find the light within exactly what Christmas—the celebration of a baby born in a manger—is all about? The reminder that we have not been forgotten or forsaken. Glad tidings in the midst of hard times. Goodwill to counter meanness. Innocence in the face of cynicism. Hope in the midst of despair. Comfort to soothe our fears. Peace as an answer to war. Love that conquers hate.

  As “fellow-passengers to the grave,” we all have a moral duty to make this world (or at least our small corners of it) just a little bit kinder, a little less hostile and a lot more helpful to those in need.

  No matter what one’s budget, religion, or political persuasion, there is no shortage of things we can each do right now to pay our blessings forward and recapture the true spirit of Christmas.

  For starters, move beyond the “us” vs. “them” mentality. Tune into what’s happening in your family, in your community and your world, and get active. Show compassion to those in need, be kind to those around you, forgive those who have wronged you, and teach your children to do the same. Talk less, and listen more. Take less, and give more. Stop being a hater. Stop acting entitled and start being empowered. Learn tolerance in the true sense of the word. Value your family. Count your blessings. Share your blessings. Feed the hungry, shelter the homeless and comfort the lonely and broken-hearted. Build bridges, and tear down walls. Stand for freedom. Strive for peace.

  One thing more: make time for joy and laughter. Shake off the blues with some Christmas tunes, whatever fits the bill for you, be it traditional carols, rollicking oldies, or some rocking new tunes. Watch a Christmas movie that reinforces your faith in the things that truly matter.

  Here are ten of my favorite Christmas movies and music albums to get you started.

  First the movies.

  It’s A Wonderful Life (1946). An American classic about a despondent man, George Bailey who is saved from suicide by an angel working to get his wings. This film is a testament to director Frank Capra’s faith in people. Sublime performances by James Stewart and Donna Reed.

  The Bishop’s Wife (1947). An angel comes to earth in answer to a bishop’s prayer for help. Cary Grant, David Niven and Loretta Young help energize this tale of lost visions and longings of the heart.

  Miracle on 34th Street (1947). By happenchance, Kris Kringle is hired as Santa Claus by Macy’s Department Store in New York City for the Thanksgiving Day Parade. Before long, Kringle, who believes himself to be the one and only Santa Claus, has impacted virtually everyone around him. Funny, witty and heartwarming, this film is stocked with some fine performances from Maureen O’Hara, John Payne and young Natalie Wood. Edmund Gwenn won the Academy Award for best supporting actor for his role as Saint Nick.

  A Christmas Carol (1951). This is the best film version of the penny-pinching Scrooge’s journey to spiritual enlightenment by way of visits from supernatural visitors. Alastair Sim as Scrooge gives one of the finest film performances never to win an Oscar. The Man Who Invented Christmas (2017) provides a wonderful glimpse into how Charles Dickens came to write A Christmas Carol.

  A Christmas Story (1983). Ralphie is a young boy obsessed with one thing and only one thing: how to get a Red Ryder BB-gun for Christmas. Ralphie’s parents are wary, and his mother continually warns him that “you’ll shoot your eye out.” Based on Jean Shepherd’s autobiographical book In God We Trust, All Others Pay Cash, at the heart of this timeless comedy is the universal yearning of a child for the magic of Christmas morning. A great cast, which includes Darren McGavin, Peter Billingsley, Melinda Dillon and a voice-over narrative by Shepherd himself.

  One Magic Christmas (1985). If you grew up in a family where times were tough, this film is for you. A guardian angel comes to earth to help a disillusioned woman who hates Christmas. This tale of redemption and second chances is a delight to watch. And Harry Dean Stanton makes a first-class offbeat angel.

  Prancer (1989). This story of an eight-year-old girl who believes that an injured reindeer in her barn is actually one of Santa’s reindeer is one of the most down-to-earth Christmas films ever made. It’s a testament to the transforming power of love and childhood innocence. Sam Elliott and Cloris Leachman are fine in supporting roles, but Rebecca Harrell shines. Filmed on location in freezing, snowy weather, this film is a treat for those who love Christmas.

  Home Alone (1990). Eight-year-old Kevin, accidentally left behind at home when his family flies to Paris for Christmas, thinks he’s got it made. Hijinks ensue when two burglars match their wits against his. A funny, tender tribute to childhood and the bonds of family.

  Elf (2003). Another modern classic with a lot of heart. Buddy, played to the hilt by Will Ferrell, is a human who was raised by elves at the North Pole. Determined to find his birth father, Buddy travels to the Big Apple and spreads his Christmas cheer to everyone he meets. This film has it all: Santa, elves, family problems, humor, emotion and above all else, a large dose of the Christmas spirit. One of the best Christmas movies ever made.

  The Christmas Chronicles (2018). The story of a sister and brother, Kate and Teddy Pierce, whose Christmas Eve plan to catch Santa Claus on camera turns into an unexpected journey that most kids could only dream about. Kurt Russell’s star turn as Santa makes for movie magic.

  Now for the music.

  Out of the hundreds of Christmas albums I’ve listened to over the years, the following, covering a broad range of musical styles, moods and tastes, each in its own way perfectly captures the essence of Christmas for me.

  It’s Christmas (EMI, 1989): 18 great songs, ranging from John Lennon’s “Happy Xmas (War Is Over)” to Bing Crosby’s “White Christmas.” The real treats on this album are Greg Lake’s “I Believe in Father Christmas,” Kate Bush’s “December Will Be Magic Again” and Aled Jones’ “Walking in the Air.”

  Christmas Guitar (Rounder, 1986): 28 beautifully done traditional Christmas songs by master guitarist John Fahey. Hearing Fahey’s guitar strings plucking out “Joy to the World,” “Good King Wenceslas,” “Jolly Old Saint Nicholas,” among others, is a sublime experience.

  Christmas Is A Special Day (The Right Stuff, 1993): 12 fine songs by Fats Domino, the great Fifties rocker, ranging from “Amazing Grace” to “Jingle Bells.” The title song, written by Domino himself, is a real treat. No one has ever played the piano keys like Fats.

  Christmas Island (August/Private Music, 1989): “Frosty the Snowman” will never sound the same after you hear Leon Redbone and Dr. John do their duet. Neither will “Christmas Island” or “Toyland” on this collection of 11 traditional and rather offbeat songs.

  A Holiday Celebration (Gold Castle, 1988): The classic folk trio Peter, Paul & Mary, backed by the New York Choral Society, sing traditional and nontraditional holiday fare on 12 beautifully orchestrated songs. Included are “I Wonder as I Wander,” “Children Go Where I Send Thee,” and “The Cherry Tree Carol.” Also thrown in is Bob Dylan’s “Blowin’ in the Wind.”

  The Christmas Album (Columbia, 1992): Neil Diamond sings 14 songs, ranging from “Silent Night” to “Jingle Bell Rock” to “The Christmas Song” to “Come, O Come Emmanuel.” Diamond also gives us a great rendition of Lennon’s “Happy Xmas (War Is Over).” A delightful album.

  A Charlie Brown Christmas (Fantasy, 1988): 12 traditional Christmas songs by the Vince Guaraldi Trio. The pianist extraordinaire and his trio perform “O Tannenbaum,” “The Christmas Song” and “Greensleeves.” Also included is the Charlie Brown Christmas theme.

  The Jethro Tull Christmas Album (Fuel Records, 2003): If you like deep-rooted traditional holiday songs, you’ll love this album. The 16 songs range from “God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen” to Ian Anderson originals such as “Another Christmas Song” and “Jack Frost and the Hooded Crow.” With Anderson on flute and vocals, this album has an old world flavor that will have you wanting mince pie and plum pudding.

  A Twisted Christmas (Razor Tie, 2006): Twisted Sister, the heavy metal group, knocks the socks off a bevy of traditional and pop Christmas songs. Dee Snider’s amazing vocals brings to life “Oh Come All Ye Faithful,” “Deck the Halls,” “I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus,” among others—including “Heavy Metal Christmas (The Twelve Days of Christmas).” Great fun and a great band.

  Songs for Christmas (Asthmatic Kitty, 2006): In 2001, independent singer/songwriter Sufjan Stevens set out to create a Christmas gift through songs for his friends and family. It eventually grew to a 5-CD box set, which includes Stevens’ original take on such standards as “Amazing Grace” and “We Three Kings” and some inventive yuletide creations of his own. A lot of fun.

  Before you know it, Christmas will be a distant memory and we’ll be back to our regularly scheduled programming of “us vs. them” politics, war, violence, materialism and mayhem.

  As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, there may not be much we can do to avoid the dismal reality of the American police state in the long term—not so long as the powers-that-be allow profit margins to take precedence over people—but in the short term, I hope you’ll do your part to “spread a smile of joy” and “throw your arms around the world at Christmastime.”

  As you celebrate the season, take to heart the closing sermon in The Bishop’s Wife:

  “Once upon a midnight clear, there was a child’s cry, a blazing star hung over a stable, and wise men came with birthday gifts. We haven’t forgotten that night down the centuries. We celebrate it with stars on Christmas trees, with the sound of bells, and with gifts… We forget nobody, adult or child. All the stockings are filled, all that is, except one. And we have even forgotten to hang it up. The stocking for the child born in a manger. It’s his birthday we’re celebrating. Don’t let us ever forget that. Let us ask ourselves what He would wish for most. And then, let each put in his share, loving kindness, warm hearts, and a stretched out hand of tolerance. All the shining gifts that make peace on earth.”—The Bishop’s Wife (1947)

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 18:00

• Christmas Comes Early For 1 In 5 American Families
  Christmas Comes Early For 1 In 5 American Families

  Christmas traditions vary greatly across the world.

  While some countries hold the main celebration on Christmas Eve, others wait until Christmas Day to get festive and, most importantly at least to kids, to open presents.

  In the United States, most families unwrap their gifts on Christmas Day, with the majority not waiting until breakfast to get cracking or unpacking.

  According to data from Statista’s Global Consumer Survey, Santa comes early to 1 in 5 families, however, as 22 percent of respondents said they open presents on Christmas Eve in their household.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 17:30

• Media Falsely Reports Texas Man Died From Omicron While Government Officials Refuse To Say
  Media Falsely Reports Texas Man Died From Omicron While Government Officials Refuse To Say

  A little more than a week ago, we shared a story about how the UK government had decided to withhold information about the first patient to die while being infected with the omicron variant. In the information vacuum, many critics of the UK government’s strategy of withholding information, including some prominent doctors, asserted that the patient likely died with omicron, not from it, an important distinction that we have discussed in the past.

  A similar scenario is apparently playing out in the US, now that authorities in Texas have confirmed their first death on a patient who was assessed to be infected with the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2. Whether that’s what actually killed him is another matter entirely.

  Now, the Blaze is reporting that officials in Texas are also being tight-lipped about the circumstances of this first death, after the increasingly careless mainstream media blared out the news that an American had died “from” the omicron variant, when that’s actually not the case – or at least has not yet been confirmed to be the case.

  

  Not only did Harris County public health officials initially claim only that the man died with the Omicron variant of COVID-19, a spokeswoman for the county confirmed this is the case when a Blaze reporter followed up later in the week.

  To be sure, Harris County isn’t entirely blameless for the confusion. On the contrary, they seemingly added to the confusion by releasing a press release with the headline “Harris County Reports First COVID-19 Omicron Variant-Related Death.” The sub-heading, however, clarified that the “unvaccinated man with underlying health conditions had tested positive for the Omicron variant.”

  As the Blaze adds, similar confusion has plagued mainstream media reporting throughout the pandemic. One problem is that the government health officials who are feeding the media its information often don’t differentiate between people who died from COVID and those who died with the virus, a fact that we first pointed out way back in 2020 shortly after the virus first went global. Any death where a patient is COVID positive is reported as a COVID death, even if the patient died from a motorcycle accident, in one famous case.

  Courtesy of the Blaze, here’s a roundup of headlines that failed to convey this important distinction.

  • Reuters: “Texas’ Harris County records its first death linked to Omicron variant”
  • Business Insider: “The first American to die of the Omicron variant was an unvaccinated Texas man who had previously caught COVID-19”
  • Newsweek: “First Omicron Death in U.S. Was Reinfection—A Warning to Those Who’ve Already Had COVID
  • KHOU-TV: “Unvaccinated man with health issues in Harris County becomes first known omicron death in US”
  • Washington Post: “Unvaccinated Houston man’s death may be first attributed to omicron in U.S.”
  • Axios: “First confirmed U.S. Omicron death recorded in Texas”
  • The Independent: “Unvaccinated Texas man first in US to die of Omicron variant”

  Of course, it’s understandable why officials in Harris County don’t want to get into the weeds on this subject. There’s simply too much risk to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s (and by extension, President Joe Biden’s) favored narrative.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 17:00

• All I Want For Christmas Is A Mute Button
  All I Want For Christmas Is A Mute Button

  You either love them or you hate them: With Christmas songs, there is no in-between.

  But, this year, as Statista’s Florian Zandt notes, fans of festive tunes can celebrate a special milestone.

  

  Mariah Carey’s 1994 hit “All I Want for Christmas Is You” has managed to rack up over one billion streams on Spotify, beating its competitors by a wide margin as our chart shows.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Coming in second is Wham!’s classic “Last Christmas” from 1984 with 794 million streams.

  When putting into perspective the years since the release of the corresponding song, Ariana Grande might just take the cake. Even though “Santa Tell me” only places third, the song managed to accumulate 595 plays. Titles that aren’t likely to challenge the dominance of Carey, Wham! and Grande make up the last four spots on the top 8, among them classics like “Rockin’ Around the Christmas Tree” by Brenda Lee from 1958 and the upbeat “Jingle Bell Rock” released in 1957 by Bobby Helms.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 16:30

• Kaepernick's SPAC Deal Implodes Just In Time For Christmas
  Kaepernick’s SPAC Deal Implodes Just In Time For Christmas

  Just like his career as a professional football player, a SPAC deal involving former San Francisco 49ers Quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who was infamously blacklisted from the league for taking a knee during the National Anthem, has fallen apart.

  Is this another case of Kaepernick being punished for shining a light on America’s racial disparities? Before anybody rushes to judgment, the answer is a definite ‘no’. The real reason, according to the WSJ reporters who broke the story, is that Kaepernick balked at demands by executives in the target company that he stump for the merger by sitting for interviews, including on “Good Morning America”, and with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos.

  Because of this, the deal is officially “dead”.

  

  In a statement from Kaepernick’s erstwhile target, the Change Company, a lender in California that supposedly focuses on doing business with underserved borrowers, the bank said it would be willing to do business with Kaepernick. But they didn’t go as far as to deny that the deal had collapsed.

  “The Change Company would proudly consider a partnership with Mr. Kaepernick – yesterday, today, or tomorrow,” the lender’s chief executive, Steve Sugarman, said in a written statement on Thursday that praised the former quarterback’s commitment to racial justice.”

  Kaepernick is Mission’s co-chairman along with Jahm Najafi, who runs a private-equity fund and is a minority owner in the National Basketball Association’s Phoenix Suns.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 16:00

• Is China Signaling Imminent Devaluation: PBOC Fixes Yuan Weaker Than Expected For Record 15th Consecutive Day
  Is China Signaling Imminent Devaluation: PBOC Fixes Yuan Weaker Than Expected For Record 15th Consecutive Day

  A little over two weeks ago, on Dec 10, just after Beijing had made it abundantly clear it was done with its latest experiment in financial tightening – an experiment which has led to the implosion of China’s property developers led by Evergrande, a deep freeze in China’s USD-denominated junk bond market, and an accelerating slowdown in China’s $62 trillion housing sector which Goldman recently defined as the world’s largest asset…

  

  … Beijing issued its loudest hint yet that with China’s economy rapidly slowing down and the country’s monetary policy now fully reversed from the tightening observed across most DM central banks following a hike in China’s FX reserve ratio (from 7% to 9%), and the first cut in China Required Reserve Ratio (by 50bps) in over a year, a currency devaluation may soon follow.

  It did that by fixing the yuan at a whopping 179 pips weaker than consensus at 6.3702. This was the largest miss vs surveyed market participants’ fixing expectations on record, and followed China’s fix on Thursday which was already the largest miss since Oct. 14. The news promptly sent the CNH sliding further, dropping as far as 6.3893 against the dollar, before sharply reversing amid continued foreign inflows into China’s capital markets, making China’s attempts to return to simple mercantilism more difficult in the process.

  

  As Bloomberg’s Simon Flint wrote then, “this is an extremely strong signal, and should prolong the impact of the policy change announced on Thursday”… only as shown in the chart above, it did just the opposite and the yuan actually strengthen shortly after the kneejerk reaction.

  Fast forward to today, when Beijing’s signaling is the loudest it has been since the August 2015 devaluation….

  

  … as China’s central bank set a slightly weaker-than-expected reference rate for the yuan in its longest string of higher fixes on record.

  On Friday, the PBOC set the daily reference rate at 6.3692 per dollar, weaker than the estimate 6.3688 with a surveyed range from 6.3676 to 6.3711. And, according to Bloomberg, at 15 days the stretch of higher-than-expected fixes is now at the record since Bloomberg released its median consensus forecast in June 2018.

  

  To some, Beijing could not be clear in its FX intentions – one among them is SocGen’s Albert Edwards, who in his year ahead outlook show a “shocking chart” of the divergence in the yuan/USD vs trade-weighted yuan. This is what he said:

  The second shocking chart I want to flag up is the one below. We all know that the renminbi has been pari-passu against a robust US dollar, but the officially targeted trade-weighted renminbi is through the roof this year and stands at an equivalent Rmb6.00/$. At a time when Chinese credit conditions are too tight, this is simply intolerable.

  

  Edwards’ conclusion: “Despite Chinese exports remaining robust, investors should be on the alert for a 2015-like surprise renminbi devaluation.“

  Maybe, but what is Beijing is unwilling to use this particular nuclear option especially since relations with the Joe “10 for the big guy” Biden admin are improving with every passing day, and the last thing Beijing needs is to be accused of stoking currency wars with the US. As we discussed two weeks ago, here China has four potential options to hit the currency:

  • More verbal warnings against one-way bets
  •  
  • Officially adding back the countercyclical factors to its yuan fixing, essentially setting the yuan weaker than otherwise
  • Accumulate dollar reserves and/or ask state banks and experts to hold dollars
  • Liberalizing FX outflows and tightening the channels for inflows.

  Here, as Bloomberg’s Ye Xie noted, “the most effective would be allowing more outbound investments to offset the inflows.” But while authorities have already done some of that, including the launch of the Southbound bond connect that allows local residents to buy overseas bonds in Hong Kong, clearly it is not enough.

  Which leads us to an ironic question: will China realize what has been clear to the Fed for so long, and use cryptocurrencies as an excess pressure “release valve”, in this case letting cryptocurrencies absorb a measured amount of FX outflows to avoid further overheating in the yuan. Needless to say, Beijing realizing that it needs to buy crypto to ease pressure off the yuan – not long after China destroyed its domestic crypto industry by banning bitcoin mining- would truly be ironic.

  And while that may be a bit hyperbolic (for now), a devaluation of sorts is clearly a topic that is being discussed among currency analysts, and last week when addressing the best way for China to ease financial conditions rapidly and lower market rates, Nomura’s China strategist Ting Lu said that selling the yuan versus the dollar would be the most effective way to achieve this goal:

  Though barely noticed by markets, the PBoC’s net purchases of FX jumped to USD5.6bn in November from USD1.7bn in October, and this could be more relevant in lowering market interest rates in coming months (Figure 2).

  

  Despite a massive FX inflow due both to a surplus in current account and financial account, the PBoC’s net purchases of FX from end-2019 until October 2021 was almost zero. We expect the net purchases of FX by the PBoC could increase significantly in the coming months, and we think it is the best option for the PBoC for three reasons.

  • First, it could prevent the yuan from appreciating further.
  • Second, it could raise the PBoC’s FX reserves in a time of rising market fear of Chinese corporates’ offshore dollar bonds defaults.
  • Third, it could add liquidity to the economy, which is slowing to a worrisome pace.

  Needless to say, “buying FX”, i.e., dollars in the open market, is certainly one way to devalue your currency. The only question is what is Xi’s intervention “red line.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 15:30

• By The Numbers: Shipping's Unparalleled Year In 10 Charts
  By The Numbers: Shipping’s Unparalleled Year In 10 Charts

  By Greg Miller of FreightWaves

  Ocean shipping hit myriad all-time highs in 2021, and just days before the new year, there’s no sign yet of a return to pre-COVID normalcy.

  Following are charts covering both container shipping and bulk commodity shipping that highlight how unusual this year has been:

  Shipping stocks

  Shipping equities have scored big in the COVID era. Shipping stock indexes are published by New York-based communications and advisory firm Capital Link. Capital Link’s container shipping index outperformed the pack, up 242% year to date as of Tuesday. 

  

  The Capital Link Maritime Index, which covers stocks of all vessel segments, was up 138%, while the dry bulk index was up 97%.

  Tankers and gas carrier stocks lagged. Capital Link’s gas carrier index was up 43% year to date as of Tuesday, with the tanker index giving back almost all of its earlier gains and up only 4%. 

  Container spot freight rates

  Why did container stocks do so well? The initial driver was spot container freight rates, which subsequently drove up ship charter rates and contract freight rates.

  Drewry’s weekly spot index reveals how extreme the rise has been. Even after a slight pullback recently, Asia-West Coast spot rates are still five to 10 times where they’ve been over the past decade.

  

  Container-ship charter rates

  The more ships that ocean carriers operate, the more boxes they can carry and the more they profit from stratospheric freight rates. This dynamic pushed ship charter rates to record highs as carriers scrambled to secure leased tonnage.

  As with freight rates, charter rates recently dipped slightly from extreme highs. Now rates are going back up again.

  

  According to Alphaliner, 2021 “will be remembered as a historic year for the charter market, with all-time high demand, a continuously tight supply and record-breaking rates. Time-charter rates are bouncing back, and in some cases improving on their previous highs, putting an end to a recent softening trend.”

  Maritime imports customs filings

  What got the ball rolling, pushing up spot freight rates, and in turn, charter rates? Consumer demand for goods, particularly in the U.S.

  Customs data on the number of import shipments per day highlights the continued strength of that demand. The rush to get goods into the country for Christmas is over, but even so, the number of daily import shipments remains near all-time highs and is up 40% from the same time two years ago, pre-COVID.

  

  Inbound ocean bookings

  The customs data shows what just arrived. Other data signals what’s coming.

  FreightWaves’ SONAR platform features a proprietary index of shippers’ ocean bookings measured in twenty-foot equivalent units as of the scheduled date of overseas departure, indexed to January 2019.

  The bookings index is a bellwether of U.S. import volumes several weeks ahead, when ships from export destinations arrive at American ports. The index peaked in May at around 250, fell to around 150 in November and has now bounced back to over 200, pointing to continued very strong volumes in the first quarter of 2022.

  

  Ships waiting for LA/LB berths

  The freight rate, charter rate, customs and ocean booking data all imply that the supply chain squeeze is far from over. Each of these numbers remains close to its all-time high.

  Yet another gauge of supply chain pressure: the number of container ships waiting for berths at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, which handle around 40% of U.S. containerized imports. The bigger this queue number, the more U.S. inventories are in transit versus available for sale.

  The queue off Southern California ports reached an initial peak in Q1, fell back in Q2, then climbed to new heights in Q3 and into Q4, far surpassing Q1 highs.

  

  As of Tuesday, there were 91 container ships in the Pacific queue. The count has been above 90 since Nov. 23, peaking at 102 on Dec. 15.

  Dry bulk spot rates

  Container shipping grabbed the headlines in 2021, but it was also an exceptionally good year for dry bulk shipping, as shown in the strong performance of dry bulk stocks.

  Spot rates for Capesizes (bulkers with capacity of around 180,000 deadweight tons or DWT) surged to $87,000 per day in early September and then plummeted; they were $20,400 per day as of Wednesday, according to Clarksons Platou Securities. That’s still several thousand per day above where rates normally are at this time of year.

  Rates for Panamaxes (65,000-90,000 DWT) hit a decade high of $36,300 per day in late September and were down to $20,800 per day on Wednesday, still around $10,000 per day better than the 2016-2020 average for this time of year.

  Rates for Supramaxes (45,000-60,000 DWT) reached a decade high of $39,900 in late October and are down to $26,200 per day, still over 2.5 times better than where they normally are at this time.

  

  Crude-tanker spot rates

  In contrast to other shipping sectors, 2021 has been exceptionally bad for crude tankers. Rates remain far below normal. Crude tanker owners continue to bleed cash.

  As of Wednesday, Clarksons put rates for 10-year-old very large crude carriers (VLCCs, tankers that carry 2 million barrels) at just $8,400 per day, with older Suezmaxes (1 million-barrel capacity) at $11,400 and Aframaxes (750,000-barrel capacity) at $13,400.

  Whereas dry bulk rates have been well above their 2016-2020 average throughout this year, crude tankers have suffered the reverse pattern: Rates are far below the five-year average. At this time of year, VLCC rates should be around $50,000 a day, more than five times current levels. Suezmax rates are normally around $35,000 and Aframax rates $30,000, more than double current levels.

  

  Ship sales

  Yet another reason that 2021 stands out: An extraordinary number of vessels traded hands in the secondhand market.

  As of mid-December, Greece’s Allied Shipbroking counted 1,897 vessel sales year to date, with aggregate capacity of 130.84 million DWT. That’s well above the totals in any year since the financial crisis and 32% higher, measured in DWT, than the previous decade high in 2017.

  

  Container-ship sales were driven by high freight rates. Carriers sought to increase upside exposure to rates not just by chartering ships but also by acquiring them. MSC was by far the leading purchaser.

  Sales were also high for bulkers and tankers — particularly bulkers. According to Allied data, tankers sales (measured in DWT) were up 32% versus the same period in 2019, pre-COVID, with bulker sales shooting up 81%.

  New ships on order

  One reason for higher bulker and tanker secondhand sales: It makes more sense to buy existing ships than to build new ones, given high newbuild prices and uncertainty over future environmental regulations. Also, as 2021 progressed, heavy ordering of new container ships and gas carriers filled up yard slots, blocking orders for other vessel types and pushing owners to the secondhand market.

  Data from Clarksons Platou Securities reveals a stark split in this year’s orderbook. At one end of the spectrum, container-ship capacity on order now equals 22.8% of tonnage on the water, with the ratio for fully refrigerated LPG carriers up to 24% and for LNG carriers to 29.2%. Those levels imply headwinds for rates when new ships are delivered.

  On the other end of the spectrum, the order-to-fleet ratio is a mere 5.7% for product tankers, 6.9% for bulkers and 7.9% for crude tankers as 2021 comes to a close. These are historically low levels of new ship orders, implying continued strength for bulkers in the years ahead and offering promise of future relief to beleaguered tanker owners.

  

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 15:05

• South Africa Eases COVID Restrictions After Omicron Peaks
  South Africa Eases COVID Restrictions After Omicron Peaks

  South Africa is dialing back COVID-19 restrictions after the Omicron variant – which is far more mild than other strains – has peaked sooner than expected.

  

  On Friday, the government announced that contacts of Covid-positive cases that they will no longer need to test or self-isolate if they aren’t showing symptoms. Those who develop mild symptoms will be required to isolate for eight days, while anyone with severe symptoms will need to isolate for 10 days, according to the Health Ministry.

  Meanwhile, the Ministry is ending quarantine at specialized facilities outside the home, and will be scrapping contact tracing efforts with the exception of cluster outbreaks, according to DW.

  The changes were “based on advice from our scientists that it [isolation] is not really having an impact anymore,” per Deputy Health Minister Sibongiseni Dhlomo in a statement to local broadcaster SABC.

  The decision comes as some researchers believe cases of the highly-transmissible omicron variant may have peaked in South Africa, where it first emerged last month.

  Also on Friday, South Africa began offering booster shots to the general public for the first time.

  Both Johnson & Johnson and Pfizer shots have been authorized as boosters by the country’s health regulator.

  So far, only J&J booster shots have been available for health workers. Pfizer booster shots will be available in early January. -DW

  As Summit News noted last week, South African Health Minister Joe Phaahla said that only 1.7% of COVID cases in the current Omicron wave are being hospitalized, compared to 19% in the previous wave and that the vast majority of cases are “fairly mild.”

  Meanwhile residents across ‘developed’ nations can look forward to another round of ‘one-virus-fits-all’ lockdowns.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 14:40

• Two Democrats Thank Police After Being Carjacked In Separate Incidents Just Hours Apart
  Two Democrats Thank Police After Being Carjacked In Separate Incidents Just Hours Apart

  Authored by Isabel van Brugen via The Epoch Times,

  Two elected Democrats this week became the victims of carjacking in the space of 24 hours, officials have confirmed.

  

  Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas), center, talks with Reps. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) and Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Penn.) during a House Judiciary Committee markup hearing on the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump in the Longworth House Office Building on Capitol Hill in Washington on Dec. 12, 2019. (Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images)

  According to her office and city officials, Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Penn.) was carjacked at gunpoint at a South Philadephia park on Wednesday afternoon, after she had a meeting at that location.

  “The Congresswoman was physically unharmed,” her office said in a statement.

  “She thanks the Philadelphia Police Department for their swift response, and appreciates the efforts of both the Sergeant at Arms in D.C. and her local police department for coordinating with Philly PD to ensure her continued safety.”

  Scanlon’s spokesperson, Lauren Cox, told The Philadelphia Inquirer that the lawmaker’s vehicle and possessions, including her government cell phone, identification, personal cell phone, and purse were taken in the incident.

  Police say that as Scanlon walked to her vehicle, she was approached by two men, aged approximately 20-30, who demanded she give them her keys, reported Fox News. One of the men drove off in her blue 2017 Acura MDX and the other fled the scene in an SUV.

  According to CBS, Delaware State Police recovered Scanlon’s stolen vehicle at 9 p.m. Wednesday and five suspects are now in custody.

  Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney, a Democrat, described the incident as “disheartening” and “infuriating.”

  “Everyone deserves to feel safe in our city, and sadly, as we know, that hasn’t always been the case this year,” said Kenney.

  “It’s disheartening, and quite frankly infuriating, that criminals feel emboldened to commit such a reckless crime in the middle of the day in what should be a place of tranquility and peace—one of Philadelphia’s beautiful parks,” the mayor added. “I’m thankful that she was not physically harmed during this incident, and my thoughts are with her during what I’m sure is a traumatic time.”

  Kenney’s administration has been criticized for how it’s been dealing with a spike in violent crime this year.

  According to figures released by the city, Philadelphia set its all-time yearly murder rate earlier this month. As of Wednesday, the city saw 544 murders in 2021, surpassing the previously set record of 500 murders in 1990.

  With a population of about 1.579 million, police data suggests Philadelphia’s homicide rate is more than 33 murders per 100,000 people, which is more than four times the 2020 U.S. homicide rate of 7.8 per 100,000 people.

  Wednesday afternoon’s carjacking incident came less than 24 hours after Illinois’ Democratic state Senate majority leader Sen. Kimberly Lightford and her husband were carjacked on Tuesday night in Chicago—amid a surge in shootings and murders in the city this year.

  Police told CBS Chicago that the pair were approached by three masked individuals as Lightford and her husband, Eric McKennie, were driving a Mercedes Benz SUV.

  The carjackers fired shots during the incident, but the pair were unharmed, police said, adding that the carjackers fled the scene in Lightford’s vehicle and a Dodge Durango.

  “First and foremost, I am thankful that my husband and I are alive and physically unharmed,” Lightford said in a statement.

  “I am trying to process the trauma of what happened. I want to thank everyone who has offered their love and support. I want to especially thank Mayor Katrina Thompson and the Broadview Police Department for their quick and thorough response.”

  Both Scanlon and Lightford have advocated for police reform following George Floyd’s May 2020 killing.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 14:15

• Vaccines Do Not Stop COVID-19 Spread As Governments Claim: Legal Advocacy Group
  Vaccines Do Not Stop COVID-19 Spread As Governments Claim: Legal Advocacy Group

  Authored by Andrew Chen via The EPoch Times,

  Vaccines are not as effective in stopping the spread of COVID-19 as governments have claimed them to be, an analysis of government narratives conducted by a constitutional rights group shows.

  

  The report (pdf), published Tuesday by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, found that claims made by government leaders that mandatory vaccination will reduce or stop the spread of COVID-19 are not supported by either medical science or real-life experience in the countries that have achieved the highest level of vaccination.

  “Unfortunately, and contrary to government-led narratives and media coverage in both Canada and the U.S., the evidence strongly suggests vaccinations do not stop the spread of Covid – not the original strains, and not the later Delta and Omicron variants,” the Justice Centre said.

  In its analysis, the legal advocacy group compared government-led narrative and what authoritative health agencies say about vaccine effectiveness in stopping the spread of the coronavirus with the actual situation in “heavily vaccinated communities,” including Israel, the United Kingdom, the U.S. state of Vermont, Gibraltar, and Sweden.

  “We conclude that whatever value vaccines may have in reducing hospitalization and mortality, they do not ‘work’ with the thoroughness government leaders claim, and certainly not to the degree that mandatory enforcement or vaccine passports could ever be justified in Canada as a reasonable limitation upon individual rights to bodily autonomy and Charter freedoms,” the Justice Centre said.

  Goal of Vaccines Redefined

  The Justice Centre said that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) change of definition of a “vaccine” in September has effectively switched its goal from producing “immunity” to merely providing “protection” against an infectious disease.

  According to the CDC website, “vaccination” is now defined as “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.”

  In response to social media controversies following the revised definition, the CDC said the previous definitions could have been interpreted to mean that vaccines were 100 percent effective, which “has never been the case for any vaccine.”

  The Justice Centre also found many government-led narratives and health policies to be socially divisive.

  While Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and U.S. President Joe Biden repeated the narrative that vaccines work, both leaders have introduced restrictions requiring employers to enforce mandatory COVID-19 vaccination mandates.

  “With these actions, Prime Minister Trudeau and President Biden have separated Canadians and Americans into two groups: those who can fully participate in society and those who, having been first excluded from events and restaurants, can now be barred from earning a living, often in employment they have enjoyed for decades,” the Justice Centre said.

  Evidence of Reinfection

  Public enthusiasm for mass vaccination stemmed from the concept of “herd immunity,” which means that when enough people within a society become immune to a disease, it becomes harder for an infected individual to spread the virus.

  However, the Justice Centre noted that real-world evidence shows that even in heavily vaccinated communities around the world, fully vaccinated people continue to contract and die from COVID-19.

  One of the most notable examples is Israel, which was the first country in the world to have the majority of its citizens fully vaccinated. However, cases started to surge in June 2021, and over 13,000 fully vaccinated individuals had breakthrough infections between July 11 and July 31, 2021.

  “To date, no government has presented the public with evidence to support its repeated and fear-filled propaganda message that the Covid vaccine stops the spread of Covid,” the Justice Centre said.

  “In a free and democratic society, an ineffective policy of mandatory vaccination and vaccine passports to participate in normal society, deliberately excluding unvaccinated Canadians from civil society, cannot be justified as a reasonable limitation upon Charter rights and freedoms.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 13:50

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Inevitability Of Kamala Harris
  The Inevitability Of Kamala Harris

  Authored by Luke Thompson via SpectatorWorld.com,

  I come neither to bury Kamala nor to praise her…

  

  Commentary on her vice presidency is polarized. Harris’s well-known praise chorus is completely deranged. True, she is the first woman to become vice president, and only the second “person of color,” to use a term in vogue. These are historic achievements to those who understand history through the thick lens of demographic taxonomy.

  True, also, Harris has over the last year shown a near-total lack of the political skill generally needed to make a serious run at the presidency. She has been given large projects and failed to advance the administration’s goals. She has not improved as a speaker and comes across as indifferent, haughty and detached. Her approval ratings lag even those of her feckless boss. Transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg — mediocrity made flesh — labors to supplant her as heir apparent with surprising brazenness.

  Nonetheless, just as Harris’s chromosomes and skin color will not win her the White House, nor will her weaknesses as a candidate doom her to the political sideline should Joe Biden forego a 2024 reelection run. Kamala Harris remains the person most likely to win her party’s nomination in a post-Biden world, for reasons not reducible to the familiarity that comes from four years in the vice presidency.

  The White House, it would seem, has realized this. The last week has seen a well-executed rollout of Kamala puff pieces, launched on Monday with dueling profiles — one schmaltz and one serious — in the San Francisco Chronicle and Los Angeles Times. These were followed by a CBS News piece lavishing her with praise for her heretofore unknown role in getting the bipartisan infrastructure bill across the finish line.

  As I wrote at The Spectator in July 2020, picking Harris to be VP showed concerns with the “here and now” of winning the presidential campaign rather than the governing that came later. A year into his presidency, Biden appears to be waking up to the difficult reality that pick created. Harris comes from the Democratic heartland, can tie together, however loosely, the major voting blocs of her party, enjoys an institutional position that gives her structural advantages over her prospective rivals, and will thus almost certainly be Biden’s successor should he exit, mumbling, stage left in 2024.

  There has never been a state with the influence over a single party that California exerts over the Democrats today. Nearly one in eight Americans resides in the Golden State, which went to both Clinton and Biden nearly two-to-one. Culturally, California calls the tune for affluent white liberals and progressives. Materially, its major industries — entertainment, tech, finance, public sector unions and renewable energy — fund and backstop Democratic campaigns. Only mid-century New York compares, but whereas the Empire State exercised outsized influence in both parties because it would swing between them, California is a Republican afterthought even though the GOP House leader hails from Bakersfield.

  So long as she controls California, Harris can make life very difficult for any prospective challengers seeking volunteers, operatives and dollars. If, as seems likely, Democrats demote the Iowa caucuses and give Nevada the first presidential nominating contest, having a political infrastructure in neighboring California will only become more, not less, valuable.

  The Democratic bench, already so desperately thin that Mayor Milquetoast is viewed as a plausible standard-bearer, looks even thinner when one turns southward. To put the matter bluntly, even if they do not love her, who could win Southern black voters away from Kamala Harris in a Democratic primary? Warren? No. Klobuchar? C’mon. Buttigieg? No way. Mitch Landrieu will enjoy fawning Morning Joe coverage, but it will make no difference to the eventual implausibility of his candidacy.

  Finally, Biden’s own political incentives help Harris. Even if Joe decides tomorrow to forego reelection, he’ll keep the decision a secret for as long as possible. Making himself a lame duck any earlier than necessary would bury his effectiveness in office. As a result, Biden will freeze the field by giving every indication of running for reelection even if he has no intention of following through on the threat. No other Democrat can ramp up a large political apparatus without appearing to be challenging Biden as the incumbent.

  Harris, by contrast, enjoys institutional benefits by virtue of her position. She can fly around the country, hold political rallies nominally for her own reelection as vice president, and keep close tabs on the Democratic Party apparatus. This advantage could only be checked by the active intervention of Biden himself or, failing that, from Barack Obama, who still enjoys godlike status among Democratic primary voters. Yet Obama has no reason to intervene against Harris, who has followed his model even as she lacks his rhetorical and political skills.

  And so, like it or not, Democrats ought to get used to the idea of nominating Kamala Harris if Biden doesn’t run. They’re unlikely to have much of a choice.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/24/2021 – 00:20

• "A Woman Is A Woman, Man Is A Man": Putin Vows To Protect Russia From West's "Gender Obscurantism"
  “A Woman Is A Woman, Man Is A Man”: Putin Vows To Protect Russia From West’s “Gender Obscurantism”

  During his marathon annual year-end press conference Q&A, which this year lasted about four hours, Russian President Vladimir Putin once again vowed to defend Russian society against the intrusion of the corrupted values of the West, in particular blasting the “gender obscurantism” pushed by the United States and Europe.

  “I am a proponent of the traditional approach that a woman is a woman and a man is a man,” Putin laid out, which it goes without saying also reflects basic Biology 101 and humans’ self-understanding for thousands upon thousands of years. He continued in the remarks on gender: “A mother is a mother, a father is a father. And I hope that our society has the internal moral protection dictated by the traditional religious denominations of the Russian Federation.”

  

  Throughout the remarks he called it basic “common sense” – which strongly suggested that the opposite is currently the rule of the day in America and the West generally, where people fear being “canceled” in their jobs and during public discourse if they don’t confirm to concepts of ‘gender fluidity’ and Frankenstein reassignment surgeries, which is even increasingly being pushed on children. 

  Putin was responding to a question form a journalist over recent gender controversies in the West, and also the way it has impacted women’s sports.

  “And we learned to treat each other with respect. And what does it mean? That also means treating the foundations of our traditional spiritual culture with respect. All the peoples of the Russian Federation, I would like to stress, all of them have a certain internal moral protection against this obscurantism that you’ve just mentioned,” the Russian leader said.

  “If somebody thinks that a woman and a man are the same thing, they’re welcome to [their opinion], but a certain common sense should exist.”

  Holding up his country’s traditional values as the “antidote” to the “new ethics”, he also seemed to allude to the “spiritual values” of the Russian Orthodox Church, which has long been dominant in Russian society. 

  That’s when he likened the West’s attempts to push these things on Eastern Europe to a viral infection… “just like the coronavirus pandemic,” he said…

  “Just like with the coronavirus pandemic one can’t escape [non-traditional values coming from abroad]. We need to look for an antidote.”

  At his annual press conference, Vladimir Putin is asked about cancel culture and JK Rowling’s anti-trans opinions:

  Putin, thru translator: “If someone thinks that a man and a woman is the same thing, well let them think that. But there is common sense.” pic.twitter.com/YT4DB94XNr

  — The Recount (@therecount) December 23, 2021

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

  Referring indirectly to last summer’s Olympic Games in Tokyo which saw New Zealand transgender weightlifter Laurel Hubbard – who is a biological man – compete as a woman, Putin described situations where it’s now as simple as someone “declaring that he is a woman and starts competing in weightlifting”.

  “And it is necessary to fight this not with direct orders and shouts and accusations but with the support for our traditional values,” he asserted further. Additionally according to a description in TASS of his remarks, he “cited the example of an incident in the US when a criminal serving time for rape declared that he was female and after a transfer to a women’s prison committed the same crime in his cell.”

  The remarks also come at a time that multiple sports controversies have erupted in the US regarding trans competitors, particularly the ongoing saga of a University of Pennsylvania “male-to-female” swimmer who’s smashing all records…

  Swimming world magazine editor says trans swimmer has same advantage ‘doping’ provideshttps://t.co/H3zGVEj4zP

  — Fox News (@FoxNews) December 20, 2021

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

  In comments earlier this year Putin called imposing transgender teaching on children a “crime against humanity”…

  Every year during what the US has designated as “pride month” in June, American embassies around the world fly the rainbow flag in most embassies throughout the globe, including in Moscow and throughout Eastern Europe, where countries like Poland tend to be more conservative that Western Europe.

  Of course, there’s a notable exception: US embassies in conservative Muslim nations like Saudi Arabia and Iraq did not fly the rainbow flag this year. The Saudis, it should be remembered, is America’s closest Arab ally and partner. 

  USA embassy in Moscow puts up a pride flag. Did the state department do this in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, or any other countries where being gay is a literal death sentence? https://t.co/VhK2fjP8ud

  — Chris Tomlinson (@TomlinsonCJ) June 30, 2020

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

  As Putin’s comments suggested, the whole trans and LGBTQ++ movement seems to be bound up with US foreign policy abroad. In prior months, Kremlin officials have accused US-based NGOs of intentionally trying to influence Russian society with these “new ethics” – resulting in a crackdown on the degree which they can freely operate. This as Russia has laws on the books that make it illegal to propagandize children on these issues outside of parental consent. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 23:55

• How To Create A Health Care Crisis
  How To Create A Health Care Crisis

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

  At the CVS down the street, the lines are very long to buy home Covid testing kits, $24 a pop, limit four per customer. Everyone seemed to be buying four. Employees cannot restock fast enough. 

  We can speculate why. Are businesses demanding negative tests from the unvaccinated? Is Omicron sweeping the country and people need to confirm? Do we have another round of disease panic happening? It’s most likely that everyone in line has a different answer. My intuition, for what it is worth: this virus is everywhere. Lots of people are sick. 

  Do you have some sense that we’ve been in this place before? Another variant, another round of panics, more restrictions, models forecasting mass deaths, experts weighing in on all the things you must do, masks masks masks, exhortations from discredited experts demanding that you do things again even though they didn’t work the last time. 

  

  This is just a remarkable scene. Nearly two years after locking down to crush the virus, to stop the spread, this is where we are. It should be more than obvious that the mitigation measures did not achieve the goal and caused enormous damage. 

  The ghoul this time is: Omicron. Only one death in the US has been attributed to it. Cases of course are through the roof. It could get worse in terms of severity. At the same time, there is a well-established and once-understood tradeoff within this family of viruses between their transmissibility and their severity. More “cases” – meaning infections in this context – tends toward fewer deaths.

  South African health officials have clearly said that so far it is not resulting in severe outcomes. It killed no one in the country in which it was discovered. Still, the weary world seems always ready for another round of panic. Nothing has ever really made sense, but now the complete senselessness is on hyper-drive. 

  Universities all over the Northeast have closed and gone back to Zoom for final exams. New York events are being cancelled. Israel is blocking its citizens from travelling to some 10 countries, one of which is the US. Lockdowns are being imposed all over Europe along with ever more vicious enforcements of masks and vaccine passports. 

  Vaccine mandates and passports are spreading from city to city. And this is with a vaccine that has been widely adopted and accepted in all the countries now locking down. 

  Health authorities in Rhode Island, Maine, and many other states, are warning of impending disaster with overwhelmed hospitals and other facilities. This is because vast numbers have quit their jobs. Oh, but we are told, this has nothing to do with the vaccine requirement. No no. It’s because they found better job opportunities elsewhere. 

  Think about this. The staff and nurses 18 months ago were working like crazy and treated like heroes for exposing themselves to the virus. They were the fodder. They took a huge risk. They obtained natural immunity. These people should have been hired and given raises. But the CDC and NIH don’t like to breathe a word about natural immunity. Instead hospital management, pushed by government pressure, demanded that all staff get vaccinated on top of existing broad, safe, and effective natural immunity. 

  We’ve known about natural immunity for thousands of years. Now it is mostly denied or not spoken about. How can we account for that?

  From the point of view of doctors, nurses, and other hospital staff, that’s an insult. It’s insulting enough to cause anyone to quit on the spot. So yes, many employees just began feeling demoralized. Here is where we stand and a look at why there is a crisis. Crisis upon crisis. 

  

  It’s the same in nursing homes. 

  

  So yes, the lockdowns and mandates created the health-care crisis that they strategized to prevent. The ICUs are filling up but not necessarily only from Covid. These are health problems generated by lockdowns. Cancer. Drug overdoses. Obesity. Broken immune systems leading to virus vulnerability. 

  But the question is why. The answer is that governors in every state locked down the hospitals for Covid only, with some exceptions made for urgent non-elective surgeries. Most hospitals in this country were empty for months. They were bleeding money. Spending on health care in general actually declined 8.6%. 

  As I’ve written, In the first half of 2020, inpatient admissions fell by 20%, while outpatient visits collapsed by 35%. Visits to the emergency room crashed too, in some places by as much as 42%. By the fall of 2020, elective surgeries were down by 90% of where they would normally be. 

  The financial crisis, the lockdown crisis, the mandate crisis, the public health crisis, have all pointed to one end: a genuine medical care crisis. 

  Now the Biden administration is taking the extraordinary step of forcing military doctors and nurses into the hospitals. Does that make you want to go to the doctor? Not likely. In fact, for nearly two years now, many people have been avoiding the doctor, letting cancer screenings go by and so on. This has produced the very public health crisis that the lockdowns were intended to prevent. 

  For the first time since this disaster began in March 2020, I feel a loss of words, an inability to explain or even describe the world in which we live. We are on the precipice of disaster, with not only a public-health mess unfolding before our eyes but now we must await a Supreme Court that is only days away from deciding on the OSHA mandate that could permanently change life in America. 

  Many businesses are now fighting for their lives. CEOs of major airlines have pleaded to end the mask mandate that is so awful for their customers flying on their extremely clean planes. Fauci flat out said no. We must wear masks forever, he says. Why is he, of all people, the dictator of our businesses, communities, and lives? And it all happened so quickly and shockingly. 

  We are surrounded by the carnage of the lockdown and mandate strategy, which not only did not stop the Omicron variant. They might have made it inevitable. And yet we still have major voices such as Jeremy Faust of Harvard University writing in his influential column: “am I willing to disrupt certain aspects of life temporarily when necessary to achieve a clearly stated goal? Yes. The key is to define that goal and to implement a strategy that can deliver it. Nobody gets tired of winning. What we’re tired of is losing.”

  Yes, we are losing because of a losing strategy that favored force over social functioning, models over public-health wisdom, central planning over decentralized intelligence, coercion over persuasion, suppression over endemicity, and brutalism over rationality. As for “temporarily,” where have we heard that before? 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 23:30

• Rocking Around The Plastic Tree
  Rocking Around The Plastic Tree

  For some families, the search for the right Christmas tree is an annual event.

  

  For large shares of Americans and Brits though, this search may have ended a long time ago – the perfect tree already sitting safely in the attic or garage, ready for its glorious but fleeting return to the living room.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  As new survey data from Statista’s Global Consumer Survey shows, it’s a different story in Germany.

  There, the home of the Christmas tree tradition, the practice is still very much alive – 42 percent of adults said they would be putting up a real tree this year, compared to 24 percent in the U.S. and just 19 percent in the United Kingdom.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 23:05

• Australia's Chief Pharmacist Says Public Needs To Accept Boosters & Mask Mandates For "Many Years" To Come
  Australia’s Chief Pharmacist Says Public Needs To Accept Boosters & Mask Mandates For “Many Years” To Come

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

  Australia’s chief pharmacist says the public “just need to accept” they will have to take regular vaccine booster shots and continue wearing masks for “many years” to come.

  

  Asserting that the bio-security police state will become a permanent fixture, Trent Twomey, National President of the Pharmacy Guild, says Aussies will have to get a COVID booster jab “every six months” if that’s what experts tell them to do.

  “I think booster shots, just like your annual influenza shot [are] something we just need to accept, its [Covid-19] not going to be with us for many weeks and months, it’s going to be with us for many years,” said Twomey.

  The chief pharmacist stressed that in order to be considered “fully vaccinated” by authorities, people would have to get “a periodic inoculation.”

  “It’s just something we’re gonna have to do,” he added. “[If] we need one every six months, then you know what Australia, let’s get one every six months.”

  Twomey also insisted that mask wearing could remain “for a long time,” something he characterized as “not that inconvenient.”

  There’s nothing more permanent than a temporary government intervention.

  The promise that people will be made to take booster shots every 6 months for years will entrench a segregated society of the jabbed and the jabbed not.

  If the unvaccinated were hoping that restrictions on their travel and right to engage in basic lifestyle activities would end when the pandemic becomes endemic, they may need to think again.

  If technocrats like Twomey get their way, mandatory jabs and never ending mask mandates to prove compliance will become part of the new normal for potentially years or decades to come.

  *  *  *

  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, 12/23/2021 – 22:40

• China Gives Celebrities & Social Media Influencers 10 More Days To Pay Taxes Owed
  China Gives Celebrities & Social Media Influencers 10 More Days To Pay Taxes Owed

  Beijing has been busy in recent days preparing to implement President Xi Jinping’s “Common Prosperity” agenda by shaking down social media influencers and China’s biggest tech firms alike for contributions to the fund Xi is apparently raising to finance more economy-boosting projects in rural areas.

  As we reported the other day, Beijing just fined one of the country’s top streaming stars $210M and accused her of concealing income booked in 2019 and 2020. And just last night, it was reported that Tencent is being essentially forced to distribute $16 billion of shares from its holdings in JD.com to shareholders after getting the tap from the CCP that it’s time to share some of its winnings, and also give up some control as the CCP fundamentally hopes to weaken the power held by individual tech firms and the billionaire founders who control them.

  

  And now, tax authorities in Beijing and Shanghai are reminding social media influencers and anyone else in danger of being targeted by tax authorities that they have 10 more days to pay what they owe, or face severe punishment. The notice explicitly addresses “celebrities, internet influencers” and others who now find themselves in Beijing’s sights.

  Authorities published the warning in a notice, the SCMP reports.

  “Celebrities, internet influencers and other public figures should strictly comply with tax regulations even more,” the notice said. “Those refusing to self-assess their [tax obligation] or who have done so incorrectly will be severely punished by the tax bureau in accordance with the laws and regulations.”

  Some well-known influencers have publicly come forward to give tax money back under Beijing’s amnesty program, which will be in place through the end of the year, while publishing apologies for misguidedly withholding the money, and praising the government’s “common prosperity” agenda.

  Others have come forward to deny rumors that they have been evading taxes. Actress Qi Wei, 37, who is managed by the same influencer talent company as Viya, the influencer who was hit with the $210M fine, issued a statement on Weibo Tuesday saying the rumors that she had also evaded taxes were false.

  Did she not get the hint that Beijing doesn’t really care how much they already paid – only that right now, it’s the wealthy’s turn to pony up.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 22:15

• Bhattacharya: We Cannot Stop The Spread Of COVID, But We Can End The Pandemic
  Bhattacharya: We Cannot Stop The Spread Of COVID, But We Can End The Pandemic

  Authored by Jayanta Bhattacharya via The Brownstone Institute,

  The arrival of the omicron variant has led some politicians and public health grandees to call for a return to business closures and ‘circuit-breaker’ lockdowns.

  The variant has been found worldwide, including in the US and the UK. The variant has already surpassed delta – dominant before omicron – in the UK.

  Early reports from South Africa confirm that the variant is more transmissible but produces a milder disease, with a lower chance of hospitalization and death upon infection.

  My message is this: we can’t stop the spread of COVID, but we can end the pandemic.

  

  In October 2020, I wrote the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD) along with Prof. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University and Prof. Martin Kulldorff of Harvard University.

  The centerpiece of the declaration is a call for increased focused protection of the vulnerable older population, who are more than a thousand times more likely to die from COVID infection than the young.

  We can protect the vulnerable without harming the rest of the population.

  As I stated above, we do not have any technology that can stop viral spread.

  While excellent vaccines protect the vaccinated versus hospitalization or death if infected, they provide only temporary and marginal protection versus infection and disease transmission after the second dose.

  The same is likely true for booster shots, which use the same technology as the initial doses.

  What about lockdowns? 

  It is now abundantly clear that they have failed to contain the virus while wreaking enormous collateral damage worldwide.

  The simplistic allure of lockdowns is that we can break the chain of viral transmission by staying apart.

  Only the laptop class — those who can just as easily work from home as in the office — can abide by a lockdown in actual practice, and even they have trouble.

  Essential workers who keep society going cannot afford the luxury, so the disease will keep spreading.

  Will the same policies that failed against a more virulent strain succeed in containing a more transmissible strain?

  The answer is self-evidently no. 

  The harms of lockdown on children and the non-elderly are catastrophic, including worse physical and mental health and irretrievably lost life opportunities.

  Lockdowns imposed in rich countries mean starvation, poverty, and death for the residents of poor countries.

  There is, however, a good alternative to lockdown.

  The Great Barrington Declaration (GBD) calls for a return to normal life for low-risk children and non-elderly adults.

  The principles at the heart of the GBD are as important today as they were a year ago. 

  In fact, they are more important now because we now have technological tools that make focused protection of the vulnerable much more straightforward than it was a year ago.

  First and most importantly, the vaccine.

  Because unvaccinated older people face such a high risk for a poor outcome on infection, and because the vaccine is so effective at blunting severe disease and death, vaccinating older people is the top priority if life-saving is to be the top priority.

  However, the vast majority of unvaccinated older people live in poor countries. 

  At current rates, the worldwide vaccination campaign will not be complete until the end of 2022, too late to save countless vulnerable people.

  Prioritizing those who have never previously had COVID will help preserve doses for those who would most benefit since – like the vaccine — COVID recovery provides excellent protection against future severe disease.

  Booster shots for older people also make sense.

  But to preserve doses, they should be reserved for those who have not previously had COVID and were vaccinated more than 6 to 8 months ago. 

  According to a careful study conducted by Swedish scientists, vaccine efficacy versus severe disease also starts to wane around that point, so boosting before then does not provide a substantial benefit.

  Second, we should make available effective early treatment options.

  During Florida’s summer wave, Gov. Ron DeSantis promoted the use of monoclonal antibodies – an FDA-approved treatment – by patients early in the course of the disease, an action that saved many lives. 

  Safe and inexpensive supplements like Vitamin D have been shown effective. Promising new treatments from Pfizer and a new antibody treatment for the immunocompromised by Astra Zeneca promise to become more widely available. Until that happens, they should be preserved for use by the most vulnerable when sick.

  Third, the widespread availability of inexpensive, privately conducted, rapid antigen tests in the UK has empowered everyone to make wise choices that reduce the risk of infecting vulnerable people. So far, the FDA says that these tests work to detect omicron.

  Even if you have no COVID-like symptoms, these tests accurately read whether you harbor the virus and pose a risk of spreading it to close contacts. With this test in hand, anyone can check if it is safe to visit grandma before heading over to her care home. It is a perfect tool for focused protection of the vulnerable. 

  US COVID policy should focus on making these tests cheaper and more widely available, as they are in the UK.

  Finally, since the virus very often spreads via aerosolization events, upgrades to ventilation systems in public spaces will reduce the risk of older people participating in everyday social life outside the home. 

  It is no accident that COVID disease spread is so rare on airplanes since they are all outfitted with excellent air filtration systems. Upgrading other public facilities, such as other public transportation systems, would reduce the risk of infection for the vulnerable.

  There are some hopeful signs that the political and ideological winds are shifting, while other developments signal a return to failed strategies.

  Colorado’s Democrat Governor Jared Polis recently declared that the widespread availability of vaccines spells ‘the end of the medical emergency,’ and he is resisting calls to impose new statewide mask mandates.

  Yet on the coasts, in California and New York, elected officials are renewing mask requirements for all – regardless of health or vaccination status.

  The end of the pandemic is primarily a social and political decision.

  Since we have no technology to eradicate the virus, we must learn to live with it. The fear-based lockdown policies of the past two years are no template for a healthy society.

  The good news is that with the new and effective technologies available and the focused protection ideas outlined in the GBD, we can end the pandemic if only we can muster the courage and political will to do so. 

  In Sweden and many US states that have eschewed lockdowns, the pandemic is effectively over, even as the virus continues to circulate. 

  As normal society resumes, the vast majority will find that living with the virus is not so hard after all.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 21:50

• Mapped: Economic Freedom Around The World
  Mapped: Economic Freedom Around The World

  How would you define a country’s economic freedom?

  The cornerstones of economic freedom by most measures are personal choice, voluntary exchange, independence to compete in markets, and security of the person and privately-owned property. Simply put, as Visual Capitalist’s Anshool Deshmukh points out, it is about the quality of political and economic institutions in countries.

  Based on the Index of Economic Freedom by the Heritage Organization, we mapped the economic freedom of 178 countries worldwide.

  

  Measures of Economic Freedom

  The index uses five broad areas to score economic freedom for each country:

  1. Size of Government: Greater government spending, taxation, and bigger government agencies tend to reduce individual choice and economic freedom.

  2. Legal System and Property Rights: The ability to accumulate private property and wealth is a central motivating force for workers and investors in a market economy, and well-functioning legal frameworks protect the rights of all citizens.

  3. Sound Money: Does earned money maintain its value, or is it lost to inflation? When inflation is high and volatile, individuals can’t plan for the future and use economic freedom effectively.

  4. Freedom to Trade Internationally: Freedom to exchange—in its broadest sense, buying, selling, making contracts, and so on—is considered essential to economic prosperity. Limited international trading options significantly reduce the potential for growth.

  5. Regulation: When governments utilize tools and impose oppressive regulations that limit the right to exchange, economic freedom typically suffers.

  World Economic Freedom by Region

  In 2021, the global average economic freedom score is 61.6, the highest its been in 27 years.

  But from Mauritius and smaller African nations being beacons of hope to East Asian and Oceanic countries epitomizing economic democracy, every region has a different story to tell.

  Let’s take a look at the economic freedom of each region in the world.

  Americas

  Even though the U.S. and Canada continue to be some of the most economically free countries globally, some markers are suffering.

  The regional average unemployment rate has risen to 6.9%, and inflation (outside of Venezuela) has increased to 5.2%. The region’s average level of public debt—already the highest globally—rose to 85.2% of its GDP during the past year.

  

  Across many Latin American countries, widespread corruption and weak protection of property rights have aggravated regulatory inefficiency and monetary instability.

  For example, Argentina’s Peronist government has recently fixed the price of 1,432 products as a response to a 3.5% price rise in September, the equivalent to a 53% increase if annualized.

  Europe

  More than half of the world’s 38 freest countries (with overall scores above 70) are in Europe. This is due to the region’s relatively extensive and long-established free-market institutions, the robust rule of law, and exceptionally strong investment freedom.

  However, Europe still struggles with a variety of policy barriers to vigorous economic expansion. This includes overly protective and costly labor regulations, which was one of the major reasons why the UK voted to leave the EU.

  

  Brexit has since had a major impact on the region.

  Even a year later, official UK figures showed a record fall in trade with the EU in January 2021, as the economy struggled with post-Brexit rules and the pandemic.

  Africa

  Dictatorships, corruption, and conflict have historically kept African nations as some of the most economically repressed in the world.

  While larger and more prosperous African nations struggle to advance economic freedom, some smaller countries are becoming the beacon of hope for the continent.

  

  Mauritius (rank 11), Seychelles (43) and Botswana (45) were the top African countries, offering the most robust policies and institutions supporting economic self-sufficiency.

  From property rights to financial freedom, small African countries are racing ahead of the continent’s largest in advancing economic autonomy as they look to build business opportunities for their citizens.

  Middle East and Central Asia

  When Israel, the UAE, and Bahrain signed the Abraham Accords last year, there was a sense of a new paradigm emerging in a region with a long history of strife.

  A year into the signing of this resolution, the effects have been promising. There have been bilateral initiatives within the private sector and civil society leading to increasing economic and political stability in the region.

  

  Central Asian countries once part of the Soviet Union have recently starting integrating more directly with the world economy, primarily through natural resource exports. In total, natural resources account for about 65% of exports in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, and more than 90% in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan.

  Despite this progress, these countries have a long way to go in terms of economic freedom. Uzbekistan (108), Turkmenistan (167) and Tajikistan (134) are still some of the lowest-ranked countries in the world.

  East Asia and Oceania

  Despite massive populations and strong economies, countries like China and India remain mostly unfree economies. The modest improvements in scores over the last few years have been through gains in property rights, judicial effectiveness, and business freedom indicators.

  Nearby, Singapore’s economy has been ranked the freest in the world for the second year in a row. Singapore remains the only country in the world that is considered economically free in every index category.

