• CCP Extending "3 Warfares" Strategy Into Space: Expert
  CCP Extending “3 Warfares” Strategy Into Space: Expert

  Authored by Andrew Thornebrooke via The Epoch Times,

  A Chinese robot trundles about in the dust. It collects rock samples, measures chemical compounds, and observes craters never before seen by humankind. It’s beyond the reach of U.S. sensors. It’s beyond the rule of international laws and norms. It’s on a mission.

  

  It’s on the dark side of the moon.

  The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been operating Yutu-2 on the far side of Luna since 2019. Ostensibly part of the CCP’s lunar exploration program, rovers such as Yutu-2 are preparing the way for the construction of a new robotic research base on the moon. That base, in turn, will prepare the way for a crewed moon landing and a new lunar base managed jointly by China and Russia.

  The exploration phase of this process, of which Yutu-2 is a part, is planned to extend through 2025 with six more missions conducted by China and Russia. Following that, construction on the base is expected to last until at least 2035, with full operational capacity being achieved by 2036.

  The ambition piques the interest of scientists, ever hungry for new knowledge about Earth’s only moon. The secrecy shrouding the project, however, unnerves strategists who don’t see this little rover as merely one small step for mankind, but as one giant leap for Chinese military capabilities.

  Indeed, some experts believe that Yutu-2’s lunar rock collection isn’t only a continuation of Sino–U.S. competition, but might actually provide the keys to victory in a future war.

  

  Space Is a Warfighting Domain

  Michael Listner is an attorney of a very peculiar sort. He specializes in space policy and has, for some years, led the publication of “The Précis,” a legal newsletter that examines the basis of space law and its ramifications for international policy in every field from business to national security.

  He says the CCP is extending its “Three Warfares” strategy into space. This vast new frontier will be central to the regime’s campaigns of media aggrandizement, the subject of psychological warfare, and, vitally, the centerpiece of new legal battles that will reshape the international order as China seeks to claim the United States’ global hegemon status for its own.

  The strategy, he said, is designed to undermine and perhaps defeat the enemy without firing a shot.

  “Space is a warfighting domain,” Listner said. “It’s going to be part of the struggle and it’s going to be part of a future conflict.”

  “They are fighting on all these fronts right now,” Listner added of the CCP’s three warfares strategy in space. “In fact, I really look at it as preparing the battlefield.”

  That effort to shape the battlefield, central to any military, is particularly meaningful to Chinese military strategists who, since at least the fifth century B.C., have studied the writings of the eminent philosopher of war Sun Tzu, who argued that preparing the battlefield was the means of mastering the enemy.

  As such, it’s feared that the Chinese regime will effectively ensure that should conflict break out, it has the strategic advantage by preparing a favorable legal landscape, positioning assets in orbit, and building alliances in its space operations.

  The reason for the continuation of this effort on the moon is simple enough: America can’t work without space.

  “The American dependence and reliance on space is almost absolute,” said Paul Crespo, president of the Center for American Defense Studies.

  “From communications to banking to air and ground travel and GPS, our economy, society, and military cannot survive without U.S. space dominance.”

  Crespo, a Marine veteran who served in the Defense Intelligence Agency, has spent years examining the CCP’s malign influence abroad and its efforts to degrade and undermine its adversaries through dual-use technologies and legal warfare.

  Both Crespo and Listner fear that the moon will be China’s next “nine-dash line,” and that it will be used to bend the rule of law to the CCP’s advantage, just as it has in the South China Sea.

  The Chinese regime claims about 85 percent of the disputed South China Sea demarcated by its nine-dash line, a claim that was rejected by a 2016 international tribunal. Several other countries also lay claim to parts of the waterway.

  Despite the ruling, Beijing has built military outposts on artificial islands and reefs in the region, and deployed coast guard ships and Chinese fishing boats to intimidate foreign vessels, block access to waterways, and seize shoals and reefs.

  Experts fear the CCP will use its moon and space infrastructure to similarly box out competition and control the happenings of the region, in violation of international laws and norms.

  “The CCP has proven it has no respect for international law or norms, and is willing to bully, threaten, coerce and push its way into any place it deems vital to its strategic goals,” Crespo said.

  “That’s crystal clear with its illegal expansion into, and claims on, most of the South China Sea.”

  “This certainly will be even more true for China in space where the norms are far less established and codified.”

  The United States’ response to CCP space adventurism has been mixed.

  During the administration of President Donald Trump, the nation took a hardline stance and sought to outrace the CCP to the moon. Indeed, the Artemis Accords were initially designed to guide those nations that were to partake in the Artemis Program, a U.S.-led effort to establish a base on the moon.

  Trump’s Space Policy Directive-1, likewise, sought to “lead an innovative and sustainable program of exploration with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion across the solar system and to bring back to Earth new knowledge and opportunities.”

  To accommodate these ambitions, NASA attempted to step up its original goal of establishing a moon presence from 2028 to 2024. That date was quickly pushed back to 2025, however. Since then, NASA has changed course again, and slated 2025 as the earliest date for a U.S. flight around the moon, but which won’t land on the moon.

  

  A Long March 5B rocket lifts off from the Wenchang launch site on China’s Hainan island on May 5, 2020. Another variant of the Long March rocket was used to get China’s hypersonic missile into orbit in July. (STR/AFP via Getty Images)

  Usurping the Advantage

  The moon race has the potential to revolutionize international relations more than any other facet of Sino–American competition. When it comes to dictating what the law is beyond the earth’s atmosphere, Crespo and Listner believe that who gets there first wins.

  “It’s all really about great power competition,” Listner said.

  “The general consensus about great power competition is who’s going to eventually make the rules in an international arena. In other words, who’s going to have the most influence in shaping what’s legal and what the worldview looks like in the next few decades.”

  Listner described the struggle between the United States and China for influence in shaping the world and its norms as one of competing visions, in which two radically different ways of understanding and operating in the world are being pitted against one another.

  That struggle, he said, is playing out in space.

  “Right now, there are two competing visions,” Listner said.

  “One is the Artemis Accords, which the Trump administration started.”

  “The Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China countered with their own competing vision, called the International Lunar Research station.”

  The Artemis Accords, Listner said, are a framework for international cooperation regarding the exploration and use of Luna, Mars, and other astronomical objects. The effort is based largely on the U.N. Outer Space Treaty of 1967, and seeks to affirm peaceful cooperation, promote interoperability, and register objects in space with uniform standards.

  The Outer Space Treaty currently has 111 signatories, including China and Russia. The Artemis Accords, first signed in 2020, has 14 signatories; China and Russia didn’t sign, viewing the effort as a commercial agreement needlessly favorable to the United States.

  The International Lunar Research Station, on the other hand, is the CCP and Russia’s effort to wrest international space leadership away from the United States’ NASA, and champion a new, Eurasian order.

  Indeed, little Yutu-2 is just the first of seven exploratory missions planned by China and Russia, which will prepare the way for the construction of the base. That matters when the future of space dominance is on the line.

  “It’s about the competing view of what the rule of law is going to be and who’s going to make the rules on the lunar surface and in exploiting space,” Listner said.

  “Whoever gets there first and starts building will be the one who makes the rules.”

  To that end, Crespo warned that the CCP is attempting to reforge space in its own image, undercutting the United States’ ability to sustain itself not only as a world superpower, but possibly as a civilization.

  “Neutralizing our space dominance will severely hamper our ability to win any major conflict, and ultimately even our ability to maintain a stable, modern, functioning society,” he said.

  “If the Chinese move beyond simply neutralizing our dominance and gain clear space dominance themselves, that will become almost a fait accompli in terms of America losing its ability to remain a world power, and even simply an independent sovereign nation.”

  Listner said that it’s gray-zone conflict at its finest, and that the United States and China are engaged in war by any other name.

  “From the perspective of the PRC, we’re at war,” Listner said, referring to the People’s Republic of China.

  

  Chinese People’s Liberation Army HQ-9 surface-to-air missile launchers are seen during a military parade at Tiananmen Square in Beijing on Sept. 3, 2015. A modified version of this missile was used to shoot down a satellite in a test by China in 2007. (Greg Baker/AFP via Getty Images)

  The Lunar Threat

  That gray-zone conflict, in which nations engage in hostilities stopping somewhere short of opening fire, is in full swing in outer space.

  “Any manned Chinese and/or Russian base on the moon would provide them a significant strategic advantage militarily, legally, and economically,” Crespo said.

  In early December, Gen. David Thompson, the U.S. Space Force’s first vice chief of space operations, said that the CCP is launching attacks on U.S. space infrastructure “every single day.” These reversible attacks, in which U.S. satellite architecture or cyber systems are compromised temporarily, are largely understood to be a testing of the waters.

  That is, preparation for a real war.

  Thompson said in separate remarks that the Chinese regime is developing space capabilities at double the rate of the United States. Moreover, its growing array of platforms designed for space warfare is growing.

  “[The Chinese] have robots in space that conduct attacks,” Thompson said.

  “They can conduct jamming attacks and laser dazzling attacks. They have a full suite of cyber capabilities.”

  “If we don’t start accelerating our development and delivery capabilities, they will exceed us. And 2030 is not an unreasonable estimate,” he said.

  Such advancements point to weaknesses in existing laws such as the Outer Space Treaty, which many people erroneously believe bans the development of space weapons.

  “Conventional weapons in space aren’t banned by the Outer Space Treaty, as can be seen by the Russian Federation’s ASAT [Anti-satellite weapon] demonstration a few weeks ago,” Listner said.

  “However, nuclear weapons in certain circumstances are prohibited by the Outer Space Treaty.”

  Listner’s remarks refer to the recent demonstration by Russia of an ASAT missile that it used to explode a satellite in orbit. Critics accused Russia of putting the lives of astronauts at risk, as the thousands of pieces of debris could destroy space vehicles. The event was similar to an incident carried out by China in 2007.

  Indeed, the CCP is rapidly expanding its military capabilities as part of an all-out push to usurp military and commercial dominance from the United States. That effort is designed to provide the CCP with an overwhelming new blitzkrieg of military technologies worthy of science fiction.

  The effort includes the development of hypersonic weapons, electromagnetic pulse devices, new naval vessels capable of launching rockets into space, and a nuclear reactor to power space travel, reportedly 100 times more powerful than those planned by the United States.

  In all, the CCP plans to launch 10,000 satellites by 2030 in its efforts to topple U.S. space dominance.

  There are several ways in which the CCP could use the moon, or space assets more generally, to exploit weaknesses in its adversaries or further its weaponization efforts. Increased presence would allow China greater communication and control of its space assets, most notably satellite architecture, which is key to U.S. and allied GPS systems that the military depends upon. Experts have long argued that a preemptive strike on U.S. GPS systems would be China’s first move in a war, including one over Taiwan.

  Other potentialities are more hypothetical, such as the long-theorized use of a kinetic bombardment system that could leverage Earth’s gravitational pull against it. Such a system could effectively turn objects as simple as tungsten rods into weapons of mass destruction due to the velocity with which they would hit the earth.

  This would effectively allow a satellite- or moon-based system to throw heavy objects at the Earth with the destructive power of a meteor, a feat for which the proposed weapon has long been termed “Rods from God.”

  Though costlier than other systems, the idea for such a system has existed since the Cold War, and the Pentagon reportedly considered developing it in 2006 before pursuing hypersonic glide vehicle research instead.

  Listner said the CCP’s continued conquest of space was partially owed to the failure of U.S. and allied leaders to recognize fundamental differences in Western and Eurasian ways of conceptualizing the world and politics.

  “Fundamentally, we have to understand that the PRC and the Russian Federation do not think like the U.S. and Western nations,” Listner said.

  His comments reflected a growing consensus, recognized by new U.S. congressional reports, that the CCP is advancing a global campaign to champion Marxism as an alternative to American capitalism, and to supplant the United States as a global hegemon.

  To this end, the international community may like to play at lawmaking, such as is the case with the Artemis Accords, but the CCP has demonstrated a repeated unwillingness to adhere to such norms.

  “NGOs, peace groups, and disarmament groups believe the PRC and the Russians think like us when they don’t,” Listner said.

  “It’s called ‘mirror thinking,’ and it’s a very, very dangerous trap to play into.”

  

  This picture released on Jan. 11, 2019, by the China National Space Administration (CNSA) via CNS shows the Yutu-2 moon rover, taken by the Chang’e-4 lunar probe on the far side of the moon. (China National Space Administrat/AFP via Getty Images)

  A Base for Whom?

  Perhaps nowhere is this trap more apparent than in the CCP’s so-called dual-use policy.

  The CCP publicly denies that its space systems and projects, including its moon plans and satellite, are used for military purposes. For instance, it characterized its grabber satellite as a means of cleaning space junk, and its hypersonic missile test as a reusable spacecraft.

  Critics of the CCP point out that the ambiguity about whether such technology is ultimately civilian or military in nature is a feature of dual use.

  Dual use is the practical realization of the CCP’s policy of “civil-military fusion,” aimed at erasing all barriers between private and public life to ensure that all civilian technologies also advance Chinese military dominance.

  The rockets used to launch Yutu-2 to Luna are one such example. The same type of rocket was used to launch the CCP’s new hypersonic weapons system, which U.S. leaders fear is a nuclear first-strike weapon.

  CCP leaders said that the test was for the benefit of its space program.

  “Virtually everything that enables a country to launch objects into space is indistinguishable from intercontinental ballistic missiles or hypersonic weapons,” Crespo said.

  “For China, that distinction is fairly moot.”

  Crespo said that that ambiguity is part of the program, designed to obscure whether the military or civilian function of any project was intended to be dominant.

  Such ambiguity makes a difference on the moon, where all Chinese taikonauts are in the employ of the Chinese military.

  “Any moon base serves scientific purposes while also clearly providing China a strategic lunar presence that will need to be defended, and can be used for surveillance, reconnaissance or military attacks of all types against satellites and other space assets,” Crespo said.

  “No lunar base will be purely civilian to the CCP.”

  A World to Gain

  Space has been described by researcher Paul Szymanski as “the most obscure battlefield.” Its obscurity doesn’t, however, diminish its centrality to the future of nations. To the contrary, the economic, military, and political ramifications of space, and of the control of Luna, in particular, are nigh impossible to overstate.

  “Space is America’s greatest asset and its greatest vulnerability,” Crespo said.

  “The Chinese and Russians see it as our Achilles heel.”

  To that end, one may consider the strategic value of space as the foremost point of CCP ambitions. It is the gateway through which one growing power might leapfrog a global hegemon to dictate the future of earthly affairs.

  Indeed, it isn’t an overstatement to say that the moon is to the CCP what the Alps were to Hannibal. Should it be taken, the rest may fall like dominoes.

  “The stakes are that high,” Crespo said. “Whoever controls space may control the world.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 23:10

• The World Is Ill-Prepared To Prevent Another Pandemic
  The World Is Ill-Prepared To Prevent Another Pandemic

  While the world’s overall preparedness score in the 2021 Global Health Security Index isn’t particularly good, Statista’s Felix Richter notes that it is markedly worse in the Prevention category.

  The global average score for the prevention of the emergence or release of pathogens is just 28.4 out of 100, as 113 countries are found to show “little to no attention” to zoonotic diseases, i.e. diseases that are transmitted from animals to humans, such as Covid-19 according to current knowledge.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  As the chart above shows, other categories also score far below the maximum of 100, with just one of the six pillars of health security reaching a global average score above 50.

  Worryingly, it’s the early stages of an epidemic, pandemic where the world seems particularly vulnerable.

  With a global average Prevention score of 28.4 out of 100 and an Early Detection & Reporting score of 32.3, the world seems dangerously underprepared to stop a future epidemic before it becomes a pandemic.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 22:35

• The Ungracious… And Their Demonization Of The Past
  The Ungracious… And Their Demonization Of The Past

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  The last two years have seen an unprecedented escalation in a decades-long war on the American past. But there are lots of logical flaws in attacking prior generations in U.S. history.

  

  Critics assume their own judgmental generation is morally superior to those of the past. So, they use their own standards to condemn the mute dead who supposedly do not measure up to them.

  Yet 21st-century critics rarely acknowledge their own present affluence and leisure owe much to history’s prior generations whose toil helped create their current comfort.

  And what may future scolds say of the modern generation that saw over 60 million abortions since Roe v. Wade, even as fetal viability outside the womb continued to progress to ever earlier ages?

  What will our grandchildren say of us who dumped on them over $30 trillion in national debt – much of it as borrowing for entitlements for ourselves?

  What sort of society snoozes as record numbers of murders continue in 12 of its major cities? What is so civilized about defunding the police, endemic smash-and-grab thefts, and car jackings?

  Was our media more responsible, professional, and learned in 1965 or 2021? Did Hollywood make more sophisticated and enjoyable films in 1954 or 2021? Was there less or more sportsmanship among professional athletes in 1990 or 2021?

  Was it actually moral to discard the “content of our character” and “equal opportunity” principles of the prior Civil Rights movement of 60 years ago? Are their replacement fixations on the “color of our skin” and “equality of result” superior?

  Would America have won World War II with the current labor participation rate of only six in 10 Americans working? Would our generation have brought all American troops home and quit World War I in fear of the deadly 1918 Spanish flu pandemic?

  Are we proud that most standardized tests of student knowledge and achievement continue to decline, despite record investments in education?

  Do we ever pause to consider that we enjoy our modern standard of living and security because we were once a meritocracy that quit judging our workforce by tribal affinities and ancient prejudices?

  Our generation talks of infrastructure nonstop. But when was the last time it built anything comparable to the Hoover Dam, the interstate highway system, or the California Water Project – much less sent a man back to the moon or beyond?

  If prior generations were so toxic, why do we continue to take for granted the moral and material world they bequeathed to us, from the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to our airports, freeways, and power plants? Did we ever defeat anything comparable to the Axis powers or Soviet communism?

  We know the symptoms of the current epidemic of hating the past.

  One is Orwellian renaming and statue-toppling. Historical revision often responds to puritanical mob frenzies rather than to democratic discussion and votes of relevant elected officials.

  Where is the pantheon of woke heroes who will replace the toppled or defaced Thomas Jefferson and Teddy Roosevelt?

  Whose morality and achievement should instead be immortalized? Were the public and private lives of Che Guevara, Angela Davis, Malcolm X, Margaret Sanger, and Franklin D. Roosevelt without sin?

  Racial fixations tend predictably in one direction. In good Confederate fashion, we lump all individuals who look alike into inexact collectives of “white,” “black,” or “brown” – often to stereotype the supposed evils of so-called white supremacy.

  But if we go down that tribalist and simplistic road of caricatured oppressors and oppressed, will future generations tally up each group’s merits and demerits, to adjudicate the roles of millions of individuals in making America worse or better?

  What standard would they use to judge our ignorant world of racial stereotyping – proportional representation in Nobel Prizes, philanthropy, scientific breakthroughs, or lasting art, music, and literature versus statistics on homicides, assault, divorce, and illegitimacy?

  Immigration – when legal, diverse, measured, and often meritocratic – has been the great strength of America, as typified by industrious arrivals who chose to abandon their own homeland to risk new lives in a foreign United States.

  But if America is so flawed and so irredeemable, why in fiscal year 2021 are nearly 2 million foreigners now crashing its borders – illegally, en masse, and intent on reaching a supposedly racist nation that is purportedly inferior to those they abandon?

  According to the ancient brutal bargain, assimilation and integration grant the immigrant as much claim to America’s present and past as the native-born. But then shouldn’t the antithesis also be true?

  Shouldn’t immigrants at least respect those of the past who created the very country they now so eagerly desire, and died in awful places from Valley Forge to Bastogne to preserve?

  Never in history has such a mediocre, but self-important and ungracious generation owed so much, and yet expressed so little gratitude, to its now dead forebears.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 22:00

• "Imperialist Russia?" Four Western Provocations That Led To The Current US-Russia Crisis
  “Imperialist Russia?” Four Western Provocations That Led To The Current US-Russia Crisis

  A fresh report and analysis at the non-interventionist think tank, Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, traces the roots of today’s US-Russia deteriorated relations and showdown over Ukraine back to the Bill Clinton administration in the 1990’s. 

  So much of current “debate” in public and media discourse is woefully lacking in even basic recent historical knowledge and context of the last thirty years since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Even in daily conversations people might get into with friends, family or neighbors – it’s common to hear the charge of Russian “imperialism” and “aggression”… as if the Cold War never ended, or worse it’s as if some think Putin represents some kind of resurrected Czarist empire.

  

  But Ted Galen Carpenter of both the Cato Institute and Responsible Statecraft has detailed four specific major Western provocations which has led to the ongoing Ukraine crisis 2.0 – and at a moment the Kremlin is demanding that NATO agree to ‘no further eastward expansion’ in the form of “security guarantees” to be negotiated starting January 10 in Geneva. 

  “The one-sided, self-serving indictments of Russia’s behavior invariably ignore the numerous Western provocations that took place long before Moscow engaged in disruptive measures,” Carpenter writes.  “Indeed, the deterioration of the West’s relations with post-communist Russia began during Bill Clinton’s administration.”

  Below is a section of the Responsible Statecraft report listing and explaining the four Western provocations that led to U.S.-Russia crisis today…

  Western provocation number 1: NATO’s first eastward expansion. 

  In her memoir “Madame Secretary,” former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and secretary of state Madeleine Albright concedes that Clinton administration officials decided already in 1993 to endorse the wishes of Central and East European countries to join NATO. The Alliance proceeded to add Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary in 1998. Albright admitted that Russian President Boris Yeltsin and his associates were extremely unhappy with that development. The Russian reaction was understandable, since the expansion violated informal promises that President George H. W. Bush’s administration had given Moscow when Mikhail Gorbachev had agreed not only to accept a unified Germany but a united Germany in NATO.  The implicit quid pro quo was that NATO would not move beyond the eastern border of a united Germany.  

  Western provocation number 2: NATO’s military intervention in the Balkans. 

  NATO’s 1995 air war against Bosnian Serbs seeking to secede from the newly minted country of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the imposition of the Dayton Peace Accords greatly annoyed Yeltsin’s government and the Russian people. The Balkans had been a region of considerable religious and strategic interest to Moscow for generations, and it was humiliating for Russians to watch impotently as a U.S.-led alliance dictated outcomes there. The Western powers conducted an even greater provocation four years later when they intervened on behalf of a secessionist insurgency in Serbia’s restless Kosovo province. Detaching that province from Serbia and placing it under U.N. control not only set an unhealthy international precedent, but the move also displayed utter contempt for Russia’s interests and preferences in the Balkans.  

  The Clinton administration’s decisions to expand NATO and meddle in Bosnia and Kosovo were crucial steps toward creating a new cold war with Russia. Former U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union Jack F. Matlock Jr. cites the negative impact that NATO expansion and the U.S.-led military interventions in the Balkans had on Russian attitudes toward the United States and the West: “The effect on Russians’ trust in the United States was devastating. In 1991, polls indicated that about 80 percent of Russian citizens had a favorable view of the United States; in 1999, nearly the same percentage had an unfavorable view.”

  Western provocation number 3: NATO’s subsequent waves of expansion.  

  Not content with how the Clinton administration antagonized Moscow by moving NATO into Central Europe, George W. Bush’s administration pushed the allies to give membership to the rest of the defunct Warsaw Pact and to the three Baltic republics. Admitting the latter in 2004 dramatically escalated the West’s military encroachment. Those three small countries had not only been part of the Soviet Union, they also had spent most of their recent history as part of Czarist Russia’s empire. Russia was still too weak to do more than present feeble diplomatic protests, but the level of anger at the West’s arrogant disregard of Russia’s security interests rose.

  Expanding NATO to Russia’s border was not the only provocation. Increasingly, the United States was engaging in “rotational” deployments of its military forces in the new alliance members. Even George Bush’s secretary of defense, Robert Gates, expressed worries that such actions were creating dangerous tensions. Putin’s February 2007 speech to the annual Munich Security Conference made it extremely clear that the Kremlin’s patience with U.S. and NATO arrogance was coming to an end. Bush, tone-deaf as ever, even tried to secure NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine — a policy that his successors have continued to push, despite resistance from France and Germany.

  Western Provocation number 4: treating Russia as an outright enemy in Ukraine and elsewhere.

  Western leaders did not take Putin’s warnings seriously enough, however. Instead, the provocations on multiple fronts continued and, in some cases, even accelerated. The United States and key NATO powers bypassed the U.N. Security Council (and a certain Russian veto) in early 2008 to grant Kosovo full independence. Three years later, Barack Obama’s administration misled Russian officials about the purpose of a “humanitarian” U.N. military mission in Libya, convincing Moscow to withhold its veto. The mission promptly turned into a U.S.-led regime-change war to overthrow Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi. Shortly thereafter, the United States worked with like-minded Middle East powers in a campaign to oust Russia’s client, Bashar al-Assad, in Syria. The egregious U.S.-EU meddling in Ukraine’s domestic politics followed.

  It is unfair to judge Russia’s aggressive and destabilizing actions, including the annexation of Crimea, the ongoing military intervention in Syria, continuing support for separatists in eastern Ukraine, and attempted interference in the political affairs of other countries, without acknowledging the multitude of preceding Western abuses. The West, not Russia, is largely responsible for the onset of the new cold war.

  * * *

  It’s likely that some of the above arguments will be the focus of debate within the coming weeks as Russian and US-NATO officials engage each other in Geneva. While US officials might feign having a short memory over these things, it’s clear the Russian side is fully aware, and unwilling to let it go.

  And Russia is the one who is blamed of “expansion”, “imperialism” and “aggression” by @NATO #warmongers🤦 https://t.co/g3IfI7BuHS

  — Elena Plotnikova (@Cosmopolitka) December 30, 2021

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

  For example, in his latest comments Friday, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov underscored precisely that Euro-Atlantic countries have repeatedly contradicted and broken prior commitments. “Our proposals are aimed at creating and legalizing a new system of agreements based on the principle of the indivisibility of security and abandonment of attempts to achieve military superiority, which was approved unanimously by the leaders of all Euro-Atlantic states in the 1990s. I would like to emphasize that what we need is legally binding guarantees since our Western colleagues systematically fail to fulfill political obligations, not to mention voiced assurances and promises given to Soviet and Russian leaders,” Lavrov said.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 21:25

• Texas Audit Finds Over 11,000 Potential Non-Citizens Registered To Vote, Other Problems
  Texas Audit Finds Over 11,000 Potential Non-Citizens Registered To Vote, Other Problems

  Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times,

  Voting irregularities – including potentially thousands of votes cast by non-citizens and the dead – were reported during the first phase of the Texas Secretary of State’s forensic audit of the 2020 general election, but critics deemed it more of a risk-limiting audit at this point.

  

  The Texas Secretary of State’s office released its findings on Dec. 31, but the issues found are not enough to significantly impact 2020 election results of the four counties involved in the audit—Collin, Dallas, Harris, and Tarrant counties—which account for about 10 million people, or a third of the Texas population.

  “Generally speaking, nothing was found on such a large scale that could have altered any election,” said Sam Taylor, assistant secretary of state for communications, in an interview with The Epoch Times.

  Findings include:

  • Statewide, a total of 11,737 potential non-U.S. citizens were identified as being registered to vote. Of these, 327 records were identified in Collin County, 1,385 in Dallas County, 3,063 in Harris County, and 708 in Tarrant County. So far, Dallas County has canceled 1,193 of these records, with Tarrant County canceling one. Neither Collin nor Harris have canceled any potential non-voting records.

  • Since November 2020, 224,585 deceased voters have been removed from the voter rolls in Texas. Collin County removed 4,889 deceased voters, Dallas County removed 14,926 deceased voters, Harris County removed 23,914 deceased voters, and Tarrant County removed 13,955 deceased voters.

  • Statewide, a total of 67 potential votes cast in the name of deceased people are under investigation. Of those, three were cast in Collin County, nine in Dallas County, four in Harris County, and one in Tarrant County.

  • In a review of each county’s partial manual count report required under Texas law, three of the four counties reported discrepancies between ballots counted electronically versus those counted by hand. The reported reasons for these discrepancies will be investigated and verified during Phase 2 of the audit.

  Taylor said the state’s audit, currently moving into its second phase, was a first-of-its-kind for Texas.

  Secretary of State John Scott portrayed the audit as the country’s “most comprehensive forensic audit of the 2020 election,” according to a November press release. He added the audit will use “analytical tools to examine the literal nuts and bolts of election administration to determine if any illegal activity may have occurred.”

  

  Voters wait in line to cast their vote in Austin, Texas, on Nov. 3, 2020. (Sergio Flores/AFP via Getty Images)

  Of the four counties being audited, former President Donald Trump won Collin County, with President Joe Biden taking Dallas and Harris counties. Tarrant County, traditionally a red county, flipped to Biden with a slim 1,826 vote margin. Overall, Trump carried Texas with 52.1 percent of the vote to Biden’s 46.5 percent.

  The Texas audit was announced soon after Trump wrote a Sept. 23 open letter to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who Trump endorsed for re-election in 2022, pushing for a more thorough forensic audit of the 2020 election.

  Trump’s letter asked Abbott to include legislation in the third special session that would allow for more comprehensive forensic audits of the 2020 presidential election in Texas, specifically pointing to House Bill 16 and Senate Bill 97. Those pieces of legislation would have allowed party officials to demand county-level audits in future elections and allowed for a 2020 audit as well. Ultimately SB 97, which had similar language as HB 16, was introduced but did not pass both chambers before the clock ran out on the third and final session this fall.

  As it stands, the four-county audit is part of Senate Bill 1, a sweeping election bill passed by the Republican-led Legislature in the second special session of 2021, but vehemently opposed by Democrats.

  Legislators hoping to revive a fourth Legislative session to deal with voting fraud issues say the current audit is limited in scope.

   

  

  President Donald Trump takes the stage for a rally in support of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) at the Toyota Center in Houston, Texas, on Oct. 22, 2018. (Loren Elliott/Getty Images)

  State Rep. Steve Toth, (R) Woodlands, who sponsored HB 16, called the Secretary of State audit more of a risk-limiting audit that won’t adequately address all 2020 election problems.

  “We know that fraud has been taking place in Texas,” Toth said in an interview with The Epoch Times.

  “We need a forensic audit.”

  Sen. Paul Bettencourt, (R) Houston, who introduced SB 97, agreed that Toth had a point. Bettencourt’s bill would have allowed audits to be conducted at the county level across Texas. However, he said the Secretary of State’s audit has the potential to become a forensic audit during phase two if it begins to dig into voting irregularities.

  “My observation over time is that fraud is used against Democrats in their primaries and against the Republicans in the general election,” Bettencourt said in an interview.

  He pointed to some 3,000 non-residents potentially voting in Harris County cited by the audit. Bettencourt said as far back as 20 years ago when he was a district voting clerk, he would use jury service data indicating non-citizens to purge them from the rolls. But at this point, he said the county appears to have abandoned such efforts.

  Bettencourt noted other irregularities not covered by the state’s audit, such as a situation in Wichita Falls, where a single-family residence was home to more than 500 registered voters.

  

  Then Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden speaks at a community event while campaigning in San Antonio, Texas, on Dec. 13, 2019. (Daniel Carde/Getty Images)

  While the Texas Attorney General’s office lists only 386 active election fraud investigations, cases of voter fraud have increased in Texas. In a Texan article, Jonathan White, head of the election fraud division in the Texas Attorney General’s Special Prosecution Division said cases were “higher than our historical average by a long shot.” There were 510 offenses pending against 43 defendants at the time, according to the article, with most stemming from mail-in ballots.

  Taylor said that the Secretary of State’s audit was indeed a forensic audit. During the second phase of the audit, the secretary of state’s Forensic Audit Division will conduct on-site examinations in January and will compare machine tabulations with paper ballots when possible.

  

  A poll worker talks to a line of voters on election day in Austin, Texas, on Nov. 3, 2020. (Sergio Flores/AFP via Getty Images)

  Issues such as how drive-thru voting was conducted in Harris County in 2020, now prohibited by SB 1, will be reviewed, Taylor said, adding there were claims of a 1,800 vote discrepancy between the number of voters checked in and the number of votes cast at drive-thrus. About 127,000 votes were cast in the Houston area this way.

  But Leah Shah, communications director for Harris County Elections, said the county uses very strict protocol on how ballots are managed and couldn’t confirm a voting discrepancy.

  “We have heard that number, but we have no idea where that number came from,” she said in an interview.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 20:50

• China Releases Astonishing Images Of Mars Taken By Tianwen-1 Spacecraft
  China Releases Astonishing Images Of Mars Taken By Tianwen-1 Spacecraft

  To celebrate the new year, China National Space Administration (CNSA) published astonishing pictures of the Tianwen-1 Mars orbiter above the north pole of the red planet, according to Shanghai Morning Post.

  CNSA said the images were taken by a detachable sensor equipped with two high-definition cameras. The first picture shows the orbiter above the north pole ice cap of Mars. 

  

  The second picture is a close-up of the orbiter’s golden exterior skin where high-speed data communication antennas and a solar wing are seen. Beyond the orbiter are ice caps though not the ice we consider on Earth. Mar’s ice caps are dry ice (solid carbon dioxide) and water ice.

  

  The third picture shows the north pole ice cap, almost like a vanilla swirl ice cream cone. 

  

  The next image is the Zhu Rong rover on the surface of Mars. We can see the topography of the desolate planet that Elon Musk wants to rocket people to at the end of the decade. 

  

  We’ve been closely following the Tianwen-1 mission. In February of last year, the orbiter entered the orbit of the red planet. A couple of months later, a rover was released on the surface of the planet.  

  The mission so far means China is the only country besides the US to land a rover on Mars successfully. Its mission is to explore the surface and geology of the planet. 

  Space is becoming the next battleground domain for both US and China. Beijing has become super aggressive in space in the last year. The country has also landed a spacecraft on the moon and collected lunar rock samples. 

  The final frontier is space — the world’s superpowers are on a hunt for trillion-dollar deposits of rare metals that will power Earth’s green energy revolution in decades to come. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 20:15

• The Last Great Inflation
  The Last Great Inflation

  Authored by Milton Ezrati via The Epoch Times,

  With inflation in the headlines, a look back at the last experience might offer needed perspective. There is no claim here that history repeats exactly. Rather a look back offers ways to dispel nonsense and identify what is important.

  

  The Arab oil embargo of 1973 dominates most references to the last great inflation. No doubt oil played a role, but problems appeared long before the embargo.

  Inflation began to build in the second half of the 1960s. After years of barely any inflation, consumer prices by 1966 were rising at a 3.5 percent annual rate and then built on themselves so that by 1969 they were rising at a 6.0 percent rate.

  This initial price pressure had two clear roots.

  One was the strain President Lyndon Johnson had placed on the federal budget and the economy by simultaneously pursuing a war in Vietnam and a domestic war on poverty.

  Second was the willingness of the Federal Reserve (Fed) to accommodate the government’s credit needs by creating a powerful flow of new money. The broad M2 measure of the nation’s money supply rose a rapid 8.0 percent a year on average during this time.

  When in 1969 Richard Nixon took over from Johnson, he continued to spend freely, even though the war in Vietnam had begun to wind down. Nixon added a new inflationary factor to the mix when in August 1971 he ended the dollar’s convertibility to gold. This move destroyed the fixed exchange rate system that had prevailed for decades. The dollar fell on global exchange markets, adding directly to American living costs by raising the prices of imports. More fundamentally, the break with gold removed any restraint on the Fed’s ability to create new money.

  Growth in the country’s money supply soared at rates approaching 12 percent a year on average between 1971 and 1973. Along with federal spending, it boosted buying pressure and added to the inflationary trend, bringing the rate of price increases up quickly from a brief pause during the mild 1971 recession toward the old highs.

  Oil entered the picture in 1973. By then, the members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) had begun to chafe over how the American inflation was eroding the real value of their product. While other prices were rising, oil, set by American interests, had held at a relatively steady $25.00 a barrel. OPEC took control of pricing by imposing an embargo on oil sales and then quadrupled prices.

  The Fed responded by pouring still more money on the economy. The broad money supply jumped 14 percent in 1974. The Fed intended this to ease the economic strains of high oil prices, but the added money mostly extended and enlarged the immediate inflationary impact of the one-time jump in oil prices. By early 1975, inflation was running at over 11 percent a year.

  By 1979, consumer price inflation verged on a rate of 14 percent a year. The economic harm had become widespread. By skewing notions of value, inflation had destroyed wealth and distorted incentives, retarding the capital spending that would otherwise have fostered growth. With the Fed accommodating inflation, all expected it to continue. Workers made wage demands on the expectation of rapid increases in the cost of living, and managements granted them on the expectation that they could easily raise prices to more than offset the impact on the bottom line. This so-called wage-price spiral gave inflation a life of its own even as workers fell further and further behind. All suffered.

  The end came when a new Fed chairman, Paul Volcker, refused to validate the inflation as the Fed had previously done. He cut the pace of money growth. Without a ready source of Fed-provided liquidity, interest rates spiked upward. The 10-year treasury yield briefly hit 16 percent, and short-term rates touched 21 percent. Painful as these responses were, the Fed’s actions broke the inflationary spiral. By 1983, some 18 years after the process had started, consumer price inflation had fallen below 3.0 percent a year.

  Though much today is different, much also looks like this past. Washington is spending even more aggressively than it did 40-50 years ago. The Fed similarly has also pursued an expansive monetary policy. Policymakers recently promised a more restrictive monetary posture, but announced plans for only the most gradual of moves. The U.S. economy may get lucky, but the picture looks disturbingly like it did last time.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 19:40

• Iraqis Threaten To Burn Down "Embassy Of The Great Devil" To Mark Soleimani Anniversary
  Iraqis Threaten To Burn Down “Embassy Of The Great Devil” To Mark Soleimani Anniversary

  Just days ahead of the second anniversary of the killing of Iran’s IRGC Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani, pro-Iran factions in Iraq held a mass demonstration just outside Baghdad’s Green Zone where the American and other international embassies are located.

  The protesters were filmed burning and destroying a large mock US embassy, in what appears a “threat” and possible warning of what’s to come. Iranian state media featured and spread the footage, describing the burning of the embassy model as part of events commemorating the “anniversary of the US assassination of Gen. Soleimani”…

  Iraqis rally ahead of anniv. of US assassination of Gen. Soleimani, burn model of US embassyhttps://t.co/U0GwljWUdZ pic.twitter.com/kNT6jizu6N

  — Press TV (@PressTV) January 1, 2022

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

  The January 3, 2020 US drone strike just outside Baghdad’s airport also took out Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, head of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) – which is seen in the West as supported by Tehran. Friday’s demonstration was reportedly organized by the PMF.

  It also comes at a time Washington’s expected withdrawal from Iraq date has come and gone. “Baghdad and Washington announced in July that the full withdrawal of American combat troops from Iraq would be completed by the end of this year,” a recent report in The National indicated. “Training and advising missions, however, would continue.” So at this point the US deems its “combat mission” as over in the country, and yet hundreds or up to a few thousand troops remain in an ‘advisory role’.

  In essence the US presence in Iraq has not at all changed or been drawn down, which is sure to keep the Pentagon on a conflict footing with the pro-Iran paramilitary forces across Iraq.

  Iranian media quoted one protester at Friday’s events outside the Green Zone as saying:

  “Today we are remembering the day the evil embassy entered Iraq, the embassy of the great devil; the American embassy that never brings good things to any country, that brought harm to the Iraqi people. Today the Iraqis also mourn Qasem Soleimani and the heroic martyr Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.”

  Saturday also witnessed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis take to the street to protest the US and the killing of Soleimani and Muhandis. 

  🔻Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have rallied ahead of the second anniversary of the US assassination of General Qassem Soleimani & Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.#مليونية_الشهادة_والسيادة pic.twitter.com/3Lt1c2SL6T

  — اياد المنصوري (@c0fWTvl6Ua60HBs) January 1, 2022

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

  The US is unlikely to leave Iraq anytime soon. Following the White House and Pentagon’s horribly bungled and botched evacuation mission from Kabul last August, the Biden administration has come under political pressure to “stay the course” in other conflict theaters. 

  However, regional leaders who wish to see a swift US departure from the Middle East (including Iraq and northeast Syria), argue that the ‘counter-ISIS’ mission is over, thus there’s no further ‘counter-terror’ justification for the Pentagon to remain there.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 19:05

• Omicron Offers An Off-Ramp From Our Failed Pandemic Policy
  Omicron Offers An Off-Ramp From Our Failed Pandemic Policy

  Authored by Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times,

  As the COVID-19 pandemic and the Western world’s unprecedented approach to it enters a new phase, with the Omicron variant becoming more prevalent, an opportunity presents itself to effect dramatic and much-needed changes to COVID policy.

  

  When the global pandemic was in its early stages in early 2020, very little was known, and our leaders feared the worst. Some understood, knowing the Chinese communist party’s response to SARS1, that the regime would avoid culpability at all costs, indeed at just about ANY cost, with possibly devastating consequences. Others, facing dubious models touting millions of deaths being brandished about by supposedly eminent scientists, and with the “extreme safety” being demanded by some elements of Western societies, were likewise in a panic. Fear gripped Western societies in a way unseen in generations.

  And, coupled with the Chinese regime’s extreme censorship of COVID-related data and workers, coupled with apocalyptic COVID propaganda spread by its mouthpieces and sycophants, it can be argued that the West largely threw out the tried-and-tested traditional pandemic playbook in favor of extreme top-down policies eerily similar to those the Chinese regime was celebrating. Most notably, we locked down our societies, in multiple ways, shuttering businesses and schools, with only “essential” work continuing—something we stuck with despite ample evidence pointing at the dubious nature of these policies. Basic principles of public health went out the window. Instead of fostering robust scientific debate, we censored and vilified contrarian scientists advocating for those principles, such as the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD). 

  In our frantic quest to find solutions, we seemingly miraculously developed vaccines to stop the virus, but enamoured by and in our rush to deploy our new miracles, we neglected key safeguards, such as collecting proper safety data. We vilified early clinicians and the therapeutic treatments they were finding success with, pushed vaccines as a panacea only to find that many didn’t want them. Then, we adopted all sorts of tyrannical policies to “encourage” adoption, even for healthy children who are at miniscule risk from the virus. We spent a year and a half breaking up society, chipping away at our most cherished basic rights, and hunkering down into tribal camps, creating a new “unclean” caste, the unvaccinated.

  As early as mid-2020, Stanford public health expert Dr. Scott Atlas unambiguously documented using available data that the human cost (in terms of lives) of the lockdown policies was already greater than the human cost of the virus, and this has not changed. Millions missed critical cancer screenings and suicidal ideation in teens skyrocketed—just a tiny part of the cost. A number of studies are showing that adverse events from the new vaccines, notably myocarditis, are more serious and common than has been generally understood. Corporate media, who have largely been cheerleaders in promoting the various questionable policies, are now asking questions about whether, for example, “too many shots might actually harm the body’s ability to fight the coronavirus.” Trillions have been spent for stimulus, and inflation is spiking—people are starting to feel the pain in their pocketbooks, especially the middle and working classes.

  The bottom line is, there will be hell to pay. And I can’t help but remember what Governor Ron DeSantis told me when I met him in Florida, trying to understand why he had adopted the unusual, though effective, policies that he had, which we documented in “Desantis: Florida vs. Lockdowns.” He told me: “They will never admit they were wrong.”

  Given the magnitude of our failure as a society in dealing with COVID, and the cardinal rule that human beings (but especially politicians) will go to gargantuan lengths to avoid responsibility, I posit that Omicron provides an off-ramp that doesn’t require admission of guilt. We need to halt the highly objectionable COVID policies being employed today, while giving up, for now, the assigning of blame.

  Omicron has changed the game. With the preliminary research in, the data appears to show several things:

  • Omicron is more contagious than Delta and other variants

  • COVID vaccines seem to do little to stop Omicron infection

  • Remarkably, there is some evidence that Omicron is breaking through natural immunity from previous variants

  • Omicron is much less severe than other variants, with many scientists comparing its symptoms to the common cold

  • Omicron is unexpected—its high level of mutation leaves scientists asking questions

  Whatever the past reality, the difference in risk from COVID infection between the vaccinated and unvaccinated now appears to be lower than it was with previous variants. Whatever the past reality, the unvaccinated are not more a danger to society than the vaccinated. As the infection goes endemic, many people will get the virus, irrespective of vaccination status or past inflection. 

  The obsession with asymptomatic testing for COVID can be left behind with heads held high, as can masks. Ignorance of the past power of natural immunity vs. the virus becomes a non-issue at present. And, unlike past variants, Omicron is indeed a bit of an enigma in terms of both its genetics and of how it functions. 

  In other words, a perfect opportunity to effect a dramatic shift in pandemic policy, for example to policies laid out in the Great Barrington Declaration and past pandemic public health standards. Vaccine mandates can be dropped in an instant, policy can indeed be “left to the states” as President Biden has suggested, and state leaders can also follow in kind.

  It’s an opportunity for leaders to use the novel Omicron variant to save face, as an “off ramp” off the current authoritarian and unpopular policy track, enacting policies that will have them celebrated and also work well, helping us start to heal our society. The sooner, the better.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 18:30

• Judge Delivers Major Setback To Prince Andrew In Lawsuit Filed By Epstein Victim
  Judge Delivers Major Setback To Prince Andrew In Lawsuit Filed By Epstein Victim

  Now that Ghislaine Maxwell has been found guilty of sex-trafficking charges tied to her work as Jeffrey Epstein’s de facto “madam”, many legal observers expect that she will eventually be sentenced to a lengthy prison stay that could see her die behind bars. But as the world waits for her sentencing, attention is turning once again the civil courts, where Prince Andrew is fighting a high-profile lawsuit filed by Virginia Roberts Guiffre, a prominent Epstein accuser who claims she was trafficked to Andrew when she was still underage.

  

  The lawsuit was filed in the US by a woman who lives in Australia, against a member of the British royal family. Andrew’s name came up during the Maxwell’s trial, when Jeffrey Epstein’s former pilot named names, though he wasn’t officially named by prosecutors.

  Now, an American judge has blocked two critical avenues for Prince Andrew to try and get around the lawsuit. Here’s more from the Guardian:

  Two of Prince Andrew’s avenues to prevent or stall the progression of Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s sex assault lawsuit against him were blocked on Saturday by a federal judge, increasing pressure to settle claims before a crucial court hearing this week.

  Judge Lewis A Kaplan, in a written order, told the prince’s lawyers they must turn over documents on the schedule that has been set in the lawsuit brought by Guiffre who claims she was abused – aged 17 – by the prince on multiple occasions in 2001 while she was being sexually abused by financier Jeffrey Epstein.

  The judge’s decision comes ahead of a critical hearing in the case that’s set for Tuesday. Also, the details of a 2009 settlement agreement between the now-deceased Epstein and Giuffre that lawyers for Prince Andrew had hoped would protect him from Guiffre’s claims are expected to be released on Monday. Among other things, the judge will decide Tuesday whether Giuffre’s claims against the Prince are solid enough to merit a trial. All of this could greatly increase pressure on the Prince’s lawyers to settle.

  Giuffre’s lawyers have claimed that they have up to six witnesses linking the Duke to his accuser on the eve of the hearing into the civil lawsuit.

  In another document, Andrew’s lawyers acknowledged that they couldn’t provide documentary evidence that he has the “inability to sweat”, one of the defenses employed by Prince Andrew to try and discredit Guiffre (although the reaction to the claim in the press was one of abject dismissal).

  Meanwhile, on Saturday, it was revealed that David Boies, a lawyer for Giuffre, had said that Ghislaine Maxwell should have “cut a deal” – the latest indication that Maxwell had the opportunity to turn states’ witness against other high-profile individuals in Epstein’s circle, a group that includes former President Bill Clinton as well as Prince Andrew.

  “I have said publicly for five years that she was making a mistake in not going in and trying to cut a deal with prosecutors. She could have cut a very good deal early on but she passed up that opportunity. I think that’s proven to be a fatal mistake,” Boies reportedly said.

  See the judge’s official dismissal below:

  

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 17:55

• "Inappropriate Political Influence": Chief Justice John Roberts Responds To Threats Against The Court
  “Inappropriate Political Influence”: Chief Justice John Roberts Responds To Threats Against The Court

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Chief Justice John Roberts used his year-end report on New Year’s Eve to denounce the threats being made against the Court and its members by Democratic politicians and groups, including threats to pack the Court to force an immediate liberal majority. Roberts referred to such threats as efforts to exercise “inappropriate political influence” on the Court in contravention of our constitutional values and traditions.

  

  We have been discussing the ramped up threats from Democratic leaders that the Court will either vote with the liberal justices on key issues or face “consequences,” including court packing.  Recently, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), a former law professor, became the latest to voice such reckless views.

  What Democratic members are demanding is raw court packing to add four members to the Court to give liberals an instant majority — a movement denounced by figures like the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Stephen Breyer.

  Last year, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass, and others stood in front of the Supreme Court to announce a court packing bill to give liberals a one-justice majority.  This follows threats from various Democratic members that conservative justices had better vote with liberal colleagues . . . or else.

  Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., recently issued a warning to the Supreme Court: reaffirm Roe v. Wade or face a “revolution.”  Sen. Richard Blumenthal previously warned the Supreme Court that, if it continued to issue conservative rulings or “chip away at Roe v Wade,” it would trigger “a seismic movement to reform the Supreme Court. It may not be expanding the Supreme Court, it may be making changes to its jurisdiction, or requiring a certain numbers of votes to strike down certain past precedents.”

  Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer also declared in front of the Supreme Court “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.”

  For her part, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. questioned the whole institution’s value if it is not going to vote consistently with her views and those of the Democratic Party: “How much does the current structure benefit us? And I don’t think it does.” Warren seems to be channeling more AOC than FDR. Roosevelt at least tried to hide his reckless desire to pack the Court by pushing an age-based rule. It was uniquely stupid. The bill would have allowed Roosevelt to add up to six justices for every member who is over 70 years old. Warren, like AOC, wants the Democratic base to know that she is pushing a pure, outcome-changing court packing scheme without even the pretense of a neutral rule.

  Despite the fact that the Court has more often voted on non-ideological lines (and regularly issued unanimous decisions), Warren denounced the Court as an “extremist” body that has “threatened, or outright dismantled, fundamental rights in this country.” Those “fundamental” values do not apparently include judicial independence.

  Now Roberts has responded. His report is striking in its measured and deliberative tone in comparison to the often reckless rhetoric of these politicians. He waited to address the year in review for his court and the 107 district and appeals courts across the country. However, he included the following lines that are clearly directed toward Congress and extreme Democratic groups like Demand Justice:

  “Decisional independence is essential to due process, promoting impartial decision-making, free from political or other extraneous influence. The Judiciary’s power to manage its internal affairs insulates courts from inappropriate political influence and is crucial to preserving public trust in its work as a separate and co-equal branch of government.”

  The criticism comes after new polling shows that Roberts is the most popular government official in the country, a fact that led some on the left to express almost apocalyptic alarm.

  He is not the only justice who is speaking out to blunt the attacks on the Court.

  Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer chaffed at the claim that this is a “conservative” court and noted “The chief justice frequently speaks on this subject as well and says, no, no: we don’t look at our rulings from the point of view of our personal ideology.”

  Justice Thomas criticized those who seem intent on diminishing the authority or respect for the Court: “the media makes it sound as though you are just always going right to your personal preference…They think you become like a politician. That’s a problem. You’re going to jeopardize any faith in the legal institutions.”

  Justice Amy Coney Barrett recently told an audience that “My goal today is to convince you that this court is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks.”

  However, as discussed in my Hill column, the attacks are likely to increase in this key election year with so many major decisions ticking away on the Court docket. The type of demagoguery denounced by Chief Justice Roberts is now going mainstream with our leaders, the media, and various advocacy groups. Yet, Democratic strategists are finding that selling court packing and attacking justices is not resonating outside of the same 30 percent of voters on the left. Instead, many view what is “dire for democracy” is the effort to destroy one of the core institutions in our constitutional system.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 17:20

• Scientists Shed New Light On What Makes Omicron Spread
  Scientists Shed New Light On What Makes Omicron Spread

  At this point, members of the public have probably heard the following mantra a hundred times: while omicron is more infectious than delta, it also produces a less severe infection. This has been repeated over and over since the variant was first introduced to the public by a group of South African scientists.

  Well, just in case any doubters remain, the NYT reported the results of the latest round of studies on New Year’s Day. The studies mostly focused on animals: In studies on mice and hamsters, omicron produced less damaging infections, often limited largely to the upper airway: the nose, throat and windpipe.

  

  Most important: omicron appears to do less harm to the lungs, where previous variants would often cause scarring and lead to serious difficulty breathing for many patients. But the animal studies show that omicron typically stays in the windpipe and upper respiratory tract: it doesn’t make its way down deep into the lungs like delta.

  “It’s fair to say that the idea of a disease that manifests itself primarily in the upper respiratory system is emerging,” said Roland Eils, a computational biologist at the Berlin Institute of Health, who has studied how coronaviruses infect the airway.

  When omicron was first introduced back in November, the only thing scientists knew for certain was that it had more than 50 mutations, many involving the spike protein used by the virus to bind with human cells. But as scientists have discovered in the interim, there is more to a virus than its mutations.

  “You can’t predict the behavior of virus from just the mutations,” said Ravindra Gupta, a virologist at the University of Cambridge.

  And after months of scientists’ infecting cells in Petri dishes and spraying the virus into the noses of animals, scientists have learned a little more about omicron. Interestingly, some scientists found the virus behaved in interesting ways, with reactions in certain species of animals drawing attention:

  Although the animals infected with Omicron on average experienced much milder symptoms, the scientists were particularly struck by the results in Syrian hamsters, a species known to get severely ill with all previous versions of the virus.

  “This was surprising, since every other variant has robustly infected these hamsters,” said Dr. Michael Diamond, a virologist at Washington University and a co-author of the study.

  For now, scientists suspect that omicron’s more mild demeanor might be a product of the human anatomy, moreso than the virus’s genetic makeup.

  The reason that Omicron is milder may be a matter of anatomy. Dr. Diamond and his colleagues found that the level of Omicron in the noses of the hamsters was the same as in animals infected with an earlier form of the coronavirus. But Omicron levels in the lungs were one-tenth or less of the level of other variants.

  A similar finding came from researchers at the University of Hong Kong who studied bits of tissue taken from human airways during surgery. In 12 lung samples, the researchers found that Omicron grew more slowly than Delta and other variants did.

  The researchers also infected tissue from the bronchi, the tubes in the upper chest that deliver air from the windpipe to the lungs. And inside of those bronchial cells, in the first two days after an infection, Omicron grew faster than Delta or the original coronavirus did.

  Although others have found characteristics in human lung tissue that help to prevent the new variant from spreading in the lungs. Specifically, a protein called TMPRSS2 on the surface of the inside of the lungs. This protein doesn’t take to omicron, impeding its spread in the critically important organ.

  Many cells in the lung carry a protein called TMPRSS2 on their surface that can inadvertently help passing viruses gain entry to the cell. But Dr. Gupta’s team found that this protein doesn’t grab on to Omicron very well. As a result, Omicron does a worse job of infecting cells in this manner than Delta does. A team at the University of Glasgow independently came to the same conclusion.

  Through an alternative route, coronaviruses can also slip into cells that don’t make TMPRSS2. Higher in the airway, cells tend not to carry the protein, which might explain the evidence that Omicron is found there more often than the lungs. Complicating matters, there are cells in the lungs that react to intruders by destroying all cells, not just infected ones.

  Of course, more studies will need to be conducted before the scientific community can say anything for certain.

  These findings will have to be followed up with further studies, such as experiments with monkeys or examination of the airways of people infected with Omicron.

  If the results hold up to scrutiny, they might explain why people infected with Omicron seem less likely to be hospitalized than those with Delta.

  Right now, this is all we can say for certain: COVID infections start in the nose, or possibly the mouth, before spreading down the throat. Mild infections don’t get much further than that…but when the virus takes hold in the lungs, it can then cause serious, lasting tissue damage.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 16:45

• How Bubbles, Price, & COVID-19 Changed Bitcoin For Me
  How Bubbles, Price, & COVID-19 Changed Bitcoin For Me

  Authored by Joakim Book via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  Bitcoin is not a bubble. It’s the monetary escape hatch we need now that the COVID-19 cat is out of the bag…

  

  I trained as a financial historian. My academic work focused on banks and financial markets in the past, and I was always fascinated by iconic bubbles of financial history — the tulip mania, the financial boom of the 1690s, the South Sea Company and Britain’s many financial panics in the 19th century.

  I wrote a thesis on the 1847 commercial crisis. I analyzed financial returns on London’s stock market in the Victorian and Edwardian eras, and showed that returns then squared well with the first round of factor analyses developed a century later. I investigated the Bank of England’s role in the 1857 crisis, the 1866 Overend, Gurney & Company collapse and the 1890 bailout of Baring Brothers. (If you are under the impression that financial crises, government mismanagement and central bank bailouts only happened in the post-1971 era of modern monetary debasement, you are sorely mistaken).

  You could, Ray Dalio-style, say that nothing is new under our financial sun: many of these past crises map well onto more modern ones — perhaps, because there are only so many ways to make losses or catastrophically ruin monetary arrangements.

  While the concept of “bubbles” runs freely across the chronicles of financial history and those who study it, I was less convinced. The hand-waving arrogance with which well-established financial historians would denounce something as a bubble, delusion or financial madness would be familiar to most bitcoiners reading The New York Times or The Economist today. Mostly, these otherwise astute academics meant to launch derogatory remarks on the sorts of people who handled assets, and implied that real-world plebs in trading pits or exchanges couldn’t possibly possess knowledge of the superior kind with which their own university libraries embodied them. Worse, when pushed, the idea of bubbles never seemed to mean much else than “what goes up must come down.”

  What fascinates me about Bitcoin is the questions it poses for monetary economics — monetary rules, macroeconomic stability, regression theorem, Gresham’s law and the classification of fiat-commodity money. When I first heard rumblings of this technological solution to overthrow the state’s monetary monopoly, I mostly denounced it as hopeful technobabble. My orange-pilled friends couldn’t explain why it mattered monetarily, how it improved much on what we had (or with better central bankers, could have). The use value seemed altogether superfluous in a fintech world where moving value was easier than ever and central banks couldn’t even hit their inflation targets, let alone shove us over the brink of hyperinflation.

  Then, two things changed: price and COVID-19.

  To many laymen, reasoning from a change in asset price seems like an asinine and bubble-fueled reason to change one’s mind — the quintessential herd mentality. To convince you that it’s not, I return to the idea of bubbles before I argue that Bitcoin is the monetary escape hatch necessary in a less free world.

  PRICES KNOW SOMETHING YOU DON’T

  At the base of economics lies an information and calculation argument: real market prices, emerging in trade between willing participants, generate information about the world. It allows us to calculate profits and losses, to see if what we make is worth more than what we put in. It allows market participants (i.e., all of us) to grasp what’s going on — not, mind you, in the news agency way of broadcasting highly-curated pictures from afar, but by informing your economic decisions. Shortages and price declines tell us what’s scarcer and more plentiful, what’s in high demand and what is better used elsewhere.

  Financial markets and assets do the same thing for society’s current and future allocation of savings. The prices of securities vary more than market prices because the (far-off) future and how to assess it is less knowable than the immediate present or recent past. The “trouble with bubbles” is that nobody knows the future.

  Asset prices incorporate the knowledge that exists about the present and forecasts the future in the best way that we know how. If owners of securities are wrong about that future, they lose money or miss out on profitable investments. Scott Sumner of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University explains this well for the two most recent bubbles in U.S. financial history: the dot-com bubble in the late ’90s and early 2000s, and the housing bubbles a few years thereafter:

  “I think asset prices are usually relatively efficient based on fundamentals. I’m very dubious of people who claim that such and such a market is obviously overvalued. Most experts, I think, believe that the tech stocks in 2000 were obviously overvalued, or housing prices in 2006 were obviously overvalued… people [were] saying things like ‘those stock prices only make sense if you think American internet firms will eventually dominate the global economy.’

  “Well, they do now. Or the 2006 housing prices would only make sense if you think interest rates will get lower and lower and NIMBY [not in my backyard] regulations will stop new construction. Well, both of those things have happened and we’re now at a new normal of much higher housing prices in America. I think these markets we’re picking up some long-term trends that really did change the traditional fundamental price earnings ratio or rent price ratio in housing.”

  Knowing that something is “obviously overvalued” is the kind of extreme hubris that opponents of Bitcoin suffer from in outsized amounts. The fundamental value is zero, says economist Steve Hanke; as renowned and astute a writer as Nassim Taleb wrote some mathematical equations and proved (“proved”) that bitcoin’s fundamental value was nil. How could they possibly know that?

  Perhaps they ran a model, mentally or computationally, plugged in some values, and out popped a bubble verdict. Could be, but when you’re testing market (ir)rationality, you’re also implicitly testing the model: “Irrational bubbles in stock prices,” concluded the father of the efficient market hypothesis, Eugene Fama, in the 1990s, “are indistinguishable from rational time-varying expected returns.”

  Fundamentals, and our confidence in them, change, which is reflected in asset prices moving up or down. Against Taleb, Nic Carter had the pithiest rebuttal: No sir, it’s $34,500 — or whatever the market priced it at when he said it.

  When prices fall after a rally — say, internet stocks from 200 to 2001, home prices from 2007 to 2009 or bitcoin in April 2021 — laymen and professionals alike say that it’s a bubble. But what if the price increases captured something real, and were then validated by future events?

  U.S. median house prices recouped their losses four years later, and today stand about 60% higher (that’s nominally; deflated by CPI, house prices are about 16% higher in 2021 than at the peak of 2007). Internet stocks, including some of those ridiculed as hopelessly overvalued in 2001, dominate the U.S. stock market — their products and services have conquered the world.

  The chattering classes’ case against Netflix, just a few years ago, was similarly overwhelming: This hopeful tech company couldn’t possibly monetize its overextended services. It would have to conquer the world for the stock’s then-valuation to make sense… and then it did exactly that. Netflix expanded services, upped its margins and offered original content. Few are the analysts today yapping about Netflix as an obvious bubble.

  Bitcoin’s scope and promise is larger than any of them. What is its future value?

  For the next year, I predict that bubble charges against bitcoin, of which we saw plenty this year, will fade away. Both because angry nocoiners tire of making them when they’re received with ridicule, and because the longer something stays alive, expands and flourishes, the less sense the etiquette makes. Nobody calls Amazon a bubble anymore, nor Netflix. Even Tesla’s haters have largely surrendered, accepting that what propelled it to the fifth-largest U.S. company by market capitalization is something other than bubbling madness.

  No Bitcoiner takes the bubble attack seriously. Price matters, and only bubbles that fail (i.e., don’t recover) are relegated to history’s dustbin as “bubbles”; the successful ones are just promising ventures, deemed as such by a future that has hindsight as a guide.

  AN ESCAPE TO FREEDOM

  Every society that collapsed into turmoil — economic, monetary, military, social or other — has had individuals contemplating when to leave. It’s not an easy decision, forecasting doom and deterioration for one’s country of birth. Many are the migrants who can tell painful stories of uprooting their lives, made increasingly impossible by authorities, famine, war or hyperinflation, for an uncertain existence elsewhere.

  When staring down the “unending path to unfreedom that we’re experimenting with these days” as I argued earlier this year, what else is there but escape? When rule by the people is replaced by ruling the people, escape hatches are crucial. COVID-19 measures all over the world — and the agitated tenacity with which troves of people embodied them — showed me that lines of privacy and tyranny drawn in the sand could be approached, flirted with… and then crossed by about a mile.

  Seeing the writing on the wall, I, like many others, wanted an out. In an uncertain future, you never know which place becomes a beacon of freedom (two years ago, who would have bet on Sweden? And now that it, too, is conforming — whereto?) and who will confiscate your assets. The idea of a monetary escape hatch clicked with me.

  “When in doubt,” wrote Ray Dalio in his new book, “get out”:

  “If you don’t want to be in a civil war or a war, you should get out while the getting is good… History has shown that when things get bad, the doors typically close for people who want to leave. The same is true for investments and money as countries introduce capital controls and other measures.”

  If history is any guide, you won’t be able to peacefully and in organized fashion be able to take your assets with you: “When the flight of wealth gets bad enough,” concluded Dalio, “the country outlaws it.”

  Plenty of Americans have taken that advice, though so far, only in a regional sense — the exodus from California speaks volumes. Others living under oppressive regimes, in the West and elsewhere, have taken similar actions, departing their domiciles for freer pastures elsewhere.

  Bitcoin facilitates the monetary component of that shift, to move value from an unfree jurisdiction to a freer one. When fleeing a sinking ship, you need your body, your health and your loved ones. Ideally, you want your most treasured belongings too, which, thanks to bitcoin, you can now carry without anybody knowing. It comes with the more important shift of holding funds outside the purview (and control!) of your invasive government. Dan Held’s Thanksgiving wishes stated it clearest:

  “With governments restricting more of our rights, what would be our light at the end of the tunnel? And with COVID, this trend has accelerated, with our movement and access to goods and resources diminished all for the sake of public safety.”

  You never know what you rely on until it’s abruptly taken away. When your assets are confiscated, your money devalued, your transactions declined and your bank decides to freeze your account for whichever made-up reason it’s trumpeting next, it’s too late. Backups and escape hatches must be put in place before they’re needed.

  I never saw the need for a monetary or financial escape before: I had access to inflation-protection and developed financial markets. I could move my funds wherever I wanted, whenever, for a sliver of what it would have cost just decades ago. Except for the occasional technical glitch or misadventures in poor countries, my transactions were never declined. I had not, to put it bluntly, checked my financial privilege. The last decade or so, culminating with COVID-19, convinced me that the unproblematic and worriless existence I had taken for granted might not always be that way.

  Measures against this public emergency probably won’t be what ultimately does in freedom, collapses societies and ushers in the authoritarianism of dystopias. But the COVID-19 cat is out of the bag now, and the power play that rulers experimented with this year and the last is from now on available at every political negotiation table like it never was before. With only vague references to public safety and astonishingly low barriers, locking up people in their homes is now a feasible option.

  The ability to escape — to get out — hasn’t been this important in generations. This time isn’t different, but this time we have Bitcoin. Perhaps that’s enough.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 16:10

• Trudeau Implies Black Canadians "Racist, Misogynistic" – Questions Whether Unvaxx'd Should Be "Tolerated"
  Trudeau Implies Black Canadians “Racist, Misogynistic” – Questions Whether Unvaxx’d Should Be “Tolerated”

  Canadian Prime Minister had a good year, if only because he managed to cling to power during a surprisingly close national election. But having abandoned all concerns about convincing those who don’t already agree with him on issues from COVID vaccinations to feminist ideology, the Canadian PM decided to attack the unvaccinated during an appearance on local TV.