  

  Finally, it’s worth noting that Australia and New Zealand are regional leaders, and are two of only five nations that are currently in the “free” category of the index.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 21:25

• Democrats' Dismal Outlook for 2022 Midterm Elections Continues To Worsen
  Democrats’ Dismal Outlook for 2022 Midterm Elections Continues To Worsen

  Authored by Mark Tapscott via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  When New Jersey Democratic Rep. Albio Sires announced that he wouldn’t seek reelection, he became the 23rd sitting Democrat in the House of Representatives to opt out of seeking another term in Congress.

  

  For a party with a majority that depends upon a mere handful of votes, losing 23 House veterans is a crushing blow, but more such announcements are expected as filing deadlines approach for the 2022 midterm congressional elections.

  Among other Democrats who aren’t running again are House Budget Committee Chairman John Yarmuth of Kentucky, Rep. Mike Doyle of Pennsylvania, Rep. David Price of North Carolina, Rep. Cheri Bustos of Illinois, Rep. Filemon Vela of Texas, and Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona.

  And no wonder, considering the latest survey results of likely voters by noted Democratic pollster and campaign strategist Doug Schoen and partner Carly Cooperman, which show majorities disapproving of President Joe Biden’s performance and holding congressional Democrats responsible for the nation’s growing list of serious problems.

  Schoen’s survey is especially telling because of the intensity of voter determination reflected in the responses. Fully 72 percent said they are “absolutely certain” to vote in November 2022 and another 28 percent said they are “very likely.”

  Numbers like those suggest 2022 could see a record midterm turnout if the present trends continue. That has to be especially worrisome for Democratic leaders because there’s virtually no good news for them in the Schoen results.

  Two-thirds, or 66 percent, of respondents agreed when asked if they believe “Joe Biden and Democrats in Congress are out of touch with hardworking Americans. They have been so focused on passing their own agenda that they’ve been ignoring Americans’ day-to-day concerns, such as the rising prices for goods and gasoline.” Only 30 percent disagreed.

  Similarly, 65 percent agreed when asked if they agree that “I thought things in the country were going to change for the better with Joe Biden’s election, but it’s just been more of the same. The country is still divided, the coronavirus pandemic is still ongoing—and now, on top of that, inflation is at a 30-year high and gasoline prices are soaring.” Thirty-one percent disagreed.

  On issue after issue, respondents expressed disagreement and dissatisfaction with the direction the country is heading with Democrats in control of the White House and both the Senate and House of Representatives:

  Democrats are blamed for rising inflation 48 percent to 31 percent for Republicans.

  Democrats are blamed for the surge in illegal immigration by a 33-point margin, 55 percent to 22 percent, over Republicans.

  Democrats are blamed for the nationwide crime surge, 48 percent to 27 percent for Republicans.

  Democrats are blamed for the hiring shortages plaguing business, 41 percent to 31 percent for Republicans.

  Other results are just as discouraging for Democrats.

  Asked “generally speaking, would you prefer that there be Democratic control or Republican control of the U.S. House of Representatives,” 46 percent of the respondents said they prefer GOP control, while 43 percent chose Democratic control.

  Asked how concerned they are with the violent crime surge, 58 percent said they are very concerned and 31 percent said they are somewhat concerned. A huge majority of the respondents, 62 percent, said they oppose defunding the police.

  Perhaps even more disturbing for Democrats is that 69 percent of the respondents agreed that “Joe Biden and Democrats are soft on crime.”

  And 67 percent of the respondents said the country has become more divided since Biden took office, while 52 percent said they believe Biden has weakened the U.S. economy.

  Rep. Sean Maloney (D-N.Y.), who heads the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), is being slammed by party colleagues who fear that he’s pushing the party down the wrong strategic path.

  “Universally, we heard that there’s been too much Trump talk, not enough focus on pocketbook issues. [former Virginia Gov. Terry] McAuliffe banged the anti-Trump drum constantly on his way to losing the race for Virginia governor,” Politico recently reported.

  “But at-risk members we spoke with worry that Maloney is still embracing the Trump-as-boogeyman strategy, blasting Republicans as extreme for seeking his blessing or otherwise supporting him,” Politico stated.

  Other factors, including the bitterly partisan atmosphere, are playing into the growing list of Democrats deciding to leave the House. Sires, the Cuban immigrant who is serving his eighth term, told Roll Call on Dec. 20 that he’s leaving because “the whole atmosphere in Washington is awful. You either have to be from the left or from the extreme right, and I don’t think that’s good for the country.”

  Democrats control the House in the 117th Congress with 221 seats, versus 213 for the GOP. That means a shift of only five Democrats to vote with Republicans is required for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to lose on critical issues.

  Republicans are ebullient about their prospects, with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) warning Democrats in November that “if you are a Democrat and President Biden won your seat by 16 points, you are in a competitive race next year. You are no longer safe.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 21:00

• CCP Locks Down 13 Million People In Xi'an Over 200 Cases As Winter Olympics Approach
  CCP Locks Down 13 Million People In Xi’an Over 200 Cases As Winter Olympics Approach

  Chinese health authorities said Thursday they found 91 new confirmed COVID cases in Xi’an, the capital city of Central China’s Shaanxi Province, as of 1300 local time on Thursday, bringing the total cases in the western city to 234, according to Xinhua’s count. The new figures come as authorities have locked down the city as China scrambles to prevent even the hint of an omicron wave as it prepares to host the Winter Olympics.

  

  The lockdown imposed by the CCP left stretches of highway in the city eerily bare on Thursday, according to a Reuters report, as workers set up lockdown enforcement checkpoints. The number of new cases reported in the city has now increased for 7 straight days starting with Dec. 17’s report. The city has a population of 13MM, which is notably larger than NYC’s 9MM.

  So far, at least, no cases of omicron have been confirmed, according to the CCP, but there’s always the possibility that health authorities have identified (or are simply just not looking for) the strain since news of new omicron cases might engender more panic.

  While practically every other nation has abandoned the “Zero COVID” approach, Beijing has pledged to continue it, surrounding each new outbreak – however mild – with testing resources while enforcing strict and immediate localized lockdowns. Beijing’s official stance is that no COVID can be allowed to spread.

  Starting Thursday, each household in the city may only send one person to shop for necessities, once every two days, while others aren’t permitted to leave unless they have essential jobs.

  Anybody who wants to leave must test negative before departure and get clearance from employers or community-level authorities.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 20:35

• Haitians Sue Biden Admin Over "Racist Treatment" In Del Rio Border Encampment
  Haitians Sue Biden Admin Over “Racist Treatment” In Del Rio Border Encampment

  Authored by Charlotte Cuthbertson via The Epoch Times,

  Several Haitians who crossed into the United States illegally are suing the Biden administration over “racist treatment” of the approximately 15,000 Haitians who gathered in a primitive encampment in Del Rio, Texas, in September.

  

  The Haitian Bridge Alliance, a nonprofit based in California, joined 11 Haitians in filing the suit on Dec. 20, the group announced on Twitter.

  The lawsuit alleges the Biden administration mistreated the Haitians with “calculated indifference.”

  “They were denied food, water, and medical care. They were physically and verbally abused. And they were summarily expelled without an opportunity to request asylum and without consideration of the danger they would face in Haiti or Mexico,” the lawsuit charges.

  The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) didn’t respond to requests for comment by The Epoch Times.

  The lawsuit alleges that the Biden administration has been using the Title 42 health directive against Haitians and other illegal immigrants.

  Title 42 was put in place in March 2020 to help curb the COVID-19 pandemic by stopping nonessential border travel.

  “Consistent with the United States’ long history of anti-Haitian and anti-Black immigration policies, the Biden administration has used the Title 42 process as a cudgel to deny thousands of Haitians an opportunity to access the U.S. asylum process,” the lawsuit states.

  Thousands of illegal immigrants, primarily Haitian nationals, started streaming across the Rio Grande—which divides Texas and Mexico—and gathering under an international bridge in Del Rio, Texas, in early September.

  The conditions quickly became crowded and squalid as law enforcement struggled to handle the overwhelming influx.

  At its height, the area held around 15,000 mostly Haitian illegal immigrants who were waiting to be processed by Border Patrol and were walking back and forth across the river to Mexico for supplies.

  

  Illegal immigrants take supplies back and forth between Acuña, Mexico, and the United States (far side) across the Rio Grande, the international boundary with Mexico, in Acuña, Mexico, on Sept. 20, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  All of the Haitians that The Epoch Times spoke to at the time had been living in Chile or Brazil for years before deciding to come to the United States.

  They all said it wasn’t an option for them to return to Haiti and that they were determined to get into the United States one way or another.

  Many had destroyed their visas and documentation from other resident countries before they crossed into the United States, as evidenced by the discarded identification documents on the Mexican side of the river. Some said they believed it would be more difficult to deport them if they discarded their papers.

  The camp was cleared by Sept. 24, with the majority of the Haitians being released into the United States to await a future court date. None were tested for COVID-19.

  DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said on Sept. 24 that approximately 2,000 Haitians had been deported to Haiti on 17 repatriation flights.

  Mayorkas said that since Sept. 9, when the Haitian crisis began to escalate, Border Patrol had encountered nearly 30,000 illegal immigrants in Del Rio.

  Of those, approximately 12,400 were released with a court date or a notice to check in at a federal immigration office within 60 days.

  Some 8,000 returned to Mexico voluntarily. Another 5,000 were being processed to determine whether they should be expelled or let go with a notice.

  

  Border Patrol drops van loads of Haitians who crossed the U.S. border illegally at local NGO Border Humanitarian Coalition to catch a bus to San Antonio or Houston, in Del Rio, Texas, on Sept. 22, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  The lawsuit alleges that at least 99 expulsion flights to Haiti carrying more than 10,000 asylum seekers have occurred since mid-September. Customs and Border Protection didn’t respond to a request to confirm those numbers.

  One Haitian couple highlighted in the lawsuit said they came to the United States with their 1-year-old after living in Chile for several years.

  “They never received an opportunity to seek asylum or explain why they feared returning to Haiti,” the lawsuit states. The couple also allege they were shackled while being transported back to Haiti.

  DHS began to restrain illegal immigrants bound for deportation while transporting them after a group of Haitians overtook a bus and tried to flee.

  On Sept. 20, when a busload of Haitians realized they were going to be deported, they started fighting with Border Patrol agents, forced the bus to stop, and fled.

  Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) officers responded to the scene and eventually detained all the individuals.

  “When the migrants found out they were going to be sent back to Haiti, they took the bus over and they fled,” said Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, at a press conference in Del Rio on Sept. 22.

  “If it wasn’t for the men and women in uniform, DPS, we do not know what would have happened.”

  The Haitian couple in the lawsuit was returned to Haiti, and the mother and child have since traveled to Chile, while the father remains in Haiti, according to the lawsuit. “They plan to return to the United States to seek asylum,” it states.

  

  Thousands of illegal immigrants, mostly Haitians, live in a primitive, makeshift camp under the international bridge that spans the Rio Grande between the U.S. and Mexico while waiting to be detained and processed by Border Patrol, in Del Rio, Texas, on Sept. 21, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  The lawsuit highlights also the Border Patrol horse patrol unit that sparked furor after several photographs and video footage showed agents grabbing people who illegally crossed from Mexico.

  White House officials decried the images and promised an investigation, while other critics claimed that Border Patrol agents were “whipping” the Haitians with their reins, which Border Patrol said is a technique to keep people from being trampled by the horse.

  The inspector general for the DHS subsequently refused to take up the investigation.

  The lawsuit charges senior White House and Homeland Security officials with developing a “Haitian deterrence policy,” which was “deliberately indifferent to humanitarian concerns, and focused on expelling Haitian asylum seekers as quickly as possible.”

  On a policy level, the Biden administration has been lenient on illegal immigrants, including through policy changes that allow most to be released into the United States.

  Mayorkas announced on May 22 an extension for Haitians currently eligible under the temporary protected status (TPS) program that was put in place after the 2010 earthquake.

  That allowed Haitians who were already in the United States before the earthquake to stay, as their country was deemed unsafe to return to. TPS holders get work permits and are shielded from deportation.

  The original 2010 designation for Haitians was extended several times until the Trump administration announced in January 2018 that it would end effective July 22, 2019. Subsequent lawsuits allowed the designation to remain in effect.

  On Aug. 3, Mayorkas dramatically increased the number of Haitians eligible for the program by announcing that all Haitians who had made it into the United States by July 29 this year would now be eligible to apply for TPS.

  

  Thousands of illegal immigrants amass in Del Rio, Texas, on Sept. 16, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  It’s difficult to know whether Haitians who have gained residency in another country, such as Chile or Brazil, are eligible for asylum in the United States.

  Asylum-seekers need to prove that they have suffered past persecution or have a well-founded fear of future persecution in their home country because of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.

  But persecution is generally considered state-sanctioned or condoned, which means the government of the alien’s home country is the sponsor of the persecution. For example, in North Korea, the regime itself persecutes Christians.

  Most claims of asylum in the United States are ultimately rejected, including roughly 90 percent of claims from Central Americans.

  A backlog of more than 1.3 million cases, with approximately 610,000 pending asylum applications, is being handled by a corps of immigration judges that numbered 539 as of April. Most asylum-seekers must wait years before their claims are adjudicated.

  The lawsuit is seeking an end to the use of Title 42 and the “Haitian deterrence policy” for the defendants and Haitian nationals in general.

  It’s also asking for the deported Haitians to be brought back to the United States to pursue asylum claims, as well as “further relief as the court deems just, equitable, and proper.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 20:10

• US, Japan Draft Plans To Set Up Attack Base In Event China Invades Taiwan
  US, Japan Draft Plans To Set Up Attack Base In Event China Invades Taiwan

  Coming days after the US and Japan reached an agreement on a new cost-sharing deal for Tokyo to continue hosting around 50,000 US troops, for which Japan will pay $9.2 billion over the next five years, which is a significant cost increase compared to what Tokyo was previously paying, a joint draft plan has been revealed for an emergency response contingency in the event China threatens to invade Taiwan.

  First reported in Japan’s Kyodo news agency on Thursday, unnamed Japanese officials detailed the plan was struck between the US and Japanese militaries, and arranges for a forward operating base to be establish on southwest islands, where the US Marine Corps would rapidly deploy troops.

  Kyodo details that “Japan’s Self-Defense Forces and the U.S. military have drawn up a draft joint operation plan that would enable the setup of an attack base along the Nansei island chain in the country’s southwest in the event of a Taiwan contingency, according to Japanese government sources.”

  

  Japan’s armed forces would primarily be responsible for providing logistical support, especially setting up vital ammunition and supply lines. This comes as the past year has seen Tokyo go from a much more neutral stance on the Taiwan issue to firmly and vocally being in Washington’s corner, which has resulted in Beijing lashing out with warnings and threats on multiple occasions. 

  Beijing is certain to react fiercely to the Kyodo news report, which additionally notes that “Such a deployment, however, would make the islands the target of attack by China’s military, putting the lives of residents there at risk. Legal changes would be needed in Japan to realize the plan, the sources said.”

  The US side has yet to confirm the agreement for the emergency plans, which appears part of longtime Washington efforts which began in earnest under the Trump administration to shore up regional allies to “stand up” to China, which has included plans for US missile bases – though so far there’s no regional ally willing to make itself target #1 for China’s formidable counter-measures by agreeing to host coastal missiles.

  According to The Hill, “Washington and Tokyo would likely reach an agreement to start creating an official version of such a plan at the 2+2 dialogue, a high-level security meeting between diplomatic and defense officials in January.”

  That the US and Japanese militaries were in talks to put in place plans for intervention in the event of a PLA offensive on Taiwan was first reported in Chinese state-linked media in November. For example The South China Morning Post at the time wrote, “China has been warned to stay alert to the possibility Japan will intervene militarily in the event of an attack on Taiwan.”

  #Japan and US have drafted a joint plan to set up an attack base along the Nansei island chain if #Taiwan comes under threat by #China, according to Japanese government sources, reports @kyodo_official. https://t.co/b35wtVL8fC

  — Steve Herman (@W7VOA) December 23, 2021

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

  The report cited that “A research paper said recent gestures of support for the island indicate that Japan and the United States have been discussing the scenario and are making plans to deter Beijing from using force to take the island.”

  Meanwhile, Beijing and Tokyo have continued trading threats and accusations over fishing and territorial rights in disputed islands – which in the recent past has looked poised to become a militarized dispute. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 19:45

• Victor Davis Hanson: Please, Stop The 'Coup' Porn!
  Victor Davis Hanson: Please, Stop The ‘Coup’ Porn!

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  In a recent Washington Post op-ed, three retired generals, Paul Eaton, Antonio Taguba, and Steven Anderson warn of a supposedly impending coup should Donald Trump be elected in 2024.

  The column seemed strangely timed to coincide with a storm of recent Democratic talking points that a re-elected Trump, or even a Republican sweep of the 2022 midterms, would spell a virtual end of democracy.

  

  Ironies abound.

  From Election Day in 2020 to Inauguration Day 2021, we were told by the Left that democracy was resilient and rightly rid the nation of Trump.

  The hard Left, for one of the rare times in U.S. history, was now in complete control of both houses of Congress and the presidency.

  Spiking inflation, supply-chain shortages, near-record gas prices, open borders, the flight from Afghanistan, multi-trillion-dollar deficits, and polarizing racial rhetoric all followed.

  In response to these events, Joe Biden’s popularity utterly collapsed. His own cognitive challenges multiplied the unpopularity of his failed policies.

  In reaction, the Left again pivoted. It suddenly announced that should it lose congressional power in 2022 or the presidency in 2024, democracy was all but doomed.

  Apparently, what changed Democrats’ views was that democracy was working all too well in expressing widespread public disgust . . . with the Left.

  Even more ironies followed.

  The three retired generals shrilly write of the dangers of insurrection and coups. Yet the FBI found no such insurrection or conspiracy in the buffoonish riot on January 6.

  Only serial media misinformation and lies turned a ragtag band of misfits into an existential threat to the nation.

  Almost every media talking point turned out to be untrue. No Capitol police officer died at the hands of the mob. (Early reports that Officer Brian Sicknick had been beaten into a coma by protesters were incorrect. The Washington, D.C., medical examiner ruled Sicknick died the next day of a stroke.) The media all but ignored the lethal police shooting of a military veteran and unarmed petite female trespasser, for the apparent crime of trying to enter Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office through a broken window. There were no gun-toting “insurrectionists” arrested inside the Capitol.

  Another irony. The three retired generals say nothing about the Russia collusion hoax in which Obama administration officials at the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the CIA helped to seed a fake dossier — paid for by candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Ex-British intelligence operative Christopher Steele’s made-up opposition research was designed first to derail Trump’s campaign, then to disable his transition and finally sabotage his presidency. All that seems rather coup-like.

  In truth, coups were regularly discussed during the last four years — but only in the context of a by-any-means-necessary way of deposing Donald Trump extralegally before his term ran out.

  In August 2020, two retired officers John Nagl and Paul Yingling, urged Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley to remove Trump from office if Milley felt it necessary after a contested election.

  Both officers knew that the law forbids Milley from interfering in the chain of command, given his mere advisory role to the president.

  Yet Milley himself had dangerously violated his purview at least twice. He once ordered subordinate officers to report to him first should Donald Trump consider any nuclear action against China. And Milley additionally called his Chinese communist counterpart to warn him that he would tip the Chinese off about any preemptive American strike on China.

  Earlier, Rosa Brooks, a former Obama Pentagon legal official, wrote a now infamous essay in Foreign Policy, listing the choices available in removing Donald Trump from his less than two-week-old presidency. Among the possible means, she listed a potential military coup.

  Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice forbids even retired military officers publicly attacking or disparaging their current commander-in-chief. Yet several retired generals and admirals serially did just that during the last administration, smearing their president in every imaginable way, from being a Mussolini-like fascist to a veritable Nazi.

  The officers published in the Washington Post are clueless as to why the military is now suffering its most dismal public approval ratings of the modern era — with only 45 percent of the public registering trust and confidence in their armed forces.

  The nation is clearly not blaming the courageous soldiers in the enlisted ranks. But it has had enough of the Pentagon’s loud top brass who seem more interested in stirring up political divisions at home than adopting winning strategies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, or deterring China and Russia.

  The officer corps too often broadcasts its woke credentials, calibrated for career advancement. Top-ranking officers upon retirement too predictably head for corporate defense contractor boards and procurement lobbying firms.

  To restore the military’s reputation, officers should eschew politics to focus on restoring strategic deterrence and military readiness. They should keep clear of divisive domestic issues. They should stop virtue signaling to the media and influential members of Congress.

  But most importantly, officers should quit all their coup porn talk — either to remove a president they don’t like, or to project their own reckless, insurrectionary behavior onto their political opponents.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 19:20

• Putin Names Russia's "Number One Partner" At Year-End Press Conference
  Putin Names Russia’s “Number One Partner” At Year-End Press Conference

  Delivering remarks on a wide range of issues during the Russian president’s annual year-end press conference where he holds a long Q&A session with the press and public, Putin named Russia’s number one partner on the global stage. 

  While a decade ago his answer would have perhaps come as a shock given the two countries’ tense history and rivalry, particularly through the 20th century – it should come as no surprise now, after both find themselves firmly in Washington’s geopolitical and economic crosshairs… China, Putin named as an unprecedented partner of close cooperation from trade to technology to defense. 

  

  Russia is “China’s number one partner,” the Russian president asserted, describing to the press conference that President Xi Jinping and he “have very trusting relations and it helps us build good business ties as well.” Putin stressed that Xi “is an obvious leader” and that recent meetings and cooperative endeavors “brings us closer together.”

  Here’s more according to an official English translation of Putin’s remarks featured in Russian state media reports:

  “We are cooperating in the field of security. The Chinese Army is equipped to a significant extent with the world’s most advanced weapons systems. We are even developing certain high-tech weapons together,” the Russian leader went on.

  He said that there has been nothing like Russia and China’s current relations in history before, and remarked that this serves as a “stabilizing factor” on the world stage.

  Xi and Putin met last week in a virtual conference, which came on the heels of Putin meeting with Biden for a much more tense, though generally positive exchange. 

  During this latest Xi-Putin summit, the Russian leader hailed his friendship with Xi as something closer than allies. Xi had also been cited in Chinese state media describing that the Russian president had “firmly supported China in defending its core interests and opposed attempts to divide China and Russia,” according to CCTV.

  Russian President Putin had a marathon 4 hr long year ending annual presser; No mention of India (nor any questions). Lot of focus on Ukraine, China. Called ties with Xi Jinping “very trustful personal relationship” https://t.co/J4qtJVWp4e

  — Sidhant Sibal (@sidhant) December 23, 2021

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

  Importantly, following that meeting Xi had declared formal support for this central security concern of Russia’s: 

  Putin won support from Xi for his push to obtain binding security guarantees for Russia from the West, a Kremlin official said, according to Reuters.

  Russia wants the United States and NATO to guarantee the military alliance will not expand further eastward or deploy weapons systems in Ukraine and other countries on Russia’s border.

  Putin during his Thursday year-end conference addressed the emerging Ukraine crisis 2.0, after last month Washington and Kiev accused the Kremlin of a major military build-up threatening Ukraine…

  “We are not the ones who are threatening someone,” Putin began. “Are we the ones who went there, to the US borders, or to the borders of the United Kingdom or somewhere? They came to us, and now they still say: no, now Ukraine will join NATO as well.”

  Xi has affirmed he stands by Russia’s firm stance on countering NATO expansion eastward…

  Xi Jinping backs Vladimir Putin’s demand for Nato to halt eastwards expansion https://t.co/ANBzBWmk3i

  — David Reynolds (@SurferObserver) December 15, 2021

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

  Days ago the Kremlin sought to initiate urgent dialogue with the West by submitting a draft document of “security guarantees” – centered on the central demand of no more NATO expansion eastward. Reports this week suggest that Russia and the US have agreed to meet over the matter in January. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 18:55

• Life Expectancy In 2020 Fell 2.3% To 77 Years. Does This Justify The COVID Panic?
  Life Expectancy In 2020 Fell 2.3% To 77 Years. Does This Justify The COVID Panic?

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  According to a new report released Wednesday by the Centers for Disease Control, the life expectancy at birth in the United States fell to 77.0 years in 2020, falling from 2019’s life expectancy of 78.8 years. The report also noted an increase of mortality with age-adjusted mortality in the US rising from 715.2 per 100,000 in 2019 to 836.4 per 100,000 in 2020. 

  Media reporting on the CDC’s report provide a variety of statistics on one-year percentage changes, no doubt with an eye toward maximizing the perceived effect of covid-19 on American health.  But what are the trends when we look at these numbers in the larger context? That is, just how much has life expectancy and mortality swung from what we’ve experienced in recent decades?  A closer look at these numbers suggests that covid does not exactly represent an epochal change in life expectancy, health, or healthcare.

  Moreover, the new numbers also help illustrate how efforts by journalists earlier this year to describe covid-19 as “deadlier” than the 1918 flu were wildly off the mark. 

  

  Just How Much Did Life Expectancy Fall in 2020?

  When the CDC released preliminary numbers on 2020’s life expectancy earlier this year, many sources claimed life expectancy “fell off a cliff.” This week the tradition continued with The Daily Mail, for example, publishing this graph with a curiously truncated y axis:

  

  If we take a longer historical view of life expectancy figures—with a normal y axis—things look a little different:

  

  Source: Historical data through 2018 obtained from National Center for Health Statistics Data Visualization Gallery (Mortality Trends in the United States, 1900–2018). Age-adjusted death rates for 2019 and 2020 obtained from Sherry L. Murphy, B.S., Kenneth D. Kochanek, M.A., Jiaquan Xu, M.D., and Elizabeth Arias, Ph.D., Mortality in the United States, 2020, NCHS Data Brief No. 427, (December 2021) 

  In 2020, life expectancy fell from 78.8 years in 2019 to 77 years in 2020. That’s a drop of 2.3 percent. However, we also find that 2020’s life expectancy of 77 years was equal to that of 2001, a period not exactly of the distant past before penicillin. Nor were the gains between 2001 and 2020 particularly impressive. Life expectancy in the US didn’t budge more than one-tenth of a year between 2010 and 2019, going back and forth between 78.7 and 78.8. This means from 2001 to 2010, life expectancy increased only 2.2 percent. (Compare, for example, with the increase from 1971 to 1980 when life expectancy increased by 3.6 percent). In other words, it didn’t take much for life expectancy to return to a level from 20-years prior. The past twenty years has not exactly been a period of great progress in this regard.

  A historical view also reveals that recent and ongoing attempts to compare the covid-19 pandemic to the flu epidemic of 1918 are hardly appropriate. From 1917 to 1918, life expectancy is estimated to have fallen by an enormous 23 percent, falling from 50.9 to 39.1.

  

  Source: Historical data through 2018 obtained from National Center for Health Statistics Data Visualization Gallery (Mortality Trends in the United States, 1900–2018). Age-adjusted death rates for 2019 and 2020 obtained from Sherry L. Murphy, B.S., Kenneth D. Kochanek, M.A., Jiaquan Xu, M.D., and Elizabeth Arias, Ph.D., Mortality in the United States, 2020, NCHS Data Brief No. 427, (December 2021)

  (The case of 1918 does provide a helpful reminder, however, that epidemics do not necessarily signal a departure from larger trends. By 1919, the life expectancy in the US had rebounded with the measure increasing to a new high of 60.8 in 1921.)

  Changes in Age-Adjusted Mortality

  The CDC on Wednesday also released new finalized year-end numbers for mortality in 2020.  From this data we see changes in life expectancy and mortality were driven overwhelmingly by deaths among adults. As the new report shows, mortality from 2019 to 2020 was virtually unchanged in the under-15 population, and for children under 5, mortality actually declined.

  More important still is age-adjusted mortality. This shows us changes in mortality while taking into account the fact that the population is aging overall—and thus more likely to experience disease and death than is a younger population. From 2019 to 2020, age-adjusted mortality in the US rose from 715.2 per 100,000 to 836.4 per 100,000. That’s an increase of nearly 17 percent. Yet, again, the rise should hardly be panic-inducing. This rise brings age-adjusted mortality back to 2003 levels—a period not exactly in the distant past. 

  

  Source: Historical data through 2018 obtained from National Center for Health Statistics Data Visualization Gallery (Mortality Trends in the United States, 1900–2018). Age-adjusted death rates for 2019 and 2020 obtained from Sherry L. Murphy, B.S., Kenneth D. Kochanek, M.A., Jiaquan Xu, M.D., and Elizabeth Arias, Ph.D., Mortality in the United States, 2020, NCHS Data Brief No. 427, (December 2021)

  A larger historical view also shows that recent efforts to compare covid to the 1918 flu in terms of mortality wildly overstate the impact of the current situation. From 1917 to 1918, the age-adjusted mortality rate increased by 392 per 100,000. From 2019 to 2020, the increase was 120 per 100,000.  

  

  Source: Historical data through 2018 obtained from National Center for Health Statistics Data Visualization Gallery (Mortality Trends in the United States, 1900–2018). Age-adjusted death rates for 2019 and 2020 obtained from Sherry L. Murphy, B.S., Kenneth D. Kochanek, M.A., Jiaquan Xu, M.D., and Elizabeth Arias, Ph.D., Mortality in the United States, 2020, NCHS Data Brief No. 427, (December 2021)

  The point here, of course, is not that covid deaths over the past eighteen months are insignificant. Indeed, even if we make no distinction between covid deaths and noncovid deaths since early 2020, it’s clear more Americans have indeed been dying from all causes. And that’s hardly something to celebrate or ignore. Moreover, the CDC’s report is an unpleasant reminder that life expectancy in the US had already all but screeched to a halt in the decade leading up to 2020. This was likely due to a continued and rapid rise in obesity—rising nearly 40 percent from 2000 to 2018—which has in turn fueled both heart disease and diabetes. Both these conditions are factors known to substantially increase the severity of covid-19.

  Nevertheless, it remains important to obtain some much-needed context when examining a disease which is being used to justify unprecedented increases in state power over even the most basic personal and economic activities of ordinary people. Even considering recent data on life expectancy and mortality, it remains extremely unclear why 2020’s changes in these metrics would justify the extreme panic and human rights violations that resulted from stay-at-home edicts and coerced medication.

  American citizens are nowadays subjected to a nonstop drumbeat of claims about “unprecedented” levels of mortality. We’re even told covid is just like the flu of 1918. And to what end? Apparently, to rob people of their livelihoods if they refuse to receive a vaccine. It’s to attempt to make pariahs of anyone who makes health decisions of which the regime does not approve. It’s to continue to justify 2020’s ineffectual lockdowns. It’s to justify government spending at levels unprecedented in peacetime. It’s to deny that natural immunity provides meaningful resistance to the disease. Yet all this rhetoric occurs at a time when age-adjusted mortality and life expectancy is not exactly “off the charts” if we look beyond the confines of just the last few years.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 18:30

• New Satellite Images Purport To Show Russian Force Build-Up Near Ukraine
  New Satellite Images Purport To Show Russian Force Build-Up Near Ukraine

  New satellite photos made public by Maxar appear to confirm the large-scale presence of Russian military hardware, including Iskander mobile short-range ballistic missiles, deployed within 200 miles of Ukraine’s border, according to a CBS correspondent. Some pundits are suggesting this as further “proof” of the continued Russian force build-up threatening Ukraine. 

  It comes as Ukraine’s media and political leaders are claiming “There are 122,000 Russian servicemen deployed at a 200-km distance to the borders of Ukraine, as well as another 143,500 at a distance of 400 km.”

  NEW: Photos show Russian troops & equipment, including hundreds of tanks, self-propelled artillery and an Iskander mobile short-range ballistic missile are deployed in a training area located approx 160 miles north of the Russia – Ukraine border.
  📸: @Maxar pic.twitter.com/qXkj7V1yeI

  — Elizabeth Campbell (@ECampbell360) December 23, 2021

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

  Kiev has charged that the Kremlin is planning to begin offensive operations aimed at annexing pro-Russia areas of Eastern Ukraine sometime in January, which Putin and other top officials have continued to deny, saying that where Russia stations its troops in its own territory shouldn’t be taken as a threat to any neighbor or outside power. 

  As to the reports of missiles and other major hardware being moved near Ukraine, this is a specific threat the foreign ministry has hinted at in the past few days, explaining that if Brussels and Washington shut the door on dialogue over the recently submitted draft “security proposals” document, then Russia will have no choice but to initiate “military-technical” measures. However, it remains that all of this equipment is still far away from the actual Ukrainian border, very firmly within Russia’s sovereign territory.

  But the reality is that pretty much all of Europe is already within range of Russia’s conventional ballistic arsenal anyway, as The Dispatch notes in examining the new security proposals being pitched to NATO:

  Article 6 would ban the deployment of intermediate and short-range ballistic missiles by the US in Europe, despite the fact that Russia has already deployed dual-capable SS-26 “Iskander” missiles in Kaliningrad that can reach much of central Europe and has developed intermediate-range missiles that cover large swaths of the continent from the western military district of Russia. Such a self-abnegating undertaking would run the risk of reproducing the missile imbalance that the USSR created in the 1970s that European leaders worried would decouple the defense of Europe from that of the United States and, at the same time, remove whatever incentive Russia might have to reach arms control agreements to limit such missile deployments on their part. 

  Concerning this draft document which is intended to jumpstart urgent dialogue between Moscow, NATO and the US, Putin on Thursday said there’s been an agreement for both sides to meet in Geneva next month to hammer out an agreement on ‘no further NATO expansion eastward’. 

  Russia has wrapped up a modernization effort that had only partially begun in 2014.

  Moscow could use Iskander missiles to knock out Ukraine’s runways, airports, and fighters on the ground.

  And it’s already begun cyberattacks on Ukrainian networks to prepare the battlefield.

  — Jack Detsch (@JackDetsch) December 23, 2021

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

  However, the White House as of Thursday afternoon is disputing the degree to which there’s been an agreement to meet. Psaki rejected the reports of a firm meeting date in place.

  Watch the White House press secretary contradict what Putin said earlier in the day:

  .@MajorCBS presses @PressSec on potential Biden/Putin meeting: Is this Jan. time more likely than not since he aired it publicly?
  We have also said that we are looking ahead to talks in early Jan.
  Why won’t you confirm it then?
  B/c we haven’t finalized the details of them yet. pic.twitter.com/Ydrz492r4p

  — Elizabeth Campbell (@ECampbell360) December 23, 2021

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

  Meanwhile, Putin during his major end of year Q&A press conference had a severe rebuke for NATO, addressing the issue of reversing course on past promises: 

  “We are not the ones who are threatening someone. Are we the ones who went there, to the US borders, or to the borders of the United Kingdom or somewhere? They came to us, and now they still say: no, now Ukraine will join NATO as well.”

  He described further, “Not a single inch to the East – that’s what we were told in the 90s. So what? Cheated. They just cheated insolently.” He explained: “[There were] five waves of NATO enlargement. And now, please, in Romania, in Poland, there are corresponding [military] systems.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 18:05

• "Terrible!": CNN Turns On Biden, Highlights Horrendous Economic Polling While Making Jimmy Carter Comparisons
  “Terrible!”: CNN Turns On Biden, Highlights Horrendous Economic Polling While Making Jimmy Carter Comparisons

  CNN on Thursday spent an entire segment bashing President Biden after a poll revealed that his economic ratings are ‘worse than Jimmy Carter’s.’

  “Just how bad is it?” host John Berman asked senior data reporter Harry Enten.

  “Terrible,” Enten replied, before pointing to Biden’s net approval rating.

  

  “Look at Joe Biden in 2021. Minus 15 points. He’s well under water. That is even lower than Jimmy Carter was in a CBS News / NYT poll at the beginning of January, 1978 when he was minus 8 points.”

  “When it comes to the economy, there is pretty much nothing good that can be said about Joe Biden’s numbers, when it comes to the American public.“

  Watch:

  CNN just ENDED Biden on LIVE TV, calling his polling on the economy “TERRIBLE” and comparing him to *Jimmy Carter*

  WATCH. pic.twitter.com/lnv5kyxRDb

  — Danny De Urbina (@dannydeurbina) December 23, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 17:40

• 7 Staffers In Top Pentagon Delegation Test Positive For Covid, Despite All Being Vaxxed
  7 Staffers In Top Pentagon Delegation Test Positive For Covid, Despite All Being Vaxxed

  Despite the Pentagon recently touting that across armed services and the DoD about 97-98% of all personnel have been fully vaccinated, there’s been a new Covid outbreak among the highest ranks.

  “Seven staffers who traveled with Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks last week tested positive for COVID-19, the Pentagon announced,” according to The Hill. She’s the second highest ranking Pentagon official in the United States government, and on that trip last week had traveled to several large US military bases. 

  

  Hicks herself has so far tested negative for Covid-19, according to a follow-up statement by Pentagon press secretary John Kirby. He said that contact tracing is still ongoing. 

  “We are also contacting hotels, bases and support personnel who may have come in contact with the traveling party,” Kirby added. The high level nature of the delegation means that the infected staff members would have come into contact with top Generals and Colonels and other officers at multiple bases and command centers.

  The Hill lists that the deputy Pentagon chief visited the following: “the Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Michigan, then traveled to Colorado to visit the U.S. Northern Command, U.S. Space Command, and the U.S. Space Force Space Training and Readiness Command.”

  “Hicks also visited the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command in Hawaii, the Naval Amphibious Base Coronado in California; and the U.S. Strategic Command in Nebraska.”

  The staff members who tested positive are currently in quarantine, with Kirby underscoring upon announcing the small outbreak that “We continue to treat the prevention of the spread of COVID-19 with utmost seriousness and care.”

  Meanwhile, the Army, Air Force, and Marines have begun the process for discharging hundreds of service members who failed to get vaccinated by their respective branch deadlines. “The Army said it has reprimanded more than 2,700 soldiers and will begin discharge proceedings in January, while the Air Force has discharged at least 27 members,” NBC recently reported.

  The Omicron variant has begun to appear within the US military…

  NEW: More than 360,000 boosters doses or third doses have been given at DoD facilities: Pentagon official.

  DoD has detected 10 cases of the Omicron COVID-19 variant within the military health system so far, spokesman John Kirby said in emailed statement.

  — Jack Detsch (@JackDetsch) December 20, 2021

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

  But the deeply awkward irony remains, underscored in these latest infections among the Pentagon’s highest ranks: without doubt those officers and staffers traveling with Deputy Secretary Hicks were fully vaccinated – and possibly also had received the booster as well. And yet the vaccine did not prevent infection in these cases.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 17:15

• Top 10 Themes For 2022: Part 2
  Top 10 Themes For 2022: Part 2

  Picking up where we left off with the first five of Deutsche Bank’s Top 10 Themes For 2022, here is Part 2 of what the bank thinks will be the biggest themes of the coming year. Themes covered include i) Antitrust (or competition) renaissance; ii) The end of free money in stock markets; iii) Space: a worrying geopolitical frontier; iv) Central Bank Digital Currencies: Growing into reality and v) ESG bonds go mainstream. (click here for Part 1 which covers the following themes 1) An overheating economy; 2) Covid optimism; 3) A hypersonic labor market and inflation; 4) Corporate focus on asset efficiency; 5). Inventory glut. )

  * * *

  6. Antitrust (or competition) renaissance, by Luke Templeman

  Like it or not, US companies will likely face tougher competition in 2022. The rest of the western world is likely to follow suit. An executive order issued by President Biden in July argued that over the last several decades, “competition has weakened in too many markets”. It blamed this for widening racial, income, and wealth inequalities, as well as suppressing worker power. A “whole-of-government” effort was promised on 72 initiatives. That followed just months after the chair of the Federal Trade Commission was given to Lina Khan who is known for her work on anti-trust and competition issues.

  If Biden’s initiatives have teeth, companies may be about to witness a sharp reversal of the trend towards less competition seen over the past few decades. The following charts show just two indicators that life has become more difficult for new companies in the US.

  

  The result of diluted competition is that corporate profit margins have grown. Last quarter’s results showed that profit margins in S&P 500 companies have hit multi-decade highs (despite covid) and have almost doubled to 11.2 per cent (on a four-quarter rolling basis). That has helped corporate earnings comfortably outpace GDP over the last two decades.

  Of course, falling costs of labor and capital over the last few decades have helped boost profits. But in a textbook competitive market, these advantages should be competed out and/or passed onto customers.

  The tighter competition has been, in part, due to consolidation after rule changes in the 1980s gave corporates the confidence to ramp-up mergers and acquisitions. Hence a lower number of large firms in many markets. For instance, only a handful of mobile carriers and airlines compared with their numbers 20 years ago. Meanwhile, there is an open-ended question of whether some large technology groups stifle or promote competition. Some argue that scale delivers cheap goods to customers; other say it reduces innovation and the incentive to spend on capex and workers.

  Regardless of the reason for less competition, Biden appears to have the political will to boost it. And this desire will be undergirded by the will of workers. Post-covid, many workers, particularly low paid staff, have significantly greater bargaining power. As a result, long-standing discontent with wages lagging profits are morphing into action. Large firms, including Amazon, Disney, and McDonald’s, have all given pay rises since covid.

  So, with political will at the top supported by worker power at the bottom, the companies stuck in the middle should expect that 2022 will usher in an era of greater competition, an easier time for new entrants, and more hurdles to mega-acquisitions. It could mean that companies come to see high profit margins as an anomaly rather than the norm.

  * * *

  7. The end of free money in stock markets, Luke Templeman

  “Will the stock market crash in 2022 as the Fed tapers and likely raises rates?” While many investors fret over this question, the forgotten theme that may accompany the end of free money is not whether stock markets will crash. Rather, it is how investors may be forced, for the first time in a decade, to consider how the end of free money may reorder equity markets on the inside.

  The end of stimulus is certain to slow the money flow into equity markets. And if rising interest rates push bond yields higher, investors will have options elsewhere in bond markets and other rate-sensitive investments that have been ignored in recent years. As investments aside from equities become more appealing, frustrated active asset managers may finally witness the return of fundamental investing.

  Equity markets will be shocked by the return of fundamentals. After all, in the era of free money, many frustrated ‘value’ managers have given up. The following charts show that as markets recovered from the financial crisis, traditional ‘value’ investing became very difficult.

  The reason for the underperformance of ‘value’ is not simply explained by the outperformance of technology ‘growth’ stocks. It is also because the financial crisis catalyzed the era of super-cheap money. A significant proportion of this poured into equity markets, much through passive funds which bought the index. As a result, all stocks began to move in similar ways regardless of the profitability of the underlying companies. The following chart shows that between the 2008 financial crisis and covid, the dispersion (or spread) of stock returns disconnected from the dispersion of returns on equity. In other words, even though corporate profits were more different, their stock prices remained similar.

  

  Since covid, stock markets have flirted with the idea of once again discriminating between companies with strong and weak profitability. But the stimulus-fuelled rally has largely ended that. Investors are, once again, simply throwing their money at the entire stock market, particularly in passive funds.

  In 2022, as equity markets lose the flood of money that has propped up all stocks over the last decade, investors may be forced to become more discerning. There are signs this is beginning to happen. Postcovid, the dispersion of returns is higher than it has been in almost a decade.

  Accelerating the return of fundamentalism could be a tightening in business conditions. Wage pressure, exposure to ESG issues, and the Biden administration’s desire to increase competition, will likely have a disproportionate effect on poor quality companies that investors have hitherto propped up. That will further highlight the gap to market values and widen the differences between companies.

  None of this means overall equity markets will crash. Rather, it may lead to a reordering within equity markets as we witness the return of fundamental value investing. Finally, active managers may be back in vogue.

  * * *

  8. Space: a worrying geopolitical frontier, Galina Pozdnyakova

  Against the backdrop of rising geo-political tensions between several countries, 2022 is shaping up to be the year when tensions over the potential for the militarization of space become a top geo-political negotiation topic.

  The problem is that most parties have an incentive to avoid agreeing on new rules. Many would rather keep space as a ‘wild west’. Of course, several countries have national space laws, and international treaties such as the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 are in place. Yet they do not adequately govern modern weaponisation of space technologies. And with no consensus over boundaries and control over space objects, and blurred lines between defence and weapons systems, the risk of conflict is rising.

  The reality of the military threat in space will be amplified in 2022 as politicians digest recent high-profile events. The Russian ASAT test in November showed that the country can take down satellites – an ability also demonstrated by the US (2008), China (2007) and India (2019). Meanwhile, France recently became the fourth country to launch electromagnetic-monitoring military satellites, following the US,  China, and Russia.

  The importance of space has surged in the past few years as falling launch costs have led to an increased number of satellites in orbit and, thus, and increased dependence upon them. Aside from military uses, future conflicts will certainly target communications, GPS, and finance applications that all rely on satellites.

  

  Countries have quickly taken the military risks of space more seriously. Over autumn, QUAD leaders agreed to finalize “Space Situational Awareness Memorandum of Understanding” this year. Separately, the UK pushed a resolution on “threatening and irresponsible space behaviours” which passed the first stage at the UN and will be reviewed in December.

  Responding to the threats, new military space divisions have popped up over the last two years. Japan’s Space Operations Squadron and the UK’s Space Command were both created since 2020. They follow the creation of China’s Strategic Support Force in 2015, and the US Space Force in 2019. The latter will receive a 13 per cent budget increase in 2022.

  The 2022 completion of the Chinese space station, Tiangong, will also mark a shift in soft space power. It will increase China’s scientific research capabilities and its collaboration with other countries. The station’s advanced technologies and equipment, as well as modular design, will allow for multiple use cases. Meanwhile, the International Space Station is only approved to operate until 2024.

  So 2022 will likely be the year where space becomes the next frontier of an arms race between key global powers. Layering these issues on top of existing geopolitical tensions will create an unusual situation for world leaders. Everyone wants everyone else to play by the rules. Yet the rules of space are antiquated and there is a heavy incentive for most powers to avoid cementing new ones. The tensions above the Earth appear set to amplify tensions on it. Space threats are already becoming a topic of geo-political negotiation and, in 2022, they will likely become front-and-center.

  * * *

  9. Central Bank Digital Currencies: Growing into reality, Marion Laboure

  There is a clear move towards a cashless society (as a mean of payment) and CBDCs is set to progressively replace cash. The question is no longer « if » but « when » and « how ». Today, 86 per cent of central banks are developing a CBDC; 60 per cent are experimenting at the proof-of-concept stage. Central banks representing about a fifth of the world’s population are likely to issue a general purpose CBDC in the next two years. We believe that a large majority of countries will have a CBDC live in the next five to six years.

  Emerging economies will lead the race. They will move quicker and with higher adoption than advanced economies. The Bahamas and the Eastern Caribbean are live; China will be live in February 2022. In five years, many emerging economies will have moved; including many Asian countries. The ECB/Fed will soon start piloting projects and, if successful, are expected to be live around 2025-26. The main barriers for advanced economies are: cultural/privacy; low interest rates; older demography, heavily reliance on cards.

  A CBDC itself is not going to rebalance the international order between the US and China. But this is the Chinese global, 360 strategy with very advanced payments technologies which is creating an advantage to pay in their currencies and will continue to gain market share. China benefits from advanced payments systems (especially settlement technologies) that could change the deal and attract merchants and vendors to use this new, more efficient currency. The Chinese government has made tremendous efforts to internationalize the renminbi, like the US intervention in the early twentieth century. China aims to become a world leader in science and innovation by 2050. China is also massively investing in advanced technologies and is currently the second largest investor in artificial intelligence enterprises after the US. Indeed, China appears on track to have an “AI ecosystem” built by 2030.

  

  * * *

  10. ESG bonds go mainstream, Luke Templeman

  Amongst the many themes turbocharged by the covid catalyst, ESG bond issuance is one of the most prominent. In 2022, ESG bond issuance is set to go mainstream. Investors have taken notice. In fact, the holdings of ESG bond exchange-traded funds have tripled to over $45bn since the covid outbreak. As the chart below shows, that surge of interest follows years of very little growth.

  

  The growth of ESG bonds appears to have breached a tipping point. Not just because investors are keen to hold ESG debt, but also because corporates see that ESG issues now affect their business and investment risk. Indeed, in our recent survey, 19 per cent of corporate debt issuers say that over the last 12 months, environmental factors have impacted their rating. A smaller, but still material proportion, report that social and governance factors have had an impact.

  Now that there is a firm nexus between ESG issues and business risk, ESG instruments (primarily bonds) have become a gateway through which corporates begin to address their impact on problems like climate change. Since early last year, over half of corporates have either offered their first ESG instrument or are currently preparing to do so.

  Some of the strongest issuance in 2022 will likely be of sustainability-linked bonds. These bonds, which have quickly become very popular, generally offer corporates an interest rate discount if they hit certain ESG targets. From a base of close to zero two years ago, sustainability-linked bonds have comprised up to half the ESG bond issuance in the second half of 2021.

  Investors have quickly fallen in love with sustainability-linked bonds. Just over half of investors say these types of bonds are the most promising instrument out of a pool of ESG assets. That is over double the next highest response, which is European green bonds, with 21 per cent.

  Driving sustainability-linked bonds is the sudden growth in the number of businesses that publish quantifiable ESG performance targets. Indeed, a third of corporate debt issuers have already started to do so since 2020. A further 21 per cent will begin publishing in the next 12 months and that will leave only 6 per cent without any plans to do so.

  Aside from investor demand and published corporate targets that have laid the platform for the growth of sustainability-linked bonds in 2022, corporates have discovered the ‘signalling’ benefits. Just over 60 per cent of companies in our survey said the main benefit of their company’s ESG instrument was that it “enables us to convey our sustainability strategy”. A further 22 per cent say these instruments expand their investor base. Meanwhile, half say there are pricing benefits.

  Definitions on how to do ESG investing ‘well’ differ given the breath-taking pace at which it is evolving. Regardless, corporates and investors have now created the market for ESG bonds. With companies starting to publish specific ESG targets, it seems inevitable that in 2022 there will be a surge in issuance from corporates and strong appetite from investors.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/23/2021 – 16:50

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Harvard Professor Charles Lieber Convicted Of Lying About China Ties
  Harvard Professor Charles Lieber Convicted Of Lying About China Ties

  Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times,

  A Harvard University professor was found guilty by a U.S. jury on Dec. 21 of lying to authorities about his ties to the Thousand Talents Plan, the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) well-financed job recruitment program.

  

  Charles Lieber, 62, former chairman of Harvard’s Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, was found guilty by a federal jury in Boston on all counts—six felony charges made up of two counts of making false statements, two counts of filing false tax returns, and two counts of failing to file reports for a foreign bank account in China.

  The jury arrived at the verdict after 2 hours and 45 minutes of deliberations and five days of testimony.

  Federal prosecutors alleged that Lieber agreed in 2011 to become a “strategic scientist” at the Wuhan University of Technology in China and that he had participated in the CCP’s Thousand Talents Plan while working on sensitive U.S. research. Lieber was also a contractual participant in the program from at least 2012 through 2017, according to court documents.

  Prosecutors alleged that Lieber had filed false tax returns to misrepresent the funding that he received from the Chinese regime’s program. This included $50,000 per month plus $158,000 in living expenses and more than $1.5 million in grants from the Wuhan University of Technology.

  Prosecutors also alleged that he lied about his role in the program in response to inquiries from the U.S. Defense Department and the U.S. National Institutes of Health.

  The CCP’s Thousand Talents Program has been in place since December 2008, targeting high-level overseas experts. It has been flagged by U.S. authorities over its threats to national security.

  Lieber was first charged in January 2020 and then later in June and July 2020, as part of the Department of Justice’s “China Initiative,” which was launched in 2018 under the Trump administration. The initiative sought to prosecute cases of economic espionage and research theft initiated by the CCP against the United States.

  President Joe Biden’s administration has continued the initiative, though the Justice Department has said it is reviewing its approach.

  Since Lieber’s arrest on the Harvard campus in January 2020, he has been on paid administrative leave.

  Lieber, who is currently battling late-stage lymphoma, will be sentenced at a later hearing, The Harvard Crimson reported.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 23:40

• Ukraine Holds Provocative Drills Using US Missiles Near Separatist Area
  Ukraine Holds Provocative Drills Using US Missiles Near Separatist Area

  Ukraine’s leaders have made it known that they want Washington to impose new biting sanctions on Russia even before any military offensive materializes. And at a moment that it appears Russia, the US, and NATO are actually ready to enter negotiations on ‘security guarantees’ related to NATO expansion, it appears Kiev is willing to do whatever it takes to conduct some muscle-flexing, possibly toward derailing the potential for January de-escalation talks. 

  In what seems its most provocative move thus far, “Ukrainian military forces have conducted combat drills with U.S.-made Javelin anti-tank missiles in a conflict area with separatists in eastern Ukraine as tensions run high with Russia, Ukrainian Dom television channel said on Wednesday,” Reuters reports.

  

  It should be remembered that Ukraine’s receiving the Javelin missile since at least 2018 has already been a source of outrage among Moscow officials. Kiev is justifying the exercises as necessary in the face of ‘Russian aggression’ – given the widespread reports of some 70,000 to 90,000 Russian troops mustered across the border. 

  Recent reports have suggested that Ukrainian national forces have in past months used the US-supplied javelins in combat with pro-Russian separatist forces in the Donbass region.

  Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky and his top officials have charged that the Kremlin is readying a military invasion of Eastern Ukraine by the end of January, something firmly denied by Putin. 

  Interfax, meanwhile, confirmed that Russia’s military held its own drills in the region on Wednesday:

  Russia held its own military drills nearby, the Interfax news agency reported on Wednesday. SU-30 fighter jets and SU-24 bombers from the Black Sea Fleet did aerial refuelling exercises over Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula which Russia annexed from Ukraine in 2014.

  “The flights were conducted in the sky over Crimea,” Interfax quoted Russia’s Black Sea Fleet as saying. Around 20 pilots practised complex flight tasks, it said, which included mid-air refuelling at altitudes ranging from 2,000 to 6,000 meters at speeds of around 600 km/h.

  Also on Wednesday, Ukraine’s Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Oleksiy Danilov revised numbers upward regarding Russian troop estimates Kiev believes are stationed near the border. He stated that 122,000 Russian troops remain within 200 km (124 miles) from Ukraine’s border.

  

  Above: Image of one of the Wednesday test launches posted to a Ukrainian news site.

  2018 Ukrainian Army test launches of the US-supplied Javelin missiles…

  “As regards the number of troops directly. Today, what we see is 122,000 located at a distance of 200 km and 143,500 soldiers of the Russian Federation are at a distance of 400 km in this radius from our border,” Danilov said.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 23:20

• The Clouds Have Cleared In 2021, And What We Are Seeing Is A Dystopian 2022
  The Clouds Have Cleared In 2021, And What We Are Seeing Is A Dystopian 2022

  Via Birch Gold Group,

  This year was a doozy. Right out of the gate, millionaires were sounding the alarm that the markets were looking overvalued while reducing their risk exposure.

  In February we got a taste of what could be the “end game” for the U.S. dollar as we saw it lose more of its grip as global reserve currency. Of course, it won’t collapse overnight because market psychology is still propping it up (for now).

  But three big major economic influences have made 2021 one to remember. This chaotic “trifecta of market turbulence” kept the media busy and retirement savers on the edge of their seats.

  

  So without further ado, let’s dive into the first one…

  The confused Fed

  Back in 2019 when the repo markets started going crazy, we reported how the Fed’s “confused” response only added fuel to a fire that continued to burn into this year.

  And this year, one word you might have heard coming from Powell’s mouth with nauseating frequency to describe rising inflation was “transitory.” Over and over again, Powell’s confused Fed kept downplaying inflation…

  Until it was obvious to everybody that inflation wasn’t transitory any longer. When Senator Pat Toomey challenged Powell during an appearance before Congress, the Fed chairman was forced to change his tune:

  Powell explained that while the word has “different meanings to different people,” the Federal Reserve “tend to use it to mean that it won’t leave a permanent mark in the form of higher inflation.

  “I think it’s — it’s probably a good time to retire that word and try to explain more clearly what we mean,” Powell added.

  (We’ll discuss this in greater detail in a moment.)

  The Fed’s supermassive interventions blew up not only their balance sheet (566% higher than in 2007), but also a truly historic “everything bubble.”

  This remarkable house of cards has sent asset prices soaring. Stocks are overvalued more than any other time in American history. Bonds, from Treasurys to junk, have negative after-inflation yields. Nationwide, housing prices are well above the peak of the 2008 housing bubble.

  Investors became speculators and lost millions on meme stocks, and then spent millions more on cartoons of monkeys.

  2021 has been one of the most challenging periods in recent economic history to report on. Because just when you think things can’t get any more insane, events prove you wrong.

  Bloomberg’s Matt Levine put it best:

  The basic issue is that right now everything is dumb… Buy some stock in a struggling company and, instead of going out and pitching your plans to BlackRock and Vanguard, get on Reddit and say like “if my board slate is elected we’re gonna take XYZ Co. to the moon and squeeze those short sellers, rocket emoji rocket emoji rocket emoji, not a proxy solicitation, read my SEC filings for full disclosures.” Draw a picture of an ape riding a rocket and slap it on your proxy statement. Call your activist fund Diamond Hands Capital LP.

  Basically you want to buy stock in a company, push it to become a meme stock, and then sell the stock at a huge profit to people on Reddit.

  The Fed has spared no effort to create an illusion of prosperity. The only problem (other than rampant inflation) is that it simply can’t last forever.

  We believe the Federal Reserve will be forced to choose between a hard market crash or runaway inflation. They’re trying to thread the needle.

  The Fed began tapering asset purchases this month and will keep doing so into next year. Meanwhile, interest rates are still near zero, inflation continues to climb and even the most overexuberant speculators are running out of cash…

  The “confused Fed” heading into 2022: It looks as though the Fed will stick to interventions heading into the next year, and we expect at least three interest rate hikes. According to IMF spokesperson Gerry Rice, this is a “well calibrated response to price pressures.”

  But based on Powell’s prior track record, we’ll have to wait and see how he actually decides to handle “Inflation Nation.”

  And this is critical, because once the illusion of prosperity has vanished, once the dreaming millionaires wake to find themselves broke, once all the imaginary money is gone, its legacy, inflation, will still be with us…

  Not even Powell believes surging inflation is “transitory” anymore

  Since the start of Biden’s term in January 2021, consumer price inflation (CPI) has been steadily increasing each month.

  You can see the official monthly tally on the bar graph below:

  

  This “tax that no one voted for” is still increasing as you read this. One example we gave back in June about the permanent damage done to people’s wealth:

  Consider our imaginary friend Arthur. He nets $100 per month. After a year of 5% inflation, Arthur’s monthly money buys 5% less. Next year, it turns out the inflation spike really was transitory, so the inflation rate goes to 0%.

  Here’s the thing: Arthur’s monthly income STILL buys 5% less.

  It’s as if Chairman Powell reached into Arthur’s pocket and stole $5 every month. Forever.

  Of course, the wealthy elite like Powell and his buddies don’t have to worry about the impact on Arthur’s income when they intentionally “let inflation run hot” because it’s “good for the economy.” (Just not for you.)

  Back in September (when inflation was 5.3%) we said the “inflation train” wasn’t traveling at full speed yet… Here we are in December, and it still doesn’t show any signs of slowing down.

  “Inflation Nation” heading into 2022: You can see how inflation is still pulling even more money out of Americans’ pockets in the graphic below…

  

  Source

  This will not get better anytime soon.

  You’ll see mainstream media reports that try to spin inflation as a good thing. They’ll say things like:

  “Social Security’s COLA is the highest in 40 years!” (That’s because prices have gone up. In other words, COLA is not a raise.)

  “Workers’ paychecks are going up!” (Yes, they are. Companies have budgeted to raise pay 3.9% overall this year, a little less than half the rate of inflation.)

  Oddly, even Biden attempted to justify the out of control inflation by stating rather defensively:

  Americans have more money in their pockets than a year ago.

  That’s technically true. What’s equally true is that “more money” simply buys less than it did a year ago.

  In 2022, inflation could turn into a nightmare. You might expect everyone who doesn’t have a net worth in the millions to start pinching pennies. You might expect the U.S. Mint to stop even making pennies.

  Stock market mania erupted in 2021

  In what was perhaps the most bizarre investor behavior this year, partly fueled by boredom and stimulus money, stock market mania turned into an all-out casino used for entertainment.

  People with nothing to do spent their stimulus money on risky stocks. Hyper-speculative investing led to memes like Wall Street Bets, which propped up failing stocks like GameStop and AMC theaters.

  On top of that, margin debt exploded to historic levels that will be tough to surpass (see chart below):

  

  Source

  Wolf Richter even called the stock market a “zoo that has gone nuts.”

  In April, this manic investing behavior led to a historic margin call at Archegos. Billions of dollars were lost in a fantastic market froth that will likely bubble up again at some point in the near future.

  Mania heading into 2022: You might think that knowing the market was severely overvalued and poised for a major correction would deter manic investing behavior.

  But if you thought that, you’d have been wrong, because in addition to the examples above, according to Forbes, meme stocks like AMC and GameStop might continue to get artificially inflated well into 2022:

  Although institutional investors are still worried so-called meme stocks could create risky financial bubbles, one team of experts argues the retail-trading frenzy propping up astronomical prices could very well continue into next year.

  And thanks to Facebook, something fittingly known as “Metaverse Mania” is now becoming familiar to manic investors who are looking for a high-risk fix.

  SPACs, NFTs, meme stocks and behind it all, a confused leadership we simply can’t trust to look out for our best interests.

  Make sure your savings are ready for anything

  After reviewing what transpired this year, it’s a good idea to ponder what happened and consider what might be coming up next.

  But considering that neither the U.S. Government nor the Federal Reserve could keep the dollar and economy under control, one good question to ponder would be:

  What will either the government or the Fed do differently in 2022?

  Of course this assumes they don’t keep trying to do the same thing and expect a different result. While they figure that out, it’s never the wrong time to reflect on Benjamin Graham’s words:

  In the short-run, the market is a voting machine – reflecting a voter-registration test that requires only money, not intelligence or emotional stability – but in the long-run, the market is a weighing machine.

  It’s a good idea to take steps to ensure your portfolio stays as stable as possible. Take a few minutes to do your own “year-end review.” Are you “voting” or are you “weighing” with your savings? Are you taking appropriate levels of risk? Are you well-enough diversified to stay on track, regardless of what market insanity comes next?

  If you’re concerned about protecting your savings from inflation and market meltdowns, consider physical precious metals. Gold and silver both have a reliable track record of holding their value relative to inflation, and may be the safe haven you need to face the year ahead…

  We’ll have some things to say about that, so don’t forget to check back next week for our 2022 economic forecasts.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 23:00

• 'Peddling' Obesity – McDonald's Customers Eat Big Macs While Riding Exercise Bikes
  ‘Peddling’ Obesity – McDonald’s Customers Eat Big Macs While Riding Exercise Bikes

  A hilarious TikTok video shows a woman downing fast food and riding an exercise bike inside a McDonald’s in China. 

  The video has clocked an astonishing 32 million views, 2.1 million likes, and 39,000 comments in just days. The woman is barely peddling while she consumes her meal. 

  

  The clip was posted by Cris13yu, who captioned the video in Portuguese as “mc da China kkkk amei a idea,” which translates into “McDonald’s in China, I loved the idea.”

  @cris13yu

  mc da China kkkk amei a ideia

  ♬ som original – cris13_u

  https://www.tiktok.com/embed.js

  TikTok users were overwhelmingly impressed by the health-conscious effort by the fast-food company to have customers burn off some calories while eating greasy food. 

  However, some said, “bad for your digestive system lol. dont do physical activites while eating, eating needs a relaxed state so it can be digested well by the GI tract.” 

  Another person said, “still more calories consumed than burned.” 

  Someone asked: “Do they wipe the equipment after use?”

  Others hinted it looks like a scene from the dystopic television series “Back Mirror.” 

  McDonald’s could be testing a new concept for stores that would bring ‘health’ in mind. We joke and say the company should change its name to “McFitness.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 22:40

• Bitcoin: This Will Make You A Believer
  Bitcoin: This Will Make You A Believer

  Authored by Thad Beversdorf via MacroHeathen.com,

  I’ve been quietly watching the BTC market figure out how to explain why BTC is profoundly positive for society. I’ve been disappointed with the attempts I’ve seen and so I’ve decided to throw my hat in the ring. 

  

  First we should define currency strength, which so many erroneously suggest is measured against other currencies as with DXY (a dollar index measuring USD conversion rates against a basket of currencies).  Measuring a currency strength relative to other currencies is akin to a group of stage 4 cancer patients arguing who among them is the strongest. The reality is they were all stronger prior to their cancer. 

  As with each cancer patient, their strength is not meaningful as a relative measure outside of themselves.  It’s only meaningful as a measure relative to themselves on a historical basis.  That is, are they stronger today than they were last month.  In the real world to real people, currency strength too is a historical concept based on purchasing power. Since I only purchase things in USD I don’t care how much I could purchase using Sterling. I only care if I can purchase more today than I could yesterday in USD. That brings me to the point of the article – aggregate net purchasing power, also known as, wealth and the impact of currency.

  The key principle difference between USD and BTC is that the former is a depreciating currency based on a principle of inflation (i.e. increasing money supply) while the latter is an appreciating currency based on a principle of finite supply.  All the BTC magic is wrapped in the economic principle of finite supply versus dynamic demand.  Or for the finance fellas… fixed vs float.  So long as the floating demand parameter has a positive slope the asset will appreciate.  That results in deflation (i.e. the persistent increase in purchasing power).

  BTC is the antithesis of inflation, devaluation, and fiat. It is the first appreciating currency in the industrialized world. But who cares? What is the significance of deflation (appreciating currency) vs inflation (depreciating currency)?  

  Having a 10-year history now provides enough observable data to draw out some of the fundamental differences between depreciating and appreciating currencies and the profound social and economic impacts of those differences.  So let’s get started…

  There are three main points I’m going to illustrate in this article.  The first is the impact to consumers, second is to savers, and finally the impact on the structure of capital allocation. 

  Let’s start by using Big Macs to illustrate the impact on consumers.

  

  The above chart depicts the price of a Big Mac, over the past decade, in both USD (green line) and BTC (orange line).  What we see is that in 2010 a Big Mac cost $3.73 or 37 BTC.  Today a Big Mac costs $5.71 or .0001 BTC.  Let’s assume we didn’t buy the Big Macs 10 years ago and instead put $3.73 and 37 BTC in a drawer. Now let’s assume we just found those currencies in the drawer and decided to go ahead and get us a Big Mac today.  

  The $3.73 would not get us even one Big Mac while the 37 BTC would get us 323,993 Big Macs today. The former is called inflation and the latter, deflation. Economists proselytize  inflation is good and deflation is bad, however, I’ve never once seen or heard a logical proof that inflation is good for the worker or consumer, despite the incessant narrative.  The proof simply does not exist.

  Now let’s have a look at the absolute mind-blowing impact that an appreciating currency has on savers. We’ll start by looking at the federal minimum wage over the last decade.

  

  10 years ago minimum wage workers received $7.25/hr and today they receive $7.25/hr.  Let’s look at that in terms of purchasing power using Big Macs. So in 2010 an hour of work (i.e. $7.25) would have purchased 1.94 Big Macs. Today that same hour of work (i.e. $7.25 minimum wage) would purchase us 1.27 Big Macs. The lesser amount is because the USD is a depreciating asset based on the principle of inflation.  

  Let’s take a parallel economy where minimum wage workers are paid in an appreciating asset (i.e. BTC) but pegged to the USD equivalent minimum wage. That would mean in 2010 the minimum wage would have been 72.5 BTC (equivalent to $7.25 in 2010). Today, the minimum wage would be .000145 BTC (equivalent to $7.25 today). It means the purchasing power of an hour of work is the same today whether they’re paid in USD or BTC.  That is, they could buy 1.94 Big Macs in 2010 and 1.27 Big Macs today regardless of which currency they are paid in.  So the inclination is to suggest that the worker is no better off being paid in BTC than USD.  But that inclination is dead wrong.  Here’s why.

  Savings.  Imagine that each worker in the parallel economies puts 10% of their income into a retirement savings account that earns 0% interest. Let’s compare the USD paid worker vs the BTC paid worker for the past 5 years.

  

  Over the past 5 years the worker paid in BTC saves a total of .887 BTC with a USD equivalent value of around $45,000, today.  The worker paid in USD would have saved a total of $7,250, today.  It means that the BTC wage worker has 600% more purchasing power (i.e. wealth) after just 5 years.  

  The mechanism of excess wealth creation in the BTC economy is that real interest rate becomes interest rate plus appreciation rather than interest rate minus inflation. This is as profound as it gets in finance. The implications literally reshape society by reconstructing the framework of the economy.

  The profundity of that one change reaches all stakeholders. After just 5 years the BTC minimum wage worker has accumulated 600% more wealth than the USD minimum wage worker and that spread will continue to grow over time. Perhaps most explosive is that the wealth was generated without taking risk. It means that even minimum wage workers would be able to generate wealth over time. Poverty essentially disappears for anyone that is able to work in a world based on appreciating currencies. 

  Another major effect is that borrowing costs will also equal interest rate plus appreciation resulting in a higher borrowing costs leading to an economy driven by productivity rather than liquidity. Money is scarce when supply is finite and thus things like NFTs do not exist in an economy based on appreciating currency.  NFTs are derived assets to which excess liquidity can be allocated to slow hyper inflation when money supply exceeds money demand.  

  In an economy with money scarcity demand always exceeds supply resulting in further appreciation. Capital allocation is prioritized toward productive investments rather than financial investments due to scarcity.  This nurtures strong economic fundamentals, things like low debt to GDP, low debt to income, and low debt to net worth. Rome would still be an empire today if it had a BTC based economy.

  Perhaps you spotted the pattern of low debt fundamentals and that should clue you in as to why there has been an incessant opposing narrative for the past 110 years with respect to inflation and deflation. The bankers lose in an economy based on an appreciating currency because borrowing becomes less relevant to the consumer and lending becomes limited due to scarcity. 

  I’ll leave it here but understand there is infinitely more to this story.  The implications are endless and the topic could very well be a university course.  The main takeaway is that BTC, as an appreciating currency, isn’t just a cool new way to transact, but when fully adopted will quite literally and fundamentally restructure society, completely. 

  I hope to see more people begin to think about BTC in terms of how it restructures real aspects of the economy and markets and put those thoughts to paper.  

  When the benefits of appreciating currencies are understood by consumers and workers, the giant con of inflation will become apparent and change will become politically impossible to reject.  

  *  *  *

  I am the MacroHeathen and I will be writing from time to time.  You can find me at macroheathen.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 22:20

• White House Mulling Strict Export Controls On Russia Which Resemble Iran Sanctions
  White House Mulling Strict Export Controls On Russia Which Resemble Iran Sanctions

  The Biden administration has prepared a punitive package of potential sanctions which would be ready to go in the instance of Russia invading Ukraine, which would involve tightening export controls in order to hurt Russia’s economy.

  Reuters on Tuesday cited an unnamed administration official who said the measures are under intense discussion, namely possible “extraordinary” export controls that could block Russia from importing smartphones, crucial aircraft and automobile parts, and other materials.

  

  It would be a significant step of escalation given such sanctions would begin to resemble aspects of the all-encompassing US sanctions long in place against Iran. Existing US sanctions related to Russia have merely targeted individual Kremlin officials and entities, for example, that resulted in the aftermath of the Navalny poisoning affair and his subsequent imprisonment, or also companies involved in work on Nord Stream 2.

  At this point their implementation is unlikely, assuming Moscow’s insistence that there is no planned Ukraine invasion in the works is true. Leaders in Kiev, as well as some of their Washington counterparts, have loudly claimed an offensive into Eastern Ukraine will happen by January.

  Meanwhile Ukraine and some other Eastern European countries are actually demanding that the US impose sanctions on Russia now, rather than waiting. This was the message issued by Polish President Andrzej Duda and Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda – who both met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in western Ukraine on Monday. The three leaders in the joint statement:

  “…called upon the international community to step up sanctions on the Russian Federation over its ongoing aggression against Ukraine and once again urged the Kremlin to de-escalate the situation by withdrawing its troops from the Ukrainian borders and temporarily occupied territories.”

  That’s when Zelenskyy urged “powerful preventative actions, powerful serious sanctions to exclude any thought about escalation.”

  Yet if US export controls were imposed immediately this would only ensure the total break in all dialogue between the US and Russia. Such sanctions would heighten the likelihood of actual military clashes. This at a time Moscow is still awaiting a Biden administration response to its list of security proposals centered on NATO agreeing to halt eastward expansion.

  We started with SWIFT and ended up with “extraordinary” export controls on Russia’s ability to import smartphones, key aircraft and automobile parts. This is not what’s going to deter Russia and it proves that the West isn’t ready for anything “nuclear”.https://t.co/2FnwcSOkJj

  — Dr Maria Shagina (@maria_shagina) December 22, 2021

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

  On this front, there’s some hopeful signs that the two sides are moving toward deconfliction, as The Hill reports: 

  Bilateral talks between the United States and Russia on Moscow’s recently-proposed security demands are expected to begin in January, a State Department official said Tuesday.

  Karen Donfried, assistant secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, told reporters on Tuesday that the US will “decide on a date” together with Russia to begin discussions.

  For now, the US administration is likely to continue with its threats and talk of “red lines” – and warnings against Russian aggression toward Ukraine, also as a method to continue building leverage ahead of these possible January talks. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 22:00

• New York Lawmaker Pulls Public Health Detainment Bill, Blames 'Conspiracy Theorists'
  New York Lawmaker Pulls Public Health Detainment Bill, Blames ‘Conspiracy Theorists’

  Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A New York lawmaker has taken down a 6-year-old bill that would authorize the state to detain infected individuals and their contacts deemed a threat to public health during a pandemic, blaming “conspiracy theorists” of spreading misinformation about his proposal.

  

  The bill in question, known as A416, was first introduced by Assemblyman Nick Perry in 2015, nearly a year after the nationwide panic over a potential outbreak of Ebola in the United States. The Brooklyn Democrat said the measure was prompted by an incident in which a nurse refused to be placed in quarantine after returning from West Africa, where she’d helped treat Ebola patients.

  Like many other bills, A416 had been reintroduced year after year and died in committee. The latest version of the bill would allow the state governor, by “issuing a single order,” to “order the removal or detention” of any person or group of people deemed to be a suspected case, contact, or carrier of a contagious disease and poses “an imminent and significant threat to the public health in severe morbidity or high mortality.”

  “Such person or group of persons shall be detained in a medical facility or other appropriate facility or premises designated by the governor or his or her delegate,” it reads.

  The bill, which received little public attention over the past years, became a center of controversy when Perry once again put it up for the 2021-2022 legislative session amid the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic. Opponents of the measure argued that it would allow then-Gov. Andrew Cuomo to build internment camps for New Yorkers who refuse to comply with his public health policies.

  “This is straight up detention camp stuff in NY! A bill giving [Gov. Andrew Cuomo], Health Commissioner or any designated official full power to remove any person/group of people from their home if deemed contagious,” Elizabeth Joy, a Republican candidate running against Rep. Paul Tonko, wrote in January. “It’s horrifying.”

  Facing mounting opposition, Perry on Monday announced he no longer seeks to advance the bill, which he said was misinterpreted by “conspiracy theorists” and internet trolls.

  “Conspiracy theorists, and those who spread misinformation online are once again trolling on social media, posting concocted stories about A416,” he wrote in a statement on Dec. 20. “To deprive these individuals the ability to use this issue for fuel to spread their fire of lies and mistruths, I will take the appropriate legislative action to strike the bill, remove it from the calendar, thus ending all consideration and actions that could lead to passage into law,” he said. “Get vaccinated and stay safe.”

  Republican Assemb. Joe Angelino was among the opposing lawmakers who celebrated the withdrawal. He dismissed Perry’s claim, saying that there was no “misinformation” around the bill since everyone could read online what the bill was actually about.

  “The sponsor of A416 is saying we were spreading ‘misinformation,’ calling us ‘conspiracy theorists’ who were ‘concocting stories’ causing him to pull his Bill. I’m pretty sure we all can read and his intent was to haul people away for the good of all,” Angelino wrote on Facebook.

  “This is reminiscent of what happened in WW2 when someone thought it was a good idea to send Americans of Japanese descent to ‘camps’ for the duration of the war,” he said, referring to President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s order to relocate Japanese Americans to interment camps following the Pearl Harbor attack.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 21:40

• US NatGas Futures Gain As Traders Price In Cold January
  US NatGas Futures Gain As Traders Price In Cold January

  US energy traders could be in the beginning stages of pricing in a cold January as natural gas futures top $4. There’s also the unresolved European energy crisis as US LNG exports increase.

  NYMEX Henry Hub natgas jumped 3.5% to $4.018 on Wednesday morning as the Northern Hemisphere winter officially began on Tuesday. Prices still trade in a month’s long horizontal flat, and there’s no confirmation on an upside breakout — yet. 

  

  One of the main drivers in today’s price action could be new long-range forecasts that point to colder temperatures for the US-Lower 48 next month. 

  12-20-21 AM #Energy Report: Discussing weekend warmer roll-forward changes + late Dec/early Jan pattern progression #natgas #oott $ng

  Update: https://t.co/Bny1qRLt7q

  DM / email Kirk@bamwx.com for a free copy of all of today’s reports + info on our service! pic.twitter.com/wf8V6Zp6Vw

  — BAMWX (@bamwxcom) December 20, 2021

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

  US-Lower 48 heating degree days shows temperatures are set to decline from Dec. 25 – Jan.6, which means energy demand will increase to heat a building structure. 

  

  Meteorologists at private weather forecasting firm BAMWX released their three and four-week forecast that shows a much cooler US through the second half of January. 

  Quick #natgas #energy take:

  🔵 New Euro weeklies moving the MJO into phase 8
  🔵 Trend vs last run for weeks 3/4 (image 2) is quite colder
  🔵 Phase 8 releases Alaska/Canada cold south

  Our new weeks 3/4 forecast is released TUE.

  DM / email Kirk@bamwx.come for a free copy #oott pic.twitter.com/pL0B1Eld50

  — Kirk 📈 Hinz | BAM Weather (@Met_khinz) December 21, 2021

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

  Earlier this month, readers may recall that we noted bullish signs for natgas were emerging as forecasts pointed to colder weather for January. As forecasts become more concrete, this could suggest natgas futures have some possible upside. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 21:20

• Supreme Court Could Decide Fate Of Monsanto/Bayer RoundUp Cancer Suits
  Supreme Court Could Decide Fate Of Monsanto/Bayer RoundUp Cancer Suits

  Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  On Dec. 13, the Supreme Court asked the Solicitor General to offer the United States’ views on “Monsanto vs. Hardeman”—the latest move in what could be a landmark case for multibillion-dollar litigation linking the pesticide RoundUp to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, if the Supreme Court agrees to review the case.

  

  After a call for the views of the solicitor general, that Justice Department official will often respond with a brief commenting on whether the Supreme Court should agree to review the case. The Epoch Times has reached out to the Solicitor General for comment.

  Monsanto, which was acquired by the German chemical company Bayer in 2018, filed its petition after a Ninth Circuit panel ruled in favor of California resident Edwin Hardeman, who claimed his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma resulted from exposure to RoundUp.

  Ninth Circuit Judge Ryan D. Nelson, a Trump appointee, found that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) did not preempt California’s law, under which RoundUp and other products containing glyphosate must feature warnings about that ingredient’s reported cancer risk.

  While the state of California maintains that glyphosate is carcinogenic, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which enforces FIFRA, maintains glyphosate is not likely to cause cancer in humans.

  Monsanto’s petition to the Supreme Court challenges the Ninth Circuit’s ruling on preemption. It also argues that the Ninth Circuit admitted low-quality expert opinions on glyphosate and cancer, deviating from the practices of other appellate courts and violating Federal Rule of Evidence 702.

  Monsanto specifically disputes Dr. Dennis Weisenburger’s testimony that Hardeman’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma was caused by glyphosate and not linked to his earlier diagnosis of Hepatitis C, known to be associated with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

  The Epoch Times has reached out to Dr. Weisenburger for comment.

  

  Bayer responded warmly to the Supreme Court’s invitation to the Solicitor General.

  “The company has been very selective in its settlement approach since filing its Petition for a Writ of Certiorari in Hardeman. Now that the Supreme Court has requested input from the Solicitor General in this case, we will not entertain any further settlement discussions with plaintiff lawyers that are representing a substantial number of Roundup™ claims,” a Bayer spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.

  In a separate interview, the spokesperson told The Epoch Times that it has resolved roughly 98,000 out of more than 125,000 claims linking non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma to RoundUp. While those settled claims would not be affected if SCOTUS ruled in favor of Monsanto, the 25,000+ outstanding claims could be, according to the spokesperson.

  While the spokesperson would not say how much the company had paid to date, they stated the company has established a $9.6 billion provision for current litigation and, in July 2021, a $4.5 billion provision for future cases.

  In addition, the company took a $2 billion provision for class action, which still stands despite the fact that the company withdrew its agreement in conjunction with an unfavorable ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria, who said elements of Bayer’s proposal were “clearly unreasonable.”

  The Bayer spokesperson told The Epoch Times that a substantial chunk of its $16.1 billion reserves for settling claims could be affected by the Supreme Court’s decision.

  Notably, the Supreme Court case could come soon after multiple California jury verdicts that found RoundUp was not responsible for a claimant’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, according to Reuters.

  California’s law, as well as Hardeman’s suit, hinges in part on a major 2015 monograph from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

  A spokesperson for IARC declined to comment on Monsanto v. Hardeman but stated its results and evaluation from 2015 are still valid.

  Monsanto’s petition argues EPA and other regulators around the world have maintained a “global consensus” that glyphosate does not cause cancer.

  In 2019, after California classified glyphosate as carcinogenic, EPA issued a letter stating that California’s warning language constituted a “false and misleading statement.”

  When asked about “Monsanto vs. Hardeman,” the EPA told The Epoch Times that “as this is pending litigation, we have nothing to add.”

  Henry Darwin, who served as Acting Deputy Administrator and Chief Operating Officer of the EPA under Trump, told The Epoch Times in an exclusive interview why he hopes the Supreme Court will take the case.

  “When EPA says that there’s no cancer risk associated with this consumer product, that shouldn’t be up for challenge by an individual state or, worse yet, by an individual scientist,” Darwin said.

  “My fear is that if California is allowed to have its own conflicting opinion about something like glyphosate, it’s a slippery slope that could lead to an eroding of our confidence in EPA as a country,” he later added.

  While “Monsanto vs. Hardeman” effectively pits California’s law against the federal government’s standards, Darwin does not believe that a ruling in favor of Monsanto would undermine the proper authority of states.

  “I’m a true believer in state’s rights if the state has a right that’s unique to the state,” said Darwin. “In this instance, we’re talking about a commercial product that’s being sold throughout the country. There’s nothing unique about its use or application in California, and Congress has made it pretty clear that through FIFRA [the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act] it is EPA’s responsibility to set the appropriate safety standards and evaluations associated with this type of consumer product.”

  Monsanto’s petition to the Supreme Court has garnered supporting briefs from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Washington Legal Foundation, and the pesticide trade organization CropLife America, among other organizations.

  “The quality of decision-making in federal court hinges on the ability and willingness of trial-court judges to prevent unreliable ‘scientific’ expert evidence from ever being admitted into evidence. Unless the Supreme Court arrests the Ninth Circuit’s pattern of excusing judges from this gatekeeping duty under Rule 702, the federal judiciary’s ability to produce fair and just results will be eroded,” said Cory Andrews, General Counsel and Vice President of Litigation for the Washington Legal Foundation, in an email to The Epoch Times.

  

  In its petition, Monsanto describes the IARC’s classification as a “slender reed” for claims against Monsanto.

  Not all scientists agree.

  John Spinelli, professor emeritus of epidemiology, biostatistics, and public health practice at the University of British Columbia, was a coauthor on a 2001 study that linked non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma to the use of pesticides. It was cited in IARC’s 2015 monograph on glyphosate.

  “I am in total support of that conclusion of the IARC review,” Spinelli told The Epoch Times.

  But Paolo Boffetta, an epidemiologist and professor across multiple disciplines at the Icahn School of Public Health at Mount Sinai, told The Epoch Times that early studies linking glyphosate to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, such as Eriksson et al.’s study of almost 2,000 Swedish adults, have seen less support from more recent research.

  His 2021 meta-analysis concluded there was no significant association between exposure to glyphosate and overall non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma risk.

  Yet in an exclusive interview with The Epoch Times, he stressed that there are many different subtypes of the cancer, making it hard to rule out a potential link at a more granular level.

  

  “Whether we can say that for each individual subtype of lymphoma we have strong evidence that there is no association, I don’t think we should say that,” Boffetta said.

  He confirmed to The Epoch Times that he previously acted as a consultant for Monsanto, though not on anything related to glyphosate.

  Other scientists who authored research linking glyphosate with cancer either declined to comment or did not respond to requests for comment from The Epoch Times.

  Jeffrey Smith, an anti-glyphosate activist who leads the Institute for Responsible Technology, told The Epoch Times in what is so far an exclusive interview on “Monsanto vs. Hardeman” that Monsanto has a history of undermining scientists who are critical of it.

  He cited emails in the “Monsanto Papers” concerning Gilles-Éric Séralini, a French molecular biologist whose research examined the toxicity of RoundUp.

  One 2009 email released in the papers showed the editor of a journal that had received one of the scientist’s manuscripts allowed it to be reviewed by a Monsanto executive, William F. Heydens.

  “With your help the following final decision has been reached: Reject (allow resubmission),” the editor, Gio Batta Gori, wrote to Heydens.

  A spokesperson for Bayer told The Epoch Times that the “Monsanto Papers” and similar materials had not been enough to convince regulators in the United States and many other countries, including in the European Union, to consider RoundUp or glyphosate carcinogenic.

  The spokesperson cited the European Food Safety Agency’s 2017 statement on the “Monsanto Papers.”

  “The nature of the information contained within the ‘Monsanto papers’ was serious enough for EFSA to investigate their significance in relation to the EU assessment of glyphosate. Following this investigation, EFSA can confirm: that there are no grounds to suggest that industry improperly influenced the EU assessment of glyphosate; and that the role of industry and of other actors in the process was carried out according to standard procedures,” EFSA wrote.

  

  Smith said Monsanto has undermined the EPA’s approval process.

  He cited a letter from the late EPA employee Marion Copley, who wrote to EPA pesticides administrator Jess Rowland as Copley was dying of breast cancer.

  In it, she accused Rowland of playing “political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants.” She also wrote that “[it] is essentially certain that glyphosate causes cancer.”

  Bayer’s spokesperson defended the EPA, stating that the EPA said its analysis of the cancer risks from glyphosate “was ‘more robust’ and ‘more transparent’ than IARC’s review.”

  Smith said a preemption precedent favoring Monsanto would be “a tragedy and a travesty,” given what he sees as Monsanto’s undue influence over the EPA.

  “They’re now hiding behind that and hoping that the Supreme Court and that the Department of Justice blindly follow a law and give the EPA determination far more validity than it deserves,” he said.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 21:00

• Michael Avenatti Lives Free In Childhood Friend's Apartment As He Spends "Prison Term" On House Arrest
  Michael Avenatti Lives Free In Childhood Friend’s Apartment As He Spends “Prison Term” On House Arrest

  One character who has mercifully faded from the media scene in the year that has passed since the November 2020 is Michael Avenatti, the attorney whose famously vain and self-indulgent representation of ex-porn star Stormy Daniels (who is now involved in a third federal case against him) led to Avenatti being fielded by CNN as a potential presidential candidate.

  

  We long suspected Avenatti’s willingness to always take urgent calls from reporter hacks like Jake Tapper, Jim Acosta or whoever needed an urgent soundbite helped endear him to the US press, particularly CNN, his biggest benefactor during his brief but spirited time in the limelight.

  Avenatti made himself famously accessible to the press. And during the three years since he was first arrested on extortion charges for allegedly attempting to shake down Nike, followed by a separate case in California accusing him of chiseling money from his clients’ settlement payments (followed by his latest case about his representation of Stormy Daniels), Avenatti’s reputation has effectively imploded. He was ultimately sentenced last year for the New York charges (which stemmed from his scheme to use a whistleblower high-school basketball coach to shine a light on allegedly untoward (and, Avenatti alleged, illegal) behavior on Nike’s part.

  But while he awaits justice in the other two cases, Avenatti, who should be serving his time in federal prison, is instead, thanks to COVID, a (mostly) free man, living under house arrest in the two bedroom apartment of an old childhood friend.

  Having so much free time on his hands now, it certainly makes sense that Avenatti would agree to participate in a profile piece for Politico, a little grist for all the Avenatti fangirls out there – and the haters who recognized the smarmy huckster for what he was immediately, even if CNN (along with other major establishment media players) acted like it had no idea.

  To the reporter’s credit, the piece does a pretty good job of skewering Avenatti. It revealed to the public the circumstances of his house arrest. Let’s just say it’s a long way from his old pre-divorce, pre-felon life.

  The last time he drove a race car, his most beloved and expensive habit, was 1,411 days ago. The last time he had a Grey Goose martini (up, two olives) and a New York strip at Craig’s, his preferred hangout in West Hollywood, was 709 days ago. The last time he wore his five-figure Patek Philippe Nautilus watch, before it was seized by the government, was 708 days ago. The last time he talked to his former client, Stormy Daniels, was February 2019. The last time a reporter asked him about running for president was March 24, 2019, the Sunday before his arrest. The last time he saw his parents was Thanksgiving 2019. His Twitter account, where he once held the attention of nearly 900,000 followers (now 680,000), sits frozen in September 2018: In the video that plays on loop in his last pinned tweet, he is on MSNBC, attacking the president and his party: “They want to make me the issue.”

  As the piece promptly admits, the old Avenatti “doesn’t exist anymore”. And for anybody who’s wondering, yes, the fact that Avenatti can no longer respond to critics, both online and on cable news, “infuriates” him.

  When I suggest to Avenatti that he could do his own live hits, launch his own podcast, reconnect with his friends at MSNBC and CNN – his old dinner partners in New York – he stops me.

  “I don’t think it would be smart. I don’t think it’d be a good look, and, you know, why risk it?” To hear other people bring up his name without being on set to challenge them, to yell like he used to –“it’s not killing me,” he says, “but it’s – it’s infuriating.”

  While he admits his unraveling was “such a gargantuan fall”…

  Avenatti always performed best with others watching, and no one has been watching for a very long time. He has endless days and weeks to think about the downward trajectory of his life, which he doesn’t like to do when he is alone, which, inconveniently, is most of the time. “If I start thinking about the relationships I had that I no longer have, the opportunities I had that I no longer have, the freedom I had that I no longer have, the wealth and things I used to have that I no longer have, the notoriety and the adoration I used to have that I no longer have — I mean, it’ll destroy me,” he says. “I have to push it out of my mind, because it’s been such a gargantuan fall.”

  …Politico says he’s becoming increasingly desperate for “validation” that he ever “mattered not as a cartoonish figure in our political circus, but as a player of substance who cannot be dismissed.”

  The scraps to which Avenatti is clinging to help buttress his sense of self-worth are comically small: According to Politico, Avenatti’s biggest accomplishment before the Stormy Daniels’ case was getting his clients on “60 Minutes” three times in 5 years. “It’s never been done before,” Avenatti reportedly gushed to Politico.

  He’s done it so many times before. Even in the beginning, when he was a little-known plaintiff’s attorney in California, before his license was suspended, he had cases appear on “60 Minutes” three times in five years. “It’s never been done,” he says. In front of a camera, he is at ease. In 2016, during his second appearance on the program, representing hospitals that claimed they’d been sold ineffective personal protective equipment, when asked to respond to one of the health care executives, he surprised himself with an ad-libbed line: “Evidently he forgot the 11th commandment,” Avenatti told Anderson Cooper. “Do not lie to ‘60 Minutes.’” As soon as he said it, he knew it would make the final cut.

  Of course, even if he is condemned to live the rest of his life as a cartoon character, he’s still sitting pretty for the moment. He has an old childhood friend looking after him (the friend took Avenatti in to live in his two-bedroom Venice apartment for the lawyer’s stint under house arrest, however long that shall be).

  He still has to be tried and, if convicted (or if he should change his plea, possibly as part of a deal), sentenced in two other federal cases. So, at this rate, the pandemic would need to drag on for years, maybe the rest of the decade, for Avenatti to avoid serving any of his sentence in federal custody.

  But still, imagine, for a second, how this case might have been treated if Avenatti was a black defendant accused of perhaps a non-violent drug-trafficking related felony rather than being a white, well-to-do lawyer.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 20:40

• University Of California Fires Director Of Ethics Program for Defying COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate
  University Of California Fires Director Of Ethics Program for Defying COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate

  Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, the longtime professor of psychiatry at the University of California-Irvine School of Medicine who sued the university over its COVID-19 vaccine mandate because it made no exceptions for natural immunity, has been fired by the institution for refusing the vaccine.

  

  In a blog post titled “Farewell, University of California,” Dr. Kheriaty said he received notice of what he called his “arbitrary and capricious” firing on Dec. 16. It was effective the same day. The termination ends his UCI medical teaching career and his longtime role as director of the Medical Ethics Program at UCI Health.

  Kheriaty said he worked unpaid nights helping the UCI president’s office draft triage guidelines for scarce resources and vaccines during the pandemic. When N-95 masks were so scarce that hospitals kept them under lock and key, Kheriaty said he found a supply at a local construction company and provided them to doctors and nurses.

  “Everyone at the university seemed to be a fan of my work, until suddenly they were not,” Kheriaty wrote. “Once I challenged one of their policies, I immediately became a ‘threat to the health and safety of the community.’ No amount of empirical evidence about natural immunity or vaccine safety and efficacy mattered at all.

  “The University’s leadership was not interested in scientific debate or ethical deliberation,” Kheriaty wrote. “When I was placed on unpaid suspension, I was not permitted to use my paid time off—that is to say, I was ordered to stay off campus because I was not vaccinated, but I also could not take vacation at home because… I was not vaccinated.”

  Kheriaty said the university tried to prevent him from doing any professional work while he was on unpaid suspension, in an effort to pressure him to resign from a job he held for 15 years. He said he was not allowed on campus except to move out of his office. Kheriaty was also restricted from making money off-campus. “It was dizzying and, at times, surreal,” he wrote.

  The firing decision, he said, was not made by the psychiatry department but by the UCI president’s office. Asked by The Epoch Times for more information about Dr. Kheriaty’s firing, UCI spokesman Tom Vasich wrote, “UCI does not comment on personnel issues.” Kheriaty was on unpaid suspension after initially being placed on “investigatory leave.”

  “Now it’s officially over,” Kheriaty wrote on his blog. “I do not regret my time at the university. Indeed, I will miss my colleagues, the residents, and the medical students. I will miss teaching and supervising and doing ethics consults on some of the most challenging cases in the hospital.”

  Kheriaty sued the University of California Board of Regents in federal court on Aug. 18, alleging the university’s vaccine mandate violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In July 2020, Kheriaty contracted COVID-19, so he now has natural immunity that he argues is likely superior to protection from a vaccine. His lawsuit is working its way through U.S. District Court.

  

  The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California refused Kheriaty’s motion for a preliminary injunction against the vaccine mandate. In his lawsuit, he highlighted the failure of vaccine mandates to account for the likely superior immunity possessed by COVID-19 survivors. His faculty colleagues at the University of California filed a 187-page declaration supporting the efficacy of natural immunity.

  As a COVID-19 survivor, Kheriaty said, his immunity to the disease is between 95 and 99 percent effective. There is not one case on record of someone who recovered from COVID-19 and then was re-infected and transmitted the virus to someone else, he said in October. This sterilizing immunity is an advantage the human immune system has over any COVID-19 vaccine, he argued, noting the declining efficacy of the mRNA vaccines over time.

  Reflecting on the pandemic, Kheriaty recalled how pregnant medical residents were concerned about doing consults on COVID-19 patients. “The administration reassured these residents that they had no elevated risks from COVID—a claim without any evidential basis at the time, and which we now know to be false. I saw the COVID consults for these worried residents, even when I was not covering the consult service.”

  He said he worked every day during the pandemic, seeing regular patients and COVID patients in the emergency room, the clinic, psychiatric wards, and hospital wards.

  “As our chief ethics consultant, I had countless conversations with families of patients dying of COVID, and tried my best to console and guide them in their grief,” he wrote.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 20:20

• Albert Edwards' 2022 Outlook: Four Big Surprises… And Lots Of Pain
  Albert Edwards’ 2022 Outlook: Four Big Surprises… And Lots Of Pain

  One month ago, just after all the Wall Street banks come out with glowing year-ahead outlooks and market forecasts, we observed a funny irony: the arrival of a new covid strain threw everyone in for a loop, one which would only get much worse a few weeks later when Biden’s Build Back Better stimulus collapsed.

  Just days after all the banks sent out their cheerful 2022 Economic outlook pieces, everything goes to hell.

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 19, 2021

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

  Since then things have gotten quite embarrassing for the likes of Goldman (and most of its bullish peers), which promptly slashed its GDP forecast over the weekend to just 2.0% from 3.0% and from much higher earlier in the year.

  However, one strategist who isn’t concerned about how to quietly goalseek the downward revision to his 2022 outlook, is SocGen’s in-house bear, Albert Edwards for the simple reason that he sees (saw, and will see) nothing but pain in the coming year.

  As a reminder, two weeks ago Albert penned a rather doomsday forecast about the future of the market-leading “generals”, the FAAMGs, or as they are better known now, the GAMMA stocks, warning that despite the sharply declining EPS of the broader IT sector, the FAANGs continue to trade at a “nosebleed PE valuation at 30x which looks vulnerable vs the market’s 22x – the widest gap since the Nasdaq bubble.” This is happening just as forward IT PEs are starting to rerate lower.

  

  Fast forward to this week when Albert summarizes the current market state as follows: “as we end the year, markets are becoming increasingly nervous that US equities – and the US tech sector specifically – are having the rug pulled out from under them. Market internals are also giving out loud warnings. Just as in 2001, could the unraveling of the recent tech bubble trigger the Vortex of Debility that destroys all before it?“

  Picking up on his recent warning, Edwards writes that the US tech sector that has so dominated this bull market in one form (the IT sector) or another (the FAANGs) “seems to be pretty invulnerable in the face of some of the major threats it is now facing. But we have seen a similar Vortex of Debility before, most recently just ahead of the Lehman bankruptcy and written up here by Paul Murphy at the FT.”

  How does that play into the SocGen strategist’s year-ahead outlook?

  Well, as he notes “it’s the time of year when strategists publish huge tomes to give their year-ahead views” but, he adds, “readers will be relieved to know that I can summarize my 2022 outlook in a few lines” and four surprises.

  As the first “big surprise” of the coming year, Edwards expects that equity markets will startle most investors when they “fall sharply as US tech unravels in the first half.”  Presenting a slightly different chart from the one he showed two weeks ago, Edwards then addresses the elephant in the room, namely the FAAMGs again, and writes that “unsupported by earnings growth (see chart below) and with poor market breadth (see inside), it may not be higher bond yields that burst this tech bubble.”

  

  Edwards then echoes what Morgan Stanley’s Mike Wilson said last week, and lays out what he believes will be the “second surprise” for next year: if an all-out equity bear market unfolds, “investors will find that while the Powell Put still exists, the strike price may be a lot lower for equities than it was at end 2018.” This is almost a carbon copy of what Wilson said last week when he predicted that “the Fed put still exists but the strike price is much lower now, in our view. If we had to guess, it’s down 20% rather than down 10% unless credit markets or economic data really start to wobble.”

  Why? Because as Edwards explains, “policymakers globally now understand that QE creates as many problems (mainly distributional) as it solves, and that fiscal policy must do more of the stimulus work.” He then asks a rhetorical question: “Would the Fed really hold back if the S&P was down 30% plus? And wouldn’t that be one huge surprise for investors?.” Here we disagree with Edwards: it is our view is that no matter what, the Fed will always panic when stocks are down 15-20% – after all so much of the US wealth effect and household net worth is now tied into stocks, that Powell will not dare risk an all out collapse…

  

  … but maybe this time is truly different.

  His “third surprise” may be, well, the most surprising – Edwards expects that easing supply bottlenecks combine with soggy commodity prices to drive US headline CPI inflation back well below 2% (this is also the inventory glut thesis floated by Morgan Stanley and Deutsche Bank). Hence, the SocGen skeptic expects “current inflation fears to evaporate as H1 unfolds and bond yields to decline sharply.”

  The “fourth and final surprise” will come out of China, where after continued growth disappointments in the face of tight money (that has helped weaken industrial commodity prices in H2 2021), Beijing will be forced to launch a Powell-like policy pivot (we have already seen the early signs of this in the past few weeks) and the Chinese monetary floodgates are re-opened – including a burst in China’s credit impulse and rapid renminbi devaluation .

  * * *

  Digging a bit deeper into these four key forecasts/surprises, and starting with the pivotal role that the giga-tech stocks will play, Edwards repeats what he said two weeks ago, and notes that as “we move into next year the US tech sector (and also the FAANGs) could hold the key for markets.” Unlike any other major equity market, the S&P is dominated by these stocks and if they go belly up, inevitably so too does the whole market. As the “floating on air” chart above shows, while until recently there had been a supportive underlying earnings story, now the sector has become reliant on massive multiple expansion relative to the rest of the market (also see chart below).

  

  Edwards then points out something we noted last week when we showed that barely 40% of the Nasdaq’s 3000 stocks are trading above their 200-DMA (a catastrophic breadth which prompted even the traditionally cheerful Goldman Sachs to issue a warning that this is unsustainable)…

  

  … and leads him to conclude that “the sickly aroma of fear is beginning to invade the nostrils of investors. Certainly, this may be one explanation why real yields remain so low and why implied 5y inflation expectations in 5 years have begun to slide to 2021 lows – all but ignoring the recent very high CPI data.”

  

  There is another reason why Edwards believes that we may soon look fondly upon the days of soaring inflation: pointing to one of our own recent charts, the SocGen strategist writes that “the Fed’s newfound hawkishness (as they admit that maybe higher inflation is not so transitory after all) is underpinning a buoyant dollar. This together with the tightness of the China Credit impulse this year has taken the shine off commodities. Zero Hedge notes that an important uptrend has now been breached which may in itself trigger even lower prices.”

  

  There is, however, a glimmer of hope: China. Whereas China’s credit impulse had been sliding for much of the year (as we warned exactly one year ago), it has now officially bottomed and posted its first uptick in 8 months. From here, it will only go higher thanks to the recent burst of stimulus being unleashed by Beijing in the coming months.

  

  Edwards then shares a second “shocking chart”, and this has to do with the soaring Chinese yuan, and Edwards prediction that it is now far too strong and will lead to devaluation one way or another: “we all know that the renminbi has been pari-passu against a robust US dollar, but the officially targeted trade-weighted renminbi is through the roof this year and stands at an equivalent Rmb6.00/$. At a time when Chinese credit conditions are too tight, this is simply intolerable. Despite Chinese exports remaining robust, investors should be on the alert for a 2015-like surprise renminbi devaluation.“

  

  Edwards then spends some time looking at what shadow fed funds rate the Fed’s hiking cycle will conclude (details in his full note inside, available to professional subs) before concluding dramatically that “we are transitioning away from The Ice Age (due primarily to turbo-charged fiscal policy), and ultimately short and long rates will exceed the peak of the previous cycle” but in the near-term, “the Fed may inadvertently burst the Nasdaq bubble pretty soon with just a few taps of their foot on the brake (or less gas).”

  And just as the last recession surprised by being one of the shortest in history, maybe the fifth, and biggest surprise of 2022, will be that this expansion could yet end up as one of the shortest ever, forcing the Fed to revert to easing mode (lower rates, more QE, NIRP, etc) in just a few months…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 20:00

• 24 States Sue Biden Admin Over COVID-19 Mandates For Children, Staff In 'Head Start' Education Program
  24 States Sue Biden Admin Over COVID-19 Mandates For Children, Staff In ‘Head Start’ Education Program

  Authored by Isabel van Brugen via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Attorneys general (AG) from 24 states have filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration challenging COVID-19 vaccine mandates for early education staff, and mask mandates for young children.

  

  Led by Louisiana AG Jeff Landry, the lawsuit (pdf) argues that the mandates involving Head Start, the country’s largest early education program, are unlawful, and exceed President Joe Biden’s statutory authority.

  Biden’s mandate, issued last month, applies to all preschool programs funded by the federal Head Start program, and affects hundreds of thousands of staff, volunteers, and preschool students across the country. It mandates vaccinations for staff, volunteers, and others in contact with students by the end of January, and masks for all adults and children aged two and above.

  The mandate offers no alternative to vaccinations, and for those granted exemptions, funds are not provided for regular testing. It applies to staff regardless of whether they work in-person or remotely.

  The Department of Health and Human Services provides funding to low-income families of preschool-age children under the federal Head Start program.

  The lawsuit argues that the president’s mandate is projected to lead to tens of thousands of Head Start agency staff losing their jobs and will cause programs to close or reduce capacity.

  “Like all of his other unlawful attempts to impose medical decisions on Americans, Biden’s overreaching orders to mask two-year-olds and force vaccinate teachers in our underserved communities will cost jobs and impede child development,” Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry said in a statement on Tuesday. “If enacted, Biden’s authoritarianism will cut funding, programs, and childcare that working families, single mothers, and elderly raising grandchildren rely on desperately.”

  The 24 states are seeking to block the Biden administration’s mandate, arguing that it is “arbitrary and capricious” and violates the Congressional Review Act and the Tenth Amendment.

  The requirements also violate the Administrative Procedure Act’s Notice-and-Comment Requirement, the Nondelegation Doctrine, the Anti-Commandeering Doctrine, the Spending Clause, and the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999, according to the lawsuit.

  “Our Nation’s children have faced enough setbacks and difficulties during the last two years; they cannot afford another government attack on their development,” Landry said. “My office has had great success in blocking Biden’s mandates on many hard-working Americans, and we will work tirelessly to achieve the same victories for toddlers and teachers.”

  The lawsuit was filed by the AGs of Louisiana, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Wyoming, and West Virginia.

  It argues that staff and volunteers will likely leave the Head Start program as a result of the mandate.

  “As a natural and foreseeable result, certain providers will close and children from low-income families in affected areas will be denied access to the preschool education that Congress guaranteed them, and children who are denied access to preschool education will miss out on crucial years of development,” it states.

  It also cites recommendations from the the World Health Organization that “based on the safety and overall interest of the child and the capacity to appropriately use a mask,” “children aged 5 years and under should not be required to wear masks.”

  The complaint cites pediatric nurse Anthony Luczak, who says a toddler mask mandate may cause psychological and health problems.

  The “reinforcement of wearing masks because of the threat of the pandemic is a reinforcement of fear that directly is triggering a toxic stress in children’s lives,” she said.

  It argues that because the federal program does not clearly authorize the mandate, the Biden administration “has acted ‘in excess’ of its constitutional and statutory authority.”

  “As a mother, I am very concerned about the latest federal mandates being forced on Head Start staff and students—children as young as two-years old will be required to wear masks and teachers will be forced to receive a vaccination against their will,” Florida AG Ashley Mood said in a statement. “I am fighting to stop this federal overreach, just as I have fought to protect Floridians against the previous unlawful mandates forced on us by the federal government.”

  Texas AG Ken Paxton said earlier this month that he will “not allow Texans to be coerced into getting a vaccine because the federal government is giving them an ultimatum to choose between their health or their child’s preschool education.”

  “These unconstitutional mandates have no place in our country, and they are not welcomed here in Texas,” he said.

  The Epoch Times has contacted the Biden administration for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 19:40

• Alex Berenson Sues Twitter, Says Company Acted 'On Behalf' Of Biden Administration
  Alex Berenson Sues Twitter, Says Company Acted ‘On Behalf’ Of Biden Administration

  Former NY Times reporter and author (check out those five-star reviews), Alex Berenson has taken Twitter to court, after the social media giant banned him from their platform after he suggested that the Covid-19 vaccine was ‘at best – a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy and terrible side effect profile…”

  

  In a 70-page complaint filed on Monday in the Northern District of California, Berenson accused Twitter of violating his First Amendment rights, and claims that a Twitter executive assured him on multiple occasions that he would be free to express his opinions on the platform without fear of punishment.

  “Despite the controversy around his statements, a senior Twitter executive repeatedly assured Mr. Berenson that the company backed his right to free expression and that he would continue to enjoy access to the platform,” reads the complaint.

  Berenson also argues that Twitter was acting on behalf of the Biden administration by censoring his content, specifically that he has a “a uniquely viable claim that Twitter acted on behalf of the federal government in censoring and barring him from to its platform.”

  The ban came just days after Biden administration officials – as well as Biden himself – called for a crackdown on Covid-19 misinformation on social media.

  According to the complaint, Twitter is subject to a California law which applies to “common carriers,” a provision which dates back to 1872 and regulates companies that “offer to the public to carry persons, property, or messages.”

  His lawyers argue that the “courts have repeatedly applied the 1872 law to telephone companies and other technologies that did not exist at the time it was enacted.”

  Responding to Twitter lawyers, Berenson laid out why his suit has legs in a Tuesday blog post:

  * * *

  So over on Twitter, one of America’s Finest Legal Scholars (TM) is taking time out from his busy practice to rebut the complaint pro malo.

  He must have a lot to do because he’s spent most of the last day on this; I wonder which client he’s billing, or if he’s “between clients” at the moment. Anyway, you can tell he’s a serious guy because he throws up memes with every tweet! Just like Brandeis.

  What’s fascinating is that despite his endless tweets, he somehow has not managed to grasp one of the core arguments – simple in theory, though complex in its details – that the complaint raises.

  For those of you who have neither the time nor the inclination to wade through the argument, it goes like this:

  1. Twitter is indisputably a messenger service. A longstanding California law regulates messenger services as “common carriers.” This means that they must accept all messages they receive. Twitter thus must accept all tweets it receives. It has no First Amendment rights to refuse them on the basis that it does not agree with them.

  2. A federal law commonly called Section 230 “preempts” the California law, giving Twitter the right to reject tweets or ban users. (Whether that right is universal or whether Twitter must act in “good faith” in restricting service is a separate question; whether Twitter acted in “good faith” in this case is still another question. But put those issues aside for the moment.)

  3. Section 230 is what enables Twitter to claim a First Amendment privilege that supersedes the California law and restrict my own First Amendment right to speak; thus federal courts have the right to review 230 on First Amendment grounds. Eugene Volokh, who is a top constitutional scholar, was among the first people to raise this possibility. If you want to know more about about the argument, you can find it here: https://reason.com/volokh/2021/01/23/might-federal-preemption-of-speech…

  4. Defenders of Twitter and other social media behemoths have successfully confused courts and lawmakers about the distinction between Twitter the company and Twitter the platform. Under the First Amendment, Twitter the company is of course free to say whatever it likes – on its platform, in ads, through lobbyists, or anywhere else.

  5. But Twitter the platform should be open to all under California law; and even if the courts find that Section 230’s preemption of California law is consistent with the First Amendment and allows Twitter the company to set rules on who can use the platform, those rules cannot be completely arbitrary or discriminatory.

  6. Twitter itself acknowledges this fact in explaining its rules, and acknowledged it further in creating its “five-strike” policy around Covid-19 “misinformation.” Twitter is legally liable for failing to follow its own rules and contractual obligations in my case.

  7. The complaint has many other factual and legal arguments; I’m not going to go into them here. I am also not going to pull back even further and walk through exactly why the Section 230 as it has been interpreted is so dangerous – that’s an broader argument that belongs in an op-ed for a major newspaper (in the unlikely event they’ll have me). But I hope this helps everyone understand the complaint a little better.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 19:20

• Air Force Allows Use Of Pronouns In Signatures
  Air Force Allows Use Of Pronouns In Signatures

  Authored by Ken Silva via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Secretary of Air Force Public Affairs announced Dec. 20 that Airmen and the Space Force Guardians are now allowed to include pronouns in their signature block.

  “Official signature blocks should include name, rank, service affiliation, duty title, organization name, phone numbers and social media contact information. Pronouns such as he/him, she/her, or they/them are now authorized but not required,” the announcement said.

  “Pronouns can be placed immediately after the name in parentheses or on separate lines within the signature block.”

  

  The change was made via an update to Air Force writing guide The Tongue and Quill, which provides formatting standards and guidelines for a number of official documents, including email, memoranda, letters and papers. The changes were spearheaded by the LGBTQ Initiatives Team, created in April to works on issues that disproportionately impact LGBTQ Airmen and Guardians.

  “The change request was driven by awareness of a restrictive policy that was being used against transgender Airmen and Guardians who were authentically representing themselves,” Lt. Col. Bree Fram, a LIT Transgender Policy Team co-lead, said in the announcement. “It was also important for many individuals often confused as being a different gender in their communications.”

  Master Sgt. Jamie Hash, the other LIT Transgender Policy Team co-lead, said in the announcement that the change was a request she started from her installation’s Diversity and Inclusion committee.

  “The LIT provided an opportunity to streamline the process for this change,” Hash said. “It is an example of how the DAFBAWG [Department of the Air Force’s Barrier Analysis Working Group] teams are addressing barriers, collaborating, and executing solutions in ways that have not been seen before to help Airmen and Guardians thrive.”

  Hash said the explicit permission to use pronouns helps the Air Force by further “explicitly acknowledging the existence and dignity of non-binary military members and civilians.” She also said the change eliminates confusion for people with non-Anglo/Western or gender-neutral names.

  “A foundational competency of the [Air Force] is to foster inclusion,” Fram added. “The use of correct pronouns is an easy way to show care and respect for Airmen and Guardians as individuals, and can help the [Air Force] retain highly qualified individuals.

  “Allowing pronouns in an individual’s signature block is a quick and simple way to eliminate confusion and promote a more inclusive culture.”

  The Air Force’s announcement came the same day the Department of Defense released its plan to combat extremism in the military.

  The Biden administration has touted diversity initiatives as a way to improve cohesion within the military, but some lawmakers and military officials worry that the Pentagon is prioritizing social issues at the expense of military preparedness. Republican lawmakers released a congressionally commissioned report in July, making that argument.

  Drawing on interviews with 77 Navy personnel, the report found “a broad consensus across interviewees on numerous cultural and structural issues that impact the morale and readiness of the Navy’s surface force.”

  Along with identifying general problems associated with a bloated bureaucracy, the report focuses on the more recent trend of Navy leadership becoming entranced by social issues. Programs to encourage diversity, suicide prevention, sexual assault, and other issues have their value—but an overfocus on those areas comes at a cost, the report said, quoting numerous officers.

  “We’ve got so many messages about X, Y, Z appreciation month, or sexual assault prevention, or you name it. We don’t even have close to that same level of emphasis on actual warfighting,” said an unidentified recent destroyer captain.

  “Sometimes, I think we care more about whether we have enough diversity officers than if we’ll survive a fight with the Chinese navy,” said an active-duty lieutenant. “It’s criminal. They think my only value is as a black woman. But you cut our ship open with a missile, and we’ll all bleed the same color.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 19:00

• Top 10 Themes For 2022: Part 1
  Top 10 Themes For 2022: Part 1

  In its comprehensive take of the top 10 themes for 2022, Deutsche Bank’s Luke Templeman asks if covid is the only theme that matters? He correctly responds that “that is not the right question. In fact, covid is now not so much a theme as it is the backdrop against which most things are evolving in economics, finance, and corporates.”

  So what themes matter in 2022?

  As part of Deutsche Bank’s look ahead analysis, Templeman, director of the bank’s thematic research group, addresses the big macro topics – the risk of the global economy overheating given stimulus measures and the change in attitude of central banks towards employment goals. Then there is how tight labor markets may further boost inflation. A flow on is higher bond yields and the end of free money that has propped up markets since the financial crisis. As he notes, while “stock markets may not crash, they could witness the return of fundamental investing.” It certainly would be welcomed… even if it comes with the S&P several hundred/thousand point lower.

  Some more observations from Tempelman’s summary:

  Corporates, in 2022, will struggle with new issues – in addition to labor shortages. For two decades, returns have been generated by rising profit margins and cheap debt. Now both those things are looking to reverse in 2022. Competition regulators are flexing their muscle and, to compensate, managers will have to rediscover their operational mojo. That means generating more sales from existing assets.

  Does any corporate theme matter in a shortage economy? A good question with a contrarian answer. Basically, we see an inventory glut in 2022. Manufacturers are going full tilt, while retailers are beginning to over-order.

  Then there is ESG, which for better or worse has been turbo-charged by covid. The momentum is fully behind ESG bonds, particularly sustainability-linked bonds: “Investors love the story, customers love the story, and corporates are piling on board.”

  Away from the spotlight, several other themes could have serious repercussions in 2022, according to Deutsche Bank. One is that central bank digital currencies will take a massive step forward with some countries planning to go live in 2022. Meanwhile, the DB strategist argues that most people underestimate how the growing militarization of space will ratchet up geo-political tensions. Between anti-satellite missiles and growing budgets for military space divisions, the worrying thing is that the benefits of space supremacy are now so great that there are reasons why countries may push back against any new treaty.

  * * *

  We split DB’s “Top 10 Themes” into two posts, each covering 5 of the biggest themes the bank believes will define the coming year. Part 1 will cover 1) An overheating economy; 2) Covid optimism; 3) A hypersonic labor market and inflation; 4) Corporate focus on asset efficiency; 5). Inventory glut. The second part, which we will publish tomorrow will turn to 1) Antitrust (or competition) renaissance; 2. The end of free money in stock markets; 3) Space: a worrying geopolitical frontier; 4) Central Bank Digital Currencies: Growing into reality; 5) ESG bonds go mainstream.

  So without further ado, here is theme #1 for 2022…

  1. An overheating economy, by Jim Reid

  While some commentators worry about stagflation in 2022, it is far more likely that the US economy will encounter overheating risks. Of course, many economies are still recovering from covid with the current winter wave plus Omicron providing obvious risks. However, unless the new variant completely rewrites the path of the pandemic, next year should be a better year on the pandemic front. Meanwhile, the huge stimulus that remains in the system, alongside easy policy conditions, will continue to ensure both inflation and growth stay high.

  The result is likely to be a “growthflationary” environment in 2022. In turn, the Fed will likely become more aggressive in 2022 in order to curb inflation. This will tighten financial conditions for a period while investors become used to the new regime. Growth should survive this in 2022 as policy and financial conditions will likely stabilize at still accommodative levels as the adjustment takes place. However, should the economy overheat, and the pace of tightening outweigh the historically easy level of financial conditions, the cycle’s end could be brought into sharper focus with a recession in 2023 or 2024 increasingly debated.

  Indeed the starting point is that the spot real federal funds rate is now more negative than it has been at any time since the 1950s. Money supply has exploded in a way it did not after the financial crisis when the world was deleveraging and thus offsetting extreme monetary policy. A lack of deleveraging in this cycle and helicopter money has left a monetary overhang this time round that will continue to encourage high growth and inflation. Potential political gridlock after the mid-terms will not change the legacy fiscal stimulus still working its way through the system in 2022.

  Overheating risks have been amplified by the recent change in the Fed’s attitude towards maximum employment. Maybe history will suggest that the Fed was unfortunate in its timing to move to average inflation targeting just as helicopter money finally arrived that removed the necessity for the policy change. It is arguably fighting the battle of the last cycle. By waiting to see actual gains in employment rather than respond to the clear labor market tightness, albeit exaggerated by the pandemic, it has arguably fallen too far behind the curve.

  One of the biggest differences between this cycle and the last is the US output and employment gap. After the financial crisis both took eight years to close. That was the slowest recovery in history so with hindsight it is quite easy to see why we did not see inflation. In this cycle the gaps will close over the next quarter which will be one of the quickest recoveries in history. So the US economy will be bumping against its inflationary speed limit in 2022 with huge stimulus still working through the system.

  

  Some argue that stagflation is a bigger threat than overheating. The reality is that most economies are still a long way from it. If DB’s growth forecasts prove correct, then most of the G7 economies will still generate economic growth of at least three per cent next year. This is some way above trend and inconsistent with ‘stagflationary’ dynamics.

  We can therefore expect robust growth, and elevated inflation. This makes the overheating of the global economy a key risk in 2022. Consider that in 2021, investors went from not pricing in a hike until 2024 to expecting as many as three next year. The risk lies in central banks, led by the US, being forced enact yet more.

  * * *

  2. Covid optimism. – Henry Allen

  The covid outlook for the northern hemisphere winter is deeply concerning. Numerous countries are moving into fresh lockdowns, and the arrival of the Omicron variant has led to new travel restrictions and another bout of financial market turmoil. Nevertheless, there are credible reasons to be optimistic about how the pandemic may evolve in 2022. Critically, improved medicines will hopefully become mainstream. At the same time, an expected increase in the availability of several covid vaccines means that those populations without access should finally receive it. And as the world begins to manage covid, it is likely that benefits will be found in some neglected areas of society upon which the pandemic has thrown a light.

  The biggest game-changer of 2022 will likely be antiviral pills. These promise to diminish hospitalizations and fatalities and already there are two encouraging candidates. Trials of the Merck pill suggest it cuts the risk of hospitalization and death by 30 per cent. Meanwhile, the Pfizer pill appears to reduce hospitalization and deaths among high-risk adults by 89 per cent. Both have applied to US regulators for authorization and Merck’s pill has already been approved in the UK.

  Apart from pills, treatments are broadening. For example, the US Coronavirus Treatment Acceleration Program is supporting a range of therapies in development, such as antiviral pills, neutralizing antibodies, and also immunomodulators that reduce the immune reaction to the virus and prevent it going into harmful overdrive.

  

  Vaccine manufacturing will also accelerate in 2022. The production of the Pfizer vaccine is expected to increase by a third to 4bn doses. Moderna will also increase supply. A chunk of this inventory is likely to be distributed in the developing world where vaccine access has, so far, been poor. Moreover, the extension of the vaccine to younger age groups will push developed countries closer to herd immunity. The US has already authorized the Pfizer vaccine for children aged 5-11. Other countries are following suit.

  Taking a step back, the tragedy of covid has forced societies to reckon with difficult issues that have been neglected for too long. As they begin to manage the virus more effectively, this offers hope that areas such as tackling educational inequalities or greater support for mental health are given greater attention.

  The pandemic has also helped us become more inventive in how we can prevent such crises in the future. The importance of a quick reaction has been fully accepted. Indeed, leaders at a recent G20 summit pledged to enhance early detection and warning systems, as well as shorten the development cycle for vaccines and therapeutics. At a smaller scale, buildings and schools are starting to plan better ventilation systems.

  Of course, new variants still pose a risk, and the arrival of the new Omicron variant has demonstrated this once again. Yet over the medium term, history shows that many viruses can become less dangerous over time, which was what happened with the H1N1 virus that was responsible for the Spanish Flu in 1918. And with the advantages of modern medicine and the array of treatments in the development pipeline, we can be confident that eventually, humanity will move past this virus too.

  * * *

  3. A hypersonic labour market and inflation,  Olga Cotaga

  Just as hypersonic missiles are stirring geopolitical tensions, the hypersonic recovery of the labor market is stirring inflationary concerns. That will likely be exacerbated in 2022 as workers that are upskilling themselves leave their current roles in search of a better job.

  The big difference in this labor market recovery is its breath-taking speed. After a normal recession, it usually takes between four to seven years for the labor market to recover. This time, it is recuperating much faster. The US unemployment rate has now returned to 4.2 per cent, not far from the 3.5 per cent seen just before covid. In France and Spain labour force participation is already higher than prior to covid.

  Whilst it is a relief that people are back in work, the speed of the recovery does contain some hidden dangers. This is because history shows the unemployment rate tends to decrease for the length of an economic cycle. Given this economic cycle has only just begun, and cycles in recent decades have been lasting longer, that implies the labour market may continue to tighten for years. Exacerbating this tightness is the fact that not everyone has returned to work. Indeed, in the US, more than 4m people left their job since covid and have not come back. More than half of those have retired early.

  An outlook for an unusually tight labor market is a perfect recipe for wage-driven price growth. Our economists have previously commented that excluding the stagflation period of the late-1970s and early- 1980s there is a decent correlation (41 per cent) between unemployment and inflation, although the correlation has weakened over time.

  Amplifying the issue is that covid has inspired people to upskill and find a better-suited and better-paid job. Indeed, more than two-thirds of workers globally are willing to retrain for new jobs.1 Meanwhile, a third of people who have ever registered on a ‘Massive Open Online Course’ platform joined in 2020.2 A global survey of nearly 6,000 people found that 40 per cent are at least somewhat likely to leave their current jobs.

  

  The issue is dominating corporate discussion, as seen in the chart above, and pushing companies to be more proactive. Alphabet, Amazon, IBM, Walmart and many other large companies are introducing training programs. Some now pay for higher education. Corporates are also spending more on wages and salaries because of labor shortages.

  While avoiding mass unemployment was one of the great successes of covid-policy, there is a catch. After all, hypersonic missiles would not be as much of a threat if they travelled at slower speeds (they would just be missiles). If we are at the start of a new economic cycle that lasts as long as the others of the last four decades, wage inflation will likely continue.

  * * *

  4. Corporate focus on asset efficiency, Luke Templeman

  Investors have not needed to care about bloated companies until now. After all, for the last decade or so, corporate returns were juiced by rising profit margins and super-cheap debt. Companies grew through acquisitions and ignored their asset efficiency. Indeed the median S&P 500 company earned $1 in sales for every $1 it held in assets in the early 2000s. It now earns just 60 cents.