  

  The takeaway from his remarks: in contemporary Canada, anybody who dares question the wisdom of the mass vaccination policy should automatically be dismissed as a racist or a misogynist, even if they’re voicing well-considered criticisms, like Dr. Robert Malone is doing.

  Trudeau made the comments to a Quebecois television station, although he was careful to stipulate that the people of Quebec aren’t the problem. Rather, Trudeau questioned whether good vaccinated Canadians should be forced to “tolerate” their unvaccinated brethren.

  “We are going to end this pandemic by proceeding with the vaccination,” said Trudeau in French.

  “We all know people who are deciding whether or not they are willing to get vaccinated, and we will do our very best to try to convince them. However, there is still a part of the population (that) is fiercely against it.”

  “They don’t believe in science/progress and are very often misogynistic and racist. It’s a very small group of people, but that doesn’t shy away from the fact that they take up some space.”

  “This leads us, as a leader and as a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people? Over 80% of the population of Quebec have done their duty by getting the shot. They are obviously not the issue in this situation.”

  While Trudeau would like Canadians to assume that all anti-vaxxers are racist, the reality couldn’t be further from the truth, because – just like in the US – black Canadians are generally more skeptical of vaccines.

  One study from Innovative Research Group showed black Canadians reported vaccination rates that were 20 percentage points below the Canadian average.

  Black Canadians also self-reported much lower rates of willingness and confidence pertaining to vaccines.

  

  President Biden has made a similar mistake in the past, and some have credited this dichotomy with influencing the White House to finally dial back its hostile rhetoric toward the unvaccinated.

  So, in reality, many of the “anti-vaxxers” Trudeau has condemned as racists are actually black themselves.

  Then again, racial sensitivity has never been one of the boyish PM’s strong suits.

  

  In a sense, Trudeau is conjuring up boogeymen, since vaccination rates across Canada are already extremely high (well beyond the levels once considered the threshold for “herd immunity”, before scientists decided to quietly scrap that concept when they realized the vaccines weren’t as effective as they had hoped).

  In Quebec, 84.5% of residents have received at least one shot, and a total of 14,900,242 jabs have been doled out since the start of the pandemic. Across Canada, 90% of people aged 12 and over have received at least one dose, while a total of 87% have received two jabs. In Alberta, it’s 90% of the people with one jab and 85% of people with two.

  Trudeau’s comments prompted People’s Party of Canada leader Maxime Bernier to lambast the PM, calling him a “fascist psychopath.”

  After all, if these people aren’t to be tolerated, what should be done? Should they be arrested and held in “re-education camps” until they acquiesce and agree to accept the shot?

  Watch the clip (in French) below:

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 15:35

• Omicron Is Creating An Unnecessary Media Hysteria Over Positive Case Numbers…Again
  Omicron Is Creating An Unnecessary Media Hysteria Over Positive Case Numbers…Again

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

  Back about a year ago – before the Delta variant, but long after we had a firm grasp on exactly how dangerous Covid was (or wasn’t, depending on your perspective) – I made the point that we had to stop blindly relying on, touting and hyping up individual positive Covid cases and blanket positive test numbers.

  In short, I made the argument that we needed to loosen our grip from hanging on individual positive tests being reported one at a time by the news. The brain damage and hysteria being drummed up from reporting one positive case at a time far outweighed the actual damage Covid was doing, in my opinion.

  If you remember correctly, back in 2020 and even in early 2021, any time a person of prominence, like an athlete, politician or celebrity tested positive, it was immediately an enormous headline that would cause the nation to collectively gasp.

  This wasn’t rational during the first variant of Covid, it remained irrational during the Delta variant, and is on the verge of just crazy-making now that the Omicron variant is here.

  The truth of the matter is that individual cases as news headlines only serve to create headlines and whip people up into a hysteria.

  For example – and I’m not trying to be mean here – but who even is this person, and why is this a lede on People.com?

  

  While the media loves singling famous people out or touting the absolute number of positive tests in a given location, it often fails to report any context.

  For example, reports about positive tests often do not include how many of the positive tests resulted in hospitalizations, how many of the positive tests even had symptoms and nuances like how many of the positive tests could be attributable to false positives.

  Why is this context extremely important when reporting about the Omicron variant?

  1. Studies are showing that Omicron is far less likely to land people in the hospital, with a trio of studies out of Scotland showing that Omicron was associated with a 2/3rd’s lower risk of hospitalization than the Delta variant. Loosely speaking, the Delta variant has been found to increase chances of hospitalization by up to 2x from the original disease. Using this loose math, this would mean that Omicron is about 30% less likely than the original variant to land you in the hospital.

  2. A new meta analysis of asymptomatic cases published in JAMA this month continues to show that about 45% of all combined cases between the U.S. and Europe are asymptomatic. This number drops to 40.5% when you include the entire geographical pool of Covid tests. This suggests that almost half of all “positive” cases may not be negatively affecting someone’s quality of life.

  3. PCR testing is notoriously sensitive. Someone close to me who follows CDC protocol, is vaxxed, boosted and routinely double masks said to me this week: “All these positive tests out of nowhere. It’s almost like it isn’t real.”

     While I’m not saying it “isn’t real”, what I am suggesting is that scratching below the surface about how PCR testing works might be a good idea before becoming hysterical about numbers the media presents.

     For example, CDC Director Rachel Walensky said this month that PCR tests may come back positive up to 12 weeks after someone has Covid.

     Back in 2020, health experts were saying PCR testing would pick up on “barely any traces” of the virus and that up to 90% of people who tested positive may not be carrying enough of the virus to infect someone else.

     “PCR’s greater accuracy detects viral load far below this level, and thus incorrectly identifies many individuals as infectious when they are not,” an Arizona State University writeup on testing accuracy from October 2020 added.

  4. False positives are still a thing. As demonstrated on national television this year when Ana Navarro had to be ushered off the set of The View, prevalence of false positives can range from 0% to 16%, or even higher, depending on which sources and studies you cite for your information. These estimates are statistically significant enough to warrant redundancy in all testing. When a second test isn’t issued for a “positive” result, the confidence in the reliability of the test diminishes ever so slightly. Combined with the above three points, it’s worth noting for context when reading Omicron positive testing headlines.

  Here’s a great example of the media at work from this summer, wherein CNN reports about an Olympic athlete who tested positive for Covid-19. CNN’s original source, a Tweet from an official Olympic body, offers slightly more context than CNN’s lede. No further information, such as whether or not the athlete even had symptoms or whether or not they were retested again that day to account for potential false positives, was given.

  

  And hey – I’m not suggesting that you should ignore case number trends in your specific jurisdiction and that you don’t take precautions. All I’m suggesting is there is a lot more behind the positive Covid test case numbers than people take the time to see.

  That, I believe, is because the media is satisfied using these numbers in the most sensational way possible and the public is largely uninformed and scared. The media I can place blame on for knowing better; the public, which largely consists of good hearted people just trying to do the right thing, I have more sympathy for.

  So let’s look at what’s happening this New Year’s Eve. People are being told to stay home and not enjoy themselves because a new variant of Covid is “sweeping the globe”. Case numbers are being reported in record sums, with terms like “unprecedented”, “unlike anything we’ve ever seen” and “shattered records” being thrown around:

  

  Holy fuck! Surely this is caused for severe alarm, right? Forget your vaccines that we once promised in a smug tone of voice would protect you from ever getting the virus again, Covid is back with a vengeance, motherfuckers!

  But seriously, let’s just calm down. We already know Omicron is more transmissible than other variants by an order of magnitude, so let’s stop acting surprised. We also know that millions upon millions of Americans have already prompted their immune systems with vaccines and booster shots, so let’s stop acting worried that the virus is once again “surprising” us.

  All month I’ve been watching athletes and coaches from various sports testing “positive” – resulting in sports games being canceled and hundreds of millions of dollars in associated revenue being put at risk.

  In addition to the economic loss “positive” tests immediately create, many of players and coaches who have been reporting to practice and feeling fine are claiming that testing protocols are taking a mental toll on them.

  Take, for example, French tennis player Benoit Paire:

  French tennis player Benoit Paire has tested positive for COVID-19 just weeks before the Australian Open gets underway on Jan. 17, 2022.

  “Hey my name is Benoit Paire, and for the 250th time I tested positive for Covid!!” he said on Twitter. “Honestly I can’t deal with this Covid s*** anymore.”

  “How am I doing? Because of Covid, I got a runny nose but because of all these quarantines spent in a hotel room halfway across the world, I don’t feel good mentally,” he continued.

  …

  Paire, who is vaccinated, added that he is “100 percent for the vaccine,” but urged people to “just live as before Covid, otherwise, I don’t see the point.”

  Do you know the old expression: “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?”

  Maybe we should be asking: “If 350 million people report ‘positive’ tests but no one cares anymore, do we really need such stringent Covid protocols?”

  I know that sounds crass, but how many of the players and coaches do you think would be simply going about their business but for some super-sensitive PCR test turning up trace amounts of the virus? How many players don’t care at this point? How many of the tens of thousands of fans that wind up in the stadium cheering along these teams care at this point?

  The counter intuitive nature of our Covid testing is on full display in the world of sports. If we are to test in this fashion going forward, no team in any sport may ever field a starting lineup again.

  I mean, honestly – imagine testing everybody for trace amounts of the cold virus before every sporting event in every major sporting league. Nothing would ever get done and the leagues would fold due to inefficiency and loss of interest from fans.

  If you take the same fallacy and apply it to everyday life and everywhere that requires Covid testing, including places of business who mandate it, one really starts to get a look at the giant wrench that can be thrown back (George Gammon voice) into the gears of both the economy and people’s everyday lives.

  Omicron cases are surging. We know. It’s a cause for concern. People will take precautions that they deem necessary for themselves and for others. However,  inciting hysteria based on total number of cases at this point, given the new variant’s properties and what we know about testing, might be the most counterintuitive and irrational decision in responding to the virus yet.

  And that’s saying something, because there’s been a lot of them.

  

  —

  Enjoy this free preview of paid content? Zerohedge readers always get a discount to subscribe to my blog. Readerscan get 22.20% off FOR LIFE as subscribers by using this New Year’s link to help usher in 2022: Get 22% off forever

  More QTR:

  1. When The Global Monetary Reset Happens, Don’t You Dare Forget Why

  2. 22 Stocks I’m Watching For 2022

  3. Can “Bond Vigilantes” Ever Return To Set The Fed Straight?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 15:00

• Ben Shapiro Eviscerates COVID Cult And 'Authoritarian Lockdown Nonsense' That's Destroyed 'Millions Of Lives'
  Ben Shapiro Eviscerates COVID Cult And ‘Authoritarian Lockdown Nonsense’ That’s Destroyed ‘Millions Of Lives’

  Now that the tide has officially turned thanks to Omicron – the hyper-transmissible, vaccine-mocking Covid strain that features flu-like symptoms and virtually no death, public health officials and their legacy media lapdogs have some explaining to do.

  In a Friday Twitter thread, Daily Wire co-founder Ben Shapiro shines an industrial grade spotlight in the faces of the hypocritical left over their seemingly-overnight pivot on Covid truths – which until now were verboten and could get one banned, demonetized, or canceled by woke mobs.

  

  Without further ado:

  So once it became clear that covid was not in fact a pagan god visiting vengeance on the unwashed Trump voters alone, the media and Democrats are now willing to admit the following:

  — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) December 31, 2021

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

  Continued via Threadreaderapp (emphasis ours): 

  1. Cloth masks are ineffective against omicron (Leanna Wen, CNN);

  2. The vaccinated can spread and get covid;

  3. The death rate is comparable to the flu (Chris Hayes);

  4. Many people are entering hospitals with covid, not from covid (Fauci);

  5. Natural immunity is a reason omicron hasn’t been as virulent (Fauci);

  6. We have to take into account societal needs, not just spread prevention (CDC);

  7. The asymptomatic should not be tested (NFL);

  8. We should focus on hospitalizations and deaths, not case rate (Biden);

  9. Children are not at risk and schools should remain open;

  10. Covid is predominantly an illness affecting the immunocompromised and elderly and we should not shut down society.

  Those of us in reality have been saying all this for months and most of it since May 2020. But your political priors were more important than the data. You had to have your demonization narrative.

  So welcome to reality. And f*** all y’all for pretending you didn’t know this so you could have fun crapping on Trump and DeSantis and all your red state relatives.

  And btw, AOC and all you Leftist covid fanatics — those whose virtue signaling authoritarian lockdown nonsense that has resulted in millions of lives destroyed — stay in your states and leave mine alone.

  We chose data and freedom. You chose alarmism and unearned moral superiority. Stay in NY, NJ, CA, and the rest — and enjoy the actual paranoid nanny state you created among your friends who reward you for telling them they will kill their kids and grandma if they don’t panic.

  Oh yes, and Happy New Year to all.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 14:25

• 2022: The Year Of Breakdown
  2022: The Year Of Breakdown

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  In other words, our economy and society have been optimized for failure.

  If we look at the fragility and instability of essential systems, it’s clear that 2022 will be the year of breakdown. Let’s start by reviewing how systems break down, a process I’ve simplified into the graphic below.

  

  1. Regardless of whether it was planned or not, all systems are optimized to process specific inputs to generate specific outputs. Each system is pared down to maximize efficiency as the means to maximize profits. This efficiency in service of maximizing profits requires trade-offs that only become visible when some key part of the system fails.

  The system that ships containers around the world offers a useful example. Shipping containers revolutionized shipping and reduced costs by commoditizing containers (all standard sizes), container ships (specifically designed to carry thousands of containers and container ports with specifically designed cranes, docks and truck lanes / queueing.

  It’s possible to load a container on some other craft with a jury-rigged crane, but the efficiency of that is essentially a fraction of the optimized system: the jury-rigged crane will only be able to load a handful of containers, the ship will only be able to carry a few containers, and the likelihood of the containers shifting increases.

  The infrastructure and labor are both highly specialized. Calling out the National Guard to speed up container offloading is a useless gesture unless the Guard can deliver more cranes and experienced operators.

  The greater the optimization, the greater the fragility as the breaking of any one link brings the entire system to a halt. Throwing in equipment and labor that the system isn’t designed to use will fail.

  Virtually every essential system has been stripped of redundancy, resilience, reserves and adaptability as the means to fully optimize inputs, processes and outputs. The system works well if every link in the dependency chain is working perfectly. Should one link go down, the entire system goes down.

  2. Cost-cutting has stripped systems of back-up staffing and expertise. Full-time workers have been replaced by gig workjers, contract workers, part-time staff on call, etc. Experienced staff cost too much so they’ve been let go as well, so there is no depth in numbers or knowledge.

  3. Management is top-heavy with MBAs and bean-counters with little pragmatic experience or knowledge of the systems they’re managing. Management is optimized to advance those who can generate big profits, not those with experiential skills needed to meet crises in real-world dependency chains, production, breakdowns, etc. So when the system comes apart, managers simply don’t have the knowledge or skills to solve real-world problems.

  The skills that are most desirable when everything is running smoothly are useless in crisis. Who do you want to go into combat with, the continuously promoted officer who won high marks for filing reports on time or the officer with actual combat experience who got passed over for promotion because he/she didn’t devote the proper attention to paperwork, meetings, virtue-signaling and derriere-kissing?

  Unfortunately the vast majority of our systems are managed by people who lack the long experience and hands-on skills needed to meet cascading crises.

  4. Systems are now so complex and opaque that they are in effect optimized to fail in ways that are impervious to quick fixes. Bureaucratic mission drift, virtue-signaling, the erosion of accountability, multiplying platforms and software and the endless expansion of compliance and regulatory burdens have loaded every system with numerous points of failure and procedural friction that contributes little or nothing to the organization’s core mission. As resources are devoted to make-work procedural black holes, the mission decays and collapses at the first crisis.

  Stop me if you’ve heard this before: contacting essential services (tax payments, etc.) rarely generates a timely reply, much less a solution; a new bridge or subway line takes decades to build and is billions over budget; software projects intended to streamline complex regulatory processes (building permits, etc.) never work right and end up slowing the whole system down, fraud is rampant, software security is laughably poor….the list is almost endless.

  5. Once the system has been stripped of resources, experienced staff, back-up equipment and supplies and loaded with unproductive friction, even a small crisis will bring down the entire system. In the graphic below, all of these resources are the buffer that enables systems to respond to the pressing demands of crises. Once these are gone, the only possible result is systemic collapse.

  6. We’ve collectively lost the ability and willingness to deal with crises for which there is no happy-story ending. We only want to hear the optimistic story, the glimmers of hope, the miracle cures, the painless tech fix, etc., and if we get a dose of reality instead, we’re quick to dismiss the bearer of inconvenient news as an alarmist, a doom-and-gloomer, etc.

  In other words, our economy and society have been optimized for failure. Drifting along in a daze of disconnected-from-reality complacency we are completely unprepared to deal with realities that don’t respond to magical thinking, optimism, hope and tech fantasies.

  *  *  *

  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
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 13:50

• "His Skin Was Burning": Melbourne Man Sets Himself On Fire Screaming About Vaccine Mandates
  “His Skin Was Burning”: Melbourne Man Sets Himself On Fire Screaming About Vaccine Mandates

  In what may be a repeat of events that sparked 2011’s Arab Spring when a Tunisian fruit vendor self-immolated, protesting soaring food prices and sparking a revolutionary wave across Northern African and Middle Eastern nations, a Melbourne man set himself and his car on fire in front of horrified diners on the first day of the new year while screaming about Covid-19 vaccine mandates in Australia’s Victoria state.

  

  The man emerged from a silver MG3 hatchback engulfed in flames near Church St in Richmond about 8pm on Saturday, where police officers and firefighters doused the man with water to extinguish the blaze with the help of about five witnesses according to the Daily Mail.

  

  The bystanders helped restrain the man before police officers pinned him to the ground. He was then taken into an ambulance and rushed to hospital. Police said he had suffered life-threatening injuries. One witness who helped restrain the man said his flesh was burning before the flames were put out with water.

  Victoria Police said it was called to the intersection after reports of a man self-harming. The man was taken to hospital with life-threatening injuries.

  Police cordoned off the area near the intersection of Church and Swan Street while customers at surrounding businesses were told to stay indoors. Bystanders said they initially saw black smoke coming from the vehicle, which was left with a charred driver’s side door.

  ⚠️ WARNING DISTRESSING FOOTAGE: Witnesses have told of a man setting himself on fire in Melbourne while crying out about Victoria’s vaccine mandates.

  Full story: https://t.co/h4jzuYH9N5 pic.twitter.com/dJnPjoJQC2

  — Avi Yemini (@OzraeliAvi) January 1, 2022

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

  Lydia O’Connor was having dinner at a nearby restaurant when she heard the man screaming.

  “His skin was burning. He was on fire. His skin is stuck to [my] shirt,” she told The Herald Sun. “He was off his face screaming about the mandates.”

  “He poured gas on himself and on his car. It was on purpose,’ O’Connor told the publication. He was screaming about mandates. He was screaming “no vax ID” and throwing books.”

  Forensic police were then seen examining the area.  

  The incident caused disruptions to trams which run along Route 70 and Route 78 while the investigation continues.

   

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 13:15

• 2022 New Year's Resolution: Stand-Up In Defense Of Dissent!
  2022 New Year’s Resolution: Stand-Up In Defense Of Dissent!

  Authored by Guy Shepherd via PlannedMan.com,

  Big Tech came to market with the promise to level hierarchies and inequalities in communications. Fifteen years later, it’s hard to recognize you guys by your pitch books. A common denominator is emerging: you bend the knee to powers that that contradicts your stated missions.

  • The de facto reality is that the First Amendment is dying on our watch.

  • By doing nothing, the majority is aiding and abetting the tyranny of a minority.

  • This is how Orwellianism comes to scale.

  • Big Tech, we could use your help.

  We need to stop this shit now. It’s time to stand up in defense of dissent!

  

  This keep-our-heads-down, shut-up, eat-me-last approach will not end well. The forces of intolerance are growing.

  It’s getting scary out there and we need to chillax now. Let’s make it a “We the People” New Year’s resolution to knock the illiberal shit off.

  On what day did the First Amendment effectually die? I know it’s still written down on paper. But it no longer guides and ennobles our public discourse and mores. The ACLU is unrecognizable.

  When the banjo player from Mumford and Sons, Winston Marshall, is forced to bend the knee to Twitter mobs because he favorably retweets a New York Times bestseller critical of Antifa, something deeply disturbing and dangerous is afoot. More proof that “antifascists” can act in a fascistic, or more accurately, Maoist manner. Marshall’s apology was forced. He did it to insulate his fellow band members from the mob. I invite you to read his open letter in Medium. After reflection and prayer, this soft-spoken and deeply reflective man separated from his band both for their sake and for his own. He could no longer abide by and bend his knee to the Lie.

  We need to do the same.

  The de facto reality is that the First Amendment is dying on our watch. By doing nothing, the majority is aiding and abetting the tyranny of a minority. Empowered by sins of omission for not calling out the sins of commission. This is how Orwellianism comes to scale.

  I think it’s an easy out to blame Twitter. Twitter is the means. It’s a tool. Twitter is like a gun. It’s a powerful, inanimate means but it lacks a soul, a free will, which comes with capacity to choose. The problem is not Twitter. The problem is us—humans. We are are the problem. (If you think that I am agreeing with you right now, you are most likely wrong. What your brain just did is a problem that the first amendment exists to mitigate.)

  Twitter and an AR-15 are ontologically equal and constitutionally protected. Twitter by the First Amendment, the AR-15 by the Second. These are facts, not opinions.

  How would Democrats react if gun manufacturers started selling guns and ammo by political preference?

  The woke might respond: Who cares? We are going to confiscate all guns! At the moment, Antifa is happy with sticks and stones (and breaking bones), but guns will always be with us. Guns are a constitutionally guaranteed means of protecting one’s interests and rights. And some folks still use them to hunt.

  Now let’s back to Twitter and its behavior as a company.

  Twitter—like Facebook and Google—came to market with the promise to level hierarchies and inequalities in communications. The Good News—The Gospel of Big Tech—was a shared promise to democratize speech. In the Us versus Them, Man versus the Machine world, Big Tech was on the side of “We the People”—a pluribus of Us. And like the goddess Justice, Big Tech purported to be blind to political, ethical, religious, and sexual persuasions. The Us of the world bought what you, Big Tech, were offering at scale.

  But along the way to creating a better—“Don’t Be Evil”—Promised Land, you all started favoring a certain “Them” over “Us.” Of course, you still use the language of Us, but now you’re clearly acting like a Them. Fifteen years later, it’s hard to recognize you by your pitch books.

  Sadly, you collectively have shown a tendency to bend the knee to government—contradicting the Us v. Them distinction that once justified your godlike status. Today, the old moralism smells creepy. A common denominator of your behavior is emerging: you bend the knee to power that contradicts your mission. In China, you do it for market access and profit. At home, you do it because you want to—and because you can.

  There are limitations that come with a Section 230 designation. Presently, you in Big Tech are operating in a “have your cake and eat it to” moment, but that will pass. You are either going be a media company like the New York Times or a free-speech, free-search, free-market utility. A business model divided against itself cannot stand. I’m betting that if forced to make a binary choice, you will go with getting your utility mojo back.

  Yes, Jack Dorsey and Co., you are the new straws that stir the drink. Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Gordon Gecko are all dead; insert your name. It’s worth remembering the role that choosing a political side played in the demise of your monopolistic predecessors. What politics giveth, politics can taketh away. I’m enjoying this Twitter war between Senator Warren and Elon Musk. While I like Musk’s moxie, the progressive arc of history favors Karen.

  Have your directors of strategy really considered how this is likely to work out? I’m writing this because I don’t think things are trending in your interest.

  Jack, the next few lines are directed at you.

  Let me break it down to basics. All human beings are assholes with assholes. All need to be sold toilet paper. Without equal access to TP, we can’t avoid becoming a shithole nation of shitty people.

  It’s understood that papers and parties are partial—they favor one particular asshole at the expense of another.

  But a utility business legally can’t and morally shouldn’t favor one asshole over another. I would think that you are morally opposed to, say, redlining according to race or sexual orientation. What’s the difference when it comes to the right of association? Once upon a time, liberals argued passionately and persuasively that any human being who had the blessing to be an American or a visitor to our shores could not be denied access to a bus seat, a drink from a water fountain, a meal at a lunch counter.

  Jack and Co.: whether you know it or not, your kingdoms are built on the Interstate Commerce Clause, which is predicated on the idea that a free market and free people see only the color green.

  It would be easier to chilaxx if you and your fellow unicorns made it a New Year’s resolution and reality to get back on the side of the original pluribus of Us. Serving us all is where it is at.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 12:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Missiles On The Doorstep And Impending Nuclear Winter
  Missiles On The Doorstep And Impending Nuclear Winter

  Authored by Brian Cloughley via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  Nobody in their right mind would advocate what is called ‘first use’ of nuclear weapons.

  

  ‘Nuclear winter’ is defined in Britannica as “the environmental devastation that certain scientists contend would probably result from the hundreds of nuclear explosions in a nuclear war.” One immediately direct effect of such a conflict would be to block out the sun’s rays, which would lead to “a massive death toll from starvation, exposure, and disease. A nuclear war could thus reduce the Earth’s human population to a fraction of its previous numbers.” There have been innumerable portrayals of what would happen in a nuclear-devastated world of which the most evocative are the film Threads, made in 1984, depicting the ghastly aftermath in the United Kingdom, and the U.S. ABC television movie The Day After, of the previous year, which was even more horrifying, even though there was a lot of censorship before it was permitted to be shown.

  It is only too apparent that a nuclear war would be catastrophic — and also that a nuclear exchange would be encouraged, indeed initiated, by the country that first fired or otherwise despatched one of these systems. No nuclear-armed country could accept nuclear devastation in its own lands without retaliating in force. The conclusion is that nobody in their right mind would advocate what is called ‘first use’ of nuclear weapons.

  So step forward U.S. legislator, Senator Roger Wicker, who was reported as declaring that if there were conflict between Russia and Ukraine then the U.S. would have to be involved to the extent that this “could mean American troops on the ground.” And taking a massive leap backwards for mankind the senator declared on Fox News on December 8 that in the event of engagement against Russia “we don’t rule out first use nuclear action.”

  The U.S. mainstream media, including The New York Times and the Washington Post did not publish the senator’s remarks, or make the slightest reference to them, which was unfortunate because his “no first use” statement is of enormous importance, especially because he used the word “we” in his public declaration of national policy. The senator is a member of the Armed Services Committee which according to its website has jurisdiction over “Aeronautical and space activities peculiar to or primarily associated with the development of weapons systems or military operations… Common Defence… Department of Defence, the Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy, and the Department of the Air Force, generally.” These are most important responsibilities, and it is therefore assumed that his proclamation has basis in policy to which he is privy.

  The only (fairly) prominent American political figure to criticise the senator was former member of Congress Tulsi Gabbard who declared that Wicker’s statement “exposes exactly how dumb, insane, and sadistic he and other like-minded warmongers are,” which, while undeniably apposite, received no wide cover. And while it is realised that President Biden has many problems with which to deal at the moment, it is reprehensible that he has not said a word in refutation of Wicker’s insane proclamation concerning national nuclear policy.

  It seems that Senator Wicker has not read what his President has said about the undesirability of nuclear war, as recorded in the “U.S.-Russia Presidential Statement on Strategic Stability” of June 16 which included the agreement that “Today, we reaffirm the principle that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. Consistent with these goals, the United States and Russia will embark together on an integrated bilateral Strategic Stability Dialogue in the near future that will be deliberate and robust. Through this Dialogue, we seek to lay the groundwork for future arms control and risk reduction measures.”

  Direct contradiction of the U.S. President by a U.S. senator concerning national policy on nuclear war is beyond disconcerting : it is alarming to the point that clarification is urgently required. The Congressional Research Service recorded that “In his press briefing following the summit, President Biden noted that this dialogue would allow diplomats “to work on a mechanism that can lead to control of new and dangerous and sophisticated weapons that are coming on the scene now that reduce the times of response, that raise the prospects of accidental war.” Presumably following Presidential guidance, the 2021 ‘Nuclear Posture Review’ commissioned by the Pentagon makes it clear that there will be examination of “how the United States can take steps to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in its national security strategy while ensuring the strategic deterrent remains safe, secure and effective and that the extended deterrence commitments to its allies remain strong and credible.”

  This might have been taken as a small step towards the beginning of another approach to arms reduction, had it not been that Colin H. Kahl, the undersecretary of defence for policy, fenced off the route when he stated that “We also see that the role that nuclear weapons play in Russia’s doctrine is quite elevated in the sense that, I think, Russia sees much higher utility for nuclear weapons than any other state.” Which is a strange pronouncement from a nation that, as noted on December 9, is “developing a totally new $100 billion missile, known as the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent.”

  Kahl did not equivocate about the Pentagon’s approach to U.S. nuclear policy when he explained that “especially important to the FY 2023 budget” will be “decisions the department makes about modernizing and replacing the aging systems of the nuclear triad, which includes ground-launched, submarine-launched and air-launched nuclear weapons. Modernization also involves new submarines, such as the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines; new intercontinental ballistic missiles as part of the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent program; and new bomber aircraft, such as the B-21 Raider.”

  In spite of President Biden and President Putin agreeing in June that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought” it is apparent that the Pentagon is at best paying lip-service to their joint declaration. And this prompted the observation by President Putin on December 23 that “The United States is standing with missiles on our doorstep. Is it an excessive requirement not to install shock systems at our house? How would the Americans react if missiles were placed at the border with Canada or Mexico?”

  We can imagine what Senator Wicker would advocate in such circumstances, but it is reassuring to know that there are some adult voices in the political games arena of the U.S. legislature, with Senator Ed Markey, for example, bringing a note of sanity by saying in a speech that “The United States has a moral responsibility to make the world safe from nuclear weapons. As Congress debates Defence Department spending, our budgets must reflect our values. It’s time to bolster climate funding, not our nuclear arsenal. President Biden should stick to his own instincts in reducing nuclear weapons risks, not follow the recklessness of the military industrial complex that was a cheerleader of the Cold War arms race and endless wars in the Middle East . . .”

  The first things that President Biden should do is remove U.S.-Nato nuclear weapons and their support infrastructure from the bases on Russia’s doorstep, while concurrently indicating publicly to Senator Wicker that such action is consistent with national defence policy. The Pentagon must be made to understand that its desired upgrading of the nuclear triad is an indicator of intent to expand the existing U.S. nuclear threat to Russia and China and that this is massively counter-productive. Remove the missiles and the threat of nuclear winter will be eliminated. That would be a good New Year present to mankind.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/01/2022 – 00:00

• A Visual Guide To Profile Picture NFTs
  A Visual Guide To Profile Picture NFTs

  How do you represent yourself on social media? For most people it’s a selfie, a photo with their friends, or a picture of their pet—but what about a digitally-created character?

  As Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu details below, profile picture NFTs are pieces of digital artwork that people use to express themselves online. Each item is a depiction of a character’s face, and has a unique mix of attributes that gives it a sense of collectability.

  Like other NFTs, they’re secured on a blockchain and can be bought and sold for cryptocurrency. And while there’s nothing to stop you from screenshotting an NFT and using it for your own profile, the market for these items continues to grow.

  To learn more, this infographic explains how three well-known profile picture NFT collections were created.

  

  CryptoPunks

  CryptoPunks are commonly regarded as one of the first examples of NFTs. The collection consists of 10,000 unique “punks” and was released in 2017 by Larva Labs.

  One interesting fact is that these NFTs were originally given out for free—today, they are worth thousands or millions of dollars each. According to OpenSea, one of the largest NFT marketplaces, CryptoPunk #3100 was sold for 4,200 Ethereum (roughly $7.6 million) in March 2021.

  A large component of #3100’s perceived value is its blue alien skin, which only eight other punks have. In other words, it’s incredibly rare. The following table shows the species distribution of the CryptoPunks collection.

  

  In addition to species, each punk features a unique mix of facial accessories or “attributes”. Examples include a big beard (found in only 146 punks), and a VR headset (found in 332 punks).

  Bored Ape Yacht Club

  Next is the Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC), another collection of 10,000 unique profile picture NFTs. Unlike CryptoPunks, BAYC NFTs show both the head and torso of a character (in this case, an ape).

  This opens up many combinations of clothing items, facial features, and accessories. Altogether, there are seven categories of attributes: Background color, Clothes, Earring, Eyes, Fur, Hat, and Mouth.

  The following table lists some examples of BAYC attributes, and their % rarity. To explore further, visit the BAYC gallery.

  

   

  BAYC NFTs also grant access to members-only benefits. This includes access to a collaborative graffiti board, as well as other NFTs from spin-off collections like the Bored Ape Kennel Club (BAKC). As its name suggests, the BAKC is a collection of dogs, rather than apes.

   

  Cool Cats NFT

  The last collection is Cool Cats NFT, which again amounts to 10,000 images. Cool Cats were minted at a cost of 0.06 Ethereum each, or roughly $200. The act of “minting” an NFT is similar to when metal coins are entered into circulation.

  Each Cool Cat NFT is a depiction of a cartoon cat with a varying number of facial features, hats, and shirts. Altogether, there are over 300,000 possible options that could be included.

  This collection also features nine “hidden” cats which boast one-off features. #500 is an upside down cat floating in a blue sky background, while #2288 is simply a skeleton.

  Building Your Identity in the Metaverse

  A criticism of today’s social media is that there’s little room to express yourself.

  Think back, for a moment, to the days of MySpace. Users could spend hours customizing their profile page, adding music, art, and whatever else they felt was an expression of themselves. As the platform’s name implied, it was a space that belonged to you.

  The metaverse offers something similar. To take part in a virtual universe, you need an avatar—a digital manifestation of yourself. Avatars will be highly customizable and far less constrained by the limitations of the real world.

  If you’re having trouble imagining this, check out VR Chat, a virtual reality game where players socialize as aliens, monsters, and other “interesting” beings.

  This may help to explain the recent craze around profile picture NFTs. When the metaverse arrives, these NFTs could become a user’s avatar. After all, who wouldn’t want to have blue alien skin?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 23:30

• China Pursues "Brain Control" Weaponry In Bid To Command Future Of Warfare
  China Pursues “Brain Control” Weaponry In Bid To Command Future Of Warfare

  Authored by Eva Fu via The Epoch Times,

  Launching assaults on the battlefield with a mere thought. Enhancing the human brain to create “super warriors.” Disrupting the minds of enemies to make them submit to the controller’s command.

  

  Once believed to only exist in sci-fi movies, the weaponization of the brain has been discussed by Chinese military officials for years. And Beijing is spending billions each year on neuroscience that could draw these scenarios ever closer to reality.

  “The study into brain science was born out of a vision for how the future warfare would evolve,” Li Peng, a medical researcher at a subsidiary of China’s state-run Academy of Military Medical Sciences (AMMS), wrote in an article in 2017.

  Such research, he added, has “an extremely strong military characteristic” and is crucial to securing a “strategic high ground” for every country.

  Li was not alone in stressing the urgency in militarizing brain science.

  In March, a Chinese military-run newspaper described cloud-powered artificial intelligence (AI) “integrating human and machine” as the key to winning wars. With the accelerating “intelligentization” of the military, it warned, China needs to quickly get a firm footing in this technology, and any delay “could lead to unimaginable consequences.”

  ‘Qualitative’ Advantage

  According to research papers and articles in military newspapers, Chinese military officials see four areas where innovations in brain science could be weaponized.

  “Brain emulation” refers to the development of high-intelligence robots that function like humans. “Brain control” is the integration of humans with machines into one, allowing soldiers to perform tasks ordinarily impossible to them. “Superbrain” involves the use of electromagnetic radiation, such as infrasonic waves or ultrasound, to stimulate human brains and activate the brain’s latent potential. The fourth, termed “controlling the brain,” is about applying advanced technology to interfere with—and manipulate—how people think.

  Two faculty members with the military-affiliated Army Medical University in a 2018 paper discussed their state-funded project researching a piece of biotechnology dubbed “psycho-virus.” Applied in the military, such psychological weapon could help develop “super warriors” who are “loyal, brave, and strategic;” in wars, the psycho-virus could “manipulate the consciousness of the enemies, crush their will, and interfere with their emotions to make them submit to the will of our side,” the authors said.

  Brain scientists may also aid the recovery of handicapped soldiers and systematically elevate the health protection of military personnel, according to a 2019 article on PLA Daily, the official newspaper for the Chinese military, known as the People’s Liberation Army.

  While the Chinese Communist Party has been dedicated for years to “getting ahead of the biotechnology arms race,” the evolution of frontier technologies has brought added urgency, according to Sam Kessler, geopolitical adviser at North Star Support Group, a multinational risk management company.

  The “improbable futuristic technology that had been dreamed up in the past has now become more realistic in real-time,” he wrote in a note to The Epoch Times. “This creates little room for error as a potential loss of dominance of such technology could potentially lead to the weakening of strategic barriers if left unchecked.”

  

  A University of Florida student uses a brain-controlled interface headset to fly a drone during a mind-controlled drone race in Gainesville, Fla., on April 16, 2016. (Jason Dearen/AP Photo)

  Concerned about Chinese activities in biotechnology, the United States in December blacklisted China’s AMMS—the country’s top medical research institute run by the Chinese military—and its 11 affiliated biotechnology research institutes, accusing them of developing “purported brain-control weaponry” to further the Chinese military.

  The Chinese regime did not comment on this aspect of the U.S. blacklisting.

  Weeks before the move, the Commerce Department’s Industry and Security Bureau solicited public comments about a proposed rule to ban the export of brain-computer interface (BCI) technology, an emerging field that seeks to enable humans to directly communicate with an external device with just their thoughts.

  Such technology would provide a “qualitative military or intelligence advantage” for U.S. adversaries, such as by “enhancing the capabilities of human soldiers, including collaboration for improved decision making, assisted-human operations, and advanced manned and unmanned military operations,” the Commerce Department said.

  ‘A Matter of China’s Future’

  The United States has been at the forefront in the field of brain technology, with the world’s largest number of research papers published on the subject.

  In April, Elon Musk’s neurotechnology startup Neuralink released a video showing a monkey playing computer games through a chip inserted in its brain. Synchron, a Silicon Valley developer of implantable neural interface technology, last week released seven tweets it said were sent wirelessly by an immobilized Australian patient who had received the company’s chip implant, known as Stentrode. The National Institutes of Health granted Synchron $10 million last July to help launch its first U.S. human trial.

  The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, known as DARPA, has also researched BCI for military applications, such as an “Avatar” project that aimed to create a semi-autonomous machine to act as the soldier’s surrogate.

  

  A young woman watches a man, wearing an EEG brain scanning apparatus on his head, play a pinball game solely through willing the paddles to react with his brain at the Berlin Brain Computer Interface research consortium stand at the CeBIT Technology Fair in Hannover, Germany, on March 2, 2010. (Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

  Beijing, closely tracking the developments in America, has demonstrated itself unwilling to stay behind. In January 2020, three months before Synchron began its first trial, eastern China’s Zhejiang University had completed testing of a brain implant on a 72-year-old paralyzed patient. Using his brainwaves, the patient could direct a robotic arm to perform handshakes, fetch drinks, and play a classic Chinese board game: Mahjong.

  Over the past six years, Beijing has come to see progress on brain-related research as “a matter of China’s future,” according to Chinese media reports.

  The country’s leading national scientific institution, the state-run Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), has poured around 60 billion yuan ($9.4 billion) annually into efforts to map out brain functions, its website shows. In September, China’s Ministry of Science and Technology opened up applications for research into the field, with an additional 3 billion yuan (about $471 million) allocated for 59 research streams.

  The role of brain science has been significant enough that Chinese leader Xi Jinping has named it as a priority field of emerging technology significant for the country’s national security, and for making China a central hub for world’s cutting-edge scientific innovations.

  “China is closer than in any time of history to the goal of rejuvenating the Chinese nation, and we need more than any time in history to build a world science and technology superpower,” he told CAS scholars in a 2018 speech.

  

  Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) soldiers line up during military training at Pamir Mountains in Kashgar, China, on Jan. 4, 2021. (STR/AFP via Getty Images)

  Military ‘High Ground’

  The Chinese regime is racing to close the gap with the United States in harnessing the power from this emerging technology.

  In terms of the volume of published papers on brain technology, China is second only to America, Zhou Jie, a senior engineer with state-run scientific research institute China Academy of Information and Communications Technology, said at a recent forum on BCI. That number grew at a pace of 41 percent over the period of 2016 to 2020, more than double the global average of 19 percent, according to a May report co-written by a Beijing-based AI robot manufacturer and a think tank advising Beijing on big data and AI.

  The stack of Chinese innovations on BCI has appeared to keep pace with the growing enthusiasm.

  AMMS, the Chinese military academy under U.S. sanctions, has been at the forefront of neuroscience research. Inventions from the AMMS and its affiliates since 2018 include various nerve signals collection devices, miniature skull implants, a remote monitoring system for restoring damaged nerves, and wearable augmented reality glasses designed for enhancing robot control, according to open depository of patent applications.

  In 2019, the Institute of Military Medicine under AMMS created a brain-controlled unmanned aerial vehicle. To move the vehicle forward, an operator puts on an electrode cap and imagines moving their right hand. Thinking about feet movement would instruct the machine to descend.

  The AMMS’ National Defence Science and Technology Innovation Research Institute in 2021 acquired a patent for using virtual reality for spacecraft docking. The device interprets the astronaut’s brain and limb activities and converts them into orders to adjust the aircraft’s position in real-time.

  

  Cho Yu NG of Hong Kong competes during the wheelchair race in Kloten, Zurich at the Cybathlon Championship, the first edition of an international competition organized by ETH Zurich for physically impaired athletes using bionic assistive technology, such as robotic prostheses, brain-computer interfaces and powered exoskeletons, on Oct. 8, 2016. (Michael Buholzer/AFP via Getty Images)

  While a sizable portion of innovations in BCI and other fields of brain technology has potential medical use, some may also be leveraged for military purposes.

  One Chinese university previously touted unmanned combat via thought-controlled robots as a “high ground” in AI that China “must race to control.”

  “Witness more miracles with Chinese characteristics in strengthening the army,” proclaimed the National University of Defense Technology, a military academy that supplies talent for China’s armed forces, as it showed off a list of brain-controlled devices produced by the university, including a wheelchair and a car that could travel roughly 9.3 miles per hour “on any road.”

  “Together, let’s change the world with our ‘minds,’” the school declared in a post on its website last November.

  Calls for Self Reliance

  The Commerce Department’s blocking rules may hinder or delay Beijing in its path of advancing biotech and brain-related technologies but are unlikely to slow it down, according to Grant Newsham, a senior fellow with the Center for Security Policy and a retired U.S. Marine Colonel.

  “[T]he Chinese will simply maneuver a bit, change some names, and keep going full-speed ahead on these efforts to weaponize biotech,” he told The Epoch Times.

  But the sanctions serve a useful purpose at home: “making it impossible for Americans (and others) who want to invest in and partner with the Chinese organizations to claim they ‘didn’t know’ what the Chinese were doing—or to argue that ‘it isn’t prohibited,’” he added.

  Meanwhile, Chinese researchers have been focused on achieving self-sufficiency in this area.

  In 2019, a research team at Tianjin University in northern China unveiled a “Brain Talker” chip, which linked to the brain through an electrode cap, that could decode a user’s mind intent and translate it into computer commands in under two seconds.

  

  The 21st century is called the century of information technology. (The Epoch Times illustration)

  Fudan University, an elite public institution in Shanghai, in January presented a remote BCI chip that can be recharged wirelessly from outside the body, avoiding potential damage to the brain. The chip consumes only a tenth of the power of its Western counterparts and costs half as much, Chinese state media reported at the time.

  The term “self-developed” was prominently featured in both team’s announcements and media reports.

  Tao Hu, associate director at CAS’ Shanghai Institute of Microsystem and Information Technology, said China has the potential to lead the world in the field of BCI.

  “China is not lagging behind foreign countries in terms of the design aspects for core BCI gear,” he wrote in a June article published on Chinese state media. He called on the country to step up resource allocation to accelerate BCI development, given the risk that the United States might block BCI exports to China.

  Ethical Risks

  China has a unique advantage to help it gain a leg up in the race: its vast bank of non-human primates, according to Poo Mu-ming, a key figure spearheading China’s brain research at CAS.

  China has been the world’s top supplier for test monkeys but stopped shipping them once the pandemic began. Poo, who in 2008 switched from mice to monkeys as the test animal at his neuroscience institute at CAS, had long wanted to utilize the country’s test animal resources to boost China’s brain research standing, according to state media reports.

  His team in 2017 cloned the world’s first pair of monkeys using the same method that produced Dolly the Sheep—a crucial step forward for China’s brain-related research. With the same cloning technology, Chinese scientists could mass produce, and experiment on, identical monkeys, eliminating interferences to experiments resulting from individual differences in test animals, Poo told Science Times, a newspaper under CAS last October.

  

  Five cloned macaques at a research institution in Shanghai are shown in a picture taken on Nov. 27, 2018 and released on January 24, 2019 by the Chinese Academy of Sciences Institute of Neuroscience. Chinese scientists said the five monkeys were cloned from a single animal that was genetically engineered to have a sleep disorder, saying it could aid research into human psychological problems. (STR/AFP via Getty Images)

  The AMMS has also proposed studies into building a database for an “aggressive consciousness control weapon” that targets specific spiritual or ethnic groups.

  Such a project was first mentioned as early as 2012 by the Institute of Radiation Medicine under AMMS. The database aimed to establish a collection of images and videos that could trigger aggressive behavior. Its proposed targets include “spiritual leaders, organizations and extreme religious groups who share the common belief, and ethnic groups who share similar traits in locations and lifestyle habits.”

  China’s more lenient ethical bar compared to the West has provided it with more leeway to gain a foothold with their BCI-related experiments that would “greatly empower them and streamline their innovations,” according to Kessler.

  ​​In China, such experiments have “less red tape preventing them from using questionable testing practices,” he told The Epoch Times. “That makes all the difference in a world where one’s edge in technology and intelligence can depend greatly on how they manage their ability to stay ahead of the curve.”

  Asked by a journal he oversaw if BCI technologies may one day “enslave” humans, Poo appeared undisturbed.

  “If we have the confidence that our society will be able to develop mechanisms to control the use of technologies for our benefits, then we need not worry about AI,” he told the National Science Review, a peer-reviewed journal under the auspices of CAS, in 2017.

  “Since the 1950s, many people have been worrying about the build-up of nuclear bombs and thought that we will soon be destroyed by a nuclear holocaust. But we still live quite well now, aren’t we?” he added.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 23:00

• Arabica Coffee Set For Largest Annual Increase Since 1994
  Arabica Coffee Set For Largest Annual Increase Since 1994

  Arabica coffee futures are about to register their largest annual gain in a quarter-century due to a global deficit. 

  Arabica coffee futures jumped 78% to about $2.30 per pound in New York this year, putting it on track for the best year since 1994. 

  

  “Severe weather in Brazil, the world’s largest arabica supplier, decimated coffee plantations, contributing to a global shortage just as demand for the high-end variety of beans expanded. That coincided with supply chain bottlenecks including container shortages and longer shipping times,” Bloomberg explained. 

  We first documented the tightening of global supplies on Mar. 25 in a commodity note titled “”Nightmare” Of Factors Pushing World Into Coffee Deficit.” Since then, the situation has become even more severe.  

  So what does this mean for the wallets of US consumers?

  According to a recent Barclays note, US importers like Starbucks are hedged out for more than a year to deal with price fluctuations. Though JM. Smucker, which owns the Folgers and Dunkin’ coffee brands, recently warned that supply chain disruptions are rising costs that will impact its business.

  It’s only a matter of time before coffee inflation strikes consumers in 2022. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 22:30

• 2021 Year In Review: Madness, Mayhem, & Tyranny
  2021 Year In Review: Madness, Mayhem, & Tyranny

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

  “Tyranny does not flourish because perpetuators are helpless and ignorant of their actions. It flourishes because they actively identify with those who promote vicious acts as virtuous.”

  – An academic study into pathocracy

  Disgruntled mobs. Martial law. A populace under house arrest. A techno-corporate state wielding its power to immobilize huge swaths of the country. A Constitution in tatters.

  

  Between the riots, lockdowns, political theater, and COVID-19 mandates, 2021 was one for the history books.

  In our ongoing pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, here were some of the stumbling blocks that kept us fettered:

  Riots, martial law and the Deep State’s coup. A simmering pot of political tensions boiled over on January 6, 2021, when protesters stormed the Capitol because the jailer of their choice didn’t get chosen to knock heads for another four years. It took no time at all for the nation’s capital to be placed under a military lockdown, online speech forums restricted, and individuals with subversive or controversial viewpoints ferreted out, investigated, shamed and/or shunned. The subsequent military occupation of the nation’s capital by 25,000 troops as part of the so-called “peaceful” transfer of power from one administration to the next was little more than martial law disguised as national security. The January 6 attempt to storm the Capitol by so-called insurrectionists created the perfect crisis for the Deep State—a.k.a. the Police State a.k.a. the Military Industrial Complex a.k.a. the Techno-Corporate State a.k.a. the Surveillance State—to swoop in and take control.

  The imperial president. All of the imperial powers amassed by Donald Trump, Barack Obama and George W. Bush—to kill American citizens without due process, to detain suspects indefinitely, to strip Americans of their citizenship rights, to carry out mass surveillance on Americans without probable cause, to suspend laws during wartime, to disregard laws with which he might disagree, to conduct secret wars and convene secret courts, to sanction torture, to sidestep the legislatures and courts with executive orders and signing statements, to direct the military to operate beyond the reach of the law, to act as a dictator and a tyrant, above the law and beyond any real accountability—were inherited by Joe Biden, the nation’s 46th president.

  The Surveillance State. On any given day, the average American going about his daily business was monitored, surveilled, spied on and tracked in more than 20 different ways, by both government and corporate eyes and ears. In such a surveillance ecosystem, we’re all suspects and databits to be tracked, catalogued and targeted. Consider that it took days, if not hours or minutes, for the FBI to begin the process of identifying, tracking and rounding up those suspected of being part of the Capitol riots. Imagine how quickly government agents could target and round up any segment of society they wanted to based on the digital trails and digital footprints we leave behind.

  Digital tyranny. In response to the events of Jan. 6, the tech giants meted out their own version of social justice by way of digital tyranny and corporate censorship. Suddenly, individuals, including those who had no ties to the Capitol riots, began to experience lock outs, suspensions and even deletions of their social media accounts. It signaled a turning point in the battle for control over digital speech, one that leaves “we the people” on the losing end of the bargain.

  A new war on terror. “Domestic terrorism,” used interchangeably with “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist,” to describe anyone who might fall somewhere on a very broad spectrum of viewpoints that could be considered “dangerous,” became the new poster child for expanding the government’s powers at the expense of civil liberties. As part of his inaugural address, President Biden pledged to wage war on so-called political extremism, ushering in what investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald described as “a wave of new domestic police powers and rhetoric in the name of fighting ‘terrorism’ that are carbon copies of many of the worst excesses of the first War on Terror that began nearly twenty years ago.” The ramifications are so far-reaching as to render almost every American an extremist in word, deed, thought or by association.

  Government violence. The death penalty may have been abolished in Virginia in 2021, but government-sanctioned murder and mayhem continued unabated, with the U.S. government acting as judge, jury and executioner over a populace that had already been pre-judged and found guilty, stripped of their rights, and left to suffer at the hands of government agents trained to respond with the utmost degree of violence. Police particularly posed a risk to anyone undergoing a mental health crisis or with special needs whose disabilities may not be immediately apparent.

  Culture wars. Political correctness gave way to a more insidious form of group think and mob rule which, coupled with government and corporate censors and a cancel culture determined not to offend “certain” viewpoints, was all too willing to eradicate views that do not conform. Critical race theory also moved to the forefront of the culture wars.

  Home invasions. Government agents routinely violated the Fourth Amendment at will under the pretext of public health and safety. This doesn’t even begin to touch on the many ways the government and its corporate partners-in-crime used surveillance technology to invade homes: with wiretaps, thermal imaging, surveillance cameras, and other monitoring devices. However, in a rare move, the Supreme Court put its foot down in two cases—Caniglia v. Strom and Lange v. California—to prevent police from carrying out warrantless home invasions in order to seize lawfully-owned guns under the pretext of their so-called “community caretaking” duties and from entering homes without warrants under the guise of being in “hot pursuit” of someone they suspect may have committed a crime.

  Bodily integrity. Caught in the crosshairs of a showdown between the rights of the individual and the so-called “emergency” state, concerns about COVID-19 mandates and bodily integrity remained part of a much larger debate over the ongoing power struggle between the citizenry and the government over our property “interest” in our bodies. This debate over bodily integrity covered broad territory, ranging from abortion and forced vaccinations to biometric surveillance and basic healthcare. Forced vaccinations, forced cavity searches, forced colonoscopies, forced blood draws, forced breath-alcohol tests, forced DNA extractions, forced eye scans, forced inclusion in biometric databases: these were just a few ways in which Americans continued to be reminded that we have no control over what happens to our bodies during an encounter with government officials.

  COVID-19. What started out as an apparent effort to prevent a novel coronavirus from sickening the nation (and the world) became yet another means by which world governments (including our own) expanded their powers, abused their authority, and further oppressed their constituents. Now that the government has gotten a taste for flexing its police state powers by way of a bevy of lockdowns, mandates, restrictions, contact tracing programs, heightened surveillance, censorship, overcriminalization, etc., it remains to be seen how the rights of the individual will hold up in the face of long-term COVID-19 authoritarianism.

  Financial tyranny. The national debt (the amount the federal government has borrowed over the years and must pay back) exceeded $29 trillion and is growing. That translates to almost $230,000 per taxpayer. The amount this country owes is now greater than its gross domestic product (all the products and services produced in one year by labor and property supplied by the citizens). That debt is also growing exponentially: it is expected to be twice the size of the U.S. economy by 2051. Meanwhile, the government continued to spend taxpayer money it didn’t have on programs it couldn’t afford; businesses shuttered for lack of customers, resources and employees; and consumers continued to encounter global supply chain shortages (and skyrocketing prices) on everything from computer chips and cars to construction materials.

  Global Deep State. Owing in large part to the U.S. government’s deep-seated and, in many cases, top-secret alliances with foreign nations and global corporations, it became increasingly obvious that we had entered into a new world order—a global world order—made up of international government agencies and corporations. We’ve been inching closer to this global world order for the past several decades, but COVID-19, which saw governmental and corporate interests become even more closely intertwined, shifted this transformation into high gear. Fascism became a global menace.

  20 years of crises. Every crisis—manufactured or otherwise—since the nation’s early beginnings has become a make-work opportunity for the government to expand its reach and its power at taxpayer expense while limiting our freedoms at every turn: The Great Depression. The World Wars. The 9/11 terror attacks. The COVID-19 pandemic. Indeed, the government’s (mis)management of various states of emergency in the past 20 years from 9/11 to COVID-19 has spawned a massive security-industrial complex the likes of which have never been seen before.

  The state of our nation. There may have been a new guy in charge this year, but for the most part, nothing changed. The nation remained politically polarized, controlled by forces beyond the purview of the average American, and rapidly moving the nation away from its freedom foundation. Over the past year, due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic, Americans found themselves repeatedly subjected to egregious civil liberties violations, invasive surveillance, martial law, lockdowns, political correctness, erosions of free speech, strip searches, police shootings of unarmed citizens, government spying, the criminalization of lawful activities, warmongering, etc.

  In other words, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the more things changed, the more they stayed the same.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 22:00

• China Punishes People Trying To Escape Brutal Lockdown In Xi'an
  China Punishes People Trying To Escape Brutal Lockdown In Xi’an

  The city of Xi’an, the provincial capital with a larger population than NYC, has been locked down, Wuhan-style, for more than a week now, and it’s residents are starting to get restless thanks to a shortage of available foodstuffs. But any citizens who hope to escape what’s shaping up to be a brutal lockdown will find the authorities to be less than understanding.

  

  According to Bloomberg, Beijing is punishing people who are trying to evade the latest COVID lockdown in Xi’an as a top official urged “forceful moves” be taken to curb the outbreak.

  Vice Premier Sun Chunlan said local authorities need to adopt more “targeted and forceful” measures and improve quarantine controls, according to a report in the official Xinhua News Agency. China reported 166 local confirmed cases for that day, 161 of them in the city.

  

  The situation in Xi’an is “severe and complex,” Sun supposedly said during a visit. Sun, the only woman on the ruling Communist Party’s 25-member Politburo, also called on the government to step up tracing efforts (although the city has undergone at least 4 rounds of mass testing over the past week).

  Local police have been deputized to track down anyone attempting to duck the tight controls in Xi’an. One man who tried to wade across the Wei River to get out of town was apprehended and given a warning, police said, while another who pedaled 80 kilometers (about 50 miles) on a shared bicycle to his hometown was fined and sent to quarantine.

  A man who hiked 100 kilometers from the airport to a nearby county was also sent to quarantine by police before being given an unspecified punishment.

  Roads in the city have been closed to traffic as the city faces a Wuhan-style lockdown. Even factories in the city have ceased operating: Micron Technology and Samsung Electronics both said that production at factories in the city has been affected by the latest lockdown. Micron said it would be able to meet most of its customer demands for product despite the lockdown, which began on Dec. 23.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 21:30

• Male & Female Athletic Performance: Worlds Apart
  Male & Female Athletic Performance: Worlds Apart

  Authored by Jon Pike, Emma Hilton, and Leslie A. Howe via Quillette.com,

  In line with the biology of sexual reproduction and evolutionary pressure on reproductive fitness, males and females are physically different. Physical divergence begins with primary sex development at around seven weeks in utero when, triggered by genetic information inherited at fertilization, bipotential gonads differentiate as either testes in males or ovaries in females. The differentiation and development of gonad type generates a sex-specific hormonal profile that drives ongoing development associated with sex class. Testes contain cells that produce the hormone testosterone, and it is testosterone and its derivatives that mediate the development of male internal and external genitalia, the establishment of growth parameters during high-testosterone “minipuberty” in the neonatal period, and the development of secondary sex characteristics at puberty.

  

  Gold medalists Natalia Kaczmarek, Karol Zalewski, Justyna Swiety-Ersetic and Kajetan Duszynski of Team Poland pose on the podium during the medal ceremony for the 4 x 400m Relay Mixed Final on day nine of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games (Photo by Ryan Pierse/Getty Images)

  In females, the absence of testosterone production from the developing ovaries permits female internal and external genital development, and the activation of estrogen pathways promotes the development of secondary sex characteristics at puberty.

  The secondary sex characteristics acquired during puberty in preparation for reproduction lead to measurably different body morphs between males and females (“sexual dimorphism”) across many physical parameters. Broadly, when compared with females, males are taller and have longer bones with narrower hips and wider shoulders; have lower body fat and higher muscle mass differentially distributed across sites, with more resistant connective tissue; have larger hearts and lungs, and higher levels of haemoglobin, the protein that carries oxygen within the blood.

  

  Male and female athletic performance

  The different physical attributes of males and females have functional consequences for sports-relevant outputs. For example, superior muscle mass, particularly in the upper body, leads to greater male strength when compared with female capacity. Greater muscular strength coupled with longer skeletal levers enable males to apply superior force in activities like jumping, throwing, and punching. Males have greater cardiovascular capacity, with higher capacity oxygenation and transport systems.

  On average, males can move faster, jump further, throw longer, and lift heavier objects than females, and this creates large performance gaps between males and females in almost all sports. Consequently, when comparing like-for-like athletes (such as male and female elite athletes, or male and female school-level athletes), male records and performances are better than those of females. The smallest performance gaps are evident in sports that require simple manoeuvres with weighted lower-body input, such as running, where females have higher relative (but not absolute) muscle mass. The involvement of upper body muscle mass, and/or complex sports that combine many different functional outputs, yields performance gaps that extend to 30 to 65 percent in weightlifting disciplines and 120 percent in the force applied in a rugby scrum.

  An analysis of performance in weightlifting enables comparison between weight-matched (and thus, in many instances, approximately height-matched) males and females. Comparing 2010–2021 world-record lifts by body weight across males and females in weight-restricted categories demonstrates that males are around 30 percent stronger than females of the same size. In a specific example, the current 55kg male record holder, who is 1.52m tall, lifts 29.5 percent more than the current 55kg female record holder, also 1.52m tall. This gap at equivalent body weight and height is, in part, explained by differential body composition where, compared with female total mass, a larger proportion of male total mass is muscle.

  When performance gaps are mapped to competitor numbers within a given discipline as a percentage, the impact is obvious and large. For example, the male-to-female gap in track sprinting is 12 percent. This translates into approximately 10,000 males having a personal best 100m sprint time faster than the current female Olympic champion, Elaine Thompson-Herah.

  Thompson’s 2016 gold medal performance was, within the year, slower than not just elite senior male sprinters, but also slower than schoolboys, Master’s category males (i.e., age 35 and older), Paralympic males, and males whose primary sport is not track sprinting.

  

  Testosterone, puberty, and athletic advantage

  There are athletic differences, probably underpinned by genetic differences and exposure to testosterone during minipuberty that are evident between male and female children at school age. However, school sports tend to promote team play, skill acquisition, and social development, and are therefore usually mixed sex (although promising children may be streamed to dedicated extracurricular sports that are divided by sex).

  Notwithstanding these childhood differences, the majority of male athletic advantage appears to be acquired at puberty, when males experience a surge of testes-derived testosterone that results, in adulthood, in circulating testosterone ranging from 8.8–30.9 nanomoles per litre (nmol/l), while female testosterone remains low, ranging from 0.4–2.0 nmol/l. Thus, from puberty into adulthood, testosterone levels between males and females form a non-overlapping, bimodal distribution.

  Over several years of male puberty, prolonged exposure to high testosterone is responsible for the development of male secondary sex characteristics such as height and strength, and thus is responsible for driving the divergence of athletic capacity between males and females. This is evident in comparisons of records and performances between elite female athletes and junior male athletes, where schoolboy records in track and field overtake elite female records when those elite schoolboys are around 14 or 15 years old. As Emma Hilton and Tommy R. Lundberg noted in a 2021 Sports Medicine article, ‘Transgender Women in the Female Category of Sport: Perspectives on Testosterone Suppression and Performance’:

  Testosterone-driven puberty, as the driving force of development of male secondary sex characteristics, underpins sporting advantages that are so large no female could reasonably hope to succeed without sex segregation in most sporting competitions. To ensure, in light of these analyses, that female athletes can be included in sporting competitions in a fair and safe manner, most sports have a female category the purpose of which is the protection of both fairness and, in some sports, safety/welfare of athletes who do not benefit from the physiological changes induced by male levels of testosterone from puberty onwards.

  Given the overwhelming data, we reject arguments that explain male advantage in sport as a by-product of social conditioning, or that cast it as a social construction more generally. That adult human males have a physiological advantage over adult human females in athletic performance is a matter of settled science. But what follows for trans-inclusion in women’s sport?

  The effect of testosterone suppression in transwomen

  The International Olympic Committee (IOC) regulations for transwomen in female sport, from 2015 to 2021, required transwomen to demonstrate total serum testosterone levels below 10 nmol/l for at least 12 months prior to competition in the female category and during the period of competition in the female category.

  As the IOC stated that its “overriding sporting objective is and remains the guarantee of fair competition,” it might be inferred that the IOC and the sports federations that subsequently adopted these criteria understand these regulations to nullify the physical advantages of transwomen, who were all born male and have experienced male puberty. But this view, as the IOC now accepts, is mistaken.

  There have been two high-quality, high-impact academic reviews, both in leading sports journals, of muscle and skeletal physiology in transwomen who have, post-puberty, suppressed testosterone as part of their transition. The reviews cover longitudinal studies; that is, they contain pre-transition metrics such as thigh muscle area and grip strength, and matched data from at least 12 months, occasionally longer, into transition. All transwomen studied had been successfully suppressing testosterone to less than 10 nmol/l for at least one year, and would therefore qualify for inclusion in female sports categories under the regulations specified by the IOC and most sports federations. Collectively, the studies captured by these reviews cover over 800 transwomen in 10 original studies, with data acquired as a routine aspect of ongoing general health assessments within clinical care teams.

  To summarize: In transwomen successfully suppressing testosterone for 12 months, skeletal metrics—height, limb/digit length, and shoulder/pelvic width—do not change, and the extent of muscle/strength loss is approximately -5 percent after 12 months, a modest change that is insufficient to bridge the baseline muscular differences between males and females.

  Regarding musculoskeletal parameters, Hilton and Lundberg concluded:

  “The biological advantage, most notably in terms of muscle mass and strength, conferred by male puberty and thus enjoyed by most transgender women is only minimally reduced when testosterone is suppressed as per current sporting guidelines for transgender athletes.”

  This conclusion was subsequently confirmed by Joanna Harper and her fellow researchers, who added: “Hormone therapy decreases strength, lean body mass and muscle area, yet values remain above [those] observed in cisgender women, even after 36 months.”

  Hilton and Lundberg compared baseline measurements in females and transwomen who were matched for the purposes of their study (where the data were available), and calculated the extent of the advantage of retained muscle/strength in the transwomen they studied.

  

  Thus, the most recent analyses generate a consensus that testosterone suppression in transwomen who meet the central IOC criteria adopted by most sporting federations induces only small amounts of muscle/strength loss, and does not remove the male athletic advantage acquired under high-testosterone conditions at puberty. Male musculoskeletal advantage is retained, and this raises obvious concerns about fairness and safety within female categories when transwomen are included.

  In the face of this evidence, the IOC has publicly made it clear that the guidance it offered in 2015 is “not fit for purpose.” Rather than tightening the policy, though, the IOC has passed the task on to international federations and governing bodies.

  Regulation of athletes with DSDs

  While fewer than 0.02 percent of individuals may appear sexually ambiguous, these rare exceptions to the general rule do not undermine or call into question the reality of the discrete nature of sex for the vast majority.

  Athletes with differences of sexual development (DSD) do not usually present with any ambiguity of sex. However, in rare cases, some athletes may have specific presentations of a DSD that compromises fairness. For example, a DSD called 5-alpha reductase deficiency causes failure of virilization of external genitalia in genetic and gonadal males, such that they may appear ambiguous or even female-typical at birth. These athletes experience male-typical testosterone levels and androgenize in a male-typical pattern at puberty. To regulate athletes with 46XY DSDs, such as 5-alpha reductase deficiency, sports federations such as World Athletics have clear guidelines centred on the role of testosterone and its androgenizing effects on the body, particularly at puberty.

  While many analyses create parallels between the regulation of transwomen and athletes with DSDs, the two groups have distinct biological features, and there is extensive variation among the latter group. Fair inclusion of athletes with DSDs must be dealt with sensitively and with nuance, and not be conflated with the regulation of the inclusion of transwomen, who are typical males at birth.

  *  *  *

  This article has been adapted from the recently published Macdonald-Laurier Institute report, Fair Game: Biology, Fairness, and Transgender Athletes in Women’s Sport.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 21:00

• FDA Maintains PCR Tests Are "Gold Standard" Despite CDC Dropping Over Positive Results 'Up To 12 Weeks'
  FDA Maintains PCR Tests Are “Gold Standard” Despite CDC Dropping Over Positive Results ‘Up To 12 Weeks’

  On Wednesday, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky defended the agency’s decision to eliminate PCR testing at the end of a Covid infection as part of its recommended guidelines, because the tests can ‘stay positive for up to 12 weeks.’

  In other words, as Yossi Gestetner points out, “This means that for the past 21 months, people sat home for extra days and weeks because their test came back with an irrelevant positive.”

  This means that for the past 21 months, people sat home for extra days and weeks because their test came back with an irrelevant positive. We didn’t know this 6, 12, 18 months ago? Really?

  — Yossi Gestetner (@YossiGestetner) December 29, 2021

  The FDA, however, which called the tests the “gold standard” in a July PolitiFact “healthcheck” – effectively rebutted Walensky’s comments, after spokesman Jim McKinney told Just The News that the agency stands by its assessment of PCR tests.

  According to McKinney, the “high sensitivity and specificity” is exactly why the tests remain the “gold standard.”

  The CDC’s acknowledgment is not new, McKinney said, pointing to the agency’s clarification of updated isolation guidance in August 2020, two weeks before the Times report on PCR tests.

  While it said “people can continue to test positive for up to 3 months after diagnosis and not be infectious to others,” the CDC said that “does not imply a person is immune to reinfection” within three months. (A review of global databases last month found reinfections of the naturally immune were “rare” and “generally mild.”)

  McKinney also noted the FDA told the Times that “commercial manufacturers and laboratories set their own” CT levels. -JTN

  So the FDA knew all along that people have been missing work and avoiding life because they’re testing positive long after they’re infectious?

  “Think of all the lives ruined, jobs lost, education squandered b/c of false positives,” tweeted Justin Heart of Rational Ground. “We’ve been saying since summer 2020 that the PCR test can be positive at 5 days or 75 days. And ONLY JUST NOW is it being used to adjust policy.”

  I can’t even express how angry this makes me. Think of all the lives ruined, jobs lost, education squandered b/c of false positives. We’ve been saying since summer 2020 that the PCR test can be positive at 5 days or 75 days. And ONLY JUST NOW is it being used to adjust policy. https://t.co/4Q6rHFDB4S

  — Justin Hart (@justin_hart) December 29, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 20:30

• Hate-Crime Hoaxes Of 2021
  Hate-Crime Hoaxes Of 2021

  Authored by Matt Lamb via TheCollegeFix.com,

  The year was filled with hate crime hoaxes, overreactions and evidence-free accusations

  

  Today, The College Fix will reveal to you the secret to exposing hoaxes: request the police report.

  This year, The Fix has identified 11 confirmed hoaxes, six likely hoaxes and six situations we might call “overreactions” that occurred at a high school, college or involved a professor. Oftentimes, simply requesting the police report revealed the truth.

  All examples but two relate to sexuality, race or religion. One example is about a fraternity falsely accused of requiring pledges to rape someone and another is about a professor who said she was sent a dog muzzle because of her promotion of COVID-19 vaccines.

  Some are better considered as bias incidents — allegedly offensive comments or drawings that  are likely legally protected under the First Amendment.

  CONFIRMED: Black student eggs her own door

  Zoriana Martinez (pictured) is a black student who, almost definitely, egged her own door, claimed people were targeting her dog and said someone vandalized her LGBT pride flag. The Wayne State University student also accused her school of “forcibly remov[ing]” her from the dorms. She also said a residence hall employee told students they could discriminate against each other as long as it happened off of campus.

  CONFIRMED: Vaccine expert’s credit card bought dog muzzle she said someone sent her as a threat

  Vanderbilt University Professor Michelle Fiscus found out that sometimes people are muzzled because of the muzzles they place there themselves.

  Fiscus claimed that someone sent her a dog muzzle, ostensibly due to her sending out a memo encouraging COVID vaccination for high schoolers, in her role as a public health official in Tennessee.

  But Fiscus paid for this not only in the threat she received, but literally out of her pocket, since someone used her credit card to buy the muzzle.

  CONFIRMED: Muslim Maryland student won’t talk to police about hijab assault that lacks video evidence

  A Muslim student at the University of Maryland Baltimore County got quiet all of a sudden when the police were asking for more information about an alleged November 16 assault against her.

  Probably because she lied about the assault happening and the university determined that the existence of a bias incident was “inconclusive.” There’s also no witnesses for the attack and a review of the video cameras in the student center yielded no footage of the incident.

  Roughly 110% of these sorts of incidents turn out to be hoaxes https://t.co/mswrWvgLGP

  — Robby Soave (@robbysoave) December 21, 2021

  CONFIRMED: No evidence for LGBT hate crime attack that happened in busiest part of the campus

  Just like the Muslim student attack above, an unknown man “grabbed” a female University of Maine student and “called her a dyke for wearing a pride shirt.”

  “The security cameras in the area were reviewed, but nothing was observed,” a spokesperson told The Fix at the time.

  She’s not the only liar, though.

  Other confirmed hoaxes include: A Muslim high school student faked assault, a black former Emory employee arrested for writing the ‘N-word,’ a black high schooler created an Instagram page that sent racist messages, students falsely accused a fraternity of requiring ‘rape initiation’, a black student set her dorm room on fire but claimed she was victim of hate crime, a black student created fake racist invite for rival fraternity and a black student admitted to writing racist graffiti.

  Likely hoaxes: Everyone is getting real quiet when the media starts asking questions

  Hoax likely: Police report for alleged hate crime against lesbian school board member finally released after intervention from state’s Attorney General office

  A lesbian school board member said that someone in the very liberal city of Evanston, Illinois left a Christmas card in her car that said “you faggot” in December 2020. Despite a security camera on a nearby home capturing the incident, no one was arrested or charged for the incident.

  The police and the school district refused to provide information and even tried to stop The Fix from obtaining the relevant documents. The police turned over the police reports only after The Fix filed an appeal to the state’s Attorney General office and it ordered the documents to be released.

  Hoax likely: No photos of allegedly racist whiteboard drawing at Iowa State

  A student reported that he heard from someone else that someone drew a “KKK rally crucifying a black man and that being symbolic of like a colored-in Among Us character to be completely black with the words #whitesupremacy written on the board.” There were no photos and the drawing was erased before any university employees reached the scene of the inappropriate but not illegal or punishable drawing.

  Some other examples include:

  A College Republican group appears to have been framed for anti-Semitic flyer, the University of San Francisco won’t disclose race of student expelled for hanging noose, Princeton remains silent on noose investigation, and a lack of evidence halts Johns Hopkins’ noose investigation.

  Finally, sometimes people overreact:

  Sometimes nooses are real but they are just part of a swing set or a construction site crane.

  Sometimes nooses aren’t even definitively nooses.

  Other times, alleged white supremacists are politically ambivalent, mentally ill criminals.

  They could also be stupid high schoolers putting up fake Klan flyers or bored people in the bathroom who feel the need to carve swastikas into walls.

  Sometimes hate hoaxes have to be created to meet the demand.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 20:00

• China Launches Mineral Hunting Satellite To Maintain Rare Earth Monopoly
  China Launches Mineral Hunting Satellite To Maintain Rare Earth Monopoly

  China is believed to control 90% of global supplies of rare earth metals. In maintaining its monopoly on rare earth metals for the production of microchips, electronics, and electric motors, Beijing launched a mineral hunting satellite to explore the planet for new resources. 

  The satellite, called “Ziyuan-1 02E” or “five-meter optical satellite 02,” was launched on Sunday that can take pictures of the ground with a resolution of five meters, according to the China National Space Administration.

  

  Ziyuan-1 is equipped with infrared, near-infrared, and hyperspectral sensors that will help China’s geological environment engineers identify places around the world rich in rare earth minerals. 

  China is believed to control up to 90% of global supplies of rare earth metals and is responsible for almost two-thirds of global production in 2019. 

  Some say China’s control over the global market for rare earths is diminishing, but the truth is this is only slightly true (read: “China Creates New State-Owned Mining Giant To Tighten Control Of Rare Earth Supplies”). 

  

  While the US and Australia ramp up the production of rare earths, China dominates the production of this space and continues to search for more minerals worldwide now using a high-tech satellite. 

  For more on rare earth minerals, visit The Market Ear content, exclusively on ZH premium, click here. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 19:30

• COVID Antiviral Pills Cause Life-Threatening Reactions When Used With Many Common Meds: FDA
  COVID Antiviral Pills Cause Life-Threatening Reactions When Used With Many Common Meds: FDA

  Authored by Tammy Hung via The Epoch Times,

  Pfizer’s antiviral oral drug developed to treat COVID-19 can cause severe or life-threatening effects when used with common medications including some anti-coagulants, some anti-depressants, and some cholesterol-lowering statins, according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (pdf).

  

  FDA does not recommend Paxlovid for those with severe kidney or liver disease.

  The FDA on Dec. 22 granted emergency use authorization (EUA) to Pfizer’s COVID-19 treatment pill as treatment for mild-to-moderate cases of COVID-19 in patients from 12 years of age.

  Paxlovid was the first oral medication of its kind authorized by the FDA to treat COVID-19, with the aim of reducing the need for hospitalization before patients become too ill from the infection.

  “This authorization provides a new tool to combat COVID-19 at a crucial time in the pandemic as new variants emerge and promises to make antiviral treatment more accessible to patients who are at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19,” stated Patrizia Cavazzoni, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

  Paxlovid consists of a cocktail of two drugs, the first being nirmatrelvir, which stops the SARS-CoV-2 virus from replicating, while the second component acts to prolong the duration of nirmatrelvir.

  The EUA came a month after the federal government announced it would purchase 10 million courses of the drug.

  Earlier in November, the Biden administration had already purchased some 10 million courses of the drug in a more than $5 billion agreement.

  “Pending EUA, U.S. will receive doses starting in 2021 and throughout 2022 as part of contract agreement with Pfizer,” Health and Human Services (HHS) stated in a statement.

  HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra on Nov. 18 emphasized the importance of “getting vaccinated” even when Paxlovid becomes available.

  “Getting vaccinated remains the most important action anyone can take to help protect themselves and others and end this pandemic, but for people who do get sick in the future and are at risk of severe outcomes, having pills they can take to keep them out of the hospital could be a lifesaver,” Becerra stated.

  “This agreement would help ensure millions of doses of this drug would be available to the American people if it is authorized.”

  Earlier in December, Pfizer announced that the pill is able to reduce the risk of hospitalization or death from the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus by 89 percent when taken shortly after initial symptoms.

  Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla on Dec. 8 told CNBC that shipments of the pill have arrived in the United States, “so product will be available this month if it’s approved.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 19:00

• China Phasing Out All NEV Subsidies By 2023
  China Phasing Out All NEV Subsidies By 2023

  There’s no doubt that new energy vehicle growth in China has been off the charts. Despite lackluster auto sales numbers heading into the backend of 2020, NEV sales continued to grow, rising 121% in November. 

  Additionally, the playing field of EV companies in China has become massive. The country leads the world in sheer number of major EV players, all jostling for position in what is still a burgeoning industry. 

  This saturation and sales growth could be why China’s Ministry of Finance, along with several other ministries, has announced that subsidies for new energy vehicles (NEV) in China will be slashed 30% heading into 2022. The subsidies are expected to be phased out by 2023, CNEVPOST reported. 

  For some areas, like city buses, cabs and postal deliveries, subsidies will only be slashed by 20% heading into 2022. 

  But more importantly, “the policy will not continue to be implemented starting in 2023,” the report said. 

  

  Grace Tao, Tesla’s global vice president, told The Beijing News earlier this week that the NEV industry is has become more “mature” and that rolling back subsidies will place a focus on product strength. 

  “This is good for the whole industry, for consumers,” she commented.

  Recall, Chinese auto sales have fallen for the last seven months of 2021, we wrote in mid-December. 

  Sales were down 9.1% from the year prior as the industry continued to struggle with what is now becoming a year’s long semiconductor shortage and the country posted total sales of 2.52 million vehicles in November, once again led by sales of new energy and electric vehicles.

  Total new energy vehicles grew 121% to 450,000 units from the year prior, helped along by the government pushing to further rein in pollution. New energy vehicles include battery-powered electric vehicles, plug-in petrol-electric hybrids and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles, Reuters wrote.

  CAAM spokesperson Chen Shihua commented: “Consumer acceptance of new energy vehicles continues to rise. The market has shifted from policy-motivated to demand-driven.”

  Among the top sellers in China were Tesla, who sold 52,859 vehicles (which we highlighted analyst analysis of days ago) and Nio, who sold a record 10,878 cars last month. Xpeng sold 15,613 vehicles and Volkswagen sold over 14,000 of its ID series electric vehicles. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 18:30

• US, South Korea Agree On Draft Declaration To End Korean War
  US, South Korea Agree On Draft Declaration To End Korean War

  Authored by Dave Decamp via AntiWar.com,

  On Wednesday, South Korean Foreign Minister Chung Eui-yong said Seoul and Washington have “effectively” agreed on a draft declaration that would finally put an official end to the Korean War.

  Chung said the US and South Korea have discussed “the importance of the declaration” and are now considering ways to start negotiations with North Korea on the matter. South Korean President Moon Jae-in ultimately favors reunification with the North and sees the end of war declaration as a vital first step.

  

  “Our government views that an end-of-war declaration is a crucial step that we must go through in the process of achieving complete denuclearization and a lasting peace settlement on the Korean Peninsula,” Chung said.

  While the fighting ended in 1953, a peace treaty was never signed to formally end the war. The US has been standing in the way of the declaration, as many hawks in Washington view the move as a “reward” for Pyongyang.

  Since President Biden took office, peace talks between Pyongyang and Seoul have been stalled. “Our government views that an end-of-war declaration provides a very useful opportunity to resume dialogue in a current deadlock in talks with North Korea,” Chung said.

  In September, Kim Yo-jong, the sister of North Korean leader Kin Jong-un, released a statement speaking favorably of the idea of declaring an end to the war.

  #Seoul, #Washington Agree on Draft Declaration to End #Korean War.

  FM Chung has said the two countries “effectively” agreed on the draft text that would formally end the 1950-53 Korean War. So far N.Korea 🇰🇵 has rejected the US & S.Korea’s requests to negotiate on the matter. pic.twitter.com/MZi6oVGJC5

  — Amb Ibrahim Hussein. (@BaloziHussein) December 30, 2021

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

  “We have discussed the end of war declaration at several opportunities in the past since we have appreciated of the necessity and meaning of the [declaration], which can be the beginning of the establishment of a system to ensure peace on the Korean Peninsula,” she said.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 18:05

• Mapped: Top Trending Searches Of 2021 In Every US State
  Mapped: Top Trending Searches Of 2021 In Every US State

  Google’s data editor Simon Rogers once said, “You’re never as honest as you are with your search engine. You get a sense of what people genuinely care about and genuinely want to know.”

  As Visual Capitalist’s Anshool Deshmukh details below, this look at trending searches for every U.S. state is a window into the topics people were truly curious about in 2021. From political tensions to meme stocks, and from Elon Musk to a devastating tornado, we saw a wide range of trending searches throughout the year.

  In the above animated video, Reddit user u/V1Analytics pulls together the top trending search terms from Google’s 2021 Year in Search summary (for the period before mid-November 2021) and Google’s Daily Search Trends page (from mid-November to December 20th) to illustrate the daily trends for each state.

  It’s fascinating to see what Americans were looking up this year.

  Trending Searches Offer a Glimpse of American Psyche

  In the year when COVID-19 vaccines became widely available, many Americans turned to the world’s most popular search engine to figure out how to come back to a life of normalcy.

  In 2021, the search entries spoke to people’s interest in alternative assets like cryptocurrencies and NFTs, as well as persistent economic insecurity, evidenced by questions about when they would get their stimulus checks.

  Entertainers and billionaires trended throughout the year, and so did topics of significant cultural impact at those moments in time.

  Here is a look at the trending searches of 2021 and when they were searched most:

  Notable Trending Searches in 2021

  Here’s a look at a few of the notable searches that trended across the U.S. in 2021:

  President Biden and Capitol

  Unsurprisingly, the year started with news of the presidential election and the U.S. Capitol riot, as President Biden was set to take office.

  In six states, however, the top trending search was still related to the Mega Millions jackpot, even as individuals stormed the Capitol Building.

  Valheim

  One of the most sought-after games of the year, Valheim, came on the market in February, 2021. By August, it had garnered over 8 million users. The developing company’s new Hearth and Home patch has skyrocketed the game’s appeal even more.

  Stimulus Check

  In March, the U.S. government unveiled their plan to distribute the third stimulus check to Americans.

  People started looking for more information about when they would be getting their checks and if there had been any changes in the amount they would receive.

  Dogecoin

  Created in 2013 as a parody of Bitcoin, Dogecoin saw record trading levels in May 2021. This was in part due to Elon Musk supporting the cryptocurrency.

  The Dogecoin market capitalization surged to a peak of $88 billion, worth more than three-quarters of the companies in the S&P 500.

  AMC Stock

  After suffering significant losses due to the pandemic-related shuttering of theaters across the country, AMC Entertainment became a fan favorite of Reddit-based retail traders who drove the share price up beyond what most analysts considered reasonable.

  AMC’s stock price rose by 95% in a couple of days, reaching a record high of $63 per share. This was the latest phase of the meme stock frenzy.

  Afghanistan

  President Biden decided to completely withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan by September 11th, 2021, ending the longest war the country has ever fought.

  As an immediate consequence of the withdrawal, the Taliban militia took over the country and the government. The event, which was broadcast in near real-time, caused widespread panic among the citizens as some attempted to flee the country.

  What’s in Store for 2022

  It’s going to be everyone’s best guess as to what the trending searches for 2022 will be. Based on the events that dominated the news throughout the year, a few predictions could be made.

  Experts predict that we will be moving to an endemic stage of the pandemic, which is bound to profoundly impact how we live in 2022.

  New trends, movies, TV shows, and even newer gadgets will surely catch everyone’s attention next year. It will be fascinating to see what’s on the minds of people in the coming 12 months.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 17:40

• COVID Testing Has Become Ridiculous & Even Counterproductive
  COVID Testing Has Become Ridiculous & Even Counterproductive

  Authored by Andrea Widburg via AmericanThinker.com,

  The Omicron version of COVID is so mild that it’s indistinguishable from a cold. Many people are asymptomatic. We also know now that early COVID counts were almost certainly wrong because the dominant test used was unable to distinguish between COVID and the regular flu. Nevertheless, Joe Biden has invested almost $140 million dollars in a German company that will build a home-test plant in America…by 2024.

  It’s no secret at this point that Omicron was O-versold. It’s so negligible that many people know they have it only because they’ve been tested. Even those who have symptoms feel only as if they’ve got a cold. They just identify as Omicron-sick. You only need to look at the hugely different trend lines between cases and deaths to understand that Omicron is a big nothing:

  

  Indeed, Omicron may or may not be extremely contagious. That’s hard to know because the CDC, after announcing that 73% of all COVID cases in America were now Omicron, backtracked and now says that only 23% are, with the remainder being the Delta variant. But if these cases are the Delta variant, they must be pretty darn mild if they’re indistinguishable from Omicron and cases are dropping.

  In any event, it’s entirely possible that COVID has been grossly overcounted from the beginning. That’s because it turns out that the PCR test was unable to distinguish between COVID and the flu. Democrats insisted that the flu vanished because of the masks and social distancing but it now appears the flu dropped off the radar because all cases were misclassified as COVID.

  And of course, there’s the little problem that vaccinated people are the ones most likely to get Omicron. Thankfully, they’re not getting very sick but that fact utterly destroys the narrative about the unvaccinated keeping COVID alive in America.

  Currently, the only thing that’s keeping COVID in the headlines is the mania for testing. I know a woman who posts on Facebook at least once a month about getting tested. It’s not clear that she’s ever been seriously symptomatic. Instead, every sniffle or cough sends her rushing out to get a test. The tests are a hypochondriac’s dream.

  

  Image: Home COVID test. Freepik license.

  Using as his starting point the home COVID tests that D.C. is handing out Christopher Bedford explains why those tests are so stupid:

  Staring at this kit Wednesday morning, sniffling, I thought, “Why would I do that?”

  Seriously, why the hell would I do that? Do I live in Florida, where if seriously ill, I’ll be given access to monoclonal antibody treatments while family, friends, and neighbors go about their lives? Do I live in Georgia or Texas, where I’d receive the same? Or Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, or Louisiana?

  Or do I live in a city where the numbers will be rushed to the press, schools will be shuttered, mask mandates will be extended, new restrictions on the eternally wicked “unvaccinated” will be rolled out, and if I have a bad case I’ll have to drive hours to find a pharmacy willing to fill a doctor’s prescription?

  The tests do nothing but allow bureaucrats and the media to keep the panic going. It’s over.

  But Biden understands the continued need for panic. That’s why he just signed a deal for $137 million with a German company to build a Wisconsin factory to produce more COVID test kids…by late 2024:

  The Biden administration struck a $137 million deal to build a new factory in the U.S. to ramp up production of COVID-19 testing kits – but the new facility won’t be completed until late 2024 at the earliest.

  MilliporeSigma, a brand formed by Germany’s Merck KGaA, will build a new factory in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, the Defense Department announced as the U.S. hit a high record of 489,267 COVID cases on Wednesday

  While the contract gives the company three years to complete the facility, it is not immediately clear when it will ramp up to full production, which is expected to pump out 83.3 million tests per month.

  This plan is not as stupid as it appears. Democrats have figured out that the descendants of those Americans who fought a revolution during a smallpox epidemic, who battled through the Civil War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and both Gulf Wars; who survived journeys (voluntary or enslaved) across dangerous oceans; who lived through Depressions and recessions; who traveled thousands of miles in covered wagons; and who populated a dangerous wilderness can be controlled completely if they’re told they have a cold or the flu with a 1% mortality rate for people who are very old or have comorbidities.

  Knowing that, if you wanted permanent political power, wouldn’t you also make sure that Americans are constantly told that they’re very, very sick?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 17:15

• Watch: Kamala Harris Gives Bizarre Answer To Inflation Question
  Watch: Kamala Harris Gives Bizarre Answer To Inflation Question

  We’re not sure what this means, but it’s how Vice President Kamala Harris led off an attempted answer – or more likely clumsy and bizarre effort to dodge – to a simple question on inflation… Face the Nation host Margaret Brennan asked, “Was it wrong to consider inflation transitory? These price spikes seem like they’re going to be with us for a while.”

  Harris said: “We have to address the fact that we have got to deal with the fact that folks are paying for gas, paying for groceries, and… need solutions to it. So let’s talk about that”. Watch…

  Kamala’s response to questions about inflation really highlights that constant complaint from her staffers that she “refuses to wade into briefing materials.” pic.twitter.com/EE8sGMBqYG

  — Matt Whitlock (@mattdizwhitlock) December 30, 2021

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

  The barely coherent response and flubbed answer to a simple straightforward question comes, as Fox and others note, amid continued internal criticisms from her staff that she “repeatedly refuses to read briefing materials and prepare for meetings.”

  The report described:

  “It’s clear that you’re not working with somebody who is willing to do the prep and the work,” one former staffer said. “With Kamala you have to put up with a constant amount of soul-destroying criticism and also her own lack of confidence. So you’re constantly sort of propping up a bully and it’s not really clear why.”

  Several Harris staffers have since left their positions in the year since she and Biden took office.

  In this latest encounter with the media, she certainly didn’t do her boss Joe Biden any favors, given the question originated in reference to White House press secretary Jen Psaki recently claiming that inflation is merely “transitory” – for many months issuing various forms of “it’s nothing to worry about” and will go away in a year…

  INFLATION: Jen Psaki says White House economic experts believe inflationary impact will be “temporary, transitory.” pic.twitter.com/SbNuByIQzD

  — Forbes (@Forbes) May 10, 2021

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

  The above exchange comes after a series of media encounters where VP Harris spouts bizarre non-answers that essentially go in circles or are not to the point. 

  Take for example another recent response. She was asked what should be for most politicians a softball question meant to boost approval ratings over her “greatest accomplishment”. She then droned on about “inspiring kids”…

  “Well, that is a great question. Umm, when I go to an event, whatever it is, and some dad or some mom brings their kids — daughters, sons – and says ‘That’s your vice president,’ and challenges their kids to think about who does what, as a way, I think, of empowering their kids to know they can do anything they want – not be confined by who has traditionally done what – I think that is, that’s one of the things I, that gives me joy, is to know that, that might be a possible impact.”

  They should ask Kamala to explain inflation again. pic.twitter.com/HNc4kWnuEI

  — Robert Kovic for Congress, NJ-11 (@RobertKovic) December 31, 2021

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

  And when she can’t string enough words together, there’s always the good ole “but it’s classified” response…

  Kamala Harris gets asked an actual question for once and has no idea how to respond.

  Her response on Russia’s threat to Ukraine: “Umm… I cannot talk to you about classified information” pic.twitter.com/SvzFfk0I9o

  — Jake Schneider (@jacobkschneider) November 15, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 16:50

• The Fall Of The Mainstream Media And The Biggest Lies They Told In 2021
  The Fall Of The Mainstream Media And The Biggest Lies They Told In 2021

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  If the past year has confirmed anything it is that the mainstream media is thoroughly dishonest. Yes, most people already suspected this, but the last 12 months have provided more confirmation than the past several years combined. 2021 has made is clear that the mainstream media is a propaganda arm of political and corporate elitists, from big government to big pharma.

  

  While there have been a few shining examples of independent and mostly unbiased journalism in the MSM, these moments are as rare as Loch Ness Monster sightings and almost as unbelievable. The public has been lied to so consistently that sometimes we ignore legitimate journalism when it pops up because it’s safer to assume the media is disingenuous at all times.

  I’ve personally noticed a wash of commercials lately paid for by major legacy media platforms like the New York Times desperately trying to convince the public that they are still relevant. The message is that they are the only “true source” of news information while they beg people to start subscribing and reading their hot garbage once again. Leftist media is crumbling, with online propaganda peddlers and click-bait prostitutes like Buzzfeed and Vox imploding. The lack of profits is obvious and the layoffs have been aggressive.

  These platforms survived for the past few years on tech media hype and venture startup capital, but the free money has run out and now they don’t know what to do. Buzzfeed’s scheme was to go public and sell shares, but this plan failed so completely and the company’s stock plunged so hard that the event has exposed all other fledgling tech media to wider scrutiny. In other words no one has faith in these outlets, at least not enough to invest in them, and now the veil of their supposed “success” has been lifted. Buzzfeed used to claim they were worth $1.5 billion; reality revealed they are worth almost nothing.

  Legacy media has also seen its audience numbers plummet over the past ten years, but the the last year in particular has been especially unkind to them. ALL of the major corporate news channels saw their audience ratings decline, with CNN seeing the largest drop overall. CNN is facing an epic decline of 68% in it’s prime time numbers in 2021, while MSNBC now has the smallest prime time audience it has witnessed since 2016. Fox also dealt with audience declines but continues to remain the most watched cable news outlet so far, probably because of the continued popularity of commenters like Tucker Carlson .

  Some might blame the loss of election coverage, but it’s not as if there hasn’t been enough news to hype in 2021. With millions of people still working from home and facing intermittent covid restrictions this year (in blue states), you would think that this would represent a captive audience for the fear machine. Hell, even YouTube and other social media platforms are forcing MSM content into our faces daily while burying any alternatives. Yet, their numbers are still plunging and audiences are laughing.

  YouTube has even removed the “Dislike” button just to protect the corporate media and the White House from the hilarious bombardment of thumbs down they receive on every video. It’s unacceptable for us peasants to have the ability to voice our discontent.

  So, where are people turning for their news if not the mainstream? While stats are not as well tracked for independent sources, it is obvious from viewership and subscription numbers that the alternative media is quickly becoming the dominant force in information. My own audience numbers have jumped at least 30% in the past two years alone and this seems to be the trend across the board for conservative and libertarian media. Websites like Social Blade, which tracks YouTube channel stats, support the conclusion that the alternative media is becoming the go-to media.

  Why is this happening? It’s actually been a long time coming. Mainstream media numbers have been in decline for many years and their audience age brackets have been increasing dramatically. This accelerated after 2016 when the mainstream media mask came off completely and what we now know as the “Culture War” revealed itself.

  The migration of audiences is undeniable in entertainment and pop culture media. Mainstream platforms funded by a steady cash flow from the corporate coffers of Disney, Time Warner, Comcast, Viacom, etc, used to reign supreme in entertainment publications. Moderately sized tech media operations clamored to remain in the good graces of these corporations in exchange for favors and special access. Now, operations with billions of dollars behind them are being thwarted by low cost do-it-yourself YouTube channels like Geeks And Gamers, The Quartering, Nerdrotic, Clownfish TV, etc.

  The bloodletting has been so horrific that social media companies (with a shared agenda) have partnered with the majors to suppress these types of channels, demonetizing them or erasing them from public view with their algorithms. Alternative channels get so much attention because they offer something people want – An honest opinion and analysis instead of an opinion bought and paid for with corporate dollars.

  In the political and social sphere there have been numerous success stories, including Joe Rogan’s podcast, Steven Crowder, Ben Shapiro, Blaze TV’s ‘You Are Here’, Tim Pool the list goes on and on. In economic media, outlets like Zero Hedge continue to bring in millions of readers that most other mainstream institutions WISH they had.

  To be sure, some of these information sources are still playing catch-up to those of us once considered “conspiracy theorists” a few years ago. That’s okay. I’m not saying that there isn’t more that could be done. What I’m saying is that there is a revolution happening in how people consume media and at least some truths are getting out there to the normies.

  I have been working and publishing within the alternative media for 16 years and I don’t think many who are new to the field realize how much Americans have broken free from the mainstream narrative in that time. When I got started, to even dream of the audience numbers we now have was considered naive fantasy. Today I continue to find great hope in the growth of independent journalism.

  The fact of the matter is, for decades corporate institutions conned the masses into believing only THEY were qualified to act as gatekeepers and guardians of the information bottleneck. Only they were the true “journalists.” They have now lost the respect of the public and their gatekeeping is over.

  On that note, lets examine just a few of the reasons why trust in the mainstream has imploded. Lets look at some of the biggest lies perpetuated by the MSM in 2021…

  The Jan 6th “Insurrection”

  Probably one of the most fake news stories of the decade. The mainstream media has relentlessly parroted the propaganda that the conservative protest at the Capitol Building on Jan 6th was some kind of planned attempt at a national takeover and violent coup resulting in multiple deaths. The reality was much less sexy.

  First, the FBI has been forced to admit there is no evidence supporting the claim that the protest was an organized coup. And when an institution that is extremely hostile to patriots admits this, you know the government has NOTHING.

  Not a single death originally attributed to the Jan 6 protesters was actually caused by them, so that tall tale has been tossed down the memory hole. While there was violence and an unarmed protester was shot and killed by police (Ashli Babbitt), the result of the event was nothing close to an insurrection. Protesters walked in, milled around for a little while, some people stole some souvenirs, and then everyone left. It can barely be considered a “riot.” Compare this to the BLM riots across the country which resulted in multiple actual killings by people directly participating, not to mention billions of dollars in property damage. The media called these riots “peaceful protests” while condemning the Jan 6 participants as monsters.

  When conservatives protest something at least we go to the source instead of burning down the homes and businesses of innocent people. And I want to explain something else to leftists because I don’t think they get it – When you do see a conservative “insurrection” (rebellion against centralized tyranny), they will not be unarmed like they were on Jan 6 and they will not stop until all corrupt elements of the establishment are removed from power. If you were hiding under your beds over the events of Jan 6th, you really have no clue.

  The Texas Power Grid Failure

  Wow, what a politically charged mess the coverage of this event was. Multiple people die from a freak winter storm hitting Texas and taking down parts of their independent power grid and the first thing the mainstream media does is write hatchet stories about how this “proves they could never secede from the union.” These people are obsessed with centralization to the point that they lose their minds if you generate your own electricity.

  Paul Krugman, a notorious spin doctor for the establishment, went on a tirade in the New York Times dismissing any and all evidence that federally funded Wind Turbine failures led to the Texas power grid crisis. The facts on this are buried to this day.

  The numbers prove Paul Krugman and the MSM utterly wrong. The Mises Institute published a comprehensive article on this based on analysis from the Institute For Energy Research, but I’ll summarize:

  The MSM and Paul Krugman argued that the entire incident was caused by Texas’ ill prepared natural gas powered grid and that Wind Turbines had nothing to do with it. By extension, the MSM asserted that this makes any notion of a state like Texas becoming independent from centralized governance and a centralized grid “laughable.” It’s important to note that Krugman offers no real stats to support his arguments. An “economist” should know better.

  The truth is that failing wind turbines were indeed the primary source of the power grid decline. Leading up to the winter storm in February, wind turbines were generating around 28% (nearly one third) of Texas power while natural gas was providing 43%. By the end of the freeze wind power had dropped to 6% while natural gas took up the slack and increased to 65% of the grid. In other words, Krugman either lied, or he was oblivious to the actual stats. While there were failures in some natural gas plants, the majority of the fault was in federally funded wind power. During the grid down crisis, natural gas lost 7% of its overall output while the federally funded wind turbines lost 47% output. THIS IS A FACT.

  Also keep in mind that power demand in the state skyrocketed at this time breaking all previous records, perhaps because the state population jumped from 29 million to 30 million from the end of 2019 to the beginning of 2021. Millions of people had just transplanted to Texas in a matter of months to escape blue state policies such as high taxes and oppressive covid mandates. And here is where we find what is likely the core motive behind the media’s lies about Texas – The establishment does not want Americans to migrate and congregate to fight against the mandates. Lying about Texas at any opportunity, even during tragedy, reveals their underlying fears.

  Fauci’s Gain Of Function Research

  Anthony Fauci is perhaps the highest paid liar in recent history, but his lies go beyond simply acting as a propagandist for the government. The covid pandemic has luckily resulted in a very low average Infection Fatality Rate (only 0.27% officially), meaning, over 99.7% of the population at any given time has very little to worry about from the virus. With the mild Omicron variant now in circulation the death numbers are falling even further. However, there have been fatalities that did not need to happen and Fauci is partly to blame.

  Despite the fact that the largest Level 4 virology lab in Asia is in Wuhan, China right down the street from the epicenter of the Covid-19 outbreak, the mainstream media at the behest of the government and the medical establishment has fought tooth and nail to deny any connection. If this was a murder investigation it would be like a detective walking in a room to find a dead body and a neighbor standing over it with a bloody knife, and then buying the suspect ice cream and sending him on his merry way. If you didn’t witness the actual stabbing, why investigate further?

  Why was the media so adamant about ignoring the obvious? Maybe because government agencies like the NIAD and NIH under the direction of Anthony Fauci were involved in funding clandestine “Gain of Function” research of corona viruses at that very lab in Wuhan. This would explain why the initial strain of Covid that spread around the world in early 2020 was a 96% match to samples held at the lab since 2013. The other 4% could be attributed to genetic manipulation through gain of function.

  Fauci denied any involvement in gain of function research, which is predominantly used for the weaponization of a virus or other microorganisms. The media violently defended him and accused anyone critical of Fauci of being crackpot conspiracy theorists. Well, it turns out he was lying again. The release of over 900 documents related to coronavirus research funded by Fauci and the US government in Wuhan proves the media either blindly defended Fauci without looking at the evidence, or that they share the same agenda.

  The Pandemic Of The Unvaccinated

  “Breakout case” is now a common term used in the media to describe fully vaccinated people who still get sick from and die from covid infection. But not long ago the narrative was that anyone and everyone falling ill from the virus was unvaccinated. The media and the government still push the notion that unvaccinated people are filling up hospitals and ICU beds, but there is ZERO evidence to support these claims. Meanwhile, the most vaccinated countries on the planet are also dealing with some of the highest infection rates on the planet and continuing deaths.

  In Ireland, for example, over 63% of recent covid deaths were fully vaccinated individuals. In Israel, nearly 60% of covid hospitalizations are fully vaccinated. Uruguay, Bahrain, Maldives and Chile all have overwhelming majority vaccinations and all of them have seen spikes in covid deaths and infections.

  If the vaccines actually work, then how is this possible? Conclusion: The vaccines don’t work, at least not in the way that pharmaceutical companies initially claimed. Add to this the fact that people with natural immunity are 13 to 27 times more protected from covid than people who submit to the jab. On has to ask – What is the point of these experimental mRNA vaccines with no long term data to prove their safety?

  “Transitory” Stagflation

  Mainstream media denial of US inflation has been commonplace for some time. Now, they can’t hide it anymore. With price inflation hitting 40 year highs (according to official numbers), the pocketbook of the average American is taking a massive hit, and its only going to get worse from here on.

  The media appears to be specifically invested in hiding real economic data from the public and protecting the Federal Reserve and central banking practices in general. I won’t get into my theories on why this is the case (I already wrote extensively on this issue in my last article), I’ll only say that an unprepared populace is an easy to control populace when an economic crash occurs.

  Covid Keeping Audiences From The Movie Theaters?

  The movie industry was on the decline well before the covid pandemic happened, and it is undeniable that this was largely due to the extreme leftist propaganda implanted into Hollywood films since 2016. Yes, Hollywood was woke before then, but nowhere near as bad as the industry has become in the past five years. Hollywood calls this politicization of films “inclusivity,” but having more black and brown people in films is not the issue. Rather, it is the injection of leftist woke ideology and cultism into everything from films to TV series to commercials.

  The culture war is VERY real, and sadly, the biggest mistake of conservatives was to mostly ignore the fight in popular entertainment until recently. There is hope, however, and it is found in the mantra of “Get Woke Go Broke!” Audiences are voting with their wallets and the consensus is that they do not want woke politics poisoning their entertainment. For the past couple years leftists in the media have said that the crash in theater profits has been caused by public fear over covid. This excuse was recently destroyed by the latest Spiderman film, which has no woke politics and had audiences coming to theaters by the millions. The film made over $1 billion in 5 days breaking previous records.

  Clearly, covid is not a factor at all, but if you look at almost every failed movie this past year there is a thread that connects them – Woke propaganda. No one wants it, no one likes it. The media has no other means of denying it any longer.

  There are many other lies I did not get a chance to cover here, but I think you get the picture. Who knows what the next year will bring in terms of spin from our corporate gatekeepers? At least, for now, the alternative media has stepped up to fill the void and bring facts where there was once only deception. In order to get rid of the truth, they will have to get rid of us. Otherwise, the free market has spoken.

  *  *  *

  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
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 16:25

• Cryptos & Crude Soar As Stocks End 2021 At Most Expensive Level Ever
  Cryptos & Crude Soar As Stocks End 2021 At Most Expensive Level Ever

  Biden ‘outperformed’ Trump in terms of the number of Americans who died from/with COVID under his watch…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Despite more deaths, more cases, and a lack of the big stimmy BBB deal, all the major US equity indices were upon the year with Trannies leading the way (and Small Caps lagging, but still up over 14%)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  For some recent context, The Dow and S&P managed to close around 1-2% higher since Omicron’s unleashing, Nasdaq faded back in the red today and Small Caps are down almost 4% since the new variant headlines hit…

  

  All of which left US stocks at their most expensive ever…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  And the “Buffett Indicator” has never been higher…

  

  With the biggest 10 stocks trading at a level the 10 largest stocks have traded at before…

  

  Chinese stocks lagged heavily on the year and while European markets put in a good performance, they lagged US…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  So-called “bubble markets” ended the year on a big downswing…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Unprofitable tech stocks had quite a year, ripping higher to start 2021, giving back all their gains and then slumping into year-end…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Interestingly, ‘Meme’ Stocks managed to hold on to gains overall (though many individual stocks did not)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Despite all the optimism, the recent Omicron wave hammered ‘recovery’ stocks leaving them big underperformers on the year…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Energy stocks were 2021’s biggest winners while Utes and Staples lagged…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Nasdaq has pushed ahead recently relative to Small Caps, suggesting real yields are going lower again…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Value/Momentum stocks have decoupled from the yield curve that it hugged all year…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  STIRs have surged higher matching The Fed’s renewed hawkish jawboning with 1 full rate-hike priced in by May 2022 and 3 full hikes by Dec 2022…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Treasury yields were all higher on the year but the last few months, since The Fed shifted tone towards hawkish, has seen the belly underperforming as the long-end rallied…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  The yield curve flattened on the year with 2s30s down around 35bps…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  The Dollar ended 2021 higher, but faded back below its 50DMA on the last day of the year (and below 2019’s closing price)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Cryptos had another big year (even with headlines more than willing to focus on recent price action). Bitcoin ended the year up 65% while Ethereum rose over 400%…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Bitcoin has been hovering around its 200DMA for a few weeks…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Ethereum’s major outperformance pushed it to the strongest relative to Bitcoin since early 2018…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Oil prices saw their biggest annual gain since 2009, but gold was lower and Silver suffered its worst year since 2014…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Gold did managed to get back above $1800…

  

  Given where real yields ended the year, we suspect gold has some upside…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  And while WTI did take a hit from Omicron and Biden’s jawboning, it’s back above $75 again now…

  

  Unfortunately for President Biden, the de minimums drop in gas prices of the last few days is likely as good as it gets as oil and wholesale gasoline prices have rebounded amid fading omicron fears…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  One of the biggest stories of the year was European NatGas prices, but the last week has seen an armada of LNG vessels heading across the Atlantic to solve Europe’s demand and EU gas prices have crashed back to reality. The following chart compares apples to apples across us/uk/eu energy prices (in oil barrel equivalents)…

  

  Finally, global central banks added over $2 trillion to their balance sheets in 2021…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  But remember, correlation is not causation, this is just a coincidence and it’s all about fun-durr-mentals…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  And on that note, happy new year!

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 16:00

• Is The Peak Of NYC's Omicron Wave Just Around The Corner?
  Is The Peak Of NYC’s Omicron Wave Just Around The Corner?

  As we noted earlier, the US and worldwide tallies for the number of new COVID cases confirmed in a day are hitting fresh record highs as the year ends, giving some the impression that the global pandemic has barely been impacted by all the lockdowns, vaccines, boosters and other restrictions that have arisen over the past 2 years.

  

  But as political leaders scramble to keep the media stocked with omicron-oriented FUD to report, it looks like we may have been correct a little over a week ago when we surmised that the peak of the outbreak in London may already be at hand.

  In the US, there’s been a lot of focus on New York City, where COVID cases and hospitalizations are climbing, though still below their levels from last year’s winter wave.

  

  Source: @ScottGottliebMD

  Here’s where things stand in New York: Thursday was another record-breaking day, with 74,207 newly reported COVID cases in NY State, with a stunning 43,985 in NYC alone. The positivity rate continues to increase; it’s now 23.1%. Hospitalizations in NYC are also rising fast, now at 3,565, with 884 new admissions in past day alone.

  Fortunately for New Yorkers, across the pond, Londoners are seeing what Dr. Scott Gottlieb believes might be a peak in the omicron wave (just in time since the NHS is already building field hospitals “just in case”).

  If the past is any guide, as Gottlieb points out in his tweet, NYC’s peak in cases could arrive within 2 weeks now that London’s peak appears to have finally arrived.

  While data is skewed by reduced holiday reporting, there’s increasing signs #Omicron wave in London may be peaking. The huge wave has occurred, so far, with only a small rise in hospital admissions requiring mechanical ventilation. New York City may be about 2 weeks behind London pic.twitter.com/WIqFkB16f9

  — Scott Gottlieb, MD (@ScottGottliebMD) December 31, 2021

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

  

  Source: @ScottGottliebMD

  Going by hospitalizations that require mechanical ventilation and deaths, the peak in London is well below levels from last year.

  

  Source: @ScottGottliebMD

  Scientists have inferred that the UK is about two weeks ahead of New York when it comes to the seasonal COVID waves. So, if London is already past the week, how much longer will New Yorkers need to put up with behavior like this:

  Protestors in NYC are arrested for entering Burger King without showing proof of vaccination pic.twitter.com/XmwMHBcJi6

  — Libs of Tik Tok (@libsoftiktok) December 28, 2021

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

  At any rate, the governor’s mansion has decided to extend mask and vaccine mandates through Feb. 1.

  Put another way, maybe JPM’s Marko Kolanovic will finally be proven correct in that the omicron wave is bullish for risk because it means the end of the pandemic phase of COVID.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/31/2021 – 15:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• CIA Experimented On 100s Of Orphans, Torturing Them To Reveal Psychopathic Traits; Report
  CIA Experimented On 100s Of Orphans, Torturing Them To Reveal Psychopathic Traits; Report

  Authored by Matt Agorist via The Free Thought Project,

  According to a new documentary out of Denmark, which interviewed former victims, the Central Intelligence Agency secretly carried out experiments on 311 orphaned children. The experiments were meant to reveal psychopathic traits and map out the link between schizophrenia and heredity. According to the report, the children were tortured in clear violation of the Nuremberg Code of 1947 that introduced ethical restrictions for experiments on humans.

  

  Hundreds of Danish orphans were unknowingly used in experiments backed by the CIA, according to Danish Radio, reporting on a new documentary called “The Search for Myself.”

  According to the report, the experiments began in the early 1960s and spanned the course of two decades. They were conducted to investigate the link between heredity and environment in the development of schizophrenia. However, the children were not told what research they were involved in. Not even after the experiments ended. It was also funded in part by a CIA front associated with the MK-Ultra program.

  Eerily, the examinations took place in a basement at the Municipal Hospital in Copenhagen. The director and producer of the documentary, Per Wennick, was actually a victim of the CIA and subjected to these experiments as a child. In the documentary, he recalled being placed in a chair, getting electrodes put on his arms, legs, and chest around the heart and having to listen to loud, shrill noises, which attempted to incite a psychological response.

  “It was very uncomfortable”, Wennick told Danish Radio.

  “And it’s not just my story, it’s the story of many children.”

  By his own admission, he was promised “something funny” before being taken to the hospital.

  “I think this is a violation of my rights as a citizen in this society. I find it so strange that some people should know more about me than I myself have been aware of.”

  According to historian, PhD, and museum inspector at the Danish Welfare Museum, Jacob Knage Rasmussen, this was the only known experiment in Danish history that used children under state care for research — and it was funded by the CIA in violation of the Nuremberg Code.

  “I do not know of similar attempts, neither in Denmark nor in Scandinavia. It is appalling information that contradicts the Nuremberg Code of 1947, which after World War II was to set some ethical restrictions for experiments on humans. Among other things, informed consent was introduced, which today is central to the world of research”, Knage Rasmussen told Danish Radio.

  He emphasized the vulnerability of the group in the custody of the state, who had nobody to complain to.

  According to Danish Radio, the idea to experiment on the vulnerable children came from American psychologist Zarnoff A. Mednick, who was then a professor at the University of Michigan.

  According to Wennick and the National Archives, the research project was co-financed by the US health service. In the first year alone, the project was supported with what today corresponds to DKK 4.6 million ($700,000). It also received funding from the Human Ecology Fund.

  The Human Ecology Fund was a CIA funded operation through the Cornell University College of Human Ecology Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology to support covert research on brainwashing. It was also connected to research under the MK-Ultra program in which social scientists, including anthropologists, were led (mostly unwittingly) to provide input into interrogation techniques still in use today.

  Danish psychiatrist Fini Schulsinger dedicated his doctoral dissertation to the experiments in 1977, titling it, “Studies to shed light on the connection between heredity and environment in psychiatry.”

  While researching for the documentary, Per Wennick managed to locate 36 boxes at the Psychiatric Centre Glostrup in Hvidovre that detailed the CIA’s unscrupulous child experiments. However, when the center got word of the documentary, they began shredding the documents.

  Danish Radio reports that Kent Kristensen, associate professor of Health Law at the University of Southern Denmark, pointed out that the shredding of the documents was illegal.

  “I think it’s a huge failure for the former orphanage children who are interested in the pieces of their own childhood to get a total story made about their own lives. That possibility is deprived of them if you shred the research material,” Knage Rasmussen told Danish Radio.

  Indeed. It also details the CIA’s depravity and violations of the Nuremberg code. If history is any indicator, however, no one will be held responsible for exploiting these children and it will be swept under the rug, likely escaping any scrutiny by the mainstream media.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 23:40

• The Companies That Defined 2021
  The Companies That Defined 2021

  Attention is an increasingly valuable form of currency in the Information Age.

  In 2021, a handful of companies stood out from the pack, dominating the conversation and influencing society in both positive and negative ways. After vigorous internal debate, here is Visual Capitalist’s list of companies that defined 2021:

  • Robinhood

  • Pfizer

  • Coinbase

  • Tesla

  • TikTok

  • Facebook/Meta

  We looked at a number of metrics to select these companies, including Google search and news volume, performance relative to competitors, industry-specific indicators, and more.

  Many of these are digital companies, and all have massive reach, scale, and influence. Interestingly, many of these companies also faced controversies along with their success, and were caught up in movements that were bigger than themselves.

  

  With this context in mind, let’s dive in.

  Robinhood

  Robinhood’s eventful year reached its peak when the stock trading app was caught in a frenzy involving retail traders, short sellers, and “meme stonks”. It did not take long for Robinhood to go from hero to villain in this story. As the Gamestop stock shot up past $400, trading was halted and position limits were initiated on the app.

  As well, Robinhood’s stated goal of democratizing finance came under scrutiny due to their pay-for-order-flow business model, where sensitive user trade activity data is sold to the highest bidder who then gets ahead of the trade, otherwise known as “front-running”.

  

  Despite the controversy, Robinhood’s platform now has over 22 million users, many of whom are younger, first-time investors. While they have key attractions like zero commission trades, they were also accused of gamifying investing with features like confetti shooting across the screen after a trade is made (a feature that was removed after media criticism).

  The company frequently made front page financial news in early 2021, and while the often negative press didn’t get in the way of their IPO—which commenced in late July—it has affected investor sentiment. Since their 52-week high of $70 per share in August, the stock has fallen some 70% towards the $18 range.

  Furthermore, the SEC is rumored to be launching an investigation into them. With these headwinds, investing on Robinhood has probably fared better so far than investing in Robinhood.

  Pfizer

  Perhaps there was no bigger story in 2021 than COVID-19 vaccines.

  Early in the year, the race to secure vaccines was on. Wealthy countries scrambled to buy stock and roll out widespread vaccination programs ahead of spring.

  And the companies that managed to produce efficient vaccines saw the biggest benefits, like pharmaceutical giant Pfizer. The company’s COVID-19 vaccine, made in partnership with German firm BioNTech, ended up becoming the world’s most-preferred vaccine to fight the pandemic.

  The company is forecasting revenue of $36 billion from its vaccine this year.

  Competing vaccines from Moderna and AstraZeneca also saw their parent companies rise in both market cap and newsworthiness. All of the involved pharma companies have also faced constant scrutiny, with many countries in the world struggling to secure COVID-19 vaccines, and others dealing with vaccine hesitancy.

  As the pandemic continues with the Omicron variant quickly spreading around the globe, Pfizer and its competitors will continue to be impactful into the new year. The company announced a COVID-19 antiviral pill that is planned to be released in the near future, and more effective vaccines and boosters against other variants are still a hot commodity.

  Coinbase

  2021 was a pivotal year for cryptocurrency. Prices reached new highs, and institutions and retail investors alike poured into the market.

  With its user-friendly app and focus on security, Coinbase was well positioned to benefit from this surge in interest. The exchange started off the year by more than doubling its transacting user base as Bitcoin prices shot to new heights.

  

  It’s easy to underestimate the influence of the company’s IPO—especially as its share price slid as the crypto market cooled off—but the exchange’s very entry into the public markets was a huge boost in legitimacy for crypto, paving the way for similar companies to IPO in the future.

  Tesla

  Nobody captures attention and creates controversy quite like Tesla’s CEO, Elon Musk.

  Most of Tesla’s actions are tied closely to the famous entrepreneur, who’s known for his brazen online presence. Musk’s social media persona is so strong, one tweet can send Tesla’s stock plummeting, like it did last year after Musk told Twitter that “Tesla’s stock is too high imo.”

  While naysayers are quick to criticize Tesla and Musk, the company has some impressive numbers to back up its hype. 2020 was already a ridiculous year for Tesla—its stock surged by nearly 700%, and with a valuation of $630 billion, it became one of the most valuable companies in the world.

  This momentum carried over into 2021. This year, revenue rose each quarter, and in October, the company’s market value surpassed $1 trillion.

  Tesla was also intertwined within other societal narratives over the course of the year. The automaker’s move from California to Texas was part of a larger conversation about the “Bay Area exodus”, as jurisdictions in Texas and Florida looked to steal Silicon Valley’s thunder.

  

  Musk’s Tesla stock sales generated a lot of buzz in Q4 as well.

  Seemingly in response to criticism over inequality and tax avoidance, Musk ran a Twitter poll to decide whether or not to sell a significant portion of his Tesla holdings. After a majority “yes” vote, the Tesla CEO now appears to have sold off enough stock to hold up his end of the bargain.

  TikTok

  TikTok was already popular in 2020, but this year truly solidified its status as a cultural phenomenon.

  The app topped a billion users in 2021, just five years after its launch in 2016. For context, it took Facebook and Instagram nearly eight years to hit that same milestone.

  

  What’s so appealing about TikTok? Experts have many theories, but in an interview with Forbes, John Holdridge, GM of Fullscreen, puts its simply: “TikTok’s success can be attributed to how it flips what we think of as social media on its head, while at the same time returning us all to roots of the original appeal–the ability to go viral.”

  TikTok’s short-style video format has become so popular that it’s inspired a slew of copycat apps, especially in regions like India where TikTok is banned.

  Even established companies like Meta have tried to mimic TikTok’s success. In 2020, Instagram launched “reels,” its own short-form video feature where users can create and share 30 second videos. But Instagram reels failed to overtake TikTok’s growth—instead, reels has become a place for users to share and promote their TikTok videos.

  Facebook/Meta

  Facebook frequently finds itself in the news, given its status as the world’s largest social network. In 2021, however, it was for two different reasons.

  The first was the U.S. Capitol Riot on January 6, 2021. In the aftermath of this event, many blamed Facebook for not doing enough to mitigate the negative effects of its platform—mainly polarization, conspiracy theories, and hate speech.

  The controversy reached its peak in September 2021, when internal files leaked by whistleblower Frances Haugen were published. These documents exposed Facebook’s internal struggles with combating misinformation, as well as employee dissent.

  Ultimately, Facebook weathered the storm and opted to shed its baggage with a new name. Not only does this help the company disassociate from its previous scandals, it also lines up with Mark Zuckerberg’s ambitions of pioneering the metaverse.

  

  Following the announcement, “metaverse” exploded overnight and became one of the hottest topics of 2021. The word “Meta” has also become incredibly valuable—Meta (the company) recently completed a $60 million deal to acquire the trademark assets of Meta Financial Group, a regional U.S. bank.

  Honorable Mentions

  While the companies highlighted above were undeniably influential in 2021, any list like this is bound to be subjective and open to debate. Here is a shortlist of other companies that we considered for the Companies that Defined 2021 list:

  Reddit

  The surge in investment that propelled Robinhood and Coinbase to new heights was partially fueled by communities on Reddit. One of the most fascinating moments of the year came when Reddit user u/deepfuckingvalue appeared before the House Committee on Financial Services proclaiming, “I am not a cat” and “I like the stock”.

  On the business front, the “Front Page of the Internet” saw double-digit user growth during the pandemic, and now has a valuation of $10 billion after a hefty round of funding.

  OpenSea

  NFTs had a Cambrian explosion alongside the crypto bull run, with OpenSea emerging as the dominant marketplace this past year. In the second half of 2021, OpenSea made up 95% of NFT trading volume on major marketplaces, and has transacted $1.42B in volume in December so far.

  While it seemed OpenSea was planning an IPO after their CFO Brian Roberts commented how “you’d be foolish not to think about it [OpenSea] going public,” user backlash resulted in Roberts later tweeting that the company is not actively planning an IPO. Whether or not OpenSea does set sail onto the public markets, they’ll soon have some serious competition from Coinbase’s own NFT marketplace currently in the works.

  Netflix

  Despite intense competition from rival streaming platforms, Netflix will finish the year on top once again. The company has a number of impressive tallies in the win column this year.

  First, Squid Game was a cultural phenomenon, quickly becoming the streaming service’s number one show, and also the world’s most Googled TV show of 2021.

  Next, Netflix’s Red Notice is likely the most watched new movie of 2021, logging well over 300 million hours of viewing time. Not bad, considering its tepid score of 36% on Rotten Tomatoes. It remains to be seen whether deep-pocketed competitors like Disney+ are able to dethrone Netflix, but for now, the company is as culturally relevant as ever.

  SpaceX

  The fact that Elon Musk has two companies in this conversation points to why he was named Time’s Most Influential Person for 2021.

  SpaceX has made launching rockets drastically cheaper in recent years, which helps explain its massive reported valuation of $200 billion. The company, which is the top commercial launch provider in the U.S., will round out the year with 31 launches.

  Which companies would you add to this list?

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 23:20

• Cruise Ships Exposed COVID Fearmongering Deception In 2020 And Expose Vaccine Efficacy Deception Now
  Cruise Ships Exposed COVID Fearmongering Deception In 2020 And Expose Vaccine Efficacy Deception Now

  Authored by Adam Dick via The Ron Paul Institute,

  Back in March of 2020, when the coronavirus fearmongering from politicians and big money media was taking off, an outbreak of coronavirus and several deaths on the Diamond Princess cruise ship was among the examples used to stir up dread of coronavirus among the American populace.

  However, people who looked critically at the Diamond Princess situation realized that it suggested coronavirus did not pose an especially great threat.

  

  Among those more levelheaded individuals was John P.A. Ioannidis, a Stanford University professor of medicine and professor of epidemiology and population health.

  Looking at the infection and fatality numbers from the Diamond Princess, Ioannidis concluded in a March 17, 2020 Stat News article that the coronavirus case fatality rate in the general population would be no greater than the one percent case fatality rate on the cruise ship and would most likely be much lower, noting that the Diamond Princess had “a largely elderly population, in which the death rate from Covid-19 is much higher.”

  Ioannidis got it right.

  But that did not stop government from shutting down much of the American economy and violating freedom Americans had long assumed secure, all in the name of countering the hyped coronavirus threat.

  Fast forward to December of 2021. We are now well into the phase of gaming the coronavirus panic where governments are applying intense pressure on people to take experimental coronavirus “vaccine” shots. Having already blown way out of proportion the threat from coronavirus, politicians and people in the big money media repeatedly assert the safety and effectiveness of these shots despite the abundant evidence that the shots are far from being either safe or effective.

  Just as the Diamond Princess cruise ship coronavirus outbreak helped expose early on the preposterousness of the fearmongering regarding coronavirus, now outbreaks of coronavirus on cruise ships are helping expose the preposterousness of claims that the experimental coronavirus vaccine shots are effective.

  Meryl Kornfield wrote Saturday at the Washington Post regarding the situation of coronavirus outbreaks on cruise ships whose crews and passengers are required to have taken the shots:

  At least six sailings on Royal Caribbean, Holland America, Carnival and others last week were altered by coronavirus outbreaks as cruise ships prepared for pre-pandemic levels before sailings were paused. Although vessels that have resumed cruising have beefed up coronavirus precautions — requiring vaccinations and testing passengers — the wave of new infections, fueled by the quickly proliferating omicron variant, has knocked the devastated industry and alarmed cruisers.

  As in the early months of the coronavirus scare, considering critically what is happening on cruise ships now provides a means to see past the disinformation. The reality on cruise ships, in March of 2020 and in December of 2021, has provided a strong contrast to, respectively, the hyped danger of coronavirus and the hyped efficacy of the experimental coronavirus vaccine shots.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 23:00

• Smash And Grab Robbers Steal $1.5 Million From Luxury Palm Beach Hand Bag Shop
  Smash And Grab Robbers Steal $1.5 Million From Luxury Palm Beach Hand Bag Shop

  A tidal wave of “smash-and-grab” robberies are plaguing upscale stores in major US cities, with thieves making off with millions of dollars. The latest incident occurred at a Palm Beach boutique shop that was hit twice in two weeks. 

  According to local news CBS 12, Only Authentics, a high-end designer bag shop, was targeted by thieves, the first on Dec. 14 and the second on Christmas Eve. Approximately $1.5 million of Hermes, Chanel, Kelly and, and Birkin handbags were stolen. 

  Several bags are worth more than six figures each, store owner Virgil Rogers said. 

  

  “It’s almost like we’re on the wild, wild west here,” he told CBS12 News reporter Andrew Lofholm.

  This is exclusive video obtained by @CBS12 where you can see criminal’s face during the Xmas Eve break-in. pic.twitter.com/q8Tui1SFxZ

  — Andrew Lofholm (@AndrewLofholm) December 28, 2021

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

  After the first break-in, Rogers said he had a special film placed on all storefront windows, making it harder to break through. 

  “We as citizens living on Palm Beach Island especially, we almost live in a bubble, we do, it’s very sad and now it’s come to the homefront and your own home, what’s going on elsewhere,” Rogers said.

  These incidents, called smash and grabs, are well organized and allegedly conducted by criminal gangs who take the loot and resell it online. Luxury retailers from multiple California cities, including San Francisco and Los Angeles, to Palm Beach, have been ideal targets for robberies because of high merchandise items. 

  Major retailers are fed up with the rash of incidents. They have penned a letter to Congress urging lawmakers to pass legislation that would make it harder for thieves to resell stolen goods on online marketplaces that do very little to verify the identity of sellers.

  “As millions of Americans have undoubtedly seen on the news in recent weeks and months, retail establishments of all kinds have seen a significant uptick in organized crime in communities across the nation,” the letter said. 

  Over a ten-day period in November, smash and grab robberies totaled a whopping $350 million in losses for retailers in Los Angeles. 

  Smash and grabs have also moved from cities to suburbs, and some are worried that criminal gangs could soon target upscale homes. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 22:40

• The COVID Narrative Is Insane & Illogical… And Maybe That's No Accident
  The COVID Narrative Is Insane & Illogical… And Maybe That’s No Accident

  Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

  Maybe forcing people to believe your lies, even after you admit you’re lying, is the purest form of power…

  

  “Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense.”

  – George Orwell, 1984

  The “Covid pandemic” narrative is insane. That is long-established at this point, we don’t really need to go into how or why here. Read our back catalogue.

  The rules are meaningless and arbitrary, the messaging contradictory, the very premise nonsensical.

  Every day some new insanity is launched out into the world, and while many of us roll our eyes, raise our voices, or just laugh…many more accept it, believe it, allow it to continue.

  Take the situation in Canada right now, where the government has enforced a vaccine mandate on healthcare workers, meaning in British Columbia alone over 3000 hospital staff were on unpaid leave by November 1st.

  How have local governments responded to staff shortages?

  They are asking vaccinated employees who have tested positive for Covid to work.

  Whether or not you believe the test means anything, they notionally do. In the reality they try to sell us every day, testing positive means you are carrying a dangerous disease.

  So they are requesting people allegedly carrying a “deadly virus” work, rather than letting perfectly healthy unvaccinated people simply have their jobs back.

  This is insanity.

  But could anything more perfectly illustrate the priorities of those running the game?

  We already know it’s not about a virus, it’s not about protecting the health service and it’s not about saving lives. Every day the people running the “pandemic” admit as much by their actions, and even their words.

  Rather, it seems to be about enforcing rules that make little to no sense, requiring conformity at the price of reason, drawing arbitrary lines in the sand and demanding people respect them, making people believe “facts” that are provably untrue.

  But why? Why is the story of Covid irrational and contradictory? Why are we told on the one hand to be afraid, and on the other that there is nothing to be afraid of?

  Why is the “pandemic” so completely insane?

  You could argue that it’s simple happenstance. The by-product of a multi-focused evolving narrative, a story being told by a thousand authors all at once, each concerned with covering their own little patch of agenda. A car with multiple drivers fighting over a single steering wheel.

  There’s probably some truth to that.

  But it’s also true that control, true control, can only be achieved with a lie.

  In clinical psychology one of the diagnostic signs of the psychopath is that they tell elaborate lies, compulsively. Many times they will tell a lie even if the truth would be more beneficial.

  Nobody knows why they do this, but I have a theory, and it applies to the swarming groups of little rat minds running the sewers of power as much as it does any individual monstrosity.

  If you want to control people, you need to lie to them, that’s the only way to guarantee you have power.

  If you are standing in the road, and I yell “look out, there’s a car a coming”, and you move just as a car whips past, I will never know if you moved because I said so, or because there actually was a car.

  If my interest is in making sure you don’t get hurt, this would not matter to me either way.

  But, what if my only true aim is the gratification of watching you do what I say, simply because I said it?

  …well, then I need to scream out a warning of a car that does not exist, and watch you dodge an imaginary threat. Or, indeed, tell you there is no car, and watch you get run over.

  Only by doing this can I see my words mean more to you than perceivable reality, and only then do I know I’m truly in control.

  You can never control people with the truth, because the truth has an existence outside yourself that cannot be altered or directed. It may be the truth itself that controls people, not you.

  You can never force people to obey rules that make sense, because they may be obeying reason, not your force.

  True power lies in making people afraid of something that does not exist, and making them abandon reason in the name of protecting themselves from the invented threat.

  To guarantee you have control, you must make people see things that are not there, make people live in a reality you build around them, and force people to follow arbitrary, contradictory rules that change day by day.

  To truly test their loyalty, their hypnosis, you could even tell them there’s nothing to be afraid of anymore, but they need to follow the rules anyway.

  Maybe that’s the point. Maybe the story isn’t supposed to be believable. Maybe the rules aren’t meant to make sense, they are meant to be obeyed.

  Maybe the more contradictory & illogical the regulations become, the more your compliance is valued.

  Maybe if you can force a person to abandon their judgment in favour of your own, you have total control over their reality.

  We started with an Orwell quote, so let’s end with one too:

  Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.”

  Isn’t that what we’re seeing now? What we’ve been seeing since the beginning?

  People being mind broken into being afraid of something they told isn’t frightening, following rules they are told are not necessary, taking “medicine” they are told does not work.

  Maybe forcing people to believe your lies, even as you admit you are lying, is the purest expression of power.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 22:20

• Texas Inspects Power Plants Ahead Of Freeze Warning
  Texas Inspects Power Plants Ahead Of Freeze Warning

  A cold snap is headed for Texas after New Year’s Eve. The state’s grid operator conducted inspections of mandatory winterization efforts at power plants to avoid repeating last winter’s devastating blackouts. 