  In 2022, the focus on asset efficiency is set to return as the two other sources of returns on equity – profit margins and leverage – are coming under significant pressure.

  Profit margins will be squeezed as workers increasingly demand higher wages and benefits. The trend towards this began in earnest in 2021; in 2022 it will likely continue as worker shortages persist (see our theme A hypersonic labour market and inflation). Also pressuring margins will be policies that aim to arrest the decline in corporate competition. Indeed, President Biden, and leaders in other developed countries, have lamented how the decline of corporate competition has helped firms over workers.

  Leverage, too, appears set to drop in 2022. Possible interest rate rises will make debt more expensive and, if some level of higher inflation proves permanent, companies can expect higher debt costs in the medium term. Already, companies have been curtailing their leverage. Since it hit a multi-decade peak in mid-last year, leverage in the median S&P 500 company has dropped eight per cent and now sits at 2016 levels.

  

  There are initial signs that asset efficiency is hitting managers’ radar. Over the last three quarters, the asset turnover ratio of S&P 500 companies has risen quicker than at any time since the financial crisis. This is good news. If asset turnover returns to pre-financial crisis levels, returns on equity would theoretically increase by two-thirds.

  Some high-profile companies are already slimming down. Johnson & Johnson, General Electric, and Toshiba have all recently announced plans to split their firms. That comes as our analysis shows that stock market returns of asset-light companies have outperformed asset-heavy companies over the last decade. Private equity will have a field day – they love acquiring unloved spin-offs.

  From an investor’s point of view, if companies do not slim down, they will have to make their existing assets work harder. This will not be easy. It requires someone skilled in turnaround management and the type of structural change that not only consumes a lot of management attention, but also creates ructions amongst staff.

  Just as 2022 will likely usher in the return of investor focus on asset efficiency, it will separate companies into three groups: those that are already asset efficient, those that ignore the issue, and those that are inefficient but addressing the problem. The latter group may provide investors with the most value. And as they do, they will likely penalize those companies that continue to meander along with a bloated balance sheet.

  * * *

  5. Inventory glut, Olga Cotaga

  In 2022, we are going to have a lot of stuff. Everywhere. Supply chain disruptions, coupled with an imperfect market, are likely to lead retailers and manufactures to being stuck with abundant inventories. A slower than expected release of pent-up demand, as well as a focus on experiences over goods, will likely exacerbate the glut. Marie Kondo would not approve.

  An inventory glut will follow the fact that retailers do not want to be caught off guard with a lack of product as they have been last year and this. Although their inventories are currently low (partly due to the auto shortage), there are signs that retailers are over-ordering ahead of the busy holiday period. All the while, manufacturers are already producing and holding far more inventory than they did before covid.

  

  This means 2022 is set for the “bullwhip” effect – where retailers and manufacturers respond to each other by under- and then over-ordering. Shortages are followed by gluts and then shortages until equilibrium is finally established.

  Third-quarter earnings results showed the highest number of S&P 500 companies discussing “supply chains” in a decade.

  Exacerbating the problem are concerns that customer demand does not recover as quickly as corporates think. Our latest presentation on pent-up demand, shows that people expect their spending to rise. But each month so far, those expectations have failed to materialize. Specifically, Americans have been spending less but expect to spend more. This is why expectations of a release of pent-up demand may not materialise. That will leave a glut of inventory either in warehouses or on the shop floor.

  One important factor behind demand not materializing is people’s appetite for savings. The US still has the highest level of covid savings of large economies, at about $1.2tn, but Europeans have arguably saved more. Savings of about six per cent of 2019 GDP are slightly higher than in the US. On top of that, more Europeans think their savings will increase in the next 12 months, compared with the beginning of last year.

  Equally as important for inventories is the fact that, so far, people have shown a preference for experiences over goods. Indeed, the upwards trajectory in spending since the beginning of 2021 has been the sharpest in the out-of-home entertainment, such as restaurant meals, theater, or cinema. This has little to do with inventories.

  The swings in the availability of goods will continue back and forth until an equilibrium is eventually established. In other words, the “bullwhip” effect is likely to continue to dominate the supply chains in 2022 and lead to a surplus of inventories. In that case, Marie Kondo’s organizational techniques may prove useful.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 18:45

• Firm Tasked With Disbursing $40 Million From Musk's SEC Settlement Hasn't Filed Required Statements, Judge Says
  Firm Tasked With Disbursing $40 Million From Musk’s SEC Settlement Hasn’t Filed Required Statements, Judge Says

  As a part of Elon Musk’s settlement with the SEC over his questionable Tweets – namely, one enormously questionable one wherein he faked an $80 billion buyout for his company – a $40 million fund had been set up from fines that Musk had to fork over.

  The fund was set up to be disbursed to those harmed by Musk’s statements, but U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan – who recently has had her hands full with the Ghislaine Maxwell trial – issued an order this week noting that the firm set up to manage the funds wasn’t holding up its end of the bargain. 

  

  On Tuesday of this week, Nathan noted that a firm appointed in May to manage the distributions hadn’t “filed required accounting statements”, according to Bloomberg. Nathan ordered that Rust Consulting submit a status report to the court by January 7. 

  The settlement between Musk and the SEC was reached back in September of 2018. Musk’s settlement didn’t include an admission of wrongdoing, but did result in the SEC setting up a Fair Fund to repay investors.

  Since the settlement, Musk has referred to the SEC as the “shortseller enrichment commission” and has invited the agency – in not so many words – to fellate him. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 18:40

• Former Trump Adviser Michael Flynn Sues Jan. 6 Committee Over Subpoenas
  Former Trump Adviser Michael Flynn Sues Jan. 6 Committee Over Subpoenas

  Authored by Isabel van Brugen via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Former Trump adviser and retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn on Tuesday sued the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol, seeking to block the panel from obtaining his phone records.

  

  In a lawsuit filed in federal court in Florida, Flynn alleged that the subpoena issued to him by the committee last month was too broad in scope and punishes him for constitutionally protected speech he engaged in as a private citizen.

  “Flynn has raised significant Constitutional and practical concerns that preclude his compliance with the subpoena without clarification of its scope and terms by the Select Committee,” the lawsuit states.

  The former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency and former President Donald Trump’s national security adviser also alleged in the lawsuit that the congressional committee “has no authority to conduct business because it is not a duly constituted Select Committee.”

  An appeals court has rejected that argument, ruling on Dec. 9 that the committee was valid and entitled to see White House records Trump has tried to shield from public view.

  The House Select Committee has requested that Flynn testify before the panel, and that he hand over documents about a “command center” at Washington’s Willard Hotel the committee alleges was set up to steer efforts to deny Democrat Joe Biden his November 2020 election win.

  “Without intervention by this Court, General Flynn faces the harm of being irreparably and illegally coerced to produce information and testimony in violation of the law and his constitutional rights,” the lawsuit says. “He will also illegally and irreparably harmed by the Select Committee’s unlawful and secret seizure of his and his family’s personal information from their telecommunications and/or electronic mail service providers.”

  Flynn’s lawsuit comes nearly a week after freelance photojournalist Amy Harris filed a lawsuit against the committee in federal court in Washington, seeking to block a subpoena. Her lawsuit argues that demanding her phone records violates her right not to reveal confidential sources.

  Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows also sued the House of Representatives panel this month after they said they would move to hold him in contempt of Congress for refusing to appear for a deposition at the request of the committee.

  Meadows’s lawsuit, filed in a Washington, D.C. federal court, asks a judge to invalidate two subpoenas that he says are “overly broad and unduly burdensome.” It accuses the committee of overreaching by issuing a subpoena to Verizon for his cellphone records.

  The Epoch Times has contacted the Jan. 6 Select Committee for comment.

  Reuters contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 18:20

• FDA Releases More Data On "Adverse Reactions" To Pfizer Vaccine
  FDA Releases More Data On “Adverse Reactions” To Pfizer Vaccine

  As the FDA prepares to approve Pfizer’s new pill for treating high-risk patients infected with COVID, more information about dangerous side effects tied to its vaccine are coming to light.

  Just yesterday, we reported another death tied to the vaccine in New Zealand. Now, documents released by the FDA reveal that drugmaker Pfizer recorded nearly 160K adverse reactions to its COVID vaccine in the initial months of its rollout.

  

  The data were obtained by a group of doctors, professors, and journalists calling themselves Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency. They filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the FDA asking for their release. And the first tranche of documents revealed that, as of February 2021, when Pfizer’s shot was being rolled out worldwide on an emergency basis, the drugmaker had compiled more than 42K case reports detailing nearly 160K individual adverse reactions to the vaccine.

  The data show the bulk of the adverse event cases, both serious and non-serious, were classified as “general disorders”.

  

  Among the more common conditions reported were fevers (pyrexia), fatigue, and diarrhea, among others.

  But perhaps the most surprising number in the entire report is that more than 1K of these cases were fatal in the US. All told, more than 3K deaths have been linked to the vaccine, something that’s in line with the company’s own data. Critics have argued that some of the deaths can’t be conclusively linked to the vaccine, but others have instead insisted that the number of deaths might still be underreported.

  Keep in mind, these data were used by the FDA to declare the Pfizer jab safe, which it did for Americans aged 16 and older in August. It has since been approved for children as young as five, along with booster doses for people aged 16 and up as of last week.

  Readers can find the complete breakdown of data from Public Health and Medical Professionals For Transparency below:

  5.3.6 Postmarketing Experience on Scribd

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/22/2021 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Mission Unaccomplished: Describing A Failing US Military As "Awesome"
  Mission Unaccomplished: Describing A Failing US Military As “Awesome”

  Authored by Andrew Bacevich via Common Dreams,

  Professional sports is a cutthroat business. Succeed and the people running the show reap rich rewards. Fail to meet expectations and you get handed your walking papers. American-style war in the twenty-first century is quite a different matter. Of course, war is not a game. The stakes on the battlefield are infinitely higher than on the playing field. When wars go wrong, “We’ll show ’em next year—just you wait!” is seldom a satisfactory response.

  At least, it shouldn’t be. Yet somehow, the American people, our political establishment, and our military have all fallen into the habit of shrugging off or simply ignoring disappointing outcomes. A few years ago, a serving army officer of unusual courage published an essay—in Armed Forces Journal no less—in which he charged that “a private who loses a rifle suffers far greater consequences than a general who loses a war.”

  

  The charge stung because it was irrefutably true then and it remains so today.

  As American politics has become increasingly contentious, the range of issues on which citizens agree has narrowed to the point of invisibility. For Democrats, promoting diversity has become akin to a sacred obligation. For Republicans, the very term is synonymous with political correctness run amok. Meanwhile, GOP supporters treat the Second Amendment as if it were a text Moses carried down from Mount Sinai, while Democrats blame the so-called right to bear arms for a plague of school shootings in this country.

  On one point, however, an unshakable consensus prevails: the U.S. military is tops. No less august a figure than General David Petraeus described our armed forces as “the best military in the world today, by far.” Nor, in his judgment, was “this situation likely to change anytime soon.” His one-word characterization for the military establishment: “awesome.”

  The claim was anything but controversial. Indeed, Petraeus was merely echoing the views of politicians, pundits, and countless other senior officers. Praising the awesomeness of that military has become twenty-first-century America’s can’t miss applause line.

  As it happens, though, a yawning gap looms between that military’s agreed upon reputation here and its actual performance. That the troops are dutiful, seasoned, and hardworking is indisputably so. Once upon a time, “soldiering” was a slang term for shirking or laziness. No longer. Today, America’s troops more than earn their pay.

  And whether individually or collectively, they also lead the world in expenditures. Even a decade ago, it cost more than $2 million a year to keep a G.I. in a war zone like Afghanistan. And, of course, no other military on the planet—in fact, not even the militaries of the next 11 countries combined—can match Pentagon spending from one year to the next.

  Is it impolite, then, to ask if the nation is getting an adequate return on its investment in military power? Simply put, are we getting our money’s worth? And what standard should we use in answering that question?

  Let me suggest using the military’s own standard.

  Demanding Victory

  According to the United States Army’s 2021 “Posture Statement,” for example, that service exists to “fight and win the nation’s wars.” The mission of the Air Force complements the Army’s: “to fly, fight, and win.” The Navy’s mission statement has three components, the first of which aligns neatly with that of the Army and Air Force: “winning wars.”

  As for the Marine Corps, it foresees “looming battles” that “come in many forms and occur on many fronts,” each posing “a critical choice: to demand victory or accept defeat.” No one even slightly familiar with the Marines will have any doubt on which side of that formulation the Corps situates itself.

  In other words, the common theme uniting these statements of institutional purpose is self-evident. The armed forces of the United States define their purpose as winning. Staving off defeat is not enough, nor is fighting to a draw, waging gallant Bataan-like last stands, or handing off wars-in-progress to pliant understudies whom American forces have tutored.

  Mission accomplishment necessarily entails defeating the enemy. In General Douglas MacArthur’s famously succinct formulation, “There is no substitute for victory.” But victory, properly understood, necessarily entails more than just besting the enemy in battle. It requires achieving the political purposes for which the war is being fought.

  A 5-year New York Times investigation into hidden Pentagon records shows that a pattern of failures in U.S. airstrikes in the Middle East has killed thousands of civilians, many of them children. None of these records show findings of wrongdoing. https://t.co/6VCYUtSZXf

  — The New York Times (@nytimes) December 18, 2021

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

  So when it comes to winning, both operationally and politically, how well have the U.S. armed forces performed since embarking upon the Global War on Terror in the autumn of 2001? Do the results achieved, whether in the principal theaters of Afghanistan and Iraq or in lesser ones like Libya, Somalia, Syria, and West Africa qualify as “awesome”? And if not, why not?

  A proposed Afghanistan War Commission now approved by Congress and awaiting President Biden’s signature could subject our military’s self-proclaimed reputation for awesomeness to critical scrutiny. That assumes, however that such a commission would forego the temptation to whitewash a conflict that even General Mark Milley, the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged ended in a “strategic failure.” As a bonus, examining the conduct of America’s longest war might well serve as a proxy for assessing the military’s overall performance since 9/11.

  The commission would necessarily pursue multiple avenues of inquiry. Among them should be: the oversight offered by senior civilian officials; the quality of leadership provided by commanders in the field; and the adequacy of the military’s training, doctrine, and equipment. It should also assess the “fighting spirit” of the troops and the complex question of whether there were ever enough “boots on the ground” to accomplish the mission. And the commission would be remiss if it did not take into account the capacity, skills, and determination of the enemy as well.

  But there is another matter that the commission will be obliged to address head-on: the quality of American generalship throughout this longest-ever U.S. war. Unless the commission agenda includes that issue, it will fall short. The essential question is obvious: Did the three- and four-star officers who presided over the Afghanistan War in the Pentagon, at U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), and in Kabul possess the “right stuff”? Or rather than contributing to a favorable resolution of the war, did they themselves constitute a significant part of the problem?

  These are not questions that the senior ranks of the officer corps are eager to pursue. As with those who reach the top in any hierarchical institution, generals and admirals are disinclined to see anything fundamentally amiss with a system that has elevated them to positions of authority. From their perspective, that system works just fine and should be perpetuated—no outside tampering required. Much like tenured faculty at a college or university, senior officers are intent on preserving the prerogatives they already enjoy. As a consequence, they will unite in resisting any demands for reform that may jeopardize those very prerogatives.

  A Necessary Purge

  President Biden habitually concludes formal presentations by petitioning God to “protect our troops.” While not doubting his sincerity in praying for divine intervention, Biden might give the Lord a hand by employing his own authority as commander-in-chief to set the table for a post-Afghanistan military-reform effort. In that regard, a first step should entail removing anyone inclined to obstruct change or (more likely) incapable of recognizing the need to alter a system that has worked so well for them.

  On that score, Dwight D. Eisenhower offers Biden an example of how to proceed. When Ike became president in 1953, he was intent on implementing major changes in U.S. defense priorities. As a preliminary step, he purged the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which then included his West Point classmate General Omar Bradley, replacing them with officers he expected to be more sympathetic to what came to be known as his “New Look.” (Eisenhower badly misjudged his ability to get the Army, his own former service, to cooperate, but that’s a story for another day.)

  A similar purge is needed now. Commander-in-chief Biden should remove certain active-duty senior officers from their posts without further ado. General Mark Milley, the discredited chair of the Joint Chiefs, would be an obvious example. General Kenneth McKenzie, who oversaw the embarrassing conclusion of the Afghanistan War as head of Central Command, is another. Requiring both of those prominent officers to retire would signal that unsatisfactory performance does indeed have consequences, a principle from which neither the private who loses a rifle nor the four stars who lose wars should be exempt.

  However, when it comes to a third figure, our political moment would create complications that didn’t exist when Ike was president. When he decided which generals and admirals to fire and whom to hire in their place, Eisenhower didn’t have to worry about identity politics. Top commanders were of a single skin tone in 1950s America. Today, however, any chief executive who ignores identity-related issues does so at their peril, laying themselves open to the charge of bigotry.

  Which brings us to the case of retired four-star general Lloyd Austin, former Iraq War and CENTCOM commander. As a freshly minted civilian, Austin presides as the first Black defense secretary, a notable distinction given that senior Pentagon officials have tended to be white or male (and usually both).  And while, by all reports, General Austin is an upright citizen and decent human being, it’s become increasingly clear that he lacks qualities the nation needs when critically examining this country’s less-than-awesome military performance, which should be the order of the day.  Whatever suit he may wear to the office, he remains a general—and that is a problem.  

  Austin also lacks imagination, drive, and charisma. Nor is he a creative thinker. Rather than an agent of change, he’s a cheerleader for the status quo—or perhaps more accurately, for a status quo defined by a Pentagon budget that never stops rising.

  A speech Austin made earlier this month at the Reagan Library illustrates the point. While he threw the expected bouquets to the troops, praising their “optimism, and pragmatism, and patriotism” and “can-do attitude,” he devoted the preponderance of his remarks to touting Pentagon plans for dealing with “an increasingly assertive and autocratic China.” The overarching theme of Austin’s address centered on confrontation. “We made the Department’s largest-ever budget request for research, development, testing, and evaluation,” he boasted. “And we’re investing in new capabilities that will make us more lethal from greater distances, and more capable of operating stealthy and unmanned platforms, and more resilient under the seas and in space and in cyberspace.”

  Nowhere in Austin’s presentation or his undisguised eagerness for a Cold War-style confrontation with China was there any mention of the Afghanistan War, which had ended just weeks before. That the less-than-awesome U.S. military performance there—20 years of exertions ending in defeat—might have some relevance to any forthcoming competition with China did not seemingly occur to the defense secretary.

  Austin’s patently obvious eagerness to move on—to put this country’s disastrous “forever wars” in the Pentagon’s rearview mirror—no doubt coincides with the preferences of the active-duty senior officers he presides over at the Pentagon. He clearly shares their eagerness to forget.

  As if to affirm that the Pentagon is done with Afghanistan once and for all, Austin soon after decided to hold no U.S. military personnel accountable for a disastrous August 29th drone strike in Kabul that killed 10 noncombatants, including seven children. In fact, since 9/11, the United States had killed thousands of civilians in several theaters of operations, with the media either in the dark or, until very recently, largely indifferent. This incident, however, provoked a rare storm of attention and seemingly cried out for disciplinary action of some sort.

  But Austin was having none of it. As John Kirby, his press spokesperson, put it, “What we saw here was a breakdown in process, and execution in procedural events, not the result of negligence, not the result of misconduct, not the result of poor leadership.” Blame the process and the procedures but give the responsible commanders a pass. That decision describes Lloyd Austin’s approach to leading the Defense Department. Whether the problem is a lack of daring or a lack of gumption, he won’t be rocking any boats.

  Will the U.S. military under his leadership recover its long-lost awesomeness?  My guess is no. In the meantime, don’t expect his increasingly beleaguered boss in the White House to notice or, for that matter, care. With a load of other problems on his desk, he’s counting on the Lord to prevent his generals from subjecting the troops and civilians elsewhere on the planet to further abuse.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 23:40

• IMF, World Bank & 10 Countries Held Alarming "Simulation" Of Global Financial System Collapse
  IMF, World Bank & 10 Countries Held Alarming “Simulation” Of Global Financial System Collapse

  Earlier this month Reuters produced a report which didn’t receive nearly enough attention among the American public – its contents would be sure to alarm most people concerned with the outbreak of yet more ‘global catastrophes’. At the very least it’s curious timing: amid the recent pandemic induced disruption in global supply chains, powerful nations and banking institutions decided to get together to run a global economic collapse scenario. 

  The report described that Israel led a “10-country simulation of a major cyber attack on the global financial system in an attempt to increase cooperation that could help to minimize any potential damage to financial markets and banks.” It was centered on a catastrophic scenario in which “hackers were 10 steps ahead of us,” according to one official who took part.

  

  Dubbed “Collective Strength”, the exercise was held in Jerusalem (after being moved from the original proposed location of Dubai) and included the participation also of the United States, UK, United Arab Emirates, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Thailand. Officials from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and Bank of International Settlements were also involved.

  The financial-geopolitical gaming simulation was set amid a scenario where sensitive data was leaked on the Dark Web, which combined with “fake news” reports going viral across societies, resulting in the collapse of global markets and an ensuing run on banks. Further, the simulation envisioned a series of devastating hacks targeting global foreign exchange systems, which also disrupted transactions between importers and exporters, according to Reuters.

  The simulation set out a severe crisis period lasting about a week-and-a-half. Events were guided by a film and narrator which related the fast moving ‘live’ events…

  “These events are creating havoc in the financial markets,” said a narrator of a film shown to the participants as part of the simulation and seen by Reuters.

  Further the report detailed of the simulation hosted under the aegis of Israel’s Finance Ministry:

  “The banks are appealing for emergency liquidity assistance in a multitude of currencies to put a halt to the chaos as counterparties withdraw their funds and limit access to liquidity leaving the banks in disarray and ruin,” the narrator said.

  The participants discussed multilateral policies to respond to the crisis, including a coordinated bank holiday, debt repayment grace periods, SWAP/REPO agreements and coordinated delinking from major currencies.

  

  Ostensibly what was a “successful” ten day exercise was aimed toward each country being prepared to contain the global damage coming from some kind of major cyber event or threat. The key takeaway was that only through rapid global cooperation and open communication among nations, would there be opportunity to prevent total collapse of the global (or perhaps rather Western-led) financial system.

  Interestingly, some participants said in reality they would in reality move faster than in the simulation in the instance of a cyber disruption of that scale. They said “in a real cyber attack situation governments would take action more quickly than in the simulation,” according to Reuters. “One European financial official said that in the case of such of an attack, his country would not wait 10 days to act.”

  However, we doubt much of the Western public will feel “comforted” by global elites engaged in a simulated global meltdown ‘readiness’ scenario. Again, as if 2020 and 2021 under the pandemic weren’t enough of a “real world” disaster and crisis scenario, one questions the need to game out a ‘pretend’ scenario in the first place. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 23:20

• "If You Could Die Of Irony, She Would Be Dead": Musk Slams Liz Warren And Woke Culture In Epic Babylon Bee Interview
  “If You Could Die Of Irony, She Would Be Dead”: Musk Slams Liz Warren And Woke Culture In Epic Babylon Bee Interview

  Elon Musk just sat down with the guys from the Babylon Bee for a 54-minute interview, where the Tesla and SpaceX founder savaged Sen. Liz Warren, and described woke culture as a “mind virus.”

  

  “You were pretty mean to Senator Warren there on Twitter recently,” said Babylon Bee EIC Kyle Mann. “Ya slammed her man.”

  “Please don’t call the manager on me, Senator Karen,” he continued – citing Musk’s December 14th response to Warren slamming him for not paying ‘enough’ taxes.

  

  To which Musk replied: “She struck first, obviously. She called me a freeloader and a grifter who doesn’t pay taxes, basically. And – I’m literally paying the most tax that any individual in history has ever paid, this year, ever. And she doesn’t pay tax… basically at all. And her salary is paid for by the taxpayer, like me.”

  “Could you even use the term irony, would that work?” asked one of the Bee guys.

  “If you could die of irony, she would be dead.”

  Musk also opined on woke culture – calling it a “mind virus,” and “arguably one of the biggest threats to modern civilization.”

  Elon Musk @elonmusk says the woke mind virus is “arguably one of the biggest threats to modern civilization.” pic.twitter.com/JqLmb1Sqm8

  — The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) December 22, 2021

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

  “Wokeness wants to make comedy illegal,” Musk continued, adding “Do we want a humorless society that is simply rife with condemnation, and hate? At its heart, wokeness is divisive, exclusionary and hateful. It basically gives mean people a shield to be cruel, armored in false virtue.”

  NOW – Elon Musk: “Wokeness basically wants to make comedy illegal, which is not cool… do we want a humorless society that is simply rife with condemnation, and hate?”pic.twitter.com/V9PJ5B3uKl

  — Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 22, 2021

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

  When asked why Musk wasn’t appearing on, say, CNN, he replied: “I’m not perverted enough?” perhaps referencing their recent pedo outbreak.

  Elon Musk @elonmusk says he’s not perverted enough to be on CNN. pic.twitter.com/8QSc04W6cr

  — The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) December 22, 2021

  Bee CEO Seth Dillon asked Musk if he gets sick of people badgering him about his wealth, to which he said that until he sold stock, he maintained relatively little cash balances – and that he happens to own 20% of a company that people decided was worth a trillion dollars.

  He also defended ‘not paying taxes,’ explaining that in 2017 he overpaid, which netted out in 2018, and that since the majority of his wealth is in stock anyway that he wasn’t incurring taxable events.

  “What am I supposed to do, send shares to the government, somehow?” said Musk.

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsWatch the full interview below:

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 23:00

• Beijing Fines Social Media Star $210 Million For 'Exploiting Tax Loophole'
  Beijing Fines Social Media Star $210 Million For ‘Exploiting Tax Loophole’

  Beijing’s ongoing housecleaning of all things deemed anti-revolutionary by the principles of President Xi Jinping Thought has once again circled back to social media influencers, a class of business that, like video games, private tutoring, and the technology industry more broadly, is being shaken down for presenting a threat to the CCP’s rule.

  The latest crackdown involves China’s ballooning live streaming business by targeting the individual streamers themselves, according to Bloomberg. On Monday, the State Taxation Administration fined Viya, a top live-streamer, $210MM, and accused her of concealing personal income and making false declarations in 2019 and 2020. It comes after authorities last month fined two live-streamers in Hangzhou nearly $15MM in total for allegedly illegally booking employment income as business income.

  

  The punishments mark what BBG described as “an escalation in President Xi Jinping’s campaign against illegal sources of income as part of China’s ‘common prosperity’ drive that aims to narrow the wealth gap.” We can’t help but wonder if they submitted that language to the CCP censors for approval ahead of time. We notice also that there is no byline attached to the story, suggesting that none of the reporters responsible for writing it wanted to take the credit.

  This is hardly the first celebrity to be targeted for retaliation by the CCP. Celebrities have been targeted by tax authorities, largely as a pretext for promoting values that the CCP sees as antithetical to its interests. Bloomberg described it as the “improper” idol culture.

  And there’s of course the issue of tennis star Peng Shuai, who recently recanted her sexual assault accusations against a top CCP member. But we’re sure that’s all a coincidence, right?

  Tax authorities have asked celebrities to report their wrongdoings in exchange for lighter punishment starting in September after announcing new tax checks. More than 1,000 live-streamers and other workers affected have reportedly paid back taxes since then, per the CCP.

  Viya, also known as Huang Wei, issued an apology after the punishment was announced. She said on her Weibo account that she felt “deeply guilty” and would pay the fines by the deadline.

  Her colleagues better pony up quick. Before it’s too late.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 22:40

• Addictive 'Brain Hijacking' Methods Of Social Media Platforms Harmful To Users, Especially Children: Insider
  Addictive ‘Brain Hijacking’ Methods Of Social Media Platforms Harmful To Users, Especially Children: Insider

  Authored by Isabel va Brugen and Joshua Philipp via The Epoch Times,

  Addictive “brain hijacking” methods used by social media giants to keep users on their platforms have harmful effects, particularly on children, according to industry insider Rex Lee, who says the companies may be violating child protection laws and consumer protection laws by employing such techniques.

  

  Lee, who has over 35 years of experience in the tech and telecom industry, recently testified before Congress, speaking to members about some of the deceptive practices used by social media networks—in particular, “brain hijacking.”

  “The first time I’d ever heard of brain hijacking, I thought it was something from a science fiction movie,” he recently told EpochTV’s Crossroads program.

  He said that social media apps, including those developed by Google, Meta, and Bytedance, are intentionally developed to be addictive.

  Part of what makes these platforms addictive is associated with brain hijacking technologies, which involve suggestive and manipulative advertising, he explained.

  Lee, who works in the tech industry for an enterprise app and platform developer, said that he was shocked after coming across an admission in a 2017 Axios interview by Sean Parker, who served as the first president of Facebook.

  In the interview, Parker said that Facebook was intentionally developed using addictive technologies associated with something he described as a “social validation feedback loop.”

  “That in itself is what is at the heart of brain hijacking,” Lee said. “And what that does is that reassures the end user that what they’re posting on the platform is being accepted by a lot of people. In other words, a social validation feedback loop would be associated with a thumbs up, or confetti or emojis, and that sort of thing after they do a post.”

  Lee said these are addictive qualities that developers put into their app and platform designs, which ultimately end up harming the user.

  “Sean Parker actually admitted this during the Axios interview when he said, ‘God only knows what it’s doing to our children’s brains,’” Lee said. “But it’s not only the brains of children, it’s the brains of the end user, whether it’s an adult, teen, child, or business and user.

  “This is why people are checking their smartphones up to 150 times a day.”

  Lee added that Parker expressly told Axios that the feedback loop was “exactly the kind of thing that a hacker like myself would come up with, because you’re exploiting vulnerability in human psychology.”

  Lee has been providing to congressional committees, as well as senators and House members, insider information on how these platforms are developed.

  The cybersecurity and privacy adviser also highlighted the harmful effects these social media platforms have on young teenagers, describing the platforms as “no different than tobacco companies making bubblegum-flavored cigarettes to sell to children.”

  “These social validation feedback loops are what’s at heart, and why young teen girls as well as boys who utilize this technology can be harmed by it—they get addicted to it, they never can find fulfillment in it,” Lee said.

  “And then, they end up depressed and they end up always constantly having to look for that validation, not only from the technology, but from the other end users on the platform.”

  “This also is dangerous because it contributes to cyber bullying,” said Lee, explaining that cyberbullies themselves may become addicted to bullying others online.

  “They [cyberbullies] get a few thumbs up from that post where they’re bullying somebody and then more thumbs up comes. And then that person, the bully, becomes addicted to actually  harming people, as well as the recipient starts getting harmed,” he explained. “And we all know what that leads to anxiety, self harm, as well as suicides. And all of those are up among teen and young adult adult users, especially young girls who utilize the platform.”

  “Kids are being exploited,” he alleged, noting that social media giants may be violating a child online protection law—the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) enacted in 1998.

  “It’s actually illegal for a child under 13 to use any type of technology that’s supported by predatory apps that are developed to exploit the user for financial gain through methods such as data mining and surveillance,” Lee said of the law.

  Lee said he analyzed the legal language on a Samsung Galaxy Note smartphone that was pre-installed with over 175 apps created or developed by 18 companies, including Chinese tech company Baidu. 

  He explained that what’s often hidden from the user within the devices themselves is “the most important part of your terms of use.”

  This includes the application permission statements and application product warnings “which describe in great detail how much surveillance and data mining that the tech companies can conduct on you.” 

  “But they don’t want that online. They hide that within the devices, and some of those application permission statements actually contain product warnings,” Lee said.

  “So again, another cigarette analogy would be, it would be like the warning for cigarettes being printed on the inside of the package,” he explained. “So that after you consume the product, you understand then that it commit that it can cause cancer, it’s the same thing.”

  He added, “They’re hiding the product warnings within the application permission statements, which can only be accessed from within the device and not online.”

  Lee said the FTC should be taking action to investigate these companies for related harm reported by their consumers, and enforce existing customer laws, particularly since former senior executives, such as Parker, have admitted that they developed these technologies to be addictive, “even at the expense of the end user safety.”

  “We not only had these platforms weaponized against the end user to exploit them for financial gain through harmful technology, such as addictive apps, but now they’re using them to oppress people and spread misinformation, censorship, crush freedom of the press, and in other things,” Lee added. “It’s unbelievable.”

  The Epoch Times has reached out to Meta, ByteDance, and Google for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 22:20

• Movies & Music Are The Most 'Essential' Part Of An American Christmas; Survey
  Movies & Music Are The Most ‘Essential’ Part Of An American Christmas; Survey

  While every family celebrates Christmas a little differently, each with its own sets of customs and traditions, as Statista’s Felix Richter notes, there are things that most celebrants can agree on, things that are considered essential for a Merry Christmas.

  According to Statista’s GCS 2021 Holiday Special, Christmas music is topping the list of holiday must-haves. 49 percent of Americans consider the right tunes an essential part of the holiday season, the question of which Christmas songs are “the right ones” notwithstanding. Christmas movies, think “Home Alone”, “Love Actually” and (to some) “Die Hard”, are another key ingredient to the holiday season with 46 percent of Americans calling them an essential tradition.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  When asked about what they are looking forward to most thinking about the holiday season, Americans show that community and family still beat the commercial aspects of the holidays. 64 percent of the respondents look forward to spending time with friends and family, making it the top answer by far.

  Interestingly Americans also prefer giving presents over receiving them, showing that not all is lost for Christmas romantics.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 22:00

• China Is Mining Bitcoin Underground: Report
  China Is Mining Bitcoin Underground: Report

  Submitted by Bitcoin Magazine

  According to a report by CNBC, bitcoin miners have found ways to keep operating in China despite the country’s comprehensive efforts to crack down on the industry.

  China used to be the country with the most significant share of hashrate. But that began to change in May when Chinese authorities began cracking down on Bitcoin and bitcoin mining. The increased regulatory scrutiny led to tangible impacts on BTC miners and exchanges, which started limiting or putting an end to their activities. In under a month, the Chinese crackdown led ASIC maker Bitmain to stop sales, a sharp decline in Bitcoin’s total hash rate, and an “ASIC exodus” to ensue as the bitcoin mining landscape began to change.

  

  By September, China had issued a complete ban on Bitcoin. Despite the prohibition, the peer-to-peer network saw nearly 145 Bitcoin nodes still running on Chinese soil after a few days. According to data from Bitrawr.com, there are currently 125 nodes in the Asian country. Similarly, it appears that not all bitcoin miners have fled China.

  Ben, a Chinese miner, told CNBC that he had gone underground, spreading his mining equipment across multiple locations to decrease the chances of being spotted on China’s power grid. He has also taken steps to conceal his digital geographical footprint and go behind the meter, pulling electricity from small power sources unconnected to the country’s larger grid.

  “We never know to what extent our government will try to crack down…to wipe us out,” Ben reportedly said.

  The report said that as much as 20% of the world’s bitcoin miners are estimated to still reside in China, scattered across the country in setups similar to Ben’s. It cited a November report by Chinese cybersecurity company Qihoo 360, which estimates an average of 109,000 bitcoin mining IP addresses active in China daily. An estimate from Cambridge University, however, says there are no miners left in the Asian country.

  

  Whereas big miners quickly and effectively moved overseas into friendlier regulations in Kazakhstan and the U.S., medium-sized miners saw their hands tied. “They couldn’t offload their equipment to recoup their losses, nor could they mine at full capacity again, because their electrical footprint is easy to pick out,” per the report. But smaller miners could deploy their operations across small power grids in China and maintain part of the operations.

  “Mining is no longer a big business” in China, another bitcoin miner told CNBC. Instead, the miner said the activity is now scattered across the country, with “a couple thousand miners here, a couple thousand miners there. It’s more like a sort of band-aid to make money to help move the miners out of the country.”

  According to the report, besides plugging into small power grids, far from government oversight, these smaller bitcoin miners often evade Chinese censorship by joining foreign mining pools willing to sign them up despite the ban and helping them uncover their activity.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 21:40

• "Our Industry Is Collapsing": California Pot Companies Beg Newsom To Stop Taxing Them Into Insolvency
  “Our Industry Is Collapsing”: California Pot Companies Beg Newsom To Stop Taxing Them Into Insolvency

  The cannabis industry in California is reeling from exorbitant taxes and crime, causing the leading companies in the industry to pen a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) warning that the state’s legal pot industry is on the verge of collapse.

  

  “Our industry is collapsing,” reads the letter, signed by more than two dozen executives, industry officials and advocates of legalization, following years of growing complaints that the industry was unable to compete with the illegal pot economy, where consumers pay far less for weed that sells 2-3x the quantity of legal businesses, according to AP (via NBC San Diego).

  As we noted last week, San Francisco was convinced to unanimously suspend the Cannabis Business Tax after city officials heard the cries from within the industry.

  Cannabis businesses create good jobs for San Franciscans and provide safe, regulated products to their customers. Now is not the time to impose a new tax on small businesses that are just getting established and trying to compete with illicit operators. https://t.co/G1wgeoh79u

  — Rafael Mandelman (@RafaelMandelman) December 2, 2021

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsIn their letter to Newsom, industry leaders asked for the immediate suspension of a cultivation tax placed on growers, as well as a three-year holiday from the excise tax – along with permission to expand retail shops throughout the state.

  According to the report, about two-thirds of California cities have no dispensaries, creating a system that “is rigged for all to fail,” according to the letter.

  

  “The opportunity to create a robust legal market has been squandered as a result of excessive taxation,” it continues. “Seventy-five percent of cannabis in California is consumed in the illicit market and is untested and unsafe.”

  “We need you to understand that we have been pushed to a breaking point.”

  Newsom responds

  Spokeswoman Erin Mellon said in a statement that the governor is supportive of cannabis tax reform, and acknowledges the need for change, while at the same time boosting law enforcement efforts to stop illegal sales and production. That said, it’s not up to him…

  “It’s clear that the current tax construct is presenting unintended but serious challenges. Any tax-reform effort in this space will require action from two-thirds of the Legislature and the Governor is open to working with them on a solution,” she said.

  Companies, executives and groups signing the letter included the California Cannabis Industry Association, the California arm of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, the Los Angeles-based United Cannabis Business Association, Flow Kana Inc., Harborside Inc., and CannaCraft.

  In a conference call with reporters, Darren Story of Strong Agronomy said tough market conditions forced him to cut loose more than half his staff. He said taxes that will increase next year make it an easy choice for shoppers. With prices in the underground half of what they see on legal shelves, he said “most consumers are going to take off.” -AP

  “The solution to these issues and the possibility of saving this industry lies in your hands,” the letter concludes.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 21:20

• Sen. Cotton: Recall, Remove, & Replace Every Last Soros Prosecutor
  Sen. Cotton: Recall, Remove, & Replace Every Last Soros Prosecutor

  Authored by Senator Tom Cotton via RealClearPolitics.com,

  Last year, our nation experienced the largest increase in murder in American history and the largest number of drug overdose deaths ever recorded.

  

  This carnage continues today and is not distributed equally. Instead, it is concentrated in cities and localities where radical, left-wing, George Soros progressives have captured state and district attorney offices. These legal arsonists condemn our rule of law as “systemically racist” and have not simply abused prosecutorial discretion, they have embraced prosecutorial nullification. As a result, a contagion of crime has infected virtually every neighborhood under their charge.

  Soros prosecutors refuse to enforce laws against shoplifting, drug trafficking, and entire categories of felonies and misdemeanors. In Chicago, Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx allows theft under $1,000 to go unpunished. In Manhattan, District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. refuses to enforce laws against prostitution. In Baltimore, State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby has unilaterally declared the war on drugs “over” and is refusing to criminally charge drug dealers in the middle of the worst drug crisis in American history. For a time, Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon even stopped enforcing laws against disturbing the peace, resisting arrest, and making criminal threats.

  All of these cities have paid a terrible price for these insane policies. Last year, the number of homicides in Chicago rose by 56%, and more than 1,000 Cook County residents have been murdered in 2021. In New York City, murder increased 47% and shootings soared 97%. In 2020, the murder rate in Baltimore was higher than El Salvador’s or Guatemala’s — nations from which citizens often attempt to claim asylum purely based on gang violence and murder—and this year murder in Baltimore is on track to be even higher. Murder in Los Angeles rose 36% last year and is on track to rise another 17% this year.

  Soon after taking office in Boston, Suffolk County District Attorney Rachel Rollins published a list of 15 crimes that she would refuse to prosecute except under special circumstances. Among the charges on her “do not prosecute” list was drug trafficking, malicious destruction of property, trespassing, driving with a revoked license, and resisting arrest. Rollins also declared that she was “going to battle” against the U.S. attorney in Massachusetts and has slandered Boston police officers as “murderers” before accusing the department of “white fragility.”

  Unsurprisingly, Boston’s violent crime rate surged shortly after Rollins took over, as the number of murders in Boston skyrocketed by 38% in 2020. As Rollins implemented leniency for drug trafficking, opioid overdose deaths increased by 32% in Suffolk County. As a reward for her ineptitude and extremism, President Biden nominated her to run the U.S. Attorney’s office in Massachusetts, the very office she had gone “to battle” against only months before. Every Democrat in the Senate voted to confirm her.

  Another Soros prosecutor, Philadelphia’s District Attorney Larry Krasner, came to office after suing the Philadelphia Police Department 75 times as a private citizen. He began his tenure by purging dozens of veteran prosecutors in his office and then slashed his jurisdiction’s prison population by over 30%. In most cases, Krasner also refuses to seek bail for accused criminals and has maintained a highly antagonistic relationship with the police, once accusing the Fraternal Order of Police lodge president of being “with the Proud Boys.”

  The number of homicides in Philadelphia has increased every year that Krasner has been DA. Last year, the murder rate rose 40% and this year it reached an all-time high.

  In San Francisco, the voters elected the son of two cop-killing terrorists as their district attorney. Chesa Boudin (pictured) has since unleashed chaos on the streets of a once-great city and inaugurated what the San Francisco mayor labelled the “reign of criminals.” San Francisco’s homelessness crisis has spiraled out of control, smash-and-grab looters are such a menace that the city had to close its downtown during Black Friday, and shoplifters have closed down retailers throughout the city. Since Boudin took over, car theft has increased by 27%, murder by 29%, arson by 36%, and burglary soared 38%.

  The liberal mayor of San Francisco, as if struck by amnesia of her own tenure and complicity in the crime wave, recently emerged to condemn her city’s appalling rise in crime. Speaker Nancy Pelosi also condemned the disorder and “attitude of lawlessness” in her city. However, in one of the great examples of “see no evil, hear no evil,” Speaker Pelosi pretended to be baffled by what could have caused the crime wave. The answer is obvious: Liberal extremists like Nancy Pelosi and Chesa Boudin caused this crisis.      

  Unfortunately, soft-on-crime policies have been, at times, a bipartisan problem. In 2018, Republicans passed the pro-criminal First Step Act. That deeply flawed legislation reduced sentences for crack dealers and granted early release to some child predators, carjackers, gang members, and bank robbers. Ironically, this jailbreak bill even provided early release for those who helped prisoners break out of jail.

  This misguided push by Republicans to win applause from liberals strengthened the hand of radicals like George Soros.  In a political environment where the parties compete for who can be more pro-criminal, the Democrats will always win.

  As soon as the party of law and order endorses a law like the First Step Act, it surrenders the crime debate. Indeed, instead of running on tough-on-crime platforms, many Republicans championed further leniency towards criminals. Multiple states passed their own First Step Acts and some members of Congress are continuing to support weak-on-crime legislation like the Democrat’s “EQUAL” Act, which would retroactively reduce sentences for crack dealers.

  We must provide moral clarity, acknowledge that the First Step Act was a step backward in the administration of justice, and ensure that this first step was also the last.

  The Republican Party must then join with independents and common-sense Democrats to wage an unrelenting war on crime. That war must begin with a campaign to recall, remove, and replace every last Soros prosecutor. Throw the bums out.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 21:00

• McDonald's Rations Fries As Supply Shortage Hits Japan 
  McDonald’s Rations Fries As Supply Shortage Hits Japan 

  A ‘fry-tening’ supply chain problem has materialized for McDonald’s Holdings Co. Japan is forcing it to ration french fries for at least a week due to a potatoes shortage. 

  Beginning on Friday, Japanese consumers desiring a classic Big Mac will be barred from ordering medium- and large-sized french fries. They will be only allowed to order small french fries as the company blames massive flooding in Vancouver for its soggy mess and attempts to source spuds elsewhere. 

  About 2,900 McDonald’s restaurants in the country will experience french fry rationing for at least this week “to ensure that as many customers as possible will have continued access to our french fries,” according to Bloomberg.

  

  McDonald’s believes the shortage will be resolved by New Year’s eve, and said meals that come with medium fries will be reduced by 44 cents to reflect the smaller portion. It said the rationing wouldn’t affect hash brown. 

  The popular fast-food company didn’t quantify the financial impact of the french fry shortage. 

  This is the second time in three years, McDonald’s has experienced a french fry shortage. Cold weather and the impact of a hurricane in 2019 damaged potato crops across North America and led to supply woes for french fry processors. 

  The latest french fry shortage is an example of fragile global supply chains as weather volatility increases. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 20:40

• Kyle Rittenhouse Issues Warning: "Media Accountability Coming Soon"
  Kyle Rittenhouse Issues Warning: “Media Accountability Coming Soon”

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

  After he was recently acquitted on murder charges, Kyle Rittenhouse suggested certain media outlets may face legal consequences in the near future.

  “There’s going to be some media accountability coming soon,” Rittenhouse told Fox News during an interview on Tuesday, without elaborating.

  There has been speculation that Rittenhouse may file defamation lawsuits against certain media outlets and high-profile individuals for how they portrayed him and the accusations they made against him.

  Rittenhouse, 18, then appeared to support lawsuits by Nick Sandmann, who settled with several media outlets over their coverage of a viral incident at Washington’s Lincoln Memorial in 2019.

  “Good for him,” Rittenhouse told Fox News.

  Earlier this week, the teen was given a standing ovation at a Turning Point USA conference in Phoenix where panelists talked about the 2020 shootings in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

  Rittenhouse was acquitted on all charges stemming from the incident after arguing he acted in self-defense.

  

  During the event, Rittenhouse suggested that people should “be on the lookout” for a possible lawsuit against certain media outlets that he believes misconstrued the events in Kenosha, the NY Post reported.

  Last month, a jury found Rittenhouse not guilty in the deaths of Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber and the wounding of Gaige Grosskreutz. The shooting occurred during nights of violence, protests, and riots following the officer-involved shooting of Jacob Blake, who had a warrant out for his arrest.

  On that night last year, businesses in Kenosha were ransacked and burned after Blake’s shooting, which came several months after an officer was seen kneeling on George Floyd, a convicted felon whose death sparked nationwide unrest, protests, and riots.

  The two-week trial captivated the nation’s attention as his defense attorneys said he acted in self-defense, an argument that was corroborated by video evidence. Prosecutors claimed he was the instigator of the violence because he brought a rifle to Kenosha on that night.

  If he had been convicted on the most serious charges in the case, he could have faced life in prison.

  At one point during the trial, Rittenhouse decided to waive his Fifth Amendment right and testified in his own defense.

  “It’s helped me grow a lot, it’s helped me mature,” Rittenhouse said of the trial.

  “My mentors who have been in my life … they’ve helped make me the person I am today, so thank you for them.”

  When asked by Fox News on Tuesday about whether he would do things differently, Rittenhouse said he would.

  “[With] what I was dragged through and what I had to go through – to facing life in prison – I wouldn’t say it was worth it,” he said, adding that “hindsight being 20/20.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 20:20

• FOIA Request Reveals Mysterious Drones Harassed US Navy Warships Off California
  FOIA Request Reveals Mysterious Drones Harassed US Navy Warships Off California

  The War Zone reports unidentified drones harassed US Navy warships on multiple occasions in 2019 off the waters of Southern California. 

  New documents released via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) provide an in-depth view of these mysterious drone encounters that harassed the Navy’s destroyers, prompting counteraction. 

  Deck logs show multiple incidents that occurred throughout July 2019. The records detail various types of countermeasures were deployed, such as “ghostbusters” anti-drone gun that is a directional jammer designed to disrupt communications between drones and their operators, the destroyer’s 5-inch cannon, and machine guns. 

  The deck logs show that Ship Nautical Or Otherwise Photographic Interpretation and Exploitation (SNOOPIE) teams were activated to document the encounters. SNOOPIE teams managed to use high-tech sensors and capture a photograph of the drones, which look like triangular shape objects – though the logs only refer to them as UAS (Unmanned Aerial Systems) or drones. 

  

  After the first several encounters, the USS Russell, an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, began conducting “counter UAS exercises.” There are no details in the logs that specify whether a drone was hit or recovered. On July 30, the USS Bunker Hill, a Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser, deployed Small Craft Action Teams (SCATs), which are crew-served weapons machine gun operators, engaged a hail of machine-gun fire at one UAS. Logs don’t explain if a drone was hit and recovered. 

  However, there’s one deck log from USS Russell with nearly the whole page redacted. Many answered questions remain if Ghostbusters were able to jam the drone or SCAT teams’ machine guns or the 5-inch guns blasted the drone out of the sky. 

  

  The new FOIA request offers insight into mysterious drones harassing US destroyers off Southern California. The incident occurred months before mysterious drone swarms were spotted over US nuclear power plants. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 20:00

• From Packing To Sacking, Democrats Pledge Politics "By Any Means Necessary"
  From Packing To Sacking, Democrats Pledge Politics “By Any Means Necessary”

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  In the Age of Rage, no institution or process appears inviolate. 

  When the majority of the Supreme Court shifted right, liberal academics and members demanded court packing — a practice long denounced as anathema to the rule of law. When the Supreme Court commission voiced concerns over court packing, it was denounced by liberal groups and two of the few conservative members resigned during the outcry. Academics have been called to “redo” the First Amendment after it became an impediment to social justice efforts.

  It is not surprising, therefore, that some of the same activists are now calling for the sacking of Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough.

  Her offense?

  She rendered a non-partisan judgment that Democrats could not push through the sweeping immigration reform package as part of the budget reconciliation process. Like the Supreme Court, the Parliamentarian was now an impediment to politics so she or her authority (or both) will have to go.

  Democratic members and staff are repeating the same menacing mantra that is now familiar in Washington of politics “by any means necessary.“

  

  Democrats previously called for firing MacDonough when she ruled against them on a legislative issue. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) called for the the Senate to “replace the parliamentarian. What’s a Democratic majority if we can’t pass our priority bills? This is unacceptable.” Similar calls followed this decision. After all, what is the value of having a majority if you cannot do whatever you want in the way you want to do it?

  That was the same question asked when the filibuster rule became an impediment rather than a benefit for members. For years, Democrats defended the rule as essential for the Senate in protecting minority rights. “God save us from that fate … [it] would change this fundamental understanding and unbroken practice of what the Senate is all about.” That included then Sen. Joe Biden and his colleagues, including then-Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and now-Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). To their credit, the Republicans refused to kill the rule despite calls to do so from President Donald Trump when they had the majority. However, once the majority shifted, the filibuster rule became one more casualty of convenience.

  In the latest controversy, MacDonough was conducting what is referred to as the “Byrd bath” — a non-partisan function named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., during which the Senate parliamentarian ensures that every provision inside a reconciliation bill is tied to the budget. The immigration reform is clearly not a budget item, but the Democrats want to use reconciliation to bypass the filibuster rule and to use Vice President Kamala Harris to cast the deciding vote in a 50-50 tie.

  The Byrd Bath process is meant to protect the Senate’s traditions of compromise and deliberation by preventing such efforts at end running the filibuster or the legislative process. The ruling of the Parliamentarian is not binding but comes with the force of a non-partisan professional applying these rules evenly and fairly. MacDonough did that.

  There is little tolerance today, however, for jurists or clerks who reach their own conclusions on the merits of such questions. It is the wrong conclusion so MacDonough or her ruling would have to be removed.

  Even if MacDonough keeps her job, various members are calling for a rare override of the ruling while others want the Democrats to simply pick a Senator for the chair who is willing to ignore the Parliamentarian and just follow pure muscle politics. Democratic members and staff are repeating the same menacing mantra that is now familiar in Washington “by any means necessary.”

  Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) who came out for court packing the same week, declared simply that MacDonough was “wrong” and, like her colleagues, emphasized that “we’re keeping all options on the table.” Likewise, Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.), and Sens.  Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), Bob Menendez (D., N.J.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) all indicated a willingness to override or ignore the ruling.

  For her part,  Sen. Mazie Hirono (D., Hawaii) made it personal by not only saying “all options” are on the table but “the protection of millions of undocumented immigrants cannot be halted due to the advice of 1 person.”

  Of course, it is not the decision of one person. The rule itself was adopted by the Senate as a whole as a matter of principle before that principle came with a cost. The rule was then implemented by not just the Parliamentarian but her entire apolitical staff.

  Hirono’s response captured the ends-over-means mentality of modern American politics. Rather than address the purpose of the rule or the nonpartisan judgment on its meaning, Hirono just cited the value of making millions of undocumented immigrants citizens and then juxtaposed their fate against the decision of one person. MacDonough was not enforcing a rule, she was putting millions into harm’s way.

  It was reminiscent of Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez justifying court packing by questioning “just, functionally, the idea that nine people, that a nine person court, can overturn laws that thousand– hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocates and policymakers drew consensus on.” She then added “How much does the current structure benefit us? And I don’t think it does.”

  When the Byrd rule no longer benefited the Senate Democrats, it likewise became as expendable as the person who enforced it.

  Thus, one plan would have Harris simply ignore the Parliamentarian and the rules. The implications of that move has a few Democrats uneasy over, what Sen. Ben Cardin (D., Md.) acknowledged would be “a pretty dramatic change” and a “direct attack with the parliamentarian.”

  Sen. Joe Manchin (D, W.Va.) has also insisted that you have to “stick with the parliamentarian … on every issue. You can’t pick and choose.” (Manchin later also said that he would vote no on the Build Back Better bill). Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) also insisted that “there is no instance in which I would overrule a parliamentarian’s decision.”

  That is not a lot of members but it would be enough to halt the effort to bulldoze the parliamentarian on immigration. However, the immediate response of Democratic members and groups captured how principle has little place in politics today. No institution or individual is a barrier when members have embraced politics “by any means necessary.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 19:40

• COVID Drives US Population Growth To Slowest Rate Since Nation's Founding
  COVID Drives US Population Growth To Slowest Rate Since Nation’s Founding

  A new population report published by the U.S. Census Bureau showed the U.S. grew by a measly 392,665, or 0.1%, the slowest rate since the nation’s founding.

  

  The bureau said that the slow growth rate is due to “decreased net international migration, decreased fertility, and increased mortality due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic.” 

  Between 2020 and 2021, 33 states saw population increases and 17 states and the District of Columbia lost population, 11 of which had losses of over 10,000 people.

  This is a historically large number of states to lose population in year.

  

  When the virus pandemic led to widespread economic shutdowns and lockdowns in the spring of 2020, many media outlets and pundits speculated this might lead to a baby boom. But it appears the opposite has happened (read: “COVID Baby Bust Accelerates Nine Months After Lockdowns”). The new report offers insights into what happened to the population in the months after.

  Even before the pandemic, population growth was in decline. 

  “Population growth has been slowing for years because of lower birth rates and decreasing net international migration, all while mortality rates are rising due to the aging of the nation’s population,” said Kristie Wilder, a demographer in the Population Division at the Census Bureau.

  “Now, with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, this combination has resulted in a historically slow pace of growth,” Wilder said. 

  

   

  Since Apr. 1, 2020, or about half a month after lockdowns began, the nation’s population increased from 331,449,281 to 331,893,745, a gain of 444,464, or 0.13%. For the 12 months ending on Jul. 1, the nation’s growth was due to a natural increase (148,043), the number of excess births over deaths, and net international migration (244,622). This is the first time net international migration (the difference between the number of people moving into the country and out of the country) has exceeded the natural increase for a given year.

  The reason for that is because the Biden administration has eased border restrictions, allowing for upwards of two million illegals to enter the U.S. southern border without authorization in the 12 months ending on Sept. 30. 

  Given that Covid accelerated the already declining birth rates, and the nation struggles with sluggish population growth, this impact is somewhat deflationary, not inflationary (explaining more about this is Chris Hamilton via Econimica blog, in a note titled “Demographics, Debt, & Disappointment – The Japanifation Of America’s Economy”). 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 19:20

• Judge Blocks Biden's COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate For Federal Contractors In 10 States
  Judge Blocks Biden’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate For Federal Contractors In 10 States

  Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A federal judge in Missouri has issued a temporary hold on the Biden administration’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for federal contractors in 10 U.S. states while litigation plays out.

  “We just beat the Biden Administration in court again,” Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt announced on Twitter late Monday.

  “This afternoon, we obtained a preliminary injunction against the vaccine mandate on federal contractors, halting enforcement of that mandate in Missouri and the other states in our coalition.”

  

  The preliminary injunction, issued by U.S. Magistrate Judge David Noce, applies to Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming. Schmitt and Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson, both Republicans, on Oct. 29 co-led the 10 states in suing the Biden administration over the mandate, calling it “unconstitutional, unlawful, and unwise.”

  “It will not harm the federal government to maintain the status quo while the courts decide the issues of the President’s authority and the implications for federalism. The Court concludes that, on balance, consideration of the harms and the public interest weigh in favor of a preliminary injunction,” reads the Monday preliminary injunction order from U.S. Magistrate Judge David Noce.

  The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

  Mandate Currently Blocked Nationwide

  A nationwide preliminary injunction is already in place blocking the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for federal contractors, after a federal court in Georgia on Dec. 7 granted the injunction in a separate seven-state lawsuit led by Georgia.

  The court had decided to block the mandate for the whole of the United States because a national trade organization—Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC)—was granted permission by the court to intervene in the case as a plaintiff. The states of Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia were the other plaintiffs.

  “[G]iven the breadth of ABC’s [nationwide] membership … limiting the relief to only those before the Court would prove unwieldy and would only cause more confusion. Thus, on the unique facts before it, the Court finds it necessary, in order to truly afford injunctive relief to the parties before it, to issue an injunction with nationwide applicability,” U.S. District Judge Stan Baker wrote in the order (pdf).

  The COVID-19 vaccine mandate for federal employees and contractors was otherwise going to take effect on Jan. 4, 2022. The deadline was initially set for Dec. 8.

  Under the vaccine mandate, issued via executive order by President Joe Biden on Sept. 9, regular COVID-19 testing wouldn’t be an option, but religious or medical exemptions from vaccination may be granted.

  Federal contractors that don’t comply may lose out on government contracts.

  Another separate ruling on Nov. 30 blocked Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for federal contractors in three states—Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 19:00

• American "Super Rich" Feel "Immense Relief" As 'BBB' Tax Hikes Are Canceled
  American “Super Rich” Feel “Immense Relief” As ‘BBB’ Tax Hikes Are Canceled

  Apparently, the Dems have managed to “turn down the heat” on the epic failure of President Biden’s Build Back Better social and climate spending package, according to at least one Washington Post columnist.

  @PressSec remarkably turns down heat on Manchin. Most questions now on covid

  — Jennifer ‘pro-voting’ Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) December 20, 2021

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

  But in case you were wondering, Michael Bloomberg and the rest of the Democrat-voting globalist billionaire class would like to remind you that the wealthy are all extremely relieved at the prospect of President Biden’s spending package failing.

  

  And it’s all Joe Manchin’s fault.

  Here’s a headline from Bloomberg Wealth on Monday: “Super-Rich Americans Feel Relief as Tax Hikes Are Canceled for Now”.

  Thanks to Sen. Manchin’s efforts, rich Americans will escape any tax hikes, saving the top 0.1% hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade, according to Bloomberg.

  “To say my clients were celebrating is the wrong word to use,” said Steven Winter, a partner at BDO who primarily advises hedge funds and private equity firms. “It was a sigh of relief.”

  Of course, a bunch of  admittedly left-leaning economists say the Democrats’ plan would help “reduce inequality.”

  Though many of Democrats’ more radical tax proposals were scaled back or dropped in negotiations, the bill would be “a meaningful step for reducing inequality,” said Carl Davis, research director at the left-leaning Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. An analysis by the group estimated the plan’s changes to the child tax credit and earned income tax credit would boost incomes of the poorest fifth of Americans by more than 10%.

  You know who else was happy to see the bill fail? The Republican leadership.

  Republicans, who uniformly oppose Biden’s bill, were gleeful that it might fail. “The single biggest Christmas present Washington Democrats could give to the American people is to kill their reckless taxing and spending spree,” Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell said in a tweet.

  […]

  Meanwhile, the very richest Americans have reaped massive windfalls. The net worths of Americans on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, a daily ranking of the world’s 500 richest people, have surged 45% since the beginning of last year. The 169 U.S. billionaires on the list are now worth $3.5 trillion, more than the bottom half of Americans combined.

  As for the BBB agenda, as we have already said, Sen. Manchin has previously expressed concerns with the “Paid Leave” component of the bill and believes it should be passed in a bipartisan effort in a separate bill. The SALT cap may also face some concern as it is expected to be one of the most expensive parts in the bill. Manchin has also raised concerns that 10 years of funding should pay for 10 years of services, while Child Care aid only lasts for six years, and cheaper premiums on the Affordable Health Care Act only last for five years. If the Senate were to make adjustments, the bill would then have to be sent back to the House.

  Here are some recent comments from Moderates:

  • Manchin said Thursday 18th November he has not decided on whether to vote to proceed to the Build Back Better Bill, says the House passage of the bill would not influence his thinking.
  • Sinema, in an interview with WaPo, noted Biden’s spending plan differs from the blueprint that Biden had worked out with centrists weeks earlier, but she did not say what, if anything, she might change. She also reiterated she is worried about inflation and that new tax hikes could harm businesses still struggling in wake of the pandemic, adding she doesn’t think the solution is always more federal spending.

  Remember, President Biden supposedly promised the squad that this package would get done. They might not be so accommodating during what’s left of his presidency going forward.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 18:40

• Freed Missionaries Tell How They Escaped Haitian Kidnappers
  Freed Missionaries Tell How They Escaped Haitian Kidnappers

  Authored by Beth Brelje via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Escaping captors in the middle of the night, 12 Christian Aid Ministries missionaries hiked silently through the moonlit Haitian jungle, pausing at times to pray for the direction that led to freedom.

  

  For roughly 10 miles, they pressed forward, through thick, thorny brush: a married couple, 10-month-old baby, 3-year-old, 14-year-old girl, 15-year-old boy, four single men, and two single women.