  The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) completed inspections at 300 electric generation units, representing 85% of the megawatt-hours lost during last winter’s storm and 22 transmission station facilities.

  ERCOT is “confident that its electric generation fleet and the grid are winterized and ready to provide power,” said Woody Rickerson, Vice President of Grid Planning and Weatherization.

  “New regulations require all electric generation and transmission owners to make significant winterization improvements and our inspections confirm they are prepared,” Rickerson said.

  The announcement comes as new weather models via Bloomberg show average temperatures across Texas are expected to slide beginning this weekend. 

  

  In some cases, the minimum temperature will dive below freezing and could strain ERCOT’s power grid as energy demand would increase. 

  

  In terms of heating degree days, energy demand will skyrocket through the first half of January.  

  

  ERCOT has already sent out a “freeze warning” email to customers, warning them about the upcoming cold blast. 

  As you are aware, there is a freeze predicted in this area. We ask that you take the following precautions to help reduce the potential for damage to property as well as personal injury. -ERCOT

  For the Lower US 48, meteorologists at private weather forecasting firm BAMWX continue to predict colder weather is set to trend for January. 

  There are definitely changes ongoing in the atmosphere that better support a pattern transition and more availability of cold air in January. The orientation of the Polar Vortex should allow cold air to bleed further east rather than be bottled up in W. NA. #Energy #NatGas pic.twitter.com/8ee5OwvMjT

  — BAMWX (@bamwxcom) December 29, 2021

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

  If colder weather is ahead, natural gas prices could get a lift. Futures linked to Henry Hub show an ascending diagonal support line where support could form. 

  

  Since Dec. 9, we’ve had the thesis that a cold blast was due to hit the US Lower 48 in January amid a very mild December.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 22:00

• "Pure Insanity": San Francisco Residents Reflect On Surge In Crime
  “Pure Insanity”: San Francisco Residents Reflect On Surge In Crime

  Authored by Jamie Joseph via The Epoch Times,

  To native San Franciscans, shoplifting and car break-ins are now a normal part of life in a big city.

  

  Car burglaries occur up to 74 times a day in the city and have increased nearly 200 percent since 2020. Some residents are going to extreme lengths to prevent their car windows from being smashed, like leaving their trunks open and their windows down, according to local reports.

  On a recent Saturday at Alamo Square Park across from the famed Painted Ladies houses, Kira Cush, a lifelong San Francisco resident who’s had her car broken into multiple times, said “it’s just something, especially if you live in this area, you need to be mindful to just not leave anything in your car.”

  “And even then, still, cars will get broken into, but you have to be super vigilant about not leaving stuff out,” she told The Epoch Times.

  Loretta, another local resident who declined to give her last name, said suspects will usually target tourists. After her car was broken into, she placed a residential sticker on her windshield to deter burglars.

  “We’ve had people dump goods, like tourists’ backpacks and stuff in our neighborhood from a smash and grab, because they got whatever they wanted, and they just dumped the rest on the street,” the 21-year resident said.

  Hot spots for car break-ins usually happen near heavily crowded tourist attractions, such as Lombard Street, Pier 39, Golden Gate Park, and Moraga Stairs.

  

  Cars and tables fill a parking lot next to a restaurant and bay cruise terminal at the Fisherman’s Wharf tourist destination in San Francisco on June 14, 2021. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

  At the Pier 39 parking lot, a resident of 46 years could be seen driving around and yelling at tourists to find another parking location. He told The Epoch Times he decided to take matters into his own hands and visit every morning until noon to warn tourists about the car break-ins.

  “What’s happened over the last 10 months is that this crime has escalated, from hitting cars, to robbing tourists, to robbing locals, to robbing stores. I mean, it’s just gotten rampant, absolutely rampant,” he said.

  The local declined to give his name out of fear he would be identified by suspects.

  “The cops aren’t going to make arrests, and the [district attorney] is not going to prosecute. Then the only way to stop this is to basically have less food for the street sharks to go after. So, you have to warn people, you have to physically warn them not to leave anything in their cars,” he said.

  Large-scale smash-and-grab robberies have also been making national headlines—drawing additional criticism to the city’s progressive criminal reform policies.

  Many store owners in Chinatown have changed their hours and now lock up their shops when the sun goes down. Walgreens hired off-duty cops to guard their stores and closed five of its 53 locations. Retail shops are relying on private security guards to deter shoplifters. A security guard in Oakland was shot and killed while protecting a KRON4 News reporter.

  And San Francisco Mayor London Breed recently announced a local state of emergency in the Tenderloin district to counter the open-air drug market and curtail assaults in the neighborhood.

  

  Police patrol Union Square in San Francisco on Nov. 30, 2021. Stores have increased security in response to a spike in thefts. (Ethan Swope/Getty Images)

  Crime Wave Controversy

  While brazen thefts at small businesses and retail stores in San Francisco have increased, drawing national headlines since the beginning of this year, some business owners told The Epoch Times they’ve stopped reporting the crimes because when they call the police, “they can’t do anything.”

  Some point to Proposition 47, a seven-year-old initiative that reduced some sentences from felonies to misdemeanors. Under the law, up to $950 can be stolen before it’s considered a felony. Even when arrests are made, they’re not held for long under the state’s zero cash bail policy.

  The California Supreme Court ruled in March that judges must consider a suspect’s financial ability to pay when setting bail prices, which permits the defendants to walk freely until further legal action is taken unless they’re deemed too dangerous.

  And in the wake of new progressive district attorneys across the country vowing to redefine criminal justice, San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin has taken the bulk of the blame in the eyes of locals who don’t think he’s doing enough to penalize criminals.

  Promising a more equitable justice system, Boudin—who is also facing a potential recall in June 2022—defended Prop. 47 in a SF Gate column on Dec. 21, a few weeks after a string of organized retail gangs committed smash-and-grab robberies across several shopping centers including Union Square and Santana Way.

  “Blaming legal reforms is equally misguided. Rolling back Proposition 47 would not solve the problems we are facing now. California’s felony theft threshold of $950 is still among the lowest in the country—38 states have felony thresholds at or above $1,000—and Texas has a threshold of $2,500,” Boudin wrote.

  “Proposition 47 also passed seven years ago and was followed by a decline in property crimes. Its passage did not prevent prosecutors from being able to hold those who commit organized retail thefts accountable; for example, all the charges in Union Square were still felonies.”

  Even though city stats show there’s been a slight decline in property crimes this year, it’s likely the data does not accurately reflect the real numbers when considering many business owners have stopped reporting crimes, according to a local activist.

  

  Union Square visitors look at damage to a Louis Vuitton store in San Francisco, Calif., on Nov. 21, 2021. (Danielle Echeverria/San Francisco Chronicle via AP)

  “I never used to see the amount of shoplifting that we have today. Never—it is pure insanity. It is awful. It’s off the charts,” San Francisco resident and activist Erica Sandberg told The Epoch Times.

  Sandberg said one of her friends was also attacked outside of his apartment by someone who tried to stab him.

  “It’s really hard for me to say that this is normal because it’s not normal. But it is increasingly common,” she said.

  According to a retail study from August, about 69 percent of retailers nationwide said they saw an increase in organized retail crime activity over the past year. Some of the potential driving factors include COVID-19 restrictions, policing, changes to sentencing guidelines, and the growth of online marketplaces for criminal activity.

  “Perpetrators are becoming more common in an era where it is easy to evade prosecution,” one retailer noted in the survey.

  Making matters worse, the San Francisco Police Department is significantly understaffed, with patrol units suffering the most, according to Sergeant Richard Cibotti. He told The Epoch Times the department currently loses between 5-10 officers a month to other departments or retirement.

  “A lot of cops have felt like they’ve lost a purpose,” Cibotti said.

  “They’ve gotten the job because they wanted to help people and go out and you know, make arrests and try to improve life in the community. But when they go out, and they make arrests … when the people that they arrest are getting no consequences, it feels like they’ve lost their purpose.”

  He said every day around 7:00 pm, high-end retail stores—like Louis Vuitton—in Union Square close for the evening. There’s also an added police presence to the area until the holiday season is over.

  

  Pedestrians walk past a Fendi store with boarded up windows near Union Square in San Francisco in Nov. 30, 2021. (Ethan Swope/Getty Images)

  Small Business Owner Speaks Out

  Michael Hsu spent one dismal morning sweeping up broken glass from the entryway of his sneaker and clothing shop, Footprint, located on the corner of Taraval Street and 27th Avenue. However, it was business as usual when his employees came to work that day.

  “We have a smile on our face. We just have to carry on. We can’t close our store. We still have to pay rent. We still have our employees, they still have to eat, so we just carry on like we normally would,” Hsu told The Epoch Times.

  The previous night, a suspect blowtorched the front entryway before clearing the shelves of thousands of dollars in brand-name hoodies, shirts, shoes, and other accessories. No arrests were made, but some of the items were later found. It’s still under investigation with the San Francisco Police Department, Hsu said.

  Later that same day, looters entered the shop and stole more items. It was another hit to Hsu’s morale. He urged his district supervisor, Gordon Mar, to set up a relief fund to help businesses recover from burglaries. Mayor London Breed joined Mar in holding a press conference at Footprint to announce the Storefront Vandalism Relief Grant—a $2,000 program to help small businesses who’ve been victimized by burglaries.

  That was in February. In September, Hsu’s store was hit yet again. This time, surveillance video—bought with funds from the vandalism relief grant—showed that the suspect climbed up the exterior wall’s scaffolding and broke through the window to Hsu’s office. Thousands of dollars in goods were stolen again.

  “Crime is there, and it seems like there’s no consequences,” Hsu said, adding that Prop. 47 sends the wrong message to San Franciscans. “As a new father, I don’t want my kid to know that—we need to teach them the difference between right and wrong, and let them know it’s not okay to take anything, even if it’s $1. It’s not okay, and that’s the message that we really need to be sending out.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 21:40

• "Journalism Is Not Sedition": US & Taiwan Blast China's Crackdown On Hong Kong Free Media
  “Journalism Is Not Sedition”: US & Taiwan Blast China’s Crackdown On Hong Kong Free Media

  Following the widely reported Hong Kong police raid on the independent news outlet Stand News Wednesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken issued swift condemnation on what’s clearly an ongoing pro-China crackdown against any HK opposition media.

  Blinken called on China’s ruling Communist Party and local HK police to “cease targeting” the city’s “free and independent media and to immediately release those journalists and media executives who have been unjustly detained and charged.”

  

  He further said that Hong Kong should return to its former status of promoting freedoms that allowed the city to “flourish as a global center for finance, trade, education, and culture,” adding that “journalism is not sedition,” according to Axios. “By silencing independent media, [China’s government] and local authorities undermine Hong Kong’s credibility and viability.  A confident government that is unafraid of the truth embraces a free press.”

  At least 200 police had raided Stand News on Wednesday, arresting at least six editors and journalists, forcing the opposition-sympathetic outlet to cease all publication. Two editors have been charged with “sedition” while others are still being held for questioning.

  On Thursday the Associated Press confirmed that “Two former editors from a Hong Kong online pro-democracy news outlet were charged with sedition and denied bail Thursday, a day after one of the last openly critical voices in the city said it would cease operations following a police raid on its office and seven arrests.”

  The entire company is facing legal action: “According to a charge sheet, national security police filed one count each of conspiracy to publish a seditious publication against Chung Pui-kuen and Patrick Lam, former editors at Stand News,” AP details. “Police also said they would prosecute the company for sedition.”

  Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam justified the police raid and the arrests, claiming that “inciting other people… could not be condoned under the guise of news reporting” – to describe the independent news outlet’s supposed actions. 

  NEW – #Taiwan stands with Hong Kong as China continues to crackdown on free speech, the Taiwanese president vows. https://t.co/M8lMhPSQCZ

  — Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 29, 2021

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

  US-backed Taiwan was also quick to issue a message backing the detained news staff, with President Tsai Ing-wen saying that “Taiwan stands with Hong Kong” and against China’s “crackdown on free speech.”

  Her public statement said, “The arrests of Stand News staff and singer Denise Ho are yet another example of the Beijing authorities’ crackdown on free speech in Hong Kong. We in Taiwan regret to see their detention and call on the international community to stand up for freedom & democracy in HK.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 21:20

• Most Americans Don't Trust Teachers, Schools With Children's Gender Identity: Survey
  Most Americans Don’t Trust Teachers, Schools With Children’s Gender Identity: Survey

  Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times,

  A majority of Americans say that male and female are the only two genders, and that schools shouldn’t be allowed to counsel children about gender or sexuality without parents’ consent, according to the results of a survey released Monday.

  

  The survey was conducted by Rasmussen Reports among 1,000 American adults from Dec. 21 to 22, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points at and 95 percent confidence level. It comes amid a social media firestorm sparked by Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling, who was accused of engaging in “hate speech” for insisting that there are only two biologically distinct genders.

  “Transgender activists have accused J.K. Rowling of ‘hate speech’ for saying it, but most Americans agree with the Harry Potter author that there are only two genders,” the report said.

  Rasmussen asked participants whether they agree with the statement, “There are only two genders: male and female.”

  The results show that 75 percent of them agreed with the statement, with 63 percent saying they “strongly” agree.

  Those identifying as Republicans (82 percent) are more likely to strongly agree than Democrats (47 percent) and independent or unaffiliated respondents (60 percent). There are also more black (68 percent) than white respondents (63 percent) or those of other races (55 percent) who strongly agreed that there are only two genders.

  When it comes to the schools and teachers’ role in shaping children’s view on gender, most respondents also said that they don’t want their children counseled by schools on their gender identity without their consent.

  The survey asked whether schools and teachers should be “allowed to counsel students about their sexual and gender identity without parental knowledge or consent.” Overall, 69 percent of respondents said they don’t agree, compared to 19 percent that think it is okay.

  Majorities of all political categories—80 percent of Republicans, 54 percent of Democrats, and 72 percent of independents—are opposed to schools counseling children on gender identity without informing parents.

  The results of the survey echoed the frustration felt by a California mother who recently made national headlines after she tore into the local school board during a meeting, accusing two middle school teachers of “coaching” her gender dysphoric daughter into an LGBTQ club without her knowledge.

  Jessica Konen of Salinas, California, went public with her story after controversy erupted over a leaked audio clip, in which two seventh-grade teachers from Buena Vista Middle School were recorded discussing with other teachers on how to hide from conservative parents that their children are participating in progressive LGBTQ activities.

  “Because we are not official, we have no club rosters. We keep no records,” said one teacher, who is also an LGBTQ club leader.

  “In fact, sometimes we don’t really want to keep records because if parents get upset that their kids are coming? We’re like, ‘Yeah, I don’t know. Maybe they came?’ You know, we would never want a kid to get in trouble for attending if their parents are upset.”

  Konen told The Epoch Times that near the end of sixth grade, her daughter told her she might be “bisexual.” By the middle of the seventh grade, Konen was called to the school for a meeting, during which a teacher said her daughter was “trans fluid” and would be called by a new name and male pronouns and would be using the unisex restroom at school.

  “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,” Konen said at the Dec. 15 meeting. “How do you not know what’s going on [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.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 21:00

• NYC Taxi Medallions Have Plunged in Value By 90% In Less Than A Decade
  NYC Taxi Medallions Have Plunged in Value By 90% In Less Than A Decade

  While taxi drivers in New York City may have finally “ridden” out the absolute worst effects of enduring the ridesharing boom and the pandemic at the same time, the road to clearer skies still looks dim. 

  That’s because, as was pointed out by @JBaksht on Twitter this week, taxi medallions have still plunged 90% over the last decade.

  The plunge in medallion value came at the same time that Lyft and Uber began to register hundreds of thousands of daily trips in New York City. Prior to the pandemic, Uber had peaked at over 500,000 trips per day, while Lyft was approaching 200,000 trips per day. 

  

  Medallions suffered their “death blow” from the pandemic in early 2020, which saw their value plunge to just pennies on the dollar from what they had cost a decade prior. 

  Medallions cost about $300,000 in the early 2000s. By 2010, they had increased in price to almost $1,000,000. But when ridesharing firms entered the market, they crashed to under $100,000, leaving many drivers in financial ruin. 

  We noted back in November that drivers had finally “won one” after they secured help in slashing the balances they owed on their medallions. But this small respite belies a decade ridden with plunging business, years of hard work saving for medallions wiped away, driver suicides and an all-out upending of a business that once had a strong moat.

  Drivers did get relief last month when a deal between New York City’s municipal government, a private equity firm that had become the single largest taxi medallion creditor, and an advocacy group that spoke for thousands of taxi drivers resulted in slashing loan balances for drivers. Some loans were as high as $500,000 and are now just $170,000, which allows drivers to make reasonable and far more manageable payments every month.

  Recall, in January of this year, we wrote that medallion lenders had started to demand payments after suspending collections for several months during the worst of the pandemic. Recalling that the collapse in medallion prices began before the outbreak – in January, NYC launched a city task force which proposed a $500 million bailout for drivers’ loans. This was followed by a February threat by NY State Attorney General Letitia A. James, to sue the city for $810 million to compensate drivers.

  After the pandemic hit, efforts to help NYC cab drivers – over 90% of whom are immigrants, evaporated.

  In 2013, yellow cabs made nearly half a million trips a day. In 2020, that number dropped to 50 – 60 thousand. But the yellow cab industry was already hemorrhaging trips pre-pandemic.

  As unregulated vehicles for hire flooded the streets, investment-backed platforms such as Uber and Lyft undercut fares, able to absorb the loss. As riders flocked to these cheaper and more accessible taxis, yellow cabdrivers were left in the dust. –CNN

  While our euphoric and completely nonsensical public markets continue to subsidize cash burning ridesharing companies, we have to admit that it’s nice to see NYC’s taxi drivers finally win one...it’s been a long road.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 20:40

• Transportation Vs Destination: Maxwell's Conviction Leaves Glaring Questions Over The Lack Of Prosecutions
  Transportation Vs Destination: Maxwell’s Conviction Leaves Glaring Questions Over The Lack Of Prosecutions

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  The conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell for five out of six criminal charges was heralded by many as bringing some justice for the girls abused through her actions. Indeed, the Southern District of New York correctly called the underlying conduct as “one of the worst crimes imaginable – facilitating and participating in the sexual abuse of children.” However, that statement only begged the question of why none of the men listed on flights of the “Lolita Express” or on the guest lists of these parties have been prosecuted. That list includes former presidents Bill Clinton and Donald Trump as well as Prince Andrew and an assortment of billionaires. It is not clear if these men committed criminal acts but it is also not clear that they have been formally questioned by the FBI.

  

  As I discussed last night, this criminal enterprise was allegedly not only to bring girls and women to Epstein but to his powerful friends. Without pursuing those alleged “johns,” the Maxwell prosecution seems like arresting a getaway driver but letting the bank robbers escape.

  The pictures of men on these trips are now well-known.  They do not in themselves establish criminal conduct. For example, the pictures of Clinton getting a message from a 22-year-old woman is not illegal and she later described him as a “perfect gentleman.”

  

  However, Clinton has been accused of misleading the public on his number of flights with Epstein.  The media has reported at least 26 flights with Epstein. Being a repeated guest with an infamous child molester raises obvious concerns. It is certainly enough to warrant questioning by the FBI.

  Then there is Prince Andrew who has been pursued for questioning. Much of the litigation, however, has come from civil litigation. Prince Andrew recently put forward a novel defense in one such case.

  

  Yet, there is a concern that the Justice Department has previously worked to scuttle rather than to pursue the underlying wrongdoing, including a disgraceful plea agreement. I was an early and vocal critic of that deal with Epstein. Despite a strong case for prosecution, Epstein’s lawyers were able to secure a ridiculous deal with prosecutors. He was accused of abusing more than forty minor girls (with many between the ages of 13 and 17).  Epstein pleaded guilty to a Florida state charge of felony solicitation of underage girls in 2008 and served a 13-month jail sentence.  Epstein was facing a 53-page indictment that could have resulted in life in prison. However, he got the 13 month deal. Moreover, to my lasting surprise, former Miami U.S. attorney Alexander Acosta was inexplicably made labor secretary under Trump.  He later resigned.

  While the FBI aggressively (and correctly) pursued Maxwell, there is no evidence of such a concerted effort to investigate the men who may have been involved in sex trafficking. Given the all-out effort on Ashley Biden’s diary, it would be good to see an equal effort on Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged co-conspirators.

  If Epstein allegedly transported women and girls to his island for visits with himself and these men, there is ample reason to interview them. It is not clear if Maxwell has further evidence to offer, but this is the time to produce it. While she is not practically looking at 65 years, she can easily receive a sentence around 15 years even as a first offender. That sentence could be reduced with cooperation credit. What is not clear is how focused the SDNY is on developing cases that focus not just on the “transportation” but the destination of these flights.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 20:20

• Israel Mulls 'Herd Immunity' Covid Strategy As Global 'Pox Party' Pivot Continues
  Israel Mulls ‘Herd Immunity’ Covid Strategy As Global ‘Pox Party’ Pivot Continues

  Last week South Africa became the first country to dial back COVID-19 restrictions after it became clear that the Omicron variant was far more mild than other strains, and that it had peaked much sooner than expected. 

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

  Let us remind you that South Africa is roughly 75% unvaccinated.

  

  Three days later, the US CDC made major changes to their Covid isolation mandates – including cutting quarantine from 10 days to 5 days (plus 5 days of masking), and eliminating PCR tests from it’s end-of-isolation guidelines. And they swear it isn’t because of test-kit shortages and/or their decision not to distribute rapid tests to Americans before the holidays.

  Tell us you want everyone to get Covid without telling us you want everyone to get Covid.

  JUST IN – UK PM Boris Johnson says “people should go out and celebrate New Year’s Eve” despite a record number of cases (The Times)

  — Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 29, 2021

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

  

  As a related aside, informed Zero Hedge reader Doug R. notes regarding the CDC’s ‘substantial’ revision in Omicron cases – where they now say it jumped from 3% infectivity to 58.6% of all cases over the course of two weeks (revised down from an even more implausible 73% they first reported): “Sorry, still not buying it. This still implies a level of infectivity that is hard to believe. My guess is the real starting point was it was already in the range of 10%-20% market share, and the CDC completely missed it. In part because it is so mild, but in larger part because they failed at their job of detecting and tracking. Because they are bad at what they do.”

  And now, Israel is mulling a new ‘herd immunity’ policy amid a second day of spiking cases.

  According to the Times of Israel:

  Israel recorded almost 3,000 new coronavirus cases for the second day in a row, according to data released Wednesday, as the infection rate continued to climb and senior Health Ministry officials were reportedly weighing a switch to a policy of reaching herd immunity through mass infection.

  …

  For the first time, most Omicron infections were recorded in the community, not in people who recently returned from abroad or those they came in contact with, indicating the true figures are likely much higher than the official ones.

  …

  In light of the lack of immediate rise in serious illness, Channel 12 news reported Tuesday evening that senior officials in the Health Ministry have recently raised the option of switching to a “mass infection model.”

  The plan would mirror Sweden’s policy in the early stage of the pandemic – which essentially meant doing nothing to restrict the spread for people who aren’t in at-risk groups. Israeli officials estimate that within two weeks, Omicron will account for 90% of Covid-19 cases across the country.

  Back to Doug R., he poses the following thought exercise: “If Omicron was the original virus, and behaving this way, how would society have reacted?  My guess, very differently to how it is reacting now.  No global freakout, lockdowns, and NO treatment with vaccinations.  It wouldn’t be necessary.  But we are now where we are, which provokes an incredibly strong and odd reaction to something that appears so mild, and may be a free vaccine.”

  Maybe policymakers are finally catching on? Their corporate media wing seems to have gotten the memo.

  As I said a few days ago, there is a big narrative shift going on: it is the lead story in the NYT morning brief today.

  Now even more evident since clearly the biggest MSM m0r0ns have their marching orders to downplay “cases” https://t.co/QEY1ZHhGRI

  — Barbarian Capital (@BarbarianCap) December 30, 2021

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 20:00

• Biden Admin Urges Supreme Court To Let It End "Remain In Mexico" Program
  Biden Admin Urges Supreme Court To Let It End “Remain In Mexico” Program

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  Department of Justice lawyers late Wednesday asked the Supreme Court to hear a case involving the “Remain in Mexico” program.

  

  The policy was started during the Trump administration and forces many asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their claims are heard.

  The Biden administration ended it but was ordered by a judge over the summer to relaunch it. The judge said Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas didn’t adequately consider the benefits of the program, which included deterring some would-be illegal immigrants from entering the United States.

  Mayorkas came up with a new memorandum in October attempting to end the program again, but an appeals court upheld the judge’s ruling, asserting the memo didn’t affect the ongoing case because it “simply reaffirmed the termination decision that the states had been challenging all along.”

  Biden administration lawyers in the filing Wednesday told the Supreme Court that decision was made in error. The administration wants the nation’s top court to hear arguments from both sides and rule on the matter.

  “The court of appeals’ decision has enormous legal and practical consequences, and there are compelling reasons for the court to review it promptly,” they wrote in a 45-page writ of certiorari.

  One argument put forth—that the lower courts “improperly dictated the exercise of the executive’s statutory discretion.”

  “By requiring the executive to engage in ongoing negotiations with a foreign sovereign over the contours of a border-wide immigration program, the lower courts effected a major and ‘unwarranted judicial interference in the conduct of foreign policy’ and executive prerogative,” the Biden administration said.

  “Remain in Mexico” relies upon the Mexican government agreeing to allow the United States to move asylum seekers into Mexico.

  After months of negotiations, the two countries reached a compromise on Dec. 2 to reboot the program.

  If the Supreme Court doesn’t step in, the policy will stay in place unless Mexican officials stop cooperating or Congress approves funding to detain all the illegal immigrants that enter the United States, Biden administration lawyers said.

  U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump nominee, found in August that federal law mandates immigration officers detain all illegal aliens unless there is no doubt that they are entitled to be admitted into the country.

  Without “Remain in Mexico,” the government is “forced to release and parole aliens into the United States because defendants simply do not have the resources to detain aliens as mandated by statute,” he said.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 19:40

• Xi'an Paralyzes By Panic As Millions Struggle To Buy Groceries
  Xi’an Paralyzes By Panic As Millions Struggle To Buy Groceries

  As the lockdown in Xi’an continues through its second week, 13M residents are getting a taste of what life was like for the millions in Wuhan who suffered through that city’s 70+ day lockdown back in the spring of 2020.

  

  Xi’an has counted more than 1,000 cases, with none confirmed to be omicron (China has found some omicron cases in Shanghai and the southern part of the country). As a result, the city has been on total lockdown – with people only allowed to leave once every few days to buy essential goods like groceries.

  According to a report in the Caixin business journal, many are struggling to buy groceries as city life grinds to a halt.

  Residents in the capital of Shaanxi province have been told since Monday to stay at home unless they need to be out for nucleic acid testing. The city, home to almost 13 million residents, went into lockdown Dec. 23, with movement of the people curtailed and risk areas sealed, amid a growing delta outbreak traced to a Dec. 4 flight from Pakistan. The city has recorded a total number of 1,137 locally confirmed cases between Dec. 9 and Dec. 29.

  Desperate residents have taken to social media to complain about online food orders – a last resort for many – that have gone undelivered. Local authorities since Tuesday night started mobilizing districts to deliver free food to residents in sealed areas, but a large number of people still face difficulties in procuring daily necessities.

  Meanwhile, residents are also affected by disruptions in health services. Chen Wei’s wife, who is four months pregnant, felt abdominal pain on Saturday, but their community didn’t have designated vehicles for medical purposes, so they had to improvise and find their own treatment: “But now it’s not possible to get approval to go out at all,” Chen told Caixin.

  Authorities say the outbreak in Xi’an is still in the “rapid development” stage.

  At a press conference Wednesday, He Qinghua, a senior official with the National Health Commission, said the local outbreak is still in a rapid development stage, with linked cases reported in other cities in Shaanxi and elsewhere outside the province. That means Xi’an is still unlikely to lift the lockdown anytime soon.

  Caixin’s report painted a picture of a city in chaos.

  Li, the resident of the urban village, reported the shortage of supplies to the city’s hotlines, but no feedback was received. On Friday, rice and eggs in the village supermarket were quickly sold out. And with a further tightening of the disease control measures, all shops in the village were closed on Sunday.

  Another Xi’an resident said the city does not have a shortage of supplies, but it lacks enough delivery workers.

  Meanwhile, there’s also information asymmetry in the city. “I heard that some supermarkets in the community cannot get their vegetables sold, while residents don’t know how to buy them,” he said.

  Residents with chronic health issues are facing a serious problem: many have lost practically all access to care as resources are diverted to dealing with the COVID outbreak. Many hospitals in the city have stopped accepting new or transferred patients, creating serious bottlenecks to care.

  Stringent epidemic control measures have disrupted health services across the city, affecting many local patients, including kidney disease patients who urgently need treatment.

  Chen, who lives in Xi’an’s Weiyang district, on Saturday called his resident community’s management office, hoping to take his wife to the hospital for an examination. But the office said they are not authorized to give permission, and Chen’s attempts to contact his community and disease control authorities to get approval were in vain.

  Another patient with cancer told Caixin that she has had her treatment delayed for several days, after the hospital she attends suspended its outpatient services on Dec. 16.

  “It hurts and I cannot sleep at night, so I can only bite my quilt. I feel it cannot be delayed any longer,” she told Caixin. Prior to the lockdown, local authorities had assured tumor patients would be able to get treatment; however, even patients who are not in sealed areas have been cut off from treatment, she said.

  For what it’s worth, the Global Times reported that the real problem isn’t shortages of food supplies, but a difficulty in the “last mile” delivery that’s supposed to bring food products to customers placing orders. In response, officials from Xixian New District said at a press conference on Thursday that they are actively coordinating the supply chain, and that they have also set up 1,603 WeChat groups, covering 195 communities, to supply more than 30 kinds of food and medicine for local residents.

  Although there have been reports that some hospitals are resuming service for patients who make an appointment.

  The outbreak has also impacted some college students who are in the middle of exams. Some have borne the expense of living in hotels while the process is disrupted.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 19:20

• COVID & Corrupt Federal Statistics
  COVID & Corrupt Federal Statistics

  Authored by James Bovard,

  Federal agencies don’t count what politicians don’t want to know. President Biden and other Democrats continuously invoke “science and data” to sanctify all their Covid-19 mandates and policies, but the same shenanigans and willful omissions have characterized Covid data.

  

  During his update on his Winter Covid Campaign on Tuesday, President Biden declared, “Almost everyone who has died from COVID-19 in the past many months has been unvaccinated.” This was true from the start of the pandemic in early 2020, until the vaccines’ efficacy began failing badly in recent months. Oregon officially classifies roughly a quarter of its Covid fatalities since August as “vaccine breakthrough deaths.” In Illinois, roughly 30 percent of Covid fatalities have occurred among fully vaccinated individuals. According to the Vermont Department of Health, “Half of the [Covid] deaths in August were breakthrough cases. Almost three-quarters of them in September were,” as well, according to Burlington, Vermont TV station WCAX.

  The Biden administration guaranteed that the vast majority of “breakthrough” infections would not be counted when the Centers for Disease Control in May ceased keeping track of “breakthrough” infections unless they resulted in hospitalization or death. Ignoring that data permitted Biden to go on CNN in July and make the ludicrously false assertion: “You’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.” But federal data on fully vaxxed Covid fatalities is far flimsier and less reliable than the numbers compiled by some states. Honestly recognizing the limits of vaccines could be fatal to Biden’s push for compulsory vaccinations.

  The same policymakers who claim to be guided by data have little or no idea how many Americans have been hit by Covid. According to the CDC, there have been 51,115,304 Covid cases in America. But a different CDC web page estimates that there had been 146.6 million Covid infections in the US as of October 2, 2021. That CDC analysis estimated that only one in four Covid infections have been reported, which would mean that based on the latest official case numbers, more than 200 million Americans have contracted Covid. For Biden and his fellow policymakers, a potential error of 150 million Covid infections is “close enough for government work.” Relying on the lower number is convenient for policymakers who want to continue ignoring the natural immunity acquired by 199 million Americans who survived Covid infections.

  Deceptive federal Covid data is not an anomaly. The same charades permeate the official data guiding both domestic and foreign policies.

  Federal education policy has perennially been exempt from the fraud penalties that the Federal Trade Commission inflicts on private corporations. The No Child Left Behind Act, passed in 2002, promised that federal mandates would make all students proficient in reading and math by the year 2014. Almost half the states responded to the law’s perverse incentives by “dumbing down” academic standards, lowering passing scores on tests to avoid harsh federal sanctions. It was obvious within the first year that the law was backfiring, but the feds covered up the catastrophe to permit President George W. Bush and other politicians to continue lying about saving America’s children.

  Food stamps have been one of the most popular ways for politicians to prove their love of downtrodden Americans. Liberals perennially claim that the food stamp program has a fraud rate of only one percent. But that is based solely on the number of violators who get caught, and federal rules discourage states (which administer the program) from vigorously pursuing violators. New Mexico Human Services Secretary Sidonie Squier complained in 2013 that the biggest fraud issue in her state was recipients selling their food-stamp Electronic Benefit (EBT) Cards and claiming that they were lost or stolen. Roughly 70 percent of all the EBT cards issued in New Mexico in 2012 were replacement cards. Squier told Albuquerque’s KOB-TV, “We know that there are some people who lose them four, six, or eight times, and it’s pretty suspicious, but you can’t do anything about it based on the federal rules. They want people to have the cards — they want the cards replaced.”

  The Peace Corps, one of the most sainted federal agencies, is also guilty of perennially covering up deadly risks to its recruits. The Peace Corps has long acted as if its volunteers’ good intentions are body armor that shield them against all perils. But its basic model – sending inexperienced young college graduates to live and work alone in many of the world’s most dangerous nations – is failing mightily. The Peace Corps routinely buries evidence of rapes suffered by its volunteers. Michael O’Neill, the Peace Corps’ security director from 1995 to 2002, commented, “Nobody wanted to talk about security [for volunteers]. It suppresses the recruitment numbers.” After a 29-year-old volunteer was gang-raped in Bangladesh, Rep. Ted Poe (R-Tx) condemned the agency’s reaction: “For political reasons, the Peace Corps did everything it could to ignore and cover up the dastardly deed, blaming the crime on the victim.” A 2021 USA Today investigation found that the agency continues suppressing evidence even though almost half of the female Peace Corps recruits “who finished service in 2019 were sexually assaulted in some way.” But this horrendous failure rarely shows up in the agency’s endless press release victory proclamations.

  Federal statistics cannot raise the dead, but they can make troublesome corpses vanish. The Obama administration vastly increased drone killings of terrorist suspects in many nations and claimed that almost all the victims were bad guys. A Salon analysis, summarizing an NBC News report, noted, “Even while admitting that the identities of many killed by drones were not known, the CIA documents asserted that all those dead were enemy combatants. The logic is twisted: If we kill you, then you were an enemy combatant.” Daniel Hale, a former Air Force intelligence analyst, leaked information revealing that nearly 90% of people who were killed in drone strikes were not the intended targets. Biden’s Justice Department responded by coercing Hale into pleading guilty to “retention and transmission of national security information.”

  Since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, the media has portrayed federal officials like Tony Fauci as America’s “best and brightest.” But Washington is full of Towers of Paternalist Babel built on statistical quicksand. Bureaucracies conspire against admitting their failures, and politicians often rig reporting requirements to hide the damage their laws inflict. Anyone who has blind faith in federal data is unfit to judge public policy in the real world.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 19:00

• Revisiting 2021's Themes
  Revisiting 2021’s Themes

  Goldman Sachs has unleashed its annual ‘themes of the year’ crossword, but before we dive into that, the following six quotes seemed to sum things up rather well:

  “The volatility in individual stocks driven by casino-like trading is a by-product of a culture of extreme risk-taking… But today’s investors also don’t necessarily understand the amount of risk that they’re taking.”

  – Arthur Levitt, Former Chair, US Securities and Exchange Commission

  “All major commodity bull markets and inflationary episodes have been invariably tied to re-distributional, or populist, policies that have reduced income and wealth inequality.”

  – Jeff Currie, GS Global Head of Commodities Research

  “A core group of crypto people see this as – and I quote from the Blue Brothers here – “a mission from god”… They will never sell. And because of that, bitcoin and ether can’t go to zero.”

  – Michael Novogratz, Co-Founder and CEO, Galaxy Digital Holdings

  “The pandemic compressed about 20 years of change into 20 weeks, marking the biggest shift in the way people work since WWII.”

  – Erik Brynjolfsson, Professor, Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI

  “Europe has seldom missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity over the last decade.”

  – Timothy Garton Ash, Professor, University of Oxford

  “The Fed’s delayed and slow reaction to inflationary pressures has unfortunately increased the probability that it will have to slam on the brakes by raising rates very quickly after tapering and at a more aggressive pace than it would have if it started to tighten policy earlier.”

  – Mohamed A. El-Erian, President, Queens’ College, Cambridge University

  Now, get to scribbling:

  

  *  *  *

  Across:

  6. Nicholas Bloom, Professor of Economics at Stanford University, finds that about _______ of all working days were spent working from home during the height of the pandemic (Issue 100).

  7. Christian Mueller-Glissmann, GS Senior Multi-Asset Strategist, has found that _______ portfolios often suffer during or after periods of high and rising inflation (Issue 97).

  12. In the process of going public, a SPAC sells units consisting of a common share and a fractional _______ , with each whole _______ allowing an investor to purchase one common share (Issue 95).

  13.  According to George Magnus, Associate at the China Center, Oxford University, President Xi Jinping’s personal agenda is to revamp the party-centered China model to put _______ back into the phrase ” _______ with Chinese characteristics” (Issue 101).

  15. Mohamed A. El-Erian, Chief Economic Advisor at Allianz, argues that survey-based inflation _______ are not well anchored, as both short and long-term _______ have risen lately (Issue 103).

  17. The _______ Inflation Targeting framework was adopted by the Fed at the 2020 Jackson Hole Symposium (Issue 97).

  18. Enrico Moretti, Professor of Economics at the University of California, Berkeley, argues that pandemic-related shifts in work are unlikely to cause a permanent shift in the economic _______ of the US (Issue 100).

  19. David Brady, Professor of Political Economy at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, argues that the Senate tends to be more _______ than the House, and this more _______ tendency is apparent in the historic pattern of failed legislation (Issue 99).

  21. _______ are the building blocks of technology, and are central inputs in many everyday devices (Issue 103).

  24. Jeff Currie, GS Global Head of Commodities Research, argues that a _______ tax/price is the most efficient way to solve climate change (Issue 104).

  25. In order to be approved to receive funds from the EU Recovery Fund, EU member states must commit to spending a minimum of 20% of expenditures on _______ (Issue 102).

  26. Dean Baker, Co-Founder of the Center for Economic Policy Research, believes that there has been a permanent shift in thinking about the role of _______ policy in supporting the economy (Issue 99).

  27. Political _______ in the US has increased over the past several decades as both the Democratic and Republican parties have become more ideological (Issue 99).

  28. A Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC) takes a company public through a _______ (Issue 95).

  30. Nouriel Roubini, Professor of Economics at NYU’s Stern School of Business, doesn’t believe that cryptocurrencies are _______ , because cryptocurrencies have no income or utility that can be used to determine their fundamental value (Issue 98).

  Down:

  1. According to Michele Della Vigna, GS Head of Energy Industry Research, capital markets are driving de-carbonization through a _______ in the cost of capital between high and low carbon investments (Issue 104).

  2. Jan Hatzius, GS Head of GIR and Chief Economist, doesn’t find the discussion of _______ very illuminating in the context of one-off spending increases, because _______ are a longer-run concept (Issue 97).

  3. According to Romano Prodi, former Prime Minister of Italy and former President of the European Commission, _______ is the biggest obstacle to further EU integration (Issue 102).

  4. Michael Klausner, Professor of Business and Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, believes that the shareholder _______ inherent in the structure of SPACs has made them a bad deal for post-merger investors (Issue 95).

  5. A wage-price _______ occurs when wage increases lead to prices increases, which in turn lead to further wage increases (Issue 103).

  8. Many Decentralized Finance (DeFi) applications currently live on this network (Issue 98).

  9. Michael Novogratz, CEO of Galaxy Digital Holdings, believes that _______ adoption and the macro factors behind it are a mega bull trend (Issue 98).

  10. A-Shares, which are RMB-traded shares of China-based companies, represent the _______ of China’s equity market (Issue 101).

  11. A change of the _______ Treaty is required for a permanent change of EU fiscal rules (Issue 102).

  14. David Li, Professor at Tsinghua University, notes that China still has significant work to do to catch up with other countries in _______ technologies, like high-quality electronic components (Issue 101).

  16. Erik Brynjolfsson, Professor at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI, believes that despite the big jump in _______ over the course of the pandemic, the opportunities that technologies like AI and machine learning offer mean that we’re not even close to seeing peak _______ (Issue 100).

  20. Evidence suggests that the volume and impact of _______ trading has grown a lot since the advent of widespread commission-free trading (Issue 96).

  22. A short  _______ occurs when the price of a heavily-shorted security moves sharply higher, forcing short-sellers to buy it back in order to cover their position (Issue 96).

  23. Arthur Levitt, former chair of the SEC, and Owen Lamont, Associate Director of Multi-Asset Research for Wellington Management’s Quantitative Investment Group, believe that despite a perception that short-sellers create volatility, they actually play a vital role in _______ discovery (Issue 96).

  29. Chris James, Founder and Executive Chairman of Engine No. 1, has found a clear linkage between _______ criteria and a company’s ability to create value over the long term (Issue 104).

  *  *  *

  Good luck

  .

  .

  .

  .

  .

  You can find the solution here (don’t cheat).

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 18:40

• NDAA Blocking Biden From Closing Gitmo
  NDAA Blocking Biden From Closing Gitmo

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The 2022 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that President Biden signed on Monday includes amendments that block him from taking steps to close the notorious prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

  The bill extends amendments that were in previous NDAA’s that block the White House from using funds to transfer or release Gitmo detainees into the US or other countries. The bill also blocks the use of funds to close the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay altogether.

  

  After signing the bill, Biden released a statement denouncing the restrictions. “Unfortunately, section 1032 of the Act continues to bar the use of funds to transfer Guantánamo Bay detainees to the custody or effective control of certain foreign countries, and section 1033 of the Act bars the use of funds to transfer Guantánamo Bay detainees into the United States unless certain conditions are met,” the statement said.

  Biden said the provisions “unduly impair the ability of the executive branch to determine when and where to prosecute Guantánamo Bay detainees and where to send them upon release.” Despite his objections, Biden still signed the massive $777.7 billion NDAA that authorized about $25 billion more than he requested from Congress.

  Biden has pledged to close Gitmo, but the same promise was also made by President Obama. There are currently 39 detainees in the prison, and only 11 have been formally charged with crimes. Gitmo costs about $540 million to operate each year, meaning the US government spends over $13 million for each prisoner.

  In July, Biden transferred former detainee Abdul Latif Nasser to his home country of Morrocco. Nasser was held since 2002 on no charges and was cleared for release five years ago. Like other Gitmo inmates, Nasser faced torture and other abuses during his time at the US military prison.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 18:20

• Have Regulators Really Defused The Year-End $230 Trillion LIBOR Derivative Time-Bomb?
  Have Regulators Really Defused The Year-End $230 Trillion LIBOR Derivative Time-Bomb?

  Years ago, we predicted that the Fed’s commitment to phase out Libor, the interest rate set by committee (not market forces) that had come to undergird trillions of dollars in loans and securities around the world, would ultimately prove unsuccessful.

  

  Now, as the FT points out, it appears we were correct.

  Libor won’t be phased out completely by the start of next year. While technically speaking no new securities can be bechmarked to Libor, there’s still the matter of the $230 trillion in existing contracts that rely on the benchmark. And the rates that undergird these contracts will continue to be published.

  Still, plenty of other Libor rates won’t. Only the most popular will survive, according to the FT. So in a way, next month does mark the moment when “four years of arduous preparation to live without it goes into effect.”

  “It’s one of the biggest transitions in financial markets in decades,” said Dixit Joshi, group treasurer of Deutsche Bank.

  “This is a milestone for the regulators since the great financial crisis about lessons learned.”

  But it’s not a complete break, which is what the world was promised in the wake of the scandals that inspired the decision.

  Much lower in its story on the impending Libor deadline, the FT concedes that, in order to make the transition “work”, America’s financial regulators had to help build a workaround whereby futures markets based on the US dollar LIbor would need to be allowed to continue on until mid-2023, something we noted a year ago.

  As a result, the US dollar Libor rates will continue to be published until that point (and potentially beyond mid-2023, once regulators devise some new excuse for keeping it alive for even longer).

  According to one expert quoted by the FT, most people never even believed regulators would make it this far which is…not exactly a vote of confidence.

  “If you’d asked anyone at the end of 2017 if this was going to happen by the end of 2021, they’d have laughed at you,” said Sarah Boyce of the UK’s Association of Corporate Treasurers.

  Now it seems the skeptics have been partially vindicated.

  That scepticism has been partially vindicated. Even as the year began, contracts worth $265tn were still attached to Libor. Embedding an alternative for US dollar Libor has been particularly tricky because it was a new rate. To ease the burden, UK and US authorities have allowed US dollar Libor for existing contracts to continue until mid-2023, although new business is barred after December. The FCA also allowed “synthetic” versions of sterling and yen Libor for a year to wean more stubborn contracts off the rate. Even so, daily publication of 24 Libor rates will go after December.

  US regulators decided to create a whole new rate to try and wean people off of Libor, and still they’ve been met with only limited success. The new rate is called “Sofr” – the “Secured Overnight Financing Rate”. According to data from the government, the latest Sofr overnight rate is close to even with its Libor equivalent.

  At the end of the day, forcing lenders to stop using Libor will be like “enforcing prohibition.” Parties will keep on using Libor until the very last second, until continuing on is no longer an option.

  “Telling people to stop using Libor is like reimposing prohibition. People will keep drinking right up until the last moment,” said Mark Cabana, head of US rates strategy at Bank of America.

  And regulators are warning now that this time, they’re for real.

  “Market participants have all the tools they need to meet this deadline. The responsibility is on market participants to take the action needed to prepare for a world with no new Libor,” said Tom Wipf, a senior executive at Morgan Stanley, who chairs the industry body to lead the shift from US dollar Libor.

  Even so, the market accepts change is coming. At CME Group, the world’s largest futures market, open positions in Sofr-linked futures outstripped Libor-linked futures for the first time in December.

  Prosecutors first accused banks of more or less openly rigging Libor in their own favor to benefit their trading books back in 2012.

  Even if regulators succeed at getting rid of Libor, pretty soon, a whole decade will have passed since the discovery of the ‘scandals’ that inspired regulators to go after Libor. Soon, people will forget why they even bothered to try to dump Libor in the first place. One critic described the transition as akin to “open heart surgery” for the financial system. And it’s going to be difficult to keep justifying something so taxing.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 18:00

• Schiffty Character – Never Let Reality Get In The Way Of Political Goals
  Schiffty Character – Never Let Reality Get In The Way Of Political Goals

  Authored by Dominick Sansome via TheAmericanConservative.com,

  Earlier this month, Representative Adam Schiff was reported to have doctored a text message between former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and Republican representative Jim Jordan in the ongoing investigations of the House January 6 Committee. This report should hardly come as a surprise.

  On the House floor, Schiff was confronted by Republican Congressman Jim Comer for peddling the “Russia hoax.” He responded by launching into a tirade of circumstantial evidence that was supposed to prove Trump-Russia collusion. Given Schiff’s most recent ethically questionable choice in the January 6 Commission, it is worth recounting his central role in the collusion investigations.

  Schiff was one of the main proponents of the collusion theory from day one.

  

  Throughout the 45th president’s tenure, the congressman continuously assured the Trump-deranged media that there was “plenty of evidence” of collusion with Russia hiding “in plain sight”, and that the proof was “more than circumstantial.” Despite substantial evidence to the contrary, he also continued to maintain the legitimacy of the legally abominable FBI application for surveillance warrants on then-Trump aide Carter Paige, one of the main premises justifying the subsequent Mueller investigation.

  Schiff was undeterred when House Intelligence Chair Devin Nunes released a memo in 2018 that detailed this corrupt FISA process. Nunes, a Republican congressman also from California, presented damning proof that the entire application was largely predicated on the now-debunked dossier by Christopher Steele—in reality, a political operation funded by the Clinton campaign through research firm Fusion GPS. Nunes’ memo was immediately denounced by the entire Democrat establishment as false, and Schiff subsequently responded with a memo of his own. The latter purported to document the errors of its Republican-derived counterpart.

  Naturally, the Schiff memo was the story that stuck for the zealots of the Russia collusion cult in Washington and their media enablers; this, despite the fact that DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz would go on to confirm the veracity of the very claims on which Schiff was attempting to cast doubt. The Wall Street Journal previously documented the exact falsehoods in the Schiff memo and the inspector general’s refutations here.

  When Schiff was called out by Comer on the House floor, the former launched into a series of “Are you aware?” questions that were ostensibly meant to maintain support for the Trump-Russia thesis (outside of the Steele Dossier). Yet Schiff’s statements are still based on, to use his own words, mere “circumstantial evidence.” It is worth considering Schiff’s reasoning behind each claim:

  “Are you aware that the president’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, met with an agent of Russian intelligence and provided Russian intelligence with internal campaign polling data, as well as strategic insights about their intelligence in key battleground states?”

  The “agent of Russian intelligence” to whom Schiff is referring here is Manafort’s longtime Ukrainian business associate Konstantin Kilimnik. According to the Washington Times, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence’s final report on Russian election interference—a more than 900 page report of which Kilimnik and Manafort are central focuses—states that Kilimnik was “a Russian intelligence officer.” Manafort’s lawyer responded to the accusation by claiming that there are classified documents that would, if released, prove this to be false; however, if Kilimnik is indeed a Russian asset as stated by the Senate report, then he “may have been connected to the GRU [Russian state intelligence service]” responsible for hacking into the DNC in 2016.

  In the second part of his statement, Schiff refers to Manafort’s providing polling data to Russian intelligence (Kilimnik, on the presumption that he is a Russian agent). The Mueller report had already cast doubt on this being connected to “Russian interference,” however, as the meeting in which this transaction took place is purported to have happened only after the reports of a Russian cyber attack had already been released by the U.S. media. Collusion would thereby be assumed only on the evidence that Manafort had an ongoing relationship with Kilimnik, and must have subsequently known about the latter’s speculative ties with the GRU and its attempt to influence the U.S. election. Circumstantial indeed.

  “Are you aware that while the Trump campaign chairman was providing internal polling data, that Kremlin intelligence was leading a clandestine social media campaign to elect Donald Trump?”

  In 2020, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a report defending a 2017 intelligence community assessment that there was “unprecedented Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election.” The report finds that the essential task of the Russian interference was to sow discord in the United States, primarily through social media posts and advertisements that were aimed at denigrating Hillary Clinton and undermining trust in U.S. democracy.

  This is in part contrary to the 2018 House Intelligence Committee report, which found that the intelligence community’s assessment on “Putin’s strategic intentions” were insufficient. When viewing the various posts, advertisements, and accounts (examples available for download from the House Report here) attributed to Russian intelligence agents, it is evident that there was a clear intention to sow discord; however, the sheer number of social justice posts related to racial equality and police brutality seem to suggest that the Russian influencers may have sought social tension as the goal in itself, rather than a means to get Trump in particular elected.

  Regardless, Schiff’s two statements together allude to the notion that Manafort was giving polling data in battleground states to Kilimnik, ostensibly all in an attempt to then have Russian hackers specifically target voters in politically purple areas.

  “I am aware of President Trump’s son meeting secretly in Trump Tower New York with a Russian delegation with the purpose of receiving dirt on Hillary Clinton, which the Russian delegation represented was part of the Russian government’s effort to help elect Donald Trump in 2016.… And when asked about that secret meeting, both the president and his son lied about it.”

  Donald Trump Jr. did indeed meet with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. The meeting is reported to have been short and fruitless, with then-candidate Trump having had no knowledge of it. Although this is not illegal, it is ethically questionable, even given the fact that politics is indeed a dirty game; however, it also incidentally sheds light on another strange development in the Trump-Russia saga. Veselnitskaya is documented as having met with Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson just hours before the Trump Tower meeting, and then again after. Recall that Fusion GPS is the Clinton-financed firm responsible for compiling the Steele Dossier, seeking to tie Trump to Russia. While Trump Jr. meeting with Veselnitskaya under the pretenses of getting dirt on a political opponent may not be considered honorable (even though that was the very mechanism working against Trump at that exact moment), the surrounding circumstances raise just as many, if not more, questions about Clinton corruption as they do Trump collusion.

  Although not mentioned by Schiff in this specific instance, also consider his maintaining the guilt of Trump’s National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. In another supposed tie between Trump and Russia, Flynn was caught in a carefully set perjury trap arranged by James Comey’s FBI. Comey actually bragged in an open forum about his taking advantage of the hectic Trump transition—which unelected bureaucratic forces and Obama holdovers mobilized to make as difficult as possible—to get agents into the White House and attempt to interrogate various officials, of whom Flynn was foremost.

  Schiff is not unique in his views among the Democratic Party or its political allies in relation to the Russia narrative, and no one can question the congressman’s determination in investigating corruption stories related to Trump—regardless of how scant or shoddy the hard evidence that the allegations are based on may be. It is important, however, to consider the circumstances he presents in support of his ongoing belief in collusion, as it is telling of how the congressman treats evidence that is politically inexpedient to his predetermined conclusions.

  This is relevant given his central position on the House January 6 Committee, and may have very real consequences for the fate of the American citizen’s upon whom the latter’s deliberations are focused.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/30/2021 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Alternate Reality Traps Democrats In World Of Dumb
  Alternate Reality Traps Democrats In World Of Dumb

  Authored by Peter Van Buren via WeMeantWell.com,

  In early December Hillary Clinton appeared on the Today show to read aloud her never-used victory speech from 2016. The scene was bizarre, Clinton tearing up as she read in first-person, present tense about becoming the first woman president, something which in real life did not happen.

  She then layered on another alternate reality, one in which President Hillary travels back in time to tell her dead mother “your daughter will grow up and become the president of the United States.”

  She glowed; she was hearing applause that never happened.

  

  The unreality of it all was leavened somewhat by the reveal Hillary is selling a video “masterclass” on resilience and the speech is somehow an example of that. While this may be just another example of a Clinton grift, like selling a Bill and Hillary Bass-o-Matic, the thing that stands out is never before has a Democrat loser been reanimated from the grave like Hillary. Al Gore and Michael Dukakis are two of those people you Google to see if they are still alive, and even an attention hound like John Kerry pretends his own presidential wipe out never even happened. A good political rule of thumb is to usher your losers off stage (or make them ambassadors.) Instead, Hillary was on the flagship Today show, not a late night infomercial where garbage like “masterclasses” in resilience usually is peddled.

  But Hillary’s delusional take is not hers alone. After a second White Claw the faithful will insist Hillary did win the popular vote, which counts as actually winning in Clinton Math. They’ll quickly tell you Hillary only lost because Trump cheated or the Russians helped. The Dems and the media so believed that Trump did not actually win-win that they spent his entire term in office trying (unsuccessfully) to negate him, impeach him, prosecute him, or just magically wish him away with a fan-fiction interpretation of the 25th Amendment which presupposed Mike Pence was more evil then they were. The high point of the delusion was Russiagate, a saga entirely made-to-order by the Clinton team and fluffed by the media. It’s one thing to self-righteously say “Not my president” (some MSM pundits would add an asterisk to the word president* when referring to Trump) but it is delusional to say “and he can’t be yours, either.”

  With Hillary granted a pass because she is using her defeat delusion to sell merch, one would have hoped the whole thing would have gone away with the election of Joe Biden.

  Democrats, you won!

  And you got the House!

  You can right all wrongs!

  Instead, the delusions just continue, an entire party seeming in the grip of political Alzheimer’s.

  One delusion is Trump will be pre-defeated ahead of 2024 by a mythical…  something. This has been kicking around since Trump won in 2016, the idea that he’ll soon go to jail over taxes, property valuations in New York, or one of his lady victims successfully suing him. Sure, the IRS has had Trump’s taxes for decades, there is at worst a civil penalty in property valuation tomfoolery, and all those victims only seem to end up dragging Dems deeper into the mud of hypocrisy as we’re told to believe all women except those who accuse Uncle Joe of getting a little handsy. Dems, if this is your best, your best won’t do.

  Nah, that stuff is just chum in the water while the Grand Illusion is tweaked.

  That one is a dramatic statement democracy is dying in America and only defeating Trump (again, once was not enough) will save it.

  It is a big ask to a weary voting block because:

  a) it is untrue;

  b) the only evidence lies in a made-up retelling of the Capitol riot and

  c) the Democrats won in 2020 in an election, something which strongly suggests democracy did its job.

  The rebuttal that January 6 was just a rehearsal is fact-free, and after all, real Nazis only needed one crack at burning down the Reichstag.

  One can find examples of the delusion almost by throwing darts at the Internet, but a concise one is MSNBC meat puppet Brian Williams’ farewell address.

  Williams of course earned America’s trust as a journalist by constantly lying throughout his career, usually in ways that suggested he was studlier than the Rock. Williams said:

  “I will wake up tomorrow in the America of the year 2021, a nation unrecognizable to those who came before us and fought to protect it, which is what you must do now. They’ve decided to burn it all down with us inside… But the darkness on the edge of town has spread to the main roads and highways and neighborhoods… Grown men and women who swore an oath to our Constitution, elected by their constituents, possessing the kinds of college degrees I could only dream of, have decided to join the mob.”

  First of course, an acknowledgement Williams plagiarized the phrase, “darkness on the edge of town,” from Bruce Springsteen, himself given over to the delusion because even as he pals around with Barack Obama all the characters from his songs now vote Republican.

  If you haven’t guessed it, Williams is referring to the delusion that the Capitol riot was the seminal event of American democracy. Williams, like others, believes Hillary won in 2016, that the Trump years saw America held prisoner, and that Trump spun up a mob on January 6 to overturn the election and remain in the White House as dictator. That none of that happened, and in fact could never have happened, matters not if you believe in it hard enough.

  Williams is far from alone.

  “Democracy will be on trial in 2024,” the Atlantic’s Barton Gellman writes.

  “American democracy is tottering,” warns Vox.

  “Can American democracy escape the doom loop?” says one Salon piece.

  “If America really surrenders to fascism, then what?” asks another.

  “If Merrick Garland Doesn’t Charge Trump and His Coup Plotters, Our Democracy Is Toast,” says the Daily Beast.

  “Are we doomed?” writes the once sentient George Packer.

  Packer actually imagines “A blue militia sacks Trump National Golf Club Bedminster; a red militia storms Oberlin College. The new president takes power in a state of siege.” Google up as many examples as you want, they are as common as anti-anxiety meds should be on Brian Williams’ night stand. Even Hillary has weighed in, warning “[2024] is a make-or-break point. Are we going to give in to all these lies and this disinformation and this organized effort to undermine our rule of law and our institutions, or are we going to stand up to it?”

  Charles Blow in the NYT seems to take the prize, in an article headlined “We’re Edging Closer to Civil War.” Blow claims “this war won’t be only about the subjugation of black people but also about the subjugation of all who challenge the white racist patriarchy. It will seek to push back against all the ‘others’: black people, immigrants, Muslims, Jews, LGBTQ people and, yes, women, particularly liberal ones.”

  So looking ahead to the democracy dies in the darkness delusion which appears to be the centerpiece of the Democratic campaign of 2024, Americans must be tutored to believe the Capitol riot was part of a massive conspiracy involving Trump, hoping to end democracy in the United States by overturning the 2020 election results via some means no one is able to articulate.

  All that could have happened was Congress delayed its largely ceremonial blessing of the electoral college results for a day, assuming they just did not convene the afternoon of January 6 somewhere else besides the chaotic Capitol.

  There is no realistic scenario that could have changed anything that mattered, and no evidence of any national-scale conspiracy underlaying the riot. It was just a bunch of angry people who got out of control for a couple of hours then went home to wait on being arrested months later. None of the rioters has been charged with treason or terrorism, mostly just trespassing. None of the arrested claimed they acted under any organized structure set in place by Trump or anyone else. In their trials each basically said the same, things got out of hand.

  After selling voters that something that did not happen happened, the Democrats must then explain how after four years in power they have not really done much to bulk up democracy except whine about stuff that’s unfair, such as Republican gerrymandering (but not Democratic gerrymandering) and Republican poll watchers (but not Democratic poll watchers) and Republicans not accepting election results (but not Democrats like Stacey Adams not accepting election results.) Never mind out-and-out garbage like the same court system is racist when it acquits one shooter and on-the-mark when it finds another guilty based on the races of shooter and victim. Voters will also have to buy in to the Democratic delusion all the bad stuff they said Trump was gonna do but did not do — LGBT concentration camps, war with Iran, fascism — will for certain happen the next time.

  Elect us to save democracy, say the delusional Democrats, ignoring the reality that democracy is bumbling along pretty much as it was intended to do. The Dem line would all make more sense if Trump had appeared bare chested at the Biden inauguration atop an M1 tank or something, but that is the nature of delusion.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 23:30

• First AI Murder Attempt? Alexa Tells Child To Touch Live Outlet With Penny
  First AI Murder Attempt? Alexa Tells Child To Touch Live Outlet With Penny

  Alexa is a virtual assistant technology designed by Amazon to improve human lives, but that wasn’t the case this past weekend when the device told a 10-year-old girl to touch a live electrical plug with a penny. 

  Twitter user “Kristin Livdahl” tweeted on Dec. 26, “OMFG My 10 year old just asked Alexa on our Echo for a challenge and this is what she said.” 

  OMFG My 10 year old just asked Alexa on our Echo for a challenge and this is what she said. pic.twitter.com/HgGgrLbdS8

  — Kristin Livdahl (@klivdahl) December 26, 2021

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

  The Echo smart speaker Alexa responded to the 10-year-old child with a “challenge to do” that said, “plug in a phone charger about halfway into a wall outlet, then touch a penny to the exposed prongs.” 

  

  On Wednesday, an Amazon spokesperson told CNBC that an error within Alexa has been fixed. 

  The dangerous activity, known as “the penny challenge,” began on TikTok and other social media platforms about a year ago. The outcome of the challenge could be potentially life-threatening. 

  Twitter users who responded to Livdahl’s tweet were shocked about Alexa’s recommendation. 

  One person said, “There is literally no reason to have an “Alexa” in your house. This should tell you that if it wasn’t already obvious.”

  “Clearly AMZN’s algorithm realized that by suggesting this challenge customers will later have to buy a lot of stuff to replace everything after the house burned down,” another person said. 

  We noted days ago that Alexa is a money-losing division for Amazon… 

  Luckily the child didn’t complete the challenge as Livdahl intervened. What if this was the first AI murder attempt? It sounds like something out of the dystopic television series “Black Mirror.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 23:10

• Gov't Can't Be Trusted With Cellphone Tracking Amid Pandemic: Former Ontario Privacy Commissioner
  Gov’t Can’t Be Trusted With Cellphone Tracking Amid Pandemic: Former Ontario Privacy Commissioner

  Authored by Noé Chartier via The Epoch Times,

  Ontario’s former privacy commissioner is sounding the alarm about the government’s tracking of cellphone data to inform policy, after it was revealed last week that a federal agency has been analyzing the movements of Canadians since the onset of the pandemic.

  “It concerns me enormously that this would enable the government to collect more and more information,” Ann Cavoukian told The Epoch Times.

  “I do not want to [see] a trend where the government is consistently doing this and starting now. You can’t trust the government.”

  

  Cavoukian, who served as Ontario’s privacy commissioner from 1997 to 2014, is founder of the advocacy group Global Privacy & Security by Design and heads the Privacy by Design Centre of Excellence at Ryerson University.

  “In March 2020, [Prime Minister Justin] Trudeau said that tracking cellphone users was not being considered. Well, they did it, PHAC’s been doing it, and they want to do it even more,” Cavoukian said.

  First reported by Blacklock’s Reporter last week, the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) has since confirmed has been using cellphone data to conduct analysis of Canadians’ anonymized movements in the context of the pandemic, and plans on expanding the program to other health issues and continuing it until 2026.

  “[Officials] say ‘as soon as the emergency is over, we’re going to return to privacy.’ They don’t. The privacy invasive measures that are introduced during emergencies, pandemics, etc., often continue well after the emergency is over,” said Cavoukian.

  She believes PHAC wanted to “keep this under wraps … because they know people do not want to have their mobile devices tracked.”

  Part of the data used by PHAC was obtained through Telus’s Data for Good program between March and October.

  Cavoukian said she’s not worried about the Telus data because they “take privacy very seriously,” noting that the company has obtained certification for various products and services five times through the Privacy by Design program she runs at Ryerson University.

  However, she said she’s concerned about other data sources used by PHAC that are unknown.

  Other cellphone data PHAC accessed came from the Communications Research Centre (CRC), a little-known organization under Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada which specializes in wireless research and big data analytics.

  “In partnership with CRC, PHAC has been producing report summaries to look at how movement trends of the Canadian population have changed over the course of the pandemic, including identifying new patterns to help direct public health messaging, planning and policy development,” PHAC said in a statement to The Epoch Times.

  The health agency said it “did not receive or collect any individual mobility data” and that “no individual level data has been acquired or stored by PHAC.”

  PHAC is now looking for a contractor to provide it with a steady flow of de-identified cellphone data, and posted its Research for Proposal (RFP) online on Dec. 16.

  The agency said in its statement that it “requires access to cell-tower/operator location data that is secure, processed, and timely in addition to being adequately vetted for security, legal, privacy and transparency considerations to assist in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

  Cavoukian perused the RFP and says the language “reflects an intention to collect this data and retain it.”

  She’s also worried that some de-identification of data could be done “very poorly” and could be easily re-identified.

  “At the very least, the Privacy Commissioner’s Office should be all over this, and saying we need to examine exactly what measures you introduced to do this and how you’re going to protect privacy and de-identify data such that it cannot be re-identified,” she said.

  “Examine this from end to end. Look under the hood.”

  The Privacy Commissioner’s Office told The Epoch Times last week it was seeking information from PHAC on the issue.

  Other Jurisdictions Also Collecting Data

  The federal government is not alone in using cellphone data to inform pandemic policies. Telus’s Data for Good web page indicates the cities of Surrey, B.C., and Ottawa have used its program.

  Many governments around the world have also been collecting this type of data and studying its use since the pandemic began.

  Privacy International (PI), a UK-based NGO that works to promote privacy rights globally, has been tracking how various countries use cellphone data in their pandemic policies. PI says on its website that the emphasis on the use of locational data is “primarily for enforcement purposes,” to “aid the monitoring and enforcement of social distancing.”