  Until now, details of their Oct. 16 kidnapping by the 400 Mawozo gang and their Dec. 15 escape could not be told, for security reasons. Even now, Christian Aid Ministries, is not releasing their names. The missionaries are from Amish, Mennonite, and other Anabaptist communities in Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Oregon, and Ontario, Canada.

  Originally, 17 missionaries were abducted while on a trip visiting an orphanage. The 400 Mawozo gang demanded $17 million and threatened to kill the hostages unless they got $1 million per person. In time they released five hostages.

  

  Ohio-based Christian Aid Ministries spokesman Weston Showalter, held a Monday press conference with details of the experience and photos of the former hostages. Details are from his speech, as told by the missionaries.

  The 17 took a van to visit the orphanage, 90 minutes from mission headquarters. They arrived at 10 a.m. and stayed until about 1 p.m., using that time to interview children and look over the facility.

  Shortly into their drive back, they saw a roadblock. While attempting to turn the van around, they were overtaken by kidnappers who chased them in a pickup truck. The kidnappers blocked their way, surrounded their vehicle, and took control.

  The driver was removed and the others wondered if they would see him again. “As the kidnappers took over their van and drove wildly to get them to a secluded area, our workers prayed out loud and sang the song, ‘The Angel of the Lord Encampeth Round About Them,’” Showalter said.

  The hostages were taken to a small house, where all 17 were placed in a small room, approximately 10 feet by 12 feet. Here they were reunited with the driver who had been taken on the road.

  “They spent the first night almost sleepless with nearly no space for all of them to lie down. In this small room, there were several mattresses. Some sat up, some stood, some laid down, and everyone endured heat, mosquitoes, and uncertainty,” Showalter said. Soon their days fell into a pattern of worship in the morning with singing and praying, sometimes until noon. They were allowed to go outside during the day.

  They prayed at 1 p.m. daily to be freed.

  The kidnappers fed them but they faced hunger. Some foods provided included Haitian breakfast spaghetti, a half hard-boiled egg per person, corn mush, scrambled eggs, rice and beans with fish sauce, and sometimes vegetable paste. On Thanksgiving they got a traditional Haitian stew.

  They were moved several times and in one location they had coconuts.

  “Although they received food each day, they were often still hungry after eating what was given to them,” Showalter said. “They provided large amounts of baby food for the small children, for which we are so thankful. Babies are precious and even the guards enjoyed talking to little Laura. As you will notice in the pictures, the little children seemed to get sufficient food.”

  

  The kidnapped were given basic hygiene items such as toothbrushes and toilet paper, although the supply was limited at times.

  They had limited clean drinking water and bathed in severely contaminated water that caused serious sores on many missionaries. Many suffered numerous bug bites that developed into serious sores from the contaminated water.

  They tried to soothe their sores by boiling water and adding ashes to it, then soaking their feet in this mixture.

  In the evenings, they talked, sang, and prayed.

  “In times when they faced fear and danger during the night, they prayed that God would wake believers around the world and nudge them to pray for them. And that truly did happen. On this side, we hear of people who were awakened at night with a sense of urgency to pray.”

  The hostages set up an around-the-clock prayer schedule, each praying for a half-hour during the day and an hour at night. One hostage prayed in his time slot, then passed the watch to the next hostage to continue prayer.

  “The hostages were able to develop a sense of relationship with the hostage-takers. Our staff encouraged them to find another way to provide for themselves by working the land and using the resources that God has given,” Showalter said.

  “They assured the hostage-takers of their love for their souls. They pointed them to Jesus. The hostages spoke to the gang leader on several occasions, boldly reminding him of God, and warning him of God’s eventual judgment if he and the gang members continue in their ways.”

  Various hostages wanted to attempt an escape, but it took them a while to all agree on when and how. Ultimately, they unified around a plan and prayed for God to give them a sign.

  “On several occasions, they planned to escape, but they had decided if specific things didn’t happen, they would accept that as God’s direction to wait,” Showalter said. “Twice when they planned to escape, God gave clear signs that this was not the right time. On both occasions, on the very minute they had discussed, the exact thing took place they had requested as a sign. God was at work, but the timing was not right.”

  They decided to attempt their escape the night of Wednesday, Dec. 15.

  During the night, they put on their shoes and packed pouches of water in their clothes. They stacked their mattresses in a corner and prepared to leave.

  “When they sensed the timing was right, they found a way to open the door that was closed and blocked, filed silently to the path they had chosen to follow, and quickly left the place they were held, despite the fact that numerous guards were close by,” Showalter said.

  “In the distance, they could see a mountain feature they recognized. They had identified this landmark before and knew this was the direction to go. They also followed the sure guidance of the stars as they journeyed through the night, traveling northwest toward safety.”

  Night turned to day and after hours of walking, they found someone who helped them make a phone call for help. Later that day, the Coast Guard flew them to Florida.

  “As we rejoice, we also remember that many others are still waiting and praying for the release of their loved ones who are being held hostage,” Showalter said.

  “Many Haitian people continued to be kidnapped. Their families struggle under the demands and threats of hostage-takers. Even if they are released they find themselves facing ongoing difficulties. We admire the resilience of the many Haitians who face difficulties with faith that God is with them.

  “The hostages desire that God be glorified for the way He cared for them during their time in captivity and arranged for their deliverance,” Showalter said and emphasized the Bible verse John 8:36, “If the son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.”

  “Freedom is not a place. Our staff members who were held hostage would confirm that. They say that despite the difficulties, they experienced freedom, even as they were being held, facing uncertainty. In their minds and in ours, the hostage-takers are the true hostages. God invites all of us, including the kidnappers, to seek and find freedom, through Jesus, from the bondage of sin.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 18:20

• Bill Gates: Omicron Will Be The "Worst Surge We Have Seen So Far"
  Bill Gates: Omicron Will Be The “Worst Surge We Have Seen So Far”

  Following this morning’s rant from the COVID-positive (and triple-vaxxed) Jim Cramer, and Tuesday afternoon’s public address from President Joe Biden begging unvaccinated Americans to please just go and get their jabs already, Microsoft billionaire (and self-appointed unofficial global vaccination czar) Bill Gates has just issued a few tweets changing his projections for how long the pandemic might actually last.

  After saying a few months ago that he finally expected the ‘acute phase’ of the pandemic to end next year, Gates has apparently once again changed his mind about the pandemic’s longevity, proving once again that armchair experts (and even many of the real scientists) see their expectations shift with whatever the current case count is.

  

  According to Gates, just when the world was finally feeling that life might soon return to normal, the surge in new cases over the past month (which has been partly driven by the rise of the omicron variant, which is now responsible for most new cases in the US, per the CDC) means the world might actually be entering “the worst part of the pandemic” instead.

  “Omicron will hit home for all of us,” Gates said (despite claims that it actually causes more mild cases than the delta strain), adding that “close friends of mine now have it” and that he had cancelled his holiday plans and urged others to do the same because of it.

  Just when it seemed like life would return to normal, we could be entering the worst part of the pandemic. Omicron will hit home for all of us. Close friends of mine now have it, and I’ve canceled most of my holiday plans.

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) December 21, 2021

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

  As if this one FUD bomb wasn’t big enough, Gates added that omicron was spreading “faster than any virus in history” and that it “will soon be in every country in the world.”

  Omicron is spreading faster than any virus in history. It will soon be in every country in the world.

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) December 21, 2021

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

  Here’s the big twist: According to Gates, “the big unknown” is how sick omicron makes people. And “we need to take it seriously” because “even if it’s only half as severe as delta, it will be the worst surge we have seen…because it’s so infectious.”

  The big unknown is how sick omicron makes you. We need to take it seriously until we know more about it. Even if it’s only half as severe as delta, it will be the worst surge we have seen so far because it’s so infectious.

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) December 21, 2021

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

  In the meantime, we all have to look out for each other, especially the most vulnerable, whether they live down the street or in another country. That means wearing masks, avoiding big indoor gatherings, and getting vaccinated. Getting a booster gives the best protection.

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) December 21, 2021

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

  Despite all the breakthrough cases and revisions about the efficacy numbers, the vaccines are still working ” well” in Gates’s estimation.

  There will be more breakthrough cases in people who are vx’d, which sounds concerning but is purely a factor of how many people are vx’d and how fast this variant is spreading. Vaccines are designed to prevent people from getting seriously ill or dying & are doing that well.

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) December 21, 2021

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

  Fortunately, there’s some “good news” at the end of the tunnel. Omicron appears to be moving so quickly, it should be over within three months.

  If there’s good news here, it’s that omicron moves so quickly that once it becomes dominant in a country, the wave there should last less than 3 months. Those few months could be bad, but I still believe if we take the right steps, the pandemic can be over in 2022.

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) December 21, 2021

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

  I know it’s frustrating to go into another holiday season with COVID looming over us. But it won’t be like this forever. Someday the pandemic will end, and the better we look after each other, the sooner that time will come.

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) December 21, 2021

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

  Which actually sounds great, Bill. Except it sounds a little like “two weeks to stop the spread” to us.

  Gates’ view of the nest phase wedges with JPMorgan’s Marki Kolanovic view that Omicron could be the “end of the pandemic.”

  While it is likely that Omicron is more transmissible, early reports suggest it may also be less deadly – which would fit into the pattern of virus evolution observed historically. Should these trends be confirmed in the coming weeks, could the Omicron variant ultimately prove to be a positive for risk markets, in the sense that it could accelerate the end of the pandemic?

  If a less severe and more transmissible virus quickly crowds out more severe variants, could the Omicron variant be a catalyst to transform a deadly pandemic into something more similar to seasonal flu? That development would fit with historical patterns (duration and number of waves) of previous respiratory virus pandemics, especially given the broad availability of vaccines and new therapeutics that are expected to work on all known variants (Pfizer, Merck).

  And also, just in case you were wondering: Bill Gates will be spending his first post-divorce Christmas alone.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 18:00

• How Vulnerable Is Your Personal Supply Chain?
  How Vulnerable Is Your Personal Supply Chain?

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  How vulnerable is your personal supply chain? For the average American, the answer is: very.

  

  Americans consider abundance and ready availability as birthrights so basic they’re like the air we breathe. The idea that shelves could become bare and stay bare is incomprehensible. yet that is the world we’re entering, for a number of complex reasons.

  One is that the world added not just another billion humans (now 7.9 billion), but one billion middle-class consumers, consumers who use about 100 times more energy per person than poor people. These additional billion middle-class consumers doubled the number of high-energy consuming humans in a few decades, and this enormous expansion of demand has consumed all the easy-to-extract resources of the planet. There are no cheap, easy-to-extract resources left; all that’s left is expensive to reach, extract, transport, etc., and since energy is the master resource, as its cost rises, so does the cost of literally everything that depends on energy.

  Consider a poor person in a rural village. Most of their food is grown locally, and their income is so limited they do not have the means to consume much energy or items shipped halfway around the world via the global supply chain. They might have a cheap mobile phone and a few consumer items gifted to them by relatives working in the developed world, but very little of their consumption depends on long global supply chains. If those chains break, the impact on the poor villagers is relatively modest.

  Compare this relative self-sufficiency to the extreme dependence on long supply chains of the average American. Very little, if any, of their everyday consumption is sourced locally, i.e., within walking distance. Every item on the shelves requires immense consumption of energy to be manufactured / produced and shipped to the shelf, and every item has a long dependency chain of intermediaries, each of which is dependent on numerous components, specialty materials, machinery and processes.

  Every intermediary, and every process and source used by each intermediary, is a potential source of failure of the entire supply chain.

  Complexity and supply chains are abstractions. To understand the intrinsic fragility of global supply chains, we must count the number of intermediaries in the chain from the resources extracted from the Earth to the end customer in the store aisle, and then count the intermediaries in each of those links.

  Counting the intermediaries in every dependency chain between the source of what we need / want and the item on the shelf (or in the UPS / FedEx / postal service vehicle) is a measure of our dependency: the more intermediaries, the greater our vulnerability and the greater the fragility of the dependency chain.

  This chain of dependencies is poorly understood outside each specialized industry. Consider semiconductors, widely touted as “the new oil,” i.e., the essential component in global production. The process of manufacturing semiconductors is extremely complex and resource-intensive, and many of the solvents, machines and components are only manufactured by one or two firms globally. If any of these links are disrupted, the entire chain of production breaks, as each is irreplaceable.

  If one firm produces 80% of the global supply of a specialty solvent, the smaller firm producing the other 20% cannot quadruple production for many reasons: its facilities are limited, adding capacity is a multi-year project, the equipment to expand isn’t available, the supply of the petrochemical feedstock cannot be increased due to limitations in the storage and delivery chain, and so on.

  There are many limits which are excluded from consideration when the supply chains are functioning. If we consider a system Americans take for granted–the ample supply of gasoline and diesel fuels–there are many unseen limits in the delivery system: the number of tanker trucks is limited, the number of drivers credentialed to drive the trucks is limited, intermediate storage of fuels is limited, and so on.

  The system is optimized for the average driver to have less than half a tank of fuel. Should the system break down and drivers start hoarding, i.e., constantly topping off their fuel tanks, then the system cannot recover its previous stability: the system has been optimized to a narrow range of storage, tanker trucks, drivers, etc., and once the system breaks out of that narrow window, the entire chain collapses.

  This is the reality of long global supply chains with dozens or hundreds of intermediaries: every supply chain has been optimized to function within a narrow window, and once any intermediary is disrupted, the entire chain breaks and cannot be restored once hoarding (at the wholesale level, over-ordering) begins. Hoarding is our instinctive response to shortages, and once the awareness of systemic fragilities and vulnerabilities rises, so too will hoarding.

  There is another source of fragility in long supply chains with many irreplaceable intermediaries. Each intermediary must make a profit or it will shut down. If price increases passed along to an intermediary cannot be passed along to the next link, then the firm absorbing the increase will lose money. Since many intermediaries are small, marginally profitable firms, they cannot absorb losses for long. Once they shut down, the chain cannot be restored without replacing them, and that is a major project, as many intermediaries have specialized skills and trusted networks which cannot be replaced without local connections and sources.

  Lastly, many of the global supply chain’s numerous intermediaries depend on credit markets to function, as their receivables often exceed 90 days. In other words, they often receive payment months after they delivered the goods or services, and so they rely on credit to fund day to day operations. Should credit markets seize up–a typical occurrence in crises–these intermediaries will shut down due to lack of funding.

  The price to be paid for stripping the domestic economy of productive capacity will be far higher than proponents of trade can even imagine, much less calculate. The price to be paid for becoming dependent on long, complex global supply chains with hundreds of intermediaries optimized for a narrow window of functionality will also be far higher than conventional analysts can imagine, much less calculate.

  How vulnerable is your personal supply chain? For the average American, the answer is: very.

  How do we reduce that extreme vulnerability? One way is to consume less. Another is to reduce the number of intermediaries between the source of our essentials and our household. For example, a barrel that collects rainwater off your roof is a source of water that has no intermediary. Vegetables collected from your home garden have limited intermediaries (sources of fertilizer and seeds). A solar panel that can charge your mobile devices in daytime has no intermediary once the panel has been purchased and installed.

  All the items that become sources of essentials–water barrels, solar panels, fertilizers–could become costly or scarce, as each requires massive amounts of energy to produce. Obtaining sources is different from stockpiling the end products. Both are worthy of consideration. So is moving to a less dependent locale and reconfiguring one’s life to consume less and reduce the number of intermediaries between your household and the sources of what you need.

  *  *  *

  My new book is now available at a 20% discount this month: Global Crisis, National Renewal: A (Revolutionary) Grand Strategy for the United States (Kindle $8.95, print $20). If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• China's US Enablers
  China’s US Enablers

  Authored by Peter Schweizer via The Gatestone Institute,

  • For Ray Dalio, moral relativism is great for business.

  • Bridgewater’s business is investment funds. Having more of those in China means more money for Bridgewater. It is really that simple. But in China business deals are not done with fellow capitalists who are dedicated to economic liberty and the free flow of capital to its most rational uses.

  • Dalio is willfully ignorant defense of Chinese communism… it is the calculated hypocrisy of the rope-selling capitalist.

  • Major American businesses are more worried about the prospect for growing or even losing their Chinese business revenues than about standing up against tyranny abroad, the silencing of Americans at home, and the outspoken intention of the Chinese Communist Party to supplant the United States — and the freedom that comes with it — as the world’s preeminent nation.

  • Apple also bowed to the Chinese government’s demand to give it full access to the data of its customers in China, even banning apps that would allow ordinary Chinese citizens to bypass their government’s sophisticated surveillance.

  • This is in contrast to Apple’s refusal in 2016 of an FBI request to break into the encryption of its iPhone after a domestic terrorist mass shooting incident in San Bernardino, California. Tim Cook told Apple employees at the time that his refusal was based on civil liberties concerns, which apparently did not stop him from agreeing to the Chinese Communist Party’s demands.

  • “Of course, Apple and Nike publicly claim to decry slave labor. But to be clear, the behavior we are seeing from US corporations is not about a company surviving: It’s about discontent with just hundreds of millions of dollars, desiring instead billions of dollars.” — Jake Tapper, CNN, December 5, 2021.

  

  One of the sadder realities of modern business is seeing how China has managed to co-opt and make hostages of American capitalists dazzled by the riches of the Chinese market. Ray Dalio (pictured) of Bridgewater Associates is just the latest financial titan to play the “Who am I to judge how another country runs itself?” card. (Photo by Kimberly White/Getty Images for TechCrunch)

  One of the sadder realities of modern business is seeing how China has managed to co-opt and make hostages of American capitalists dazzled by the riches of the Chinese market. Ray Dalio of Bridgewater Associates is just the latest financial titan to play the “Who am I to judge how another country runs itself?” card.

  For Dalio, moral relativism is great for business.

  Bridgewater’s business is investment funds. Having more of those in China means more money for Bridgewater. It is really that simple. In China, however, business deals are not done with fellow capitalists who are dedicated to economic liberty and the free flow of capital to its most rational uses. They are conducted with western-educated, government-tied, military-tied, intelligence-tied Chinese kingpins and princelings who understand their ultimate loyalty is to the Chinese Communist Party.

  After the Wall Street Journal reported that Dalio had raised $1.25 billion to create Bridgewater’s third investment fund in China, Dalio was asked by a CNBC host the frequently asked questions about doing business in China, given its many human rights abuses. Dalio demurred, claiming “I can’t be an expert in these types of things.” When asked in the same interview about the Chinese regime “disappearing” tennis star Peng Shuai from the public view for a month, Dalio stuttered out the explanation that the Chinese regime is really “like a strict parent.” He even tossed in the moral relativist’s favorite argument:

  “And then I look at the United States and I say, well, what’s going on in the United States and should I not invest in the United States because other things, err, human rights issues or other things?”

  For a man once described by former FBI director James Comey as “one smart bastard,” Dalio’s willfully ignorant defense of Chinese communism looks pathetic. It is actually even worse than that — it is the calculated hypocrisy of the rope-selling capitalist.

  Dalio is actually deeply knowledgeable about how things work in China. He has called Wang Qishan, the second most powerful man in the Chinese Communist Party, a “personal hero.” In his 2017 book, Principles, Dalio confessed, “Every time I speak with Wang, I feel like I get closer to cracking the unifying code that unlocks the laws of the universe.”

  Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan might not have quite Dalio’s level of reverence for someone known throughout China as “Xi’s enforcer,” but Dimon came to understand the importance of the “Who am I to judge?” principle of business etiquette in China. While in Hong Kong recently, Dimon casually joked that “the Communist Party is celebrating its 100th year. So is JPMorgan [referring to the firm’s Chinese business]. And I’ll make a bet we last longer.”

  That will not do. And sure enough, Dimon quickly walked back the comment. “I regret and should not have made that comment. I was trying to emphasize the strength and longevity of our company,” he said. A corporate spokesperson said the bank was committed to China and that Dimon had made clear during the discussion in Boston that “China and its people are very smart and very thoughtful… Dimon acknowledges that he should never speak lightly or disrespectfully about another country or its leadership,” the spokesperson added.

  It is tempting to write off such obviously insincere apologies as simply a necessary part of business etiquette — the flattery necessary to make a buck in a hostile environment. That is what most Americans assume when they read stories about basketball star Lebron James upbraiding another NBA team’s general manager for supporting pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong. James, who earns millions in licensing fees for jerseys and other items bearing his name and likeness in China, said that Houston Rockets’ GM Daryl Morey was “either misinformed or not really educated on the situation” regarding Chinese repression of dissent in the territory.

  But this masks a darker implication: that major American businesses are more worried about the prospect for growing or even losing their Chinese business revenues than about standing up against tyranny abroad, the silencing of Americans at home, and the outspoken intention of the Chinese Communist Party to supplant the United States — and the freedom that comes with it — as the world’s preeminent nation. There is a dangerous parallel between the thought-policing that has been mainstreamed on American college campuses and the self-censorship of American business.

  Apple’s Tim Cook pioneered the company’s entrance into China as Apple’s operations chief, which helped make Apple the most valuable company in the world. Apple now assembles nearly all of its products and earns a fifth of its revenue in the China region. Apple also bowed to the Chinese government’s demand to give it full access to the data of its customers in China, even banning apps that would allow ordinary Chinese citizens to bypass their government’s sophisticated surveillance. This is in contrast to Apple’s refusal in 2016 of an FBI request to break into the encryption of its iPhone after a domestic terrorist mass shooting incident in San Bernardino, California. Tim Cook told Apple employees at the time that his refusal was based on civil liberties concerns, which apparently did not stop him from agreeing to the Chinese Communist Party’s demands.

  In 2015, President Xi stopped off in Silicon Valley before meeting with President Barack Obama, meeting the heads of Amazon, Airbnb, Facebook, and Microsoft. According to Matt Sheehan’s book, The Transpacific Experiment: How China and California Collaborate and Compete for Our Future, after Xi entered the gathering a thunderstruck Cook asked, “Did you feel the room shake?”

  Viewed simply as the over-enthusiastic gushing of a businessman with dollar-signs for eyes, Cook’s swooning, Dimon’s kowtowing, or Dalio’s feigned ignorance of Chinese repression as “strict parenting” are cringeworthy enough. But with China flexing its muscles on the world stage more every day, one must wonder, is there any line they won’t cross?

  It was all too much for Jake Tapper of CNN, who did not mince words in criticizing them all: “The millionaires and billionaires of Hollywood and the NBA and the IOC and Wall Street are all so eager for Chinese cash, they’re pretending none of this is happening,” he recently said.

  “Of course, Apple and Nike publicly claim to decry slave labor. But to be clear, the behavior we are seeing from US corporations is not about a company surviving: It’s about discontent with just hundreds of millions of dollars, desiring instead billions of dollars.”

  Tapper concluded, “There is no amount of money that can buy enough soap to wash that blood off their hands.”

  *  *  *

  Peter Schweizer, President of the Governmental Accountability Institute, is a Gatestone Institute Distinguished Senior Fellow and author of the best-selling books Profiles in Corruption, Secret Empires and Clinton Cash, among others.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/21/2021 – 00:00

• Death Of 26-Year-Old New Zealand Man Linked To Pfizer Vaccine
  Death Of 26-Year-Old New Zealand Man Linked To Pfizer Vaccine

  Just when Pfizer and Moderna were pumping out FUD about the omicron variant alongside obviously optimistic “data” about the efficacy of their vaccines, the word has come out of New Zealand: authorities there have linked the death of a 26-year-old man to the vaccine.

  

  According to Reuters, New Zealand authorities on Monday said they had linked a 26-year-old man’s death to Pfizer’s COVID vaccine after the deceased suffered myocarditis, a rare inflammation of the heart muscle, after taking his first dose. The condition has been notably linked to mRNA vaccines for months now, and this is not the first case of a death being linked to the vaccine in New Zealand (there have been dozens of cases in the US).

  What’s more, this isn’t the first death the media has reported in New Zealand. Per Reuters:

  The death is New Zealand’s second linked to a known but rare side effect from the vaccine after health authorities in August reported a woman had died after taking her doses.

  “With the current available information, the board has considered that the myocarditis was probably due to vaccination in this individual,” a COVID Vaccine Independent Safety Monitoring Board said in a statement.

  Details about the incident were sparse, but Reuters added that the individual – whose name hasn’t been released – died within two weeks of his first dose. He had not sought medical advice or treatment for his symptoms.

  A Pfizer spokesperson told Reuters the company was “aware” of the death in New Zealand, and that it monitored all reports of possible “adverse events.” Still, it continues to believe the risk-benefit profile is positive.

  New Zealand’s vaccine safety board also said another two people, including a 13-year-old, had died with possible myocarditis after taking their vaccinations. More details were needed before linking the child’s death to the vaccine, while the death of a man in his 60s was unlikely related to the vaccine, it said.

  We can’t help but wonder: have there been more deaths like this in the US? We know there have at least been some. And keep in mind, nobody’s paying anything to help the families affected by this.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 23:40

• Ben Garrison Exposes The Elephant In The Room
  Ben Garrison Exposes The Elephant In The Room

  Authored by Ben Garrison via GrrrGraphics.com,

  IGNORING THE OBVIOUS

  In America we are all entitled to an opinion.

  The First Amendment guarantees our free speech. Unfortunately, many are now censored for having an opinion that does not align with the ‘official’ one pushed by the globalist ‘authorities.’ In particular, any opinion that contradicts the current and ongoing medical tyranny is banned. We at GrrrGraphics recently endured a one-week suspension on Twitter merely because one of our cartoons questioned the abuse of vaccines. It’s my opinion, based on copious evidence, that the so-called vaccines for COVID-19 aren’t working. That said, we at GrrrGraphics are not dispensing medical advice. If you insist on getting jabbed with experimental gene therapy drugs, then that’s your decision.

  Back in February Anthony Fauci pronounced the Covid injections to be “100 percent safe and effective” at preventing death by the Chinese bioweapon he helped fund. This was ridiculous if one considers that it usually takes a new vaccine nearly a decade of trials and testing before given to mass populations. In this case, billions around the world have been subjected to a giant lab experiment.

  By April, Fauci downgraded his glowing scientific analysis and said no vaccine is 100 percent effective. No kidding. Everyone’s body chemistry is different. A one-size fits all inoculation is crazy. Some are allergic, some have already had vaccine damage and can’t take more. Due to the lack of testing, who knows what dangers lie ahead for the vaccinated.

  Then we found out the vaccines did not stop the jabbed from transmitting the virus. Then we found out the vaccinated could still contract COVID-19, but Fauci said if that happened the symptoms would be less severe. Then we started hearing about people who were fully vaccinated yet still died from the virus, and along the way we read many stories of people dying from the vaccinations themselves.

  Fauci has been promoted as the very embodiment of science, but he’s often wrong. He was wrong about the treatment of AIDS sufferers about three decades ago. Many died from him recommending the drug, AZT until it was pulled from the market.  Israel recently awarded Fauci a one million dollar prize for ‘speaking truth to power’ amid the so-called pandemic. That was a howler. Fauci is the sadistic face of power that has corrupted science. Let’s not forget he funded the torture of beagles. A man who is cruel to animals has no problem being cruel to human beings.

  Now we’re seeing increased Covid cases and deaths among the fully vaccinated. The lying corporate media won’t talk about it, but, you can find plenty of evidence presented by real journalists.

  

  We will have continue to hear about one variant after another. Coronavirus tends to mutate. That’s why it’s tough to cure the common cold. I’m sure Fauci and Gates will recommend endless boosters and new vaccines. Gates, Fauci, and Big Pharma, will all continue to rake in even more taxpayer money. More people will die, but that’s the New World Order’s plan. Fear will continue to be fanned because it’s necessary for the globalists’ Great Reset plan. That plan includes far less humans on a planet owned by the oligarchs at the top of the pyramid.

  *  *  *

  Join Us on Subscribe Star, Our account was suspended by Patreon for telling the truth- Support Cartoons see New Cartoons Early before Public release! 

  Sign up for our Cartoon Newsletter and Never miss a cartoon- click to join

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 23:20

• COVID Outbreak Hits World's Largest Cruise Ship
  COVID Outbreak Hits World’s Largest Cruise Ship

  For the second time this month, a cruise ship with fully vaccinated adult passengers and crew detected a COVID-19 outbreak. 

  Forty-eight people aboard a Royal Caribbean Symphony of the Seas, the world’s largest cruise ship, tested positive for COVID on Saturday after returning from a week-long cruise. 

  

  “Everyone who tested positive was asymptomatic or had mild symptoms, and we continuously monitored their health,” Royal Caribbean told NBC Miami. “Each person quickly went into quarantine,” the statement said.

  The five positive cases in our group have been sent to the Holiday Inn Miami. 2 already have rooms. @RoyalCaribbean has the rest sitting in a conference center without chairs or water/ food. My partner had to call and make a fuss for them to provide these essentials. pic.twitter.com/8jBqcsAoLN

  — Connor O’Dell (@connorwitha_no) December 18, 2021

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

  Royal Caribbean’s health policy requires all adults to be vaxxed with at least two shots of Pfizer or Moderna or one shot of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. The outbreak represents 0.78% of the 6,091 passengers and crew who left Miami on Dec. 11 and sailed to Caribbean ports St. Maarten, St. Thomas, and Royal Caribbean’s private island, CocoCay. The cruise ship returned to homeport on Dec. 18.  

  Cruise ships have been lauded as one of the safest vacations due to their strict health policies of only allowing vaxxed adults — but as the vaccine efficacy wanes, that appears not to be the case. 

  Earlier this month, Norwegian Breakaway, owned by Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd, detected an outbreak of COVID despite a fully vaxxed ship. 

  Cruise Industry News reported the cruise ship industry had tightened its mask measures amid surging virus cases in the US. 

  What’s becoming evident is that efficacy rates for vaccines are dropping. A recent study of the three primary COVID vaccines showed a ‘dramatic‘ drop in efficacy over six months. So as cruise ship operators hit the high seas with only fully vaxxed passengers and crews that have waning defenses against the virus, one would suspect additional outbreaks on ships as new infections surge across the US. 

  So what are cruise ship operators supposed to do now? Only allow people who’ve had three boosters or more on vessels?

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 23:00

• Hong Kong Voter Turnout Sinks To Record Low In First 'Patriots Only' Election
  Hong Kong Voter Turnout Sinks To Record Low In First ‘Patriots Only’ Election

  In what was the first Hong Kong legislative election since Beijing overhauled the electoral system to allow the vetting and restriction of candidates according to their political views and “patriotism”, turnout hit a record low.

  As CNN reports, it’s also the city’s first Legislative Council election since stringent new electoral reforms were passed in March.

  The changes gave the government greater vetting powers, dramatically lessening the public’s ability to vote directly for candidates, and only allowed government-screened “patriots” – those loyal to Beijing and its ruling Communist Party – to stand.

  Under the previous system, about half of the 70-seat legislature was directly elected by the public, while the other half was chosen by trade and industry bodies that usually favor pro-China candidates.

  

  As Statista’s Martin Armstrong notes, since 1998, the share of eligible voters casting their ballot has been between 44 and 58 percent.

  This time round though, despite government officials urging people to vote as well as providing free public transport, that sunk to just 30 percent.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  This increase in voter apathy has largely been attributed to what Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and US referred to in a post-election joint statement as “grave concern over the erosion of democratic elements” in Hong Kong. China, on the other hand describes the recent changes as a push to ensure stability after a prolonged period of protests which began in 2019.

  Carrie Lam, the city’s leader, thanked voters late Sunday night, saying it was “an important election following the improvements to the electoral system to implement the principle of ‘patriots administering Hong Kong.”

  After the election, won by pro-China candidates, China said in a white paper that Hong Kong was now entering a new stage of “restored order”.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 22:40

• California Rewards Deadbeats Once Again With $80K Cash Giveaway To Delinquent Homeowners
  California Rewards Deadbeats Once Again With $80K Cash Giveaway To Delinquent Homeowners

  California homeowners who are behind on their mortgage payments due to the pandemic, or whatever, are about to receive up to $80,000 per household in the form of a direct payment to mortgage servicers.

  

  The $1 billion program funded by taxpayers – as opposed to making homeowners tap into the massive equity gained in their homes while they weren’t making payments – was approved by the US Department of the Treasury, and will apply to as many as 40,000 struggling homeowners according to a statement from Newsom’s office.

  “We are committed to supporting those hit hardest by the pandemic, and that includes homeowners who have fallen behind on their housing payments,” it reads. “No one should have to live in fear of losing the roof over their head, so we’re stepping up to support struggling homeowners to get them the resources they need to cover past due mortgage payments.”

  Newsom noted that renters and landlords had already received assistance.

  “Now, with our California Mortgage Relief Program, we are extending that relief to homeowners,” he said.

  The funding, which is allocated through the federal American Rescue Plan Act’s Homeowner Assistance Fund, is provided as a one-time grant that qualified homeowners will not be required to repay.

  Californians at or below 100% of their county’s area median income, who own a single-family home, condo or manufactured home, and who faced pandemic-related hardships after Jan. 21, 2020, may be eligible for the program. –Sacramento Bee

  Will those who didn’t over-commit themselves in the first place receive tax credits?

  Once again, moral hazard FTW.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 22:20

• Tennis Star Peng Shuai Walks Back Sexual Assault Claim In Interview
  Tennis Star Peng Shuai Walks Back Sexual Assault Claim In Interview

  Authored by Nicole Hao via The Epoch Times,

  Chinese tennis star Peng Shuai said on Dec. 19 that she had never accused anyone of sexually assaulting her, and that her post on social media had been misunderstood.

  

  In a six-minute interview with Singapore’s pro-Beijing Chinese-language media Lianhe Zaobao, Peng said she was not under house arrest and her posts were misunderstood.

  On Nov. 2, Peng, 35, posted on Chinese social media Weibo that China’s ex-vice premier, Zhang Gaoli, 75, with the help of his wife, forced her to have sex with him. Peng’s posts were removed from the internet shortly after, before she disappeared from the public eye for nearly three weeks. In her reappearances after that she was accompanied by Chinese officials.

  Peng’s well-being have since become a matter of concern among the global tennis community and rights groups. The Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) even moved to halt all matches in mainland China and Hong Kong indefinitely on Dec. 1 over concerns for Peng.

  “Sunday’s video looks like an intentionally arranged one,” said U.S.-based China affairs commentator Tang Jingyuan.

  Tang told The Epoch Times on Dec. 19 that while it appears as though the reporter from Lianhe Zaobao stopped Peng and interviewed her on the spot, the questions and Peng’s reactions both seem pre-arranged.

  “Peng didn’t deny the unethical relationships with Zhang, nor explain why she didn’t update her Weibo to clarify the misunderstandings. Even all Peng’s photos and videos that were released in the past month were published by state-run media, rather than herself,” Tang said. “I’m worried about Peng’s freedom.”

  

  Peng Shuai of China plays a backhand during her Women’s Singles first round match against Nao Hibino of Japan on day two of the 2020 Australian Open at Melbourne Park in Melbourne, Australia, on Jan. 21, 2020. (Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)

  Peng’s New Video

  On Dec. 19, Peng first spoke on camera about the alleged sexual assault when she attended a cross-country skiing event in Shanghai, China.

  “First, I need to stress one point that is extremely important: I have never said or written that anyone has sexually assaulted me, I have to clearly stress this point,” Peng told Lianhe Zaobao.

  She said what she posted on Weibo was a “private matter,” and “people have many misunderstandings” about her posts. Talking about her life, Peng said she had lived at her home in Beijing the whole time and she had freedom to do her things.

  Peng talked about the email that she sent to WTA chief Steve Simon on Dec. 2. “The Chinese email is written by myself. CGTN (Chinese state-run China Global Television Network) translated it into English and posted it on its twitter.”

  Simon had said at the time that he “had a hard time believing” that Peng had actually written the email or believed what had been attributed to her.

  During the six-minute interview, Peng didn’t mention Zhang’s name, nor explain the misunderstandings.

  

  This combination of file photos shows tennis player Peng Shuai of China (L) during her women’s singles first round match at the Australian Open tennis tournament in Melbourne on Jan. 16, 2017; and Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Gaoli (R) during a visit to Russia at the Saint Petersburg International Investment Forum in Saint Petersburg on June 18, 2015. (Paul Crock and Alexander Zemlianichenko/AFP via Getty Images)

  On Sunday, Peng watched the skiing together with Chinese sports officials, including former NBA player and current Chairman of Chinese Basketball Association Yao Ming, and vice Chair of Chinese Table Tennis Association Wang Liqin, according to Lianhe Zaobao.

  In the video, Peng wears a red T-shirt, which has the characters for China, and a black down coat that has “China” in English and the Chinese flag.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 22:00

• As China's Property Sector Continues Disintegrating, Much More Easing Will Be Needed
  As China’s Property Sector Continues Disintegrating, Much More Easing Will Be Needed

  Evergrande’s default may not have been a one-time “Lehman” event, but the painful, creeping consequences of China’s property market getting hit – the single biggest asset class in the world…

  

  … will resonate for years in a slow, painful repricing – absent a major kick from the PBOC – and sure enough, Chinese property stocks tumbled close to a new five-year low – levels last seen in 2014 – after a series of asset sales underscored concern that equity investors will bear the brunt of losses as developers offload projects to repay debt (assuming defaults don’t wipe out the equity tranche completely).

  

  As Bloomberg reports overnight, Shimao Group Holdings agreed to sell stakes in a Hong Kong development at a loss while distressed property giant, Sunac China Holdings, unloaded assets in Shanghai as developers rush to raise cash. China regulators meanwhile signaled they will support “quality” real estate firms looking to buy assets from struggling rivals, according to a report.

  An index of Chinese developers fell for the sixth day in seven, led by Sunac, which posted a record one-day decline of 18%. Trading in Chinese dollar bonds remained light during the seasonal end-of-year lull.

  The plunge in developer shares means the richest bosses behind China’s real estate firms have lost more than $46 billion combined this year, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Evergrande founder Hui Ka Yan’s wealth alone has plunged by $17.2 billion.

  

  It’s not looking good for a quick and painless rebound in the billionaire’s net worth – here are some of the more notable recent developments, all of which paint a grim picture for China’s developers:

  • Evergrande Declared in Default by S&P for Failed Payments

  Evergrande was labeled a defaulter by S&P Global Ratings, the second credit-risk assessor to do so after Fitch. S&P cut Evergrande to “selective default” Friday over its failure to make coupon payments by the end of a grace period earlier this month, a move that may trigger cross defaults on the developer’s $19.2 billion of dollar debt. S&P also withdrew its ratings on the group at Evergrande’s request.

  Fitch Ratings was the first to declare the property developer in default on Dec. 9. Long considered by many investors as too big to fail, Evergrande has become the largest casualty of President Xi Jinping’s campaign to tame the country’s overindebted conglomerates and overheated property market. Concern has since spread to higher-rated firms like Shimao Group as liquidity stress intensifies.

  • Evergrande Land Seized by Chengdu City on Lack of Development:

  The local government in western China’s Chengdu city took two parcels back without repaying the developers, saying that Evergrande failed to start construction on time, according to Dec. 17 statements from a Chengdu land regulator (one could call this a partial nationalization of the now defaulted developer): one site, sized 83,997 square meters, was sold to a firm fully owned by by Evergrande’s onshore subsidiary Hengda Real Estate in 2010, according to a statement and corporate registry search platform Qichacha. Another site, sized 258,667 square meters, was sold to a developer in 2002 and transferred to another Hengda unit in 2011, according to a separate statement and Qichacha.

  • China Offshore Bond Defaults Hit Record in December

  December is poised to be a record month for Chinese offshore corporate defaults after missed payments by indebted companies including China Evergrande and Kaisa Group Holdings Chinese firms have defaulted on a record $3.8 billion in offshore bonds so far this month, data compiled by Bloomberg show. The previous monthly high was in January when Chinese borrowers failed to repay $2.7 billion of such notes.

  

  • China Regulators Encourage Property Acquisitions

  China is ramping up support of the embattled real estate sector as growing stress in the industry threatens to deepen an economic slowdown (something we first discussed last month in “Beijing Capitulates: Urges Local Govts To Unleash Debt Flood As Cities Begin Backstopping Property Developers”). Authorities are encouraging banks to fund acquisitions of projects of distressed developers and pushing financially healthy property firms to make such purchases, the central bank-backed Financial News reported Monday.

  China is also providing credit support to an economy showing strain from the property slump, with domestic banks on Monday lowering borrowing costs for the first time in 20 months. The move follows action by the People’s Bank of China earlier this month to cut the amount of cash banks must hold in reserve, freeing up 1.2 trillion yuan ($188 billion) of cheap long-term funds for lenders.

  As Bloomberg notes, the support measures come as some developers such as Kaisa and Evergrande struggle to sell assets to raise cash and service mounting debts amid a crackdown on leverage in the industry. Meanwhile, after a relentless deleveraging property developer campaign which started a year ago with the three red lines, regulators have finally eased up on the clampdown in recent weeks, such as by encouraging stronger real estate firms to tap the onshore interbank bond market for financing.

  • Kaisa Appoints Advisers; Shares Resume Trading

  Kaisa has appointed Houlihan Lokey as its financial adviser and Sidley Austin as legal adviser after missing multiple offshore debt payments. The retention of the bankruptcy-focused financial adviser will evaluate Kaisa’s liquidity and explore all feasible solutions, the company said in a stock exchange filing on Monday. Kaisa said it hasn’t received any notice regarding acceleration of repayment by holders, and has been in talks with holder representatives about a comprehensive debt restructuring plan. That said, the hiring of HLHZ is a clear indication that a default is coming; Kaisa shares tumbled.

  • Evergrande Backer’s Privatization Collapses

  Chinese Estates Holdings Ltd. minority shareholders failed to give sufficient support to the company’s proposed privatization, derailing a plan by the long-time ally of Evergrande to delist next month. The stock plunged 30%. Among the 74 stockholders participating, 64 voted no and made up 10.8% of the shares among the investors, according to a stock exchange filing Friday. The Hong Kong real estate firm, owned by the family of billionaire Joseph Lau, announced plans in October to buy out investors at HK$4 a share. The stock last traded at HK$3.78 before being halted Friday afternoon ahead of the results. Chinese Estates requested a trading resumption and said its listing will be maintained.

  • Shimao Sells Stake in Hong Kong Development Z

  Shimao agreed to sell its 22.5% stake in three entities created for the Grand Victoria property development in Hong Kong for HK$2.1 billion ($270 million), according to an exchange filing. The buyers include entities owned by fellow developers SEA Holdings, Wheelock & Co. and Sino Land. Shimao expects to recognize a loss of about HK$770 million from the sale. Separately, Sunac China Holdings Ltd. sold three projects in Shanghai and Hangzhou for 2.68 billion yuan ($420 million), the 21st Century Business Herald reported, citing unidentified people.

  * * *

  Will all these adverse developments in mind, it is not only quite easy to understand why China cut its RRR last week, followed by a 5bps cut to its Libor, the Loan Prime Rate, but as Bloomberg notes, much more easing will be needed to revive China’s market.

  As a reminder, over the weekend Morgan Stanley predicted that China’s credit impulse is due for a sharp rebound as a result of already implemented policy easing.

  

  But the question is whether this isn’t too little too late – as Bloomberg’s Ye Xie puts it, markets have largely shrugged off the first cut in benchmark borrowing costs in 20 months in China. That in part reflects the fact that policy easing so far has been more measured. Even as the policy mix is becoming more market friendly, the bottom line is that the country needs credit growth to pick up more meaningfully. Here are some more observations from Xie:

  • The combination of elevated inflation and renewed growth concerns from the spread of the omicron variant of Covid has complicated the job of policy makers around the world. While the Fed and other major central banks have shifted focus to taming inflation, markets are more nervous about the economic outlook. For instance, the market implied rate for the Fed’s benchmark in 2023 has declined since the FOMC meeting last week to about 1.25%, compared with the median forecast of 1.625% on the dot- plot.
  • In contrast, Beijing, with less inflation pressure, is moving toward policy easing. Chinese banks cut the one-year LPR rate by 5 bps Monday, surprising most economists who had expected them to stay put. But market reactions were largely muted. Ten-year bond yields were little changed, while the CSI 300 declined 1.5%. What gives?
  • For starters, while few economists had predicted the move, investors have been anticipating some policy easing since the central economic working conference earlier this month, when Beijing signaled that propping up the economy has become its top priority. The RRR cut in early December, plus a similar move in July, saved enough costs for banks to pass them on to borrowers. So the LPR cut did not exactly come out of the blue.
  • The lenders held the five-year rate, which is tied to mortgage rates, steady. It signaled that Beijing may not intend to change overall control over the housing market, despite some recent policy fine-tuning. What’s more, the seven-day repo, a measure of interbank liquidity, has been stable. All of this suggests that the PBOC isn’t in a full-blown easing mode, yet.
  • Historically, the stock, bond and currency markets’ performance has been mixed in the month following an LPR cut. As noted by Larry Hu, an economist at Macquarie Securities, cutting the rate is less important in China’s context, “where the monetary policy is more based on quantity than price.” In other words, the supply of money is more important than the price of money.

  So as the world waits to see if the Fed will either taper its taper, or hint at far fewer rates hikes (if any) now that Biden’s BBB plan isn’t coming, and with it $1.75 trillion in fiscal stimulus is gone, China is already stepping on the monetary stimulus engine. It won’t be alone, and we are confident that it is only a matter of time before Powell folds again. As for rampant inflation, it will take just one small change in the definition of CPI – one which is already on its way – to fix all that.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 21:40

• Tucker Carlson Slams 'Pedo Outbreak' At CNN
  Tucker Carlson Slams ‘Pedo Outbreak’ At CNN

  Fox news host Tucker Carlson on Monday blasted CNN for what he called a “pedo outbreak,” after not one, but two recent busts involving CNN producers who have been accused of child molestation.

  

  “One of them is a man called John Griffin, who was just indicted by a federal grand jury for attempting to “induce minors to engage in unlawful sexual activity,”” Carlson noted.

  “Then just days after that story, Project Veritas exposed another creep at CNN. They published graphic text messages and video of a CNN producer fantasizing about molesting a child.“

  “Project Veritas said the producer also allegedly sought explicit photographs of that child.”

  And the kicker: “As of today there are more accused pedophiles at CNN than Americans who have died of the so-called Omicron variant.“

  Watch:

  There’s a pedo outbreak over at CNN pic.twitter.com/nFLhxKoNTR

  — Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) December 21, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 21:20

• World's Most Prestigious Medical Journal Roasts Facebook Over "Inaccurate, Incompetent & Irresponsible" Fact Check
  World’s Most Prestigious Medical Journal Roasts Facebook Over “Inaccurate, Incompetent & Irresponsible” Fact Check

  The Machiavellian quote (sic) that “if you’re going to come at the king, you best not miss,” may be about to bite Mark Zuckerberg and his army of fact-checking mercenaries.

  While Zuckerberg may feel omnipotent atop his opaque algo-world but the so-called ‘fact-checkers’ – so expert at shutting down any narrative-conflicting-information (on behalf of, and often at the behest of, the Biden administration) – may have met their match by claiming that one of the world’s oldest and most prestigious medical journals delivered “false information” that “could mislead people.”

  

  As we detailed in early November, The British Medical Journal (BMJ) – a weekly peer-reviewed medical trade journal, published by the trade union the British Medical Association – published a whistleblower report calling into question data integrity and regulatory oversight issues surrounding Pfizer’s pivotal phase III Covid-19 vaccine trial.

  Brook Jackson, a now-fired regional director at Ventavia Research Group, revealed to The BMJ that vaccine trials at several sites in Texas last year had major problems – including falsified data, broke fundamental rules, and were ‘slow’ to report adverse reactions.

  When she notified superiors of the issues she found, they fired her.

  A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial. Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding. After repeatedly notifying Ventavia of these problems, the regional director, Brook Jackson, emailed a complaint to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Ventavia fired her later the same day. Jackson has provided The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails. -The BMJ

  Very soon after, as the worrisome story went viral, BMJ soon would get a taste of what Facebook, Google, and others are doing to independent media platforms. As TrialSiteNews.com reports, even though BMJ is one of the most prominent medical journals and the information was rigorously peer-reviewed, strange things started occurring.

  For example, readers would try to post some of the information on social media such as Facebook to share with their networks. But “some reported being unable to share it [the information].” Moreover, those individuals that were simply sharing this content, peer-reviewed from The BMJ, were warned by Facebook that, “Independent fact-checkers concluded, “This information could mislead people.”

  

  Moreover, they were told, “Those trying to post the article were informed by Facebook that people who repeatedly share ‘false information’ might have their posts moved lower in Facebook’s News Feed.”

  In addition, some group administrators received notices from Facebook that the information was “partly false.”

  Readers were sent to a “fact check” performed by Lead Stories, a third-party fact-checker.

  And so, as possibly the top experts in the world when it comes to medical research information, BMJ has now been forced to fact-check the ‘fact-checkers’.

  In a no-holds-barred ‘open letter to Mark Zuckerberg’, the editors exposed that ‘fact-check’ as “inaccurate, incompetent, and irresponsible.”

  Having received no response from Facebook or from Lead Stories, after requesting the removal of the “fact checking” label, the BMJ’s editors raise a “wider concern”:

  We are aware that The BMJ is not the only high quality information provider to have been affected by the incompetence of Meta’s fact checking regime…

  Rather than investing a proportion of Meta’s substantial profits to help ensure the accuracy of medical information shared through social media, you have apparently delegated responsibility to people incompetent in carrying out this crucial task.

  Fact checking has been a staple of good journalism for decades.

  What has happened in this instance should be of concern to anyone who values and relies on sources such as The BMJ.

  Additionally, ‘goopthink’ offered more anti-censorship fire and brimstone in an eloquent comment at ycombinator:

  In addition to the points raised by BMJ and in the comments below, there is a limit to what independent fact checking can accomplish.

  For example, are their fact checkers conducting their own scientific experiments validating claims and outcomes of a scientific paper? Are fact checkers reaching out to sources from a news article and verifying quoted information? When “breaking news” or “scoops” are reported presenting totally new information about the world, how can that be verified against other information that – by virtue of something being new – cannot be verified by other preexisting sources?

  If the fact checking process is limited to verification based on other information that is currently available, and if the fact checking process cannot distinguish between factual information and the opinions people hold as a result of that information, the outcome will be an inevitable echo chamber that reinforces currently dominant views or whatever preexisting biases are present.

  …and that is exactly what the establishment wants.

  

  *  *  *

  Full letter from The BMJ below (emphasis ours):

  Open letter from The BMJ to Mark Zuckerberg

  Dear Mark Zuckerberg,

  We are Fiona Godlee and Kamran Abbasi, editors of The BMJ, one of the world’s oldest and most influential general medical journals. We are writing to raise serious concerns about the “fact checking” being undertaken by third party providers on behalf of Facebook/Meta.

  In September, a former employee of Ventavia, a contract research company helping carry out the main Pfizer covid-19 vaccine trial, began providing The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails. These materials revealed a host of poor clinical trial research practices occurring at Ventavia that could impact data integrity and patient safety. We also discovered that, despite receiving a direct complaint about these problems over a year ago, the FDA did not inspect Ventavia’s trial sites.

  The BMJ commissioned an investigative reporter to write up the story for our journal. The article was published on 2 November, following legal review, external peer review and subject to The BMJ’s usual high level editorial oversight and review.

  But from November 10, readers began reporting a variety of problems when trying to share our article. Some reported being unable to share it. Many others reported having their posts flagged with a warning about “Missing context … Independent fact-checkers say this information could mislead people.” Those trying to post the article were informed by Facebook that people who repeatedly share “false information” might have their posts moved lower in Facebook’s News Feed. Group administrators where the article was shared received messages from Facebook informing them that such posts were “partly false.”

  Readers were directed to a “fact check” performed by a Facebook contractor named Lead Stories.

  We find the “fact check” performed by Lead Stories to be inaccurate, incompetent and irresponsible.

  • It fails to provide any assertions of fact that The BMJ article got wrong

  • It has a nonsensical title: “Fact Check: The British Medical Journal Did NOT Reveal Disqualifying And Ignored Reports Of Flaws In Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Trials”

  • The first paragraph inaccurately labels The BMJ a “news blog”

  • It contains a screenshot of our article with a stamp over it stating “Flaws Reviewed,” despite the Lead Stories article not identifying anything false or untrue in The BMJ article

  • It published the story on its website under a URL that contains the phrase “hoax-alert”

  We have contacted Lead Stories, but they refuse to change anything about their article or actions that have led to Facebook flagging our article.

  We have also contacted Facebook directly, requesting immediate removal of the “fact checking” label and any link to the Lead Stories article, thereby allowing our readers to freely share the article on your platform.

  There is also a wider concern that we wish to raise. We are aware that The BMJ is not the only high quality information provider to have been affected by the incompetence of Meta’s fact checking regime. To give one other example, we would highlight the treatment by Instagram (also owned by Meta) of Cochrane, the international provider of high quality systematic reviews of the medical evidence. Rather than investing a proportion of Meta’s substantial profits to help ensure the accuracy of medical information shared through social media, you have apparently delegated responsibility to people incompetent in carrying out this crucial task. Fact checking has been a staple of good journalism for decades. What has happened in this instance should be of concern to anyone who values and relies on sources such as The BMJ.

  We hope you will act swiftly: specifically to correct the error relating to The BMJ’s article and to review the processes that led to the error; and generally to reconsider your investment in and approach to fact checking overall.

  Best wishes,

  Fiona Godlee, editor in chief

  Kamran Abbasi, incoming editor in chief

  The BMJ

  Competing interests:

  As current and incoming editors in chief, we are responsible for everything The BMJ contains.

  It appears the ‘fact-checkers’ have some facts of their own to check… or otherwise admit they are simply there – as Fauci and Collins collusion was exposed this week – to maintain the propaganda peace for whoever is pulling the strings.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 21:00

• 1.5 Million Parents Could Drop Out Of Workforce If Biden Stimulus Passes; Analysis
  1.5 Million Parents Could Drop Out Of Workforce If Biden Stimulus Passes; Analysis

  Submitted by Andrew Moran of The Epoch Times,

  As many as 1.5 million working parents could exit the labor market as more U.S. households receive the expanded Child Tax Credit (CTC) benefit, a new study predicts.  

  

  According to a recent analysis (pdf) from University of Chicago economist Bruce Meyer, approximately 2.6 percent of parents could drop out of the workforce after being given monthly entitlement checks based on family income.  

  Under the American Rescue Plan that was passed in March, lawmakers expanded the CTC from $2,000 to as much as 3,600 per child. Half of the CTC funds were sent to households or deposited into bank accounts in the form of monthly checks from July to December. Parents are not required to work to receive the CTC and its monthly payments.

  Meyer explained that some parents could choose to quit working because of the payments and if they can gather enough money from public assistance and family and friends.  

  “The proposed expansion would get rid of the strong work incentives under the prior CTC; it would essentially eliminate a tax credit that encouraged work and replace it with something that discourages work,” Meyer told CBS MoneyWatch.

  “In the end, those at the bottom may not be better off.”  

  He added that it would be “a good idea” to insert a work requirement. The economist endorsed Sen. Joe Manchin’s (D-W.Va.) proposal of requiring an employment prerequisite.  

  

  As part of the previous CTC, beneficiaries needed to work to receive the full credit.  

  Still, Meyer anticipates that the tax credit, even if 1.5 million parents were to quit their jobs, would alleviate child poverty. He projected that child poverty could decline by 22 percent because of the payments.  

  Others dispute his suggestion that more than one million working parents would be submitting their letters of resignation.   

  Researchers at Columbia University’s Center on Poverty and Social Policy argued in a recent paper (pdf) that the data show that CTC payments have not led to a noticeable impact on payrolls or the labor force participation rate.   

  “Real-world data in the immediate wake of the CTC expansion do not support claims that the elimination of the phase-in portion of the CTC has discouraged work among parents in any meaningful way,” the researchers stated.  

  Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Dec. 17, White House press secretary Jen Psaki stated that President Joe Biden could double the CTC payments in February if the $1.75 trillion social-spending and climate change plan is enacted in January.  

  “If we get it done in January, we’ve talked to Treasury officials and others about doing double payments in February as an option,” she told the press. “The president wants to see this move forward. It’s a priority for him as soon as Congress returns.”  

  While the administration and Democrats want to extend the payments as part of the legislative push, the bill is not guaranteed to pass amid hesitancy from Manchin. In addition, many congressional Democrats have conceded that they do not have a considerable backup plan to maintain the monthly payments prior to their expiration.  

  Ultimately, experts concede that the United States has, for many decades, refrained from offering variations of basic income similar to the CTC payments. Therefore, they aver, there are still many unknowns and uncertainties.  

  Child Care Costs a Financial Burden

  For many parents, it might be economically beneficial to resign from their positions since daycare is costly.

  It is no secret that the cost of child care is expensive. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the price of daycare and pre-school advanced by 2.7 percent year-over-year in November.

  Families nationwide spend an average of $8,355 per child for year-round child care, with some estimates going as high as $16,000.

  “Monthly child-care costs can feel like an extra mortgage payment, especially if you live in an expensive area or have more than one kid,” said Ted Rossman, Bankrate’s senior industry analyst, in a news release.

  Biden’s American Families Plan possesses proposals to diminish child-care prices. For households earning less than 1.5 times their state median income levels, they would not pay for child care. Others earning above that level would pay no more than 7 percent of their income on child care.

  The Latest from The Great Resignation 

  Employers are coming across a myriad of challenges in this economy, and labor has been one of the chief obstacles in this market.  

  According to the BLS, about 4.2 million Americans quit their jobs in October, bringing the total number of people leaving employment to nearly 39 million in the first 10 months of 2021.  

  It is expected that 2021 will set a new record if workers leave their jobs at comparable levels in November and December.  

  The so-called quit rate for public- and private-sector workers is high for many reasons. Many people are quitting because of concerns over contracting the coronavirus, being unable to find or afford care for their children or aging parents, or they have located employment opportunities with better compensation.  

  

  Indeed, the number of job openings in the United States increased to almost 11 million in October, with the figure concentrated in education, hotels, manufacturing, and restaurants.  

  Experts contend that the labor market pendulum has swung in the direction of the workers. As a result, companies have been raising wages, expanding their perks and benefits, and introducing a wide range of bonuses to attract talent.  

  “As companies face labor shortages, employers are making a serious effort to recruit workers by offering signing bonuses, additional benefits, and—most importantly—higher compensation across the income distribution,” Morgan Stanley recently purported in a research note.  

  When businesses cannot find applicants, employers are doing everything they can to retain their current staff members. This, market analysts note, is part of the reason why initial jobless claims have hovered around a five-decade low. Businesses are too frightened to terminate their employees in this environment.

  According to a study from the Conference Board think tank, private firms are allocating 3.9 percent of their payroll budgets to wage hikes in 2022, the biggest increase since 2008.  

  The report noted a unique trend as companies try to limit record turnover rates. Many of the salary hikes will be given to present employees.  

  Meanwhile, the Conference Board survey reported that 39 percent of businesses revealed they are hiking incomes to keep up with surging inflation.  

  “The rapid increase in wages and inflation are forcing businesses to make important decisions regarding their approach to salaries, recruiting, and retention,” said Conference Board chief economist Gad Levanon in the report. “In particular, companies are likely to raise wages aggressively for their current employees or they will risk even lower retention rates. After being a non-issue in wage determination for several decades, sizable cost of living adjustments may be making a comeback.”

  “At the same time, business leaders will have to decide how much they will pass the additional labor costs to consumers through price increases. That decision, relative to competitors’ strategies, could impact companies’ market shares.”

  This development could persist heading into the next calendar year. A recent CareerArc/Harris Poll survey discovered that 23 percent of employed Americans intend to quit their jobs over the next 12 months as a considerable number desire better working conditions and want higher pay. 

  JPMorgan Chase recently warned that this labor shortage could persist for years, citing a diverse array of factors. JPMorgan’s chief global strategist David Kelly alluded to Baby Boomers retiring, falling immigration numbers, and skills mismatch as partially to blame for the lack of workers.

  “All of these forces should gradually resolve the current excess demand for labor,” Kelly stated in a research note. “However, barring a recession, this process could take years.”

  Fed Worried About Wage Threat in 2022

  This month, many experts, from Wall Street analysts to top economic policymakers, have sounded the alarm about one of the biggest threats in the economy next year: A “wages push” by workers in 2022 that could contribute to higher inflationary pressures. While he conceded his concerns over 39-year high inflation, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell explained that ballooning wages are “both larger in [their] effect on inflation and more persistent.”

  He revealed that one of the notable factors determining a rate hike was the Employment Cost Index (ECI) that was published in October. The report discovered that hourly labor costs climbed at a “very high” pace of 5.7 percent over the last three months.

  

  Over the last 12 months, average hourly earnings have climbed by 4.8 percent to $31.03.

  “If you had something where real wages were persistently above productivity growth, that puts upward pressure on firms, and they raise prices,” Powell said. “We don’t see that yet. But with the kind of hot labor market readings—wages we’re seeing, it’s something that we’re watching… You know, usually, in every other expansion, it’s that there aren’t enough jobs and people can’t find jobs,” he added. “What we need is another long expansion, like the ones we have been having over the last 40 years.”

  The head of the U.S. central bank acknowledged that many Americans do not want to return to the workforce because of medical concerns, the paucity of child care, and nobody to look after seniors. “The ratio of job openings, for example, to vacancies is at all-time highs, quits—the wages, all those things are even hotter,” Powell said.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 20:40

• "They're Totally Confused": Biden's Vaccine Mandate Chaos Leaves Employers With "Whiplash"
  “They’re Totally Confused”: Biden’s Vaccine Mandate Chaos Leaves Employers With “Whiplash”

  The Biden Administration’s attempt to force millions of American workers to either get vaccinated or risk losing their jobs has backfired spectacularly. On Monday, the NYT published what to many probably sounded like scathing criticism coming from the notoriously pro-Dem paper: President Biden’s attempt to use OSHA to try and force some 84MM workers to get vaccinated has left said employers with “whiplash”. “They’re totally confused”, a quote in the headline screamed.

  

  Just a few weeks ago, the Administration was charging ahead, but its momentum has been decidedly crippled, especially now that the “very definition of fully vaccinated” has been thrown into question.

  The marching orders from the Biden administration in November had seemed clear — large employers were to get their workers fully vaccinated by early next year, or make sure the workers were tested weekly. But a little over a month later, the Labor Department’s vaccine rule has been swept into confusion and uncertainty by legal battles, shifting deadlines and rising Covid case counts that throw the very definition of fully vaccinated into question.

  The spread of the highly transmissible Omicron variant has seemingly bolstered the government’s argument, at the heart of its legal battle over the rule, that the virus remains a grave threat to workers. But the recent surge in cases has raised the issue of whether the government will take its requirements further — even as the original rule remains contentious — and ask employers to mandate booster shots, too. The country’s testing capacity has also been strained, adding to concerns that companies will be unable to meet the rule’s testing requirements.

  Even the lawyers don’t know what to do.

  “My clients are totally confused as, quite frankly, am I,” Erin McLaughlin, a labor and employment lawyer at Buchanan, Ingersoll & Rooney, said on Saturday. “My sense is that there are a lot of employers scrambling to try and put their mandate programs in place.”

  With the issue still being viciously contested in the courts, the legal reality of the situation is that the order is still pending, so in effect, the Biden Administration has been stymied.

  With so much likely riding on a decision from the nation’s highest court, how much longer until this becomes another cudgel used by the progressive left to push their court packing agenda, which is not dead, since President Biden and VP Kamala Harris mostly refuse to talk about it publicly.

  No company has been spared the whirlwind of changes in the last week, set off by the spike in Covid cases that have, in some instances, cut into their work forces. Then on Friday, an appeals court lifted the legal block on the vaccine rule, though appeals to the ruling were immediately filed, leaving the rule’s legal status up in the air. On Saturday, hours after the appeals court ruling, the Labor Department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration urged employers to start working to get in compliance. But OSHA also gave employers some leeway, pushing back full enforcement of the rule until February, recognizing that for all its best intentions the rollout of the rule has been muddled.

  For companies struggling to meet OSHA’s standards because of testing shortages, the Labor Department said Sunday that it would “consider refraining from enforcement” if the employer has shown a good-faith effort to comply.

  The fact that many states have cities (most notably NYC) have rolled out their own rules for enforcement adds another layer of complexity to the whole mess.

  Adding a layer of confusion, many states and cities have created their own vaccine rules — some more stringent than the federal government’s, as in New York City, where an option to test out of vaccine requirements isn’t allowed, while some, like Florida, have sought to undermine OSHA’s rule. There’s also the question of whether companies will eventually be required to mandate boosters, which would require accommodating the six-month delay between the second and third shots.

  And as far as Wall Street is concerned, their current state of vaccine enforcement is “we’re not going to talk about it.”

  JPMorgan Chase, whose decision to require vaccines is complicated by its sprawling retail operations across the United States, declined to comment on how the court’s most recent decision, along with the recent spike in cases, affects any plans to mandate vaccines. But the bank on Friday told its American employees who do not work in bank branches that “each group should assess who needs to come into the office, work priorities and who should revert to working from home on a more regular basis over the next few weeks.”

  At this point, opponents of the rule, which includes the National Retail Federation, a trade group, haven’t changed their positions despite the “rise” of omicron (which, keep in mind, has only been confirmed in a tiny fraction of overall new cases).

  Even the spread of Omicron hasn’t changed the position of some of the vaccine rule’s most ardent opponents. The National Retail Federation, one of the trade groups challenging the administration’s vaccine rule, is among those that have filed a petition with the Supreme Court. The group is in favor of vaccinations but has pushed for companies to get more time to carry out mandates. Still, even as it fights the administration’s rule, the federation is also holding twice weekly calls with members to compare notes on how to carry it out.

  “There’s no question that the increased number of variants like Omicron certainly don’t make it less dangerous,” said Stephanie Martz, the group’s chief administrative officer and general counsel. “The legitimate, remaining question is, is this inherent to the workplace?”

  Then of course there’s the booster question.

  And employers face yet another uncertainty: Should they mandate boosters? And will they be required to?

  When will all of this insanity and confusion end?

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 20:00

• Why Ted Cruz Wants Bitcoin Miners In The Lone Star State
  Why Ted Cruz Wants Bitcoin Miners In The Lone Star State

  Authored by Felicity Bradstock via OilPrice.com,

  • Crypto-miners are flocking to some of the country’s biggest energy-producing states, but it’s not just the cheap power bringing them there.

  • Miners are looking to gas-flaring as a potential energy source, one that could help curb one of Big Oil’s most controversial practices.

  • Bitcoin miners are also pleading their case to ERCOT, suggesting they could help the electric provider tackle its supply and demand problems by bringing equilibrium to the grid.

  

  Crypto-enthusiasts believe the digital currency could become closely interwoven with the energy industry of the future, improving ageing infrastructure downfalls as well as helping to reduce carbon emissions. So how will the magical virtual money help the fossil fuel and renewables sector in the coming years?

  Texas, the home of many crypto start-ups, is seeing several new companies seek partnerships with Big Oil and state energy actors to integrate their operations into energy strategies for the next decade. The Bitcoin mining community believes that adding another electricity consumer to the already oversaturated system could help, maybe somewhat surprisingly. 

  Right now, the existing grid system – Electric Reliability Council of Texas, aka ERCOT, provides electricity to around 90 percent of the state of Texas. But it is temperamental as it requires a careful equilibrium between supply and demand to function well. It’s for this reason that crypto companies are suggesting that additional buyers in the system, that can take whatever amount of power is delivered to them at any time of day, will help maintain this balance. 

  Bitcoin miners could benefit from greater access to electricity, and the grid would benefit from the almost immediate responsiveness of the user. This is thanks to the ability of bitcoin machinery to turn on in a matter of seconds. Therefore, energy can be taken from and sent back to the grid as needed. 

  Senator Ted Cruz  explained, “If you have a moment where you have a power shortage or a power crisis, whether it’s a freeze or some other natural disaster where power generation capacity goes down, that creates the capacity to instantaneously shift that energy to put it back on the grid.”

  Innovations like these have arisen in response to dramatic failures in ageing U.S. infrastructure. Earlier this year, we saw the Texas electricity grid fail in response to a severe winter storm. At the same time, gas and water supplies were stalled, leading to significant energy shortages and, ultimately, in the loss of several lives. Although President Biden is currently pursuing a trillion-dollar infrastructure bill, this will only fix some of the problems and could take years to carry out. So, alternative solutions from start-ups seem increasingly appealing when looking at the alternative. 

  But this is not the first intervention we have seen from crypto start-ups in the energy sector. Tech companies in Houston, a digital currency hub, are recommending the construction of huge crypto-mines to run on renewable energy. It is estimated that digital currency mining uses around 0.5% of all electricity consumed worldwide or 7 times as much as Google. Therefore, switching away from fossil fuels to renewables would mean a dramatic reduction in the carbon footprint of Bitcoin and other currencies. 

  Tech company, Lancium, announced plans in November to construct Bitcoin mines in Texas, worth $150 million, to run on wind and solar power. As West Texas is part of the country’s ‘wind belt’ and the state has good sun quality on average, it makes it the perfect location for this type of project. In fact, the region is expecting to double its sun and wind energy output within the next five years, encouraging greater interest in tech and energy partnerships. 

  Crypto-energy projects are already up and running in some parts of the country. In Wyoming, for example, the company JAI mines Bitcoin for itself and energy investors who want a piece of the action, running power mining rigs from electricity converted from gas flares. Gas that would typically be released into the atmosphere is, instead, captured and reused. The company, like many others, is now hoping to expand operations to Texas and other states. 

  At present, gas flaring contributes around 1 percent of global carbon emissions. As governments push for net-zero and companies strive to decarbonise their operations, a crypto-energy partnership could be just what the doctor ordered. A by-product of fracked shale, gas is flared because it is seen as unprofitable. But with increasing international pressure for Big Oil to reduce its carbon footprint, digital currency companies quickly came up with a way to reuse this gas to run their mines.  

  As investment figures in digital currencies are climbing, the worldwide electricity use associated with this mining system will continue to rise. Contributing a significant proportion of the world’s energy use, it seems only logical that crypto companies join forces with oil, gas, and renewables firms. 

  Whether running off waste gas and reducing emissions or contributing to the construction of major green energy projects, it seems that the two sectors will continue to cross paths so long as digital currencies maintain their recent appeal. However, the volatility of these types of currencies could deter energy companies from investing until their future becomes more certain.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 19:40

• Israel Puts US On No-Fly List For 1st Time, Citing Omicron
  Israel Puts US On No-Fly List For 1st Time, Citing Omicron

  On Monday Israeli parliament ministers voted to ban all travel into the United States for its citizens amid the spread of the Omicron variant. It’s expected to take effect Tuesday night, at midnight, and significantly marks the first time ever the US has been placed on Israel’s official no-fly list.

  Additional bans placed on the growing list include Italy, Belgium, Hungary, Morocco, Portugal, Canada, Switzerland, and Turkey. The UAE and South Africa also previously red-listed at the start of this month, along with some Scandinavian countries where the virus is believed spreading.

  At the beginning of the pandemic Tel Aviv had issued a temporary blanket travel ban, which by definition also included the US, but it’s widely believed this was a tactic to avoid angering the Trump administration at the time by singling out the US where Covid-19 had been exploding.

  

  Akin to Australia and some other nations seen as implementing some of the strictest global measures, Israel has opened several state-run quarantine hotels for inbound travelers. They must stay until they show a negative Covid test, after which they are required to continue their quarantine at home for at least seven days.

  A new “coronavirus hotel” is also expected to open at the country’s main Ben Gurion International Airport, according to Times of Israel, taking the total number of such state hotels to five.

  As of this week, Israel now has a total of 10 countries on its “red list” of places to which Israelis are barred from traveling. This also at a time Israeli leaders are pushing to get all children ages 5 and up vaccinated.

  I’m dead that Trump thinks Netanyahu was loyal to him personally instead of just whoever happened to become President.

  “Trump blasts Netanyahu for disloyalty: “F**k him”” https://t.co/suMON7H7Ic

  — Hamza (@hamzadawud) December 11, 2021

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

  Interestingly, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett admitted on Monday that despite the country being among the world’s foremost “ultra-vaxxed” populations, most people are eventually going to get Covid: 

  Prime Minister Naftali Bennett hinted Monday at future health restrictions and said that while most people may eventually contract COVID-19, being vaccinated would keep their illness from “being a big deal.”

  At a meeting with education officials about vaccinating children, Bennett said Israel would race to make sure every eligible kid was immunized in the next two weeks, as Israel girds for what is expected to be a major wave of new cases fueled by the fast-spreading Omicron variant.

  “This is a wave that we cannot stop, but we can delay and slow and diminish its strength,” Bennet added in his remarks.

  His comment on hoping the illness would for most people not be a “big deal” is interesting, given we’re clearly far past this point in terms of extreme curbs on individual freedoms and rights in the country, which was among the first to implement a “green pass” – or what’s essentially a vaccine passport required to enter restaurants, bars, and all public venues. We would assume most people have experienced this as the far greater “big deal”.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 19:20

• Here Is The "Fallback Plan" Manchin Would Support… And Why Goldman Thinks It Wouldn't Move The Needle
  Here Is The “Fallback Plan” Manchin Would Support… And Why Goldman Thinks It Wouldn’t Move The Needle

  The Washington Post reports that the most powerful man in Washignton – Senator Manchin – who singlehandedly destroyed Biden’s Build Back Better plan that passed in the House, presented a proposal to President Biden several days ago, before the negotiations fell apart, that totaled $1.8 trillion and consisted of universal pre-kindergarten, $500-600bn in climate-related subsidies, and expansion of ACA health insurance subsidies.

  As Goldman’s Alec Phillips writes, the report seems credible in light of CBO estimates that the cost of those policies would total around $1.7 trillion assuming that they all last for the full 10 years covered by the estimate.

  What is notable about Sen. Manchin’s reported proposal is that it does not include an extension of the expanded child tax credit (CTC). This is not surprising, since Sen. Manchin has criticized the full refundability of the expanded CTC enacted earlier this year.

  Nevertheless, it highlights the obstacles to enacting an extension of the CTC – republicans seem unlikely to support extending the CTC in its current fully-refundable form, leaving a reconciliation bill as the only vehicle to extend the current  version. However, Phillips writes that Manchin seems unlikely to support that. This might still leave the door open to a modified CTC – for example, keeping the higher dollar amounts ($3000/$3600 per child) but eliminating full refundability–but this would still cost well over $1 trillion, which would force congressional Democrats to choose between dropping child care/pre-k or climate provisions from the bill (assuming that the top line remains $1.75 trillion).  

  Instead, if the White House were to accept Manchin’s proposal, the top-line figure of $1.8 trillion might look similar to the House-passed BBB but the effect in FY2022 would be much smaller. Specifically, the House bill would have increased spending (including tax credits) by roughly $200bn (0.9% of GDP) in FY2022, with the child tax credit extension accounting for the majority of this. By contrast, a package consisting of the House’s provisions on child care, pre-k, ACA subsidies and green energy would total around $30bn in FY2022 (0.1% of GDP).

  So while a fallback proposal can’t be ruled out, even if it were to pass next year it might not have much of an effect on the fiscal impulse to growth if it omits an extension of the child tax credit.

  

  Meanwhile, according to Politico, the two Joes – Manchin and Biden – spoke Sunday night after the blowup in negotiations around the president’s domestic agenda. According to the report, the conversation ended with a sense that negotiations would, in fact, resume around the Build Back Better Act in some form in the new year. The tone of conversation was cordial and it was agreed that they would speak again on legislative priorities.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 19:00

• Pentagon Cracks Down On 'Extremism' Within US Military
  Pentagon Cracks Down On ‘Extremism’ Within US Military

  It wasn’t enough to feminize the US military (China and Russia send their regards, we’re sure).

  According to the Associated Press, the Pentagon is now warning that ‘extremism’ within the ranks is increasing – requiring ‘detailed new rules’ that prohibit service members from engaging in certain activities.

  

  The announcement comes after senior defense officials tell AP that fewer than 100 military members are known to have been involved in ‘substantiated’ instances of extremist activity over the past year, but the number may grow – particularly among veterans.

  In short: the Pentagon is clamping down over a potential threat.

  The policy doesn’t necessarily change what is prohibited – but is “more of an effort to make sure troops are clear on what they can and can’t do,” particularly on social media.

  The new policy lays out in detail the banned activities, which range from advocating terrorism or supporting the overthrow of the government to fundraising or rallying on behalf of an extremist group or “liking” or reposting extremist views on social media. The rules also specify that commanders must determine two things in order for someone to be held accountable: that the action was an extremist activity, as defined in the rules, and that the service member “actively participated” in that prohibited activity. -AP

  Previous policies banned extremist activities but didn’t go into such great detail, and also did not specify the two step process to determine someone accountable. -AP

  The changes come after a focus group concluded that service members wanted better definitions of what was not allowed. That said, the new rules don’t provide a list of allegedly extremist organizations – and instead leave it up to commanders to determine if a subordinate is actively conducting extremist activities based on the definitions. The new rules lay out six broad groups of ‘extremist activities,’ as well as 14 definitions that would constitute active participation.

  The rules, said the officials, focus on behavior not ideology. So service members have whatever political, religious or other beliefs that they want, but their actions and behavior are governed.

  In addition to the new rules, the Pentagon is expanding its screening for recruits to include a deeper look at potential extremist activities. Some activities may not totally prevent someone from joining the military, but require a closer look at the applicant. -AP

  In a Monday message, Defense Secretary Lloyd “Raytheon” Austin said that the department believes that just a few service members are extremists, but that “even the actions of a few can have an outsized impact on unit cohesion, morale and readiness – and the physical harm some of these activities can engender can undermine the safety of our people.”

  And of course, there’s a national security threat which goes hand in hand with extremist views, according to the report.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 18:40

• Fauci's War on Science: The Smoking Gun
  Fauci’s War on Science: The Smoking Gun

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

  Those weeks following the release of the Great Barrington Declaration did feel odd…

  

  On the good side, medical doctors, scientists, public health workers, and citizens all over the world were thrilled that three top scholars in fields of public health and epidemiology had spoken out against lockdowns and for a reasoned approach to Covid. They eagerly signed the document. 

  Yes, there were some attempts to sabotage it too, with fake names and so on, which should have been a clue about what was coming. The fakes were deleted in days and new methods of confirming signatures were deployed. 

  The document, on the one hand, said nothing controversial. The right way to deal with this pandemic, it said, was to focus on those who could face severe outcomes from disease – a very plain point and nothing new. There was nothing to be gained by locking down the whole of society because of a pathogen with such a huge differential in its demographic impact. 

  The virus would have to become endemic in any case (including the realization of “herd immunity,” which is not a “strategy” but a descriptive term widely accepted in epidemiology) and certainly would not be stopped by destroying peoples’ lives and liberties. 

  The hope of the Declaration was simply that journalists would pay attention to a different point of view and a debate would begin on the unprecedented experiment in lockdowns. Perhaps science could prevail, even in this climate. 

  On the bad side, and at the very same time, following the release, the attacks began pouring in, and they were brutal, structured to destroy. The three main signers – Sunetra Gupta (Oxford), Martin Kulldorff (Harvard), and Jay Bhattacharya (Stanford) – made the statement as a matter of principle. It was also born of frustration with the prevailing narrative. 

  Mostly this declaration was intended as an educational effort. But the authors were being called vicious names and treated like heretics that should be burned. There certainly was no civil debate; quite the contrary. 

  It was all quite shocking given that the Declaration was a statement concerning what almost everyone in these professional circles believed earlier in the year. They were merely stating the consensus based on science and experience. Nothing more. Even on March 2, 2020, 850 scientists signed a letter to the White House warning against lockdowns, closures, and travel restrictions. It was sponsored by Yale University. Today it reads nearly like a first draft of the Great Barrington Declaration. Indeed on that same day, Fauci wrote to a Washington Post reporter: “The epidemic will gradually decline and stop on its own without a vaccine.”

  But following the March 13-16, 2020 lockdowns, the orthodoxy had evidently changed. And suddenly. The signers of the GBD had declined to change with it. Thus did they endure astonishingly brutal smears. What felt odd at the time was the sheer intensity of the attacks, as well as their dogmatism and ferocity. These attacks also had a strong political flavor that had little regard for science. 

  Already by the summer, it was very clear that the lockdowns had not achieved what they were supposed to achieve. Two weeks had stretched into many months, and the data on cases and deaths were uncorrelated with the “mitigation measures” that had been imposed on the country and the world. Meanwhile, millions had missed cancer screenings, schools and churches had been shut, public health was in a state of crisis, and small businesses and communities were fighting to stay alive. 

  It was obvious on October 4, 2020, when the Declaration was released, that it was a correct statement and that the lockdowns had failed by every measure. Following Trump’s fatal March 2020 decision to acquiesce to Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, the president had pushed for reopening the country and treating this pathogen as a disease with normal medical methods. He was not making much headway, however. The handful of people around Trump who had been responsible for pushing them were digging in, prepared to wage a full war on dissent. 

  What historian Phil Magness has discovered, with newly unearthed emails, comes not as a shock to any of us but it is satisfying to see the confirmation of what we suspected. It seemed at the time that the effort to attack and destroy both the GBD and its authors was coordinated from the top. Here at last is the proof that our intuition was not crazy. 

  The author of the initial email is Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health. The recipients were Anthony Fauci and H. Clifford Lane, NIAID Deputy Director for Clinical Research and Special Projects.The email calls for a “published take down” of the GBD that is both “quick and devastating.”

  

  That evening, Fauci wrote back, not with a reference to any scientific papers supporting lockdowns and so on but with a piece from the gadget publication called Wired, which said the GBD is wrong because “quite literally arguing with the past” because the lockdowns are no longer being used. Collins responded: “excellent.”

  

  The next day, Fauci struck again with an article from the pro-lockdown leftist newspaper The Nation. It’s a demoralizing reference simply because the public was led to believe that between his endless TV interviews, Fauci was scouring “the science” to find out more about SARS-CoV-2, not googling and landing on highly politicized and ideological webzines. What we find in these emails are highly political people who are obsessed not with science but with messaging and popular influences on the public mind.

  

  Days later, Collins himself gave quotes to the Washington Post that ridiculed the position that society should reopen. He was clearly attacking Trump and the White House generally. Fauci said not to worry about it because they were too busy with other things, e.g. the election. 

  

  Over the following weeks, many new pieces appeared in the popular press. These gentlemen eagerly shared them. 

  What do we learn from these emails?

  The attacks on tens of thousands of medical professionals and scientists were indeed encouraged from the top. The basis for the attacks were not scientific articles. They were heavily political popular pieces. This adds serious weight to the impression we all had at the time, which was that this was not really about science but about something far more insidious. 

  You can discover more about this in Scott Atlas’s book on the topic. These new emails confirm his account. It was an outright war on top scientists, people whose views on matters of public health were not different from the professional consensus only earlier in the year. For that matter, Anthony Fauci himself warned against lockdowns in January and February, favoring instead normal methods of mitigation. 

  My own estimate is that the convinced advocates of lockdowns when they took place were probably fewer than 50 in the US. How and why they managed to grab hold of the reins of power will be investigated by historians for many decades. The incredibly positive response to the Great Barrington Declaration, which has garnered 900,000 signatures in the meantime, demonstrates that there was and is still life remaining in traditional public health measures deployed throughout the 20th century and still respect for human dignity and science remaining among medical professionals and the general public. 

  Please remember that Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins are not just two scientists among hundreds of thousands. As the NIH site says, it “invests about $41.7 billion annually in medical research for the American people.” With that kind of spending power, you can wield a great deal of influence, even to the point of crushing dissent, however rooted in serious science the target might be. It might be enough power and influence to achieve the seemingly impossible, such as conducting a despotic experiment without precedent, under the cover of virus control, in overturning law, tradition, rights, and liberties hard won from hundreds of years of human experience. 

  This war on dissent against lockdowns is not only a scandal of our times. The lockdowns and now the mandates have fundamentally transformed society and its relationship to government, technology, media, and much more. The emergency continues. Protests have arisen the world over but they are hardly even covered by the media. We seem ever more to be on the precipice of total disaster, one that will be difficult to reverse. It is urgent that we know who did this, as well as how and why, and take steps to stop it before more damage is done and then becomes permanent. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 18:20

• The Real Brandon Speaks: "People Have A Right To Frustration & Anger"
  The Real Brandon Speaks: “People Have A Right To Frustration & Anger”

  The professional race car driver at the center of the viral, highly censored anti-Biden ‘Let’s Go Brandon‘ meme has finally opened up about his thoughts on the hilarious headline grabbing saga in a just published op-ed in Newsweek.

  To review, NASCAR driver Brandon Brown – a self identified Republican voter – clinched his first Xfinity Series race at Talladega in October, and during his live interview with NBC Sports reporter Kelli Stavast, loud “F**k Joe Biden” chants could be clearly heard from the packed stadium in the background. That’s when Stavast took it upon herself to censor the moment in real time, absurdly claiming before her national TV audience that they were really saying “Let’s go, Brandon”. 

  

  And the rest is history, with entire stadiums of fans at sports games now regularly in unison shouting Let’s go Brandon… Republican political rallies erupting in the same, and rap videos topping the charts on iTunes, and with literally hundreds of viral TikTok videos taking up the #LetsGoBrandonChallenge.

  Of course, the more that official platforms tried to censor it as “dangerous” and “hate speech” – the more it took off, resulting in Brandon Brown being put in the NASCAR and media spotlight. And now during the holidays, one can even buy “Let’s Go Brandon” t-shirts, Christmas ornaments, stickers, and other merchandise to express how they feel about Biden. People have been fired from their jobs, or put under investigation, such as an airline pilot who dare to utter the phrase over the intercom during a flight.

  “All the advice I got from those around my racing career was to stay quiet after that now-famous interview. No one knew how my sponsors would react and, in my world, there is no car to drive without the sponsors,” Brandon describes in the Newsweek op-ed.

  He introduced the piece with, “My name is Brandon. Brandon Brown, to be specific. Yes, that Brandon”…

  I am Brandon, the NASCAR driver and unlikely meme. A 28-year-old who now finds himself in the middle of the American political conversation. As a pro driver, I never expected to be in the passenger seat of my own viral moment.

  …Since that race, my name has been chanted in literally hundreds of stadiums across the country, spanning nearly every conceivable sport (and then some). I’ve heard my name chanted in bars, at events, in the course of everyday life and even in the chambers of Congress.

  He further describes that he’s turned down countless requests for press interviews precisely become he was deeply fearful of being canceled by NASCAR and his own sponsors. As he says, without sponsors – it becomes impossible to drive professionally 

  “So, I kept quiet. I turned down more press requests than I imagined someone could ever get—especially someone just starting his NASCAR career. I was afraid of being canceled by my sponsors, or by the media, for being caught up in something that has little to do with me,” he writes.

  He then explains why he’s now speaking, ending his silence… he understands that this has become a rallying cry for millions of Americans suffering and struggling under government elites who “only make it worse”…

  I understand that millions of people are struggling right now and are frustrated. Struggling to get by and struggling to build a solid life for themselves and their families, and wondering why their government only seems to make it worse. People have a right to frustration—even anger.

  Far from denying the central importance of the “Let’s go Brandon” moment, the professional driver now appears to be publicly embracing it with the op-ed, saying he’s “no longer going to be silent” about the situation…

  I have no interest in leading some political fight. I race cars. I am not going to endorse anyone, and I am certainly not going to tell anyone how to vote.

  But I’m also no longer going to be silent about the situation I find myself in, and why millions of Americans are chanting my name. I hear them, even if Washington does not.

  And yet even with him explaining his perspective in his own words, some corners of mainstream media are already trying to spin it, with for example The Hill ignoring his words in context, instead emphasizing in their misleading headline that the Driver of ‘Let’s Go Brandon’ fame has ‘zero desire to be involved in politics’

  But in his own words spelled out with crystal clarity in the article he emphasizes that as he races, he’ll at the same time no longer hesitate to loudly speak up about issues he’s passionate about, also pledging, “To my fans, to NASCAR fans and to everyone who has chanted my name: I dedicate myself this upcoming season to compete hard on the racetrack and to spotlight issues that are important to me and to millions of Americans across the country.”

  Brown signs off the op-ed with… “Let’s Go America.”

  * * *

  And now to revisit the famous post-race interview that started it all…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 18:00

• Court Fight Over Dead People On Voter Lists Heats Up In Michigan
  Court Fight Over Dead People On Voter Lists Heats Up In Michigan

  Authored by Steven Kovac via The Epoch Times,

  How many dead people should remain on Michigan voter rolls? The answer may be determined by a federal judge…

  

  The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) on Nov. 3 sued Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, for allegedly failing to remove from the state’s voter rolls the names of 26,000 registered voters who have either died or moved away.

  According to PILF President J. Christian Adams, the failure to remove the names “creates an opportunity for fraud.”

  The lawsuit also alleges that 334 people registered to vote after they died, with 15 of those registrations occurring in 2020.

  Benson’s office said they do not comment on pending litigation.

  However, Tracy Wimmer, a spokesperson for Benson, told Fox News, “Michigan maintains its voter registration list in accordance with all state and federal laws.”

  “As we’ve seen throughout the past year, meritless lawsuits serve as press releases for those seeking to further election misinformation and undermine American democracy,” Wimmer said.

  The office of the Michigan Attorney General filed a response to PILF’s complaint and a motion to dismiss the case on December 13, 2021.

  In the reply, Benson denies any failures to perform list maintenance activities required by federal law.

  Her lawyers point out that the National Voting Rights Act (NVRA) requires only that a state conduct a general program and make a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official voter registration list by notice of death, change of residence, or the voter’s request.

  “The NVRA does not require a state enact an exhaustive program to remove every voter who becomes ineligible,” wrote Benson’s counsel.

  The complaint alleges, that “when more than 25,000 deceased registrants are identified on the qualified voter list and not removed for an extended period of years, the list maintenance program is not only unreasonable, it is failing.

  “The NVRA does not simply require a percentage or portion of dead registrants to be removed, it requires a program that actually detects dead registrants and removes them.”

  Among other requests, PILF is asking the court to require Benson to remove the names of deceased voters from the rolls and to order her to allow inspection of records pertaining to the implementation of programs and activities used in cleaning up the voter list.

  Adams said the numbers speak for themselves and is confident the suit will survive the motion to dismiss.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/20/2021 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Why The US Will Reject Russia's Proposed Peace-Settlement
  Why The US Will Reject Russia’s Proposed Peace-Settlement

  Authored by Eric Zuesse via TheDuran.com,

  On December 17th, Russia presented America with a proposed peace-settlement that would empower the U.N. to be not only nominally but in reality the one-and-only body that can create international laws. 

  The proposed treaty would obliterate America’s effort to replace the U.N. by America’s never-defined ‘rules-based international order’, which was first proposed by the neoliberal-neoconservative Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in 2008 and never ever defined by anyone because it implicitly would replace international laws (from the U.N.) by the edicts of the U.S. Government, which nobody (outside the U.S. regime’s vassal-nations such as Australia) will accept. So: Rudd’s ‘rules-based international order’ is really just an attempt to impose the U.S. empire to replace the U.N., and that won’t be able to be done without a Third World War in which the U.S. and its allies go to war against the rest of the world and win, which is impossible because there would be only losers: any WW III would end all life on this planet, or at least all human life, because of nuclear winter if for no other reason. (Yes, it’s possible for BOTH sides to lose a war.) It’s just an American-empire pipe-dream for individuals (such as Rudd, and Bush, and Obama, and Trump, and Biden, and all American ‘allies’ or vassal-nations) who insist that, as the neoconservative Obama told the U.S. military on 28 May 2014:

  The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation. That has been true for the century passed and it will be true for the century to come. … Russia’s aggression toward former Soviet states unnerves capitals in Europe, while China’s economic rise and military reach worries its neighbors. From Brazil to India, rising middle classes compete with us, and governments seek a greater say in global forums. … It will be your generation’s task to respond to this new world.

  In short: all other nations are “dispensable,” and all rising and competing less-wealthy nations are enemies to whom “your generation’s task” is “to respond” (militarily) to that economic competition, from such ‘enemies’.

  

  That would be the spirit in which the proposed “rules-based international order” would be imposed upon the world. And, now, Russia is finally demanding that America stand down from America’s demand to replace the U.N. by its own international dictatorship (no Security Counsel; no General Assembly). Russia, finally, is telling America that ONLY the U.N. is, and will be, the source of international laws; America won’t.

  Russia is demanding that, just as the originator of the U.N., FDR, had been intending ever since 11 August 1941 (see pages 5&6), which was even before America entered WW II, and until his death on 12 April 1945, when he became replaced by the neoconservative (i.e., seeking an all-encompassing global U.S. empire) President Harry S. Truman, all empires need to be ended now and replaced by a U.N. that is, at last, fully empowered to make and to judge and to impose international laws so that all geostrategically important weaponry will be placed under the U.N.’s control, as FDR had intended. Russia is now (in effect) demanding that this finally be done. Russia is demanding that all empires, including America’s, must be REPLACED by a U.N. that will be re-formed in the image that FDR had been advocating, ever since 11 August 1941. That is what Russia is demanding now: the end of the “neoconservatism” that Truman had started on 25 July 1945, when Truman decided (based largely upon the advice of General Eisenhower, whom Truman practically worshipped) that either the Soviet Union would take over the world, or else America would, and when both he and Ike chose for America to take over the world, and then all subsequent U.S. Presidents have been following through with that neoconservative plan — the Truman-Eisenhower plan, for a world controlled by America’s billionaires (the people who now control the U.S. Government).

  So, since what followed after FDR has been Truman’s America, instead of FDR’s America, this America will say no to that.

  Russia also presented, on the same day, a proposed “AGREEMENT ON MEASURES TO ENSURE THE SECURITY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND MEMBER STATES OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION”, which would start as being an “agreement,” but would be intended ultimately to produce a set of treaties between Russia and each of the NATO nations.

  The great teacher on international national-security law, Alexander Mercouris, headlined on December 18th, “Russia Demands US Strategic Retreat, Demands US Agree Draft Treaties Ending/Reversing NATO Expansion, Revive INF, ABM Treaties, Respect UN, End US Exceptionalism, Regime Change Wars”, and explained there in a one-hour video, in very clear terms, what Putin is proposing in each of these two documents, and what the significance of those proposals are, though those proposals will be the start of either serious negotiations for a fundamental change in the current world-system, or else WW III. This will be a major turning-point in history, either way.

  U.S.-and-allied arms-manufacturers will no doubt be terrified that their decades-long gravy trains are finally being seriously challenged, and the billionaires who are riding those trains will be doing everything they possibly can to continue the current direction of those trains, ever-closer toward WW III (and ever-bigger arms-sales).

  *  *  *

  Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 23:30

• Americans Brace For Holiday "Tidal Wave" As Omicron Speeds Infections
  Americans Brace For Holiday “Tidal Wave” As Omicron Speeds Infections

  The world is two years in to the COVID pandemic, and yet for many, things are starting to seem like they’re moving in reverse. As European nations start with the latest round of lockdowns, the US is seeing new cases and hospitalizations climb at an alarming rate, as the omicron variant is reportedly showing the world that it’s even more virulent than scientists had anticipated.

  Across the US, over the last month alone, hospitalizations for COVID have jumped 45%, and confirmed cases have increased 40% to a weeklong average of 123K new US infections a day.

  

  Speaking on Friday, Pfizer’s CEO predicted the pandemic will last until 2024. He also said a weaker version of the mRNA vaccines being doled out to adults generated a weaker than expected response, which could delay the approval of shots for children younger than 5.

  As for American sports leagues, the NFL has rescheduled three weekend games after multiple teams were hard by outbreaks. The NHL added another game to its recent list of postponements, and many are beginning to doubt that the league will send the best players for the Winter Olympics in Beijing.

  Back in NYC, where viral videos of police being booed by patrons after storming restaurants to ensure everybody inside is in compliance with the city’s vaccination rules, the Radio City Rockettes have cancelled the rest of their holiday performances, while the Michael Jackson musical “MJ” on Broadway has cancelled performances through Dec. 27.

  Generally speaking, early studies have shown that omicron is much more agile and easily transmissible, even for those who have been “fully vaccinated” a definition that – as Dr. Anthony Fauci has hinted – might change.

  Preliminary data in South Africa suggests Omicron leads to milder illness than the Delta variant, which is still driving much of the current wave of infections. But a British study released on Friday found no difference in severity between the two variants

  But Dr. Fauci suggested that with the growing number of cases, there will also be a growing number of deaths.

  While lockdowns of workplaces and public venues haven’t been instituted – at least not yet – it’s clear fears about the new variant is already having an impact on public life. Many Americans are already delaying holiday plans. Many have been stunned by the speed at which omicron has developed.

  “Two weeks ago, everyone was boosted. Then the infections went up exponentially,” she said. “By January, who is going to feel safe? I just pulled the plug on it.”

  Eric Hrubant, the chief executive of CIRE Travel, said he hadn’t yet seen a wave of cancellations, as he did in August when the Delta variant swept the country. But worried clients have inundated the agency with calls about new COVID-19 protocols, such as mandatory travel quarantines.

  “People aren’t panicking,” he said. “People are making educated decisions.”

  Several US states have already reached alarming levels of cases and hospitalizations. The US states reporting the highest 7-day average of infections are New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Michigan. In some states, like Michigan and Ohio, hospitals are already being overwhelmed by the number of patients. Starting Monday, exhausted hospital workers in Ohio will be getting some help from the National Guard.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 23:05

• Rise Of Gaddafi's Son Throws Libyan Elections Into Chaos, Alarms West
  Rise Of Gaddafi’s Son Throws Libyan Elections Into Chaos, Alarms West

  Via Southfront.org,

  The presidential and political elections scheduled for December 24th in Libya will not be held. It is certain now. Only official communication from the National High Electoral Commission is awaited. Libya risks a new power vacuum, because both Prime Minister Abdelhamid Dbeibah and Head of State Mohamed Younis Ahmed al-Manfi would have fallen from their posts in coincidence with the elections. Their mandate was completed and linked to the electoral consultation.

  Saif Al Islam Gaddafi’s candidacy destroyed the already precarious balance between the factions competing for power in Libya. The country is divided into three major areas of influence. Tripolitania is substantially under the protection of the Turkish government, Cyrenaica – currently the only “quiet” region – is governed by the Libyan National Army led by General Haftar and is under Russian and Egyptian influence. And finally the Fezzan, the reservoir of much of Libyan wealth with 70 per cent of hydrocarbons. Precisely in the constituency of Sebha, the most important city of Fezzan, Saif Al Islam Gaddafi had presented his candidacy as president of the Libyan Republic.

  

  The pressures of the international community to celebrate the vote have stalled due to the friction between the various actors in Libyan politics. If the vote were truly free, Libya would undoubtedly choose Saif Al Islam as the new head of state. It is the result of all the pre-election polls carried out by the media and social media operators in recent weeks. Gaddafi’s name would have defeated every competitor: an epochal defeat for the United Nations and for the new leaders of Libya after 2011.

  There are clear signals from the political and military fields. Tripoli came under the control of armed militias again last week. Colonel Salah Badi’s Al Samoud Brigade showed the total inconsistency of the Dbeibah/AlMenfi duo. In a few hours, Colonel Badi’s vehicles brought the key points of power in Tripoli under control, from the presidential palace to the Ministry of Defense. At the same time, the Lybian National Army was besieging the city of Sebha. The objective of General Haftar’s troops was to put the 116th Brigade under their control. Mission accomplished. Haftar’s army now controls two of the three main Libyan regions.

  What appears to be the prelude to a civil war is actually a “risiko game” that serves to reposition the forces in the field and restore a stable balance. For Dbeibah and Al Menfi there is no hope of remaining at the helm of the country after the deadline of 24 December. The great laborer is Aquila Saleh, former head of state in Libya between 2014 and 2015. After leaving office in favor of Fayez Al Serraj (the president imposed on Libya by the international community), Saleh continued his work of political texture from Tobruk. Candidate in the elections on 24 December, the Libyan politician managed to find a solution that satisfies all the forces in the field. A “unitary” solution which consists in being all aligned against the return of a Gaddafi to power.

  Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, son of former Libyan ruler Muammar Gaddafi, will be permitted to run in Libya’s presidential election after being briefly disqualified for possible war crimes. https://t.co/WTbNNHQnz8

  — ABA International (@ABAInternatl) December 13, 2021

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

  Thus, eternal rivalries are destined to turn into convenient alliances in the near future. Saleh’s plan involves the creation of some guarantee figures. With the elderly leader originally from the city of Al Qubbah as president of the nation, the leadership of the government would be entrusted to the pro-Turkish Fathi Bashaga, former Minister of Internal Affairs of the Al Serraj government. The Saleh-Bashaga ticket is nothing new. The two presented themselves together at the final votes of the Libyan Political Dialogue Forum in Geneva (LPDF, an intra-Libyan series of meetings started in late 2020, aiming to quickly lead to Libyan elections and todemocractic legitimacy of Libyan institutions). The vote on January 18, 2021 saw Saleh and Bashaga (both backed by the US State Department) defeated by five votes by two virtually unknown politicians: current Prime Minister Dbeibah and President Al Manfi.

  The Libyan government will also have two vice presidents. One’s name is sure: Khaled Al Misri, one of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya. Al Misri had announced for months that the Brotherhood would not participate in the elections.

  It remains to be clarified which role to assign to Libya’s third major key player: General Haftar. Saleh played a mediating role between the commander of the Lybian National Army and the former Minister of the Interior Bashaga. Haftar, or whoever for him, will have the task of coordinating the military defense system of the whole of Libya. Only a year and a half ago, Haftar’s militias and national government troops (supported by the Turkish contingent) clashed in Operation Volcan of Rage for the conquest of Tripoli. A long time has passed since then.

  Muammar Gaddafi was brutally executed in the street by US/NATO-backed “rebels” on Oct.20,2011 near Sirte.

  

  Gaddafi’s ghost, symbolically embodied in his eldest son, is frightening enough to force the two old rivals to forge a new alliance. The agreement also went through the scrutiny of the Turkish government, which gave the green light. Once in office, the Saleh-Bashaga government will have to set a new date for the elections. But it will be a long time. First, it is necessary to settle the accounts, once and for all, with the “old enemy” of all time: the ghost of Gaddafi.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 22:40

• Russia Preparing To 'Fight' Over Space Tourism Supremacy
  Russia Preparing To ‘Fight’ Over Space Tourism Supremacy

  Russia is set to compete with billionaires, the United States and China in an ambitious bid to relaunch their fledgling space tourism industry, according to AFP.

  In its first tourist launch in 12 years, the Kremlin sent two adventurers to the International Space Station (ISS) – Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezwa and his assistant. Next, Russia is mulling plans to add a special module onto the ISS for visitors to be able to take spacewalks outside the station, and eventually, trips to the moon.

  

  “We will not give this niche to the Americans. We are ready to fight for it,” Russian space chief Dmitry Rogozin told reporters at a press conference related to the Maezawa launch.

  In the early 2000s, Russian space agency Roscosmos was sending wealthy tourists to space on a regular basis – which came to a screeching halt in 2011 after NASA retired its shuttle for astronauts and booked every available Roscosmos seat for the next decade.

  

  After Elon Musk’s SpaceX launched a successful trip to the ISS, however, NASA dropped Roscosmos, freeing up seats for tourists at a cost of $90 million per flight. The change left the cash-strapped Russian space agency in difficult shape, compounded by budget cuts and corruption scandals.

  In short, Russia had no choice but to start opening seats up to tourism – starting at an estimated $50 – $60 million per seat, which covers the cost of constructing the three-person Soyuz spacecraft in order to shuttle a crew of two, and a rich passenger to make the endeavor financially feasible.

  “The Russian space industry is reliant on consistent orders for these launches,” industry analyst Vitaly Yegorov told AFP.

  In addition to operating funds, Russian space tourism is about pride.

  “It’s national prestige. It gets young people interested in manned spaceflight. It’s the future, after all,” says Dmitry Loskutov, head of Glavkosmos — a subsidiary of Roscosmos responsible for commercial projects, including tourism.

  Russia, China and the US are the only three countries capable of manned flights, however competition from newcomers such as SpaceX, Jeff Bezos and Richard Branson has put pressure on the Kremlin to beef up their program.

  According to Andrei Ionin of the Russian Academy of Cosmonautics, sending people into ‘simple’ orbit for a few minutes like the above newcomers are doing is no comparison to actually boarding the ISS.

  “It’s like comparing the Ferrari and the Renault market,” he said – a point echoed by Loskutov, who said that the SpaceX and Bezos ‘Blue Origin’ trips were more a part of the “entertainment industry” than real space travel.

  According to Rogozin, the potential new ISS module would be a “separate tourist module,” which could allow for the possibility of new routes – such as following the path of the first human in space – Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 22:15

• Former Harvard Chemistry Chair Admits To Taking Tens Of Thousands Of Dollars From China
  Former Harvard Chemistry Chair Admits To Taking Tens Of Thousands Of Dollars From China

  Authored by Eva Fu via The Epoch Times,

  The former chair of Harvard University’s chemistry department accused of hiding Chinese ties had admitted to taking tens of thousands of dollars from China, a video presented to the federal court on Dec. 17 shows.

  

  The video, shot during federal investigators’ interrogation of nanoscientist Charles Lieber, was played for jurors during the Friday court hearing, the fourth day of the trial on Lieber’s alleged false statements about China funding.

  The 62-year-old Harvard professor had maintained that he didn’t take payments from a Chinese university except for compensation of his travel costs to China. But he shifted account quickly after Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents Robert Plumb and Kara Spice accosted him with copies of evidence, including a bilingual contract he signed with the Wuhan University of Technology (WUT) in 2011.

  “That’s pretty damning,” Lieber, dressed in a blue jacket, told the agents at the campus police station during a three-hour interrogation, which took place on the day of Lieber’s arrest nearly two years ago. “Now that you bring it up, yes, I do remember,” he said in the recording, local media reported.

  The five-year agreement described Lieber as a “strategic scientist” at the Chinese school that entitled him to $50,000 per month with approximately $158,000 in living expenses. It also alluded to his future involvement with China’s Thousand Talents Plan, a state-run program to solicit top scientific and specialized experts from around the world.

  Later in the interview, FBI agents showed Lieber an email he wrote, asking the Wuhan university to pay half of his salary in cash with the other half deposited into a Chinese bank account.

  “I can’t even believe I did this,” Lieber said in response, local media reported. “It’s my mistake and obviously I made a mistake.”

  

  Charles Lieber (L) and his defense lawyer Marc Mukasey exit the John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse in Boston, Mass., on Dec. 17. (Learner Liu/The Epoch Times)

  Lieber said he likely made no more than six trips to China around 2012 and was paid between $10,000 and $20,000 each time, according to local media reports. He had spent the money—a total he estimated to be between $50,000 and $100,000—on groceries and living expenses, such as housekeeping.

  The payment was in $100 bills that Lieber brought back in his luggage, he said. He didn’t declare them at customs nor pay any taxes on the money.

  “If I brought it back, I didn’t declare it, and that’s illegal,” he told the FBI agents.

  In the recording, Lieber repeatedly said he couldn’t recall the precise amount of money, blaming the lapses on his “selective memory,” according to local reports.

  The Chinese bank account had a balance equivalent to $200,000 under Lieber’s name as of 2014, which the scientist said he never tapped into, in part because of his deteriorating health and a recent cancer diagnosis.

  ‘Very Dishonest’

  Since 2008, the Lieber Research Group at Harvard University that Lieber led has received more than $15 million in funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense.

  Lieber was a contractual participant of the Thousand Talents Plan between at least 2012 and 2017, a court document shows.

  While affiliation with the Chinese recruitment program isn’t itself illegal, it constitutes a foreign conflict of interest that researchers need to disclose for receiving federal grants.

  Lieber conceded that it “looks like I was very dishonest” when the Department of Defense questioned him about his involvement in the talent program in 2018.

  “I wasn’t completely transparent by any stretch of the imagination,” he told the agents in the recording.

  

  Harvard University professor Charles Lieber (L) leaves federal court with his lawyer Marc Mukasey, in Boston, Mass., on Dec. 14, 2021. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)

  Lieber said what had motivated him to get into the talent program was not money but a desire to get recognized. He was “younger and stupid” at the time, he said.

  “I’m not exactly competitive, but if I get other people to pursue an aspect based on the research I did, there is a trickle down,” Lieber said, according to local media reports. “Every scientist wants a Nobel Prize.”

  The Harvard professor later sought to distance himself from the Wuhan collaboration, including by canceling a trip to the school in June 2015.

  In a 2018 email to a research colleague two days after he was interviewed by the Department of Defense, Lieber expressed concerns about a Chinese web page listing him as directing the Wuhan research lab, saying, “I lost a lot of sleep worrying about all of these things last night and want to start taking steps to correct sooner than later.”

  “I will be careful about what I discuss with Harvard University, and none of this will be shared with government investigators at this time,” he wrote in the email, which was also presented in court on Friday.

  In the interrogation, though, he insisted that he didn’t do anything wrong—except that he “shouldn’t have had an agreement and accepted money.”

  “You’re right, it was wrong,” Lieber said when FBI agents asked why he decided to conceal the information from Harvard and U.S. authorities. “I was afraid of being arrested, like I am right now.”

  Lieber is facing six counts of federal charges, including lying to federal authorities, filing false income tax returns, and failing to report on his foreign bank and financial accounts. He has pleaded not guilty to all six.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 21:50

• Stocks, Bond Yields Tumble After Manchin "No" On Build Back Better, Goldman Slashes GDP
  Stocks, Bond Yields Tumble After Manchin “No” On Build Back Better, Goldman Slashes GDP

  A decisive “no” from Senator Joe Manchin on President Biden’s Build Back Better (BBB) social engineering spendfest has sparked anger from The White House and economic outlook cuts from Wall Street.

  While BBB enactment had already looked like a close call, in light of Manchin’s comments Goldman has removed the assumption that BBB will become law from its forecast.

  In light of their changed fiscal assumptions, Goldman lowers their real GDP forecast for 2022: 2% in Q1 (vs. 3% prior), 3% in Q2 (vs. 3.5% prior), and 2.75% in Q3 (vs. 3% prior).

  The main points from Goldman’s report are as follows:

  1. Senator Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) released a statement this morning indicating that he would not support President Biden’s Build Back Better (BBB) legislation, saying that his “concerns have only increased as the pandemic surges on, inflation rises and geopolitical uncertainty increases around the world”. His statement also cites electric grid reliability and the increased reliance on foreign supply chains as concerns, in reference to the bill’s energy and climate provisions. In apparent reference to the bill’s social benefits, he says “my Democratic colleagues in Washington are determined to dramatically reshape our society in a way that leaves our country even more vulnerable to the threats we face.” He also makes multiple references to concerns about the public debt and potential fiscal implications of the legislation.

  2. BBB no longer looks like the base case. We recently put the probability of a modified version of the BBB legislation passing at slightly better than even but, in light of Manchin’s comments, the odds have clearly declined and we will remove the assumption from our forecast. With headline CPI reaching as high as 7% in the next few months in our forecast before it begins to fall, the inflation concerns that Sen. Manchin and others have already expressed are likely to persist, making passage more difficult. The omicron variant is also likely to shift political attention back to virus-related issues and away from long-term reforms. There is still a possibility that Congress passes a few smaller short-term fiscal provisions aimed at virus-related issues, and it also still looks likely that Congress will pass a version of the Senate’s competitiveness legislation, which included around $250bn in economic incentives related to research, manufacturing, semiconductors and supply chains.

  3. The most important question for the near-term outlook is the fate of the expanded child tax credit. Sen. Manchin has already proposed adding work requirements on the credit, which could be done by making it only partly refundable, as it had been until 2021. In theory, congressional Democrats could finance a permanent extension of a partly- or non-refundable child tax credit at the current higher level ($3000/$3600 per child, depending on age) with the revenue from the tax increases in the House-passed BBB; Manchin has not objected to those tax increases. However, it would likely take several weeks to negotiate a new compromise, and with the expanded child tax credit expiring Dec. 31, the urgency to extend it is likely to fade while any negotiations take place. It is also unclear whether progressive Democrats would accept legislation that drops most of their other priorities. While we still think there is some chance that Congress extends the expanded child tax credit retroactively in some form, the odds of this happening seem to be less than even at this point.

  4. A failure to pass BBB has negative growth implications. We had already expected a negative fiscal impulse for 2022 as a result of the fading support from COVID-relief legislation enacted in 2020 and 2021, and without BBB enactment, this fiscal impulse will become somewhat more negative than we had expected. Specifically, the expiration of the child tax credit and the lack of the other new spending we had been expecting will reduce the fiscal impulse to growth by around 1pp in Q1, 0.5pp in Q2 and 0.25pp in Q3. With this change, our GDP forecast for 2022 now stands at 2% in Q1 (vs. 3% prior), 3% in Q2 (vs. 3.5% prior) and 2.75% in Q3 (vs. 3% prior).

  

  5. Most Fed officials likely expected the BBB Act or something like it to become law, and a failure to pass it would introduce some risk to our expectation that the FOMC will deliver the first rate hike in March.

  6. While the apparent demise of the BBB legislation has negative implications for near-term consumption, for financial markets there are also likely to be some offsetting positive effects. The odds of corporate tax increases have now declined, for example, which our equity strategists had estimated would reduce S&P profits by 3%. And while a failure of the BBB legislation would be a clear setback for the renewable energy sector, it would be a positive for biopharma which would no longer be tapped for more than $100bn in price reductions in the Medicare program.

  However, the bond and stock market have reacted (for now, apparently not seeing the ‘bad news is good news’ angle from Goldman) as one would expect, with futures lower (S&P futs are now underwater for December)…

  

  And 30Y Yields lower (also lower for the month)…

  

  The White House is furious.

  White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement on Sunday that Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) went back on his word when he announced Sunday that he will not support President Joe Biden’s mammoth “Build Back Better” spending package, likely imperiling the measure.

  “Senator Manchin’s comments this morning on FOX are at odds with his discussions this week with the President, with White House staff, and with his own public utterances.”

  Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a self-described democratic socialist, alleged Manchin “does not have the guts to stand up to powerful special interests” by voting for the bill. Sanders did not elaborate on who those “powerful special interests” may be.

  The White House will continue to apply pressure on Manchin to see whether he will reverse his position, Psaki said.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 21:25

• Morgan Stanley: Here Comes The China Upswing
  Morgan Stanley: Here Comes The China Upswing

  From Chetan Ahya, chief Asia economist at Morgan Stanley

  The China Upswing

  Over the years, China has experienced a number of mini-cycles. This year brought another iteration – the economy started the year on a strong footing but has entered a policy-induced downturn. The policy cycle has shifted from overtightening to easing, and our chief China economist Robin Xing estimates that GDP growth will accelerate to 5.5%Y in 2022. Investors we speak with are less confident in the recovery, but we think that this mini-cycle repeats a familiar pattern and policy-makers have already taken steps to reverse the downturn.

  Moreover, the recent statement after the Central Economic Working Conference confirms their resolve and increases our confidence on the recovery call.

  China’s mini economic cycles tend to follow policy cycles. Most downturns begin because of macro or regulatory tightening. Tighter policy starts out as counter- cyclical, typically when external demand is strong. But eventually it becomes pro-cyclical, sometimes because external demand conditions deteriorate (e.g., the onset of trade tensions in mid-2018). Once growth decelerates beyond the policy-makers’ comfort zone, their priorities shift to stabilizing growth and preventing an adverse spillover impact to the labor market. Their policy stance shifts accordingly – they first pause on tightening macro and regulatory policies, and then start to ease.

  In the current cycle, with the sharp pick-up in external demand, policy-makers stuck to their playbook and tightened macro policies to slow infrastructure and property spending. But policy tightening was unusually aggressive this time, with debt/GDP reduced by 10 percentage points in 2021. The property sector has seen the most prominent tightening.

  This tightening then became pro-cyclical. The Delta wave and China’s continued Covid-zero approach curtailed the recovery in consumption growth, keeping consumption below trend. Policy measures have extended beyond reducing excessive leverage, with regulatory tightening ranging across the internet, education and entertainment sectors, and a step-up in decarbonization efforts.

  The rapid succession of regulatory actions has taken markets by surprise, adding uncertainty, and they have lasted longer than expected, keeping market concerns on the boil.

  Now, with GDP growth decelerating to just 3.3%Y in 4Q21 (4.9% on a 2-year CAGR basis), policy-makers have hit pause on deleveraging and began to ease both monetary and fiscal policy a few weeks ago. RRR cuts were coupled with window guidance to banks to allocate credit to SMEs, renewables, mortgages and developer loans. Faster local government bond issuance will translate into stronger infrastructure spending, and property purchase restrictions have been lifted in a number of cities.

  This past week, top policy-makers convened at the Central Economic Working Conference (CEWC), an annual meeting that sets the agenda for the economy in the year ahead. Their statement acknowledged that “China’s economic development is facing three pressures: demand contraction, supply shock and weakening expectations”, suggesting to us that they will continue to take action to stem the downturn:

  • Policy-makers are prioritizing infrastructure investment in areas like pollution alleviation, carbon emission reduction, new energy sources, new technologies and new industrial clusters.

  • Regarding the property sector, the statement mentioned efforts to “support the commodity housing market to better satisfy homebuyers’ reasonable housing demand”. They will “enhance guidance on housing market expectations” and “promote a virtuous cycle” for the first time in the past decade. The January 2022 reset of mortgage loan quotas will help to lift home purchases.

  • As for decarbonization, a similar reset of the targets in the new year will alleviate near-term headwinds. Policy-makers have now indicated that they will first invest in alternative energy before curtailing fossil fuel-based energy sources.

  These easing measures will complement the sustained strength in exports and a pick-up in private capex, driving the recovery.

  

  The character of regulatory tightening is also changing at the margin. Policymakers are taking a more structured and institutionalized approach, and changes from here on will likely be more incremental. More broadly, the CEWC statement also made it clear that while policy-makers want to divide the economic pie more equally, the pie still needs to grow, which in our view will alleviate concerns about further actions that could weigh on private corporate sentiment.

  In terms of market implications, our China equity strategy team continues to prefer A-shares rather than offshore markets. Our China property and Asia credit strategy analysts are bullish on the China property sector as well as China HY property.

  The key risk to our call in the near term is the Omicron variant. The effectiveness of containment and tracing capabilities has improved over time such that each successive wave of Covid outbreaks has had a smaller impact on mobility and hence growth. However, Omicron’s greater transmissibility suggests to us that it will keep China’s Covid-zero policy in place for longer and could force China to impose more selective, surgical shutdowns than during the Delta wave.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 20:55

• Chicago's Ex-City Attorney Brands Mayor Lori Lightfoot A 'Disaster' After $2.9 Million Settlement Over Botched Police Raid
  Chicago’s Ex-City Attorney Brands Mayor Lori Lightfoot A ‘Disaster’ After $2.9 Million Settlement Over Botched Police Raid

  The former head city attorney for Chicago slammed Mayor Lori Lightfoot in a new op-ed, branding her tenure a “disaster” after the City Council voted on Wednesday to pay $2.9 million to a woman who was handcuffed by police while naked during a botched 2019 raid on her home, according to Fox News.

  

  Mark Flessner, the former head city attorney, resigned after the Law Department attempted to conceal video of the raid on the wrong address.

  The vote to pay the woman, Anjanette Young, came two days after a council committee advised that the city accept the settlement after Young’s attorney agreed to the figure.

  Lightfoot used the settlement at the taxpayer’s expense to “jump-start her reelection campaign,” Mark Flessner, who resigned after the Law Department attempted to withhold video of the raid on the wrong address, wrote in a recent op-ed for the Chicago Tribune. 

  Flessner outlined how officers executed a search warrant at the wrong address and Young was forced to stand for six seconds uncovered and then another 10 minutes handcuffed and covered with a blanket while officers secured the home. Recognizing the embarrassment Young must have felt and that she should have been compensated, Flessner said the settlement should have been far less, around $50,000. -Fox News

  According to Flessner, Lightfoot “has made a deal with the national civil rights movement to raise money for her reelection … In exchange for national civil rights leaders donating millions of dollars to her campaign, she will do their bidding, like she did in the Young case. Chicago will be poorer for it.”

  “The mayor publicly criticizes those who work for her and provides little to no guidance. She belittles the City Council, the police and fire departments, and the teachers,” Flessner added. “She has no professional respect for any of the hardworking, dedicated public servants who make this city run day to day. That is why her tenure has been a disaster.” 

  In response, Lightfoot said at a Wednesday press conference that she asked for Flessner’s resignation because she had “utterly lost confidence in his ability to function as the corporation counsel” and had acted to stop a media outlet from publishing the footage without her go-ahead. “Fundamentally, what was clear, is he just didn’t see [Young],” Lightfoot said. “He didn’t value her experience in that moment, as we all saw in that video,” she said.

  

  According to Chicago Corporation Counsel Celia Meza, by settling with Young, the city avoided what could have been a much higher price tag had her lawsuit gone to trial – particularly in light of the fact that Young had repeatedly told officers they were at the wrong address, and because the Civilian Office of Police Accountability recommended that eight officers either be suspended or fired over the Feb. 2019 raid.

  “No amount of money could erase what Ms. Young has suffered. No amount of money could provide Ms. Young with what she truly wants — which is to never have been placed in this situation in the first place,” Young’s attorney said in a Wednesday statement.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 20:20

• Why Is The Left Suddenly Worried About The End Of Democracy?
  Why Is The Left Suddenly Worried About The End Of Democracy?

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  What is behind recent pessimistic appraisals of democracy’s future, from Hillary Clinton, Adam Schiff, Brian Williams and other elite intellectuals, media personalities, and politicians on the Left? Some are warning about its possible erosion in 2024. Others predict democracy’s downturn as early 2022, with scary scenarios of “autocracy” and Trump “coups.”

  

  To answer that question, understand first what is not behind these shrill forecasts.

  • They are not worried about 2 million foreign nationals crashing the border in a single year, without vaccinations during a pandemic. Yet it seems insurrectionary for a government simply to nullify its own immigration laws.

  • They are not worried that some 800,000 foreign nationals, some residing illegally, will now vote in New York City elections.

  • They are not worried that there are formal efforts underway to dismantle the U.S. Constitution by junking the 233-year-old Electoral College or the preeminence of the states in establishing ballot laws in national elections.

  • They are not worried that we are witnessing an unprecedented left-wing effort to scrap the 180-year-old filibuster, the 150-year-old nine-person Supreme Court, and the 60-year tradition of 50 states, for naked political advantage.

  • They are not worried that the Senate this year put on trial an impeached ex-president and private citizen, without the chief justice in attendance, without a special prosecutor or witnesses, and without a formal commission report of presidential high crimes and misdemeanors.

  • They are not worried that the FBI, Justice Department, CIA, Hillary Clinton, and members of the Obama administration systematically sought to use U.S. government agencies to sabotage a presidential campaign, transition, and presidency, via the use of a foreign national and ex-spy Christopher Steele and his coterie of discredited Russian sources.

  • They are not worried that the Pentagon suddenly has lost the majority support of the American people. Top current and retired officers have flagrantly violated the chain-of-command, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and without data or evidence have announced a hunt in the ranks for anyone suspected of “white rage” or “white supremacy.”

  • They are not worried that in 2020, a record 64 percent of the electorate did not cast their ballots on Election Day.

  • Nor are they worried that the usual rejection rate in most states of non-Election Day ballots plunged—even as an unprecedented 101 million ballots were cast by mail or early voting.

  • And they are certainly not worried that partisan billionaires of Silicon Valley poured well over $400 million into selected precincts in swing states to “help” public agencies conduct the election.

  What then is behind this new left-wing hysteria about the supposed looming end of democracy?

  It is quite simple.

  The Left expects to lose power over the next two years – both because of the way it gained and used it, and because of its radical, top-down agendas that never had any public support.

  After gaining control of both houses of Congress and the presidency – with an obsequious media and the support of Wall Street, Silicon Valley, higher education, popular culture, entertainment, and professional sports—the Left has managed in just 11 months to alienate a majority of voters.

  The nation has been wracked by unprecedented crime and nonenforcement of the borders. Leftist district attorneys either won’t indict criminals; they let them out of jails or both.

  Illegal immigration and inflation are soaring. Deliberate cuts in gas and oil production helped spike fuel prices.

  All this bad news is on top of the Afghanistan disaster, worsening racial relations, and an enfeebled president.

  • Democrats are running 10 points behind the Republicans in generic polls, with the midterms less than a year away.

  • Joe Biden’s negatives run between 50 and 57 percent—in Donald Trump’s own former underwater territory.

  • Less than a third of the country wants Biden to run for reelection. In many head-to-head polls, Trump now defeats Biden.

  In other words, leftist elites are terrified that democracy will work too robustly.

  After the Russian collusion hoax, two impeachments, the Hunter Biden laptop stories, the staged melodramas of the Kavanaugh hearings, the Jussie Smollett con, the Covington kids smear, and the Rittenhouse trial race frenzy, the people are not just worn out by leftist hysterias, but they also weary of how the Left gains power and administers it.

  If Joe Biden were polling at 70 percent approval, and his policies at 60 percent, the current doomsayers would be reassuring us of the “health of the system.”

  They are fearful and angry not because democracy doesn’t work, but because it does despite their own media and political efforts to warp it.

  When a party is hijacked by radicals and uses almost any means necessary to gain and use power for agendas that few Americans support, then average voters express their disapproval.

  That reality apparently terrifies an elite.