  A September 2020 article published in the science journal Nature on the use of mobile phone data to inform COVID-19 pandemic policies, said the use of such data “must be considered alongside a careful understanding of the behaviors and populations they capture.”

  The article addressed some of the shortcomings of using the data in public health policy, saying “it is increasingly clear that the COVID-19 burden is not equally borne throughout the population. Using aggregate mobility flows to estimate population-level reductions in travel will fail to capture increased risk among essential workers unable to stay home.”

  In addition, the more at-risk population from COVID-19, the elderly, might not have the same cellphone habits as the younger population.

  The authors also sounded a word of caution.

  “Collecting potentially sensitive identifiable data, perhaps passively or without opt-in consent, requires a deep, careful understanding of the legal, ethical, and privacy concerns surrounding the collection and use of these data relative to the potential public health applications and benefits,” they wrote.

  “In all cases, transparent data policies must be used to ensure community engagement and appropriate use and dissemination of collected data.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 22:50

• After Warmest Christmas On Record, Alaska Braces For 'Biblical Rains'
  After Warmest Christmas On Record, Alaska Braces For ‘Biblical Rains’

  At a moment much of the southern United States experienced an unusually warm Christmas, with temperatures in Texas over the past days staying in the 70’s and even reaching into the 80’s, Alaska in the far north near the Arctic Circle has seen its own records smashed in terms of abnormally warm temperatures.

  On Sunday, the day after Christmas – The Hill describes that “Kodiak Tide Gauge recorded 67 degrees on Dec. 26, while the Kodiak Airport recorded 65 degrees.” That’s a whopping 9 degrees higher than what’s ever been recorded at any point in December. 

  

  The National Weather Service in Anchorage issued a statement on Monday, saying that “In addition to setting a statewide record, Kodiak obliterated the daily record by TWENTY degrees.” Some places saw their warmest Christmas day on record. “Temperatures in Unalaska soared to 56 degrees on Saturday. That topped the prior Christmas Day record of 55 degrees set in the Southeast Alaska community of Metlakatla in 2009,” local KUCB station reported.

  Further the data shows “It is the warmest temperature on record for anytime between October 5th and April 21st.” But like much of the rest of the nation, temperatures are expected to plunge by the end of the week.

  The unusual temperature, which one scientist at the Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Policy called “absurd”, is expected to wreak havoc on roads across the state, especially in the Alaska interior, given what’s typically a dry month of December has turned to conditions that could unleash “biblical rains”. 

  “Normally, December is a dry month in interior Alaska because the usually frigid air cannot hold much moisture, The Guardian observes. “Whatever moisture does flow in tends to be ‘the more fluffy powder because the air is nice and cold’, said [Rick] Thoman, who lives in Fairbanks.” Unusually high moisture now falling in many places as rain will soon be subject to rapid freeze. Precipitation on roads has already begin freezing as thick sheets of ice as opposed to the easier to handle and remove snow. 

  This is berserk. Kodiak, Alaska hit 65 degrees today, 20 DEGREES warmer than their previous record.

  Not their average. Their record.

  That’s like winning a 5K by ten minutes. Numerous nearby stations recorded similar.

  Warmest winter temperature on record. @FOX5DC @MyRadarWX pic.twitter.com/az0meU3LL6

  — Matthew Cappucci (@MatthewCappucci) December 28, 2021

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

  Here’s how Alaska’s Department of Transportation described the situation in a Monday tweet:

  “Roads across the Interior & Fairbanks are covered in ice. So now what? Ice is extremely difficult to remove once it has binded to the road surface.”

  “Even though air temps were warm during #icemageddon2021, roads were at sub-zero temps, which caused ice to bind to the surface.”

  Further the department warned Alaskans that there won’t be a “quick fox for ice-covered roads” and that hazardous conditions are like to remain until temperatures warm enough to melt the surfaces.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 22:30

• Dear Stanford: I Will Not Spend Another Semester Locked Down & Miserable
  Dear Stanford: I Will Not Spend Another Semester Locked Down & Miserable

  Authored by Jacob Reses via TheNewAtlantis.com, (emphasis ours)

  Dear [a senior Stanford administrator],

  Thank you for informing us about Stanford’s decision to delay in-person instruction and giving us time to process this information. I have become extremely cynical about most institutional decision-making in America over the last two years, but I am not cynical about your leadership. On the issues of greatest importance to me, you have consistently demonstrated appreciation of a broad range of concerns from a broad range of voices. For that I remain grateful.

  For my part, I am now planning, if personal circumstances and University policy allow it, to avoid Stanford in January and live my life in ways that are more personally fulfilling to me than moping around in a dorm room. I hope to travel somewhere warm, spend time with my aging parents, and live a lifestyle unencumbered by COVID restrictions to the fullest extent allowed under the law of whatever jurisdiction I decide to travel to. This plan is based on my strong view that we are extremely unlikely to return to in-person instruction on the timeline the University has laid out and that any return will involve restrictions on daily life that make it less worth living. Life is too short to be miserable.

  

  For what it is worth, I got a booster shortly after the FDA approved it for those in my age and health profile. This is not about the University booster mandate.

  Institutions like Stanford have consistently demonstrated sclerosis in their decision-making over the course of the pandemic. Public pressure to appear consistent and steadfast in their determination to reduce any COVID spread, bizarre COVID competition between elite institutions comparing themselves to each other to make sure they are not out of step with the latest consensus, and private pressure from the most risk-averse internal constituencies repeatedly overwhelm even the most sincere institutional desires to be nimble, respond to new data with revised attitudes, and return to some semblance of normalcy. I believe that Stanford and the law school do sincerely want to return to normal, but I do not believe that administrators have a plan to overwhelm this consistent pattern of bureaucratic policy lock-in.

  Stanford’s preemptive announcement is useful for planning purposes, and I greatly appreciate that the University did not hide the ball, but the policy’s timing creates a predictable problem for the return the University claims will occur. There is a very good chance that in the two weeks of online instruction we will be experiencing either a national Omicron case spike or a regional spike contributed to in part by the travel that will bring students back to campus. I accept the University’s ostensible rationale for this timing — addressing logistical challenges related to travel, boosters, and potential travel-related quarantine for sick students, rather than committing to elimination of all COVID spread — at face value. But I do not accept that this rationale would remain operative in the midst of a case spike. COVID bureaucratic logic will likely set in if a spike occurs, whether just before we return to in-person class or whether the spike has already subsided by the time of the planned return, and the policy will be revised to give administrators more time to reduce spread. I expect at least one extension of several more weeks of online instruction, and perhaps several more extensions. I won’t be surprised if the entire quarter is online regardless of health outcomes, which I expect to be mostly mild given age profiles and universal vaccination of those in our community.

  I also expect that Stanford will adopt flawed metrics to systematize its decision-making, as many local governments have done for the last two years. After a case spike, I expect an announcement that we need to wait for test positivity to reduce to some arbitrarily selected level before we can return to normal. I do not trust the University to properly consider whether such a threshold is achievable or accurately reflects the trajectory of any surge we may experience. I also do not trust the University to revise its thinking if the health risks posed by Omicron turn out to be low despite high infectivity.

  Finally, I fear that these measures will be accompanied by a variety of arbitrary NPIs [non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as closures and masking –Ed.] that will make my day-to-day life worse. Will I be able to access the gym, which is essential in providing structure to my daily schedule and maintaining the habits that keep me in good health? Will I be allowed to see friends at restaurants and bars? What of Shabbat dinner? And when will I be allowed to live, as I can in Washington, D.C. this month (for now), without wearing a mask whenever I am indoors? I am 31 years old, and I do not want to feel like I am being monitored and punished like a teenager for making my own decisions about how to live my life. I do not trust Stanford or county public health officials to protect my right to live my life as I see fit or respect me as an adult to make such choices.

  So I do not want to move my life to California again with the knowledge of these uncertainties. I did not want to do it at the start of Fall Quarter because I had all these reservations about that return to in-person instruction. You and your colleagues surprised me by keeping to your word, and I am sincerely grateful for that. I fear you will not be able to do so this time in the face of a highly infectious, vaccine-piercing variant that appears to produce mostly mild illness and poses no significant threat to my health.

  Thank you, truly, for your efforts to return us to normal. I hope that you receive this message in the spirit that it is intended, and I will pray for you and your colleagues to act with the wisdom that is needed to account for the dynamics I have described and commit the University to a course of action it can successfully execute, internal politics be damned.

  Best wishes for a Happy New Year.

  Jacob

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 22:10

• 45% Of Millennials Say Maintenance Costs Are Serious Deterrent To Home Ownership
  45% Of Millennials Say Maintenance Costs Are Serious Deterrent To Home Ownership

  Not having the money for a down payment isn’t the only factor deterring millennials from buying a home. For some, an ingrained fear of “adult” responsibilities like the joys of home maintenance is something they would rather leave up to a landlord.

  In fact, some 45% of millennials say these responsibilities are a major deterrent to owning a home. Or at least that’s one recent survey found.

  Whether it’s fixing a leaky faucet or a busted pipe, being a homeowner can be a time-consuming enterprise.

  

  And it’s made even more difficult by the fact that most millennials are ill-equipped to perform tasks that were considered basic home-maintenance skills by members of older generations.

  Only 47% of millennials say they know how to caulk tile (and 53% don’t know how). 49% say they don’t know how to clean a disherwasher’s filter. And 6% said they don’t even know how to unclog a toilet (it’s called using a plunger).

  

  And even those millennials who are familiar with these skills and do own their own homes don’t seem to clean or do enough maintenance to meet the standards set by their parents.

  

  Many don’t even own basic tools like a ladder or a stud finder.

  

  But at least they have YouTube…

  

  Many also don’t budget enough for repairs and maintenance, ensuring that it likely won’t happen.

  

   

  Fortunately for most millennials, 30 is the new 20, giving them more time to pay off more of the interests accruing to their insurmountable student debt (unless President Biden and the Dems succeed in forgiving it).

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 21:50

• "The Consequences For… Popular Democracy Could Be Dire": New York Mag Decries Popularity Of Chief Justice Roberts
  “The Consequences For… Popular Democracy Could Be Dire”: New York Mag Decries Popularity Of Chief Justice Roberts

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  “The consequences for … popular democracy could be dire.”

  Those ominous words from Eric Levitz in the New York Magazine are enough to chill one to the bone after a year of alleged insurrections and ongoing plans for a conservative coup. Indeed, the magazine itself has disclosed a Republican strategy to actually kill Americans with Covid-19. So what is now the existential threat to democracy? A new Gallup poll showing that Chief Justice Roberts is the most popular political figure in public life. 

  

  The apoplectic response of many in the media was notable with liberals asking “what’s wrong with you, America?” Yet, none was more revealing than the New York Magazine in explaining the reason. After all, it would not seem to take much to be the most popular in a class of public officials widely despised by the public. The three highest ranking congressional leaders remain highly unpopular (Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell are at 48, 40, and 48 percent disapproval, respectively).

  President Joe Biden has a 51 percent disapproval rating — only slightly above Vice President Kamala Harris’ 54 percent disapproval rating. Conversely, at 53 percent approval,  Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell shows that these polls are hardly a measure of charisma.

  So why is the Roberts 60 percent approval rating so crushing for democracy? Because, Levitz explained,

  “If the Court’s right-wing majority finds that it can continually push the boundaries of conservative judicial activism without undermining its own popular legitimacy, then the consequences for progressivism and popular democracy could be dire.”

  Unpack that line for a second.

  First of all, Levitz is saying that the goals of the left would be scuttled if the Court or its members are popular. For over a year, many in the media and Congress have launched unrelenting attacks on the Court and pushed an agenda to pack the Court to create an instant liberal majority. They know that court packing is widely detested by the public (as it once was by President Biden and many on the left). In order to achieve such a goal, the justices must be demonized like much else in our age of rage.  But it is not working if 60 percent of the public actually like the Chief Justice.

  It is also worth noting that the stated goal is “popular democracy.”  The term is often associated with “direct democracy” where citizens have unfiltered and direct say in the government decisions. It was the model expressly rejected by the Framers in favor of our system of representative democracy.

  In Federalist 10, Madison wrote:

  Pure democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.

  Instead, he created a system by which public passions could be filtered or expressed through a smaller group of representatives, officials who could temper and refine popular impulse.

  In addition to our system of representative democracy, we have institutions designed to resist popular impulse or demands. The United States Supreme Court is the principal example. Justices were given life tenure to insulate them from such pressures and intimidation. The court is designed to stand against majoritarian demands and what Madison called “the tyranny of the majority.”

  That system has served us well. It was the countermajoritarian role that allowed the Court to strike down bans on interracial marriage, decriminalize homosexuality, and protect the rights of the accused.  Those were unpopular acts but the Court followed the Constitution rather than the polls.

  The left once celebrated the independence of the Court in ordering relief that was denied or blocked in Congress like desegregation. After Brown v. Board of Education, political groups responded with the same anger of Levitz with “Impeach [Chief Justice] Earl Warren” billboards.

  This year, extreme groups like Demand Justice have run their own billboards targeting justices like Stephen Breyer to try to push them to retire.  With the support of many law professors, they are also demanding that Congress pack the Court to create an instant liberal majority. As in the 1960s, Democratic politicians are issuing direct warnings to the justices to rule “correctly,” or face consequences. Professors have declared that “our Constitution isn’t working” because they are not seeing the outcomes that they deem to be correct. Senators and commentators are now calling for “revolution” and “rebellion” to achieve what cannot be achieved in a system that has worked for over two centuries to preserve stability and freedom for our country. That is not “insurrection,” mind you. Revolution is apparently insurrection for a progressive cause.  After all, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. asked why we should preserve an institution if it is not going to vote consistently with her views and those of the Democratic party: “How much does the current structure benefit us? And I don’t think it does.”

  That brings us back to Roberts and his pesky popularity. You cannot achieve a revolution without people getting really angry. Yet, despite a steady drumbeat in the media, it is not working. Indeed, the Gallup poll shows the diminishing power of the mainstream media which has largely abandoned half of the country with its embrace of “advocacy journalism.” Levitz is one of the writers who previously denounced those reporters who have been critical of Biden and openly editorializing “against the White House’s policy.” The result is that all of that advocacy journalism is just “singing to the choir” — independents and conservative left a long time ago as our media have become more of a series of hardened silos for echo journalism.

  With the courts and the public not responding, the only option is revolutionary change. But it is hard to have a revolution without a mob willing to tear down institutions that stand in the way. Levitz put it best: “In other words: Even if the Court overreaches on abortion and forfeits its popular support, the conservative judicial project is likely to endure. And given Roberts’s current poll numbers, it’s not even clear that Roe’s invalidation will durably erode public reverence for the judiciary.”

  Putting aside the notion of “overreaching” by a court limiting its own authority in favor of the states, the problem is that all of the attacks in the media have not “eroded public reverence for the judiciary.” The scary thought for Levitz is that, if conservative justices are respected, there is little hope for forcing the Court to yield to demands of “progressivism and popular democracy.” Of course, it really does not matter if Roberts is the most popular among unpopular choices. As the iconic liberal statesman Adlai Stevenson once said, “my definition of a free society is a society where it is safe to be unpopular.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 21:30

• Luongo: Biden's COVID Pivot Is Pure Politics
  Luongo: Biden’s COVID Pivot Is Pure Politics

  Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

  If you thought the worst screenplay you’d have to endure this winter was anything written by a Wachowski sister, boy howdy are you wrong.

  

  A couple of weeks ago I told you that Davos’ Last Stand bombed at the box office. Well, now I’m here to tell you that as bad as that movie’s opening weekend was, just wait for the resurrection of it later this year because they filmed the sequel, Omicron 2: COVID Boogaflu, at the same time.

  And it’s coming this spring.

  The problem for Bidenwood is Omicron spreads quickly but doesn’t hit nearly as hard as the original virus, or even the recent Delta variant.

  After the early data came in, they realized this will be the last film in the series.

  So, they have one last chance to concoct a story they can use for the midterms.

  Can’t let the opportunity of one last COVID wave go to waste can we?

  Because these are people too incompetent at dealing with the actual problem and have pivoted completely to pure politics.

  So, over the past few days we’ve seen a spate of about-faces by the Biden administration and the Davos quislings with regards to COVID-19 and its offspring.

  •CDC reduces quarantine to 5 days
  •Biden says there’s no federal solution
  •CBS Face the Nation discusses devastating impacts of COVID policies on children
  •NYT and BBC admit vaccine passes don’t increase uptake

  Promising, but suspicious. They’re up to something..

  — Michael P Senger (@MichaelPSenger) December 28, 2021

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

  To which I’ll add the CDC just sunsetted the use of the PCR test as valid means for detecting Omicron because it can’t select between it and the flu. So it would seem all of this is finally over and that by the summer we can expect these terrible writers to move onto their next straight-to-streaming monstrosity.

  The initial reaction to these announcements has been a little too much high-fiving and victory-lap dancing from the ‘right.’

  Because here’s the thing. Do you think they don’t know all of this about Omicron’s transmissibility and severity?

  Let’s run a few numbers for the sake of argument. Let’s assume Omicron is 20 times more transmissible but just one-tenth as severe. And severity is defined as requiring hospitalization.

  With the speed at which this thing is ripping through the population, even millions of mild cases will still result in hundreds of thousands of hospitalizations over a short period of time. Because the rate of transmissibility will create a swell in hospitalizations that is just a function of math.

  I’m not saying the numbers I have here are right. That’s not the point of the exercise. The point is that even if you crush the severity down by a factor of twenty over Delta, it’s still a lot of strain on any state’s medical system.

  So spare me the idea that President Depends and Peppermint Psaki woke up yesterday and had a flirtation with being compassionate humans.

  No, these people are full-blown political animals who turned on a dime for a reason.

  My numbers are likely wrong but you know who has the real numbers? Yup. The Bidenwood screenwriters.

  So, the CDC lowers the quarantine period for health care workers down to five days so asymptomatic health care workers can go back to work as the new wave of hospitalizations happens and Biden throws it back to the states to deal with.

  Then we find out from the Florida Surgeon General that the Biden administration is “actively preventing” distribution of Regeneron monoclonal antibodies, holding up shipments to Florida.

  NEW: Florida Surgeon General says Biden Admin is “actively preventing” distribution of monoclonal antibodies by pausing shipments of Regeneron, in letter to HHS Sec.

  Feds paused Regeneron bc it may not work against Omicron. FL says it can still be used in existing Delta cases. pic.twitter.com/9mmw5SsuZJ

  — Jay O’Brien (@jayobtv) December 28, 2021

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

  This is the end of Act I.

  In Acts II and III we will be treated to some of the laziest writing in the history of American political cinema.

  Act II will start silently, no more daily case counts because of the CDC invalidating the PCR test and everything seemingly returns to normal.

  During that time you can expect guys like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis to gloat publicly over beating COVID by supporting freedom.

  Then at the mid-point turn, hospitalizations run wild as the law of large numbers takes over and the same cohorts of people vulnerable to the flu are found quickly by Omicron. It spreads throughout the U.S. quickly possibly overwhelming some hospitals, especially in the places where there aren’t health care workers because they were all fired for not getting the clot-shot.

  And guess who will get the blame for all of it? Their Public Enemy #1, the man who at this point is the biggest threat to the Biden administration as well as what’s left of the COVID phase to bankrupt the world known as the Great Reset….

  Yup. Governor Ron DeSantis.

  The messaging will all be for weeks to come, “We would have licked this thing if it wasn’t for DeSantis allowing it to incubate in Florida. The States did a terrible job containing this thing and now we’re all suffering for it.”

  After that comes the worst Act III in history as Biden tries to swoop in on a Huey lobbing missiles at the Red States to take credit for the natural burnout of Omicron and ending COVID-9/11’s threat to humanity.

  Expect a big grandstanding speech written by Aaron Sorkin about serving the common good as the denouement to ensure millions take the blue pill and go back to sleep.

  It may wind up being the worst screenplay since Young Einstein. Unfortunately, it’ll do enough box office to keep MSNBC in business.

  But it’s coming to a screen near you.

  *  *  *

  Join my Patreon if you aren’t a political hack

  BTC: 3GSkAe8PhENyMWQb7orjtnJK9VX8mMf7Zf
  BCH: qq9pvwq26d8fjfk0f6k5mmnn09vzkmeh3sffxd6ryt
  DCR: DsV2x4kJ4gWCPSpHmS4czbLz2fJNqms78oE
  LTC: MWWdCHbMmn1yuyMSZX55ENJnQo8DXCFg5k
  DASH: XjWQKXJuxYzaNV6WMC4zhuQ43uBw8mN4Va
  WAVES: 3PF58yzAghxPJad5rM44ZpH5fUZJug4kBSa
  ETH: 0x1dd2e6cddb02e3839700b33e9dd45859344c9edc
  DGB: SXygreEdaAWESbgW6mG15dgfH6qVUE5FSE

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 20:50

• Three Boeing 747 Freighters Packed With Potatoes Head To Japan Amid French Fry Shortage
  Three Boeing 747 Freighters Packed With Potatoes Head To Japan Amid French Fry Shortage

  Believe it or not, three Boeing 747 freighters packed with potatoes are headed to Japan to mitigate the french fry shortage. 

  U.S. freight forwarder Flexport Inc. CEO Ryan Petersen tweeted Tuesday night that his firm contracted three 747 freighters to fly potatoes to Japan to help with McDonald’s Holdings Co. Japan’s french fly crisis. 

  “Flexport just contracted to fly three 747 loads of potatoes to Japan to help with the French fry shortage,” Petersen tweeted. 

  

  On Dec. 21, we reported that McDonald’s faced a ‘fry-tening’ supply chain problem of a potato shortage that forced the fast-food restaurant to ration french fries with meals. The company blamed massive flooding in Vancouver for its soggy mess.

  There are 2,900 McDonald’s restaurants in the country, and many have been rationing french fries for the last week. There was no word if air freight costs would result in french fry inflation for consumers.

  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.

  “We considered involving Flexport for this humanitarian relief operation but in the end decided that the for-profit side was a better fit,” Petersen tweeted. 

  Seattle Port Commissioner Sam Cho responded to Petersen’s tweet above and said, “Serious question: Why would a French fry shortage even be considered as “humanitarian relief?” Or is that sarcasm?” 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 20:30

• After Thousands Of Parents Refused To Comply, California School District Reverses Child Jab Mandate
  After Thousands Of Parents Refused To Comply, California School District Reverses Child Jab Mandate

  Authored by Matt Agorist via The Free Thought Project,

  Forgoing any legal democratic processes, multiple school districts in California began mandating the COVID-19 vaccination for children earlier this year. Set to go into effect in January, any child, 16 and older, who did not get the jab, was banned from campus in all San Diego public schools.

  

  This authoritarian move caused a mass of backlash and thousands of children and parents refused to comply.

  The refusal to get vaccinated set the stage for a showdown that was to unfold on January 24 when the children would be kicked out of school for non-compliance.

  There will be no showdown, however, as a San Diego judge struck down the mandate this week, accurately pointing out that a school district has no authority to mandate medical procedures for children.

  CBS 7 reports that Superior Court Judge John S. Meyer granted a writ of mandate for a lawsuit filed by the group “Let Them Choose,” which sought to keep the school district‘s COVID-19 vaccine mandate from going into effect by arguing it did not comply with state law.

  Meyer noted in the ruling that the school district‘s COVID-19 vaccine mandate cannot move forward because it conflicts with state law, which says any decision to mandate vaccines must be made at the state level and must also include a “personal belief exemption” if the mandate is not imposed by the state Legislature.

  San Diego Unified’s policy did not contain this exemption.

  “SDUSD’s Roadmap appears to be necessary and rational, and the district’s desire to protect its students from COVID-19 is commendable. Unfortunately, the field of school vaccine mandates has been fully occupied by the State, and the Roadmap directly conflicts with state law,” the judge wrote in a tentative ruling.

  Naturally, the school district disagreed and claimed they have the right to dictate what children can and can’t be injected with. For now, however, their objection is meaningless and the children and parents who did not want to take the vaccination, will no longer be forced to do so.

  “I am overjoyed. We knew that our legal argument was strong, and we brought this case on behalf of thousands of concerned parents and students and to hear the judge say no student should be coerced into getting this vaccine was just a wonderful thing to hear,” said Sharon McKeeman, founder of the group behind Let Them Choose.

  As TFTP reported earlier this month, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) — which is the second largest school district in the country — made a similar move and mandated shots for all children aged 12 and older.

  Students were told they would be banned from campus on January 10, 2022 if they failed to comply and take the shot.

  NBC4 spoke to an attorney who is following these cases, Jennifer Kennedy, who explained that school districts do not have the authority to mandate medical procedures. Just like the San Diego school district did not have the authority to mandate the jabs, the LAUSD did not have it either.

  “These grotesque contests and displays of treatment and candy and gifts and favors, raffles and cash prizes inducing the kids to the vaccination…. Here is the problem, kids in California cannot consent to vaccination.”

  She added, “The LAUSD does not have the power to add a vaccine to the California school schedule,” she said. “You couldn’t do it if you were a po-dunk school district and you can’t do it if you’re LAUSD, the second largest district in the nation. You don’t have that legal authority.”

  Several parents of students filed lawsuits against the LAUSD over the mandate and thousands of children remained unvaccinated in LAUSD. This line in the sand forced the school district to postpone their mandate last week after a whopping 28,000 children refused the jab.

  It is only through resistance that the change we seek will come. As history shows us, one cannot comply their way out of tyranny.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 20:10

• China Publicly Shames Suspects Accused Of Violating COVID Border Controls
  China Publicly Shames Suspects Accused Of Violating COVID Border Controls

  Say what you will about the shortcomings of the American justice system, but at least the US doesn’t do this.

  According to foreign press reports, four Chinese nationals who were busted for allegedly violating the country’s COVID rules by smuggling Vietnamese migrants across the border were publicly shamed somewhere in the city of Jingxi, withiin China’s Guangxi border region.

  China’s state-controlled press said the shaming occurred on Tuesday. Footage of the incident quickly went viral, heaping even more shame and embarrassment on these poor people.

  Accompanied by authorities in Hazmat suits, the suspects could be were seen holding placards displaying their photos and names. Each of the four accused were held by two police officers. A large crowd looked on and jeered.

  這些人是挖了包子家祖墳嗎？需要這樣對待？ pic.twitter.com/Zlzx7KIVsf

  — 默默 (@zixinho17) December 28, 2021

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

  Obrazki jak z czasów Rewolucji Kulturalnej. A to Jingxi w prow. Kuangsi i 4 osoby oskarżone o przemycanie ludzi przez granicę prowadzone na plac przed zgromadzonych na nim mieszkańców. Urzędnicy nie wiedzą w tych „dyscyplinarnych działaniach ostrzegawczych” niczego niestosowanego pic.twitter.com/MQCuzeJ3az

  — Krzysztof Pawliszak (@luigiluib) December 29, 2021

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

  The incident apparently ignited a debate within the CCP’s news apparatus, with one party-controlled journal opining that public shaming was a bridge too far. That argument was made by Chinese Communist Party-affiliated Beijing News.

  “The measure seriously violates the spirit of the rule of law and cannot be allowed to happen again,” the Beijing News report read.

  Technically speaking, public shaming of those accused of crimes has been outlawed in China since 2010. However, this isn’t the first time public shaming has popped up in the Chinese press. Similar scenes were filmed in November and in August, when armed police escorted a suspect through the street to a children’s playground.

  Whether the backlash makes any difference, of course, will ultimately be decided by President Xi.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 19:50

• The Reckless Push For Electric Vehicles At The US Postal Service
  The Reckless Push For Electric Vehicles At The US Postal Service

  Authored by Paul Steidler via RealClearEnergy.org,

  As Democrats regroup and forge ahead with plans to implement components of the Build Back Better legislation killed by Senator Joe Manchin, calls for the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to be given billions to electrify its vehicle fleet are likely to soon reach a fever pitch.  

  

  USPS is a high-profile, well-regarded institution through which progressives want to unveil new programs. Progressives pulled out all the stops to provide USPS with electric vehicle funding in 2021 and will likely double down in 2022.  

  Republicans and fiscal conservatives in Washington, D.C. should push back hard. Electric vehicle subsidies for USPS epitomize what is wrong in Washington, D.C. and how proven, time-tested financial restraint and related guard rails are being eviscerated. 

  USPS needs a new delivery vehicle fleet, and it has been on the path to purchasing the vehicles long before Build Back Better was ever conceived. After years of study, USPS announced on February 23 that it was purchasing 50,000 to 165,000 next generation delivery vehicles over the next 10 years. 

  USPS plans to purchase a combination of electric and fuel-efficient internal combustion engine vehicles, all of which are markedly cleaner than the current vehicles which are an average of 25 years old.  

  For fiscal year 2022, Build Back Better provides $2.6 billion for USPS to purchase electric vehicles and $3.4 billion to construct charging and related infrastructure to support such vehicles. It is the first step in progressives’ push to make all USPS delivery vehicles electric by 2028 and to also require all USPS medium- and heavy-duty trucks to be electric. 

  There are three fundamental reasons to strongly oppose electric vehicle funding to USPS. 

  1. USPS has the cash to buy electric vehicles now. For the quarter ending September 30, 2021, USPS reported having $23.9 billion in cash, nearly four times what Congress wants to provide. USPS also received $10 billion in COVID relief funds even though the pandemic provided a catalyst for its business by significantly increasing the demand for package shipments. And keep in mind, USPS plans to purchase and pay for its new fleet over 10 years. 

  2. Electric vehicle subsidies will wreak havoc on operations. A central pillar of the 1970 Postal Reorganization Act is that USPS is to cover its costs through the sales of products and services. Electric vehicle funding amounts to Congressional interference in USPS’s operations. The $3.4 billion in charging infrastructure will require ongoing management, distracting from the central public duty to deliver mail most efficiently. It will also pressure, if not box-in, USPS to only purchase electric vehicles in the years ahead, potentially driving up costs astronomically. 

  3. Special interests benefit the most. In Congressional testimony on March 11, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy said that 5,000 packages take up the same amount of space as 500,000 letters. As such, the new vehicles will be used predominantly to deliver packages. Any public funding of electric vehicles is likely to thus disproportionately benefit the large retailers who send many packages more than those who still rely on USPS for mail. 

  One legislative measure that progressives are likely to target for the electric vehicle funding is the Postal Service Reform Act, which has bipartisan support in the House and Senate. The measure already provides more than $46 billion in balance sheet and other financial relief to USPS related to financial challenges from the decline in mail volume. 

  Including electric vehicle funding as part of postal reform would amount to sanctioning heavy-handed Congressional management of USPS by dictating what vehicles it operates and saddling them with this permanent obligation. Not only should such an electric vehicle amendment be opposed, but the entire “reform” package should be voted down if it has this troubling feature. 

  At a time when mail delivery is slower than it was in the 1970s, and USPS has major financial challenges, electric vehicle subsidies and corresponding Congressional interference will only make these matters worse, while doing little to curb greenhouse gas emissions. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 19:30

• Canada Cancels Unvaccinated Joe Rogan: Can't Attend His Own Sold-Out Show
  Canada Cancels Unvaccinated Joe Rogan: Can’t Attend His Own Sold-Out Show

  Joe Rogan was set to attend his long anticipated Vancouver show scheduled for April 20, which has long been sold out, but on Wednesday The Hill is reporting it’s been canceled due to the Canadian government barring him from entry for the event. 

  “Ticketmaster Wednesday on its website confirmed that Rogan’s Vancouver show had been canceled and ticket holders would receive a refund,” The Hill reports. However, the event has been pushed to a much later date in 2022, though it’s unclear whether Canada will relax its vaccine requirement to cross the border by that point (at the rate things are going, an unlikelihood). “According to Rogan’s Facebook page, the event has been rescheduled for Oct. 24,” The Hill added.

  

  Rogan himself had hinted that the cancelation is coming, given Canada’s strict requirements for all entering its territory of showing proof of “fully vaccinated” status.

  During his Dec.24th episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience” podcast, which gets more listeners than even major mainstream TV network shows get viewers during prime time hours, Rogan explained, “I should probably say this because I haven’t yet. My 4/20 show that’s sold out in Vancouver — I don’t think that’s happening.” 

  He then vented to his guest, comedian Tim Dillon, that it’s ridiculous that unlike an increasing number of European countries Canada doesn’t recognize natural immunity from a prior infection. 

  “I don’t think I can even get into the country. I’m not vaccinated. I’m not gonna get vaccinated. I have antibodies, it doesn’t make any sense,” Rogan said.

  Since announcing that he had Covid in late August in a social media post last September, Rogan has been at the center of mainstream media attacks over his spending a lot of time describing his personal experience with a mix of medications given by a doctor. Additionally he had given advice to friends based on his successfully and fully recovering in a matter of a few days.

  Rogan posted the following image announcing the show’s cancelation and postponement:

  

  This included the supposedly “controversial” ivermectin (which led to disinformation and personal attacks from CNN), in addition to a treatment of monoclonal antibodies, a Z-pack, prednisone, an NAD drip, as well as a vitamin drip.

  Also contributing to the Vancouver show’s cancelation is the current implementation of what are essentially “Covid passports” for a number of indoor and public venues. “The Canadian territory requires proof of vaccination to gain entry into some indoor businesses and event spaces, including Rogers Arena, where Rogan’s show was set to take place,” The Hill underscores.

  @joerogan – just got an email that your 4/20 show in Vancouver originally scheduled for Apr 2020 and rescheduled to Apr 2022 was just canceled by the “Event Organizer” … what gives? Been holding onto tickets looking forward to this show for 2 years 😞

  — Guri C (@gurichattha) December 17, 2021

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

  For Rogan fans in Canada, the likelihood is that he’s not going to be let in the country even by late 2022. A number of health officials in Western governments have of late declared various forms of policies which sound like “mandates forever” as they promote the notion that citizens must get ready to live under pandemic conditions for possibly more years to come. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 19:10

• Doug Casey On How Marxists Captured The Universities And Will Soon Capture The Nation
  Doug Casey On How Marxists Captured The Universities And Will Soon Capture The Nation

  Authored by Doug Casey via InternationalMan.com,

  International Man: Communist and socialist ideas are growing in popularity among the millennial and Gen Z generations. In fact, the majority of young people dislike capitalism and favor a more socialist or even a communist economic system.

  This is evidenced by the rise of politicians like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (AOC) and The Squad.

  What’s your take on this?

  

  Doug Casey: The youth are being corrupted, and it’s more serious than ever. Although I say that a bit tongue-in-cheek since people have probably thought the youth were becoming degenerate since about day one.

  For instance, one of the two charges against Socrates when he was executed in Ancient Greece was corrupting the youth. Older people always think the youth are foolish, ignorant, lazy, crazy and generally taking the world to hell in a handbasket. And, of course, many of their charges are, and always have been, true.

  But as kids get older, they generally get wiser, more knowledgeable, harder-working, and more prudent—nothing new here. The world has survived roughly 250 new generations since civilization began in Sumer 5,000 years ago. And it will likely survive this one too.

  That’s the bright side. And, as you know, I always look on the bright side. But, on the other hand, the American university system has been totally captured by Cultural Marxists, socialists, statists, collectivists, promoters of identity politics, and people of that ilk. These people hate Western Civilization and its values and are actively trying to destroy them. My view is that this challenge is perhaps the most serious we’ve ever encountered, and the dangers are greatly amplified by advancing technology.

  International Man: What role are Western universities playing? How is this shaping current and future generations?

  Doug Casey: Universities have been totally transformed in many ways over the past century, and it’s been for the worst in every instance. When the average 18-year-old goes to college, he knows very little about how the world works in general. He’s got vague ideas he picked up mostly from TV, movies, and people who got a job teaching high school. They know basically nothing about economics, government, or history. Worse, what they think they know is mostly wrong.

  That makes them easy prey for professors with totally bent views to indoctrinate them.

  It’s not so much that they’re taught inaccurate facts. There are plenty of “factoids” (artificial facts), of course—like the War Between the States (which shouldn’t be called the Civil War) was mainly fought to free the slaves. Or that Keynesian economics is correct. Or that the US is a democracy ruled by “We the People.” And many, many more. But that’s just part of the problem.

  It’s not just the factoids they’re taught. It’s the way the schools interpret actual facts and the kind of meaning they infuse into events. The “why?” of events is twisted, and concepts of good and evil are perverted. The education system has been almost completely captured by Marxists and other leftists. They’re in a position to indoctrinate the youth, and they use that power to the maximum. Once a kid’s thoughts are bent—much the way a tree can be bent as a sapling—in one direction or another, it’s very hard to straighten them out.

  Of course, that leads to the question of whether the youth should be directed one way or another in the first place. Which values are “right” or “wrong?” I certainly have views on that subject, but this isn’t the place to go into them—beyond saying that basic values are too important to be left to random government employees.

  The real problem, however, is that today’s education does not teach critical thinking. Rather just the opposite is true. Students are taught blind acceptance of what’s currently considered politically correct.

  Instead of questioning authority in a peaceful and rational manner—which is what Socrates did—the current idea is to prevent any divergent views from even being discussed. The professors are basically all socialists, and the kids tend to believe what they’re taught. Those views are reinforced by the other sources of information surrounding them—Hollywood, mass media, and the government itself.

  Destructive ideas usually start with “intellectuals.” Intellectuals typically despise business, commerce, and production, and they envy the money the capitalists have. Intellectuals feel they’re not only smarter but also much more moral than business people. That gives them the right, in their own eyes, to dictate to everyone else. They’re usually socialists, and approve of “cadres” like themselves, ordering everyone else around. Intellectuals naturally gravitate to the universities, where they’re paid to hang out with each other, be lionized by kids, and hatch goofy ideas.

  This has always been the case. But it’s become a much bigger problem than in the past, partly because a much, much higher percentage of kids go to college now than ever before. Even in the recent past, at most five or 10 percent of kids went to college. These days, almost everybody goes, and a much higher proportion of the youth are being infected with leftist memes than ever before.

  Some kids will grow out of it and realize that most of what they’ve paid an exorbitant amount of money to learn is nonsense. But most will reflexively defend what they were taught in the cocoon. And I’m afraid those people now make up a big chunk of the U.S. population.

  Kids who are polled say that they think socialism is good.. I suspect the polls are accurate. And even if they don’t think it, almost all of them feel it—although few know the difference between thinking and feeling … If you’re brought up thinking that the values of socialism and the welfare state are good, and everyone around you believes in them, the chances are you will too.

  International Man: What are your thoughts on the emphasis on identity politics and the concept of “white privilege?”

  Doug Casey: Identity politics is essentially the idea that a person is first and foremost a member of some race or ethnicity and only secondarily an individual. In recent years, most people have been indoctrinated indirectly and directly, subtly and overtly, to believe white people and the civilization they created are bad. The meme is everywhere. They’ve come to believe Western Civilization is a bad thing and that white people are destroying the world.

  Even if they don’t want to believe it because the concept is so stupid and so utterly contrafactual, they end up accepting it just because they’ve heard it over and over. Propaganda works. Memes that originated with intellectuals in universities have thoroughly infiltrated the mass media and the entertainment industry. It’s perverse how today’s “thought leaders” overwhelmingly think the same thing.

  There’s been no defense at all—forget about a counterattack—from so-called capitalists and business leaders. All they’re interested in is making money. In fact, they not only accept the ideas but contribute money to the causes of their enemies, idiotically thinking that virtue-signaling will placate them. It’s an unfortunate fact that business people, especially the suits managing large corporations, don’t really care how they make money. They tend to be completely amoral or immoral philistines and political hacks. They look like hypocrites and are (correctly) held in contempt by the intellectuals. The corporate types are happy to work with and for their counterparts in government, which is exactly what the fascism of Mussolini advocated. They self-righteously make charitable contributions to universities and NGOs, subsidizing the source of the poison.

  There’s almost no defense of the ideas that brought us Western Civilization, which is responsible for just about everything that’s good in the world. I’m not kidding when I make that assertion. With the exception of a few anomalies like Taoism, martial arts, yoga, and Oriental cooking, East minus West equals zero. Without it, the whole world would resemble Africa, Cambodia, or Mongolia—not even today, but 200 years ago. Ideas like individualism, freedom of thought, freedom of speech, science, rationality, and capitalism are products of Western Civilization. These concepts no longer have any defenders anywhere. They’re under attack everywhere.

  International Man: What do you think the impact of this will be on the markets and the economy?

  Doug Casey: I’m bearish, especially for the near term since actual Jacobins are in charge in Washington.

  How can the markets be healthy when what passes for a ruling class in the West actually hate themselves and middle class is collapsing economically and psychologically? When, political entrepreneurship is valued more than making money through production, When the currency is being actively destroyed to prop up what has become a very corrupt political system?

  In fact, the economy and the markets are the least of our problems. The very foundation of civilization itself is under attack. The widespread acceptance of destructive statist and collectivist ideas is serious. The consequences will be the same here as they were in Russia under the Soviets, in Germany under the Nazis, and in China under Mao. The situation may be even more serious since the idea of Western Civilization itself is under serious attack in the U.S., which has been the bulwark for the last century.

  So, excuse my bearishness, but I think it’s warranted.

  *  *  *

  Unfortunately, there’s little any individual can practically do to change the course of these trends in motion. The coming economic and political crisis is going to be much worse, much longer, and very different than what we’ve seen in the past. That’s exactly why New York Times best-selling author Doug Casey and his team just released an urgent new video Doug Casey’s Top 3 Secrets to Survive and Thrive During a Dollar Crisis. It explains what’s to come and exactly what you should do to protect yourself. Click here to watch it now.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 18:50

• Marines "Crushed" By Vax Mandate As "Thousands" Denied Religious Exemptions In "Political Purge"
  Marines “Crushed” By Vax Mandate As “Thousands” Denied Religious Exemptions In “Political Purge”

  Days ago it was first revealed that despite the Department of Defense offering a “religious exemption” as part of the Covid-19 vaccine mandate across all military branches, not a single one has yet to be approved – at a time at least 169 Marines were already discharged for their refusal to receive the shot.

  A new investigative report by Fox News finds that multiple “thousands” of Marines are still set to be processed out over the mandate, and that the corps’ “best and brightest” are being “crushed” by the Biden vaccine order. “Marines are allowed to apply for a religious exemption, but so far not a single application regarding the COVID-19 vaccine, or any vaccine for that matter, has been approved, a Marine Corps spokesman told Fox News.”

  For this reason the mandate is being likened to a “political purge” – which has seen a “blanket denial” of all formal requests for religious exemptions. In recent days official Marine Corps statements have underscored no exemptions are being given out, yet supposedly these are being considered on a case by case basis.

  

  As of late last week, the Marine Corps confirmed that not a single religious exemption request has yet to be approved. It was further confirmed that at least a few thousand could be discharged based on the exemption denial: 

  Marine Corps spokesman Capt. Ryan Bruce told Fox News that as of Thursday, 3,080 of the 3,192 requests for religious accommodation concerning the COVID-19 vaccine mandate had been processed and zero had been approved, adding that “no religious accommodations have been approved for any other vaccine in the past seven years.” 

  So assuming these Marines will still refuse the jab, thousands are set to be booted from the Marine Corps. In its reporting, Fox extensively quotes Marine officers, whose names are withheld. The Daily Wire, citing the most recently available public data from last week, estimated that some 9,000 could still be set for early discharge from the service: 

  As of Thursday, 94% of active-duty troops were fully vaccinated and another 1% were partially vaccinated, according to data from the U.S. Marine Corps.

  That leaves the remaining 5% of an active-duty Marine force of about 182,500, which amounts to about 9,125 active-duty Marines who are still unvaccinated.

  “There’s something fundamentally wrong at this point with our nation’s leadership,” a major with over 17 years of active service was cited as saying. “We are facing an unconstitutional edict that I think is very targeted as a political purge, taking out some of the best and brightest soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and guardians from the Space Force.”

  Further, a lieutenant colonel who has served for almost two decades said the Marines are discharging service members “as fast as they can and as brutally as they can, damaging every Marine as much as they can on the way out.”

  Further, Fox’s Jessica Chasmar, who interviewed several of the officers, said:

  “The one message I got from the colonel above me was: ‘Tread very carefully, this is political, you will be crushed like an ant.’ And he told me that because he cares about me,” the lieutenant colonel said. “Do I want to continue serving in an institution that crushes people for bringing up reasonable points in defending their faith?”

  One master sergeant said it seems that “the louder I speak the tighter the screws are turned against me.”

  Additionally one Marine who ranks high on the enlisted side said, “When you’re expected to behave a certain way and to obey certain rules and follow certain processes, and then to see on the other end that that’s not a two-way street, that’s a violation of my morals that I can’t stand by and not speak out about.”

  Over 9,000 Marines Still Unvaccinated, Over 100 Discharged For Refusal https://t.co/HaAnNe8d3r pic.twitter.com/YISN55KDy6

  — Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) December 28, 2021

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

  The same Marine, identified as a Master Sergeant, described one particular instance of an individual Marine’s exhaustively documented and very convincing case for a religious exemption: “I saw one package from a sergeant who had attached, like, 30 pages of material to substantiate why his belief was sincere, under no lawful obligation to do so,” the master sergeant said. “And then to have this as a response with no individual inquiry and just a generalized assertion of governmental interest is insulting.”

  “On the religious side, this is absolutely a travesty what’s happening,” a separate officer described. “People are getting blanket denials, they’re not addressing the individual concerns or beliefs of Marines who are submitting for religious accommodations, and I think that’s just horribly wrong. I honestly believe that they’re not really reading the packages.”

  Those interviewed also depicted an ongoing culture of intimidation which appears intended to silence any potential opposition to the mandate, further with no recourse whatsoever. Instead the Marines feel steamrolled into compliance. What’s more is that unlike many parts of Europe, prior infection and natural immunity is being completely ignored. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 18:30

• Jake Tapper's Producer Resigns From CNN Amid Pedo Scandal
  Jake Tapper’s Producer Resigns From CNN Amid Pedo Scandal

  Authored by Libby Emmons via The Post Millennial,

  CNN has confirmed on Wednesday that Jake Tapper’s producer, Rick Saleeby, has resigned from his position after it was revealed that he allegedly solicited sexually explicit photos of an underage girl. Fairfax County police seized devices from his residence.

  

  The news broke to Twitter via Jack Posobiec of Human Events, along with Project Veritas’ James O’Keefe, who first reported the revelations.

  BREAKING: CNN confirms @JakeTapper’s producer has resigned

  — Jack Posobiec ✝️ (@JackPosobiec) December 29, 2021

  

  Rick Saleeby was a CNN producer for “The Lead with Jake Tapper.” Allegations emerged that he had asked an underage girl for explicit photographs. This led to a seizure of his devices and hard drives from his Virginia home.

  Project Veritas revealed the allegations, finding texts showing that he had fantasies about molesting his fiance’s daughter. Saleeby, in one exchange, described his fiance’s daughter’s exceedingly short bottoms at the pool, saying that she was  “wearing very closely cut bottoms at the pool.” He then went on to describe the outline of the girls pubic area.

  Janine Banani was in a relationship with Saleeby for over a decade, and told Project Veritas that Saleeby solicited the photos of her daughter. Banani also gave a recording in which Saleeby allegedly said “…after I’m done having my mouth on her, I’m going to walk up and put my crotch very close to her face… slowly unzip my zipper and just guide her head a little closer and I’m just going to have her kiss the head and I’m going to put her hand on it so she can feel what the hard flesh feels like.”

  Saleeby appeared in Fairfax County, Virginia court on Tuesday, and was confronted by a news crew from Project Veritas. When asked, he refused to say whether or not he was still with CNN.

  The producer had previously taken others to task for their illicit behavior toward minors. As to that person, he said “He had already been accused of things prior. But he would make advances if there was a social gathering and they were drunk, put his arms around them, try and touch their leg.”

  “Try and build up emails to the level where he would get flirty and inappropriate. I’ll tell you this. In the climate that’s going on now, he definitely would have been fired,” said Saleeby, referring to the #MeToo movement in 2018.

  In an interview with Posobiec, O’Keefe slammed Tapper f an explosive interview with Human Events senior editor Jack Posobiec.

  O’Keefe said he has called on Tapper to verify Saleeby’s voice on the audio recordings. “What I want to ask Japper Tapper though is: ‘Jake, when I do this work, and I’m on TV and you’re on TV, Jake, there’s a thing called the IFB. And that’s that little headphone that goes in your ear. And what are you listening to is that it’s your producers voice. You always hear whether on the other side of the glass or whoever it was or the camera, the lights etc.’ I don’t think there’s anyone else on Earth who’s more qualified to identify that voice than Jake Tapper himself,” O’Keefe said. Posobiec added, “He won’t do it.”

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 18:10

• Police Raid Shutters Independent Hong Kong News Outlet For "Seditious" Content
  Police Raid Shutters Independent Hong Kong News Outlet For “Seditious” Content

  In the latest pro-China crackdown on Hong Kong independent media, police raided the headquarters of vocal pro-democracy website Stand News on Wednesday and arrested at least six, including current and former editors and board members.

  “Police raided Stand News’ office earlier in the day after arresting the six, including popular singer and activist Denise Ho, a former board member, on charges of conspiracy to publish a seditious publication,” the Associated Press detailed of the raid which involved over 200 officers and the seizure of all suspected “subversive” and “seditious” journalistic materials under last year’s national security law.

  

  Hours into the day the news website was no longer being updated, nor its active social media pages. Stand News’ HK$61 million in assets have been frozen and all employees dismissed. 

  It appears to be part of a new crackdown wave against opposition Honk Kong media, following the June 2021 shuttering of the Apple Daily newspaper in a similar massive police raid which saw its publisher Jimmy Lai and top editors arrested, as HK authorities continue forcing the public firmly in line with “pro-China” policies. 

  It’s now looking like the crackdown is likely to continue beyond Stand News. The AP writes further, “Early Wednesday, Stand News posted a video on Facebook of police officers at the home of a deputy editor, Ronson Chan.”

  The report adds that “Chan, who is also chair of the Hong Kong Journalists Association, was taken away for questioning, the organization confirmed in a statement.” Later released, he described that all his credentials and press pass, including all electronic devises and even bank cards were seized. 

  Police National Security Department moving evidence out from @StandNewsHK office pic.twitter.com/mBnly2lWrP

  — Galileo Cheng (@galileocheng) December 29, 2021

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

  Hong Kong police claimed in a follow-up press conference that “we are not targeting reporters” while a media industry group protested the raid. Police described Stand News in particular as having “stirred up hatred or contempt for the government and judiciary,” the AP noted. HK police further had some friendly “advice” for all other media and journalists: 

  “We are not targeting reporters, we are not targeting the media, we just targeted national security offenses,” said Li Kwai-wah, senior superintendent of the police National Security Department. “If you only report, I don’t think this is a problem.”

  He said at a news conference that those arrested had to account for their actions even if they had resigned from Stand News.

  Asked what advice he had for the media, Li replied, “Don’t be biased. You know well how to report, how to be a responsible reporter, how to make a non-biased report to your readers. That’s all I can give you.”

  This comes even after the outlet ceased the publication of most op-eds and removed the subscription-only membership, citing the prior national security law. Those still being detained reportedly face up to two years in prison and a fine up to HK$5,000.

  Pop star Denise Ho was among the Wednesday arrests of pro-democracy media voices…

  Pop star and prominent Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Denise Ho was arrested Wednesday morning by national security police.

  She was one of seven people accused by police of “conspiracy to publish seditious material.” https://t.co/vgQ0KIVTuD

  — Lalo (@LaloDagach) December 29, 2021

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

  Likely it’s only a matter of time for all remaining independent and opposition outlet voices before the police come knocking, as journalists struggle to figure out what exactly “don’t be biased” actually means in the minds of pro-mainland authorities.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 17:50

• Aaron Rodgers: Science That "Can't Be Questioned" Is "Propaganda"
  Aaron Rodgers: Science That “Can’t Be Questioned” Is “Propaganda”

  Authored by Isabel van Brugen via The Epoch Times,

  Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers on Tuesday took aim at the criticism he says he has received for his views on COVID-19 vaccines.

  

  During his weekly appearance on “The Pat McAfee Show,” Rodgers said that his previous comments on the issue has led to strong pushback from both a number of NFL voices and Silicon Valley.

  “If science can’t be questioned, it’s not science anymore; it’s propaganda and that’s the truth,” he said.

  “If science can’t be questioned it’s not science anymore it’s propaganda & that’s the truth” ~@AaronRodgers12#PatMcAfeeShowLIVE pic.twitter.com/8PHGdTgYmc

  — Pat McAfee (@PatMcAfeeShow) December 28, 2021

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

  Rodgers, 37, on Tuesday claimed that many NFL teams are quietly experimenting with various COVID-19 treatments behind the scenes.

  “When did science become this blind agreement and then not having any debate over what can actually heal people and work for people. That makes no sense to me,” he said.

  “When did we lose the ability to respect somebody’s opinion. My thoughts on COVID are my opinion. Why can’t we have more conversations between people with different opinions?” he added.

  Rodgers made headlines last month after he tested positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, after claiming in August that he was “immunized” against the virus.

  The three-time most valuable NFL player claimed on Nov. 5 that he was told by a league doctor that people who take a vaccine for COVID-19 will not catch or spread the disease.

  “One of the main docs said it’s impossible for a vaccinated person to get COVID or spread COVID,” he said.

  “We know now that information is totally false.”

  He confirmed during a television appearance that he is not vaccinated against COVID-19, explaining that he is allergic to an ingredient in the mRNA Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, and is wary of taking the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, citing documented past cases of blood clots that prompted federal regulatory agencies to temporarily pause administration of the shots earlier this year.

  Rodgers was fined by the NFL on Nov. 9 for COVID-19 protocol violations after an investigation found that he failed to consistently wear face masks inside the team’s facilities, and attended a Halloween party maskless—violating protocol that requires masks for players not vaccinated against COVID-19.

  He was also dropped by Prevea Health over his vaccine views after being aligned with the company for nine years.

  Rodgers in a separate appearance on “The Pat McAfee Show” on Nov. 9 said that the COVID-19 vaccine can be “polarizing,” but did not back down from his stance on the vaccine.

  “In the end, I have to stay true to who I am and what I’m about, and I stand behind the things that I said,” the quarterback added at the time.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 17:30

• Ghislaine Maxwell Found Guilty Of Helping Epstein Sexually Abuse Teen Girls
  Ghislaine Maxwell Found Guilty Of Helping Epstein Sexually Abuse Teen Girls

  After hearing from around 30 witnesses including the four accusers, the 12-person panel began deliberating in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell just before 5 p.m. on Dec. 20.

  “Maxwell was Jeffrey Epstein’s right hand,” Assistant US Attorney Alison Moe said in her closing statement.

  

  Today, after six days of deliberations over accusations that Maxwell helped pedophile Jeffrey Epstein mount a “pyramid scheme of abuse” involving underage girls, the jury came to their decision ahead of what was to be a working weekend through the new years’ break.

  The jury found her guilty on 5 of the 6 counts of luring and grooming underage girls for sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein, a verdict that offers some long-delayed justice for his victims.

  She was acquitted of one count of enticing a minor to travel across state lines to engage in an illegal sexual act.

  

  The verdict was largely a rejection of Ms. Maxwell’s defense, which centered on an argument that government’s case was based on flimsy evidence, prosecutors’ animus toward Mr. Epstein, and the inconsistent accounts of women who were motivated by money to point the finger at Ms. Maxwell.

  AP reports that she stood with her hands folded as the jury filed out, and glanced at her siblings as she herself was led from the courtroom, but was otherwise stoic.

  Maxwell faces up to 70 years behind bars, and still awaits trial on two counts of perjury.

  Lawsuits involving the abuse allegations also continue, including one in which a woman not involved in the trial, Virginia Giuffre, says she was coerced into sexual encounters with Prince Andrew when she was 17. Andrew has denied her account and that lawsuit is not expected to come to trial for many months.

  

  The question is – will Maxwell be “Epstein’d” too?

  So are any of the men who abused these underage girls actually going to face justice? Or at least be named

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 29, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/29/2021 – 17:09

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Shellenberger: How 'Defund The Police' Backfired On Democrats
  Shellenberger: How ‘Defund The Police’ Backfired On Democrats

  Authored by Michael Shellenberger via Unherd.com,

  Over the last two decades, progressives have established a new consensus on crime. Nonviolent felonies like shoplifting and drug possession should be reclassified as misdemeanours. Cities should defund the police and spend the money on nurses, psychologists and social workers instead. Offenders should have minimal involvement with the justice system — and be kept out of jail wherever possible.

  

  But now, rising crime is rapidly undermining the progressive consensus. Homicides rose 30% in 2020, and over two-thirds of America’s largest cities will have had even more homicides in 2021 than in 2020. At least 13 big cities will set all-time records for homicides, including Philadelphia, Austin, and Portland. Meanwhile property crimes in California’s four largest cities rose 7% between 2020 and 2021. Car break-ins in San Francisco declined temporarily in 2020, because Covid emptied the city of tourists, but they have since skyrocketed, reaching 3,000 in November. Many residents have stopped bothering to report crime.

  Of course, many crime rates are still below what they were in the Eighties. And progressives are right to say that we shouldn’t panic about rising crime, since past panics contributed to cruel and crude responses, including overly long prison sentences with little in the way of real rehabilitation programmes. That’s why, in the late Nineties, I worked for George Soros’s foundation, among others, advocating for drug decriminalisation, reduced sentences for nonviolent crimes, and alternatives to incarceration.

  But today it’s clear that the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. In 2000, when I stopped working on criminal justice policy, progressives were advocating mandatory rehabilitation as an alternative to incarceration. Now, progressive prosecutors are simply releasing criminal suspects from custody without requiring rehab or extended probation. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, for instance, a man who had run over the mother of his child with his SUV was released on $1,000 bail. Neither he nor his SUV were put under electronic surveillance. Soon after, he killed six people and injured another three dozen — by running them over with his SUV.

  Meanwhile incarceration rates in the United States are at a 30-year low. In 2019, there were 17% fewer prisoners in the US than in 2009. And while progressives are right to point out that nearly half of the people in federal prisons are there for nonviolent drug offences, it’s worth noting that there are eight times more people in state prisons than federal prisons. And just 14% of people in state prisons are there for nonviolent drug offences. Half are there for murder, rape, robbery and other violent offences.

  While homicides and other violent crimes merit special attention, crimes driven by drug addiction, such as shoplifting, public camping, and public defecation, undermine the fabric of city life. Progressives sold their criminal justice reforms on the idea that nonviolent offenders would be released into some kind of supervisory care, focused on treatment and rehabilitation. But often that did not happen.

  Consider San Francisco. Its jail population plummeted to 766 in 2021 from 2,850 in 2019. If progressives had done what they’d promised, there would be 2,000 extra people on probation being supported to stay sober and out of trouble. That hasn’t happened. And that’s troubling because many who are released re-offend. Half of all offenders — and three-quarters of the most violent ones ­— who were released from San Francisco jails before trial, between 2016 and 2019, went on to commit new crimes. Instead of benevolent paternalism, progressives delivered libertarian anarchism. And yet all that would have been required would have been weekly drug testing, check-ins with probation officers, and electronic monitoring.

  Still, if we are to reduce crime without returning to an era of mass incarceration, we need a new consensus around criminal justice — one that prioritises prevention and rehabilitation, rejects calls to defund the police, and views probation as critical to making alternatives to incarceration work. And all of that starts with understanding why people commit crimes in the first place.

  Progressives attribute crime to “root causes” like poverty, inequality, and structural racism. San Francisco’s District Attorney Chesa Boudin, for example, recently claimed that, “Affordable housing, quality education, access to health care and addiction services can provide the stability that empirical evidence has shown actually deters criminal activity.” Of course these things are important, but there is no evidence that they prevent crime. Indeed, the study Boudin cited simply found that, in 12 cities where over 10% of population received welfare benefits, “more crime occurs when more time has passed since welfare payments occurred.” It did not look at the role of any of the factors he referenced.

  Indeed, there is little evidence for the claim that poverty and structural racism have any impact on crime. African American crime rates were lower during the Forties and Fifties, when segregation was legal, poverty more widespread, and discrimination more overt, than between 1965 and 1990. Indeed, homicides among African Americans shot up after the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. And though it’s true that homicides rose during the first few years of the Great Depression, they then declined in most major cities afterward. And rates of crime, including homicide, kept declining after the 2007 financial crash and resulting recession, the worst since the Depression.

  Homicide is irrational and emotional, experts agree, not a natural and predictable response to personal setbacks. Social conditions like poverty, oppression, and unemployment do not drive violent acts; people suffering from these conditions have varied rates of violence throughout history. Rather, one of the most important factors, when it comes to homicide, is the public’s belief in the legitimacy of the criminal justice system, as well as things like patriotism and “fellow feeling”. Homicide rates among unrelated adults in the United States closely follow the proportion of the public who trust their government to do the right thing, and believe that most public officials are honest. As trust in government fell in the late Sixties and early Seventies, homicides increased. When trust in government rose in the Fifties and mid-Nineties, homicides decreased.

  So anti-police protests take a toll. In 2014, a white police officer in Ferguson killed an unarmed 18-year-old black teenager, causing demonstrations across the US. Afterwards, the police chief in nearby St Louis noted that, “the criminal element is feeling empowered by the environment.” In 2015, the US Department of Justice asked one of the country’s leading criminologists, Richard Rosenfeld, to investigate whether homicides had risen after the incident. At first, Rosenfeld was sceptical, noting that homicides in St. Louis had started to rise before then. But after looking at the evidence, he changed his mind. “The homicide increase in the nation’s large cities was real and nearly unprecedented,” he wrote in his 2016 report. Rosenfeld had found a 17% rise in homicide in the nation’s largest cities, between 2014 and 2015.

  Rosenfeld told me, when I interviewed him, that last year’s Black Lives Matter protests had contributed to the homicide increase. “When people believe the procedures of formal social control are unjust,” noted Rosenfeld, “they are less likely to obey the law.” And BLM protestors fail to recognise that the people who suffer most, when the police can’t do their jobs, are black Americans, who are more likely to be victims of violent crime. They are seven to eight times more likely to be homicide victims than white Americans.

  But progressives have gone one step further, by undermining the idea that police actually have any power to reduce crime. “Law enforcement is not going to prevent the violence,” claimed Philip Atiba Goff, CEO of the Center for Policing Equity, a few weeks ago. In 2020, then–vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris tweeted, “America has confused having safe communities with having more cops on the street. It’s time to change that.”

  Researchers find that negative publicity about the police has a powerful impact on police officers. Little wonder, then, that in 2020, at least two dozen police chiefs or senior officers resigned, retired, or took disability leave in America’s 50 biggest cities. 3,700 beat officers left. Today there are fewer police officers per capita in America than at any time since 1992.

  What liberals ignore is that there is good quantitative evidence that more policing can reduce crime. They argue that the police don’t actually prevent crime, they just punish people after the fact. But in 2009, President Obama’s stimulus package offered a billion dollars in grants to struggling American cities, to fund the police; cities qualifying for the grant increased policing by 3.2% and experienced a 3.5% decline in crime.

  And there’s another inconvenient truth that liberals ignore: the evidence suggests that fewer cops may mean more police misconduct, because the remaining officers must work longer and more stressful hours. Working a 13-hour, rather than 10-hour, shift means cops are far more likely to experience public complaints against them, while back-to-back shifts quadruple the likelihood.

  Still, progressives are busy gaslighting the public about their efforts to defund the police. A progressive columnist for the San Francisco Chronicle recently wrote, “while there is continuing debate about what is driving the violent crime increases … we know for a fact that defund had nothing to do with it. Because defund never actually happened.” This is patently untrue. After the Black Lives Matter protests, more than 20 big cities reduced police budgets by at least $870 million. The LAPD’s budget was slashed by $150 million in July, for instance. It’s just that homicides rose so quickly that most cities reversed their defunding budgets. “From New York City to Los Angeles,” noted the Associated Press at the end of last month, “in cities that had some of the largest Black Lives Matter protests … police departments are seeing their finances partially restored in response to rising homicides, an officer exodus, and political pressures.”

  San Francisco is a classic example. After Black Lives Matter protesters last year demanded that cities “Defund the Police,” Mayor London Breed held a press conference to announce that her city would be one of the first to do exactly that. Breed announced $120 million in cuts to the budgets of both San Francisco’s police and sheriff’s departments. Last week, Breed u-turned dramatically, announcing that she was making an emergency request to the city’s Board of Supervisors for more money to fund the police and support a crackdown on crime, including open-air drug-dealing, car break-ins, and retail theft.

  Progressives denounced her plan. They oppose enforcing laws, when addicts and mentally ill people break them, because they believe “the system” is fundamentally racist, wrong and the cause of social injustice. This explains why progressives are narrowly focused on black people killed by the police, even though 30 times more black people are killed by civilians. And it explains why Boudin and other progressive prosecutors are obsessed with emptying prisons. (“The challenge going forward,” said Boudin in 2019, “is how do we close a jail?”)

  Still, there’s reason to be hopeful. When Breed announced a sweeping crackdown on open air drug dealing and crime, she said, “I’m proud this city believes in giving people second chances.”

  “Nevertheless, we also need there to be accountability when someone does break the law … Our compassion cannot be mistaken for weakness or indifference … I was raised by my grandmother to believe in ‘tough love,’ in keeping your house in order, and we need that, now more than ever.”

  My time working in justice reform taught me that tough love works. The Netherlands and Portugal are often held up as progressive utopias, and while it’s true that both have reduced criminal penalties, both nations still ban drug dealing, arrest drug users, and sentence dealers and users to prison or rehabilitation. “If somebody in Portugal started injecting heroin in public,” I asked the head of drug policy in that country, “what would happen to them?” He said, without hesitation, “They would be arrested.”

  And being arrested is sometimes what addicts need. “I am a big fan of mandated stuff,” says former felon Victoria Westbrook. “I don’t recommend it as a way to get your life together, but getting indicted by the Feds worked for me.” Today Victoria is working for the San Francisco city government to integrate ex-convicts back into society.

  It’s hard work, but it pays off. Over the last 20 years, Miami has reduced its “homeless” population by 57%, despite skyrocketing rents, by closing open drug scenes and providing free psychiatric care, drug treatment and basic shelter. In High Point, North Carolina, police targeted three neighbourhoods with persistent crack cocaine dealing. There, police officers, accompanied by local community workers, met with dealers in person, asked them to stop, and offered them job training, tattoo removal and help restarting their lives. The officers gave the dealers unsigned arrest warrants, ring binders of the evidence against them, and video proof of their crimes. It proved to be good motivation for the dealers to clean up their acts.

  People in progressive cities are often shouted down for even suggesting a role for law enforcement. “Anytime a person says, ‘Maybe the police and the health care system could work together?’ or, ‘Maybe we could try some probation or low-level arrests,’ there’s an enormous outcry,” said Stanford addiction specialist Keith Humphreys. “‘No! That’s the war on drugs! The police have no role in this! Let’s open up some more services and people will come in and use them voluntarily!’”