  It then claims any system that allows the people to vote against the Left is not people power at all.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 19:45

• Amazon Bowed To Beijing's Propaganda Arm To Keep Chinese Sales Secured, New Report Reveals
  Amazon Bowed To Beijing’s Propaganda Arm To Keep Chinese Sales Secured, New Report Reveals

  Similar to what we noted about Apple and its “pay to play” arrangement with the Chinese government at the beginning of the month, it looks as though Amazon is also in the midst of trading integrity for profit when it comes to Beijing.

  Amazon was “marketing a collection of President Xi Jinping’s speeches and writings on its Chinese website about two years ago, when Beijing delivered an edict,” according to a new report from Reuters. Beijing wanted Amazon to stop allowing customer ratings and reviews from China.

  The demand from the CCP came as a result of negative reviews of Xi’s book, the report says. “I think the issue was anything under five stars,” a source told Reuters. 

  Amazon complied with the demand, according to two sources, and on Amazon.cn, customers are unable to review or rate the book. The comments section for the book is also disabled.

  Adhering to the demands of the CCP is one piece of a “deeper, decade-long effort by the company to win favor in Beijing,” the report claimed.  

  

  Amazon said in an internal 2018 memo about doing business in China: “Ideological control and propaganda is the core of the toolkit for the communist party to achieve and maintain its success. We are not making judgement on whether it is right or wrong.”

  The report claims that “helping to further the ruling Communist Party’s global economic and political agenda” has been crucial to Amazon’s success in China.

  In fact, Amazon even partnered with Beijing’s propaganda apparatus to create a selling portal for U.S. customers called “China Books”. While it hasn’t generated significant revenue, the report says, “it was seen by Amazon as crucial to winning support in China”.

  The same 2018 Amazon briefing document called China Books “the key element to safeguard” to keep its licensing problem with China at bay. 

  Reuters reports that the books push favorable CCP lines on everything from Uyghur labor camps to Covid-19:

  One book extols life in Xinjiang, where United Nations experts have said China interned one million ethnic Uyghurs in a network of camps. The book – “Incredible Xinjiang: Stories of Passion and Heritage” – discusses an online comedy show situated in the region. The book quotes an actor who plays a Uyghur “country bumpkin” saying that ethnicity is “not a problem” there. That echoes the position of Beijing, which has denied mistreating minority groups.

  Some books portray China’s battle against the COVID-19 pandemic, which began in the Chinese city of Wuhan, in heroic terms. One is titled “Stories of Courage and Determination: Wuhan in Coronavirus Lockdown.” Another begins with commentary from Xi: “Our success to date has once again demonstrated the strengths of CPC (the Communist Party of China) leadership and Chinese socialism.”

  Recall, earlier this month we also shed light on a secret $275 billion deal Apple signed with the Chinese government. The deal emerged after a series of meetings between Cook and Chinese officials back in 2016, we wrote. 

  

  China is Apple’s second-biggest market after the US, and has long been targeted as a critical market for growth. Apple’s iPhones have seen growing popularity despite rising tensions with the US. This year, Apple became the second-biggest smartphone maker in China.

  The deal, which was forged over the span of years, represents a five-year plan, according to documents from inside Apple that were seen by The Information. Whether talks on another five-year plan are in the works isn’t yet clear.

  “The fact that Apple never disclosed this deal to the US will likely trigger an angry response from lawmakers, who are bound to question Apple’s loyalty to the US, along with whether it prioritized profits and growth over respecting human rights (so much for all that climate virtue signaling),” we wrote earlier this month. 

  Before the deal was struck, documents show, Apple executives were scrambling to salvage their relationship with Chinese officials, who had accused Apple of not contributing enough to the local economy. Amid the government crackdown and the bad publicity that accompanied it, iPhone sales plummeted, though they have since bounced back.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 19:10

• TINA, BOGO & FOMO's Engines Are Stuttering
  TINA, BOGO & FOMO’s Engines Are Stuttering

  Authored by Peter Tchir via Academy Securities,

  The Last Thing I Wanted to Write about is Omicron         

  I really didn’t want to have to start another weekend T-Report thinking about COVID. I would much rather have pointed you towards the excellent Around the World – Geopolitical Surprises, published Friday. I’d much prefer to jump into today’s themes, but it is difficult to talk about markets, the economy, or inflation without at least attempting to address what is going on with COVID.

  What we “seem” to know so far:

  Omicron is highly transmissible. The spread seems rapid and it seems to be able to infect people who have been vaccinated, who have had boosters, or who have had other variants.

  • The symptoms seem relatively mild. That seems to be the case for those who have been vaccinated and those who have not been vaccinated. From what I can tell it is more severe for the unvaccinated, but even then, nowhere close to what we were seeing when COVID initially burst onto the scene.

  • We have likely gotten far better at dealing with COVID. Knowing those most at risk presumably helps them be more cautious when necessary. Treatment options now exist unlike back in early 2020. We should be able to manage this much better.

  • Have the politician’s gotten better at dealing with COVID? While I believe that the population at large actually has a decent understanding of the risks and is taking precautions as they see fit, the wildcard is what governments do with the latest variant. We are seeing countries in Europe revert to lockdowns. China, if it maintains its zero-tolerance policy, will see lockdowns as well. On Tuesday, President Biden is set to give a speech detailing our plans. As far as I can tell, lockdowns have become politically dangerous here. There seems to be (at least from everything I can tell) a large portion of the population that has done all the vaccinations and followed all the rules and doesn’t seem to believe that a lockdown is necessary given what we know about this variant.

  • What politicians do may be more dangerous than the Omicron variant for markets and the economy. Several people that I find to be very good have expressed this view, and I agree with it.

  I think on Tuesday, President Biden will be cautious but avoid anything too disruptive.

  COVID Modelling 

  On Twitter, there is an interesting thread about COVID modelling that is worth reading. @NateSilver538 weighed in on the discussion, which is what caught my eye, as he is an expert at modelling. The original thread started with @FraserNelson (Editor of the Spectator, which I don’t know much about, and would have ignored, if not for Nate weighing in). The other participant is @GrahamMedley, professor of infectious disease modelling and chair of the SPI-M, a sub-group of SAGE, which seems to be responsible for the modelling that the U.K. government relies on.

  What is interesting is that the modelling focuses on what could be considered “worst-case” scenarios, certainly those where the population does little to curtail the spread.

  I am not sure what side of the argument I come out on (my bias is certainly towards probability weighted scenario analysis), but I’m not sure what the right approach is on this topic. Having said that, I found this thread fascinating and intend to dig deeper as it gives a little insight into the “science” and how politicians use (or even drive) the “science.”

  

  

  

  I am not sure what to make of this subject, and maybe it is nothing, but it caught my eye enough that I figured that I’d point it out to you as I suspect it will be a topic that gets addressed going forward giving us more insight into models and policy response.

  TINA, BOGO & FOMO’s Engines Are Stuttering

  Now we can focus on a few things that will be in play in the coming weeks.

  Year-end is always a difficult time to think about market direction as people are out of the office, liquidity is thin, people have positions to defend or push in an environment that makes it easier to push. And, this year, we have the impact of Omicron, and how politicians choose to respond to that.

  This week’s piece follows up on a few recent pieces:

  • The Markets Love the FOMC – For Now.

  • The Training Wheels are Off.

  • To a lesser extent, Inflation, Like Greed, Is Good, which got a boost this past week with the Senate cracking down on slave labor in the Xinjiang Province of China. We are at the early stages of supply chain scrutiny, driven by ESG, and that will reshape the global economy.

  

  BOGO vs Quality

  Buy One, Get One free, or BOGO seems to be running rampant right now.

  If I check my emails, I think there are sales that started as Black Friday sales (on the Monday before Thanksgiving) that turned into Cyber Monday sales and are somehow “still” available today. It reminds me of the “going out of business” sales which would hit late night TV, where the seller seemed to be going out of business for years, despite creating an urgency on Saturday nights at 1 am.

  I think that there are a few important things to take away from this:

  • There was a time, not that long ago, that if you slapped a big enough sale price on something, people would buy it. Now, and this is more anecdotal, but no one wants to buy things in “that color” or with those design “features” at a discount if no one wanted to buy them at regular price. Whether there is less care about owning the label rather than something that looked good, I am seeing/hearing about the trend towards quality. That extends, to some degree, not just to the product but to the procurement of that product.

  • I believe that we will continue to see this trend towards “quality”, where people will pay more for the product they want, which will include factors such as country of origin, sustainability, and other potentially “intangible” factors that affect the perceived quality of a good or service. Capturing this shift will allow companies to drive sales and earnings.

  • This phenomenon also seems to be hitting the stock market. Even as the S&P 500 and Nasdaq hover near all-time highs, there are a large number of stocks that are 50% below their peaks. Everywhere I turn, I see articles about the lack of breadth. How unusual it is for indices to be up 23% (S&P 500) year to date, with so many laggards. I highlight this, because as a contrarian, I naturally gravitate to these types of stocks. These, in theory, are stocks that could be ripe for huge bounces, possibly even short squeezes, and I’m finally inclined to get on that bandwagon. But (and this remains a big but) quality matters and half off sales now don’t attract buyers in stocks or goods. Maybe it is too early for some of these, despite the discounts?

  Fundamentals vs Technicals

  This little rant follows directly from the BOGO comments.

  The number of interviews I’ve watched or listened to recently where the pundit or stockpicker mentions that the recent 10%, or 25%, or even 50% pullback had nothing to do with fundamentals and has everything to do with technicals has reached a peak. It is driving me nuts! (I am sure that some of my comments on media drive people nuts as well, but that is a topic for another day).

  I am completely willing to accept that the drops are not associated with fundamentals per se. I am biased, so I do think broad shifts in the economy impact future fundamentals, but my main issue is that no one seems to believe that any of the 50% rises, or doublings, or even triplings, had anything to do with technicals and things out of their control.

  I can completely agree that a stock dropping 50% in a couple of months had more to do with positioning and other factors (which is why I love exploring those other factors). But I also believe that stocks that doubled or even quadrupled in a quarter or two likely weren’t being completely driven by fundamentals and other factors (like performance chasing, thin floats, etc.) impacted the upside.

  Not sure why this one bothers me so much, but I suspect that until there is more acceptance that these factors work both ways, there will be people holding positions that could be in for more downside.

  TINA vs There Is An Alternative

  Not sure what a good antonym for TINA would be and TIAA is already taken, but maybe someone will come up with a good one (or send me a good antonym if it already exists).

  While the Fed hasn’t hiked and interest rates across the globe remain low, Central Banks are gradually pumping less money into the economy. The “threat of hikes” is real.

  While today, I can’t say that there is an alternative, we are headed down a path to where there will be alternatives which should offer opportunities and add to some existing risks.

  FOMO’s Engines are Stuttering

  While FOMO’s engines may not stall, that is increasingly a big risk.

  I’ve had a lot of interesting discussions about FOMO in the past week or two.

  There is the obvious driver of FOMO, which is higher prices. Higher prices create the atmosphere where the fear of missing out becomes prevalent. But let’s spend less time on that obvious one and spend a bit of time on things that aren’t discussed quite as much and could be the death knell for some of the biggest FOMO trades (with a focus on crypto).

  • For many assets the “average” investor is already likely to be under water on their investments.

    • Early buyers are still way up because they bought cheap. Investors who came late to the party have born the brunt of the pullback. For many assets, the in-flows accelerate as prices rise, so that when they fall, the “average” investor is now staring at losses.

  • There is a correlation between “weak” hands and losses.

    • Almost by definition, FOMO means that an investor eventually succumbs to their fear of missing out and buys the asset. So, when we get the pullbacks, the people with losses are the ones who were least interested in being involved in the first place. The early adopters told the story, the 2nd wave believed it, and spread it to the 3rd wave, etc. The latest wave of buyers is far less likely to be successful in generating a next wave (what forces someone in once the music may have stopped).

  • Complexity aids FOMO, but also encourages doubt.

    • The more complex something is, the easier it is to overcome fear, because maybe people do know a lot more than you. After all, Bitcoin is always pictured as a cute gold coin, so it must be a coin or currency of some sort? Sorry, for being a bit too sarcastic with that one, but I did start 2021 bullish crypto. It is very difficult to convince someone to buy a generic $1 bill for $5. It is much easier to find a buyer for something that is truly difficult to comprehend. As that doubt sets in, and starts infiltrating the conversations, you have a real risk of “rolling” back the waves. Each successive wave was more reluctant than the prior wave and their performance has been disappointing.

    • The sheer number of coins, NFTs, tokens, etc. were always a bit of a head scratcher when things were going up, but raises some concerns as things are going down. I’ve read some great papers about coins that will do well in the metaverse for example, but during FOMO, this competition added to the opportunity set and now it may make many wonder why there are so many and if they are all useful.

    • El Salvador, Bitcoin Bonds, and Bitcoin City. This may work in the end, but if I was good at GIFS, I’d have a good “how it started” and “how it is going” GIF. This could have been inspirational (and it may yet be), but it may also further detract from the “use” case, which is the way I’m leaning at the moment.

  • Volatility is a requirement of FOMO.

    • This may sound a bit weird, but volatility is required to create FOMO. If something can jump 10% in a day, then you better buy it today because it might be too expensive tomorrow. In a world where I’ve seen the term “non-permanent losses” used to describe what pullbacks do to your holdings, you need that hope of a huge swing. In stocks, TQQQ, a triple leveraged Nasdaq 100 play, is all the rage, and in London, a 5x version was launched (along with 3x versions of various ARK funds).

    • If prices merely stabilize, FOMO will decrease. Gambling is the most fun when you get instant gratification. Heck, maybe even instant results, as gamblers keep coming back. If the market is heavily skewed by “gamblers”, let’s call them people who are heavily leveraged, enjoy the weekly option trading game, etc., then a decrease in volatility (especially for the weekly options players) immediately impacts their participation.

    • While a bit of a non-sequitur, I have been thinking a lot about David Tepper’s interview on CNBC from September 2010. It is quite famous as he used a colloquialism to describe his positioning which turned out to be spot on. What most people forget, is at the end of that interview, he is asked by Kernen if he has any questions. While it seems to have been edited out of the clips I can find, I will do my best to paraphrase what happened next. Tepper asked Kernen about what drives their business (the business of financial media). Kernen swept his arm, broadly indicating the set and said that even with the fancy new studio and all the new graphics, whether markets went up or whether they went down, none of it mattered, because what mattered was volatility. Why do people tune in en masse? Because there is volatility and I think that fits the narrative that FOMO and volatility go hand in hand.

  Do Diamond Hand, HODLers Ever Run Out of Money?

  Buy the dip.

  Buy the dip.

  How much money do people have if they never sell? The diamond hands/HODLer seems to apply more to crypto than to stocks, though I think you could easily argue that it has filtered into the meme stocks and maybe some specific areas (think back to BOGO).

  There have been record inflows into stocks this year. How much more money is available? How much leverage is being employed? That really scares me as leverage is the biggest step towards forced selling.

  Bottom Line

  On the equity side of things, I’m leaning heavily towards:

  • Companies and cash flows that are relatively easy to understand

  • Valuations that are compelling on “traditional” metrics (probably a convoluted way of saying value).

  • Dividend payers

  • The plumbing. Anything that makes the economy work. Logistics. Companies that benefit from building factories and infrastructure domestically. Real estate probably falls into this category.

  • Mexico, then Latin America, and Canada. As supply chains shift, the “repatriation” will be to those that we are closer to, both in terms of proximity and in terms of political ideology.

  • Cyclicals.

  On the fixed income side of things:

  • I’d like to bet on slightly higher long-end yields and steeper curves, but the Fed seems to be intent on saying things that the market is interpreting as policy mistakes.

  • Credit is fine. When you look at what I like in equities, that encompasses the vast majority of the credit market, especially high yield, from a sector standpoint. Own credit, including high yield and leveraged loans.

  • Delve into structured products. While TINA might be fading in equities, I think it will still exist in credit and will be where to pick up incremental yield and is worth the risk. Digging into structured products will be key.

  While reaction to Omicron will drive the direction at the start of the week, I think quality will overwhelm FOMO in the coming weeks.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 18:35

• Erdogan Reiterates Commitment To 'Islamic' Rate-Cut Plan, Threatens Turkish Business Lobby Over Dissent
  Erdogan Reiterates Commitment To ‘Islamic’ Rate-Cut Plan, Threatens Turkish Business Lobby Over Dissent

  Having seen his nation’s currency continue its collapse (losing half its value in the last three months), despite shutting down stock trading last week and proposing huge fines for any form of “hoarding”, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan addressed the nation in a public statement, invoking religion as behind his decision to buck economic orthodoxy and cut rates into hyperinflation.

  

  Referring to Islamic proscriptions on usury as a basis for his new policy push, Erdogan clarified ‘his’ policy: “What is it? We are lowering interest rates. Don’t expect anything else from me.“

  “As a Muslim, I’ll continue to do what is required by nas,” Erdogan said, using an Arabic word used in Turkish to refer to Islamic teachings.

  More fundamentally speaking, as Bloomberg notes, the president believes Turkey can free itself from reliance on foreign capital flows by abandoning policies that prioritized higher interest rates and strong inflows. At the heart of his ideas is a belief that lower interest rates will also curb consumer price growth – the exact opposite of the consensus view among the world’s central bankers.

  The response to Erdogan’s latest statement is more of the same – selling the lira…

  

  The leader blamed the collapse of the currency on an “economic siege”, reiterating that he wouldn’t back down from his plan (to drive his nation into hyperinflation?).

  “Of course, we know the impact from price increases on people’s daily lives. We are of course aware of the instability caused by the lira’s fluctuations and its impact on prices,” Erdogan said.

  “But we will put up resistance against these. I announce from here: there is no backing down.”

  As we recently noted, at the height of the last big wave of Turkey’s ongoing crisis, in August 2018, the European Central Bank issued a warning about the potential impact the plummeting lira could have on Euro Area banks heavily exposed to Turkey’s economy via large amounts in loans — much of them in euros — through banks they acquired in Turkey. The central bank was worried that Turkish borrowers might not be hedged against the lira’s weakness and would begin to default on foreign currency loans, which accounted for 40% of the Turkish banking sector’s assets.

  In the end, the contagion risks were largely contained. Many Turkish banks ended up agreeing to restructure the debts of their corporate clients, particularly the large ones. At the same time, the Erdogan government used state-owned lenders to bail out millions of cash-strapped consumers by restructuring their consumer loans, many of them foreign denominated, and credit card debt.  

  But concerns are once again on the rise about European banks’ exposure to Turkey.

  

  As one might expect, it’s not just banks that are fearful, Erdogan’s recent actions sparked anger among Turkish business owners, with several associations calling for measures to stabilize the lira’s exchange rate. Scandalously, in such an increasingly totalitarian state, key business group Tusiad urged the government to abandon the current policy stance, citing recent market turmoil as proof that the experimental model is bound to fail.

  

  But speaking truth to power in Istanbul is not welcomed and Erdogan threatened those critical of him directly that “they won’t be able to challenge the government.”

  “You are working to put in power a government that you can exploit. This nation will not allow you to do that,” he added.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 18:00

• Why Don't People "Trust The Science?" Because Scientists Are Often Caught Lying
  Why Don’t People “Trust The Science?” Because Scientists Are Often Caught Lying

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  There has been an unfortunate shift in Western educational practices in the past few decades away from what we used to call “critical thinking.” In fact, critical thinking was once a fundamental staple of US colleges and now it seems as though the concept doesn’t exist anymore; at least not in the way it used to. Instead, another brand of learning has arisen which promotes “right thinking”; a form of indoctrination which encourages and rewards a particular response from students that falls in line with ideology and not necessarily in line with reality.

  

  It’s not that schools directly enforce a collectivist or corporatist ideology (sometimes they do), it’s more that they filter out alternative viewpoints as well as facts and evidence they do not like until all that is left is a single path and a single conclusion to any given problem. They teach students how to NOT think by presenting thought experiments and then controlling the acceptable outcomes.

  For example, a common and manipulative thought experiment used in schools is to ask students to write an “analysis” on why people do not trust science or scientists these days. The trick is that the question is always presented with a built-in conclusion – That scientists should be trusted, and some people are refusing to listen, so let’s figure out why these people are so stupid.

  I have seen this experiment numerous times, always presented in the same way. Not once have I ever seen a college professor or public school teacher ask students: “Should scientists today be trusted?”

  Not once.

  This is NOT analysis, this is controlled hypothesis. If you already have a conclusion in mind before you enter into a thought experiment, then you will naturally try to adjust the outcome of the experiment to fit your preconceived notions. Schools today present this foolishness as a form of thinking game when it is actually propaganda. Students are being taught to think inside the box, not outside the box. This is not science, it is anti-science.

  Educational programming like this is now a mainstay while actual science has taken a backseat. Millions of kids are exiting public schools and universities with no understanding of actual scientific method or science in general. Ask them what the equations for Density or Acceleration are, and they’ll have no clue what your are talking about. Ask them about issues surrounding vaccination or “climate change”, and they will regurgitate a litany of pre-programmed responses as to why the science cannot be questioned in any way.

  In the alternative media we often refer to this as being “trapped in the Matrix,” and it’s hard to think of a better analogy. People have been rewarded for so long for accepting the mainstream narrative and blindly dismissing any other information that when they are presented with reality they either laugh at it arrogantly or recoil in horror. The Matrix is so much more comfortable and safe, and look at all the good grades you get when you say the right things and avoid the hard questions and agree with the teacher.

  Given the sad state of science in the West these days surrounding the response to covid as well as the insane and unscientific push for forced vaccinations, I thought it would be interesting to try out this thought exercise, but from an angle that is never allowed in today’s schools:

  Why don’t people trust the science and scientists anymore?

  This is simple: Because many scientists have been caught lying and misrepresenting their data to fit the conclusions they want rather than the facts at hand. Science is often politicized to serve an agenda. This is not conspiracy theory, this is provable fact.

  That’s not to say that all science is to be mistrusted.

  The point is, no science should be blindly accepted without independent examination of ALL the available facts. This is the whole point of science, after all.

  Yes, there are idiotic conspiracy theories out there when it comes to scientific analysis, but there are a number of scams in the world of science as well.

  The usual false claim is that the average person is ignorant and that they don’t have the capacity to understand scientific data. I do find it interesting that this is the general message of the trust-science thought experiment. It fits right in line with the mainstream and government narrative that THEIR scientists, the scientists they pay for and that corporations pay for, are implicitly correct and should not be questioned. They are the high priests of the modern era, delving into great magics that we dirty peasants cannot possibly grasp. It is not for us to question “the science”, it our job to simply embrace it like a religion and bow down in reverence.

  Most people have the capacity to sift through scientific data as long as it’s transparent. When the facts are obscured or spun or omitted this causes confusion, and of course only the establishment scientists can untangle the mess because they are the ones that created it. Let’s look at a couple of examples directly related to human health…

  GMO Crops And The Corporate Money Train

  The propaganda surrounding Genetically Modified Organisms is relentless and pervasive, with the overall thrust being that they are perfectly safe and that anyone who says otherwise is a tinfoil hat crackpot. And certainly, there a hundreds if not thousands of studies which readily confirm this conclusion. So, case closed, right?

  Not quite. Here is where critical thinking is so useful and where reality escapes the indoctrinated – Who paid for these studies, and do they have a vested interest in censoring negative data on GMOs?

  Well, in the vast majority of cases GMO studies are funded by two sources – GMO industry giants like Monsanto, Dupont and Syngenta, or, government agencies like the FDA and EPA. Very few studies are truly independent, and this is the problem. Both the government and corporations like Monsanto have a vested interest in preventing any critical studies from being released on GMO’s.

  Monsanto has been caught on numerous occasions hiding the dangerous health effects of its products, from Agent Orange to the RGBH growth hormone used in dairy cows. They have been caught compiling illegal dossiers on their critics. The industry has been caught multiple times paying off academics and scientists to produce studies on GMOs with a positive spin and even to attack other scientists that are involved in experiments that are critical of GMOs. Research shows that at least half of all GMO studies are funded by the GMO industry, while the majority of the other half are funded by governments.

  There has also long been a revolving door between GMO industry insiders and the FDA and EPA; officials often work for Monsanto and then get jobs with the government, then go back to Monsanto again. The back scratching is so egregious that the government even created special legal protections for GMO companies like Monsanto under what is now known as the Monsanto Protection Act (Section 735 of Agricultural Appropriations Bill HR 993) under the Obama Administration in 2013. This essentially makes GMO companies immune to litigation over GMOs, and the same protections have been renewed in different bills ever since.

  Beyond the revolving door, the government has approved many GMO products with little to no critical data to confirm their safety. Not only that, but in most cases the government has sovereign immunity from litigation, even if they’ve been negligent. Meaning, if any of these products is proven to cause long term health damage the government cannot be sued for approving them unless there are special circumstances.

  If they could be held liable, you would be damn sure the FDA would be running every conceivable test imaginable to confirm GMOs are definitively safe without any bias attached, but this is not the case. Instead, the government actively propagandizes for GMO companies and uses hired hatchet men to derail any public criticism.

  I, for one, would love to know for sure if GMOs are harmful to the human body in the long term, and there is certainly science to suggest that this might be the case. There have been many situations in which specific GMO foods were removed from the market in foreign countries because of potentially harmful side effects. Endogenous toxins of plants with modified metabolites are a concern, along with “plant incorporated protectants” (plants designed to produce toxins which act as pesticides).

  There is data that tells us to be wary, but nothing conclusive. Why? Because billions of dollars are being invested by corporations into research designed to “debunk” any notion of side effects. If the same amount of funding was put into independent studies with no bias, then we might hear a different story about the risks of GMOs. All the money is in dismissing the risks of GMOs; there’s almost no money in studying them honestly.

  The science appears to be rigged to a particular outcome or narrative, and that is lying. Science is supposed to remain as objective as possible, but how can it be objective when it is being paid for by people with an agenda? The temptation to sell out is extreme.

  Covid Vaccines And The Death Of Science

  I bring up the example of GMO’s because I think it is representative of how science can be controlled to produce only one message while excluding all other analysis. We don’t really know for sure how dangerous GMOs are because the majority of data is dictated by the people that profit from them and by their friends in government. The lack of knowing is upheld as proof of safety – But this is not scientific. Science and medicine would demand that we err on the side of caution until we know for sure.

  The same dynamic exists in the world of covid vaccines. Big Pharma has a vested interest in ensuring NO negative information is released about the mRNA vaccines because there is a perpetual river of money to be made as long as the vax remains approved for emergency use by the FDA. It may be important to note that the FDA has said it will take at least 55 YEARS to release all the data it has on the Pfizer covid vaccines, which suggests again that there is a beneficial collusion between the government and corporate behemoths.

  In the meantime, anyone that questions the efficacy or safety of the vax is immediately set upon by attack dogs in the media, most of them paid with advertising dollars from Big Pharma. These attacks are not limited to the alternative media; the establishment has also gone after any scientist or doctor with questions about vaccine safety.

  There are clear and openly admitted ideological agendas surrounding covid science which have nothing to do with public health safety and everything to do with political control. When you have the head of the World Economic Forum applauding the covid pandemic as a perfect “opportunity” to push forward global socialist centralization and erase the last vestiges of free markets and individual liberty, any rational person would have to question if the covid science is also being rigged to support special interests.

  Luckily, the covid issue is so massive that it is impossible for them to control every study. Instead, the establishment ignores the studies and data they don’t like.

  The virus is being hyped as a threat to the majority of the public and as a rationale for 100% vaccination rates, by force if needed. Yet, the median Infection Fatality Rate of covid is only 0.27%. This means that on average 99.7% of the population at any given time has nothing to fear from the virus. This is confirmed by dozens of independent medical studies, but when was the last time you heard that number discussed by mainstream government scientists like Anthony Fauci?

  I’ve never heard them talk about it. But how is it scientific to ignore data just because it doesn’t fit your political aims? Again, deliberate omission of data is a form of lying.

  What about the multiple studies indicating that natural immunity is far superior in protection to the mRNA vaccines? What about the fact that the countries with the highest vaccination rates also have the highest rates of infections and their hospitalizations have actually increased? What about the fact that the states and countries with the harshest lockdown and mask mandates also have the highest infection rates? What about the fact that the average vaccine is tested for 10-15 years before being approved for human use, while the covid mRNA vaccines were put into production within months? That is to say, there is NO long term data to prove the safety of the covid vax.

  These are easily observable scientific facts, but we never hear about them from corporate scientists or government scientists like Fauci. Instead, Fauci argues that criticism of his policies is an attack on him, and attacking him is the same as “attacking science.” In other words, Fauci believes HE IS the science.

  And doesn’t that just illustrate how far science has fallen in the new millennium. Real scientists like Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, call Fauci a fraud, but they are ignored while Fauci is worshiped. I can’t even get into climate change “science” here, I would have to write an entire separate article about the fallacies perpetrated by global warming academics (did you know that global temperatures have only increased by 1 degree Celsius in the past century? Yep, just 1 degree according to the NOAA’s own data, yet, institutions like the NOAA continue to claim the end of the world is nigh because of global warming).

  The stringent bottleneck on science today reminds me of the Catholic church under Pope Innocent III when church authorities forbade common people from owning or reading a bible in their own language. These laws remained in effect well into the 13th and 14th centuries. Instead, the peasants were to go to church and have the texts read to them by specific clergy. Often the bible readings were done in Latin (bibles were only allowed to be written in Latin) which most people did not speak, and interpreted however the church wished.

  It was only the invention of the printing press in the 1400s that changed the power dynamic and allowed bibles to be widely distributed and information to spread without church oversight. Much like the creation of the internet allows the public to access mountains of scientific data and methodologies at their fingertips. The free flow of information is an anathema according to the establishment; they argue that only they have the right to process information for public consumption.

  Cultism requires excessive control of data and the complete restriction of outside interpretations. As information becomes openly available the public is then able to learn the whole truth, not just approved establishment narratives.

  Science is quickly becoming a political religion rather than a bastion of critical thought. Conflicting data is ignored as “non-science” or even censored as “dangerous.” Government and corporate paid studies are treated as sacrosanct. Is it any wonder that so many people now distrust the science? Any reasonable person would have questions and suspicions. Those who do not have been indoctrinated into a cult they don’t even know they are a part of.

  *  *  *

  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
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 17:25

• Senator Elizabeth Warren Tests Positive For COVID-19
  Senator Elizabeth Warren Tests Positive For COVID-19

  Everyone’s favorite soke-the-rich socialist-ic senator has joined the list of breakthrough cases from the miracle COVD vaccines.

  

  The 72-year-old – who is vaccinated and boosted (#SoBrave) just tested positive for COVID-19:

  “I regularly test for COVID & while I tested negative earlier this week, today I tested positive with a breakthrough case. Thankfully, I am only experiencing mild symptoms & am grateful for the protection provided against serious illness that comes from being vaccinated & boosted,” the Massachusetts Democrat tweeted.

  Furthermore she added that:

  “As cases increase across the country, I urge everyone who has not already done so to get the vaccine and the booster as soon as possible – together, we can save lives.”

  Is this still a pandemic of the unvaccinated?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 16:55

• Navarro: Biden, Democrats, & China Are To Blame For America's Stagflation Mess
  Navarro: Biden, Democrats, & China Are To Blame For America’s Stagflation Mess

  Authored by Peter Navarro, op-ed via FoxNews.com,

  When President Joe Biden canceled the Keystone Pipeline and ended the leasing of Federal lands for oil and gas exploration, he not only ensured an energy price shock.  He would spike food prices.  To understand why is to understand the stagflationary morass America now finds itself in.

  

  Amidst slowing economic growth, America’s working classes and small businesses are indeed under attack from a virulent inflation. 

  Milk is up 4.5% annually, beef 13.9%, used car and truck prices have broken the 30% barrier while gas prices are up nearly 60%. While gross pay has increased by 4.8%, real wages are down by nearly 2%.

  This pandemic-driven and politician-made disaster is a situation eerily similar to a 1970s stagflation spawned by over-stimulative Keynesian policies and related demand-pull inflation along with cost-push inflation energy and food price shocks. 

  Demand-pull inflation happens when “too much money chases too few goods.” A profligate White House and Democrat Congress have appropriated trillions upon trillions of poorly targeted expenditures while the Federal Reserve has accommodated this profligacy by running a massive printing press. 

  After lying to us that the resulting inflation would be “transitory,” Fed Chairman Jerome Powell finally fessed up when he announced an acceleration of the tapering of the Fed’s accommodation – effectively ending Powell’s ultra-easy money policies. Note to Jay: This action will NOT end the budding wage-price spiral.

  America’s far bigger problem is the cost-push inflationary pressures arising primarily from food and energy price shocks but also from broken global supply chains and the export of Made in China inflation. And the Fed has nary a tool in its shed to fight any of this.

  Consider what happens when energy and gasoline prices rise.  Businesses cut output.  Consumers have less purchasing power for holiday shopping. 

  In the aggregate, the result is slower growth – that’s the stag part of the stagflation equation. If the Fed engages in contractionary monetary policy as a “cure,” this merely exacerbates the stag part of the problem.  America’s current energy price shock is indeed a politician-made disaster. Canceling the Keystone Pipeline, ending petroleum exploration on federal lands, and more broadly signaling to petroleum producers that additional investment will be penalized by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and her Green New Deal cadres has led inevitably to cost-push inflation in the oil patch. 

  The dark joke going around football tailgate parties is that caviar is now on the menu because it’s less expensive than hotdogs cooked with propane.

  Ominously, energy price shocks also beget food price shocks. Petroleum is THE most important production input for fertilizer. It also takes a lot of now expensive fuel to transport products from farm to market and table.

  As in the 1970s, today’s food price shocks are also weather-related. With over half of the lower 48 states in drought, it’s not just lower yields driving up prices. Farmers are switching away from water-intensive crops like vegetables and melons. In a Marie Antoinette White House, perhaps the slogan will be “let them eat cheap almonds.”

  Communist China has also significantly increased its purchases of farm products, further pushing up prices for American consumers.  For example, corn exports to China are up five-fold, from four million metric tons in 2020 to 20 million metric tons this year.

  At the same time, Communist China’s producers are now not only exporting their products to the US, and driving our trade deficit, and stealing American jobs. With inflation rising faster in China than the U.S., these economic predators are exporting China’s inflation as well.

  As a coup de grâce, global supply chains are in shambles as a result of the pandemic. The poster child here is a global computer chip shortage which has crippled US auto production.

  Fewer new cars has rippled into the used car market, which is on fire,.  A robust used car market, in turn, has delayed the scrapping of used cars; and at least partly as a result, we see soaring prices for scrap metal – up 10.7% – as well as for downstream products like hot-rolled steel and strip.

  The pandemic from communist China has even dramatically changed critical buying patterns of the American people. A new “my home is my castle” ethos of Americans fed up with economic lockdowns and forced to spend more time in their residences has driven up home prices by nearly 20% year-over-year.

  Defeating this stagflationary beast will require a broad-based strategy involving the end of profligate fiscal and monetary policies, onshoring our factories and supply chains, and a sane energy policy that leverages America’s abundant resources.  Both the White House and Fed must also come to grips with the fact that simply quelling demand-pull inflation won’t stop a wage-price spiral driven largely by cost-push pressures.

  Finally, it may be time to revisit both our trade and diplomatic relations with Communist China. It should be clear that most of America’s runaway inflation has originated from a pandemic almost certainly unleashed from the Wuhan Institute of Virology – likely with the help of Tony Fauci’s American taxpayer funding of dangerous gain-of-function experiments conducted by the Chinese military.

  It is unlikely we can ever fully come to grips with this pandemic and its economic fallout until Communist China comes clean about how the virus was genetically engineered – we still don’t have the original genome of that virus, a critical piece of the broader pandemic puzzle. Until China and Fauci come clean, it is going to be a rocky stagflationary road.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 16:15

• Pfizer Pushes Third Vaccine Dose For Kids 5 And Under
  Pfizer Pushes Third Vaccine Dose For Kids 5 And Under

  As Pfizer and Moderna fight to get their COVID jabs approved for children under the age of 5, Pfizer revealed on Friday that it’s changing its approach by testing three vaccine doses in babies and preschoolers after discovering that two doses simply doesn’t provide enough protection.

  According to the AP, Pfizer announced the change after a preliminary analysis found 2- to 4-year-olds didn’t have as strong an immune response as expected to the very low-dose shots the company is testing in the youngest children.

  All of this seems funny to us off the bat because it was our understanding that youngsters had natural immunity to the virus barring some immunodeficiency issue.

  

  Pfizer said  it had expected data on how well the vaccines were working in children under 5 by year’s end. Now, nobody knows how long that might take as the company tries out different strategy. But one thing’s for sure: Pfizer is about to be selling a lot more vaccines.

  A kid-sized version of Pfizer’s vaccine is already available for 5- to 11-year-olds, one that’s a third of the dose given to adults and anybody else aged 12 and older.

  For children younger than 5, Pfizer is testing an even smaller dose, just 3 micrograms or a tenth of the adult dose. Here’s the quandry: The very low-dose shots appeared to work just fine in youngsters under age 2, who produced similar antibody levels. But the immune response in 2- to 4-year-olds was lower, according to Pfizer vaccine research chief Kathrin Jansen.

  Oddly, rather than trying a higher-dose shot for the preschoolers, Pfizer decided to expand the study to evaluate three of the very low-dose shots in all the study participants – from 6 months up to age 5. This third shot will be given at least two months after the youngsters’ second dose.

  And the head researcher said if the additional pediatric testing is successful, “we would have a consistent three-dose vaccine approach for all ages.”

  We imagine Pfizer, Moderna and the rest of then would love that – selling 50% more doses to whoever’s willing to buy them.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 15:40

• Rickards: The Great Supply Chain Collapse
  Rickards: The Great Supply Chain Collapse

  Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

  What’s at the root of the supply chain breakdown? That’s a critical question but the answer is almost irrelevant. The supply chain is a complex dynamic system of immense scale. It is of a complexity comparable to the climate as a system.

  

  This means that exact cause and effect cannot be computed because the processing power needed exceeds the combined processing power of every computer in the world.

  Most people have some notion of how supply chains work, but few understand how extensive, complex and vulnerable they are. If you go to the store to buy a loaf of bread, you know that the bread did not mystically appear on the shelf.

  It was delivered by a local bakery, put on the shelf by a clerk, you carried it home and served it with dinner. That’s a succinct description of a supply chain – from baker to store to home.

  Yet that description barely scratches the surface. What about the truck driver who delivered the bread from the bakery to the store? Where did the bakery get the flour, yeast and water needed to make the bread? What about the ovens used to bake the bread? When the bread was baked, it was put in clear or paper wrappers of some sort. Where did those come from?

  Even that expanded description of a supply chain is just getting started in terms of a complete chain. The flour used for baking came from wheat. That wheat was grown on a farm and harvested with heavy equipment. The farmer hires labor, uses water and fertilizer and sends his wheat out for processing and packaging before it gets to the bakery.

  The manufacturer who built the oven has his own supply chain of steel, tempered glass, semiconductors, electrical circuits and other inputs needed to build the ovens. The ovens are either hand crafted (engineered-to-order) or mass produced (made-to-stock) in a factory that may use either assembly lines or manufacturing cells to get the job done.

  The factory requires inputs of electricity, natural gas, heating and ventilation systems, and skilled labor to turn out the ovens.

  The store that sells the bread is on the receiving end of numerous supply chains. It also requires electricity, natural gas, heating and ventilation systems and skilled labor to keep the doors open and keep merchandise in stock. The store has loading docks, back rooms for inventory, forklifts and conveyor belts to move its merchandise from truck to shelf.

  Every link in these supply chains requires transportation. The farmer relies on trucks or rail for deliveries of seeds, fertilizers, equipment and other inputs. The oven manufacturer also relies on trucks or rail for deliveries of its inputs, including oven components. The bakery and the store rely mainly on trucks for deliveries of their inputs and the finished loaves of bread. The consumer relies on her automobile to get to the store and return home.

  These transportation modes have their own supply chains involving truck drivers, train engineers, good roads, good railroads, rail spurs and energy supplies to keep moving and keep deliveries on time.

  This entire network (farms, factories, bakeries, stores, trucks, railroads and consumers) relies on energy supplies to keep working. The energy can come from nuclear reactors, coal-fired or natural gas-fired power plants or renewable sources fed to a grid of high-tension wires, substations, transformers and local connections to reach the individual user.

  Everything described above sits somewhere in a complex supply chain needed to produce one loaf of bread. Now take everything else in the grocery store (fruits, vegetables, meat, poultry, fish, canned goods, coffee, condiments and so on) and imagine the supply chains needed for each one of those products.

  Then take all the other stores in the shopping center (home goods, clothing, pharmacy, hardware, restaurants, sporting goods) and imagine all the goods and services available from those vendors and the supply chains behind each and every one of those.

  In case you think I have exaggerated the components and steps in making a loaf of bread in the above example, I didn’t. The example above is a grossly simplified description of the actual supply chain.

  A full description of the needed supply chain would reach back further (where do the seeds for the wheat come from?) and branch off in tangential directions (where do the bread wrappers originate?).

  A full description of the loaf of bread supply chain with choice of vendor analysis, quality-control tests and bulk purchase discounts among other decision tree branches could easily stretch to several hundred pages.

  Now consider all of the supply chain links and possible bottlenecks described above are purely domestic. But very few supply chains are actually that local. CEOs, logistics engineers, consultants and politicians have spent the past 30 years making supply chains global.

  You’ve heard discussion of globalization since the early 1990s. What one may not have realized is that the process that was being globalized was the supply chain.

  You know your iPhone comes from China. Did you know that the specialized glass used in the iPhone comes from South Korea? Did you know the semiconductors in the iPhone come from Taiwan? That the intellectual property and design of the iPhone are from California?

  The iPhone includes flash storage from Japan, gyroscopes from Germany, audio amplifiers, battery chargers, display port multiplexers, batteries, cameras and hundreds of other advanced parts.

  In total, Apple works with suppliers in 43 countries on six continents to source the materials and parts that go into an iPhone. That’s a quick overview of the iPhone supply chain. Of course, every supplier in that supply chain has its own supply chain of sources and processes. Again, supply chains are immensely complex.

  Once the global perspective is added, we have to expand our transportation options from trucks and trains to include ships and planes. That means ports and airports are additional links in the chain.

  Those facilities have their own links and inputs including cranes, containers, port authorities, air traffic controllers, pilots, captains and the vessels themselves. And to our list of trucks, trains, ships and planes we can add pipelines that transport liquids such as petroleum, gasoline and natural gas.

  You get the idea. Supply chains may be hidden but they are everywhere. They are interconnected, densely networked and unimaginably complex.

  The touchstone of these efforts was the idea of just-in-time inventory (JIT). If you’re installing seats on an automobile assembly line, it is ideal if those seats arrive at the plant the same morning as the installation. That minimizes storage and inventory costs. The same is true for every part installed on the assembly line. The logistics behind this are daunting but can be managed with state-of-the-art software.

  All these efforts are fine as far as they go. The cost savings are real. The supply chains are efficient. The capacity of this system to keep a lid on costs is demonstrable.

  The supply chain revolution since the early 1990s has been about cost reduction, which gets passed to consumers in the form of lower prices. That practically explains the entire phenomenon.

  There’s only one problem. The system is extremely fragile. When things break down, everything gets worse at the same time. One missed delivery can result in an entire assembly line shutting down. One delayed vessel can result in empty shelves. One power outage can result in a transportation breakdown.

  In a nutshell, that’s what has happened to the global supply chain. There’s a lack of redundancy. The system is not robust to shocks. The shocks have occurred nevertheless (pandemic, trade wars, China-U.S. decoupling, bank collateral shortages and more) and the system has broken down.

  The failures have cascaded. Delays in receiving commodity inputs in China have resulted in manufacturing delays for exports. Energy shortages in China have resulted in further disruption of steel production, mining, transportation and other basic industries.

  Port delays in Los Angeles have resulted in component and finished goods delayed in the U.S. Semiconductor shortages have halted production of electronics, appliances, automobiles and other consumer durables that rely on automated applications. You’ve seen how complex the system is.

  The bottom line is if supply chains are breaking down, the economy is breaking down. If the economy breaks down, the breakdown of social order is not far behind.

  And the costs of social disorder are far higher than any possible savings from supposedly efficient supply chains.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 15:05

• Texts Show Amazon Threatened To Fire Driver If Packages Not Delivered During Deadly Tornado
  Texts Show Amazon Threatened To Fire Driver If Packages Not Delivered During Deadly Tornado

  Authored by Kenny Stancil via Common Dreams,

  More damning information about the deadly workplace disaster at an Amazon building in Illinois emerged on Friday when a delivery driver shared records of a conversation she had with her boss, which revealed that the e-commerce giant threatened to fire her if she didn’t keep delivering packages even as tornado sirens blared.

  “Radio’s been going off,” the driver told her supervisor—less than an hour and a half before a twister hit one of Amazon’s warehouses in Edwardsville—in a text message obtained by Bloomberg News. “Keep delivering,” her boss replied. “We can’t just call people back for a warning unless Amazon tells us to.”

  

  Amazon was already in hot water for forcing employees to attend their shifts that deadly Friday despite the impending storm and refusing to let them leave before catastrophe struck. Six workers were crushed to death when a warehouse that is being investigated for possible building code violations collapsed—exemplifying the company’s long track record of prioritizing profits over occupational safety, critics say.

  New evidence that Amazon also pressured delivery drivers to work through a tornado instead of immediately helping them obtain safe shelter has only increased the amount of contempt that many people have for one of the world’s most powerful corporations.

  “More details emerge about lives put in danger by Amazon’s dehumanization of workers and its gigantic, chaotic bureaucracy,” tweeted Athena Coalition, a nonprofit group made up of more than 50 organizations that are “building democratic power to stand up to Amazon’s abuse of our communities.”

  The exchange shows that roughly 30 minutes after the driver informed her boss about the radio warnings, she said that “tornado alarms are going off over here.”

  “Just keep delivering for now,” her supervisor responded again. “We have to wait for word from Amazon if we need to bring people back, the decision is ultimately up to them. I will let you know if the situation changes at all. I’m talking with them now about it.”

  “Shelter in place for now,” the boss instructed the driver minutes later. “Give it about 15-20 minutes and then continue as normal. I will let everyone know if that changes”…

  At this point, the driver indicated that she wanted to return to the warehouse for her own safety. “Having alarms going off next to me and nothing but locked building[s] around me isn’t sheltering in place,” she said. “That’s waiting to turn this van into my casket.”

  Amazon: Some of “our Amazon family passed away as a result of the storm” ☹️

  Also Amazon: “If you decide to return with your packages, it will be viewed as you refusing your route, which will ultimately end with you not having a job come tomorrow morning” https://t.co/FOCMlEtqKF pic.twitter.com/rKLmYP2NQe

  — Brian Kahn (@blkahn) December 17, 2021

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

  The driver pointed out that her delivery shift ended in just an hour. “And if you look at the radar the worst of the storm is gonna be right on top of me in 30 minutes,” she added.

  To which the boss replied: “If you decide to come back, that choice is yours. But I can tell you it won’t be viewed as for your own safety. The safest practice is to stay exactly where you are. If you decide to return with your packages it will be viewed as you refusing your route, which will ultimately end with you not having a job come tomorrow morning. The sirens are just a warning.”

  “I’m literally stuck in this damn van without a safe place to go with a tornado on the ground!” the driver said.

  Bloomberg, which reviewed text messages from contract drivers and interviewed current and former workers, reported that Amazon employees “said they received instructions on what do in fires or tornadoes, but never did the kind of drills that could help avoid confusion in an emergency. Training for new hires entails merely pointing out emergency exits and assembly points, they said.”

  Previously The Daily Poster reported that prior to the tornado disaster—which also killed eight workers at a candle factory in Mayfield, Kentucky—corporate lobbyists, including groups linked to Amazon, obstructed a bill designed to protect the jobs of employees who leave an unsafe workplace.

  “In the months before workers were reportedly barred from abandoning their job site or threatened with termination if they fled this weekend’s deadly tornadoes, corporate lobbying groups were fighting legislation to prohibit retribution against employees who seek to leave work out of fear for their safety,” the news outlet reported. “Amazon—which owns a warehouse where several workers were killed—and its staffing firm have links to corporate lobbying groups that have been opposing the legislation, which remains stalled.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 14:30

• NFL, In Major Shift, To Test Vaccinated Players Less Frequently
  NFL, In Major Shift, To Test Vaccinated Players Less Frequently

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

  The NFL loosened its COVID-19 protocols over the weekend as the league was forced to postpone several games due to a rise in cases, according to memos that were distributed to teams on Saturday.

  

  The NFL and NFL Player’s Association (NFLPA) said the league would partake in a “more targeted testing plan” for COVID-19, the illness caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

  “The NFL and NFLPA have been engaged with our medical advisors to address the emergence of the new Omicron variant and how to stop the spread to ensure we keep everyone safe and complete the remainder of the season responsibly,” said the NFL and NFLPA a joint statement.

  “The intensive protocols implemented last week and the rescheduling of three games were designed to stop the transmission of the virus and play this week’s games safely,” according to the statement. “After this weekend’s games, we have agreed to put into place a new set of protocols, which will include a more targeted testing plan, more flexibility for players to attend meetings virtually and also a high-risk player opt-out for the remainder of the season.”

  Under the league’s original COVID-19 rules, vaccinated personnel and players had to be tested for the virus every week. The new rule announced this weekend eliminates the requirement, which allows players and staff to be screened for COVID-19 symptoms and be tested less frequently.

  Vaccinated players who show symptoms of the CCP virus will be isolated and tested immediately. Those who don’t show symptoms will be subject to the NFL’s “targeted testing,” according to the memo.

  For unvaccinated players, there is no change in the NFL’s protocol. It means they will still have to be tested for COVID-19 every day.

  “In many respects, Omicron appears to be a very different illness from the one that we first confronted in the spring of 2020,” NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said in the memo.

  The move appears to be designed to keep players from being sidelined while not experiencing any COVID-19 symptoms. Last week, the league announced that three games were postponed relating to COVID-19 outbreaks among players and staff in the Los Angeles Rams, Cleveland Browns, and Washington Football Team.

  “We can’t apply 2020 solutions to the 2021 problems that we’re having,” NFL Chief Medical Officer Dr. Allen Sills said several days ago.

  “We’re often at the tip of the spear in seeing some of these changes before they show up in other elements of society because we do have so many tools at our disposal.”

  According to the memos, the NFL and NFLPA came to an agreement that allowed players to opt out of the rest of the season. Players with a higher risk based on medical factors have until Monday, Dec. 20 to make a decision on not playing, which means they wouldn’t be paid for the rest of the season.

  Some team owners, including Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, appeared to support the latest directive.

  “I think we will get to a point, probably this week, that we’ll test only if symptomatic, that’s if you’ve been vaccinated,” Jones told 105.3 The Fan over the weekend. “That’s a good thing. Test when you’re symptomatic and that’s it.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 13:55

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Escobar: Putin, Xi Running Circles Around Biden's Hybrid War
  Escobar: Putin, Xi Running Circles Around Biden’s Hybrid War

  Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Cradle,

  Russia and China’s announcement of an independent financial trading platform will free nations under US sanctions from western intrusion into their commercial activities…

  

  Vladimir Putin got straight to the point. At the opening of his one hour and fourteen minute video conversation with Xi Jinping on 15 December, he described Russia-China relations as “an example of genuine inter-state cooperation in the 21st century.”

  Their myriad levels of cooperation have been known for years now – from trade, oil and gas, finance, aerospace and the fight against Covid-19, to the progressive interconnection of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).

  But now the stage was set for the announcement of a serious counter-move in their carefully coordinated ballet opposing the relentless Hybrid War/Cold War 2.0 combo deployed by Empire.

  As Assistant to the President for Foreign Policy Yuri Ushakov succinctly explained, Putin and Xi agreed to create an “independent financial structure for trade operations that could not be influenced by other countries.”

  Diplomatic sources, off the record, confirmed the structure may be announced by a joint summit before the end of 2022.

  This is a stunning game-changer in more ways than one. It had been extensively discussed in previous bilaterals and in preparations for BRICS summits – mostly centered on increasing the share of yuan and rubles in Russia-China settlements, bypassing the US dollar, and opening new stock market options for Russian and Chinese investors.

  Now we’ve come to the crunch. And the catalyzing event was none other than US hawks floating the – financially nuclear – idea of expelling Russia from SWIFT, the messaging network used by 11,000+ banks in over 200 countries, as well as financial institutions, for rapid money transfers worldwide.

  Cutting off Russia from SWIFT would be part of a harsh new sanctions package developed in response to an ‘invasion’ of Ukraine that will never happen – mainly because the only ones praying for it are professional NATO warmongers.

  Profiting from a strategic blunder

  Once again, an American strategic blunder offers the Russia-China self-described “comprehensive strategic partnership” the chance to advance their coordination.

  Ushakov put it very diplomatically: it’s time to bypass a SWIFT mechanism “influenced by third countries” to form “an independent financial structure.”

  That amounts to a serious game-changer for the entire Global South – as scores of nations yearn to be released from a de facto US dollar dictatorship, complete with recurring Fed quantitative easing circus packages.

  Russia and China have been experimenting with their alternative payment systems for quite a while now: the Russian SPFS (System for Transfer of Financial Messages) and the Chinese CIPS (Cross Border Interbank Payment System).

  It won’t be easy, as the most powerful Chinese banks are deep into SWIFT and have expressed their reservations about SPFS. Yet, they will have to inevitably integrate prior to the launch of the new mechanism, possibly in late 2022.

  Once the most important Russian and Chinese banks – from Sberbank to the Bank of China – adopt the system, the path opens for other banks across Eurasia and the Global South to join in.

  In the long run, SWIFT, prone to non-stop American political interference, will be increasingly marginalized, or restricted to Atlanticist latitudes.

  Bypassing the US dollar, on trade and all sorts of financial settlements, is an absolutely central plank of the ever-evolving Russia-China notion of a multipolar world.

  The road will be long, of course, especially when it comes to offering a solid counterpoint to the US-controlled global financial system, a maze that includes the humongous investment houses of the BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street variety, with their interlocking shareholding of virtually every major multinational company.

  Yet a SWIFT escape will rapidly gain momentum, because it is inextricably linked to a series of developments that Putin-Xi touched upon in their conversation, the most important of which are:

  1. The progressive interconnection of BRI and EAEU, offering expanding roles to the BRICS-run New Development Bank (NDB) as well as the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

  2. The increasing geopolitical and geo-economic reach of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), especially after the admission of Iran in October.

  3. And crucially, the upcoming Chinese presidency of the BRICS in 2022.

  China in 2022 will invest deeply in BRICS+. This expanded BRICS club will be linked to a development process that includes:

  1. The consolidation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) – a massive East Asia trade deal uniting China, the ASEAN 10 and Japan, and South Korea, as well as Australia and New Zealand.

  2. The African Continental Free Trade Area (ACFTA).

  3. And the memoranda of understanding signed between the EAEU and MERCOSUR and between the EAEU and ASEAN.

  Anchoring West Asia  

  Yaroslav Lissovolik, one of the world’s leading experts on BRICS+, argues that it’s now time for BRICS+ 2.0, operating in a system that opens “the possibility for bilateral and plurilateral agreements to complement the core network of regional alliances formed by BRICS countries and their respective regional neighbors.”

  So if we’re talking about a major qualitative jump in terms of economic development across the Global South, the question is inevitable. What about West Asia?

  All these interconnections, plus an escape from SWIFT, will certainly profit the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), arguably the flagship BRI project, to which Beijing plans to annex Afghanistan.

  CPEC will be progressively connected to the future Iran-China corridor via Afghanistan, part of the 20 year Iran-China strategic deal in which BRI projects will be prominently featured. Iran and China already trade in yuan and rials, so settlements between Iran and China in a non-SWIFT mechanism will be a given.

  What happened to Iran is a classic example of SWIFT becoming hostage of imperial political manipulation. Iranian banks were expelled from SWIFT in 2012, because of pressure from the usual suspects. In 2016, access was restored as part of the JCPOA, clinched in 2015. Yet in 2018, under the Trump administration, Iran was once again cut off from SWIFT.

  None of that will ever happen with Iran joining the new Russia-China mechanism.

  And that leads us to the interconnection of China’s BRI expansion in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. The reconstruction of Syria may be largely financed via the non-SWIFT mechanism. Same for China buying Iraqi energy. Same for the reconstruction of a Yemen possibly hosting a Chinese-owned port, part of the “string of pearls.”

  Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and Israel may remain in the US financial sphere of influence, or lack thereof. And even if there is no BRICS nation anchoring West Asia, and no regional integration economic agreement on the horizon, the role of the economic integrator is bound to be eventually played by China.

  China will play a similar role to Brazil anchoring MERCOSUR, Russia anchoring the EAEU and South Africa anchoring the SADC/SACU.

  Both BRI and the EAEU will get a tremendous boost by bypassing SWIFT. You simply can’t go multipolar if you trade using (devalued) imperial legal tender.

  BRI, EAEU and those interlocking economic development agreements, combined with digital technology, will be integrating billions of people in the Global South.

  Think of a possible, auspicious future spelling out cheap telecom delivering financial services and world market access, in a non-dollar environment, to all those who have been so far cut off from a truly globalized economy.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/19/2021 – 00:00

• Mapped: The Most Common Illicit Drugs In The World
  Mapped: The Most Common Illicit Drugs In The World

  Despite strict prohibitory laws around much of the world, many common illicit drugs still see widespread use.

  Humans have a storied and complicated relationship with drugs. Defined as chemical substances that cause a change in our physiology or psychology, many drugs are taken medicinally or accepted culturally, like caffeine, nicotine, and alcohol.

  But, as Visual Capitalist’s Omri Wallach details below, many drugs – including medicines and non-medicinal substances taken as drugs – are taken recreationally and can be abused. Each country and people have their own relationship to drugs, with some embracing the use of specific substances while others shun them outright.

  What are the most common drugs that are considered generally illicit in different parts of the world? Today’s graphics use data from the UN’s World Drug Report 2021 to highlight the most prevalent drug used in each country.

  What Types of Common Drugs Are Tracked?

  The World Drug Report looks explicitly at the supply and demand of the international illegal drug market, not including commonly legal substances like caffeine and alcohol.

  Drugs are grouped by class and type, with six main types of drugs found as the most prevalent drugs worldwide.

  • Cannabis*: Drugs derived from cannabis, including hemp. This category includes marijuana (dried flowers), hashish (resin), and other for various other parts of the plant or derived oils.

  

  • Cocaine: Drugs derived from the leaves of coca plants. Labeled as either cocaine salts for powder form or crack for cocaine processed with baking soda and water into rock form.

  • Opioids: Includes opiates which are derived directly from the opium poppy plant, including morphine, codeine, and heroin, as well as synthetic alkaloids.

  

  • Amphetamine-type Stimulants (ATS): Amphetamine and drugs derived from amphetamine, including meth (also known as speed), MDMA, and ecstasy.

  

  • Sedatives and Tranquilizers: Includes other drugs whose main purpose is to reduce energy, excitement, or anxiety, as well as drugs used primarily to initiate or help with sleep (also called hypnotics).

  

  • Solvents and Inhalants: Gases or chemicals that can cause intoxication but are not intended to be drugs, including fuels, glues, and other industrial substances.

  The report also tracked the prevalence of hallucinogens—psychoactive drugs which strongly affect the mind and cause a “trip”—but no hallucinogens ranked as the most prevalent drug in any one country.

  *Editor’s note: Recreational cannabis is legal in five countries, and some non-federal jurisdictions (i.e. states). However, in the context of this report, it was included because it is still widely illicit in most countries globally.

  The Most Prevalent Drug in Each Country

  According to the report, 275 million people used drugs worldwide in 2020. Between the ages of 15–64, around 5.5% of the global population used drugs at least once.

  Many countries grouped different types of the same drug class together, and a few like Saudi Arabia and North Macedonia had multiple different drug types listed as the most prevalent.

  But across the board, cannabis was the most commonly prevalent drug used in 107 listed countries and territories.

  How prevalent is cannabis worldwide? 72 locations or more than two-thirds of those reporting listed cannabis as the most prevalent drug.

  Unsurprisingly these include countries that have legalized recreational cannabis: Canada, Georgia, Mexico, South Africa, and Uruguay.

  How Common Are Opioids and Other Drugs?

  Though the global prevalence of cannabis is unsurprising, especially as it becomes legalized and accepted in more countries, other drugs also have strong footholds.

  Opioids (14 locations) were the most prevalent drugs in the Middle-East, South and Central Asia, including in India and Iran. Notably, Afghanistan is the world’s largest producer of opium, supplying more than 90% of illicit heroin globally.

  Amphetamine-type drugs (9 locations) were the third-most common drugs overall, mainly in East Asia. Methamphetamine was the reported most prevalent drug in China, South Korea, and Japan, while amphetamine was only the most common drug in Bangladesh.

  However, it’s important to note that illicit drug usage is tough to track. Asian countries where cannabis is less frequently found (or reported) might understate its usage. At the same time, the opioid epidemic in the U.S. and Canada reflects high opioid usage in the West.

  As some drugs become more widespread and others face a renewed “war,” the landscape is certain to shift over the next few years.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 23:25

• US Builds Software To Predict China's Response To Military Action
  US Builds Software To Predict China’s Response To Military Action

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The US military has built software to predict Beijing’s reactions to US actions in Asia, such as military activity near China and arms sales to allies in the region, Reuters reported this week.

  Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks was briefed on the new software on Tuesday during a visit to US Indo-Pacific Command in Hawaii. The tool examines data going back to early 2020 of China’s responses to provocations from the US.

  

  “With the spectrum of conflict and the challenge sets spanning down into the grey zone. What you see is the need to be looking at a far broader set of indicators, weaving that together and then understanding the threat interaction,” Hicks said in an interview days ago.

  Since 2020, the US has significantly increased its military activity in the South China Sea and other sensitive areas near China. Unsurprisingly, China has responded by holding more military drills in the region.

  A US official told Reuters that China’s condemning of a joint naval patrol between the US and Canada through the Taiwan Strait and similar incidents fueled demand for the tool, although Beijing has always denounced US transits through the waterway.

  Further, it will seek to calculate “strategic friction” – as a US defense official put it:

  It looks at data since early 2020 and evaluates significant activities that had impacted U.S.-Sino relations. The computer-based system will help the Pentagon predict whether certain actions will provoke an outsized Chinese reaction.

  The software will also try to predict China’s responses to congressional delegation visits to Taiwan, which have increased over the past year. Since the Trump administration, the US has taken more steps to boost diplomatic ties with Taipei, drawing the ire of Beijing.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 22:50

• Meet The Scientists Hunting For The Next Variant Of Concern
  Meet The Scientists Hunting For The Next Variant Of Concern

  America has some of the most advanced medical research capabilities in the world. So why is it that a small group of labs in South Africa seems to be a step ahead of everybody else when it comes to sniffing out new variants?