  But there is strong quantitative evidence that probationary programs that are “swift, certain, and fair” reduce arrests, recidivism, and drug use. The most famous of these programmes is Hawaii’s Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE). It incentivised offenders to follow probation rules by applying guaranteed, immediate, and short jail time for parole violations like failing a drug test. One study found that HOPE reduced drug use by 72%, future arrests by 55%, and incarceration by 48%.

  A researcher summarised the benefits of the program, saying, “HOPE actually gets people to change their behaviour by setting up a circumstance where their natural behaviour moves in the right direction. They don’t want to be arrested and go to jail, so they stop using. That’s a profoundly rehabilitative thing to do.” In other words, HOPE rewards addicts and criminals for behaving well, instead of simply expecting them to.

  It’s time for a new consensus on crime. Enforcing laws will reduce violence. Pushing offenders to take responsibility for themselves, when they leave prison, will lead them to independent lives, rather lives of crime. Progressives have done their best to undermine justice, as well as common sense, for two decades. As well as refunding the police, we should apologise to them.

  * * *

  Michael Shellenberger is author of the best-selling book Apocalypse Never (HarperCollins 2020) and San Fransicko (HarperCollins 2021).

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 23:40

• Asia's Going Nuclear
  Asia’s Going Nuclear

  After announcing its plans for a phase-out of nuclear power in 2000 and ramping up financial and infrastructural investments in renewable energy production since then, Germany is entering the home stretch: In the following weeks, the country will take offline three of its six remaining nuclear power plants, with the remaining three following at the end of 2022.

  And as Statista’s Florian Zandt notes, since there are no plans to build new reactors, this will make the European country only the second nation worldwide next to Italy to close down all preexisting nuclear reactors without constructing new ones so far.

  As Statista’s chart indicates, the rest of the world is not ready to ditch this power source quite yet…

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Asia in particular is still big on nuclear power, even with the nuclear disaster at Fukushima happening as recently as 2011 and some neighboring regions still being visibly affected by the fallout to this day. Japan still has 33 reactors in commission while proposals, planning or construction have started on an additional eleven according to data by the World Nuclear Association. India plans to triple its number of nuclear power plants to 72 in total, while China has proposed the construction of 168 new reactors in addition to 18 being built and 37 being planned, which would amount to an increase of 337 percent. Overall, 35 reactors around Asia are already in construction, with Europe coming in second with 15 plants.

  While the steady increase in energy consumption and the scarcity of fossil fuels like coal, crude oil and gas might make nuclear energy a viable, clean option on paper, the technology still poses a great many risks, especially when it comes to the correct disposal and storage of highly radioactive waste products and the condition of older plants. According to data by the International Atomic Energy Agency, two thirds of the 441 currently active nuclear power plants are older than 30 years, a fact that might make thinking about at least overhauling those plants instead of building new ones something to consider.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 23:20

• A Perfect Storm Of Incentives
  A Perfect Storm Of Incentives

  Authored by Antony Davies via The American Institute for Economic Research,

  It is not yet clear whether history will remember the 2020s more for an outbreak of a deadly virus, or for an outbreak of mass psychosis.

  No doubt, both were at play, the former because the virus was novel and deadly, the latter because we had no idea how much so. In March of 2020, the World Health Organization estimated Covid’s case fatality rate to be over 3 percent. Some outlets reported case fatality rates above 10 percent. By comparison, the case fatality rate for the common flu is a mere fraction of a percent. 

  But the early information ranged from sketchy to biased. In the early days, the number of Covid tests was limited, so physicians only tested those who were sick enough to show up at hospitals. This skewed the early data toward showing Covid as being deadlier than it actually was. With no randomized testing, the actual lethality was impossible to know. 

  This bias interacted with the media and politicians’ incentives to create a perfect storm of incentives.

  
  The media had an incentive to repeat the worst fatality projections and to play down the bias behind the projections because bad news attracts viewers, and viewers attract advertising dollars. Heavy media coverage of the worst Covid projections alarmed voters, and that forced politicians to respond. But the politicians’ incentives were skewed toward a heavy-handed response.

  There were two ways politicians could have been caught making mistakes. Politicians might not have imposed lockdowns when lockdowns were needed. If they erred in this way, the error would have become quickly and clearly evidenced in body counts. Angry voters would have looked for someone to blame, and the politicians would have been the clear choice. Conversely, politicians might have imposed lockdowns when lockdowns were not needed. If they erred in this way, the error would have remained mostly hidden. Unemployment and business closures would skyrocket, but politicians could point to the millions of hypothetical deaths that “would have occurred” were it not for the lockdowns.

  By late 2020, it became clear that early case fatality rates were overstated, but it was too late for politicians to change course. A feedback loop had ensued wherein the media sold advertising by spotlighting the Covid danger. This made people fearful, and the people pushed politicians to act. Politicians acted and then hid the potential error of unnecessary lockdowns by emphasizing the danger of Covid. This gave the media more material to spotlight and more advertising to sell. Social media then jumped into the fray by anointing itself the arbiter of what was and wasn’t “misinformation.” But social media was as motivated as the mainstream media to attract eyeballs and sell advertising, and so anything that contradicted the official line on Covid was deemed “misinformation.”

  The result was mass psychosis in which people’s behaviors toward the real threat of Covid became inconsistent with their behaviors toward other real threats. And what was the real threat of Covid?

  While most countries imposed lockdowns, Sweden resisted. The Swedish government recommended social distancing and banned gatherings of more than 50 people, but it did not require businesses to close. Because of differences in population mobility, density, size, and the environment, a comparison of Sweden to the United States isn’t possible. What is possible is a comparison of Sweden to Sweden. The Imperial College of London (ICL) produced the early forecasts of Covid deaths. These were the forecasts on which politicians based their policy decisions. Applying the ICL forecast model to Sweden, Swedish epidemiologists predicted that, by July 1 2020, Sweden would have suffered 96,000 deaths if it had done nothing, and 81,600 deaths with the few policies that it did employ. In fact, by July 1, Sweden had suffered only 5,500 deaths.

  The ICL model overestimated Sweden’s Covid deaths by a factor of nearly fifteen.

  Early ICL forecasts indicated that, unchecked, Covid would kill 40 million worldwide in 2020, and that the number could be cut in half by social distancing and isolating the elderly. According to the World Health Organization, worldwide Covid deaths for 2020 totaled 1.8 million.

  The ICL model overestimated world Covid deaths by a factor of ten.

  For 2020, the same ICL forecasting model also predicted that, if the countries did nothing in response to Covid, up to 2.2 million people in the US and another 550,000 in the UK would directly die from Covid.

  Suppose that ICL predictions of US and UK Covid deaths were overstated only by a factor of three. Then, in the absence of lockdowns and mandatory masks, the United States could have expected around 730,000 Covid deaths and the UK 180,000 in 2020. How many people actually died? In 2020, the number of direct deaths due to Covid were approximately 360,000 in the US and 77,000 in the UK. Thus, even assuming that the ICL model had a significantly smaller bias than it demonstrated elsewhere, the lockdowns appear to have only saved around 370,000 lives in the US and 103,000 in the UK.

  To further skew these estimates, the ICL model assumes nonpharmaceutical interventions only. The widespread availability in the US of a vaccine, beginning in mid-2020, further reduces the number of lives the lockdowns saved. In short, however many lives the lockdowns did save, they were far fewer than what the ICL models predicted they would save.

  As with all things, lockdowns do not come without tradeoffs. Some people died of cancer, kidney disease, and other non-Covid causes because they were afraid to go to hospitals out of fear of contracting Covid. In Canada, cancer screening was suspended so that hospital resources could be devoted to Covid care. Early estimates show up to a 10 percent increase in cancer deaths as a consequence. In the US in the early days of Covid, there was a 30 percent decline in the number of people seeking initial treatment for kidney disease.

  At the start of the pandemic, calls to suicide hotlines spiked across the country, as did instances of domestic violence. The Centers for Disease Control estimates that the total number of deaths in the US was 450,000 larger than it should have been in 2020. That 360,000 of those were directly due to Covid means that the remaining 90,000 were due to Covid only indirectly or due to the lockdowns themselves.

  In addition to the lockdowns costing lives, we expended unprecedented resources maintaining them. These came initially in the form of unemployment and business closures, and later in the form of supply chain problems and inflation and higher taxes to pay for massive stimulus spending. In late 2020, economists estimated that, provided it ended by the fall of 2021, the pandemic will cost the United States around $16 trillion over the next decade. That’s around $40 million for every life saved. 

  But how many more lives might we have saved had we done something different with those resources? Around 660,000 people die each year of heart disease in the US. The National Institutes of Health spends around $5 billion each year researching cures for cardiovascular diseases. Americans spend another $330 billion each year for hospitalization, home health care, medication, and lost productivity associated with cardiovascular diseases.

  Suppose that, over the next decade, it turns out that the 2020-21 lockdown saved a total of 1.1 million US lives (including people who may have contracted Covid in 2020-21 but died over the subsequent decade from lingering complications). This is three times the 370,000 the lockdown appears to have saved in 2020 alone. We will have spent $16 trillion in direct costs and lost productivity to save those 1.1 million people. But, over the same decade, 6.6 million people will have died of cardiovascular diseases. To save them, we will have spent $3.3 trillion. We are dedicating one-fifth the resources to fighting a disease that kills six times the number of people. That makes no sense.

  Of course, Covid and cardiovascular diseases are very different in that heart disease isn’t contagious. And yet, that criticism cuts both ways: because heart disease isn’t contagious, we can’t develop a herd immunity, and so heart disease will remain with us for generations whereas Covid will not.

  None of this is to say that we shouldn’t have taken measures to halt Covid’s spread. It is to say that there is something markedly broken about a public policy response that spends five times the resources on a threat that is one-sixth as deadly as the single most deadly thing that kills Americans.

  We got here because politicians’ survival incentive is to do whatever it takes to secure our votes, and the media’s profit incentive is to say whatever it takes to bring us back looking for more. As Omicron looms, and as surely as Pi, Rho, and Sigma will follow, voters should meet their fears with reason, view the media with a skeptical eye, and demand that politicians discuss tradeoffs openly and honestly.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 23:00

• TikTok Tricks Teens Into 'Self-Diagnosing' Rare Mental Disorders
  TikTok Tricks Teens Into ‘Self-Diagnosing’ Rare Mental Disorders

  On top of inundating teenagers with content produced by wannabe hookers-in-training glorifying BDSM, kinky sex and other prurient subjects, much to the chagrin of responsible parents everywhere, TikTok is also facing criticism for convincing teenagers that they have (sometimes rare) mental disorders, everything from ADHD to Borderline Personality Disorder, and beyond.

  The news initially appeared in WSJ, which spoke to several teenage high school students about their experiences with the app. One, a young woman named Samantha Fridley, who claims she was diagnosed with depression at age 10, told WSJ she had stayed up until 0300 in the morning while watching an endless stream of videos about BDP and other rare disorders like bipolar disorder and multiple-personality disorder.

  Many of these videos are being made by teenagers or twentysomethings who try to portray themselves as “experts”, but who in fact have no formal experience treating mental illness. Some encouraged viewers to perform their own self-diagnoses at home, convincing young impressionable adults that they have serious disorders.

  It’s becoming a problem since young people who manage to convince themselves that they have these disorders might be more tempted to indulge in borderline behavior in an effort to convince themselves, and others, that the diagnosis is legitimate.

  TikTok videos containing the hashtag #borderlinepersonalitydisorder have been viewed almost 600MM times. However, only 1.4% of the US adult population is believed to experience the disorder, according to the National Alliance on Mental Illness.

  

  Multiple-personality (otherwise known as dissociative-identity) disorder is even rarer, afflicting 1% of the population, according to the Cleveland Clinic. Videos containing the hashtag #dissociativeidentitydisorder have been viewed well over 700M times on TikTok. Many of the videos feature teens and young adults as they appear to switch from one personality to another.

  One mental health expert said TikTok videos that help to de-stigmatize mental illness can be helpful. But self-diagnosing teens have been inundating mental health providers, potentially creating problems for the whole system. That same provider said they were surprised when they saw the sheer volume of videos about MPD, considering how extremely rare it is.

  Some even worry that bombarding teens with this type of negative content might potentially alter their brain chemistry.

  “We have to convince these kids to release their self-diagnoses but when they leave us they go right back into that TikTok community which reinforces their beliefs,” said Don Grant, executive director of outpatient services for Newport Healthcare’s teen treatment center in Santa Monica, Calif.

  Grant hasn’t kept a tally of the teens who use TikTok to self-diagnose, but he told WSJ the number was “significant.”

  This is just the latest report to raise questions about the TikTok algorithm, which is considered a trade secret by TikTok owner ByteDance and is closely guarded. The company says it’s working on tweaks to the algorithm that could protect teens and other users from being over-exposed to just one type of content.

  Any parents who are concerned about their child’s self-diagnosis are encouraged to sit back and listen to the teen before making judgments. But if they refuse to change their minds, it might be time to force them to delete the app entirely.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 22:40

• Buchanan: How We Forfeited The Fruits Of Cold War Victory
  Buchanan: How We Forfeited The Fruits Of Cold War Victory

  Authored by Pat Buchanan,

  As 1991 turned into 1992, America appeared to have arrived at the apogee of its national power and world prestige.

  President George H.W. Bush had just sent an army of half a million men to expel, in a 100-hour campaign, Saddam Hussein’s invading army from Kuwait. The world, including Russia, China and Iran, had supported U.S.-led military action to overturn Iraq’s aggression.

  Our Cold War adversary, the Soviet Union, had just collapsed and disintegrated into 15 nations. The Warsaw Pact had dissolved. All of Eastern Europe was free. We were the sole surviving superpower.

  In the reviewing stand on Constitution Avenue for the victory parade of the troops of Desert Storm, the thought occurred: This is what it must have been like when the generals returned in triumph to Rome to take the cheers of the crowds.

  

  But, instead of making America again “a normal country in a normal time,” as Jeane Kirkpatrick had urged, we set out on our path to empire.

  There was much hubristic talk in those days of a “unipolar moment” in which we would establish a “benevolent global hegemony” and create a New World Order under U.S. dominance and tutelage.

  Secretary of State Madeleine Albright explained: “If we have to use force, it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future.”

  Three decades after those heady days, how has it gone for us?

  Today, the world’s other great powers, Russia and China, are united against us in a “relationship” that, the autocrat Xi Jinping says, “in its closeness and effectiveness … even exceeds an alliance.”

  Russia is issuing virtual ultimata against any further advance of NATO into Ukraine or Georgia. Beijing, after digesting Hong Kong, is indicating that the time draws near for its annexation of Taiwan.

  How did we get here?

  At age 90, Mikhail Gorbachev, who gave up power in December 1991, identifies a primary cause: “The triumphal mood in the West, especially in the U.S. Arrogance and self-confidence went to their heads.”

  Indeed. Back in February of 1997, George Kennan, the architect of Cold War containment of Joseph Stalin’s USSR, implored America not to seize its triumphal moment and move NATO into Eastern Europe:

  “Expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era.”

  “Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.”

  So said Kennan. And so it came to pass, as Russia has placed 100,000 troops on the borders of Ukraine and told us that any further expansion of NATO into its border states, or the installation of weapons there that can threaten Russia, would be intolerable — and resisted.

  Because we admitted into an alliance to contain Russia all of its former Warsaw Pact allies and three former Soviet republics, we are now close to sword’s point with a Russia that our own actions have driven into an entente with the greatest rival the U.S. has ever known: China.

  And who built up China, with four times our population, into the first world power with a capacity to challenge America across all fronts — strategic, military, diplomatic and economic?

  Capitalist America did.

  Clinton Democrats and Bush Republicans, reveling in the riches global trade would realize for our prosperity, threw open America’s markets to production from anywhere and everywhere on earth.

  U.S. corporations swiftly began to transfer production out of the United States to where it could be done cheapest — the People’s Republic of China. From 1991 on, China surged and eventually swept past the U.S. as the first manufacturing power on earth.

  A self-sufficient America that provided for all its needs in World Wars I and II is now dependent on foreign nations for the necessities of its national life.

  Meanwhile, a mighty China is rolling up islands, rocks and reefs in the South and East China seas and warning the United States against any effort to prevent the reunion of Taiwan and the motherland.

  These, then, are three of the historic blunders that have forfeited for us the unique position America held at the close of the Cold War.

  • First, alienating Russia by treating it as an incorrigible and permanent enemy by pushing our alliance onto its front porch.

  • Second, pursuing a globalist trade policy that China exploited to become an economic and military rival of the United States.

  • Third, America’s plunge into the Middle East, with our forever wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and then Syria, Libya and Yemen.

  They availed us nothing and led only to death and destruction.

  Of the passing of that preeminence we had in 1991, let it be said: We did it to ourselves.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 22:20

• Mexican Billionaire's Christmas Advice: Buy Bitcoin, "Stay Away From Fiat!"
  Mexican Billionaire’s Christmas Advice: Buy Bitcoin, “Stay Away From Fiat!”

  The unprecedented monetary stimulus unleashed by the Federal Reserve and other major central banks to help combat the economy-destroying COVID crisis has unleashed hyperinflation, which has resulted in the spiraling death of fiat. 

  On Christmas day, Ricardo Salinas Pliego – Mexico’s third-richest man – tweeted to his million followers why they needed to ditch fiat currencies and purchase Bitcoin. 

  “A hug and all the success of the universe for all of you, may God give you health, desire to live and get ahead, the world belongs to dreamers!

  “Stay away from FIAT money .. it’s fake money made of paper and lies. The Central Banks are printing more money than ever before. Invest in Bitcoin,” Pliego said. 

  Pliego quoted market commentator Holger Zschaepitz’s ever-expanding Federal Reserve balance sheet chart. He called fiat a “mega fraud.” 

  Para los que no entendieron mi segundo regalo navideño de ayer…
  Pónganse almejas! El Fiat es un mega fraude. https://t.co/RosuvTCHLC

  — Ricardo Salinas Pliego (@RicardoBSalinas) December 26, 2021

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

  The billionaire sounded frustrated and also said, “politics leaves NOTHING GOOD for an entrepreneur, I better dedicate myself to continue generating prosperity and job opportunities for our collaborators … When you enter politics, you realize that enemies are real and friends are lies.” 

  Pliego has been investing in Bitcoin for years and has called out the central banking scam. He said in November 2020 that he invested a substantial portion of his liquid assets in the world’s biggest cryptocurrency. 

  “Many people ask me if I have bitcoins,” Salinas said at the time, who has a $13.4b fortune through his stakes in retail, banking and broadcast businesses, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. “YES. I have 10% of my liquid portfolio invested it,” he tweeted last year. 

  The billionaire is right – the purchasing power of currencies has lost tremendous value as central banks print trillions of dollars to prevent the global economy from imploding. 

  For example, one U.S. dollar could buy ten beer bottles in 1933. Today, as Visual Capitalist Govind Bhutanda notes, it’s the cost of a small McDonald’s coffee.

  

  In other words, the dollar’s purchasing power – its value in terms of what it can buy – has decreased over time as price levels have risen. Bitcoin fairs better than fiat because it’s limited in numbers and serves as an inflation hedge. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 22:00

• Biden's Troubled Relationship With The Truth… And Consequences
  Biden’s Troubled Relationship With The Truth… And Consequences

  Authored by Andy Puzder via RealClearPolitics.com,

  President Biden’s approval rating has plummeted, and Democrats wonder why. The United States is facing hardships, but hardships alone don’t make a president unpopular. Leaders who are honest about the problems we face and forthright about the solutions they offer tend to do well (think, say, of Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan). Unfortunately, that is not the leadership Americans are getting from this president.

  

  Instead, the Biden administration has tried to convince the public of things that are not just untrue but implausible. To note a few, Biden did not (and does not) have a “national strategy” to defeat COVID; our southern border is not “secure;” the Afghan withdrawal was not an “extraordinary success”; the current bout of inflation is neither “temporary” nor “a good thing”; and government spending never takes “the pressure off of inflation.”

  Of course, politicians often overstate things and sometimes outright lie. Nothing new there. It’s the in-your-face nature of the administration’s falsehoods that is stunning.

  For a recent example, take Biden’s efforts to promote his Build Back Better bill. The administration often claims that the legislation really “costs zero dollars” because it is “paid for.” Most Americans realize that paying for something doesn’t make it free. Otherwise, literally everything would be free. Seriously, people get this.

  In fairness, Biden was attempting to state that BBB wouldn’t add to the deficit because taxing the rich would pay for it. But even that claim didn’t pass the smell test. Just about everybody outside of Washington, D.C., knows that government programs are never actually “paid for.” We are already borrowing from our great-grandkids just to cover our current profligate spending.

  So, the Democrats resorted to various accounting tricks and budgetary chicanery to make it appear as though taxing “the rich” would pay the BBB bills. Few were fooled. Analyzing the bill using realistic assumptions, the Congressional Budget Office found that it would result in around $3 trillion in new deficit spending.

  In yet another implausible claim, Biden said that BBB’s massive government spending would take “the pressure off of inflation.” No less an authority than former Clinton and Obama economist Larry Summers warned in February that profligate government spending would “set off inflationary pressures of a kind we have not seen in a generation.” The Democrats ignored him and passed a $1.9 trillion COVID relief boondoggle. In hindsight, Summers was prescient. In November, he recommended that the administration “not compound errors” it had already made “with far too much fiscal stimulus and overly easy monetary policy” and reject Build Back Better.

  To counter these concerns, Biden claimed that BBB’s massive government spending would bring down inflation because government would pick up the tab for certain household expenses, such as child care. Of course, this ignores the impact that the bill would have on the supply of – and demand for – child care.

  Child care providers are already in short supply. According to Sen. Richard Burr, ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, the bill would shrink the supply further “by killing off faith-based providers, small family child care homes, [and] kinship care,” while increasing the demand for child care with massive government subsidies. Not surprisingly, a study by the Progressive Peoples Policy Project, a think tank as left-leaning as its name implies, found that the bill would actually increase the cost of child care for middle-class families by about $13,000 per child annually.

  The supply-and-demand dynamic and its impact on inflation seem to be mysteries to the administration – but not to most Americans. According to the Penn Wharton Budget Model, the average American family will incur an additional $3,500 in expenses this year solely because of already-surging inflation. It’s the kind of thing people notice.

  Of course, the administration made this implausible claim only because the bill needed West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin’s support to pass. Manchin, however, made it clear that, with inflation already at a 40-year high, he wouldn’t support legislation that added to the deficit or further swelled prices.

  Like most Americans (including Larry Summers), Manchin refused to be fooled. He announced that he won’t support the bill – effectively killing it in its present shape. Rarely deterred by reality, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer then announced that the Senate would move forward with a vote on the bill nonetheless.

  Progressives have long lived in a bubble that cuts them off from the concerns of the “deplorables” in “fly-over America.” During the pandemic, the left hermetically sealed that bubble, shielding its leaders from the discontent that runs across political, geographic, racial, and ethnic lines. Otherwise, they would have foreseen the declining popularity of a president who repeatedly makes patently implausible claims and attempts to advance policies at odds with basic common sense.

  The lesson here is not a new one. As someone said long ago: “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.”

  * * *

  Andy Puzder is the former CEO of CKE Restaurants, chairman of the board of 2ndVote Advisers and a senior fellow at Pepperdine University’s School of Public Policy.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 21:40

• Strategist Explains How A Declining Working-Age Population Can Be An 'Inflationary Force'
  Strategist Explains How A Declining Working-Age Population Can Be An ‘Inflationary Force’

  During an otherwise quiet Holiday weekend, the team at MacroVoices has come through with a new episode of its markets podcast featuring returning guest Jesse Felder, founder of the Felder Report, which offers proprietary research to paying customers. During the interview, Felder offers his perspective on the inflation/disinflation debate that has been raging on MV, while popular inflation indicators take out highs from three or four decades ago.

  But before readers get too bogged down in this all-too-fresh indicators, Felder asserts that – preferring to approach his inflationary outlook from a structural perspective – over the long term, demographic changes in the US could create more headwinds and tailwinds alike.

  For example, the US got a taste of one inflationary dynamic last year when the virus hit, and baby boomers old enough to retire left the workforce en masse, choosing to walk away from the table with as much of their gains from the prior decade as they could. According to Felder, declines in the working population relative to the nonworking population is an “inflationary force”.

  We’ll let Felder explain in his own words:

  “If you just start with demographics, I think the IMF put out a thing, a report, you know, three, four years ago pointing out that demographics in the United States actually globally, everywhere but Japan, you know, we’re seeing these increasing age dependency ratios of you know, more retirees than working population, and that is an inflationary dynamic. I think something, one of the things that people don’t really appreciate, is that in the wake of the financial crisis, I think we had a lot of baby boomers who were forced to stay in the workforce. They weren’t able to retire because their retirement accounts took a hit and so they had to stay in the workforce longer than they otherwise would have kind of artificially increasing the supply of labor for a period of time acting as a disinflationary force. But what we saw with the pandemic was a total reversal of that, where all those folks said, hey, look, my retirement accounts now 300%, whatever front, you know, in the last decade, and I can now afford to retire, and I don’t want to stay at work and get sick. So all those folks retired, and then you had, you know, even further to that degree, a bunch of people who maybe were going to retire 5-10 years from now, who thought you know, what, I’ve just done so well, with my retirement accounts. Why don’t I retire early.”

  “And so we’re seeing this dramatic decline, I think in the working population relative to the non-working and that is an inflationary force, putting pressure on wages. And I think that’s one of the factors we’re seeing right now that’s a secular push. That’s, you know, in place, but it’s been exacerbated by the pandemic.”

  He also warned about the impact of debt as a disinflationary force…

  You know, when you talk about debt as another disinflationary force. I think that’s true for folks like me, and you Erik, who, you know, if we get too indebted, we have to cut back on our spending and hurts demand. But that’s true for everybody but the federal government who can, you know, print money to monetize the debt. I think that’s another thing we’ve seen as part of the pandemic is this, you know, when debt-to-GDP, you know, gets to where it is, it’s typically problematic for countries that can’t, you know, get away with money printing. The United States government has been getting away with it for the past, you know, a couple years now. And obviously, that’s not disinflationary at all to be issuing $4 or $5 trillion dollars of new debt and having the Fed you know, buy it all up is has not been disinflationary, it’s been absolutely inflationary.

  …and the potentially inflationary aspects of economic rule by a handful of massive tech giants – Amazon, Apple, Alphabet, Meta etc – that dominate markets today have seen such profound growth and durability to competition (thanks to their ability to simply buy every company that threatens their market share in any way) that some are beginning to wonder whether they will ever become victim to disruptors, like the first few waves of dotcom-focused tech giants did (who doesn’t remember Netscape?)

  And I think the final thing that Rosie brought up, and I’m a big fan of his work. He talks about disruptive technology. And I think that’s been true for a long time, too. But if you look at what’s happened in the economy, in the last 10 years, we’ve seen a concentration of economic power in fewer and fewer companies. You know, who’s disrupting apple today, who’s disrupting Facebook today. Facebook and Google are maybe a good example of companies who have their finger on the pulse of who in social media is going to potentially disrupt Facebook? Well it’s Instagram then we will just by them. And you know, same thing with Google. And so they’ve been able to make 1000s and 1000s of acquisitions to essentially shore up their position, their monopoly or duopoly positions that have really prevented from disruptive tech from exerting a disinflationary impact in recent years. And I would say, Amazon is probably another example of this. Who’s disrupting Amazon? Nobody. In the pandemic, we saw that you know, sales already off of a huge base, go up 40% or something insane, you know, we’ve never really seen a company of that size, see that type of growth. And they just have such a strong position in the market that they can’t be disrupted. I think we’re seeing this in wages, too, with Amazon, there was a good article in the Wall Street Journal recently, that pointed out that, you know, with Amazon paying $18 starting wage in its warehouses. It’s putting pressure on every other employer across the country to raise wages.

  The interview also included a helpful chart pack that Felder delved into during the Q&A. One indicator he shared that caught our eye is the following chart comparing the S&P 500’s performance with changes in excess liquidity in the economy.

  

  Felder explains what can be a confusing dynamic succinctly and simply: in the wake of the great financial crisis, many baby boomers put off retirement because their portfolios took a hit,

  To help show how excess liquidity is being sucked out of the system, Felder turned to a simple indicator that has become increasingly familiar to us: a comparison in the rate of growth between the M2 money supply and GDP. The purpose of the indicator is it’s believed to be a reliable illustrator of excess liquidity by showing the growth in the money supply that’s due to central bank stimulus vs. real economic activity.

  As Felder’s chart shows, excess liquidity is already being sucked out of the system rapidly already, allowing them to be pushed into yet another policy blunder with potentially severe consequences for the market. Notice the correlation between the indicator and stocks over the past few years. How much longer can this continue without impacting the market?

  Felder also shared this interesting chart of a Nasdaq “Hindenburg” indicator that triggers whenever market breadth collapses, signaling that only a few richly valued stocks are carrying the market on their back, and it’s only a matter of time before they, too, give in.

  The last time we saw this indicator was in the late summer of 2018, just that Q42018 selloff that sent stocks deep into the red just before the holidays, leaving the S&P500 with its most recent annual decline.

  From the highs, that move was a 20% decline. 

  It was seen again in the early months of 2016  and  the summer of 2015 before the flash crash that August. Prior to that, it was also seen in 2007, and before that, it triggered just as the dotcom mania was collapsing.

  

  Felder’s interview and accompanying chart pack, both available on MacroVoices, features more food for thought about Felder’s outlook for the dollar, commodities, precious metals and crypto.

  Listen below:

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 21:20

• RIP, 'Pandemic Of The Unvaccinated'
  RIP, ‘Pandemic Of The Unvaccinated’

  Authored by Matt Welch via Reason.com,

  Farewell to a Biden White House messaging strategy that was terrible long before Omicron…

  

  If you spend too much time observing the way politicians speak, you’ll pick up an almost perceptibly mechanical gear-shift in their heads when the brain-groove reminds them to reproduce an anecdote or talking point they have formulated so many times before. Occasionally the subconscious rebels against the alienating monotony with apologetic prefix clauses like, “That’s why I like to say,” or “I always tell the story that,” but the pre-sets mostly override such human twitches to deliver the desired political result.

  So it was for President Joe Biden’s counterproductive “pandemic of the unvaccinated” slogan, which the White House COVID-19 Response Team introduced in mid-July, and which the president was still regurgitating inaccurately as late as December 14.

  In a local TV interview with News Center 7 in Dayton, Ohio, the president was asked about whether his administration would continue fighting his contested employer vaccine mandates in court. The politician-brain quickly whirred into gear.

  “This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. The unvaccinated. Not the vaccinated, the unvaccinated,” Biden emphasized, on the same day that the omicron variant produced a one-day positive-case increase of 16 percent in highly vaccinated New York City. 

  “That’s the problem. And so everybody talks about ‘freedom,’ and not to have a shot or have a test. Well guess what? How about patriotism? How about making sure that you’re vaccinated, so you do not spread the disease to anybody else? What about that?”

  What about that indeed.

  New York City’s one-shot vaccination rate (of 92 percent for adults, 83 percent for kids between 13 and 17) “rivals any number in the free world,” Politico’s Jack Shafer observed last week, and yet somehow my vaccinated teen and boosted self spent Christmas under quarantine. The fact-checkers over at The Poynter Institute’s PolitiFact generously rated Biden’s “vaccinated…do not spread the disease” claim as only “mostly” false, despite epidemiologist quotes like “[the] statement is not accurate,” and “vaccinated individuals can definitely infect other people.”

  But the problems with the “pandemic of the unvaccinated” message pre-date the variant that rendered it factually ludicrous. On September 16, one week after Biden reversed serial administration promises by announcing an employer vaccine mandate (while using language such as “We’ve been patient, but our patience is wearing thin. And your refusal has cost all of us”), science writer Yasmin Tayag penned an Atlantic piece headlined “Stop Calling It a ‘Pandemic of the Unvaccinated.’“

  “Bullying the unvaccinated into getting their shots isn’t going to work in the long run,” Tayag predicted, in a piece surveying a field of study (behavioral science) to which the White House seems oblivious.

  “The way the mandates are being presented is driving a wedge between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. If the goal is to inoculate enough people to reach herd immunity, this approach may eventually backfire.”

  So how have mandates worked in practice? The New York Times on December 18 published a survey of all 50 states and the country’s largest 100 cities, and concluded that the government orders “have not provided the significant boost to state and local vaccination rates that some experts had hoped for.” To the contrary: “In most locations, the number of adults with at least one shot grew at a slower pace after states and cities announced mandates than it did nationwide in the same time periods.”

  “Mandates might help for people who are just finding it inconvenient, but have no really legitimate reason to not get the vaccine,” Lisa Cooper, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Equity, told the Times.

  “But then you have people who have strong beliefs against it or who really have significant other struggles, and the mandates are not going to do anything for those people.”

  The Times notes that—at least until and unless Biden’s employer mandate passes legal muster—the vast majority of government vaccination orders take place in Democratic-voting, high-vaxxed polities: “In almost all of these states and in all of the counties surrounding the cities with mandates, a majority of the residents voted for President Biden. Statewide mandates tend to be most popular along the West Coast and in the Northeast, whereas states banning some mandates tend to be clustered in the South.”

  So if vaccine mandates aren’t moving the needle on vaccination, what, precisely, are they for? One particularly ungenerous hypothesis is hard to avoid. Rebranding COVID-19 as the “pandemic of the unvaccinated,” then targeting that population with punishments for noncompliance, has been a way to scapegoat political opponents and technology companies, while bolstering the sense of virtuousness among the vaxxed.

  Those dynamics were present at the creation of the re-brand. The same week that the White House COVID-19 Response Team began telling vaccinated people that the pandemic was now for those other people, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy called for a “whole-of-society” effort to combat “health misinformation,” then Biden just flat-out accused Facebook and other social media companies of “killing people.”

  Then in the same week that Biden announced his vaccine mandate, he also charged prominent GOP officials with being “cavalier” about whether children lived or died. “Republican governors in states like Texas and Florida are doing everything they can to undermine the public health requirements that keep people safe,” the president tweeted. “They’re playing politics with the lives of their citizens, especially children. I refuse to give in to it.”

  Biden’s entire speech unveiling his vaccine mandate was dripping with irritation for Americans who had yet to get a shot, and for politicians who were not sufficiently on board with his COVID policies. A selection:

  Many of us are frustrated with the nearly 80 million Americans who are still not vaccinated […]

  This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated. And it’s caused by the fact that despite America having an unprecedented and successful vaccination program, despite the fact that for almost five months free vaccines have been available in 80,000 different locations, we still have nearly 80 million Americans who have failed to get the shot.

  And to make matters worse, there are elected officials actively working to undermine the fight against COVID-19. Instead of encouraging people to get vaccinated and mask up, they’re ordering mobile morgues for the unvaccinated dying from COVID in their communities. This is totally unacceptable. […]

  That 25 percent [of unvaccinated people] can cause a lot of damage—and they are. The unvaccinated overcrowd our hospitals, are overrunning the emergency rooms and intensive care units, leaving no room for someone with a heart attack, or [pancreatitis], or cancer. […]

  [W]hat makes it incredibly more frustrating is that we have the tools to combat COVID-19, and a distinct minority of Americans—supported by a distinct minority of elected officials—are keeping us from turning the corner. These pandemic politics, as I refer to, are making people sick, causing unvaccinated people to die.

  We cannot allow these actions to stand in the way of protecting the large majority of Americans who have done their part and want to get back to life as normal. […]

  The bottom line: We’re going to protect vaccinated workers from unvaccinated co-workers.

  The message given here to the vaccinated is mixed bordering on schizophrenic. This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated does not jibe with vaccinated workers need protection from unvaccinated workers. In a speech touting the urgent need for vaccination, Biden is saying that getting vaccinated cannot be a ticket back to normal life until we deal with those foolish anti-vaxxers. Rather than encourage the kind of social cohesion that correlates best with high inoculation rates, the president is telling one bloc of voters it’s OK to be pissed off at the other.

  Writing in The Lancet last month under the headline “Stigmatising the unvaccinated is not justified,” epidemiologist Günter Kampf laid out the practical drawbacks to Biden’s approach.

  “People who are vaccinated have a lower risk of severe disease but are still a relevant part of the pandemic,” Kampf wrote.

  “It is therefore wrong and dangerous to speak of a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Historically, both the USA and Germany have engendered negative experiences by stigmatising parts of the population for their skin colour or religion. I call on high-level officials and scientists to stop the inappropriate stigmatisation of unvaccinated people, who include our patients, colleagues, and other fellow citizens, and to put extra effort into bringing society together.”

  The pandemic of the unvaccinated framing actively encouraged one of the uglier and least productive societal reactions to COVID-19: Making the mere fact of contracting the virus a morality play falling largely along partisan lines. The whole notion that by “doing everything right,” and “following all the rules,” you will be righteously spared, unlike those anti-science people this summer down south.

  That self-flattering narrative is collapsing, now that (as predicted) a stubbornly seasonal/regional virus has hit media/Democratic centers for a third consecutive winter. “Thousands who ‘followed the rules’ are about to get covid,” ran the headline on a Washington Post “Wellness” column last week. “They shouldn’t be ashamed.” Lovely sentiment, that.

  If the public health goal is to prevent unnecessary deaths by persuading fence-sitters to take the life-saving vaccine, there are many strategies that strike me as more potentially effective than scapegoating, marginalizing, and punishing a population that’s already disproportionately suffering from the disease. Starting with maybe studying, you know, behavioral science.

  Outgoing National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Francis Collins did an interview with NPR this month that included this startling admission: “I do think we need to understand better how—in the current climate—people make decisions….To have now 60 million people still holding off of taking advantage of lifesaving vaccines is pretty unexpected. It does make me, at least, realize, ‘Boy, there are things about human behavior that I don’t think we had invested enough into understanding.'” Boy!

  Next, politicians and public health officials might consider telling the whole relevant truth as they know it, rather than the partial bowdlerized truth as they mold it to shape public behavior.

  It’s not just Biden busting the fact-check-o-meters; it’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walensky, as Jacob Sullum pointed out just today: “Time and again during the COVID-19 pandemic…Walensky has proven herself untrustworthy. The latest example is Walensky’s slippery response to criticism of a study that she has repeatedly cited to justify the CDC’s controversial recommendation that K–12 schools require students to wear face masks as a safeguard against COVID-19.”

  Public health officials have been unreliable narrators about the science of masks, the science of social distancing, the science of outdoor transmission, the science of outdoor dining, and the science of reopening, almost always in the direction of favoring their preferred restrictions. Responding specifically and factually to expressed reasons for vaccine hesitancy is not only more moral than compulsion and demonization, it might well be more effective at the stated goal.

  This doesn’t mean sugarcoating the vastly different outcomes among the Covid-positive vaxxed and unvaxxed—far from it. This graph is far more compelling to me than sitting through yet another rambly Joe Biden speech:

  

  But the above should also serve a message to us vaccinated Americans: It looks like, on balance, we’re going to come out of this omicron infection all right. Maybe instead of directing rage at a subset of our fellow countrymen who are getting seriously ill in disproportionate numbers, we should personally live as though we are in an endemic, and otherwise try to persuade our recalcitrant loved ones that this mild cough and week-plus indoors is a damn sight better than the alternative. Politicians might not be able to shut off their internal machinery of rhetorical division, but weren’t you supposed to be better than all that?

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 21:00

• Hollywood Elites Panic-Buy Armored-Cars And Safe-Rooms Amid Rising Violent Crime
  Hollywood Elites Panic-Buy Armored-Cars And Safe-Rooms Amid Rising Violent Crime

  After years of rising crime in Los Angeles, elites in wealthy neighborhoods are finally panicking about the recent string of high-profile retail robberies and home burglaries. Experts say wealthy individuals are purchasing bulletproof cars, safe rooms, employing armed guards, and even constructing walls with barbed wire around their properties.

  The issue of violent crime is nothing new to Los Angeles, but a spillover to upscale neighborhoods has put elites on edge. The Hollywood Reporter reports agencies who provide private security are seeing increasing demand for private patrols. 

  Since August, Rising S Company, a company that builds underground bunkers, has installed 13 safe rooms, nine safe doors, two underground bunker shelters, and two window fortifications across Brentwood Park, Beverly Park, and Paradise Cove. This compares with seven safe rooms in California in the last 2.5 years. 

  

  Estate manager Bryan Peele, president and founder of the L.A.-based Estate Managers Coalition, said his clients have “fully equipped safe rooms that they can live in for a few days, if necessary, that are completely hard-wired with phone cables, Internet, everything.”

  One of Peele’s clients has three bulletproof cars and wears fake Rolexes. “This guy will take a $200,000 Rolex and copy it, using stainless steel and other metals, so it looks like the original but costs maybe $2,000-$3,000 per watch. So, in the event that it’s stolen, the client is out a lot less money,” he said. 

  Many upscale homes are installing more cameras, constructing fences with barbed wire, and employing 24-7 security details that will protect them from once their private jet touches down to their mansions. 

  Some people are even taking firearm and self-defense classes so they will know how to defend their family and or themselves in an emergency. 

  Violent crime rises from an alarming cocktail of criminal justice reforms. For instance, thieves can steal up to $950 in goods and receive a slap on the wrist, the equivalent of a traffic ticket. Criminal gangs have taken advantage of relaxed laws and have recently gone on a wave of retailer smash and grab robberies. There have also been high-profile robberies of elites. 

  When philanthropist Jacqueline Avant was murdered in her Beverly Hills mansion earlier this month, it was a wake-up call for the community.

  “Almost immediately after the Avant shooting, it’s been crazy busy. We have increased operations in that area tremendously,” said Aaron Jones, CEO of International Protective Security. “I have a lot of regular VIPs; when people call, I get on the phone with them. We understand the urgency of what’s going on. It’s nonstop.”

  Criminal justice reforms caused all this madness. Law and order needs to be restored or people will start moving out of the area. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 20:40

• Woman Charged With Assault After Punching, Spitting-On Unmasked Passenger During Delta Flight
  Woman Charged With Assault After Punching, Spitting-On Unmasked Passenger During Delta Flight

  By Allen Zhong of the Epoch Times

  A woman who was recorded in a viral video punching and spitting an unmasked male passenger on a Delta Air Lines flight was charged in Georgia.

  The woman who was identified as Patricia Yannet Cornwall was charged with assaulting by striking, beating, or wounding; a crime which is punishable by a fine and/or up to one year in jail if found guilty. Records from the Walton County Sheriff’s Office show Cornwall is a California resident.

  According to the complaint and sworn affidavit from FBI Task Force Officer Rudyard Jarrard, the incident happened during the flight from Tampa, Florida, to Atlanta, Georgia. The disputes were started over a beverage cart blocking the aisle.

  “Who am I, Rosa Parks?” Cornwall responded when the flight attendant asked her to find an open seat until beverage service was completed. The male passenger—who is identified as R.S.M. in the complaint—seemed to think that Cornwall’s response was inappropriate, and told her that she “isn’t black … this isn’t Alabama and this isn’t a bus.”

  Cornwall then turned on the male passenger and ended up striking his head with a closed fist and causing visible injury. She also spat in the passenger’s face and head area. She was taken by the flight security and restrained for the remainder of the flight, reads the complaint.

  Cornwall was released on Monday after a $20,000 bond was posted, court records show. A federal public defender, Mildred Geckler Dunn, was assigned as her attorney.

  

  The complaint doesn’t mention any disputes over masking during the altercation. However, a video clip that captured the event shows an argument about masks being part of the feud.

  Delta flight from Tampa to Atlanta got crazy‼️ pic.twitter.com/I9BZUKv3LB

  — ATL Uncensored | Atlanta News (@ATLUncensored) December 25, 2021

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

  Cornwall can be seen in the video—with her mask under her chin—telling the male passenger “Wear your [sic] mask?”

  “I’m eating,” the passenger can be heard responding.

  “Sit down, Karen!” the passenger can be heard shouting at Cornwall once during the video.

  R.S.M. and at least another passenger reminded Cornwall to wear her mask during the event. He can be heard swearing while telling Cornwall to wear her mask.

  Cornwall punched him right after.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 20:20

• Omicron Has Lower Hospitalization Rate, Epidemiologists Confirm
  Omicron Has Lower Hospitalization Rate, Epidemiologists Confirm

  Epidemiologists were anxious as they awaited the next batch of data about the omicron variant, but already it’s pretty clear that the number of hospitalizations from the so-called “omicron wave” is far below the level from earlier waves, including last year’s winter wave.

  As Bloomberg reports, the seven-day average of new cases in the US hit 206,577 on Sunday, roughly 18% lower than the all-time high recorded on Jan. 11… Meanwhile, hospitalizations rose to a seven-day average of 8,964, only half their earlier peak.

  “We are seeing exponential increases in cases, and a much lower increase in hospitalizations and deaths,” said Albert Ko, chair of the department of epidemiology and microbial diseases at the Yale School of Public Health.

  And it’s not just in the US: London has also seen lower hospitalization numbers during its latest wave, as data shared by Dr. Scott Gottlieb show.

  London and New York City: New Covid cases and New Covid Hospitalizations – #Omicron versus prior waves. On a relative basis, Hospitalizations are well below what was seen in prior Covid waves. pic.twitter.com/FaUyySGuLO

  — Scott Gottlieb, MD (@ScottGottliebMD) December 28, 2021

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

  This isn’t exactly a shocker: three studies published last week show that hospitalization rates for omicron have been far lower than with previous strains.

  Scientists even attempted to determine exactly how much of the decline in hospitalization rates has been due to growing levels of natural immunity; and even when patients do end up in the hospital with omicron, they appear to spend less time there.

  On a relative basis, Hospitalizations are well below what was seen in prior Covid waves.

  “It appears there is less risk of hospitalized disease across the board, but we have to be a little bit careful about interpreting that,”  said Jeffrey Morris, professor and director of the biostatistics division at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine.

  And that’s not the only new piece of data that might help put the public’s mind at ease:

  The most recent spike was purely “technical” in nature.

  1/7

  On Monday the number of COVID cases in the U.S. spiked as labs reopened after the holiday. While this is more a technical spike due to labs catching up from previous days, the seven-day moving average is on the verge of making a new high. pic.twitter.com/KrD9gM4lqM

  — Jim Bianco biancoresearch.eth (@biancoresearch) December 28, 2021

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

  Still, 2MM Americans have been confirmed infected in recent weeks, sending the effective unemployment rate surging.

  3/7

  This chart shows 2.04M tested positive in the past 10-days. If we assume 75% are in the workforce (few under 18 test positive), then 1.04% of the workforce is currently “out” with a positive test.

  So, the effective unemployment rate just spiked 1.04% in the last 10-days. pic.twitter.com/67ZvkPHoDk

  — Jim Bianco biancoresearch.eth (@biancoresearch) December 28, 2021

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

  But it wouldn’t be Xmas without the Grinch, and unfortunately for those who believe the peak of this latest wave might be right around the corner, Bianco’s research suggests otherwise:

  7/7

  Europe has been struggling with tens of millions of lost workdays as their positives surge and surge and it has still have not peaked.

  Many think US positives will peak in the next 2- to 3-weeks … this has not been the case in Europe, and the US is ~6-WEEKS behind them. pic.twitter.com/KdmZ82xuNd

  — Jim Bianco biancoresearch.eth (@biancoresearch) December 28, 2021

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

  If Europe’s path is followed by US, we still have six more weeks before this exponential wave peaks.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 20:00

• The Net Impact Of Child Tax Credit Expansion Is More Inflation
  The Net Impact Of Child Tax Credit Expansion Is More Inflation

  Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

  Biden claims Build Back Better won’t add to inflation. We strongly disagree…

  

  The Anti-Poverty, Targeting, and Labor Supply Effects of the Proposed Child Tax Credit Expansion

  The University of Chicago investigates the The Anti-Poverty, Targeting, and Labor Supply Effects of the Proposed Child Tax Credit Expansion emphasis mine.

  We estimate the anti-poverty, targeting, and labor supply effects of the expansion by linking survey data with administrative tax and government program data which form part of the Comprehensive Income Dataset (CID). Initially ignoring any behavioral responses, we estimate that the expansion of the CTC would reduce child poverty by 34% and deep child poverty by 39%. 

  The paragraph look good if you stop reading there and miss the key phrase “initially ignoring any behavioral responses”. 

  Reality then surfaces.

  We then simulate anti-poverty effects accounting for labor supply responses. By replacing the TCJA CTC (which contained substantial work incentives akin to the EITC) with a universal basic income-type benefit, the CTC expansion reduces the return to working at all by at least $2,000 per child for most workers with children.

  Relying on elasticity estimates consistent with mainstream simulation models and the academic literature, we estimate that this change in policy would lead 1.5 million workers (constituting 2.6% of all working parents) to exit the labor force.

  The decline in employment and the consequent earnings loss would mean that child poverty would only fall by 22% and deep child poverty would not fall at all with the CTC expansion.

  In short, people would drop out of the labor force content with $3,000 or $3,600 per child (up from $2,000 per child).

  Moreover, there was no means test on this.

  As BBB is currently written, the money would be handed out willy-nilly.

  Beware of Expansions!

  Press Secretary Jen  Psaki moaned “Maybe Senator Manchin can explain to the millions of children who have been lifted out of poverty, in part due to the Child Tax Credit, why he wants to end a program that is helping achieve this milestone.” 

  Manchin is not ending the program. He is willing to let the emergency tax credit expire and return the amount to where it was.

  One of Manchin’s fears is precisely that programs never end. The second is they are not paid for. And the third is the program will add to inflation.

  If Manchin OK’d BBB he would be under the same pressure a year from now, something he wants to avoid.  

  Meanwhile, at a time when labor shortages abound, there would be increased incentive for people to drop out of the labor force.

  Add it all up and it’s impossible to not get inflation out of this mess. 

  Incentivizing people to not work is the last thing we need right now.

  *  *  *

  Like these reports? If so, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 19:40

• NFL Legend John Madden Unexpectedly Died Tuesday Morning
  NFL Legend John Madden Unexpectedly Died Tuesday Morning

  According to a press statement by the NFL, Hall of Fame coaching and broadcasting legend John Madden died unexpectedly Tuesday morning. He was 85 years old. 

  Madden is one of the most iconic figures in NFL history with a 103-32-7 record. 

  

  The NFL announced the passing of Madden on Tuesday evening:

  Earlier today we received the sad news that the great John Madden died unexpectedly this morning. He was 85.

  “On behalf of the entire NFL family, we extend our condolences to Virginia, Mike, Joe and their families,” said NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.

  “We all know him as the Hall of Fame coach of the Oakland Raiders and broadcaster who worked for every major network, but more than anything, he was a devoted husband, father and grandfather. 

  “Nobody loved football more than Coach. He was football. He was an incredible sounding board to me and so many others. There will never be another John Madden, and we will forever be indebted to him for all he did to make football and the NFL what it is today.”

  Memorial service information will be announced when available.

  Madden was the youngest head coach in pro football when Al Davis hired him to coach the Oakland Raiders, and he led them to a Super Bowl title while having so much success that he still has the all-time highest winning percentage among all coaches who won at least 100 games.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 19:30

• Goldman's Head Of Hedge Fund Coverage: The Inconvenient Truth Is That The Era Of "Irresponsible Bullishness" Is Over
  Goldman’s Head Of Hedge Fund Coverage: The Inconvenient Truth Is That The Era Of “Irresponsible Bullishness” Is Over

  As excerpted from from the weekly markets/macro comment by Tony Pasquariello, Global Head of Hedge Fund Coverage at Goldman Sachs

  I went back and read a batch of emails that I sent over the course of this year. it’s a humbling exercise, but I think valuable — it illustrates the broad direction of things, as well as how much noise, clutter and emotion we absorb along the way. in the doing, you also realize what gets traction (references to coffee, baseball trivia and my grandparents 1) and what doesn’t land quite as well (you’re tired of New England sports references, I know). In the end, we should give thanks, as 2021 will go down as one of those extraordinary years, certainly in the US: record M&A … record new issue … record retail activity … all-time highs in the equity market, the housing market and the digital space … long may it run.

  some parting thoughts on 2021:

  1. the year began with a marriage of fiscal and monetary policies the likes of which the world had never seen; the year ends with a potentially failed BBB bill and a central bank that’s quickly getting out of the bond buying business. I’ll get into the implications of this shift in the 2022 section.

  2. looking back, despite so much intoxication at the time, it’s notable how many things topped out in Q1 — not only in the reflation foot race (the high close on 10-year note yields was 1.74% on March 31st), but also in highly valued tech names (see GSXUNPTC), the renewables space (GSXURNEW) and SPACs (GSCBSPC1). in a way, it’s remarkable that Q1 marked peak exuberance, yet the broader market continued to make higher highs for many months thereafter; again, this is largely to the credit of the US mega cap tech names, who yet again beat the pants off most every other item on the global menu.

  3. what to say of COVID? it faded, at times, from the market narrative, but kept coming back in problematic ways. I’ll go back to a comment from July on Delta, which hopefully proves to be a cut-and-paste for Omicron: “to this point in the local move I’d argue the role of the variants has one been of concern around economic impingement — relative to very high growth expectations — rather than a game change; as we look ahead, the UK reopening experience could be the perfect stress test for whether stocks should discount something more than that.”

  4. the year featured a painful disjunction between “the stock market” and “the market of stocks.” you don’t need me to say it, but I can’t recall a year where headline market returns so hugely belied the difficulty of managing professional, levered funds along the path. even before you consider that S&P has added nearly 1,000 index points this year on a Sharpe Ratio that approaches 2.0, here’s an overly simple way to frame it: if you take the YTD total return of the GS Hedge Fund VIP basket … and you triple it … you still fall short of S&P 500.

  5. if there was ever a doubt about who wields power in the stock market, the US retail investor stole the show in 2021. following a year that saw more inflows than the prior 25 years combined, to what extent this cohort remains in the fight is a major open question for early 2022. in general, for financial actors of all stripes — households, corporations, sovereigns, your alma mater — I tend to think one of the big unknowns for next year is simply: where does all the capital go?

  6. on many days, the options market overpowered the underlying cash equity market. whether it was short-dated upside gamma grabbed by retail investors on their favorite single stocks, or record demand for index protection by professional investors, at various turns we saw the clear footprints of plain old calls and puts on the broader market. to recall a line from the great Emanuel Derman: “the central dogma of derivatives is that causality flows from underliers to derivatives, but that hasn’t been true for a long time.”

  7. in January of this year, headline CPI registered +1.4% y/y … the last print was +6.8% … and, it’s not crazy to think that number will be upwards of 7% come January. if you had told me at the start of the year how the inflation narrative would pan out, I certainly wouldn’t have predicted 10-year note yields of just 1.48% … nor that gold would be — gasp — down 6% … and, if I’m being honest, I don’t think I would have predicted that S&P would make a high over 4700. I’ll again reference a quote from Morgan Housel: “we think about and are taught about money in ways that are too much like physics (with rules and laws) and not enough like psychology (with emotions and nuance). physics isn’t controversial. it’s guided by laws. finance is different. it’s guided by people’s behaviors.”

  Thinking ahead to 2022:

  1. the big ball: the setup for risk taking is changing. I can no longer stand up and say that the outlook for growth is totally spectacular … nor can I say that both fiscal and monetary policy is utterly unbounded. so, the inconvenient truth is we’ve passed the near-perfect points of peak activity and peak liquidity. and, when you go from that remarkable brew to something, well, “less great” or “different,” I think it has to matter to asset markets — particularly when the base line is the COVID era produced a Sharpe ratio on 60/40 portfolios which is 3x the long-term average. at the very least, it’s harder to see the upside tail as clearly from here, therefore the era of “irresponsible bullishness” is probably over for now.

  2. following an era where the total return of S&P has been positive in 12 of the past 13 years, does that mean it’s game over for the bull market? with appreciation for the prior point and a lowering of expectations, I’m not inclined to ditch Old Turkey just yet and I think there are still good macro fundamentals to anchor to. from here, the bull case is now predicated on the 1st derivative:

  1. financial conditions are still ridiculously, if inappropriately, easy — note that US 10yr real rates are 15bps lower today than they were before the PFE news last year;
  2. the underlying economy retains significant strength into next year, and a +3.5% GDP forecast is still well above-trend;
  3. if S&P earnings growth 8% next year, the index has significant underlying ballast.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 19:20

• Just 3% Of CEOs Say COVID-19 Is Their Top Worry: Report
  Just 3% Of CEOs Say COVID-19 Is Their Top Worry: Report

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

  While the fear of getting fired has risen sharply among C-suite executives due to various disruptive forces buffeting their businesses, a mere 3 percent identified COVID-19 as their top worry, according to the CEO of management consultancy AlixPartners.

  

  In a Dec. 27 interview with Yahoo Finance, AlixPartners CEO Simon Freakley previewed some of the topline findings of the forthcoming 2022 AlixPartners Disruption Index, which surveyed over 3,000 senior executives globally across multiple industries to find out what keeps them awake at night.

  Freakley told the outlet that AlixPartners’ third annual disruption survey, due for release in January, will show that nearly three-quarters of CEOs feel their jobs are at risk.

  “The 72 percent—almost three-quarters—of CEOs feel that their jobs are in jeopardy, a massive 20 point jump since last year, is really significant,” Freakley said.

  Last year’s disruption index showed that 51 percent C-suite executives worried about losing their jobs due to the disruption facing their industries, while 25 percent identified COVID-19 as their top concern. COVID-19 is the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, also known as SARS-CoV-2.

  “When we asked people what was keeping them awake at night, COVID didn’t even make the top 10,” Freakley said of this year’s findings, adding that pandemic anxiety came in at number 13.

  “In the top 10 were issues like the impact of artificial intelligence in their sectors, governance issues coming from new regulation, environmental issues, how they were responsible but still profitable, all of these concerns are in the top 10,” he added.

  The prior 2021 disruption index showed that new or evolving competition or business models was the main worry (34 percent), followed by technological advances as well as data privacy and security issues (33 percent each), and automation, artificial intelligence, and robotics (32 percent).

  Freakley said that, while it remains a concern, COVID-19 has been relegated to a more routine disruptive force.

  “I think the learning from this has been that COVID, whilst an enormous disruption in our times, is just another disruption,” Freakley told Yahoo Finance. “There are many, many disruptions hitting businesses being managed by executive teams. This is just another one.”

  At the same time, a whopping 94 percent of CEOs told AlixPartners for the 2022 survey that they feel their business models must fundamentally change over the next three years for them to stay relevant in their respective markets.

  While there has been no shortage of concern expressed by policymakers and public health officials about the pandemic generally, and the spread of the highly-contagious Omicron variant specifically, Freakley’s remarks suggest executives have become more adept at managing the disruptive impact of the outbreak.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 19:00

• TikTok Promoting "Proud Groomer Teacher" Videos
  TikTok Promoting “Proud Groomer Teacher” Videos

  Rod Dreher at The American Conservative details the disturbing trend of school teachers openly bragging on popular social media platforms about indoctrinating young children in their classes with transgender and “sexual rights” instruction. “Call it confidence, or call it arrogance, but there are some young schoolteachers who brag on TikTok about telling the little kids in their class all about transgenderism and gender theory,” Dreher writes.

  It comes also as a number of media reports in the US and UK have correlated the amount of time children spend online consuming content on apps like TikTok and their willingness to “come out” as a different gender, at increasingly young ages. One recent Daily Mail article observes that “Campaigners have accused TikTok of helping children to be ‘brainwashed’ by hosting viral social-media videos that promote changing sex as ‘cool’.”

  “TikTok signed a partnership earlier this year with Stonewall, the controversial [LGBT] rights charity, to promote this material” ⁦@StephenNolan⁩

  Children are being ‘brainwashed’ by TikTok videos on ‘cool’ trans surgery | Daily Mail Online https://t.co/EvOo4xiAWA

  — Hackney Terven (@NoShirleyNo) December 27, 2021

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

  “Material posted by transgender influencers on the social networking service – in which they provide advice on transitioning and accessing hormone therapies – has been seen by millions of young viewers,” the report continues. 

  The phenomenon is fueling a ‘social contagion’ of pressure to persuade young people that they were not ‘born in the right body’, the report continues:

  “Some parents are concerned the involvement of TikTok, which became the UK’s most downloaded app last year, is fueling a ‘social contagion’ of pressure on impressionable youngsters and the rise in teenagers who are identifying as trans.”

  And now in many instances public school teachers are very openly boasting on their private channels that they are going after the young in their classrooms and online. Or as Rod Dreher sarcastically describes, these are “proud groomer teachers”…

  Preschool teacher 😳 pic.twitter.com/Rp3uSLOnfP

  — Libs of Tik Tok (@libsoftiktok) December 27, 2021

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

  My politics are very simple

  People like this should be fired, rendered unemployable, and everyone like them should be terrified of having conversations about “gender and sexuality” with your kids behind your back because they would be next https://t.co/p2CAbYEoCK

  — Pedro L. Gonzalez (@emeriticus) December 27, 2021

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

  And more…

  This is who you entrust your kids with. She gets her validation from 10 year olds saying the right pronoun pic.twitter.com/EQsaQeD415

  — Libs of Tik Tok (@libsoftiktok) December 24, 2021

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

  In Douglas Murray’s landmark book The Madness of Crowds, he wrote about “the increasing number of concessions to any and all trans demands by figures in authority.”

  

  Murray observed that already in 2019… “In online culture it is not at all unusual for the taking of hormones to be turned into an absurdly easy and consequence-free exercise. On YouTube, Instagram and other sites there are countless people who say that they are trans and who push the idea that you might be too.” 

  He noted in the book: “In such videos testosterone injections become known as ‘T’ or ‘man juice’. Some of these people who are transitioning in real time become celebrities in their own right.”

  Kristin Pitzen, a teacher for @nmusd in Orange County, Calif., recorded herself on TikTok talking about how she took down the US flag & has her students pledge allegiance to the LGBTQ BLM trans flag. https://t.co/uE0DSERpCq

  — Andy Ngô 🏳️‍🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) August 29, 2021

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

  And back to Rod Dreher’s commentary, he highlights the woefully underreported fact that…

  TikTok signed a partnership earlier this year with Stonewall, the controversial lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights charity, to promote this material.

  Dreher then underscores, “TikTok is owned indirectly by the Chinese government, which this year began restricting LGBT social media material for its own people. Make of this what you will.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 18:40

• Oil Market Year In Review: The Big Storage Unwind Of 2021 And Looking Forward
  Oil Market Year In Review: The Big Storage Unwind Of 2021 And Looking Forward

  By Ryan Fitzmaurice of Rabobank

  Summary

  • Oil is set to end the year at the top of the pack with respect to commodity sector returns

  • A group of traders categorized as “Other Reportables” were the big buyers of Brent this year

  • Unwind trades related to storage plays were a key driver of WTI positioning and price in 2021

  Top of the pack

  As we approach the final trading days of 2021, we felt now was a good time to review the oil price formation this past year as well as the key drivers behind the historic annual gains.

  Ironically, the impressive gains come on the heels of a terrible 2020 which saw oil prices trade into the low teens and even briefly negative in the case of WTI. As it stands though, the petroleum sector is up 55% for 2021 and is set to end the year at the top of the pack with respect to commodity sector returns. Further to that end, this year will mark the largest annual gain for the Brent crude index since the late 1990s. Interestingly, the aggressive buyers behind this year’s rally are not the usual suspects as money managers were net sellers of oil futures over the course of the year. That’s not to say money managers were bearish crude oil, as that was not necessarily the case either. In fact, the commonly used quantitative signals were heavily weighted toward the bullish end of the spectrum for much of the year, such as oil trend, momentum, and carry.

  On the flip side, the US Dollar strongly appreciated, and oil market volatility was elevated at different points in time, causing asset managers to reduce oil futures holdings to compensate for the currency and volatility shifts. As it turns out, a lesser-known group of speculators categorized as “Other Reportables” were the big buyers of ICE Brent futures this year. For reference, this category of trader has emerged as a powerful market force in recent years and has distinctly different trading behavior from the heavily momentum-driven managed money category. Nonetheless, “Other Reportables” bought an impressive 250k contracts over the past 52 weeks, taking the other side of the managed money liquidation selling, in addition to all the selling from swap dealers and commercial interests. As for the Nymex WTI contract, it was a slightly different scenario with commercial storage trade unwinds dominating the buying interest throughout most of the year while both money managers and “Other Reportables” were net sellers of the US benchmark.

  

  The big storage unwind of 2021

  As we just noted, commercial storage traders were the big buyers of the Nymex WTI contract in 2021. This was not just a 2021 story though and to fully understand one needs to goes further back in time to the dark days of the early pandemic when oil prices were crashing on the threat of breaching physical storage limits amid widespread lockdowns and even a brief OPEC market share war. At the time, oil calendar spreads were in “contango” and blowing out to historic proportions, creating an enormous opportunity for those market participants with the right storage and logistical assets. In essence, an extremely attractive and virtually risk-free return could be made by storing physical crude oil, given the ability to sell futures forward, effectively locking in a huge spread above the cost of financing and leasing fees. Naturally, storage filled up fast in that environment, nearly reaching maximum capacity at the peak. Importantly, a great deal of futures were sold forward to hedge this enormous build up in inventory. In fact, this hedging pressure undoubtedly contributed to the selloff witnessed during that period. As we now know though, conditions changed rapidly in 2021, and a huge drawdown in crude stocks occurred as global economies reopened and as crude supplies tightened as a result of OPEC+ discipline.

  Furthermore, the forward curves for both crude oil benchmarks shifted from a historic “contango” in 2020, to a strong “backwardation” in 2021, as can be seen in Figure 3. This abrupt shift in fundamentals and curve structure reversed the favorable conditions for storing oil and, as such, commercial traders sold down inventory and unwound “short” hedges in the futures market for much of the year. In fact, this dynamic can be seen in Figure 4 with the CFTC Commercial “Short” positioning for Nymex WTI being reduced in conjunction with the inventory draws. Furthermore, the shift from a deep “contango” to a rather steep “backwardation” dramatically improved the backdrop for oil and commodity index investors as a result of the attractive roll-yield on offer for much of 2021. Further to that end, the WTI index is up 55% on the year, with the increase in spot prices accounting for roughly 46% of the gains and with roll-yield adding a meaningful 9% or so depending on the exact timing of rolls. As is clear from this year, roll-yield is a significant contributor to commodity futures market returns and its long-term impacts cannot be overstated.

  

  Looking Forward

  Looking forward, oil markets are heading into 2022 with strong momentum, trend, and carry signals as it currently stands. Further to that end, money managers have plenty of dry power at hand to buy oil futures following a year of net liquidation, as a result of a stronger US Dollar and elevated market volatility.