  The group first gained notoriety for discovering the beta variant and alerting the world to its presence. But most people probably became familiar with Alex Sigal, Tulio de Oliveira and their work at a gene-sequencing laboratory in the South African port city of Durban when they announced the discovery of the omicron variant, the latest “variant of concern” while Americans were enjoying their Thanksgiving dinner.

  What is it that makes their lab so successful? Well, it looks like Bloomberg has finally found the answer in a profile of the Africa Health Research Institute, as it’s formally known.

  

  South African scientists became experts at combating viruses almost by necessity, They have been hard at work fighting AIDS, Turburculosis and other viruses – work that has made them a magnet for the world’s best epidemiologists.

  Because of this, Sigal’s lab has become a kind of training ground for scientists across the continent. It was the first to test omicron against blood plasma from people who’d received two doses of the Pfizer jab. They also developed a theory claiming that immunodepressed people might be breeding grounds for mutants since they’re so vulnerable.

  One reason for its success with finding new variants: South Africa has set up a network of seven genomic surveillance labs with one at the National Institute for Communicable Diseases and six at academic institutions.

  Sigal works with Tulio de Oliveira, the Brazilian head of the gene-sequencing laboratory Krisp.

  “There’s a lot of technical capacity in South Africa to do genomic sequencing of pathogens because we’ve built up that expertise over many years for HIV and TB,” said Richard Lessells, a Scottish infectious diseases specialist at Krisp. “Very early on in the pandemic, we recognized that genomic sequencing and genomic surveillance was going to be very important.”

  Since the discovery of omicron, many of the scientists working in the lab have been dealing with sleepless nights.

  “I’ve been working to get the Pfizer vaccine efficacy study ready,” said Sigal, who becomes animated when he watches a time-lapse video of the omicron variant attacking cells. “I worked through the night.”

  Put another way: the more variants they “discover”, the more prestige and funding they will be rewarded with.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 22:15

• Shellenberger: Why Democrats Self-Destruct On Crime
  Shellenberger: Why Democrats Self-Destruct On Crime

  Authored by Michael Shellenberger via Substack,

  Progressives still deny rising crime even as it undermines Joe Biden’s presidency…

  

  As progressives including Rep. Alexandria-Ocasio (left) and Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner (right) deny crime, President Joe Biden’s popularity suffers.

  Over the last 18 months, many progressives and Democrats have argued that public concern over crime, particularly in liberal cities, doesn’t reflect reality. “Overall crime [in San Francisco] was down 25 percent from 2019,” noted Washington Post columnist Radley Balko in July, “and all major categories of crime remained well below their five-year average.” Said progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) earlier this month, “A lot of these allegations of organized retail theft are not actually panning out. I believe a Walgreens in California cited it, but the data didn’t back it up.” And, last week, Philadelphia’s progressive District Attorney, Larry Krasner, said, “We don’t have a crisis of lawlessness, we don’t have a crisis of crime, we don’t have a crisis of violence.”

  But homicides, shoplifting, and crime in general did indeed rise in 2020, and rose even more in 2021, including well above the five-year average. Homicides, the worst of all crimes, increased 30 percent nationwide in 2020. Whether or not shoplifting was the sole or even main reason Walgreens has been closing stores in San Francisco, there is no question they were being regularly ransacked by shoplifters, harming revenues, and putting employees in danger. And burglaries increased 50 percent in San Francisco between 2019 and 2021, while brazen “hot prowl” burglaries, where residents are at home while criminals steal, doubled.

  It’s true that some crimes declined in 2020, and that many crimes are still far below what they were in the 1980s and 1990s. The national murder rate in 2020 was still 40% lower than where it hovered in the 1980s and 1990s. There were 175 homicides in Oakland in 1992 in and 102 in 2020. As for San Francisco, wrote Balko, “Murders did increase in 2020, but only by 14 percent (from 41 to 47) from a 56-year low in 2019.”

  But over two-thirds of America’s largest cities will have more homicides in 2021 than in 2020, and at least 13 big cities will set all time records for homicides, including Philadelphia, Austin, St. Paul, Baton Rouge, Rochester, Toledo, Indianapolis, Portland, Minneapolis, Louisville, Columbus, Albuquerque, and Tucson.

  And many of the crimes that declined in 2020 did so due to covid, and have since increased. Car break-ins in San Francisco declined temporarily from reduced tourism in 2020 but have since skyrocketed to new heights, reaching 3,000 in November. Many San Francisco business leaders and residents say they no longer bother reporting crimes. Now, big cities are seeing a wave of spectacular smash-and-grab burglaries of luxury stores like Louis Vuitton by criminal gangs.

  The downplaying of crime by progressive Democrats has provoked a backlash from moderate Democrats. Last Friday, former Philadelphia mayor, Michael Nutter, who is black, accused Krasner, who is white, of “white privilege” and “white wokeness… to have so little regard for human lives lost, many of them black and brown.”

  Higher crime, and the downplaying of it by progressives, could hurt Democrats in 2022 and 2024 Congressional and presidential elections. In 2020, more voters said they trusted Republicans more than Democrats on law enforcement and criminal justice. Since then, crime has worsened. The share of Americans who say they support Biden’s handling of crime declined from 43 percent in October to 36 percent last week. And the percentage of Americans who say crime in their local area is getting worse rose from 38 to 51 percent between 2020 and 2021.

  None of this should come as a surprise to Democrats. After the 2020 elections, Biden ally Rep. James Clyburn said that the progressive “Defund the Police” slogan was partly responsively for Democrats failing to win a stronger majority in the Senate. His complaints were widely publicized and debated. And many party leaders, including Biden, remember how, from the 1970s through the early 1990s, Democrats lost elections and political power due to the public perception that they were too soft on crime.

  Why, then, do so many progressives and Democrats continue to deny the crisis of crime, violence, and lawlessness?

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 21:40

• Exactly Which Dystopian Novel Are We Living In?
  Exactly Which Dystopian Novel Are We Living In?

  There’s a debate going on among the disaffected/terrified over which dystopian novel we’re now living in.

  As John Rubino remarks, some point to social media addiction and designer drugs to suggest Brave New World. 

  Others see mass surveillance and pandemic lockdowns as putting us squarely in 1984. 

  Still others cite online censorship and cancel culture as favoring Fahrenheit 451.

  Each of these opinions seems valid, which is confusing.

  A prisoner should know the shape of their cell. So it’s a relief to find out that someone (not sure who) has settled the argument by creating the following Venn diagram (Tweeted by our friend David Morgan).

  

  Turns out we’re not in a single dystopian novel. We’re in all of them simultaneously.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 21:05

• Parents Erupt At California School Board Meeting Over Alleged 'Coaching' Of Students Into LGBTQ Club
  Parents Erupt At California School Board Meeting Over Alleged ‘Coaching’ Of Students Into LGBTQ Club

  Authored by Brad Jones via The Epoch Times,

  A mixed crowd of more than 150 people packed a school board meeting in Salinas, Calif., on Dec. 15 as frustrated parents clashed with supporters of two teachers accused of subverting parents and recruiting middle school students into a Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) club.

  

  Jessica Konen, one of about 30 people who spoke during an extended public comment period, told the board that school staff indoctrinated her child and usurped her parental authority.

  Konen blasted the board and accused teachers and staff of coaching her gender dysphoric daughter through the Equality Club, an LGBTQ+ support group now called the You Be You (UBU) Club at Buena Vista Middle School.

  “I stand here today in front of all of you because I am outraged. Is this really barely coming to light? Are you guys serious?” she said.

  “How could you even allow this? How could you even have this meeting to question it? How dare you let these teachers come in and act as if they have done nothing wrong? A mistake? How long of a mistake?”

  Konen went public with her story after controversy erupted over an audio recording leaked to “Irreversible Damage” author Abigail Shrier and The Epoch Times that revealed two teachers at a California Teachers Association (CTA) conference dismissing parents’ concerns about homosexual and transgender indoctrination at school.

  The two seventh-grade teachers from Buena Vista Middle School in Salinas, Calif., were recorded coaching other teachers how to hide the nature of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, or Questioning (LGBTQ+) Clubs, also known as GSA clubs, from parents. They led a workshop called “How we run a ‘GSA’ in Conservative Communities” at the CTA’s “2021 LGBTQ+ Issues Conference, Beyond the Binary: Identity & Imagining Possibilities” in Palm Springs, Calif., from Oct. 29 to 31.

  Spreckels Union School District (SUSD) has since suspended the teachers with pay pending the outcome of an independent third-party investigation.

  

  A school board meeting in Salinas, Calif., on Dec. 15, 2021. (Courtesy of Josey Schenkoske)

  At the Dec. 15 Spreckels Union School District (SUSD) meeting, Konen accused Buena Vista Middle School staff of failing to tell her that child might be having suicidal thoughts based on internet searches, while some school staff allegedly knew about them.

  “They didn’t tell me that my child was suicidal,” she said. “You allow these teachers to open their classrooms, teaching predatorial information to a young child, a mindful child that doesn’t even know how to comprehend it all. How do you not know what’s going on your own campuses? Did you think that no parent would ever come forward? You will not quiet me today. I will stand here today and protect my child along with every other child who has not come forward yet.”

  “Do they have psychiatry degrees that I was unaware of, because I didn’t hire them? I did not hire them to sit there and nitpick my child’s brain. You took away my ability to parent my child,” Konen added.

  She accused Buena Vista Middle School teachers and administrators of contributing to her daughter’s gender confusion.

  “You planted seeds,” she said. “Your job was to educate my child in math, science, English, etc. Do your job and let me do mine!”

  Parents cheered and applauded her speech.

  Preceding Konen’s comments, her father, Gunter Konen, told the board he was infuriated when he found out how Konen and his granddaughter had been treated. He said his granddaughter was a straight-A student before she was “coached” by staff on gender issues.

  “She’s the one that’s confused, because she was coached,” he said.

  “[Child Protective Services] was called on my daughter because she went to school to have a discussion with the teacher for hiding the fact that [her daughter] was given a new name—a boy’s name,” he said.

  Suggesting to a girl that she may be a boy or to a boy he may be a girl is wrong, he said.

  “That’s just vile nonsense,” he said.

  “I think education needs to be grounded on truth,” Gunter Konen said. “I just feel that our kids are impressionable at that age, and we should keep the parents informed. I say resign or repent.”

  Cheryl Duffus, a parent of two boys who attended Buena Vista Middle School said she has complained to administration multiple times about how one of the teachers had taken pushed LGBTQ activism to “unacceptable” levels.

  “On one occasion, I picked my youngest one up from school during an all-school assembly, where he and other students were supposed to walk under a rainbow arch in the inner court to support the club. This was an all-school event, not just for members of the GSA club,” Duffus said.

  After the incident, the principal assured Duffus he would talk to one of the teachers about the activism and ask her to “tone it down.”

  Duffus said four other parents made similar complaints to Tarallo the same year: 2015.

  “This issue is not about a GSA club on campus. It has nothing to do with that. This issue is about deceiving parents, stalking children, and these are children. They’re 12 years old,” she said.

  What happened to Jennifer Konen and her family was “horrific,” she said.

  

  A crowd of more than 150 people packed a school board meeting in Salinas, Calif., on Dec. 15, 2021. (Courtesy of Josey Schenkoske)

  Board Comments

  Trustee Michael Scott said he supports the decision to conduct a third-party investigation surrounding the UBU Club in light of the leaked audio.

  However, he accused Shrier of framing what’s happening with transgender youth “in terms of a war.”

  “We are not at war here. Everyone loses in a war,” Scott said. “War is completely contrary to our core values of compassion, kindness, and respect. I believe we should do everything we can to support and be inclusive,” Scott said.

  “I am hopeful the third-party investigation will provide a clearer picture of the circumstances surrounding the UBU Club,” he said.

  Any subsequent action should be responsive to the values, beliefs, and priorities of the community which are to be inclusive and “social emotionally” supportive.

  “As we navigate this situation, I hope we can adhere to the values of compassion, kindness, and respect,” Scott said.

  Other trustees called for the same values.

  “I just want to stress my commitment to the support and safety of all of our students,” said Trustee Stephanie McMurtrie Adams. “I will continue to work to ensure equity for all of our students, both academically and socially, emotionally.”

  “I, too, would like to echo was previously been said,” Trustee Jennifer Kato said.

  Supt. Eric Tarallo said the UBU Club “has not been disbanded,” but has been suspended while the investigation is carried out. He called for kindness, respect and civility.

  “We’re living through incredibly difficult and divisive times, that seem get worse every month,” Tarallo said.

  SUSD President Steve McDougall said the district has received hundreds of emails since the controversy surfaced in mid-November and that SUSD is doing its best to deal with the situation.

  

  A man speaks at a school board meeting in Salinas, Calif., on Dec. 15, 2021. (Courtesy of Josey Schenkoske)

  “We’re going to do it right. We’re going to do it within the law. We’re going to find out what we need to do moving forward once this independent investigation has concluded at that time, and not before. And that’s the way it’s going to be if I’m going to be involved with it,” he said.

  Vicki Nohrden, a parent and grandparent, blasted the board for preaching about compassion, kindness and respect while disregarding parental rights.

  “Respect is so important,” she said. “What I think is lacking is we are not respecting the parents when parents don’t have a voice and a place of authority in their children’s world, and the school seeks to undermine that authority.”

  Nohrden called for school choice, “because when monies aren’t being spent in the way they should be spent to educate our children with an education—not an indoctrination—then things are out of order.”

  She touted Shrier’s book “Irreversible Damage,” which examines the alarming surge in gender dysphoria among teenage girls.

  Nohrden criticized school staff for reporting parents to Child Protective Services (CPS) for not using transgender names and pronouns of their child’s choosing, or for not being “emotionally supportive” enough in the minds of some activist teachers.

  “The thing that concerns me the most is when schools want to undermine the authority of the parents,” she told the board.

  “I worked as a court-appointed special advocate for children. I really care about the community, but when somebody disagrees with a mindset and then sends CPS to somebody’s house, I say that is absolutely out of order,” Nohrden said.

  Grant Cremers, a father of three children who attended SUSD schools including Buena Vista, said he supports the UBU, but not how it was run. He suggested that the entire board and administration should be investigated, not just the two teachers.

  “There’s a history here. The board probably needs to be part of the investigation, not overseeing the investigation,” he said.

  “This is not easy to talk about,” he said. “These were teachers that we knew and supported in the classroom, and their actions have gone too far. They’ve used predatory tactics to push political activism on our school grounds to our children.”

  Tanya Navarro said the controversy is not that a LGBTQ+ support club exists, but the way in which the teachers conducted themselves and the way it was run. She called for a district-wide investigation, and suggested police—not a third-party investigation firm—should lead it.

  Navarro said there should have been more transparency about the intent of the UBU club, so that parents, like herself, would have had a chance to explain to their children “what our convictions and our religions and our perspectives and ideologies are.”

  “But, when you force and impose upon them, that is immoral. That is wrong,” she said.

  Teacher Supporters

  Katherine Beck, a former student who said she attended the LGBTQ+ club at Buena Vista when it was called the “Equality Club,” expressed support for the club and the teachers who ran it.

  “I first attended the UBU, then called the Equality Club, meeting when I was in the sixth grade,” she said. “I was not sought after. I was not pressured, and I was not forced into attending the meeting. Nor was I ever pressured or forced into being anyone but who I already was,” she said.

  “I learned about the club the same way every other student at Buena Vista learned about the club; Through the club’s slide on morning announcements,” Beck said. “I joined the club because I was sick of dealing with lunchtime middle school drama. When I wanted to attend a meeting I did. And when I wanted to hang out my friends, I did that too. It’s true that the Equality Club did not keep records, did not take attendance, and did not have club officers, but that’s the case with all clubs at Buena Vista, including the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.”

  During her time in the club, students led their own discussions on a wide range of topics “from racism to disabilities to Yes, LGBTQ issues,” Beck said.

  The club was “never a secret to the school board, nor to the school administration,” she said.

  Jennifer Ruttschow, whose children attend SUSD schools including Buena Vista, said she supports the two teachers, the UBU Club and the morning announcements, which one of the teachers said in the audio are used to promote LGBTQ inclusivity and the club.

  “Suspending the UBU club and morning announcements that are created by students is a disservice to students, the very people that our district is here to serve,” Ruttschow said.

  “I support these teachers being in the classroom and providing extracurricular activities so that my children are provided with opportunities not only to learn about kindness and inclusion, but opportunities to implement them in real life situations,” she said.

  Sam Gomez, a former SUSD student of Buena Vista who is now the deputy director of The Epicenter, a youth-led support group for at-risk youth in Monterey County, told the board she wishes that LGBTQ clubs would have existed when she went to school.

  “In 2006, I was a seventh grader at one of us the middle school. During this time, I was outed by a classmate, and shortly after the entire school learned about me being a part of the LGBTQ+ community. There were mixed reactions, including judgmental stares from peers, supportive encouragement from other classmates, and unfortunately the disapproval by some parents,” said Gomez.

  Some of the parents would no longer allow their children to be friends with her, she said.

  “As a 12-year-old child this negatively impacted my mental health and led to some seriously negative habits including self-harm. I did not have support at home, and I was terrified of being outed to my family at the time because of their negative views towards the LGBTQ+ plus community,” she said.

  Gomez called for more resources for LGBTQ+ inclusivity at the school and “competency training” for teachers and staff.

  Thomas Caldeira-Perry told the board there was no violation of students’ privacy and that the club has always been run with “full and utmost” transparency.

  “I am the son of highly respected and award-winning teacher Lori Caldeira as well as a Buena Vista Middle School alumni. I am here to speak on behalf of my family, my mother on the impact that these recent events have had on us,” he said.

  Perry attacked Shrier over her article based on the leaked audio recording.

  “There are great many assumptions and accusations being made as a result of a political third-party blogger with a very clear anti-LGBT agenda, who’s looking only to boost the sales of her discredited book. While she sits completely uncaring of the destruction she has caused, my mother and Ms. Baraki continue to be victimized by targeted and hate speech due to the district’s knee-jerk reaction and fear-based response,” he said.

  A source who goes by the pseudonym Rebecca Murphy attended the CTA conference. She told The Epoch Times following the SUSD board meeting that Shrier’s article was “spot on.”

  “It was completely accurate,” she said.

  Murphy said most parents would be “appalled” and “aghast” as she was to watch and listen to the two activist teachers describe the challenges they faced in concealing the nature of the GSA clubs from parents.

  Meanwhile, Shrier told The Epoch Times in an email on Dec. 16, “I stand by every word of my reporting.”

  Dalila Epperson said she has been attending school board meetings with other parents since late May.

  “One of the things we’ve been noticing is that the school boards have not been listening to us,” she said.

  Parents have been receiving leaked information similar to what Shrier wrote in her article for the last year and a half, Epperson said.

  “That’s why the parents have been so upset,” she said.

  Preceding the meeting, the Voices of Monterey Bay published a letter signed by several local politicians and community leaders in support of the You Be You (UBU) Club.

  Assembly Member Mark Stone (D-Monterey Bay), who signed the letter, did not respond to inquiries preceding the Dec. 15 meeting.

  The next SUSD school board meeting is set for Jan. 6.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 20:30

• North Korea Marks Anniversary Of Prior Ruler's Death With 11-Day Ban On Laughing
  North Korea Marks Anniversary Of Prior Ruler’s Death With 11-Day Ban On Laughing

  North Korea is marking the 10th anniversary of former leader Kim Jong-Il’s death in somewhat characteristically bizarre ways, with dictates from Pyongyang saying citizens must mourn on a “unified” front that includes a ban on laughing for 11 days.

  More than mere commemorative moments of silence, all instances of general enjoyment have been banned during the week-and-a-half period, including shopping, recreation, and alcohol consumption. Even going for groceries is on the list of banned activities, according to Radio Free Asia’s Korean Service.

  

  “During the mourning period, we must not drink alcohol, laugh or engage in leisure activities,” a resident of the northeastern city of Sinuiju was cited in the US state-funded publication as saying. The source added that “In the past many people who were caught drinking or being intoxicated during the mourning period were arrested and treated as ideological criminals. They were taken away and never seen again.”

  “Even if your family member dies during the mourning period, you are not allowed to cry out loud and the body must be taken out after it’s over,” the source told RFA further. “People cannot even celebrate their own birthdays if they fall within the mourning period.”

  While RFA is an American government-linked media agency, and so the report should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt, this type of strict mourning is somewhat common in many Eastern cultures from the Levant to East Asia, at least on a local level and within families. But strict dictates imposed on a national scale is something perhaps only common to the DPRK.

  Dubbed by Pyongyang officials “the parent of our people,” Kim Jong Ill’s death anniversary commemoration ceremony observed in the capital included the following according to NY Post…

  Cars, trains and ships blew their horns, the Hermit Kingdom’s flags were lowered to half-staff and people flocked to Pyongyang’s Mansu Hill to lay flowers and bow before giant statues of Kim Jong Il and his father, Kim Il Sung, who ruled for 46 years.

  

  Kim Jong Un participates in annual tributes to his late father, Kim Jong-il, who died on December 17, 2011 – reportedly of a heart attack at the age of 69.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 19:55

• A Delusional AOC Provides The Tweet Irony Of The Day
  A Delusional AOC Provides The Tweet Irony Of The Day

  Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

  

  AOC Irony

  People want to “but Manchin” everyone to death, but learned helplessness is not a disposition that inspires confidence or support.

  The President has tools at his disposal. Leadership has tools at their disposal. If it really is just 1-2 votes, Senate should force a vote on BBB

  — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) December 17, 2021

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

  No Progressive princess, what’s happening is the public is sick of your progressive cohort for hijacking the Democratic Party to the extreme Left. 

  The vote in Virginia and near loss in New Jersey were not because of failure to pass programs. The vote is because you want to pass extreme Progressive bills.

  Senate  Parliamentarian Irony

  Yesterday, the Senate Parliamentarian correctly ruled that immigration reform is not a budget item. 

  Whether you are for or against reform, clearly it’s not a budget item and that means it cannot be part of Build Back Better.  

  Let’s tune into what a delusional AOC thinks.

  Good thing the Parliamentarian’s guidance here is non binding! It’s just guidance.

  The Senate can still include a path to citizenship in BBB and call a vote on it, which is why we have called on them to do so. https://t.co/lbHJWDaghj

  — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) December 17, 2021

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

  Say What?

  Sure .Schumer can introduce a vote. And it will take 60 Senators to pass it. 

  More Delusion 

  As this was playing out, the conventional beltway groupthink was that the progressives were being ‘unreasonable’ in not trusting there were the votes in the Senate to get this done. https://t.co/QQM8Dt3LTU

  — Amanda Becker (@AmandaBecker) December 17, 2021

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

  “I didn’t think he [President Biden] could promise the Senate. He promised anyway. It’s time for him to deliver“

  Another Say What?! 

  Biden made a promise that was not his to make. And the only way he can deliver is by doing what Manchin wants. 

  There is no way Biden can “force” the Senate to deliver a Progressive mandate.

  Manchin’s Demand List

  1. $1.7 Trillion fully paid budget up from $1.5 Trillion – Position since April

  2. Means-testing child-care subsidies and the child tax credit – Position since April

  3. Concerned over inflation – Position since April

  4. No timeline gimmicks of expiring programs to make a fake budget – Position since April 

  5. No paid family leave – Position since April

  6. No new entitlements that aren’t means-tested or don’t require work – Position since April

  In addition to the above, Manchin will not go along with proposals to change Parliamentary rules, pack the court, or end the filibuster. Those have been his position forever.

  What did Pelosi, AOC, and the House do? 

  They ignored every one of Manchin’s requirements. 

  And now, AOC moans about delusion. Wow, talk about the need to look in the mirror. 

  A Democrat bloodbath is likely in November of 2022. 

  Meanwhile, if the delusional Progressive stick with the same plan, Build Back Better will not pass at all. And that would be a great thing.

  The final irony is that in order to kill BBB entirely, we must now hope Progressives keep doing what they’re doing. 

  Go for it AOC!

  *  *  *

  Like these reports? If so, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 19:20

• The 16 US Cities That Hit All-Time Homicide Records This Year
  The 16 US Cities That Hit All-Time Homicide Records This Year

  As we’ve observed over the past days and weeks, murder records are being shattered all over America, which many major cities seeing all-time murder highs for 2021, and others hitting three decade peaks.

  According to data collected by Fox News based on local police departments and local media tracking, no less than 16 cities have set new homicide records in 2021. This still with a couple weeks to go before the close of the year.

  

  The mayor of one of the cities on the below list recently decried, “It’s terrible to every morning get up and have to go look at the numbers and then look at the news and see the stories. It’s just crazy. It’s just crazy and this needs to stop,” according to the words of Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney, a Democrat. 

  Not making the grim list below, though fast approaching their historic record homicide highs this year, are also Houston, Memphis, Oakland, and Greensboro, North Carolina. Here are the 16 cities which have seen homicide records smashed this year, listed in alphabetical order.

  * * *

  1. Albuquerque, New Mexico

  Homicides in 2021: At least 107.

  Previous record: 93 in 2019.

  2. Atlanta, Georgia

  Homicides in 2021: At least 150.

  Previous record: 145 in 2020.

  Fox notes that “Homicide numbers in Atlanta in 2021 reflect a 30-year record. The city saw 241 homicides in 1990, according to a report.”

  3. Austin, Texas

  Homicides in 2021: At least 88.

  Previous record: 59 in 1984

  4. Baton Rouge, Louisiana

  Homicides in 2021: At least 115 (unofficial).

  Previous record: 110 in 2020.

  5. Columbus, Ohio

  Homicides in 2021: At least 179.

  Previous record: 177 in 2020.

  Defund the police?…

  As crime rates continue to rise in cities both large and small across the U.S., including record-breaking homicide numbers in many places, city leaders are calling for more funding for police. https://t.co/7GDT4dv5uC

  — WLOS (@WLOS_13) December 17, 2021

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

  6. Indianapolis, Indiana

  Homicides in 2021: At least 258.

  Previous record: 233 in 2020.

  7. Jackson, Mississippi

  Homicides in 2021: At least 129.

  Previous record: 128 in 2020.

  8. Louisville, Kentucky

  Homicides in 2021: At least 179.

  Previous record: 111 in 2016.

  9. Macon, Georgia

  Homicides in 2021: At least 52.

  Previous record: 48 in 1992.

  10. Milwaukee, Wisconsin

  Homicides in 2021: At least 190.

  Previous record: 186 in 2020.

  11. New Haven, Connecticut

  Homicides in 2021: At least 25.

  Previous record: 23 in 2011.

  12. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

  Homicides in 2021: At least 524.

  Pevious record: 500 in 1990.

  13. Portland, Oregon

  Homicides in 2021: At least 84.

  Previous record: 70 homicides in 1987.

  14. Rochester, New York

  Homicides in 2021: At least 80.

  Previous record: 69 in 1991.

  15. St. Paul, Minnesota

  Homicides in 2021: At least 35.

  Previous record: 34 in 1992.

  16. Tucson, Arizona

  Homicides in 2021: At least 92.

  Previous record: 79 in 2008.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 18:45

• Pandemic Could Be Solved Quickly If Politics Thrown Out: Dr. Ben Carson
  Pandemic Could Be Solved Quickly If Politics Thrown Out: Dr. Ben Carson

  Authored by Harry Lee and Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times,

  “We’ve been having tunnel vision” dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Ben Carson told EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program.

  “Let’s throw the politics out. We could solve this problem pretty quickly,” he stated in an interview that will premiere on Dec. 18 at 7 p.m. New York time.

  “Let’s open this thing up to all the different mechanisms,” said Carson, a renowned neurosurgeon who was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom—the highest civilian award in the nation—in 2008 for his work. He retired in 2013 and ran for the presidency in 2016, before serving as the secretary of Housing and Urban Development during the Trump administration.

  

  “Let’s look around the world at things that work. Let’s look at the fact that on the western coast of Africa, there’s almost no COVID. And let’s ask ourselves, why is that? And then you see, it’s because they take antimalarials, particularly hydroxychloroquine. Let’s study that. Let’s see what’s going on there.

  “Let’s listen to these physician groups who’ve had incredible success with ivermectin. Let’s look at the results with monoclonal antibodies. Let’s look at all of these things. Let’s put them all in our armamentarium so that we don’t have a one-size-fits-all system.”

  The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) at one time had authorized hydroxychloroquine for treating certain COVID-19 patients but quickly revoked the emergency use authorization (EUA) in June 2020, claiming no data showed its effectiveness.

  The FDA hasn’t approved or issued an EUA for ivermectin to treat COVID-19, citing the same reasons.

  Using hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin to treat COVID-19 patients has been highly controversial. Some studies show, and some doctors claim, that hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin can effectively treat COVID-19 patients. A vaccine confidence insight report (pdf) from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) labeled such claims as misinformation or disinformation.

  “COVID is a virus. Viruses mutate. That’s what they do. And they will continue to mutate,” Carson said.

  Carson pointed out that fortunately, most of the time, viruses become a little weaker with each mutation.

  “We can admit that and deal with it, or we can take every little mutation and every little change and try to make it into a crisis so we can frighten people and control their lives more,” Carson said.

  The latest variant has been named Omicron. During a White House COVID-19 Task Force briefing on Dec. 15, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said that she expected Omicron cases to increase in the coming weeks, urging people to take preventive measures such as being vaccinated and getting booster doses.

  

  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington on Nov. 4, 2021. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

  Carson said he has some concerns with how COVID-19 is being utilized to “manipulate and frighten people.”

  “We should be using every tool available to us to fight the pandemic. There’s no question about that,” Carson said.

  “But that means, you know, therapeutics, which had been poo-pooed. And I understand why. Because in order to get an EUA—an emergency use authorization—to pursue the vaccines, you can’t have anything that’s effective as an alternative. So, that’s a defect in our system, we need to get rid of that.

  “I think a lot of people died unnecessarily because we had that attitude,” Carson added. He shared that when he contracted the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus and was severely ill, monoclonal antibodies saved his life. He said monoclonal antibodies weren’t really utilized the way they should have been early on.

  The FDA issued its first EUA for monoclonal antibodies to treat COVID-19 patients in November 2020.

  “There are many things that have been very effective that we have not pursued, including natural immunity,” Carson said.

  “Well, why wouldn’t you collect that information? Why wouldn’t you want to know that? The only reason you wouldn’t do that is because you didn’t want to know the answer,” he said. “Because it didn’t fit very neatly into what you’re trying to do, which is get everybody to be vaccinated.”

  That’s one of the reasons people are losing confidence in federal health agencies, he suggested.

  Last month, the CDC said it had no record of naturally immune people transmitting the CCP virus.

  “A lot of people who probably should be vaccinated are not doing it because they see these inconsistencies, these things that make absolutely no sense,” Carson said. “This demand that everybody get a vaccination, except if you’re coming across the southern border illegally, then it’s not all that important.”

  Carson also opposes forcing children to be vaccinated.

  

  First-grade student, 6-year-old Leonel Campos, receives a COVID-19 vaccine at Arturo Velasquez Institute in Chicago, on Nov. 12, 2021. ( Scott Olson/Getty Images)

  “We have a situation where you have the government advocating that children be vaccinated, even though the risk for death for a child with COVID is 0.025 percent, essentially the same as it is for seasonal flu. You don’t see us doing all this every year for seasonal flu,” Carson stated.

  “The risk of mortality for a healthy child is approaching zero, and yet we’re saying do this without knowing what the long-term risks are?” he said.

  “And why would you subject an innocent child to a lifetime of unknown risk? It just makes absolutely no sense.

  “We need to have faith in our government. We need to have faith in our health care systems. And by injecting politics into it, I think we have put ourselves behind the eight ball. It’s going to take a while to reestablish that trust,” he said.

  “Why not learn how to look at what’s logical and what makes sense? And why not encourage discussion of those things, rather than everybody getting their respective corners and shooting hand grenades at each other?”

  The way out is real leadership, he said.

  “The only path is strong leadership. We don’t have that.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 18:10

• Man Thrown Off United Flight After Using Red Thong As A Mask
  Man Thrown Off United Flight After Using Red Thong As A Mask

  A Cape Coral man has been banned from flying by United Airlines after using a red thong as a mask.

  Passenger Adam Jenne was flying from Fort Lauderdale to Washington D.C. but was escorted off of his flight before it took off. He was officially asked to leave the flight for “failing to comply with the federal mask mandate”. 

  Jenne wasn’t shy about his reasoning for using the thong as his mask. “I think the best way to illustrate absurdity is with absurdity,” he said, according to NBC 2. 

  He also had no problem admitting that this wasn’t his first time using the thong as his mask.

  He told NBC: “Every single flight has been met with different reactions from the flight crew. Some with a wild appreciation, others confrontational.”

  

  But for every flight in the past, Jenne has made it to his final destination, the report says. This time, he wound up in the custody of the Broward County Sheriff’s Office. 

  “Eventually, they called TSA and airport security. I ended up staying at the gate for about 45 minutes,” he said. He also said others then followed his lead, taking off their masks and walking off the plane in protest. 

  “I think it’s a testament to passengers having had enough, citizens having had enough. This is just nonsense,” he continued. “My intention was not to ruin anybody else’s day.” 

  United Airlines stated: “The customer clearly wasn’t in compliance with the federal mask mandate and we appreciate that our team addressed the issue on the ground prior to takeoff, avoiding any potential disruptions on the air.”

  Jenne concluded: “It’s all nonsense. COVID doesn’t know that we’re at cruising altitude. It’s stupid. The whole thing is theater. Hopefully, Spirit Airlines has a better sense of humor tomorrow.”

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 17:35

• Survey Calls Facebook "Worst Company Of 2021"
  Survey Calls Facebook “Worst Company Of 2021”

  Authored by Nicholas Dolinger via The Epoch Times,

  Meta Platforms, formerly known as Facebook, was declared “the worst company of 2021” in the results of an audience survey conducted by Yahoo Finance.

  

  The poll, which surveyed 1,541 readers, saw Facebook receive 8 percent of the total votes for the ignominious distinction.

  Respondents were polarized in their assessments of the tech company and expressed contradictory reasons for their disdain. Conservatives and dissidents expressed frustration with the tech company for being overly censorious and discriminating against their views. However, progressives often complained that the company did not go far enough in its efforts to eradicate perceived misinformation, with many claiming that the company was inadequately suppressive of skeptical views regarding the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic and the 2020 United States presidential election.

  Last September, Facebook fell under scrutiny for The Facebook Files, a series of investigative reports published by the Wall Street Journal and based on leaks provided by whistleblower Frances Haugen. Much of the publicity around the leaks focused on the impact of Instagram (a subsidiary of Meta Platforms) on teenage girls, and the company’s alleged indifference to those concerns. Haugen also alleged that Facebook’s potential for radicalization has contributed to genocides in Myanmar and Ethiopia, among a myriad of other concerns expressed in the reports.

  Additionally, the company has been under the scrutiny of antitrust regulators for several years. Last year, the Federal Trade Commission and the attorneys general of 48 states sued Facebook for alleged violations of antitrust laws. That particular case against the company was dismissed as legally insufficient, but the lawsuit is still pending as the court considers dismissing the case outright.

  Perhaps owing to this negative publicity, Facebook rebranded the parent company which oversees its platforms as Meta Platforms last October. The new name coincides with Zuckerberg’s increasing emphasis on the concept of the “metaverse,” a concept in which the internet would be presented as a simulated, three-dimensional world accessible through virtual reality. The proposed Facebook metaverse has been no less controversial, with critics calling it everything from ridiculous to dystopian.

  Still, Meta’s stock value has seen 22 percent growth in the past year—lagging somewhat behind the S&P, but hardly a crisis for investors. For strictly financial concerns, Meta appears in much better shape than the second-place finisher for worst company of 2021: the Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba, which has seen its stock price plummet by over 50 percent after a tumultuous year of harassment by the Chinese Communist Party.

  However, Facebook has seen itself dogged by controversy since its inception, and this has not deterred it in its rise to become an information powerhouse. It is thus unclear whether such negative publicity will serve as a significant deterrent to the company, which still persists as a leader in social media even despite the ensemble of negative publicity it has received.

  Facebook/Meta Platforms did not respond to a request for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 17:00

• Timing The Crash: Why "Buy The 1st Rate Hike, Sell The Penultimate Hike" Won't Work This Time
  Timing The Crash: Why “Buy The 1st Rate Hike, Sell The Penultimate Hike” Won’t Work This Time

  Speaking on CNBC, the FOMC’s most clueless member – NY Fed president John Williams who runs the world’s most important trading desk yet has zero trading experience and every market crisis shows it – said that the Fed is “very focused” on taming “too high” inflation and will be able to do so without causing a recession.

  That, of course, is a lie: as we last week, virtually every single rate hike cycle since before the Great Depression ended in disaster (and/or recession)…

  

  … and this time won’t be any different, just like the brief bear market at the end of 2018 which ended the Fed’s last rate hike cycle, wasn’t any different.

  

  Guaranteeing that there will be a very sad ending (at least until the next QE/NIRP/ETF purchases at which point everything will go vertical) is that in keeping with the long-running theme from BofA CIO Michael Hartnett that we are about to get the double whammy of “Inflation Shock…Rates Shock“, Hartnett writes in his latest Flow Show “here come the central banks…Fed to end QE in March & hike thrice in ’22, BoE hiked 15bps despite Omicron surge, Norges hiked 25bps, ECB tapering & hinting rate hike in ’22; in contrast in EM…swaps market hinting China could cut 50bps next Monday & Turkey aggressively easing (Turkish stocks up 54% in local-FX terms & down 27% in US$-terms YTD).”

  However, while everyone knows how it all ends – in both nominal and real terms – the question is when.

  And here we get some useful insight from Hartnett who reminds us of the “wonderful old market adage” to “buy the 1st hike, sell the penultimate rate hike”  because “first rates hikes are “good” hikes on back of strong growth and mid-cycle bull market.”

  But this time, the BofA strategist says that this market-timing adage is “wrong” as inflation is already out of control and even with speedier end to QE, and central banks are only slightly less out of control.

  As a result, Hartnett writes that tighter financial conditions remain his key investment forecast into ’22, and his favorite trades are as follows:

  • Tighter financial conditions = long US$, long MOVE/VIX, short credit, short PE/XBD.
  • EPS deceleration/flatter yield curve/high CPI = long quality, defensives, yield & shortextended cyclical (SOX/XHB), long commodities to hedge inflation
  • Contrarian = short Nasdaq (“hubris”), long EM/China (“humiliation”).

  Which brings us back to the point up top, namely that inflation always precede Recessions: whether driven by asset, housing, commodity, consumer or labor, inflation is like a very high body temperature, and must be reduced via tightening or recession to return the body to normal and ensure future good health.

  And while global growth is good right now (despite Omicron risks) with just 6% of investors forecasting recession in ’22 (a recent FMS finding we mocked last week), the risk that the coming “rates shock” quickly morphs a into “recession scare” is high.

  Finally, according to Hartnett, UK mid-cap stocks and yield curve are the best leading indicator of “policy error” – case in point, in 2017/18 BoE’s 1st rate hike was the penultimate rate hike, and markets were sold.

  

  How to best position for the coming pain? As BofA puts it, “Defence until Capitulation and/or new Declaration of Indulgence“, or in other words, remain defensive and bearish until a) positioning shows full-blown capitulation and/or b) credit events/losses on Wall St force central banks to announce reversal of tightening.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 16:25

• White House To Unvaxx'd: "You're Looking At A Winter Of Severe Illness And Death"
  White House To Unvaxx’d: “You’re Looking At A Winter Of Severe Illness And Death”

  Authored by Nick Ciolino via The Epoch Times,

  White House COVID-19 response coordinator Jeff Zients predicts a winter of severe illness and death for Americans who decide to not take the vaccination for the CCP virus, which causes the disease COVID-19.

  “For the unvaccinated: you’re looking at a winter of severe illness and death,” said Zients during a White House COVID-19 update Friday.

  “For yourselves, your families and the hospitals you may soon overwhelm.”

  

  The grim message from the White House comes a day after a panel of advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) unanimously voted to recommend the agency tell the public that the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines are preferred to the jab from Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

  “Any vaccination is better than no vaccination,” said CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky of the J&J jab after endorsing the panel’s recommendation.

  Additionally, Pfizer-BioNTech announced Friday they will add a third vaccine dose to ongoing clinical trials on children as young as six months as two doses do not produce a robust immune response in kids 2 to 5 years old.

  Meanwhile, the national average for daily COVID cases ticks up to about 119,500 per day as have the average daily deaths and hospitalizations with about 7,800 new admissions and about 1,200 deaths each day.

  This despite more than 60 percent of the population being considered fully vaccinated.

  Public health officials continue to push vaccines even though without a booster shot, data shows the jabs to be only nominally effective against the new, more transmissible Omicron variant which is expected to become the dominant strain of COVID in the U.S. in the coming weeks.

  “Clearly unvaccinated individuals [sic] are really at a high risk of serious involvement, including hospitalization,” said Dr. Anthony Fauci, the president’s Chief Medical Advisor.

  Fauci concedes “it’s still up in the air” as to how the severity of the Omicron variant compares to the previous Delta and Alpha strains of COVID.

  Pfizer-BioNTech continues to advance the development of a variant-specific vaccine for Omicron and expects to have it available by March.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 15:50

• Defense Rests In Ghislaine Maxwell Case After Just 2 Days Without Calling Socialite To Testify
  Defense Rests In Ghislaine Maxwell Case After Just 2 Days Without Calling Socialite To Testify

  The defense in the Ghislaine Maxwell sex-trafficking trial rested after just two days of presentation, as her attorneys attempted to erode her accusers’ credibility and suggest that she and Jeffrey Epstein were innocent, law-abiding people.

  

  Maxwell elected not to testify, telling the court “The government has not proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and so there’s no need for me to testify.”

  The defense called on nine witnesses, some of whom told of Epstein’s charitable donations, and innocent relationships he had with young daughters of family friends (as opposed to many of Epstein’s accusers, who were often in poor financial condition and recruited from outside Epstein’s circle). Witnesses also testified to Epstein and Maxwell’s interest in “professional” messages, as opposed to accusers who say Ghislaine instructed them on how to best sexually please the pedophile and his friends.

  

  Maxwell’s lawyers attacked the memories of the accusers over incidents which happened more than 20 years ago in some cases.

  Prior to resting, the defense called the last of its witnesses – including two FBI agents who reviewed interview summaries known as FD-302s. According to the Epoch Times, agents Jason Richards and Amanda Young who had signed off on the forms had interviewed alleged Epstein victims.

  Under cross-examination by prosecuting attorney Maurene Comey, both witnesses testified that recording devices were not used in any of the interviews, the alleged victims never attested to the accuracy of the summaries before they testified, and that specifically, “Jane” was not given hers to review before she appeared as a witness for the prosecution.

  Another witness for the defense was Dr. Eva Andersson-Dubin, a former girlfriend of Epstein. They dated from 1983 to around 1991. She and Epstein remained friends, even after she started a family with her husband, Glenn Dubin.

  Andersson-Dubin testified she never saw any inappropriate behavior by Epstein with teenage girls.

  Cimberly Espinosa, who was Maxwell’s assistant for six years, testified that she never saw her boss or Epstein acting inappropriately with underage girls, adding that Epstein was “a giver” was paid for her personal trainer and gave her a watch.

  The 55-year-old Espinosa said Epstein and “Jane” had a “loving relationship.” Jane says Epstein sexually abused her, and was coached by Maxwell on how to give Epstein sexualized massages, according to Bloomberg.

  Espinosa told jurors that she didn’t see any improper behavior by the financier at his Manhattan office shared by Maxwell and that she had booked massage appointments for the duo at well-known Manhattan spas. She said that Maxwell began dating other men, and that she and Epstein would come and go from the office at separate times. –Bloomberg

  Former Epstein employee Michelle Healey also testified, saying that when she met “Jane” for the first time, “She looked like a grownup to me” with “a lot of makeup on.”

  Healy praised Maxwell, saying the British socialite “taught me a lot,” adding “I respected her. She’s tough, but she’s great.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 15:15

• Dollar Illiquidity – The Ironic Yet Ignored Spark For The Next Crisis
  Dollar Illiquidity – The Ironic Yet Ignored Spark For The Next Crisis

  Authored by Matthew Piepenburg via GoldSwitzerland.com,

  In October of 2019, I began writing/warning of the ignored yet ominous signals coming out of the repo and Eurodollar markets and what the illiquidity (i.e., lack of availability) of U.S. Dollars portended for our markets in the coming years.

  Well, those years have since arrived.

  Such dollar illiquidity may seem hard to imagine in a world otherwise awash in printed currencies and expanding money supplies.

  

  But what I warned then is no different than what is happening now: The Fed is gonna need to print a lot more dollars.

  In other words, today’s hawks will once again become tomorrow’s doves.

  Why?

  Because there were and are just not enough liquid dollars today to meet the fantastic array of nuanced and complex dollar demand in both U.S. and global markets.

  The First Tremors—2019 Repo Woes

  As Egon von Greyerz and I have said many times, the first overt signs of this danger in the cash-poor (i.e., illiquid) repo market which reared its “repo head” in September of 2019.

  This was a neon-flashing signal of long-term trouble ahead. And it had nothing to do with COVID…

  Informed investors in the autumn of 2019 had sifted through all the confusing minutia and noise behind the September panic in the otherwise open-fraud scheme that is the U.S. repo market (i.e., private banks levering GSE deposits for guaranteed payouts from Uncle Sam which the U.S. taxpayer funds).

  Despite all this noise, and despite being completely ignored (and deliberately downplayed) by an otherwise teenage-savvy mainstream financial media, the entire repo story simply boiled down to this: There weren’t enough available dollars to keep it (and the banks) going.

  As a result, the 2019 Fed printed more dollars and immediately dumped a $1.5 trillion rollover facility into the repo pits.

  Much, much more followed.

  After all, there’s nothing a money printer can’t temporarily solve.

  Unfortunately, however, this gaping wound in the repo markets was not an isolated event, but rather a symptom of a much larger and systemic problem that was equally responsible for the crisis of 2008, namely: Not enough dollars.

  More importantly, such dollar illiquidity will be the key factor in the next financial crisis.

  Second Tremor: The Misunderstood Eurodollar Market

  This percolating liquidity crisis has a lot to do with the Eurodollar market, an ignored little corner of the global financial cesspool which very few investors understand.

  This is because the Fed and the U.S. Treasury are still perceived as the official overseers of U.S. Dollar supply.

  Many investors still assume that these institutions know what they are doing and are “in control.”

  If only this were true…

  In reality, the Fed is becoming increasingly cornered and dysfunctional when it comes to managing U.S. Dollar liquidity.

  Why?

  Because the Fed is not in fact in control of the supply of U.S. Dollars; instead, more of the power lies in the media-ignored Eurodollar markets.

  THE Ticking Time Bomb

  Almost no one gets the Eurodollar “thing.” Almost no one sees it, yet it’s a ticking time bomb.

  So, what is the ticking time bomb that almost no one is publicly touching upon?

  What is the silent poison lurking beneath our national and global market system which no one at the Eccles Building, the White House, or the Treasury Department is discussing, let alone fully understanding?

  How the Eurodollar System is Quietly Killing U.S. and Global Markets

  In basic terms, a Eurodollar is just a U.S. Dollar held on deposit anywhere (not just in the Eurozone) outside of the U.S.

  Simple enough.

  One can therefore think of foreign banks like SocGen or Deutsche Bank making simple, clean, and direct loans to foreign companies denominated in these “Euro” dollars – i.e., U.S. Dollars held overseas.

  But nothing the big banks do ever stays simple, clean, or direct for very long.

  These bankers just can’t help themselves when it comes to leverage, short-term profits and long-term distortions. This is particularly true of what they’ve done with the Eurodollar.

  A Brief History of Distortion

  In fact, Eurodollars have been floating around the world in greater force since the mid-1950s.

  But banks (and bankers) always come up with clever ways to make simple Eurodollar transactions complex, as they can easily hide all kinds of greed-satisfying and wealth-generating schemes behind such deliberate Eurodollar complexity.

  Specifically, rather than foreign banks using U.S. Dollars overseas (i.e., Eurodollars) to make simple, direct loans to corporate borrowers that can be easily tracked and regulated on the asset and liability columns of offshore bank balance sheets, these same bankers have spent the last few decades getting more and more creative with the Eurodollar – which is to say, more and more toxic and out of control.

  Rather than using Eurodollars for direct loans from Bank “X” to Borrower “Y,” offshore financial groups have been busy using these Eurodollars for complex inter-bank borrowing, swap schemes, futures contracts, and levered derivative transactions.

  In short, and once again: More derivative-based poison (and extreme banking risk) at work.

  The Fed Losing Control of Its Own Dollar

  These mind-numbingly complex Eurodollar transactions have acted as extreme dollar multipliers entirely outside the purview or control of regulatory bodies like the Fed and now exist at what is essentially infinite leverage multiples.

  When U.S. banks like Bear Sterns or Lehman Brothers, for example, were leveraging U.S. Dollars in subprime derivative landmines at leverage multiples of 60:1, that was a problem.

  A big problem. Remember?

  Unfortunately, what we have been seeing (and the media ignoring) in the unregulated Eurodollar market is a leverage ratio of U.S. Dollars that is much, much, much higher – and makes the Bear Sterns of 2008 seem like child’s play by comparison today.

  And what this basically boils down to is that the actual amount of U.S. Dollars in overseas, shadow banking Eurodollar transactions is massively beyond the pale of what the Fed thinks it is, and, more importantly, is massively beyond the pale of anything that even the Fed can control.

  How Can There Be a Dollar Shortage?

  But wait, you’re probably asking: Matt, you just warned there’s not enough dollars, but now you’re saying that such Eurodollar schemes have dramatically increased (i.e., levered) the amount of dollars in circulation.

  What gives?

  Well, stick with me.

  You see, all those complex derivative schemes in Eurodollars increases their amount, but then tangles them up into so much non-liquid confusion that the end result is far fewer dollars in actual circulation.

   Crazy but true.

  Thus, as Powell tinkers with adjusting interest rates and printing or tapering more money here in the U.S. to ostensibly “control” the amount and price of U.S. Dollars, he is effectively chasing windmills, or playing chess as Rome burns.

  There are now trillions in uncontrollable/unregulated U.S. Dollar liabilities floating around (and clogging up) an uber-complex international banking and Eurodollar based derivatives system.

  Unfortunately, this system is so interconnected and beyond the measures of complexity theory that trying to untie these Eurodollar financial knots and counter-party complexities would be akin to untying the knots of 1,000,000,000 fly-fishermen all at once.

  In other words, impossible.

  With all these U.S. Dollars (trading as “Eurodollars”) tied up in countless and unregulated banking schemes and derivative instruments, the actual amount of available U.S. Dollars is inextricably tied up in all these toxic “knots.”

  As a result, there are simply less dollars available for use (including emergency use) in these over-levered/risk-high markets – which is what the fancy lads call a “liquidity problem.”

  In fact, despite all the well-deserved attention subprime mortgages received for being the cause of the 2008 Great Financial Crisis, here’s a little secret from inside Wall Street:

  The subprime instruments were the “patient zero” of the 2008 disaster, but the real killer in 2008 was dollar illiquidity, much of which was tied up in these Gordian Eurodollar knots of which almost no one understands, discusses or knows how to control.

  In short: Today we have a similar ticking time bomb. A Eurodollar time bomb.

  Defusing the Eurodollar Liquidity Crisis?

  So how can we diffuse this ignored and misunderstood time bomb?

  Well, even the grandfather of debt, John Maynard Keynes, warned about this in 1944; the head of the People’s Bank of China warned about this in 2011; and in the summer of 2019, Mark Carney, the Governor of the Bank of England, warned about this at the Fed’s little banker retreat in Jackson Hole.

  What was the suggested option from the head of England’s central bank?

  Simple – we need to replace the U.S. Dollar as the world’s reserve currency with a neutral, electronic currency to settle international payments with a new, floating system that replaces the dollar.

  That’s a big deal. And yet it never made the headlines. Big shocker, eh?

  The sad but hidden and otherwise undeniable truth of the matter is that the U.S. Dollar is no longer under the control of an increasingly clueless Federal Reserve.

  Every Crisis is a Liquidity Crisis

  When the supply of dollars tightens/shortens, crisis always follows, every time, for every market crisis is, at root, a liquidity crisis.

  Again, we saw a brief taste of this dollar shortage during the repo scare of September 2019.

  But that was mere child’s play compared to what prior crises of dollar illiquidity can and have done to markets, as we saw in 2008, when our markets suffered over $2 trillion (!) in U.S. Dollar shortages (aka, “funding gap”).

  How was this “gap” filled?

  You guessed it: Global money printing gone wild.

  

  Going forward, and with the recent (and completely downplayed) tremors of the cash-poor repo market still in our rear-view mirror, the insiders in D.C. and Wall Street are bracing themselves for further crises of dollar illiquidity – i.e., major market disasters driven by “funding gaps” – aka a lack of enough dollars.

  The Fed knows this as well – but just barely. They certainly are in no position today to simply release the U.S. Dollar from its global reserve status.

  That takes years, but the IMF has effectively telegraphed that it’s coming.

  In the interim, this means that the only current tool available to the Fed when the next dollar-liquidity crisis sends our markets and economy over yet another cliff will be more desperate and last-minute money printing, despite the fact that they are now signaling a taper for early 2022 (!).

  Longer term, such inevitable money printing will be good for gold.

  Told You So…

  In 2019 and 2020, I warned of this. I warned of massive, unimaginable money printing and full-on debt monetization ahead due to massive dollar illiquidity.

  In case you don’t believe me, just see for yourselves in this re-published, ad-hoc warning originally released in March of 2020, here.

  Since that warning, the Fed’s balance sheet has more than doubled.

  

  Facts really are stubborn things, no?

  Investing in the New Abnormal

  Of course, such measures have nothing at all to do with capitalism or free markets.

  Central and commercial banks have kissed those old values and systems goodbye.

  Today, we now live, invest, and trade in a centralized market in which central banks have and are losing control over the supply of the U.S. Dollar in offshore, shadow banking Eurodollar schemes who’s embedded, levered, illiquid and complex risks, dangers, and extremes are understood by only a handful of insiders and would frankly require hundreds of more pages here to fully unpack.

  What YOU need to take away from all of this complexity is quite simple: Normal business cycles are now extinct, replaced instead by central bank liquidity cycles which ultimately destroy currencies.

  Natural supply and demand forces, including for dollars, has been replaced by money printing from the central banks.

  More and more dollars will be printed down the road, not because we “think so,” but simply because there is literally no other way to keep this now totally rigged-to-fail system afloat.

  As for market volatility and the safety and growth of your money in such a toxic and complex backdrop, we admit that it is becoming increasingly hard to rely upon old predictive measures of market risk or even recession timing to fully make sense of the Twilight Zone in which we now find our capital markets.

  We truly are in uncharted and completely distorted waters, where risk outweighs reward at nearly every turn.

  This is new terrain for all of us.

  The Current Landscape – Hawkish Hubris

  Thus, if you are wondering why the USD is up (relatively, as opposed to purchasing-power) despite insane levels of mouse-clicked money creation and broad money supply expansion, it’s simple: Those dollars are tied up in a derivative-based Eurodollar ball of knots.

  With not enough liquid dollars available, dollar-demand is up, and hence so is the USD.

  Needless to say, for those nations who owe USD-denominated debts, finding and paying for the owed dollars is getting harder, which explains why the Turkish lira is tanking, dropping 30% vs. the USD in November alone…

  

  Other cracks as well as signals in this distorted, Dollar-thirsty financial landscape include more volatility now and ahead.

  Recent swings in the S&P 500 (worst quarter since 2011) and BTC’s 20% drop in perfect tandem with the Wall Street sell-off are obvious examples, as well as harbingers of more pain to come, despite Jim Cramer’s pathetic (December 9th) cry that the U.S. is “the strongest economy ever seen,” and a “marvel to behold.”

  Poor Cramer was likely referring to the Atlanta Fed’s bullish GDP estimate for Q4:

  

  But cheerleaders like Cramer are overlooking the flattening U.S. yield curve which suggests the bond market feels such strength is temporary at best.

  The Future Landscape—Doves (and Pain) Ahead

  Meanwhile, as dollar illiquidity rises, and pandemic benefits fade, the Fed stubbornly sticks to its hawkish plan to taper/tighten liquidity into 2022—thereby adding gasoline to a risk asset fire and fiscal cliff crushing just about every asset class but the USD, UST and the VIX.

  With the U.S. debt/GDP at a ratio of 122%, any hope for sustainable GDP growth and the delevering of US debt in such a backdrop without causing markets to tank is pure fantasy.

  In other words: tic toc, tic toc…

  In short, if the taper collides with the aforementioned yet hidden dollar illiquidity, get ready for an extremely bumpy and unpleasant 2022 and hence a sudden reversal of the Fed’s now hawkish stance.

  When the doves and extreme money printing (and hence currency debasement) return, gold will be waiting, as always, to get the last word.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 14:40

• Ringing The Bell On Record Stock Inflows: Long Onlies See Biggest Outflow Since March 2020 Crash
  Ringing The Bell On Record Stock Inflows: Long Onlies See Biggest Outflow Since March 2020 Crash

  When it comes to equity market fund flows, the one defining feature of 2021 was the unprecedented reversal of years of outflows (or at best stagnant inflows), culminating in a record flood of new money entering equity funds as retail investors awoke from their decade-long hibernation (with the help of trillions in stimmies).

  

  But with stocks now entering a period of extended turbulence coupled with violent drawdowns (at least until the Fed’s new put strike price emerges) now that the Fed has again ushered in a rate hiking cycle, the relentless avalanche of fund flows is finally starting to ebb.

  According to the latest EPFR data compiled by BofA’s Michael Hartnett, last week saw the largest “flight to safety” inflow to Treasuries since Jul 2020, for $3.6BN, the largest outflow from IG bonds since Mar 2021 ($6.4bn); as well as the largest monthly outflow from HY & EM bonds since Apr’20, amounting to $2.9bn.

  

  Most importantly, last week also saw the largest outflow from long-only developed market equity funds since Apr 2020 at $26.0 billion, a clear signal that sentiment may have well peaked.

  

  … curiously offset by the largest inflow to tech since Feb’21 at $4.4 billion (which makes some sense since tech is really just a super long-duration instrument); as well as the largest inflow to consumer stocks since Dec’20 at $2.5bn.

  That said, as Goldman further breaks down the flow data, net flows into all global funds reversed in the week ending December 15n (+$32bn vs +$11bn the prior week) due to a surge in demand for US-dedicated products: As shown in the chart below, global equity inflows excluding US-dedicated products were negative; net selling of EM benchmark products accelerated, while outflows from Western European shares moderated.

  

  Finally, while money market cash has continued to rise in recent weeks (despite repeated predictions that the money on the sidelines will enter the stock market)…

  

  … it remains a relatively small fraction of global equity market cap.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 14:05

• US Accuses China Of Developing Brain Control Technology
  US Accuses China Of Developing Brain Control Technology

  Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

  

  Brain Control Blacklist 

  Over alleged brain-control weaponry, the Biden Administration Blacklists 34 Chinese Entities. 

  The Biden administration said Thursday it imposed trade restrictions on more than 30 Chinese research institutes and entities over human rights violations and the alleged development of technologies, such as brain-control weapons, that undermine U.S. national security. 

  The Commerce Department accused China’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences and 11 of its research institutes of using biotechnology “to support Chinese military end uses and end users, to include purported brain-control weaponry,” according to a notice in the Federal Register.

  The Washington Post had these interesting comments.

  “The scientific pursuit of biotechnology and medical innovation can save lives,” Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said in a statement. “Unfortunately, [China] is choosing to use these technologies to pursue control over its people and its repression of members of ethnic and religious minority groups. We cannot allow U.S. commodities, technologies, and software that support medical science and biotechnical innovation to be diverted toward uses contrary to U.S. national security.”

  The State Department has deemed as “genocide” China’s repression of Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities in Xinjiang, which includes the use of forced labor and sterilization. The U.S. intelligence community has said that China has established a “high tech surveillance system” across Xinjiang “as part of its apparatus of oppression,” said a senior administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the matter’s sensitivity.

  As a part of that system, authorities not only use biometric facial recognition for mass surveillance, but also have collected DNA samples from all Xinjiang residents ages 12 to 65, the official said.

  Under China’s “military civil fusion” strategy, Beijing is seeking to use emerging biotechnologies to support future military applications, including sponsoring research on gene editing, human performance enhancement, brain machine interfaces and biological materials, the official said.

  “We’ve had concerns about China’s activity in the biotechnology space for quite a while,” the official said, adding that targeting firms and bolstering the U.S. biotechnology sector will be a “continued area of focus for us.”

  “The Official, Said …..”  What Official? Brain Machine Interfaces? 

  Somehow the WaPo managed to write up its lead paragraph as follows:

  The Biden administration said Thursday it is adding China’s top military medical research institute to an export blacklist in response to concerns about Beijing’s use of emerging technologies such as biometrics and brain-control weapons in ways that U.S. officials say threaten national security.

  Federal Register 

  In a very lengthy sentence that names companies that are blacklisted, the actual statement by the Federal Register says “its eleven research institutes use biotechnology processes to support Chinese military end uses and end users, to include purported brain-control weaponry. This activity is contrary to U.S. national security and foreign policy interests under § 744.11(b) of the EAR.”

  I have no idea what China is or isn’t doing, nor it seems does the Federal Register. The word “brain” appears only once in the document preceded immediately by the word “purported”. 

  What’s Going On?

  The Biden administration wants to sanction China over human rights abuses just as Trump sanctioned China over trade disputes. 

  Meanwhile, let’s take a look at how mind control works in the US.

  Build Back Better Costs Nothing

  

  I Won Big

  

   

  It’s Transitory 

   

  

  Yeah Right!

  Yellen was still sticking with the transitory meme as late as October 21. She had to, because that is what Biden wanted. 

  It’s now so ridiculous, even Fed Chair Jerome Powell is willing to throw the word away. Yellen officially tossed it as well.

  Now the “yeah, right” messages is from Biden who still says Build Back Better costs nothing (amusingly he also says it’s fully paid for), and BBB will not add anything to inflation. 

  Nearly all the Democrats go along with this nonsense for one of two reasons (It supports what they want, they are dumb enough to believe anything their president says).

  Regarding the latter, most people will believe anything the leaders of their political party says, no matter how ridiculous. 

  Repeating Lies

  Repeat the lies enough times and even some of the initial skeptics will start believing nearly anything.

  Heck, an entire legion of complete fools actually believes rising inflation is a good thing while simultaneously moaning about it! 

  That’s how brain control works in practice.

  *  *  *

  Like these reports? If so, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/18/2021 – 13:30