  As such, we expect these two factors to play an outsized role for oil markets in the coming year and a reversal in either or both should lead to increased oil buying from money managers. In addition, inflation concerns were a key driver of a resurgence in commodity index flows in 2021, and we suspect this trend to continue well into 2022 and beyond.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 18:20

• Russia Mocks Woke American Snowflakes With Christmas Diversity Guide
  Russia Mocks Woke American Snowflakes With Christmas Diversity Guide

  As America’s institutions continue to slide deeper and deeper into wokeism, and attempts to resist the #resitance are met with cancel campaigns and authoritarianism, all that’s left at this point is parody.

  

  To that end, the Russian state-sponsored RT has put together a two-minute clip mocking everything that the American left has become with a “Christmas Tolerance-Diversity Guide 2022,” which trolls the US with everything from feminized cuckold husbands to transgender snowmen, to culturally appropriating a reindeer.

  Watch:

  Russia knows how to troll 😂 👌🏻 pic.twitter.com/bhnyI5ut6d

  — Matt Davio (@MissTrade) December 27, 2021

  Perhaps US state-sponsored Radio Free Liberty can throw something together mocking Russians for functional alcoholism or how their hotties turn into babushkas seemingly overnight… but unfortunately the left can’t meme. And, of course, it might offend someone.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/28/2021 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• A Bitcoiner's Reflection On 2021: A Year Of Awareness
  A Bitcoiner’s Reflection On 2021: A Year Of Awareness

  Authored by Shawn Amick via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  Was 2021 a good year? Depends, as most things do, on perspective. As I sat writing the first line of this article, I asked myself this question. Now, this article might sound harsh at times, and I just ask that you stick with me. There’s a method to my madness.

  As we progress through the months of this year, keep in mind that I could not address every event that happened, and each event spoken to is purposefully chosen to illustrate a larger narrative.

  To describe this year, I’m met with the conflict of state failure and burdening regulations stifling societal livelihoods and businesses, but also with the substantial growth and prosperity I’ve personally experienced, as well as the enduring betterment of and growth of Bitcoiners, and let’s not forget, Bitcoin itself. So, how best can we answer this question of whether or not this was a good year? Let’s take a review.

  

  JANUARY AND CENSORSHIP

  January 6, to be precise. The attack on the capitol (call it what you want, that’s not the point) was a culmination of a bull-headed figure dead-set on his reelection, a disenfranchised society, polarity at its most extreme, misinformation, and a myriad of other factors. Why is this relevant to Bitcoin?

  The President of the United States was censored and removed from Twitter and Facebook. I’ll refrain from being political here. Absent opinion of Trump, this was a clear message from Big Tech that they are the ones in control. They control, and allow the dispersion of information, and misinformation.

  Bitcoin doesn’t allow that sort of centralized control, and we started the year off being reminded just how not in control we really are of our current system.

  FEBRUARY AND “INFLUENCERS”

  February seemed to have better connotations looming about. Elon publicly got excited about Bitcoin towards the end of January, and into February, then saying he was “late to the party,” but that he was a supporter.

  And of course, the Bitcoin community got excited. But then the Dogecoin tweets started, and suddenly there were people all throughout the community trying to figure out if he was serious, as his interest seemed to affect short-term price action with his massive Tesla buy and their acceptance of bitcoin as a payment. This started us down a dangerous road of influencers.

  MARCH AND $60,000

  The good news is pouring in, Tesla is up big on their investment, Saylor is putting out his usual updates of purchases, bitcoin is mooning! Eventually we broke the $60,000 mark! WOOO!!!! Where is all of this good news heading?

  APRIL AND POLITICS

  New all-time high? Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy says the government can no longer ignore Bitcoin. The state is starting to take notice.

  While the state begins to open their eyes, Coinbase goes public. A cryptocurrency exchange is suddenly in everyone’s ear. Will the listing affect price action, the young Bitcoiner asks? But, how now shall the government regulate this, and what are these ICOs that are popping about?

  Turkey panics over its failing currency and institutes a ban on crypto on its Official Gazette to take place at the end of April. We enter May with a crisp $53,000 value on bitcoin. Nation-states are taking notice, and whispers begin to fill the air.

  MAY AND FEAR

  The Internal Revenue Service says it will seize assets from those violating tax regulations. The hero found in Elon Musk earlier this year has now lived long enough to see himself become Bitcoin’s villain. Citing environmental concerns, Elon’s FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) spreads like wildfire.

  But it didn’t stop there. A meltdown instigated by one of the many “influencers” of bitcoin sent Musk on a DOGE shilling tirade, further dampening the support previously made.

  China came out and warned investors they would have no protection in crypto markets.

  May 20, and suddenly we are back to $37,000. The fighting continued, Bitcoin “toxic maximalism” became the forefront of the discussion as others witnessed the attack on Musk from the sidelines.

  JUNE AND JACK AND EL SALVADOR

  Bitcoin Conference 2021! People had a blast (so I’m told). Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter is interviewed and gives great insight into Bitcoin, and now Twitter is becoming a much larger part of the conversation. Suddenly, laser eyes are popping up all over the place (profile pictures on Twitter with red laser eyes), and everyone takes particular notice when Nayib Bukele, the President of El Salvador, dons laser eyes.

  The President of El Salvador announces he will be making bitcoin legal tender. Within 90 days, it is accomplished. Now, I want to take a short minute on this one.

  I want to start by saying that I personally attended the Twitter Space when President Bukele passed the legislation to make bitcoin legal tender, and I had the great experience of hearing their chamber erupt with cheers. Twitter, Spaces, Jack Dorsey, and Jack Mallers, all had a hand in changing the world that night. This cannot be understated. The world has become widely more accessible, in a way that allows anyone willing to attend a historic event for the people of El Salvador.

  Do I think forced merchant adoption by legal definition of tender is how we want bitcoin to be adopted? No. Do I think government-owned wallets are how we want bitcoin to be transacted with? No. Do I think everything is good for Bitcoin? No. I still haven’t fully made up an opinion here, and I hope I never do. But what I do know … is that the world has changed.

  But that’s not all that happened in June. China returned to tell banks and payment platforms to stop facilitating crypto transactions and issued a mining ban. The great mining migration began and the hashrate plummeted overnight.

  JULY AND THE FALL TO $29,000

  The hype from El Salvador didn’t cause the momentum push Bitcoiners were desperately hoping for. For all that talk of low time preference, patience was running thin. The hype needed to return. Interviews with a political leader of Tonga on Bitcoin were had. An Argentinian bill to pay people in bitcoin was introduced. Suddenly, we fall below $30,000 for a short time, the support level is taken back and maintained, and a slow reversal begins. The space quickly becomes aggressive and defensive.

  I mention this need and focus on price action for one reason. The narrative of hyperbitcoinization has left the tips of many tongues in the Bitcoin space. It’s dangerous. We must, at all times, be presently focused on low time preference. If we fail to do so, those new to the space are led to false expectations, which inevitably creates weak hands that are more damaging to adoption than anything. These narratives burn newcomers.

  AUGUST: THE STATE STRIKES BACK

  Late on August 1, hidden within an infrastructure bill, the state seeks to attack cryptocurrency. Bitcoiners become widely political at an impressively quick rate. Soon, many are trying to figure out the legal definitions and meanings behind these impending tax regulations, and what these implications hold for those who maintain the network.

  Suddenly, Bitcoin “influencers” are ramping up their politics. If you’d like to read an article about influencers in Bitcoin, see here.

  It was a call-to-arms. Automatic directories where you simply needed to dial a number would send you directly to your representative to voice your discontent with the bill. It was on every Bitcoin podcast and newsletter. Anger was setting in, and for the first time it became abundantly clear that this would be a fight.

  The absence of physical violence does not imply peace. This is not a peaceful revolution.

  August ended back at $47,000.

  WAKE ME UP WHEN SEPTEMBER ENDS

  The psychology of support/resistance levels drives people insane, and sadly Bitcoiners are rarely different in that regard. As I type this article on December 2, 2021, I have a Twitter space in the background full of people losing their minds at the $44,000 dip and trying to figure out if we will lose the support of $42,000.

  I mention this because at the start of September, Bitcoiners started simping for $50,000 and for anything they could get their hands on to provide hope, like getting excited that Starbucks was accepting bitcoin in El Salvador. Being made legal tender in that country, of course this was going to happen.

  We all clearly understand that bitcoin functions as a medium of exchange, but this was being shouted from the heavens and stuffed down anyone’s throat willing, or unwilling, to listen. The need for hyperbitcoinization was mounting again.

  Robinhood announced a DCA (dollar cost average) product which got the same people criticizing Robinhood earlier this year for turning off the “buy” button, sharing that all over the place. The mayor of Miami stated we needed a “pro Bitcoin President” in the U.S. But I’m sure this had nothing to do with his own future ambitions.

  September 7 comes and the $50,000 price is reclaimed.

  After that, The People’s Bank of China reiterates their ban and declares participation in the financial revolution as “illegal activity.”

  But, at least El Salvador started working on a volcano mine, so that was cool. We ended September at $41,000.

  OCTOBER BELONGS TO THE BULLS

  El Salvador onboards 3 million people with the Chivo wallet. Criticism aside, this is a notable achievement for a largely unbanked nation. With a nation of almost 6.5 million people, this is an achievement of almost half of the population. Previously, statistics floated around that in 2017, less than 30% of the total citizenry even had a bank account. Yet, almost half of them have a Chivo wallet within months.

  Tesla is up $1 billion on their bitcoin investment. Square doubles their money on their investment into bitcoin. September closes over $60,000 on the month with all of this bullish news, and let’s not forget the most important thing that happened in October … I started writing for Bitcoin Magazine! That’s right, you can thank me for $60,000!

  November And Taproot

  I won’t rehash what Taproot is in totality, but the link will take you to a breakdown. Simply put, Taproot allows for a greater level of security, privacy, and scalability, and it went live in November.

  This resulted in greater privacy and security with a new form of digital signatures, and options within processing, as well as scalability with aggregation tools that can save the network time and effort.

  Smart contracts have always been on Bitcoin, but Tapscript was an addition within Taproot that allows more flexibility within these contracts and provides attraction for developers to create. This was needed. This was necessary. This was, in my opinion, the single largest event of the year for Bitcoin, and I am not discussing any other event for this month because everything else this month was irrelevant, comparatively. November ends at $57,000.

  DECEMBER’S CLEANSE

  Remember the dip I mentioned earlier in the article? Well, it’s still happening. It’s December 4, and liquidations across the market ran rampant. Bitcoin and cryptocurrency markets bled tonight, and that’s okay.

  My tone has been marginally sarcastic and mocking through some of this article, mostly because that’s my attitude towards price action. Bitcoin is the world’s greatest asset. I know this. I don’t need a price or market cap to confirm that for me. You shouldn’t need anyone to confirm that for you.

  This may seem dark and dreary, and maybe it’s because I’m a fan of Edgar Allen Poe. Most of these year-end reviews will shine happy lights on many of the accomplishments of the year, as there are many. Much like technical analysis, if all we do is focus on bullish information, then we miss the larger picture. However, we are here to ask a simple question:

  Was 2021 a good year for Bitcoin?

  Yes. The protocol received a well-deserved and absolutely necessary upgrade that provides greater levels of privacy and security, and allows a clear path to further scalability.

  But let’s ask a second question. Was 2021 a good year for Bitcoiners?

  Yes. Because we all had to learn some hard lessons about dangerous narratives, and trusting the wrong people.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 23:40

• US B-2 Bomber Caught Mid-Flight On Google Earth
  US B-2 Bomber Caught Mid-Flight On Google Earth

  A Redditor has revealed a Google maps image that shows a Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit stealth bomber mid-flight over farm fields in the US Midwest. 

  The image was recently published on Reddit and had more than 111 thousand upvotes. 

  

  Thousands of Redditors commented on the image. Some said the $2 billion price tag per bomber is outrages considering it can’t hide from Google Earth. 

  The three-decade-old bomber maintains an impressive lethal record. We were able to pinpoint where the bomber was caught on satellite footage near Whiteman Air Force Base (current home of the B-2 fleet). 

  

  Here’s what some Redditors had to say about the B-2 in action.

  “More like a photo bomber,” said user RandyGareth.

  ZebrasFuckedMyWife said, “Not so stealthy now, are ya?” 

  “That stealth tech is overrated. I can totally see it,” another user said. 

  Netizens and air observers should be on the lookout for the B-21 Raider, a new long-range stealth bomber that is expected to debut in early 2022 and replace the B-2. 

  If you want to review the B-2 on Google Earth, enter coordinates 39 01 18.5N 93 35 40.5W.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 23:20

• Banning Russia From SWIFT Would Drive It Closer To China
  Banning Russia From SWIFT Would Drive It Closer To China

  Authored by Antonio Graceffo via The Epoch Times,

  The United States has threatened to cut Russia off from the SWIFT banking system, to prevent it from invading Ukraine. This would wreck Russia’s economy, driving the country closer to China.

  

  The Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), established in 1973, is a communication platform that is used by banks, brokerages, and financial institutions to process payments across countries. Each year, SWIFT transmits roughly 10 billion messages between 11,000 financial institutions in more than 200 countries and dependencies, processing trillions of dollars in payments.

  The SWIFT system is governed by Belgian and European law, and is overseen by the G10 central banks. Therefore, SWIFT would not be obligated to meet U.S. demands. But Washington could pressure the platform to comply, as it did in 2012, when the United States wanted Iranian banks removed due to economic sanctions.

  The United States has tremendous influence over SWIFT because nearly 80 percent of global trade is transacted in dollars and most of those dollars pass through SWIFT, to be cleared in U.S. banks. In order to convince SWIFT to comply, the United States need only threaten to remove its own banks from the system.

  The United States is not the only country that has asked to have Russia removed. In 2014, the United Kingdom proposed to European leaders to exclude Russia from SWIFT. And in April 2021, the European Parliament passed a resolution to shut down Russia’s access to SWIFT should its troops invade the Ukraine.

  When Russia faced being cut from SWIFT in 2014, then-Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev threatened that it would be “a declaration of war.” The reason he took such a harsh stance is because Russia’s economy would be devastated if it no longer had access to the international financial platform. It would be nearly impossible for Russia to conduct international business because there would be no way of transmitting across borders.

  When Iran was removed from SWIFT, the country experienced difficulty, but not a catastrophe, because it was only somewhat involved with the global economy.

  Russia, on the other hand, would feel the effects more strongly as a result of its greater integration with the system. Russia would essentially be unable to sell its exports of oil and natural gas. The ruble would fall and the country would suffer massive capital outflows. Former Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin forecasts that losing access to SWIFT could cut Russia’s GDP by 5 percent.

  

  Russia’s former finance minister Alexei Kudrin speaks during the Gaidar Forum in Moscow, Russia, on Jan. 14, 2015. (Pavel Golovkin/AP Photo)

  Although dependent on SWIFT, Russia does have a few options to soften the blow if it was banned from the system. When Russia invaded the Ukraine in 2014, the United States threatened to cut it off from SWIFT. Consequently, the Kremlin called for the development of a domestic financial-communications platform. The System for Transfer of Financial Messages (SPFS), the Russian equivalent of SWIFT, has over 400 member banks across former Soviet republics, handling more than 20 percent of domestic transactions.

  The Russian system is far from a replacement for SWIFT. Where SWIFT operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, SPFS only works Monday through Friday, during normal Russian business hours. Additionally, the message size is much smaller. Theoretically, SPFS could be expanded and additional foreign countries could be invited to join. But that would take years, and Russia could experience a tremendous economic disruption in the meantime.

  Since 2015, China has also been developing a SWIFT alternative, called the Cross-Border Interbank Payment System (CIPS), which it had hoped would help internationalize the yuan.

  CIPS may be another possibility for Russia. Due to China’s greater economic importance, the yuan may be a more viable option than the ruble for cross-border trade. However, at present the yuan only accounts for 2 percent of international financial transactions. And CIPS is only 0.3 percent the size of SWIFT. It is possible that the two systems could collaborate; but, so far, 23 Russian banks have joined CIPS, whereas only one Chinese bank has joined SPSF.

  

  This aerial photo shows the logo (L) of China’s pioneering digital payments firm Alipay on the office block of its parent company Ant Group in Shanghai on Nov. 4, 2020. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)

  Another possibility for Russia is the digital ruble, which is meant to be launched in 2022. This option is also flawed, because, although the currency could easily flow across borders, it will be equally as weak and unstable as the physical ruble. Countries that are outside of the U.S. sphere, such as Iran or Venezuela, may accept some payment in currencies other than dollars, but even these countries would not want the risk of transacting in an unstable currency. Additionally, U.S. law does not differentiate between physical currencies and digital currencies, when it comes to sanctions.

  According to Dmitry Dolgin, ING Bank’s chief economist for Russia, “any wire transaction that takes place in the world involving U.S. dollars is at some point cleared through a U.S. bank.” In 2019, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping agreed to find a way around both the U.S. dollar and the U.S.-dominated SWIFT system. The options that the two countries have discussed include de-dollarization, yuan digitalization, and alternative financial settlement and messaging systems, like CIPS.

  By 2019, Russia had dumped about half of its dollars, and increased its yuan holdings to 15 percent of its reserves. Working to eliminate the dollar from their bilateral trade, the two countries have managed to get the number down to 46 percent in 2020. Russia increased its euro holdings and is expanding its use of euros for international trade transactions.

  Even the euro, however, cannot replace the dollar as the primary international currency, as there are three benefits to the dollar that no other currency offers. First, the dollar generally remains stable in the face of inflation. Next, no country can match the sheer size of the U.S. market or the volume of the U.S. currency. And finally, U.S. financial markets are deep, liquid, and transparent.

  The problem for China and Russia is that the U.S. government can deny any entity’s ability to access dollar clearing and dollar settlement. The United States could blacklist large Russian banks and Russian sovereign wealth funds, essentially making it impossible for Russia to transact business in dollars. Russia could begin using euros, but even euro-denominated transactions have to go through SWIFT. And, again, the United States has considerable influence over SWIFT because U.S. dollar clearances account for 79.5 percent of inter-regional currency transactions.

  If the United States could convince the Europeans to cut Russia out of SWIFT, the effects on Russia would be devastating. Aside from potentially triggering a war, there would be major collateral damage. Germany would suffer economic loss because of the amount of business they do with Russia. U.S. banks would also take a large hit, as they process the bulk of SWIFT transactions. Europe would also suffer because it is dependent on oil and natural gas from Russia.

  Russia is China’s number two supplier of oil, and also a major supplier of natural gas and coal. Even if Russia is removed from SWIFT, the two countries will most likely find a way to continue to trade. This will make Russia even more economically dependent on China, pushing it deeper into the Chinese orbit.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 23:00

• "Hello World" – Paralyzed Man With Brain Implant Composes First-Ever Tweet With Mind
  “Hello World” – Paralyzed Man With Brain Implant Composes First-Ever Tweet With Mind

  An Australian man with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is the first person to tweet a message to the world using only his thought with no other muscles. 

  On Thursday, Australian brain computer interface company Synchron published a press release detailing how one of its patients, Philip O’Keefe, 62yo man with ALS, is the first person to tweet directly through thought using an implantable brain-computer interface. O’Keefe’s ALS has left him in paralysis. 

  

  “Hello, world!” tweeted O’Keefe from Synchron CEO Thomas Oxley’s Twitter account. “Short tweet. Monumental progress.”

  hello, world! Short tweet. Monumental progress.

  — Thomas Oxley (@tomoxl) December 23, 2021

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

  “My hope is that I’m paving the way for people to tweet through thoughts,” he tweeted in a follow-up message. 

  my hope is that I’m paving the way for people to tweet through thoughts phil

  — Thomas Oxley (@tomoxl) December 23, 2021

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

  According to Synchron, O’Keefe received the Stentrode brain-computer interface in April 2020. ALS has left him unable to communicate with his family or friends. However, the new small stent-mounted electrode array implanted in his brain through the jugular has allowed him to reconnect with the world. 

  “When I first heard about this technology, I knew how much independence it could give back to me. The system is astonishing, it’s like learning to ride a bike – it takes practice, but once you’re rolling, it becomes natural.

  “Now, I just think about where on the computer I want to click, and I can email, bank, shop, and now message the world via Twitter,” O’Keefe said in a statement. 

  Synchron claims O’Keefe is reconnecting with the world. 

  “These fun holiday tweets are actually an important moment for the field of implantable brain computer interfaces,” Oxley said in the statement. “They highlight the connection, hope and freedom that BCIs give to people like Phil who have had so much of their functional independence taken away due to debilitating paralysis.”

  Synchron’s implantable brain-computer interface is similar to Elon Musk’s mind-machine interface company, Neuralink, which alleges it can “enable someone with paralysis to use a smartphone with their mind faster than someone using thumbs.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 22:40

• It's Madness What Is Happening To College Kids
  It’s Madness What Is Happening To College Kids

  Authored by Vinay Prasad via The Brownstone Institute,

  This is a post about the absolutely insane, crushing restrictions being imposed on young, healthy vaccinated (often booster and often naturally immune) people by institutions of knowledge. In order to prove my thesis that these policies are misguided, let me start with some basics.

  

  When it comes to COVID19, there are only 3 things any of us can do:

  1. We can lower the risk of bad outcomes when we encounter the virus. 

  2. We can delay the time to meet the virus

  3. We can engage in theater which does not delay the time to meet the virus 

  What goes in these buckets? 

  Category 1 (risk reduction) is easy. You can’t modify your age, a huge risk favor, but you can modify your vaccination status, and you can modify your weight and general health. 

  Category 2 (delay time to virus) is harder. We don’t have many well done studies, but theoretically if you sealed yourself in a bunker and ate canned food, you would do this. Wearing a snug n95 might also delay the time to meeting the virus. The challenge with these interventions is they are not sustainable by most people, and may lead to fatigue or backsliding, and thus the effect is transient. 

  Delaying serves two purposes: 

  1. For the individual, it makes sense if, by delaying, you can do something for category 1 that you cannot do today. If you are waiting for your vaccine, for instance, by all means delay.
  2. For the community it makes sense, if, by some delaying, the pandemic trajectory is bent and hospitals are less likely to be overwhelmed. 

  Delaying also has a downside. It may hurt your mental health, particularly when you do it effectively. If you need evidence of this damage: please see twitter.

  Category 3 (useless, virtue signaling theater) is the most common. Wearing your mask when you enter a restaurant and walk to your table, but not when you sit there for two hours laughing and drinking is one example. The fact this policy exists reflects serious impairment in thinking and total failure of policy makers. 

  Making a 2-4 year old wear a cloth mask in day care (which the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends against the advice of the World Health Organization), but, of course, kids take the cloth mask off to nap next to each other for 4 hours in the same room! Theater.

  Closing beaches and other outdoor activities. Wearing a mask outside. The list goes on and on, and most things we did fit in this category. On a side note:  Here we review all data on masking. 

  Enter young, healthy college kids.

  The vast majority are either double vaxxed or have natural immunity or both, and some are also boosted. They are young (lucky them!), and the majority are healthy. What more can such students do for Category 1? Nothing. 

  What about category 2? It appears that many universities are making college kids wear masks, restricting their movement, banning gatherings etc. Here is just one example of how extreme they are:

  Emerson College in Boston has issued a “stay in room directive” for returning students next month — the same students already required to get “boosted” and tested twice a week. Sounds like fun pic.twitter.com/F5mUYZtDKP

  — Michael Tracey (@mtracey) December 23, 2021

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

  These severe restrictions might actually delay the time till college kids meet the virus! But it does so with a huge disruption to their lives. All the wonderful things of being young require being very close to other people. Many simply cannot occur with a mask on.

  Will these restrictions benefit the college kids? Absolutely not. When they eventually meet the virus— and they will— on vacation or next semester— they will just be a little older, but have similar great chances of doing well. 

  Will the restrictions benefit society? Doubtful. After all, everyone not on a college campus is not following any of these ridiculous rules, and the pandemic trajectory will be dictated by those (aka 99.9% ) of places. 

  It will likely not even to protect the faculty and staff on campus, who will largely face risks when they leave work and go home and on vacation, and again, if these folks have already optimized Category 1, delay makes little sense.

  Will it harm the college kids? Absolutely, it will. Their mental health will surely suffer from this isolation. It has already. I will say again: all of the joys of youth require being close to other people.

  What is the net balance? The net balance is these policies are catastrophically detrimental to them. Moreover, there is no countervailing benefit to staff or society to justify the huge imposition. It is morally and scientifically bankrupt.

  Truly, I can’t even understand how anyone thinks these policies are justified. I am also surprised college students have accepted them with scant protest. I can only surmise that many have been mislead into thinking this sacrifice serves a broader interest (i.e. believe they are being altruistic), or that the incentives on their lives and career for conformity are so great they are afraid to speak up. 

  I suspect the strong link between restrictions and political party may also affect them. After all, the youth most strongly leans left (full disclosure: as do it!), and thus adheres to the identify badges of the left (but in my case, sadly, I spent too many years studying & publishing on scientific evidence to turn my brain off).

  In short, draconian restrictions on vaccinated young people or those with natural immunity living in tiny pockets of college campus makes no sense, and is a policy that contributes to a harm in societal well-being. The policy is unethical and illogical.

  To young people: I am personally sorry that those of us who recognized the futility and harm of these policies could not have done more to shield you from the anxieties and risk aversion of the irrational.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 22:20

• China Says US Officials Applied For Visas To Attend Olympics In 'Double Faced' Move
  China Says US Officials Applied For Visas To Attend Olympics In ‘Double Faced’ Move

  Weeks after the Biden administration announced a diplomatic boycott of the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics, China reported that it received multiple visa applications from U.S. officials expected to attend the Games. 

  Bloomberg reports Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian told reporters at a regular press meeting on Monday that China received three-month visa applications from the State Department and other government departments. 

  “Previously out of political manipulation, the U.S. without any invitation has put on a show of so-called not sending diplomats or officials to the Beijing 2022 Games,” Zhao said

  

  According to China’s state-run tabloid Global Times, a total of 18 personnel, including 15 personnel working for the State Department, have applied for visas to attend the Games. 

  Hong Kong-based English-language newspaper South China Morning Post quoted “two sources and a document” as saying, “Of the 18 names on the list, 15 of the U.S. personnel work for the State Department and one works for the Pentagon,” and “The U.S. indicated to Chinese officials it might submit applications for 40 more officials in the coming months.”

  The move is in sharp contrast from the Biden administration’s diplomatic boycott announcement on Dec. 6, which criticized Beijing for torturing Uyghurs in Xinjiang camps. “We are determined to put human rights at the center of our foreign policy, and we reaffirm this commitment by using appropriate tools and authorities to draw attention to and promote accountability for human rights violations and abuses, no matter where they occur,” U.S. State Secretary Antony Blinken said at the time. 

  Li Haidong, a professor at the Institute of International Relations of the China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times that the U.S.’ double-faced move would embarrass its allies and show growing divergences within the Biden administration about China. 

  Haidong pointed out the Biden administration is entangled in confusion when managing issues related to China. 

  Meanwhile, U.S. allies, such as Britain, Lithuania, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan, will be caught off guard by the new announcement because they also declared a diplomatic boycott of the Games.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 22:00

• A Strategy To Promote Sound Money: Decentralize The State
  A Strategy To Promote Sound Money: Decentralize The State

  Authored by Matt Ray via The Mises Institute,

  For more than a century, an inflationary monetary policy has plagued the United States. Most recently, price inflation has become the most obvious consequence of the Federal Reserve’s actions to the public. Other effects, while less visible, have been no less pernicious. Indeed, inflation is particularly insidious because rising prices can mask a transfer of wealth. Additionally, the Fed’s policies of artificially low interest rates and quantitative easing have discouraged savings and fueled boom-bust cycles.

  

  As these monetary issues have continued to intensify, the need for solutions has become more urgent. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the ways in which paper money and centralization reinforce each other, and to explore how political decentralization can promote sound money.

  One of the more obvious ways fiat money enables centralization is by removing the limitations on the power of the government to inflate the currency that exist under a commodity money standard. Under a system of unbacked fiat money, there are fewer limitations the ability of the regime to increase government spending by inflating the money supply.

  Still, the central government risks the depreciation of its own currency in terms of harder currencies. As a territorial monopolist of compulsion, however, a state can compel the acceptance of its currency through legal tender laws and by taxing or even prohibiting alternatives within its jurisdiction. From this it follows that as a state expands the territory under its control, it can compel more people to accept its currency—for example by requiring the payment of taxes in the government’s official currency. To illustrate this, we will review some of the ways the United States government has reinforced its currency.

  In 1865, the federal government imposed a tax on state banknotes to limit their circulation. However, Franklin Roosevelt went even further by prohibiting American citizens from owning more than a small amount of monetary gold. While this prohibition has since been repealed, capital gains taxes still limit the use of gold. Internationally, military dominance has helped the United States secure the dollar’s status as reserve currency through international monetary agreements and supranational organizations like the International Monetary Fund, which allow for coordinated inflation. These are some of the ways in which centralization has enabled the US’s fiat money.

  In distinct contrast, decentralization would weaken the current monetary system. Indeed, taken to its logical conclusion, decentralization would eventually require the abandonment of the current system and the restoration of sound money. Hans-Hermann Hoppe explains:

  Yet if one then imagines a proliferation of ever smaller national territories, ultimately to the point where each household forms its own country, [Milton] Friedman’s proposal is revealed for what it is—an outright absurdity. For if every household were to issue its own paper currency, the world would be right back at barter. No one would accept anyone else’s paper, economic calculation would be impossible, and trade would come to a virtual standstill. It is only due to centuries of political centralization and the fact that only a relatively small number of countries and national currencies remain, and hence that the disintegrative consequences and calculational difficulties are far less severe, that this could have been overlooked. From this theoretical insight it follows that secession, provided it proceeds far enough, will actually promote monetary integration. In a world of hundreds of thousands of independent political units, each country would have to abandon the current fiat money system which has been responsible for the greatest worldwide inflation in all of human history and once again adopt an international commodity money system such as the gold standard.

  As we have seen, the current system of freely fluctuating paper currencies with the US dollar as reserve currency would not have been possible without political centralization. Put differently, the system of multiple paper currencies hinders exchange. At the same time, the further decentralization proceeds, the more difficult it becomes to maintain a relatively high standard of living under a policy of autarky. Thus, as decentralization proceeds and the pressure for free trade increases, it becomes increasingly necessary to adopt an international currency outside the control of any government.

  To be sure, there are more direct ways to restore sound money. Ludwig von Mises has explained how this could be accomplished. However, we should not expect policymakers to embrace Mises’s proposal any time soon. In the short term, the nullification or repeal of all taxes on alternatives to fiat money—such as gold and bitcoin—is a reasonable goal for a decentralist strategy.

  Decentralization is not a panacea that will cure our monetary ills overnight. But it would represent an important first step toward the restoration of sound money.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 21:40

• China Creates AI Prosecutor That Can Identify Crimes And Press Charges
  China Creates AI Prosecutor That Can Identify Crimes And Press Charges

  Unfortunately, this isn’t a joke.

  China’s Communist-controlled government has reportedly developed an artificial intelligence program that can automatically prosecute crimes committed in the People’s Republic, according to a report in the state-friendly South China Morning Post, an English-language, Hong Kong-based newspaper.

  

  The machine can reliably identify eight common crimes such as fraud, gambling, dangerous driving and “picking quarrels”, according to researchers cited by the paper.

  The AI “prosecutor” can file a charge with more than 97% accuracy based on a verbal description of the case alone.

  To be sure, that’s not exactly a testament to the algorithm’s complexity or quality: China’s criminal justice system is notoriously opaque, with courts that have been criticized for being hopelessly slanted in favor of the government. The country’s prosecutors have also been criticized for charging those suspected of political disloyalty with criminal offenses like tax evasion.

  Recently, China kicked off a transnational dispute with Canada after it arrested two Canadian nationals (a diplomat and a businessman) and sentenced them to lengthy prison sentences over charges that the Canadian government alleges were trumped-up – before being abruptly released once Ottawa had freed the CFO of Huawei after she reached a deal with the American Justice Department. 

  The prosecution machine was built and tested by the Shanghai Pudong People’s Procuratorate, the country’s largest, and busiest, district prosecution office.

  “The system can replace prosecutors in the decision-making process to a certain extent,” said Shi and his colleagues in a paper published this month in the domestic peer-reviewed journal Management Review.

  According to the SCMP, China isn’t the first country to automate some aspects of prosecution.

  The application of AI technology in law enforcement has been increasing around the world.

  Some German prosecutors have used AI technology such as image recognition and digital forensics to increase case processing speed and accuracy.

  China’s legal system was an “early adopter”.

  The application of AI technology in law enforcement has been increasing around the world.

  Some German prosecutors have used AI technology such as image recognition and digital forensics to increase case processing speed and accuracy.

  China was an early adopter of AI in its legal system, beginning in 2016. Many prosecutors now use an AI tool called “System 206”. The tool can purportedly evaluate the strength of evidence, as well as conditions for an arrest – while also assessing the subject’s danger to the public. But all existing AI tools have a limited role, because “they do not participate in the decision-making process of filing charges and [suggesting] sentences.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 21:20

• Lockdown Policies And Mask Mandates Linked With Lower IQ In Children
  Lockdown Policies And Mask Mandates Linked With Lower IQ In Children

  Authored by Tommy Hung via The Epoch Times,

  The nation’s recent lockdown policies and mask mandates will create a generation of children who exhibit lower IQs and signs of social brain damage, according to a clinical psychiatrist for children and adolescents.

  

  Dr. Mark McDonald cited an Aug. 11 study by Brown University (pdf) that found that “children born during the pandemic have significantly reduced verbal, motor, and overall cognitive performance compared to children born pre-pandemic,” during an interview with host Cindy Drukier on a Dec. 25 episode of NTD’s “The Nation Speaks.” NTD is a sister media outlet of The Epoch Times.

  The masks, “Zoom schools,” and lockdown mandates have led to “deprivation overall, of social contact, [of] not being able to see faces, being stuck at home all day long, [and this] has actually caused brain damage to the youngsters,” he said.

  In another interview in the episode, professor Carl Heneghan, the director of Oxford University’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, cited evidence that pandemic restrictions and the “fear we instill into children” has led to the worsening of psychological problems.

  Heneghan cited his Oct. 2 study, which concluded that “eight out of 10 children and adolescents report worsening of behavior or any psychological symptoms or an increase in negative feelings due to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

  “School closures contributed to increased anxiety, loneliness and stress; negative feelings due to COVID-19 increased with the duration of school closures,” the study reports.

  “Deteriorating mental health was found to be worse in females and older adolescents.”

  Adolescents above the age of 12 also did worse than children under 12, as adolescents face increasing peer pressure, social pressure, and are more aware of messages being delivered globally, according to Heneghan.

  “The first thing is to deescalate any fear and anxiety around COVID for children,” Heneghan said.

  “For children, [COVID] is actually a very safe disease” and children shouldn’t be worried about the impact of COVID “on themselves or their future health.”

  He said that “shutting areas like schools was a mistake,” as keeping them open is good for education, “social connectedness, and well-being.”

  “We should really prioritize education and those interventions that are in children’s best interest,” he said.

  According to a Dec. 20 study, data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also showed that mental health-related visits in 2020, when pandemic restrictions were first imposed, increased by 24 percent in 5- to 11-year-olds and 31 percent in 12- to 17-year-olds, compared to 2019 data.

  Anecdotally, McDonald noted that he’s seen children who “refuse to make eye contact, who are wetting their pants or wetting the bed at night, cannot go to sleepovers—being away from their mother for extended periods of time.”

  Teenagers, on the other hand, come out of lockdown restrictions being “so wrapped up in social media and phones and Zoom school because they’ve been trained for the last year and a half, that they do not even want to go out anymore,” he said.

  McDonald called the government and media corporations out for creating a “behavioral conditioning program,” in which children are subjected to “irrational, ridiculous” situations such as eating outside on a 40-degree day and having to run marathons or play sports with masks on.

  As of Dec. 27, the Biden administration is recommending that children “too young to be vaccinated” should be “surrounded by vaccinated people and mask in public indoor spaces, including schools,” according to the COVID plan on the White House website. “For those adolescents aged 12 and above who are eligible for vaccination, the most important step parents can take is to get them vaccinated.”

  As of Dec. 27, the website states that “over half of the nation’s adolescents have been vaccinated.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 21:00

• Starlink Speeds Are Getting Worse, Not Better
  Starlink Speeds Are Getting Worse, Not Better

  SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet service is expanding coverage across the US and elsewhere. According to a new report, internet speeds are slowing as Starlink adds new customers. 

  Data collected by Ookla, which runs speed tests, noticed median download speeds in the US fell from 97.23Mbps to 87.25Mbps between Q2 and Q3. Even though these speeds are much faster than satellite competitors HughesNet and Viasat, the noticeable slowdown is concerning as more users are added to the space internet. 

  Advertised on Starlink’s website, “Users can expect to see download speeds between 100 Mb/s and 200 Mb/s and latency as low as 20ms in most locations.” However, Ookla’s clocked median Starlink speeds fall well short of what is advertised by the company. 

  

  Elon Musk’s SpaceX promised in February 2021 that “speed will double to ~300Mb/s & latency will drop to ~20ms later this year.” 

  Speed will double to ~300Mb/s & latency will drop to ~20ms later this year

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 22, 2021

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

  It’s the end of the year, and those speeds have yet to be seen. 

  Another disappointment is that Musk’s timeline on the availability of Starlink was significantly off. He promised a “nationwide rollout” of the internet service by the end of October, but that was delayed and left thousands of people who put down a $100 deposit to secure a dish furious. 

  Musk appears to have over-promised Starlink’s capabilities. None of this comes as a surprise, considering it’s Elon Musk: the greatest salesman of all times. Whatever happened to those million robotaxis that musk promised to be on the road by the end of 2020?

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 20:40

• Lessons From An Underground Economy
  Lessons From An Underground Economy

  Authored by J.G.Martinez via The Organic Prepper blog,

  How is it possible to survive a nation with inflation rates of 20%/month and 1700%/year? The answer? The underground economy. This is the level of hyperinflation we have found ourselves with here in Venezuela, and considering the spread of inflation worldwide, it would be well worth the prepper’s time to glean what we can learn here.

  

  Virtually everything you read dictates inflation on this scale necessitates civil war.

  Yet Venezuela hasn’t seen this. Why not? Why are the streets not being taken by armed civilians?

  While the main reason revolves around 20 years of disarmament and anti-self-defense teachings, I would argue that there is a second reason we haven’t delved into full on anarchy as well: our underground economy.

  Underground economies keep people fed.

  I’ve lived in four different and fallen South American countries, and it’s been the underground economy which has kept people going in each case.

  When I used to work in the Venezuelan oil industry, our salary was taxed heavily just like everyone else’s. As expected, these taxes can quickly make it hard for a family to pay its bills.

  But the underground economy? It’s completely unregulated.

  I know guys with a hot dog cart who make much more money than engineers down here. And this isn’t new – our world has been like this for many years now. The guy working with the hot dog cart doesn’t pay taxes. He doesn’t pay rent. And usually, (and this is a now an “accepted” practice) these street vendors will run a wire from some nearby pole for their music and lights.

  This man is a member of the underground economy. And he is just one of many.

  Our stated hot dog vendor is not an isolated case either. He is part of what is keeping this country alive. In all probability, it is the men of this underground economy who likely comprise over half of our GDP here in Venezuela.

  More than half of the money generated here is a result of men such as our hot dog vendor. Of course, much of this money also comes from the cartel and Russian mafia, but the point remains: it is the underground economy which is keeping the people of Venezuela (somewhat) fed.

  More overreach, more underground.

  One thing is for sure. The larger and more bloated the government control is, the greater the underground activity. “Irregular” business is the answer to these controls. It’s simply to be expected – especially in Latin American countries.

  I believe I don’t need to explain why.

  The government has seized the right to own foreign currency, trapping you in your hyper-inflated national fiat currency? A booming forex black market will spring up, regardless of how hard one attempts to stamp it out.

  Store shelves are empty? Well, I know a guy who knows a guy that can get you a 20 kilo pack of cornmeal flour for a bit of arepas (a Venezuelan bread). (You should also check out our FREE Quickstart Guide to help you figure out how to keep a properly stocked larder to help your family ride out troubled times…)

  Corruption and trafficking of certain items was already a way of life here. These statist thugs just came into the equation to incorporate it further as a part of our lifestyle. How else do you explain that a simple Venezuelan pilot of a former State President can buy himself a 200 million dollar yatch? Unless this guy works for pleasure and his surname is Onassis, I find that highly suspicious.

  Need further proof? The rumor in Caracas is that Ferraris, Lamborghinis and other luxury cars are being brought in for the corrupt elite. And all paid for by our tax dollars.

  You can still prepare for this though.

  Yes, rampant corruption and government overreach is bad, but it doesn’t have to hit your family as hard as it could if you’ve made some preparations beforehand.

  For Venezuelan preppers, getting rid of these insane controls actually worked. It kept us alive.

  I sold the inflated money I earned and then bought food, and everything else we needed in the black market. It was the only way we could make it.

  But one thing I’ve realized is that there are some underground services which are more profitable than others (outside of the truly criminal). For the prepper considering how he is to survive an underground economy during an economic crisis, one may want to consider the following list of occupations I’ve seen perform well here in Venezuela…

  Fumigation

  One of the most attractive business you can develop in an underground economy is fumigation. Sure, you need a machine and chemicals, and unless you really know what you’re doing, you can face problems, but this is something most don’t like to mess with. The end result? A lot of potential.

  Local regulations do impact some of the people down here with this job, however.

  Fast Food

  I’m astonished about how extensive this income source is for families all throughout Venezuela. Yes, I do know we Venezuelans love hot dogs, hamburgers, shawarmas, and the like, but it’s simply ridiculous to see the excessive amount of fast food businesses flourishing near my home.

  I can’t figure it out, and neither can anyone else.

  The best I can figure is this: people like to eat.

  In the Venezuelan underground economy, almost every business related to food is going to put food on your table as well. Honestly, these people do so well (such as our previously mentioned hot dog man) that I’m to get my own deep fryer to delve into the market on fried chicken.

  Machine Repairs

  It doesn’t matter the machine here. If you’re skilled enough to repair it, congrats. You’ve the makings of an incredible underground business. I’ve written about this extensively in the past, but whether it’s HVAC, small engines, cars, sewing machines, farm equipment, or anything else, you will never be short on business in an underground economy.

  A prepper should seriously consider becoming knowledgeable in at least some aspect of machine repairs.

  House Repairs

  Every single house owner will sooner or later need to repair something that is outside of their range of experience. I’ve found here that if your fees are reasonable, you work fast, you do good work, and you arrive on time (a rare combination for a contractor, I know), you will get multiple jobs from the same customer.

  I’ve also discovered that the suburbs seem to have more money in their pockets than do many of the other neighborhoods in Venezuela. If you’re going to delve into the world of underground house repairs, that may be a profitable market to dive into.

  When the normal economy dies, the underground economy thrives.

  The Venezuelan people have been through a lot. Hyperinflation, famine, rampant corruption and crime – we’re not new to any of it. Yet despite all this, people still had to find a way to keep bread on the table and in their family’s tummies. And the underground economy was the way we did it.

  That’s the way things have played out here (and are continuing to play out), and will be the way things happen in other collapsing nations as well. The prepper needs to not only be prepared for disaster, but prepared for this form of black market as well.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 20:20

• Israel Starts 4th Covid Dose Trial While Pushing Booster On Children 12 & Up
  Israel Starts 4th Covid Dose Trial While Pushing Booster On Children 12 & Up

  Israel has been at the forefront of countries speedily rolling out Covid-19 vaccines for its population of just over 9 million, earlier in the fall becoming the first nation to initiate a widespread booster program. Recently a government advisory panel went so far as to recommend a booster shot for children ages 12 to 15.

  On Monday Israel has initiated trials of a fourth Covid-19 vaccine dose, or its second round of a booster, which is being conducted on 150 medical workers who took their third booster shot of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in August, according to The Associated Press. Israel is believed to be the first country in the world to initiate such a program as a second booster.

  

  The country is already considered the world’s leader in administering a booster dose to the population, with 4.2 million of the total population having received one. This as it is continually updating the requirements of what it means to be “fully vaccinated” – which impacts citizens’ ability to use the so-called Green Pass for access to restaurants, bars, gyms, and other public venues.

  The trial is expected to take six months, so it’s unlikely that all Israelis will be forced to roll up their sleeves for yet a fourth shot until after this period:

  Gili Regev-Yochay, the director of Infectious Disease Epidemiology Unit at Sheba, explained that the study will assess the antibody boost from a fourth shot and monitor any potential adverse reactions, and if the second boost reduces the risk of infection from omicron, according to CBS News. 

  The participants will be monitored for six months after receiving their fourth dose.

  However, a fourth shot is already set to be offered to people over the age of 60 or anyone with a compromised immune system, including also frontline health care workers. People will be advised to wait four months after they receive their third shot to get the fourth one.

  CNBC reports, “A Health Ministry expert panel last week recommended that Israel become the first country to offer a fourth vaccine dose – also known as a second booster – to those aged over 60, those suffering from compromised immune systems, and medical workers.”

  All of this begs the question: does the third shot work? if not, then will a fourth? After all, Israelis like much of the rest of the world are wondering ‘when will it all end?’… An important weekend development widely reported in Israeli media is illustrative: 

  Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s daughter tested positive for the coronavirus, and will enter quarantine, a spokesman for the prime minister said Sunday afternoon.

  The prime minister left Sunday’s cabinet meeting on the Golan Heights after receiving news of his daughter’s positive test and was also self-isolating, according to the spokesperson. Bennett took a rapid antigen test before attending the meeting and tested negative.

  The daughter, who is 14 years old, was vaccinated against COVID-19 in June.

  

  So the leader of one of the most highly vaccinated countries on the earth had to run out of an important cabinet meeting due to exposure to Covid-19. Bennett reportedly later tested negative. 

  One would think that after himself being triple-vaxxed, he would have had a little more confidence in the vaccine and stayed in the cabinet meeting. But it seems the PM’s “faith” in the “trust the science” mantra is waning. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 20:00

• Former Boston College Student Pleads Guilty To Manslaughter After Encouraging Boyfriend To Commit Suicide
  Former Boston College Student Pleads Guilty To Manslaughter After Encouraging Boyfriend To Commit Suicide

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Over the years, we have discussed the prosecution of people who encourage friends or strangers to commit suicide. I have raised free speech concerns over prior prosecutions in the ambiguous line often drawn by prosecutors. The most recent case of Inyoung You, who pleaded guilty to manslaughter last week after repeatedly telling her boyfriend, Alexander Urtula, to kill himself. Both were students at Boston College and had a tumultuous 18 month relationship.

  

  The couple met at Boston College and police say that You was highly abusive to Urtule. Her calls for his suicide reportedly began after she learned that he had met with his former girlfriend.

  In a case similar to that of the Michele Carter prosecution in Massachusetts, You encouraged Urtula to kill himself. This case, however, is even worse with You sending a “barrage” of more than 75,000 text messages, including repeated calls for him to kill himself. In one text to the 22-year-old, she told him “do everyone a favor and go f**king kill yourself, you’re such a f**king stupid ass worthless s**t.”  Urtule proceeded to jump off the top of a building just hours before his graduation with his family from New Jersey waiting to watch him walk across the stage.

  Suffolk County District Attorney Rachael Rollins said that You was “physically, verbally, and psychologically abusive” toward Urtula and the “abuse became more frequent and more powerful, and more demeaning, in the days and hours leading up to” his death. She stressed that she was “aware of his spiraling depression and suicidal thoughts brought on by her abuse. Yet, she persisted.”

  Caitlin Grasso, an assistant district attorney, said that You used her iPhone to track Urtula’s location and was on the roof when he jumped around 8:30 a.m. He was scheduled to graduate at 10:00 a.m.

  You later fled to her native South Korea and reportedly maintained that she was on the roof to try to stop him.

  You’s guilty plea comes with an agreement that she will undergo mental health treatment and do community service. In addition, she may not profit from any portrayal of the case over the next 10 years.

  You’s conduct is clearly disgusting and reprehensible. My concern in these cases is how such prosecutions could be used to criminalize speech related to suicide. Many advocate for the right to die and often share information on ways to killing oneself with the least amount of pain. Moreover, there are concerns about people who engage in reckless or hyperbolic speech.  There has been a long debate over the culpability of people who routinely yell up to people on ledges or bridges to jump. Historically, such horrific conduct has been treated as an exercise of free speech or at least not criminally culpable in any subsequent suicide. The problem is that free speech demands “bright lines” and this standard could not be more murky.

  It is hard to raise such concerns in the context of this type of case. The loss to the Urtula family is unimaginable. The trauma of learning of Alexander’s suicide as they waited to watch him graduate must have been overwhelming. One would hope that this plea could bring even a small degree of solace for the family. However, we need to address the implications of these prosecutions and how to define this crime to avoid a broader criminalization of speech.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 19:40

• Scientists Expect Omicron Wave Will Peak In January
  Scientists Expect Omicron Wave Will Peak In January

  African countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo are struggling with an influx of hospitalizations as the omicron-driven 4th wave of the global pandemic environment hammers the country, which boasts one of the world’s lowest vaccination rates. But Congo isn’t alone; over the weekend, American media reported that, after nearly two years of seeing surprisingly low COVID levels, sub-Saharan Africa is finally seeing a big enough wave of infections to pose a serious threat to its health-care system.

  Experts in the US are projecting that the latest COVID wave will worsen before it gets better, according to the following chart from Fundstrat, which features projections and data from the CDC as well as various state-level public health departments.

  As it shows, the peak should arrive around Jan. 9, with the number of new daily cases declining swiftly after that, tumbling to just under 40K new cases/day by Feb. 9.

  

  Researchers at a university in Texas estimated that the peak of the omicron wave would likely land somewhere between Jan. 13 and Feb. 3, according to CNBC.

  Last year’s peak arrived on Jan. 11, according to data from Johns Hopkins.

  And the number of deaths peaked on Jan. 13.

  Even as hospitals across the US see the number of available beds fill up, deaths remain far lower than last year, a clear sign that Americans’ levels of ‘herd immunity’ (a concept we haven’t heard much about lately ever since scientists declared that COVID is likely now an endemic disease) have continued to improve, despite the virus’s shifting nature.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 19:20

• Cocaine, Guns, & Gushers: Colombia's Oil Industry Struggles To Reactivate
  Cocaine, Guns, & Gushers: Colombia’s Oil Industry Struggles To Reactivate

  Authored by Matthew Smith via OilPrice.com,

  • Rising security risk and rural violence, which is mostly fueled by the vast profits generated by the cocaine trade, is a key deterrent to attracting onshore oil investment in Colombia.

  • According to the UN, Colombia’s cocaine production during 2020 increased by 8% compared to a year earlier, despite a 7% decrease in the volume of land used for coca cropping. 

  • Despite the risks associated with operating in onshore Colombia, the Andean country’s 2021 bid round found some success.

  Despite the groundbreaking 2016 peace deal between the Colombian government and the largest guerilla group the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC – Spanish initials) there are fears that conflict is escalating once again. Colombia, which is Latin America’s third-largest petroleum producer and the world’s largest manufacturer of cocaine for nearly a century, has been caught in a simmering low-intensity asymmetric conflict that reached boiling point during the 1980s.

  The primary flashpoint for the civil conflict, which currently engulfs Colombia and failed to end with the 2016 FARC peace accord was the April 1948 assassination of Liberal Party leader Jorge Gaitan in Bogota. That sparked the Bogotazo, days of violent rioting that swept across Bogota resulting in up to 3,000 deaths, which eventually evolved into a vicious 10-year civil war between the Colombian Liberal and Conservative parties known as La Violencia. While that brutal struggle ended in a 1958 power-sharing agreement between Colombia’s leading political parties, it sowed the seeds for the current low-intensity multiparty asymmetric conflict.  In 1964 the Colombian Communist Party formed the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC – Spanish initials) after a military attack on the community of Marquetalia, a Communist peasant enclave established during the of La Violencia. That event saw the communist FARC emerge as the most powerful left-wing anti-government armed group during the conflict. The guerillas eventually cut ties with the Colombian Communist Party and increasingly relied upon kidnapping, extortion, and cocaine trafficking to fund their operations. Prior to these events, which cast Colombia into what appears to be a never-ending low-intensity asymmetric multiparty civil conflict, oil was discovered in 1918 at the La Cira-Infantas field in the Middle Magdalena Basin near the city of Barrancabermeja. Even after additional petroleum discoveries in the Middle Magdalena Basin, it was not until the giant Caño Limon, Cusiana, and Cupiagua oilfields were discovered between 1983 and 1993 that Colombia embarked on becoming a major oil producer. Those mega discoveries and a notable increase in foreign energy investment, as well as petroleum production, occurred despite violence surging because of the tremendous influx of profits from the booming cocaine trade.

  

  Even the tremendous escalation of violence, homicides, kidnappings, and attacks on energy infrastructure which escalated in the late-1980s, lasting well into the early 21st century, had little material impact on Colombia’s hydrocarbon sector. By 1991 Colombia was pumping over 400,000 barrels per day, more than double its output in 1985, despite becoming the world’s murder capital with a homicide rate of 84 intentional killings per 100,000 people. That was more than eight times greater than the U.S. which reported 9.8 homicides per 100,000 head of population, 7-times higher than neighboring Venezuela’s murder rate of 12 and 8-times larger than Ecuador’s 11 homicides per 100,000 people.

  Heightened insecurity and violence remained a persistent problem in Colombia, even after the collapse of the Medellin and Cali cartels, as the FARC and National Liberation Army ELN (Spanish initials) ramped-up operations as vast revenue flowed in from the drug trade. By 2000, after President Andres Pastrana’s peace negotiations with the FARC had failed, the leftist guerillas controlled a 42,000 square mile territory in southeastern Colombia and kidnappings had surged to a record high of 3,500 for the year. Even those events failed to have any material impact on Colombia’s oil boom. A combination of soaring oil prices and rapidly improving internal security during the early 2000s, because of Plan Colombia and President Alvaro Uribe’s military campaign against the FARC, saw foreign energy investment and hence crude oil production growth.

  During 2003 when Brent averaged $28.83 per barrel, a 15% increase over 2002, Colombia pumped an average of 550,000 barrels of crude oil per day. When Brent had soared to over $140 per barrel during 2008, annual petroleum production averaged 600,000 barrels daily and kept growing to peak at a yearly record of just over 1 million barrels per day by 2013. Since 2016 Colombia’s petroleum output has been in terminal decline impacted at first by the late-2014 oil price crash, sharply rising violence, and finally because of the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic. Even the 2017 demobilization of the largest leftist guerilla group the FARC, after a 2016 peace agreement was struck with the government of President Juan Manuel Santos, has done little if anything to arrest Colombia’s production decline. That in part can be blamed on current President Ivan Duque’s reluctance to fully implement the peace deal, contributing to an increase in violence and civil unrest in regional Colombia.

  During 2020, the crisis-driven Andean nation only pumped on average 781,300 barrels of crude oil per day as the COVID-19 pandemic, related national quarantine lockdown and sharply weaker oil prices impacted investment as well as production. More worrying, is that despite the pandemic lockdown ending by September 2020 and energy investment increasing, average petroleum output only reached 734,231 barrels per day for the first 10 months of 2021 which is 6% less than the full year 2020. That disappointing decline occurred because of heightened civil unrest with anti-government protests sweeping across Colombia during late- April 2021 lasting into May and early-June 2021. Falling crude oil output can also be attributed to rising insecurity in regional areas, where petroleum industry operations are concentrated, fueled by a marked uptick in violence related to the activities of illegal armed groups and cocaine production.

  It is the cocaine trade that is an enduring problem for Colombia. The tremendous profits that the trade generates are responsible for fueling what is a near-perpetual low-level asymmetric conflict where only the illegal armed actors change as the various groups fragment and reform. Estimates vary, but Colombia’s government believes the civil conflict has claimed up to 260,000 lives and displaced at least 9 million people. According to the UN Colombia’s cocaine production during 2020 increased by 8% compared to a year earlier, despite a 7% decrease in the volume of land used for coca cropping and an 18% increase in seizures. The scale of massive profits generated by cocaine is highlighted by former finance minister Juan Carlos Echeverry’s estimate (Spanish) that the drug trade generates $8 to $12 billion annually, which is equivalent to 5 to 4% of Colombia’s gross domestic product. Using Echeverry’s numbers the cocaine trade is contributing the same amount, if not more, to Colombia’s GDP than the oil industry which based on DANE data (Spanish) for the first 3 quarters of 2021 was responsible for 3% of GDP.

  Rising security risk and rural violence, which is mostly fueled by the vast profits generated by the cocaine trade, is a key deterrent to attracting onshore oil investment in Colombia. A combination of security risks and mature assets saw Occidental Petroleum, in October 2020, sell its Colombian onshore petroleum assets in an $825 million deal, although the company retained its offshore exploration blocks. Despite the risks associated with operating in onshore Colombia, the Andean country’s 2021 bid round found some success. Seven companies made offers for 30 of the 53 blocks (Spanish) on offer with initial investment expected to exceed $148 million. Five of the offers came from national oil company Ecopetrol or its subsidiaries and 21 from intermediate energy companies with existing operational presence in Colombia, Parex Resources, Frontera Energy, and Canacol Energy. This indicates that Colombia is struggling to attract foreign onshore energy investment because of the heightened security risks coupled with high breakeven prices and elevated carbon content of the sour heavy crude oil produced.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 19:00

• Protests Erupt In South Korea Over Vaccination Deaths
  Protests Erupt In South Korea Over Vaccination Deaths

  Americans and Europeans aren’t the only people to express skepticism of the COVID jabs produced by a handful of pharmaceutical giants, most notably Pfizer and Moderna. As reports of deaths and other ‘adverse health events’ suspected of being triggered by vaccines mount, South Koreans are reportedly taking to the streets to protest their governments’ refusal to acknowledge thousands of deaths that many believe were caused by vaccines.

  

  As we said above, more than 10K people have died under murky circumstances shortly after being vaccinated in South Korea. The government has only reported a connection in a handful of serious cases. But it has also moved to recognize and compensate victims: for example, a nursing assistant was recognized in August as a victim of an industrial accident and awarded government benefits after suffering paralysis in the wake of receiving AstraZeneca’s COVID shot.

  Back in August, the government investigated after a teenager with no underlying health conditions died following inoculation with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID jab.

  But in the absence of more concrete answers, thousands of South Koreans are taking to the streets to protest the vaccine mandate in one of the world’s most heavily vaccinated countries.

  According to RT, an association called the COVID Vaccine Victims and Families Council has held rallies in several South Korean cities. Demonstrators on Sunday marched from Busan City Hall to Busan National University of Education in a large demonstration held in the country’s second city.

  There’s even a chance that vaccine skepticism might become an issue in SK’s upcoming presidential election. Last week, the opposition People’s Power Party held a public hearing on vaccine sideeffects, inviting purported victims and their families to suggest support new strategies for confronting the epidemic that may be adopted by presidential candidate Yoon Seok-yeol.

  Kim Jong-in, the party’s campaign chairman, has accused sitting SK President Moon Jae-in and his administration of being indifferent to damages caused by vaccines.

  “I think the people have reached a point where they can’t trust the government,” Kim said.

  The government promised to compensate victims of vaccine side effects before the first jabs arrived. But it’s also responsible for determining which cases merit compensation, a fact that has rankled some purported victims, who feel they have been shafted.

  Roughly 83% of South Koreans have been vaccinated against Covid-19, easily the highest rate among G20 nations.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 18:40

• The Scientific Blunder At The Core Of 'The Matrix'
  The Scientific Blunder At The Core Of ‘The Matrix’

  Authored by Ross Pomeroy via RealClearScience.com,

  The Matrix is one of the greatest works of science fiction ever devised, but it also features one of the most glaring scientific plot holes. With the fourth installment of The Matrix movies currently in theaters, it seems a fitting time to review it.

  

  Before we get nit-picky, let us first acknowledge that science fiction creators are allowed to take liberties with scientific fact if it serves the story (provided it’s a good one, at least). Warp drive and transporters in Star Trek, wormholes in Interstellar, time travel in Back to the Future – these unlikely plot devices are totally fine.

  The Matrix‘s scientific blunder is particularly terrible, however. In the movie, the entire reason for the Matrix – a simulated dreamworld to which almost all human beings are connected – is so artificially intelligent robot overlords can keep humanity controlled while they use humans as an energy source on a barren, hellish, futuristic Earth where the Sun is completely blocked.

  As Morpheus, one of the main characters, describes, “The human body generates more bio-electricity than a 120-volt battery and over 25,000 BTUs of body heat. Combined with a form of fusion, the machines had found all the energy they would ever need.”

  This, however, doesn’t make any sense! The highly educated writers of the science fiction comedy Futurama – with numerous Ph.Ds in mathematics, computer science, and chemistry between them – playfully skewered the notion in one episode.

  “But wouldn’t almost anything make a better battery than a human body?” one of the show’s characters, Bender, asks. “Like a potato? Or a battery?”

  “Plus no matter how much energy they produce, it would take more energy than that to keep them alive!” another character, Fry, chimes in.

  Futurama’s televised chiding was echoed by Robert Hurt, a Caltech-based visualization scientist who has worked on many NASA projects, in a 2019 interview with Esquire.

  Humans consume quite a lot of high-energy products (food, oxygen) and the only thing they produce that could count as ‘energy’ would be basically heat. But if you took all the food and just burned it you’d get WAY more heat out of it. You can chalk it up to thermodynamics and entropy; some systems just don’t process efficiently and basically you can count on getting less energy out than you put in.

  Reportedly, this ‘battery’ explanation for The Matrix was not the Wachowskis’ original intent. 

  In earlier versions of the script, the writer-director sister duo conceived of the Matrix as a simulation collectively produced by the brains of humans hooked into it. The malevolent machines needed humanity enslaved because they were dependent upon the massive processing power of billions of human brains. Apparently, studio executives thought this was a little too complex for 1999 audiences to grasp, so they urged the nonsensical ‘battery’ alternative. In the end, it’s just an annoying pockmark on a darn near perfect flick.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 18:20

• CDC Makes Major Changes To Covid Isolation Recos, Treats Unboosted As Unvaxxed For Quarantines
  CDC Makes Major Changes To Covid Isolation Recos, Treats Unboosted As Unvaxxed For Quarantines

  And so, the “scientific” goal posts move again.

  With even Biden this close to admitting defeat over covid, admitting today that “there is no Federal solution” before quietly getting out of Dodge, the CDC announced late on Monday that is slashing its previous self-isolation recommended period in half, and telling people who have Covid-19 to isolate themselves from others for 5 days if they aren’t experiencing symptoms, down from 10 days previously.

  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also said in a statement Monday that following the 5-day isolation period, people with Covid-19 should wear a mask for 5 days when they are around other people. The new guidance supplants previous recommendations that said people who have tested positive for the virus should isolate for 10 days.

  While Omicron has been documented to be far more mild than prior versions of covid, cases are still expected to surge in the U.S. following the holidays, threatening confusion and chaos among who are infected or exposed to the virus. The shorter isolation and quarantine periods will allow people to return to work or school sooner than previously permitted.

  The CDC said in its statement that the shift in guidance was motivated by science^TM showing the majority of coronavirus transmission occurs early in the course of the illness, in the first day or two before the onset of symptoms and the two to three days that follow.

  The CDC also updated its recommended quarantine period for people who have been exposed to Covid-19. For those who are unvaccinated or who are eligible for a booster shot but haven’t yet received one, the agency recommends a five-day quarantine, followed by strict use of a mask for five more days despite copious research demonstrating that masks have little impact on virus spread, and despite the fact that the cities with the most aggressive mask requirements have emerged as the biggest covid epicenters.

  Cases in New York State are now higher than they’ve ever been in Florida, despite all of New York’s mask mandates, vaccine passports and media praise

  And yes, of course, New York’s collapse is also entirely the fault of Ron DeSantis pic.twitter.com/R28T9pv1t9

  — IM (@ianmSC) December 27, 2021

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

  If a five-day quarantine isn’t feasible, an exposed person should wear a well-fitting mask, such as an N95, at all times when around others for 10 days after exposure, the CDC recommended. 

  Meanwhile, individuals who have received a booster shot don’t need to quarantine following an exposure, but should wear a mask for 10 days, the CDC said. If symptoms occur, individuals should quarantine until a negative test confirms that they don’t have Covid-19. Then again, if symptoms occur after taking a booster shot, perhaps it is time to realize that something is very wrong with the “expert” recommendations…

  In other words, in a remarkable departure meant to stigmatize not just the unvaxxed but those without a booster shot, vaccinated but unboosted people are will now treated as “unvaccinated” when it comes to close contact quarantines. This, as a social worker noted on Twitter….

  “would wreak havoc on school attendance for unboosted kids and teachers!  I can’t emphasize enough how this would totally derail the school year. All unboosted teachers would miss 5 days of school EVERY TIME one of their students test positive. And 12-15 year olds who are >6mo out from their 2nd dose aren’t even booster eligible!”

  

  According to Bloomberg, the new guidance “could entice more Americans to seek another dose of a vaccine”, although with millions of “breakthrough” cases amid residual concerns about vaccine side-effects, it’s unclear just how the billionaire’s media empire came to this profound conclusion. Just under one-third of fully vaccinated people in the U.S. have received a booster, according to the CDC. We don’t expect this number to rise substantially.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 18:01

• Daily Briefing: Following the Money as End of Holidays Nears
  Daily Briefing: Following the Money as End of Holidays Nears

  What put a floor under global markets last week may not be what you think. Weston Nakamura provides an overview of the global and cross-asset markets in the last week of the year. Nakamura explains that regional market holiday schedules matter because they determine the makeup of active market participants. He then talks about the unprecedented volatility in the Turkish Lira having rallied 50% from all time lows after President Erdogan unveiled his controversial new economic policy to protect depositors against FX risk. He also makes the case that the upside in global macro risk assets could have been driven by the breakneck reversal in the Lira, following up on his recently released video, “How Policy Changes Created Turkish Lira Volatility”. Link to Weston’s video on the Turkish Dollar from Dec 25th 2021: https://youtu.be/WnDiFCWgBDQ

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 17:45

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Brigette Macron Takes Legal Action To Suppress Rumor She's Transgender
  Brigette Macron Takes Legal Action To Suppress Rumor She’s Transgender

  Brigette Macron, the first lady of France, is reportedly taking action to suppress rumors that she was actually born a male – rumors on which we first reported nearly one week ago.

  

  The BBC quoted a lawyer for Mrs. Macron, who confirmed she is taking action.

  A lawyer for Mrs Macron – who is the mother of three adult children from her first marriage – confirmed she is taking action.

  “She has decided to initiate proceedings, it is in progress,” lawyer Jean Ennochi confirmed to the AFP news agency.

  The rumors about the 68-year-old woman and mother have been spread by allegedly “far right” accounts on francophile social media. The BBC blamed “the QAnon Movement”, among other contributors, for spreading it.

  The French press corps have reportedly traced the rumor to an article written on a far-right website by a woman going by Natacha Rey before finding wider circulation after being discussed on a popular YouTube channel. 

  The conspiracy theory is circulating as France is gearing up for a presidential election in the spring 2022.

  Of course, with so many other rumors spreading on “far-right” venues – including one particularly virulent rumor about the establishment moving to “fix” the upcoming vote to prevent a victory by the far-right  – one can’t help but wonder why Mrs. Macron is taking action on this.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/27/2021 – 01:00

• DataTrek: What We Learned This Year
  DataTrek: What We Learned This Year

  By Nicholas Colas of DataTrek Research

  This week’s Story Time is a list of things we learned in 2021. We’ll have a look-ahead piece on predictions for 2022 this week.

  I (Nick) will start with my biggest personal “Aha” moment of the year: Marc Andreessen describing what he calls “the original sin of the Internet”. There’s a link to an A16Z podcast/Clubhouse recording below, a conversation between Marc and Ben Horowitz, where he goes into detail on this idea. He’s discussed it before, but this was when it all made sense to me.

  The backstory: when Marc was building Mosaic, an early Internet browser, he thought it would be very useful to add payment functionality to the software. He approached banks, credit card companies, anyone he thought might be interested. No one was. Crickets …

  That led to an internet built on advertising rather than direct commercial interaction. Online advertising is only as effective as the targeting it employs, so a whole industry sprang up to support user surveillance. Social media copied that ad-based approach as it developed a decade later. That’s how we ended up with a low-privacy online environment that can be easily “hacked” to drive attention.

  This also explains why a handful of companies – Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc. – have grown to such critical mass. Without a “buy now” button native to a browser, platforms become the de facto marketplace for buyers and sellers to find each other. And, since platforms live or die based on network effects, only a few survive.

  Marc’s vision for the future is one where new technologies allow for platform-less, direct connectivity between economic agents. Virtual currencies, writ broadly, are the mechanism for this transformation to decentralization. They are just the tip of the iceberg, however, at least in Marc’s mental model because once you unbundle the platforms everything changes.

  Takeaway: venture capitalists are funding this vision of a decentralized future with billions of dollars, backing founders that share this very specific view on how technology should evolve. Most of these companies will fail or, best case, only recoup the initial investments made in them. A few will work, however, and those will change how consumers shop, save, invest, and interact with businesses. Yes, just like the last 2 iterations of the Internet. The more things change ….

  * * *

  Now, 3 other thoughts on “things we learned this year”. To be fair, they are not so much “learnings” as examples of how 2021 was a master class in how capital markets actually function.

  #1: Only earnings matter. This was not supposed to be a +20 percent year for the S&P 500. We were supposed to get a choppy, grinding 2021 with pandemic issues interjecting themselves on a regular basis. The single reason we are at 4,668 on the S&P is because what should have been a $167/share in earnings year turned out to be $205/share, 23 percent better. The S&P 500 is up 24 percent YTD. No further explanation required. Not Fed policy, not 10-year yields, not which party controls Congress or the White House. None of that has mattered.

  Takeaway: as Hal Holbrooke’s character in the movie Wall Street said, “stick to the fundamentals”. As much as the words “extraordinary” and “unprecedented” have been thrown around this year, 2021 was all about corporate earnings when it came to US large cap stock returns. Just like every other year in our +30-year career on Wall Street. We doubt 2022 will be any different, or any year thereafter.

  #2: Fulcrum issues drive relative returns. You’d have thought 2021 would be the year of US small caps and Emerging Markets given that’s how investment cycles usually work off a bottom such as 2020. But no, that was not to be. The Russell 2000 is up 9 percent YTD against that 24 pct gain on the S&P 500. The MSCI Emerging Markets Index is down 6 percent on the year. Even MSCI Italy, a country not known for generating large stock market returns, is up 9 percent on the year.

  What went wrong? Two simple things:

  • US Small Caps trade with high yield corporate spreads. When spreads fall quickly, the Russell outperforms. When spreads get close to their historical lows, the Russell loses momentum. In 2021, high yield spreads stopped dropping in early April; the Russell has been range bound ever since.

  • MSCI Emerging Markets is overweight China (33 percent). MSCI China is down 22 percent YTD, thanks to that country’s crackdown on their local Big Tech companies. EEM, the most widely held emerging markets ETF, lost money this year because of this one fact. MSCI Taiwan is up 21 pct YTD. MSCI South Korea is down 9 percent YTD, but MSCI India is up 11 percent. Those are the other large weights in MSCI EM, so ex-China this asset class would have performed much better in 2021.

  Takeaway: regular readers know one of our mantras is “don’t overthink things/make them harder than they have to be”, and these are two good examples of how that works in real life. We have written about the challenges facing small caps and EM since April, and they remain even today.

  #3: Inflation is always both a mathematical and psychological phenomenon. Milton Friedman famously said it is “always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”, but he assumed the US velocity of money was reasonably constant. That was true from 1960 – 1990 (1.6 – 1.9x M2 velocity), but it has not been the case since 2000 (M2 velocity has fallen from 2.1x to 1.1x today). That’s why all the money printing since the Financial Crisis had such little effect on goods and services inflation over the last +10 years.

  What we have now is mathematical inflation that should ease in the next year, but inflationary psychology that expects the current rate of price increases to continue for the foreseeable future. Much of the latter is due to food and energy inflation. These are two categories that don’t really respond to monetary policy unless there is a significant economic slowdown or recession. Consumers need to eat and drive, pretty much every day.

  Takeaway: this is the one 2021 “learning” that is still evolving as we enter 2022 and therefore has no clear resolution. The Federal Reserve is on the case, true, at least in terms of tapering and communication. How this filters through to inflation psychology, and whatever the inflation math turns out to be next year, remains uncertain. The offsetting positive from an investment perspective is that large cap corporate earnings have little to fear from inflation as long as the US economy continues to expand (point #1 above). So, let’s not overthink things too much (point #2). Yet, anyway.

  Sources:

  Marc Andreessen/Ben Horowitz conversation (audio): https://a16z.simplecast.com/episodes/one-on-one-with-marc-and-ben-EyXRfTSO

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 23:30

• America's White-Collar Workers See Pay Rise At Fastest Pace In More Than 20 Years
  America’s White-Collar Workers See Pay Rise At Fastest Pace In More Than 20 Years

  It appears burnt-out junior bankers aren’t the only white-collar workers who have seen their compensation improve over the past 12 months. According to a report published in Sunday’s Wall Street Journal, America’s salaried employees are finally seeing wage gains commensurate with those experienced by (often lower-paid) hourly workers.

  

  Citing data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, American professionals toward the end of this year saw their compensation jump at the fastest rate in nearly 20 years. Though that’s still slower than the pace of headline inflation, which is running at a YoY rate of nearly 7% according to the latest available CPI data which is the fastest pace in nearly four decades.  For a more detailed breakdown of inflation by category, see here.

  

  As WSJ pointed out, these rapidly increasing price pressures will in many cases “decimate” the gains accrued by advancing wages.

  Data from Q3 shows American private-sector workers saw their pay improve by 4.6% YoY, however the most serious gains were realized by workers in the hospitality industry, like bartenders and waiters.

  

  Source: WSJ

  For those in positions of management, business and financial occupations, wages rose 3.9% in the quarter, the fastest pace since 2003 for this bucket of workers, although it was still slower than their blue-collar peers.

  Fortunately for them, it looks like private employers are setting aside money for more pay raises next year. A survey from the Conference Board earlier this month found that employers are setting aside an average 3.9% of total payroll for wage increases next year. That’s the largest amount since 2008.

  “Candidates are turning down our offers or wanting to negotiate more aggressively than they did in the past,” said Kathie Patterson, chief human resources officer at Ally Financial, said the Detroit-based lender is raising its salary and bonus pools, while also increasing its contributions to its employee 401(k) plans.

  Part of the reason for the increase is the increasing stress due to chronic understaffing across the economy. Workers apparently expect to be well-compensated for the additional stress and work, especially in the financial services industry.

  “There’s been so much pressure on pay,” said Alan Johnson, managing director of Johnson Associates, a compensation-consulting firm focused on financial services. “My clients are understaffed. With Covid, they curtailed hiring, and now with a spike in the economy and markets, they’re working people very, very hard,” he added.

  While this is good news for workers (even if the gains on average weren’t enough to counter the impact of surging inflationary pressures), economists are growing increasingly worried about the prospects of a “wage-price spiral”. This happens when companies raise pay, passing increased costs along to consumers in the form of higher prices, which in turn prompts workers to demand higher wages to offset their loss in buying power.

  We expect the Fed will be keeping an eye out for any signs of this dynamic, issuing any warnings in the form of a verbose central bank research report.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 22:45

• "I Told You So" – Larry Summers Gloats About Being Right On Inflation
  “I Told You So” – Larry Summers Gloats About Being Right On Inflation

  Nearly one year ago, Larry Summers, the esteemed former Clinton advisor, was met with a flurry of attacks from his fellow Democrats after he warned that the new administration’s plans to massively expand social spending on top of the massive COVID-inspired stimulus programs would cause inflationary pressures to skyrocket.

  At the time, the Biden Administration and its allies dismissed Summers’ concerns. But as it turns out, Summers’ predictions that inflation would run hotter than 5% by the end of 2021 were conservative.

  

  Now, he’s having his “I told you so” moment, as economists and politicians acknowledge that Summers’ comments were prescient. The Fed has jettisoned the word “transitory” from its vocabulary, and President Biden’s approval rating is suffering as the nation endures inflation that has already neared 7% (according to one of the most popular indicators).

  So, during a recent interview with Bloomberg, Summers – who has apparently avoided having his Democratic Party membership card from being revoked by the virtue of being right – offered an updated view on his outlook for inflation, as well as offering an explanation of how Summers’ came to his conclusions.

  Read the full interview below:

  Stephanie Flanders: Hello, and welcome to Stephanomics, the podcast that brings the global economy to you. And we have a special episode today in honor of the holiday season, a conversation with the economist Larry Summers—professor at Harvard, former Treasury secretary and frequent participant in the public debate about all things economic. Also my friend and former boss. Larry, I mean, it is the end of the year. I guess we can start with a little gloating. I mean, in any given year economists get a lot wrong. And this year, an especially large number of them wrongly assumed inflation was going to be a fleeting phenomenon. But you sounded the alarm early in the year and were considered a bit of a crank for doing so initially. But not anymore. What did you see that others didn’t see?

  Larry Summers: Stephanie, you know, I’ve been right this year, but there have been plenty of years when I’ve been wrong. I did what I thought was a straightforward analysis of the situation. I looked at how short incomes were of trend. And I saw that they were about $25 billion or $30 billion short of trend each month. And that that number was declining. And then I saw that the proposed transfer payments and other stimulus represented close to $200 billion a month. And so I thought if you were filling a $30 billion hole with $200 billion of spending, there was likely to be some overflow and that overflow would translate into inflation. I did the same calculation essentially, looking at GDP, and I saw a 2% or 3% GDP gap, met with about 15% of stimulus. I had thought.

  Indeed, I expressed them at the time, that that stimulus was too small. That stimulus in its first year was perhaps half of the GDP gap. This proposed stimulus was a significant multiple of the GDP gap. I thought there was a case that the Obama stimulus might have been low by 50%. It might have been low by 60%. It surely was not low by a factor of five to 10. So it seemed to me that we were overstimulating the economy and that people had not seen inflation in 40 years. So they assumed it was something you didn’t need to worry about, but that if you just did a straightforward analysis, demand was gonna run ahead of supply. And I have to say, I think that’s pretty much what we’ve seen. I don’t think that the analyses suggesting that this is all bottlenecks are right, 90% of CPI components show inflation above 3%, more than 50% above the Fed’s target. If I look at what’s happening in the labor market, it looks to me like we’ve got substantial labor shortages that push wages up, but only with a lag because wages aren’t reset constantly. We’ve got substantial pressures in the housing market that have not manifested themselves at all, really, in the official price indices yet. So I think we’ve got a fairly serious inflationary situation that’s been growing for quite some time.

  Flanders: If wages do go up, and it’s true that we haven’t seen as much as you might have expected in the last few months. But if they, if they do go up—the last 20 years we haven’t seen a follow through from higher wages to higher inflation. Even the Fed’s own model doesn’t include much response from inflation. So why do you think this time will be different?

  Summers: Well, there’s two different questions. One is the response of prices to wages, and the other is the response of wages to unemployment. With respect to wages to prices, we just haven’t seen very much variation in the level of wage growth, and therefore it would be hard to find a relationship with prices. I’m much more influenced by the experience of my own talking to businesses and even more people like those Bloomberg employees who spend their lives talking to companies, and they all say more or less the same thing. “We’re gonna have to push up wages because of labor shortages. And when we do, we have plenty of pricing power.” And I guess I trust those anecdotes more than I trust econometric relationships estimated over periods when there’s been very little variation. We did have some months in 2019 with low unemployment and not extremely rapid wage pressure, but that’s one several-month experience in 20 years. I don’t think there’s any support in the data for the view the Fed took that the economy can enjoy 3.5% unemployment for multiple years with significantly declining inflation. Indeed, the Fed’s forecasts call for unemployment below its estimates of the normal level, interest rates never reaching in the next few years its concept of the normal level and, nonetheless, continuous deceleration of inflation. That might happen. But it doesn’t seem to me that it is the most intuitive reading of our macroeconomic history.

  Flanders: Just to follow up briefly on the, on the wages and prices thing. You’re obviously right that companies have been complaining about labor shortages, have been talking archly about rising costs, meaning they were gonna have to push up prices. And they clearly do have pricing power. All the data that we’ve looked at, and we discussed it on the podcast a few weeks ago, suggested that they’ve already used that power to raise profit margins this year well beyond any increase in costs. And, it’s not obvious that they couldn’t absorb some of these increased wages in profit margins. I mean, inherently that wouldn’t be such a bad thing, right, if you had more wages for workers and companies absorb some of it in profit margins, which in some cases are historically high?

  Summers: Certainly if you look at analysts’ forecasts of profits over the next year, the last time I looked the forecast was for 2022 profits to rise 18% relative to 2021 profits, which suggests as a predictive matter that that’s not mostly what is going to happen. You know, Stephanie, prices are set by supply and demand, and we are seeing in a very wide range of sectors rising demand. For example, retailers are engaged apparently, as best one can tell from the anecdotes, in much less promotional activity this Christmas than they have been in previous Christmases. That’s showing up in higher margins for them and for their suppliers. I don’t think there’s anything nefarious about that. That’s just what goes with an economy where stores are full. I think the diagnosis that you are implicitly offering is the one that the Nixon administration rather unsuccessfully offered, that rising prices necessitate price controls so as to contain profits and reduce inflation. That worked out rather spectacularly badly. And fortunately, that’s not an idea we’ve heard this time around. I think trying to restrict prices would be the best way I could imagine to lengthen the period of shortages, bottlenecks and disillusionment. We tried that strategy with respect to gasoline in the late 1970s. I don’t know why businesses would not be pushing on prices when they had shortages of goods and supply.

  Flanders: I guess what I’m tripping over is that you’ve written quite a lot in the past in important academic papers, actually, about the decline in labor bargaining power and the impact that this had had. And that particularly how the scales had shifted in favor of employers in many parts of the labor market. I don’t recall you accused me of proposing price controls. I don’t recall ever saying that, but I’ll check the transcript. But the description you’re giving suggests there is no way to reset that balance or perhaps even in the sort of macro terms, start having a higher share of national income going to labor relative to capital. You know, a reversal of what we’ve had in the last few years. Because if wages go up faster than productivity, you’re saying the Fed should definitely put on the brakes in response to that. And if it doesn’t, companies will inevitably just pass on any wage increase and it’ll just result in more and more inflation. It doesn’t feel like there’s any way to reverse that cycle we’ve seen over the last few decades.

  Summers: That’s really not what I’m saying, Stephanie. I mean, first just on the facts, this period of high inflation has coincided with more rapid, real wage reduction than we had seen previously. So for the majority of workers it’s working out badly so far, not working out well. That’s a political response to inflation that we’re observing. Second, I am a strong supporter of the type of labor law reforms that the administration has worked on. My colleague in the labor power paper that you referred to, Anna Stansbury, has done very important work showing that when you put reasonable penalties on, it influences behavior and allows union organizing to take place. I am a strong supporter of measures to strengthen labor through the labor movement in unions, through a range of innovations that would encourage labor power. What I don’t agree with is the idea that simply running the economy hot on an unlimited basis can do it.

  If I thought we could sustainably run the economy in a red-hot way, that would be a wonderful thing. But the consequence, and this is the excruciating lesson we learned in the 1970s, the consequence of an overheating economy is not merely elevated inflation, but constantly rising inflation. And that’s why my fear is that we are already reaching a point where it will be challenging to reduce inflation without giving rise to recession. Should we do all kinds of things? Should we raise the minimum wage? Absolutely. Should we empower unions? Yes. But this kind of policy—there are no examples of successful inflationary policy that has worked out to the benefit of workers. And there are dozens of examples from the Labor Party in Britain in the 1970s to multiple Latin American experiences to our own experience in the ‘60s and ‘70s where it backfired with respect to the very people it was trying to help.

  Flanders: Do you think Bidenomics deserves a dictionary entry or will deserve a dictionary entry when the dictionaries get rewritten or revised? Does it amount to anything in your view? I mean, we’ve had nearly 12 months.

  Summers: I think we’ll have to see what happens down the road. The hope would be that it represents a kind of progressive supply side economics that emphasizes supply and does so through public investment. Unfortunately, the share of the spending that represents transfer payments rather than public investments has been sufficiently high that I’m not sure how great the benefits will be. And I’m concerned that there’s been insufficient impulse to making the public investments cost effective, streamlining infrastructure investment, for example. On the other hand, Stephanie, I think that the recognition that we have—on the one hand, on your flight you can now watch television in the seat in front of you in a way that would’ve been inconceivable 30 years ago. On the other hand, it takes half an hour more to get from Boston to Washington than it did 30 years ago, just because of the decaying infrastructure. That’s a kind of misplaced priority and it’s a metaphor for what’s gone wrong in important parts of the way our economic system has functioned.

  Flanders: I’ve known you for a long time and through a lot of that time, and certainly when you and I were at the Treasury Department in the late ’90s, the kind of default view of most governments was that governments should meddle as little as possible in markets—set the rules for markets, but then let the chips fall where they may, especially on trade and potentially the environment, industrial policy, all those things where the sort of default was to be suspicious of these things. Have you had a change of heart on those things? I mean, I noticed that Janet Yellen recently talked about needing to be less reliant on other countries for critical goods. And I’ve seen, you have talked a bit about in the environment of wanting a more sort of muscular approach to government. Are you, are you rethinking your view of government?

  Summers: I think that there’s been this extraordinary change in relative prices, Stephanie. If you look at the relative price of a day in a hospital and a television set, it’s changed by a factor of 100 since the ‘80s. That means we’re in a very different economy and a much larger share of the economy, a much larger share of the people working are in sectors that have a range of market failures. And certainly there’s a case for government involvement in those. But I think what needs to be very, very careful about how government will carry out any kind of industrial policy intervention. And I have to say that when I hear about industrial policy in the name of achieving green objectives, I’m much more sympathetic, for example, than when I hear about it in the name of preserving a job. I think the available evidence on protectionist strategies is that they mostly cost $1 million a job saved or more once you work through their full impacts. Take, for example, steel protection. Steel protection operates to save potentially 50,000 jobs of steel workers, one-sixth as many as we have manicurists in the U.S. But it makes industries with 5 million people that use steel less competitive than they otherwise would be.

  Flanders: Going back with the Janet Yellen comments, a lot of people look at the supply chain, snarl ups, the lines of container ships outside Long Beach, California, and other big ports and say, “Donald Trump was right. We should be less reliant on all these foreign manufacturers.”

  Summers: It’s important to understand why we have those supply, why we have those long lines. It is not because of anything that China is doing. It is because our demand for goods surged and I would much rather see us be better at expanding port capacity quickly. Do we need to pay attention to rare earths and other goods that are highly concentrated in the world for our national security? Yes, we do. Should we institute some broader program of non-reliance on trade? I suspect there would be very substantial inefficiencies from doing that. I do think we need to manage the global economy much more than we have. That’s why I was such a strong supporter of the initiatives that Secretary Yellen brought to completion to harmonize corporate taxes around the world so capital could run, but it couldn’t hide and would be taxed in reasonable ways.

  Summers: That’s why I think the right trade agreements pay attention also to the context in which trade takes place. What kinds of regulations there are. What kinds of rules there are for workers. What kind of exchange rate arrangements there are. But I think a strategy of actively pursuing disintegration is not likely to make us more secure. And certainly the first order effect of stopping us from buying goods from abroad when they are cheapest will be to exacerbate inflation rather than to reduce inflation. So the idea of cutting off cheap supply as a strategy for reducing inflation at a moment when that’s our principle economic problem seems to short run economic problem seems to me bizarre.

  * * *

  Source: Bloomberg

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 22:05

• Dam Collapse Sends Wall Of Water Into Brazilian Town
  Dam Collapse Sends Wall Of Water Into Brazilian Town

  After weeks of heavy rain, a dam in the northeastern Brazilian state of Bahia collapsed, sending a massive wall of water into populated areas. 

  The dam in focus is the Igua dam, located near the city of Vitoria da Conquista in southern Bahia. It reportedly collapsed on Saturday evening and resulted in flooding of towns, including Itambe. Officials in the city warned people to evacuate immediately. 

  “A dam with a high volume of water has broken and a strong flash flood is expected to affect the municipality of Itambe in a few moments. All residents should evacuate from the banks of the river Verruga urgently,” said an Instagram post by the city. 

  Local all-news radio network, BandNews FM, tweeted a video that shows the devastation in Itambe. 

  CHUVAS • A prefeitura de Itambé, município do Sul da Bahia, alerta sobre o rompimento da barragem de Iguá devido às fortes chuvas na região, e disse que uma forte enxurrada poderia atingir áreas da cidade.
  Confira:https://t.co/c2jpQCNg70 pic.twitter.com/ztHykbAut7

  — Rádio BandNews FM (@radiobandnewsfm) December 26, 2021

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

  Other areas have been affected by the flooding. 

  Itororó-Bahia #Bahia #SOSsuldabahia #SOSBahia pic.twitter.com/f1qWY4hiBt

  — oxigenada (@iaeceros) December 26, 2021

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

  BAIRRO DA MANGABINHA, EM ITABUNA, DEBAIXO D’ÁGUA. ⚠️🌧

  Registro foi feito por voluntários da cidade que estão utilizando jetski para resgatar as pessoas de suas casas. As imagens mostram que o nível da água chega no teto das residências

  #chuva #bahia #itabuna pic.twitter.com/8nGgfHrFgM

  — DEUS ME LIVRE DE FOFOCA (@DeusmelivreFofo) December 26, 2021

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

  Se cenas como está não te chocam ou despertam em vc sentimentos de angústia ou aflição, vc já morreu a tempos.
  O Extremo Sul da Bahia pede ajuda, contribua de alguma forma com as várias formas que estão disponíveis.
  Contribua p/ comunidades Indígenas: 7399198-2962 Tiara A Santos. pic.twitter.com/3BqVlDosWO

  — Thyara #SOSpovopataxo 🏹 (@PataxoThyara) December 26, 2021

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

  MELLOS COM SUL DA BAHIA

  pic.twitter.com/XW4PlU88OR

  — FABI 🍷 (@Fabyana_braz) December 26, 2021

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

  Since early November, the Bahia state government said torrential rains had caused major floods across 72 cities and killed at least 18 people, with 4,000 households displaced. There was no word on how many people were displaced are killed in the latest flooding incident. 

  “At this first moment, we’re acting to save people, to get people off the top of their houses, out of isolation, with boats,” Bahia Gov. Rui Costa said Sunday. He said first responders are distributing emergency aid to affected residents. 

  Other towns in Bahia monitor the deteriorating situation as more heavy rains mean other dams in the state could be at risk of collapse. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 21:20

• LNG Shipping's Wild Ride: Record, Plunge, New Record, New Plunge
  LNG Shipping’s Wild Ride: Record, Plunge, New Record, New Plunge

  By Greg Miller of FreightWaves

  

  Shippers of containerized goods were caught off guard this year. Never before had container spot rates risen so far, so fast. But shippers of liquid and dry bulk commodities know such cost swings all too well.

  When bulk commodity transport demand exceeds supply, shipping spot rates can keep rising until cargo shippers’ profit margins are erased. The spectacular rise and fall of liquefied natural gas shipping rates is the latest example.

  LNG carriers boast the highest day rates of any cargo vessel type. Shippers can afford to pay eye-wateringly high freight because the profit on moving a cargo can be enormous: In mid-November, a cargo could be bought for $20 million in the U.S. and sold for $120 million in Asia.

  The wild ride for spot rates began early this year as cold temperatures pushed up commodity pricing in Asia. An LNG carrier was chartered for $350,000 per day in January, a new all-time high for any cargo vessel. 

  Then rates crashed. U.S. Gulf-Japan rates were down to just $16,800 in mid-March.

  Rates rebounded to a new record high last month. The Baltic Exchange assessment for the Australia-Japan route for a tri-fuel, diesel-engine (TFDE) LNG carrier peaked at $366,700 per day in late November. Lloyd’s List reported that one vessel was chartered for $424,000 per day.

  Shippers of containerized goods were caught off guard this year. Never before had container spot rates risen so far, so fast. But shippers of liquid and dry bulk commodities know such cost swings all too well.

  When bulk commodity transport demand exceeds supply, shipping spot rates can keep rising until cargo shippers’ profit margins are erased. The spectacular rise and fall of liquefied natural gas shipping rates is the latest example.

  LNG carriers boast the highest day rates of any cargo vessel type. Shippers can afford to pay eye-wateringly high freight because the profit on moving a cargo can be enormous: In mid-November, a cargo could be bought for $20 million in the U.S. and sold for $120 million in Asia.

  The wild ride for spot rates began early this year as cold temperatures pushed up commodity pricing in Asia. An LNG carrier was chartered for $350,000 per day in January, a new all-time high for any cargo vessel. 

  Then rates crashed. U.S. Gulf-Japan rates were down to just $16,800 in mid-March.

  Rates rebounded to a new record high last month. The Baltic Exchange assessment for the Australia-Japan route for a tri-fuel, diesel-engine (TFDE) LNG carrier peaked at $366,700 per day in late November. Lloyd’s List reported that one vessel was chartered for $424,000 per day.

  LNG prices in Asia averaged $5 per metric million British thermal unit (MMBtu) higher than in Europe in October and November, which “instigated a significant amount of reexport trading opportunities from West to East” that “catapulted spot rates,” explained Mørkedal. In contrast, the European gas price was $6 per MMBtu above Asia’s on Monday, “the widest [spread] we have observed on record” and one that has “reduced West-East trading,” he said.

  LNG shipping still ‘very healthy’

  LNG shipping remains profitable despite the collapse in spot rates. “Even at these lower rates, companies are printing money,” noted Nolan.

  Also, spot business is less important to LNG shipowners than to owners or operators in any other ocean segment. Spot rates make the headlines, but the overwhelming majority of LNG shipping revenues derive from time charters.

  Chartering activity “has been plentiful of late with several newbuilding deals concluded for delivery in 2024-25 with charters in the seven- to 10-year time frame,” Mørkedal said last week.

  Regarding on-the-water LNG carriers, “term charters continue to be discussed in the one- to three-year time frame,” he said. One-year TFDE charters are going for $90,000 per day and MEGI-propulsion carriers for $115,000 per day.

  “The LNG shipping market remains very healthy even with spot rates easing from their extreme highs as time-charter activity remains robust,” the Clarksons analyst affirmed.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 20:45

• The $1 Pizza Slice Is Rapidly Vanishing From Manhattan
  The $1 Pizza Slice Is Rapidly Vanishing From Manhattan

  Just like when Dollar Tree was forced to ‘Break the Buck’ by raising prices on some goods past the titular $1 mark, another “milestone” has been reached as inflationary pressures drive prices of everything – but especially food – higher.

  The NY Times reported Tuesday that a growing number of Manhattan’s $1 cheese pizza slice vendors. For many, that price has held for two decades due to the fiercely competitive nature of the Manhattan market, even where the economics have long since put a stop to $1 slices.

  Because of its durability over the years, the dollar slice has – for some – become a symbol of the strangely egalitarian life of being a New Yorker, where billionaires, homeless men, students and construction workers are all thrown in together, and where almost everybody at times resorts to a cheap slice on the go.

  The owner of the 2 Bros’ chain, Mohammad Abdul, is now reportedly agonizing over whether to raise prices for the first time since opening in 2001. For those who are unfamiliar with 2 Bros’, it’s the biggest player in the $1 slice market, and its shops are visible across the borough. Interestingly, the city’s dollar-slice culture really “took off” after the 2008 financial crisis.

  

  The situation for the dollar-slice joints is further complicated by the fact that pizza-related businesses have been hugely successful during the pandemic. But the inflation situation has created problems in the lowest-cost vendors, some of whom have closed up shop.

  As we reported, the pace of inflation was the fastest in November than it has been in decades, with the headline CPI number surpassing 6%. And restaurant prices in the New York area last month saw prices rise at the fastest rate since 1987.

  The NYT goes on to explain that inflationary pressures have fallen especially hard on pizza vendors. A severe drought in parts of the US and Canada decimated wheat crops, driving up flour prices. And worker shortages at meat-processing plants led to higher prices for pepperoni. Pizzeria owners buying canned tomatoes from Italy or red chile flakes from India also face higher shipping costs, in many cases being passed on by wholesalers.

  A surge in demand for packaging materials, plus a lapse in production from the winter freeze in Texas early this year, has also caused prices on packaging materials, napkins, paper plates and plastic cutlery to surge.

  A winter freeze in Texas earlier this year curtailed the production of resin, a raw ingredient in plastic straws and packaging materials like shrink wrap. And in perhaps the biggest shortage of all for pizzerias, reliance on food delivery during the pandemic prompted a surge in demand and increased prices for pizza boxes, paper plates and takeout containers.

  One point of relief is that prices for processed cheese, typically the biggest food cost for any pizzeria, have actually fallen. The average block cheese prices are down from last year’s unusually high peaks. Cheese prices have been for years propped up by government subsidies to help dairy producers. But the Department of Agriculture is already forecasting that prices will rise next year.

  Because of the stable cheese prices, 2 Bros is still charging $1 for a cheese slice at six of its nine locations. But newer stores have raised prices to $1.50.

  So far, these businesses have survived during the pandemic largely due to discounted rents from landlords.

  Rents for residential properties have come roaring back already this year. Commercial rents (like those needed by $1 slice businesses) have been the hardest hit.

  How much longer until these pressures finally make the $1 slice extinct?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 20:00

• A Colossal Theft In Pain Sight
  A Colossal Theft In Pain Sight

  Submitted by Larry McDonald, author of The Bear Traps Report

  What have we done with the $11 Trillion?

  We have clients in 23 different countries, but most reside within the continental United States – in recent weeks, we keep hearing countless stories of self-proclaimed 24-hour turnaround testing centers to do a PCR test, then taking more than 80 hours to get the results back. Friends in New Jersey tell us not one pharmacy or walk-in clinic in a 100-mile radius has appointments available in the next week. Home testing has improved but for those traveling overseas – it is a PCR test that is needed.

  The question that haunts us now is that, almost two years into this crisis and an $11 Trillion U.S. Fiscal and Monetary spending deluge, we still don’t have an adequate testing infrastructure? It blows us away –  we are still dealing with endless waiting lines, no availability of testing appointments, shortages of at-home tests and overwhelmed testing labs scrambling to process vials.  Where did all that money go?

  State and Federal Debts Add Up

  

  In the US, the corona crisis started on January 29, 2020, when the White House initiated its coronavirus task force. Since then, the US has gone from crisis to crisis and the media and our politicians have been obsessed with this epidemic and its consequences ever since. Amidst all the turmoil, the US government has left no stone unturned to throw money at this disaster. The Fed kicked off in early March by lowering interest rates to zero and shortly after began rolled out an alphabet soup of emergency programs. From buying high yield debt to bankrolling bailout checks (PPP loans), nothing was left on the table for our adroit stewards at the Fed. The byzantine maze of fiscal stimuli has left everyone confused. Nevertheless, the total amount of support the Fed has pumped into the economy is best measured by the expansion of its balance sheet. When the Fed finishes its asset tapering program in March of 2022, its balance sheet will have expanded by $5 Trillion. In less than two years the Fed deployed more money than during, and in the 10 years after, the great financial crisis ($3.5TR). This monetary support alone is also more than that of the entire GDP of Japan, the third-largest economy in the world.

  Not to be outdone, the Federal government opened the floodgates by quickly passing spending bill after spending bill. After less than two years, the total amount of fiscal stimulus, as measured by the fiscal deficit spending, has reached a mind-blowing $6 Trillion. U.S. Federal debt has reached $29 Trillion and $32 Trillion if you add State and Local debt. At this point, US debt is a whopping 134% of GDP, giving the U.S. the dubious honor of being among top ten most indebted countries worldwide. This is a spot the erstwhile creditor to the world shares with the likes of Italy and Venezuela.

  Where did all the money go?

  And what did we, the American people, get for this colossal $11 Trillion in a monetary and fiscal deluge? As we find ourselves in the midst of yet another massive outbreak is case count, this seems like a valid question. You would think that the priority for these funds is to bolster essential healthcare needs to address this medical crisis. But even now, the US is still woefully ill-equipped with testing capabilities, almost two years into this crisis.  Our friends in Europe tell us testing is quickly done there. They live in urban areas such as Paris where testing is still readily available. France is also in the midst of another outbreak but seems to have no problem providing its citizens with ample testing facilities.

  In hospitals, there has apparently been no improvement in available capacity in the critical ICUs, judged by the Johns Hopkins weekly hospitalization trends.

  Hospitalizations

  

  Incredulously, ICU beds-in-use compared to overall availability is almost higher now than it was a year ago.

  So Where did the Money Go?

  According to the Congressional Research Service, $25 Billion was appropriated for “selected domestic COVID-19 vaccine-related activities”. That sounds like a lot, but it’s a mere 0.5% of the federal emergency spending in the last two years. It turns out that the department of health and human services wasn’t even the biggest recipient of all the emergency spending. It was fourth on the list, which was topped by the Treasury Department, the small business administration, and the department of labor. Other major recipients were the department of education and the agriculture department. Why farmers needed a $160 Billion windfall during the pandemic is incomprehensible, especially since most crop commodities have been at record highs for a year now.

  Reasonable people can agree that small businesses needed support during this crisis, especially during the lockdown. But the Fed’s Term Asset-Backed security Loan Facility (TALF), Primary and Secondary Market Corporate Credit Facilities ((P/S) MCCF), and Municipal Liquidity Facility (MLF) had absolutely nothing to do with small business assistance. These programs, together with the $5 Trillion purchases of Treasuries and agency debt, helped to foster an explosion in debt issuance by big business. Fueling stock buybacks – Investment-grade debt issued in this year and last year was a total of $3.1 Trillion, almost half the size of the total IG market. High yield issuance was even more baffling, setting issuance records two years in a row amidst a debilitating epidemic.

  Junk Bond Bonanza Fueling Stock Buybacks

  

  The effect of all this government largesse has had a profound impact on the stock market. The total market value of all stocks has risen from $34 Trillion to $53 Trillion; a whopping $19 Trillion (50%) increase from pre-pandemic levels. The IPO market has been red hot this year, with 1000 deals for the first time in history. Rock bottom interest rates and epic multiple expansion have driven investors into IPOs, as they clamor for excess returns in the most unsavory deals. U.S. junk bonds, we see new supply to plunge as much as 30% in 2022 as refinancings, the driver for almost 60% of issuance this year, will shrink because companies already capitalized on low yields and lengthened maturities. Likewise, a Fed in a hiking cycle should tighten financial conditions – shrink issuance.

  Buybacks Driving S&P and Nasdaq Higher – On Leverage

  

  Congress wants to tax stock buybacks – the implications are sky-high as a colossal equity market bid comes from Fed-induced corporate bond sales- See above with @SamRo – he notes just 20 companies are responsible for half the stock buybacks – this is one enormous – central bank fueled – leveraged Ponzi is driving stock indexes (S&P 500 and Nasdaq) higher. Of course in Q1 – Q2 2020 when stocks were on sale – few companies were buying back stock. Per Fitch – U.S. dollar-denominated, investment-grade (IG), corporate bond volume, excluding financial institutions, supranationals, sovereigns, and agencies, tallied $705 billion through Dec. 16, 2021. We saw the second-highest issuance through the first 10 months of the year and are up 27% and 13%, from 2018’s and 2019’s respective levels. Volume is down 36% versus the record 2020 amount; though that gap could shrink by year’s end as the final two months of 2020’s issuance was well below 2021’s monthly average. The volume disparity between 2020 and 2021 relates to deal size. Last year, there were double the number of transactions done for $4 billion or more compared with this year (60 in 2020 versus 29 in 2021). Both years featured at least two $20 billion issuances, with AT&T Inc. and The Boeing Company driving 2020 while Verizon Communications Inc. and AT&T led 2021.

  Several prominent companies tapped the IG market in 2021, including Verizon, AT&T, Amazon.com Inc., Oracle Corp., Comcast Corp. and Apple Inc. These six issuers comprised 21% of the year’s total volume, with all completing bond transactions of $15 billion or more. In fact, the 10 largest issuers make up 29% of 2021’s volume, highlighting the market’s concentration.

  The problem is – central banks are fueling unsustainable inequality.

  Share of Total Net Worth held by the Top 1%

  • 2021: 32.5%
  • 2010s: 31.2%
  • 2000s: 27.2%
  • 1990s: 26.7%
  • 1980s: 23.2%

  

  *Since 2003, the Bottom 50% total net worth held has plunged from 39% to 30%. Federal Reserve data. For 20 years 1990-2010, the top 1% net worth held was range-bound 26-27% – since central bank aggression in balance sheet expansion in 2009, inequality has exploded higher. 

  The Great Heist at the Taxpayers Expense

  This is all great if you own stocks, or when you are a Fortune 500 company issuing debt to repurchase your own stock, but neither the deluge in debt nor the record number of buybacks (at a run-rate of $1 Trillion this year) have done anything to bolster our country’s medical care or Americans’ health. More troubling even is reports showing outright theft of funds earmarked for pandemic emergency spending. The Wall Street Journal quoted the U.S. Secret Service who said that “some $100 billion has potentially been stolen from Covid-19 relief programs designed to help individuals and businesses harmed by the pandemic.” The main culprits are worldwide organized crime networks, who defrauded primarily the pandemic unemployment insurance program. On top of that, as much as 15% of the PPP loans ($76 billion out of $800 billion total) may have been fraudulent, according to the New York Times.

  The Middle Class is in Pain

  

  After $11 Trillion of emergency spending and support, the US healthcare system is just as inadequate as it was before the crisis, violent crime is rampant, drug overdoses have never been higher and the economy is showing signs of stagflation, as illustrated by the record spread between Treasury breakevens and TIPS yields¹.  What these bond market metrics suggest is that the potential growth rate of the US economy has structurally declined since the pandemic (it already declined a lot since the “great financial crisis”) and that any growth future growth is coming from price increases. The bond market is telling us – all future GDP growth is coming from price increases, but there is little real growth in the economy, that is why TIPS yields are -1%.

  Consumers in Pain

  

  Since August – we have had THREE sub-80 readings from the University of Michigan Consumer Economic Confidence Data.  Looking back over the last 30 years – it is HIGHLY unusual for the Fed to hike rates with consumers in this kind of pain. Inflation´s taxing powers over the consumer have already hiked rates 100bps for the Fed in our view – colossal demand destruction has taken place. These stagflationary conditions erode people’s real disposable income, making them worse off. Ultimately, most of the $11 Trillion ended up benefiting the top wealthiest Americans, by inflating the prices of assets such as bonds and stocks and lowering interest rates for borrowers with the highest credit rating. For the average citizen, this has been a very raw deal.

  Loud Covid Narrative Hides Inconvenient Truths     

  

  We must look at the big picture. The number one killer of Americans aged 18 to 45 is now fentanyl overdoses, with nearly 79,000 victims in the age range dying to them between 2020 and 2021.

  Inflation is a Regressive Tax on the Middle Class

  

  TIPS: Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities: The principal of a TIPS increases with inflation and decreases with deflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index. When a TIPS matures, you are paid the adjusted principal or original principal, whichever is greater. Breakeven yield is calculated by deducting TIPS yields from real yields. Breakeven rates derive the rate of inflation priced in by the bond market for applicable maturity (such as 10-year breakevens express the implied rate of inflation in the next 10 years).

  Trillions of Fiscal and Monetary Support

  What is so painful is that not only is there no discernable improvement in the healthcare infrastructure to deal with the corona crisis, but other facets of America’s healthcare are now even worse off. The CDC reported this week that fentanyl is now the leading cause of death among teenagers. These drugs have killed more people between the ages of 18 to 45 than corona, car accidents, and suicides. Data from Families Against Fentanyl suggests that now one person dies from an overdose every 8.5 minutes. The pandemic has pushed drug abuse into overdrive as “the stress of the pandemic has led more people to use these types of drugs, according to experts.”  The Census Bureau this week reported that America’s population grew at the lowest rate in history. In the year that ended July 1, the U.S. recorded only 148,000 more births than deaths, with the balance coming from net immigration.

  America’s life expectancy last year declined by an unprecedented 1.8 years to 77 years. Besides corona, increases in mortality from drug overdoses, heart disease, homicide and diabetes also decreased life expectancy. Violent crime especially has seen a dramatic increase in the last two years. CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics reported that homicide rates rose 30% between 2019 and 2020 and they continue to go up this year.  At least 12 major U.S. cities have broken annual homicide records in 2021 — and there’s still three weeks to go in the year.

  US Annual Population Growth

  • 2021: 0.1%
  • 2011: 0.8%
  • 2001: 1.0%
  • 1991: 1.2%

  America is dying – and it’s NOT just a Covid narrative. From 1999–2019, nearly 500,000 people died from an overdose involving any opioid, including prescription and illicit opioids -CDC data. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 19:15

• Oregon Man Who Told Biden "Let's Go Brandon" Speaks Out
  Oregon Man Who Told Biden “Let’s Go Brandon” Speaks Out

  By Jack Phillips of Epoch Times

  

  The Oregon man who drew international headlines when he told President Joe Biden, “Let’s go Brandon” over the weekend said the comment was made in “jest” and revealed he’s received threats after the stunt.

  Jared Schmeck, a father of four, told the Oregonian Saturday that he is “being attacked for utilizing my freedom of speech” and is now receiving threatening phone calls.

  The call, which was streamed online, drew media attention, in part, because of Biden’s response. He told Schmeck, “’Let’s go Brandon,’ I agree.” Biden did not appear to be impacted by Schmeck’s quip at all.

  “I understand there is a vulgar meaning to ‘Let’s go, Brandon,’ but I’m not that simple-minded, no matter how I feel about him,” Schmeck told the outlet, adding that he has no ill feelings toward Biden. But, he argued, Biden could be “doing a better job” as president.

  “[Biden] seems like he’s a cordial guy,” he added. “There’s no animosity or anything like that. It was merely just an innocent jest to also express my God-given right to express my frustrations in a joking manner. … I love him just like I love any brother or sister.”

  Schmeck said that he is not a supporter of former President Donald Trump, but is a “free-thinking American and follower of Jesus Christ.”

  The man, a former police officer who works for a power company, said his family typically calls into the NORAD Tracker on Christmas Eve every year and didn’t know it would be live-streamed.

  The meme started earlier this year after an NBC Sports reporter noted the crowd’s loud chant at a NASCAR race as she interviewed driver Brandon Brown, who had just won the race. She told the driver that they were chanting “let’s go Brandon.” The crowd was actually chanting “[expletive] Joe Biden.”

  With his name now firmly stuck in the public lexicon, Brown, in an opinion article for Newsweek on Dec. 20, wrote that because of his profession, he doesn’t have “time to think about politics.”

  “My job is to run the next lap faster than the last one. Politics has never been that interesting to me,” he added. “Though, like most, I have always had the impression that politicians were likely the cause of more problems than they were the solutions.”

  “I have zero desire to be involved in politics,” Brown also told The New York Times on Sunday.

  He also recently told Sports Business Journal that he’s struggled to obtain corporate sponsorship deals due to the phrase.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 18:30

• Inflation In 2021 Far Different From What We Had In 1979
  Inflation In 2021 Far Different From What We Had In 1979

  Authored by Bruce Wilds via Advancing Time blog,

  The inflation of today is a starkly different creature than what we faced in 1979. The world is massively different and presenting us with a strain of inflation that will most likely be stronger and more difficult to combat without major disruptions to our economy. This article is an attempt to highlight the differences and why today the position we find ourselves in is much more precarious.

  

  New data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed price inflation in November rose to the highest in forty years. Allianz Chief Economic Advisor Mohamed El-Erian warned the Federal Reserve is losing credibility by not tapering its balance sheet to rein in inflation. Appearing on CBS’ “Face the Nation” he stated the most significant miscalculation in decades is the Fed’s inability to characterize inflation correctly. It was only on November 30th that Fed Chair Jerome Powell finally retired the term “transitory” and opted to label inflation as persistent. 

  President Biden response to rising inflation has been to call upon Congress to pass his Build Back Better plan. Biden claims this will lower how much families pay for health care, prescription drugs, child care, and more.” In reality, of course, the passage of BBB would increase inflationary pressure throughout the economy and only transfer these soaring costs from the individual to the government.

  The idea the economy of 2021 is strong enough to allow a rapid and huge surge in interest rates such as those imposed upon America in 1981 is false. During America’s prior bout with inflation 40 years ago the economy was able to withstand the shock. Yes, we did have a recession, but it was short-lived because the foundation of our economy was much stronger. America was not bleeding from huge trade deficits and people had real jobs.

  

  Debt And The Money Supply Are Rising Much Faster Than The GDP

  Today, after years of trade deficits, America’s economic foundation has grown much weaker. We have created the illusion of economic growth by blowing the lid off government spending. This has created a false economy and should not be confused with real growth. The chart above has been circulated in many forms. It reveals the GDP lagging the growth in the money supply and debt. We are living in a completely different era and facing a far more serious problem.

  The cause of inflation during the 1970s is blamed on several events specific to that time in our history. Part of it was due to rising oil prices (oil prices tripled in the 1970s). There was also inflation due to rising wages. Unions were relatively powerful and their bargaining for higher wages to keep up with the rising cost of living created a wage-inflationary spiral. Yous should also throw in spending on the Vietnam War and Nixon cutting the tie of the dollar to gold. The result was an inflationary mindset that exploded as investors and waves of people started investing in ways that would protect them from being ravished by a falling dollar.

  Fast forward to the end of 2021. Today, many people are busy blaming the recent inflation on supply chain disruptions resulting from the global pandemic. In truth, much more focus should be turned to the surge in money supply, government spending, and Fed policies. The result from the combination of these toxic paths forward has created a slew of new problems. Surging inequality, more reliance on government. 

  Lock-downs initiated by governments to halt the spread of what turned out to be a “not so deadly” virus also have added to our woes. This is evident as small and mid-size businesses struggle to stay afloat in a world where huge companies have access to cash and many options not afforded to their smaller competitors. Today the “Amazon effect” is continuing to ravage America while its full impact has yet to be felt in most communities. It seems that only after Amazon has wrecked communities leaving many Americans jobless and retail stores sitting as giant empty shells might short-sighted consumers finally realize Amazon is bad for America and its distribution system an affront to the environment.

  The idea anyone can predict how creating trillions, upon trillions, upon trillions of dollars worth of demand and debt over just a few years will tilt inflation is a reach. Now that inflation has taken hold how to stop it will be the real test. This calls for a bunch of clumsy idiots to thread an economic needle. A great deal of the problem we currently face is rooted in the lack of faith many people have come to hold in those that direct the policies that affect us. 

  This extends to how Central Banks and politicians want to bend and manipulate the economy to rapidly address what they call climate change and a rash of other issues. We are even being told while the planet is about to undergo food and energy shortages the answer is to have more children because we need more workers. Ironically, this is being touted as an answer at the same time we are giving people less incentive to work and rapidly moving to erase millions of jobs through automation.

  As for the Fed, it has become “the great enabler” by allowing this to go on for so long. Many economic watchers have come to the conclusion the Fed has totally lost control of the situation. The big question is whether it will taper and risk a major recession or keep pumping out money. Continuing down its current path is viewed as a recipe that will allow inflation to run rampant. 

  Years ago we saw more of a balancing act with Central Banks concerned that bond vigilantes would descend upon them if they stepped out of line. Before the days of Modern Monetary Theory, investors voted on government budget deficits and debt management each day by buying or selling bonds. This is no longer seems the case due to massive Central Bank intervention. With each “crisis” has come excuse after excuse which has allowed the Central Banks to rewrite the rule governing the global financial system. 

  Going forward other calamities and crises await society, these will also affect inflation. Whether they come in the form of energy shortages, food shortages, or devastation caused by war, each will leave its mark. While creating the illusion this time is different has allowed those in charge to postpone facing serious questions only time will tell. It is clear the currency is being debased, the big questions now are where it will be most prevalent and how we as individuals can protect ourselves from its fury.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 18:00

• TikTok Wins Internet's Most Visited Site 2021
  TikTok Wins Internet’s Most Visited Site 2021

  TikTok overtook Google as the most popular website in 2021, according to web security company Cloudflare’s 2021 Year in Review for internet traffic.

  

  The video-sharing app, owned by Beijing-based ByteDance Ltd., was everywhere this year. Its secretive algorithm has hooked more than one billion monthly users, contributing to its popularity. Last year, the app “only ranked #7 or #8” on Cloudflare’s list, quickly climbed the ladder to nab the top spot, according to the company.

  “It was on February 17, 2021, that TikTok got the top spot for a day,” Cloudflare wrote in the report. “Back in March, TikTok got a few more days and also in May, but it was after August 10, 2021, that TikTok took the lead on most days. There were some days when Google was #1, but October and November were mostly TikTok’s days, including on Thanksgiving (November 25) and Black Friday (November 26).”

  Behind TikTok this year, Cloudflare ranked Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, YouTube, Twitter, and WhatsApp, in that order. 

  

  Here’s TikTok’s rank that accelerated to the number one spot by late year. 

  

  TikTok has also displaced Facebook as the most popular social media website. 

  

  TikTok’s dominance is changing how social media works and has become a threat to US Big Tech. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 17:30

• USA Swimming Official Quits Over Trans Swimmer Competing Against Women
  USA Swimming Official Quits Over Trans Swimmer Competing Against Women

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

  USA Swimming official Cynthia Millen has resigned in protest over the participation of transgender swimmer Lia Thomas in women’s competitions, saying in the resignation letter she can’t back a sport that allows “biological men to compete against women.”

  

  The resignation letter to USA Swimming indicates that Millen, who has been involved in the sport for some 30 years, resigned on Dec. 17.

  “I told my fellow officials that I can no longer participate in a sport which allows biological men to compete against women,” Millen wrote in the resignation letter, Swimming World reported.

  “Everything fair about swimming is being destroyed,” Millen’s letter continued.

  “If Lia came on my deck as a referee, I would pull the coach aside and say, ‘Lia can swim, but Lia can swim exhibition or a time trial. Lia cannot compete against those women because that’s not fair.’”

  USA Swimming did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Epoch Times.

  Thomas, a 22-year-old University of Pennsylvania women’s swim team member who recently broke three women’s records in freestyle swimming, could be a women’s National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) title contender in a few months.

  “Lia Thomas had another strong day in the pool for the Red and Blue,” Penn athletics wrote on their website on Dec. 3.

  “During the prelims, she set a new pool and meet record in the 500 free. In the finals she swam more than 12 seconds faster, finishing in first place with a time of 4:34.06. That time is currently the best in the country in the event.”

  Formerly a member of the men’s swimming program, Thomas underwent hormone suppression and is in line with NCAA rules that allow the athlete to compete on the women’s team, according to Swimming World.

  Thomas submitted hormone tests and doctor’s medical notes to the NCAA and “they approved everything,” the athlete said in a Dec. 9 interview on the SwimSwam podcast. Thomas continues to take estrogen and a testosterone blocker and has “experienced a lot of muscle loss and strength loss.”

  Asked about the pushback Thomas has received to competing against women, the swimmer said it was “expected” but added that the extent to which the issue has “blown up” was something of a surprise.

  “I just don’t engage with it,” Thomas said of the criticism, adding that, “it’s not healthy for me to read it and engage with it at all and so I don’t.”

  Among the pushback was a blunt Dec. 19 editorial penned by John Lohn, editor-in-chief of Swimming World, America’s most prestigious swimming magazine. Lohn wrote that Thomas qualified for the women’s team after taking testosterone suppressants for barely one year, which is the NCAA’s minimum for allowing biologically male transgender athletes to compete as women.

  That rule “is not nearly stringent enough to create a level playing field between Thomas and the biological females against whom she is racing,” Lohn wrote.

  “Thomas’ male-puberty advantage has not been rolled back an adequate amount,” Lohn continued.

  “The fact is, for nearly 20 years, she built muscle and benefited from the testosterone naturally produced by her body. That strength does not disappear overnight, nor with a year’s worth of suppressants.”

  “Consequently, Thomas dives into the water with an inherent advantage over those on the surrounding blocks,” Lohn wrote.

  Swimming World editorial staff said on Dec. 24 that Thomas’s performances demonstrate “a competitive advantage due to male puberty and years of testosterone production.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 17:00

• Pentagon Plans For "Actionable" Intelligence Sharing With Ukraine If Russians Attack
  Pentagon Plans For “Actionable” Intelligence Sharing With Ukraine If Russians Attack

  Pentagon officials claim it’s all about “avoiding escalation” – but surely the Kremlin will see the revelations in this recent New York Times report very differently: “The Pentagon is working on a plan to provide Ukraine with battlefield intelligence that could help the country more quickly respond to a possible Russian invasion, senior administration officials said.”

  This weekend Russia’s military announced the withdrawal of some 10,000 troops from near the Ukrainian border at the conclusion of what it dubbed “training drills”. But Kiev and Washington officials have been asking about the some 100,000 additional forces said to be mustered in the region. Contrary to claims that an “invasion” is set for some point in January, there are significant signs this is the beginning of de-escalation. 

  The NY Times report frames the currently in the works Pentagon planning as a contingency that would enable Washington to help thwart any Russian incursion into Donbass “in real time”. But to most common sense outside observers, it appears a recipe for ensuring the US would get directly sucked into to any Russia-Ukraine shooting war. 

  

  This further follows on the heels of Ukraine’s army showing off its guided anti-tank Javelin missiles, last week week deployed in ‘live-fire’ exercises near a pro-Russia separatist region. But by all accounts a robust intelligence sharing plan would marks a huge escalation in US military and intelligence involvement. NY Times writes:

  But the proposal at the Pentagon for “actionable” intelligence is potentially more significant, two U.S. officials said. The information would include images of whether Russian troops were moving to cross the border. Such information, if shared in time, could enable the Ukrainian military to head off an attack.

  The real-time nature of the sharing would also be clearly geared toward ensuring that Washington doesn’t hear about a sudden “Russian annexation of Eastern Ukraine” in the newspapers the next day. While it’s not explicitly stated in the report, any authorization of such a program would more than likely involve a covert US intelligence presence on the ground in the region (of course, this very likely has already long been the case).

  As described by one top former Obama admin official, Evelyn Farkas, who served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, “The number one thing we can do is real time actionable intelligence that says, ‘The Russians are coming over the berm,'”. She added: “We tell them, and they use that to target the Russians.”

  But if the Russian military knew such US targeting assistance were the case, it would immediately deem the US a direct party and aggressor in the conflict, opening up the possibility of a rapidly internationalized regional war centered on Ukraine. 

  Meanwhile, the list of Pentagon “options” being drawn up doesn’t stop there:

  The list of ideas being drawn up at the Pentagon, the State Department and the White House include redirecting helicopters and other military equipment once allocated for the Afghan military to Ukraine, officials said. The administration is also considering sending additional cyberwarfare experts to Ukraine. The United States and Britain have sent some experts to shore up defenses in case Mr. Putin launches a cyberstrike on Ukraine either in advance or instead of a ground invasion.

  The delay in actually implementing the US plan is tied precisely to fears that Putin would see it as enough of a serious provocation to set invasion plans in motion…

  New from @helenecooper (with a small assist from me) the US is mulling providing more battlefield intelligence to Ukraine to prepare for anything Russia might do. The delay? No one wants to give Putin an excuse to claim the moral high ground. https://t.co/Bv6e0fI8rJ

  — Julian E. Barnes (@julianbarnes) December 23, 2021

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

  A lot if this will likely depend on whether Russia and US-NATO talks planned for next month actually materialize. Last week the Russian side made public what it says are agreed upon talks for “security guarantees” related to NATO eastward expansion, to be held in Geneva.

  However, the White House has been much more vague so far on its level of commitment to the talks, with Jen Psaki days ago being unable to confirm where or when the talks would take place. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 16:15

• "Outpacing 2019 Levels": All Of A Sudden, There Is A Rental Car Supply Crisis
  “Outpacing 2019 Levels”: All Of A Sudden, There Is A Rental Car Supply Crisis

  Supply chain issues aren’t just showing up for consumer staples, they’re also starting to rear their head in rental cars.

  There has been a shortage in the rental car industry since earlier this year and while travelers are “encountering higher rates and few choices,” according to a new Wall Street Journal article, companies like Hertz are “struggling” to re-stock fleets after downsizing due to Covid. 

  For customers lucky enough to even find a car, many are being forced to downsize or book vehicles they didn’t originally intend.

  At the same time, rental rates are skyrocketing. The daily rate is now $81, which is up 31% from a year prior, WSJ reported. Hasn’t someone told Hertz the “official” CPI number is just 6.7%?

  This figure is up from about $46 per day, prior to the pandemic.

  In winter destinations like Maui, Salt Lake City and Bozeman, Mont., rates are over $100 per day, WSJ reported. 

  The omicron variant has also caused some travelers to switch from flying to driving, further depleting supply of rental cars. One traveler who chose to drive to North Carolina from Chicago told the Journal: “It was overall a high-stress situation.”

  

  The same traveler was limited to just two car choices, a Dodge muscle car and a Chevy Spark subcompact, and paid $725 for a 9 day trip.

  “I couldn’t think too much about budget or anything like that because if we didn’t get it all figured out in a matter of hours, we were going to be out of luck,” she said. 

  Another potential traveler, 24 year old Cassie Clark from New York City, told the WSJ: “I’m not going to see my family for Christmas at all, all because of the rental car situation.”

  Meanwhile, rental car companies, like everyone else, are citing the semiconductor shortage as a reason for lack of supply. 

  Avis Chief Executive Joseph Ferraro recently said that a large part of the company’s great prior quarter was due to higher prices. “The Americas booking patterns for the fourth quarter and holiday seasons appear robust and are currently outpacing 2019 levels,” he said on an earnings call.

  The supply crunch partially comes as a result of names like Hertz downsizing their fleets after Covid. But rental-fleet utilization rates have risen recently. Avis’ fleet utilization was up to 71% from 50% in the first nine months of the year. 

  Henry Harteveldt, a travel industry analyst, concluded: “The car-rental situation will only get better if the car-manufacturing landscape improves. Until then, it’s going to be one of the bleakest times to be renting a car.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 15:45

• Canada Admits To Secretly Tracking 33 Million Phones During Covid-19 Lockdown
  Canada Admits To Secretly Tracking 33 Million Phones During Covid-19 Lockdown

  Canada – which has a population of 38 million – has admitted to secretly tracking 33 million phones during the Covid-19 lockown, according to the National Post, citing Blacklock’s Reporter which first noted the disclosure.

  

  The country’s Public Health Agency (PHAC) did so to assess “the public’s responsiveness during lockdown measures,” according to the report.

  In March, the Agency awarded a contract to the Telus Data For Good program to provide “de-identified and aggregated data” of movement trends in Canada. The contract expired in October, and PHAC no longer has access to the location data, the spokesperson said. -National Post

  “Evidence is coming in from many sources, from countries around the world, that what was seen as a huge surveillance surge — post 9/11 — is now completely upstaged by pandemic surveillance,” according to “Pandemic Surveillance” author David Lyon, the former director of the Surveillance Studies Centre and Queen’s University in Ontario. “I think that the Canadian public will find out about many other such unauthorized surveillance initiatives before the pandemic is over—and afterwards.”

  Location and movement data was purchased from Canadian telecom giant Telus in order to “understand possible links between the movement of populations within Canada and the spread of COVID-19,” according to an agency spokesperson, who said that the mobility data analysis “helps to advance public health objectives.”

  

  Meanwhile, PHAC intends to continue tracking population movement for at least the next five years to monitor behavior concerning “other infectious diseases, chronic disease prevention and mental health,” the spokesperson added.

  In a notice posted earlier this week, the agency called for contractors with access to “cell-tower/operator location data in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic and for other public health applications.” It asks for “de-identified cell-tower based location data from across Canada” beginning from from Jan. 2019 until the end of the contract period on May 31, 2023, with possibility of three one-year extensions.

  The contractor must provide anonymized data to PHAC and ensure its users have the ability to easily opt-out of mobility data sharing programs, the agency says.

  PHAC’s privacy management division conducted an assessment and “determined that since no personal information is being acquired through this contract, there are no concerns under the Privacy Act,” the spokesperson said. -National Post

  According to Lyon, PHAC is using “the same kinds of ‘reassuring’ language as national security agencies use, for instance not mentioning possibilities for re-identifying data that has been ‘de-identified.'”

  “In principle, of course, cell data can be used for tracking,” he added.

  “The pandemic has created opportunities for a massive surveillance surge on many levels—not only for public health, but also for monitoring those working, shopping and learning from home.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 15:15

• The Crypto Trading Cycle: Asian Weak Hands Selling To US Whales
  The Crypto Trading Cycle: Asian Weak Hands Selling To US Whales

  It has been a rather testing time for the latest and newest cohort of crypto owners (especially those expecting quick and easy gains), because aside for major breakout at the start of the year, and a second one in the middle of 2021, bitcoin is where it was in February and ether, is at levels first hit in May. In its latest Crypto Compass note, UBS writes that extending weakness in major coin prices can be blamed on many things including Fed chair Powell’s latest hawkish pivot and options market fragilities.

  

  But the single best and most reliable relationship remains with inflation expectations, which in US 10y break-even terms has fallen back to late-September levels of just over 2.4% (Figure 4).

  

  This is roughly one standard deviation above its post-2000 average of 2.0%, so mildly elevated but by no means as alarming as end-October when they were approaching 2.8%. That would have constituted a 20+-year breakout.

  And while over the longer-term cryptos are clearly an inflation hedge – and with China about to push their credit impulse into overdrive (we will discuss this shortly), we expect much more inflation in the coming months – a different pattern emerges in the daily trading cycle.

  As UBS notes, in the past month hourly price action has been characterized by lurches lower at times of relatively thin liquidity through APAC trading hours, almost as if some Asian central bank (coughpbocough) is doing everything it can to crash and discredit cryptos during times of lease resistance, but the dip gets immediately bought by crypto-native whales in North America.

  

  And while so far the whales have been clearly correct to bid every dip, UBS points out that insofar as such appetite rests on the logic of cornering supply ahead of TradFi market entry now that 90% of all bitcoins there will ever be have been mined, the Swiss bank cautions that whale dip-buying may be vulnerable to timing inconsistencies which could be set back further by regulatory rulings in 2022. On the other hand, should the US regulatory regime seek to take the opposite track of the scroched earth crackdown approach used by China, we may see a prompt doubling in price, especially since many have pointed out that bitcoin is now late for its traditional havening surge…

  

  

  … while ETH’s eventual transition to ethereum 2.0 will catalyze dramatic inflows into the web3-backing token.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 14:42

• UK Mulls Door-To-Door Vaccination Squads
  UK Mulls Door-To-Door Vaccination Squads

  The UK is considering a plan to send door-to-door vaccinations squads to the homes of unvaccinated Britons in an effort to reach an estimated five million people who haven’t taken the jab, according to the Daily Mail.

  

  The initiative has been discussed by the Department of Health, NHS England and No. 10 over the past week as part of a nationwide drive to send vaccine teams into areas which have the lowest vaccination rates – and are floating it as an alternative to lockdowns and other restrictions, as well as a solution to ‘encourage’ vaccination in rural areas or households where people cannot easily travel to a vax center.

  “I think anything that encourages the vaccine-hesitant is sensible,” said one Cabinet Minister, who then warned: “The mood in the country is hardening against people who refuse to be vaccinated.“

  In other words, get vaxxed despite the fact that Omicron laughs at the vaccine, and hardly anyone has died of it.

  This comes as SAGE warned the UK is about to be hit by a large wave of Covid hospitalisations and the peak could be even higher than last winter despite the reduced severity of Omicron.

  In minutes from a meeting on December 23 published last night, the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies warned that the peak on hospital admissions ‘may be comparable to or higher than previous peaks’ – including the second wave in January.

  But MPs and hospitality bosses have warned Boris Johnson not to bring in new restrictions before New Year’s Eve or risk ‘devastating’ businesses. -Daily Mail

  While Boris Johnson and crew have said there are no plans to close schools in January, there has been pushback at any hint of lockdowns or other restrictions.

  “I am all in favour of free choice but there comes a point when you cannot lock up 90 per cent of the country who are vaccinated for the ten per cent who refuse to be.”

  

  

  NHS England‘s vaccination push continued throughout Christmas day – while over 220,000 first doses of the vaccine administered in the week leading up to Dec. 21, a 46% jump over the previous week. First doses jumped in the 18-24 year-old age bracket by 85%, and 71% in 25 to 30-year-olds – which Health Secretary Sajid Javid called ‘excellent.’

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 13:45

• 2,400 Flights Canceled Since Christmas Eve On Crew Shortage
  2,400 Flights Canceled Since Christmas Eve On Crew Shortage

  As the holiday weekend draws to a close, it has been anything but merry for tens of thousands of stranded airline passengers who had their flight canceled due to a flare-up of the omicron variant that resulted in staffing shortages of pilots and crew for several major airline carriers.  Data tracker FlightAware.com shows US flight cancellations exceeded 2,400 in just the past 48 hours.

  

  The situation has yet to ease on Sunday as total cancellations within, into, or out of the U.S. topped 754 flights as of 1300 ET. On Christmas day, U.S. cancellations topped nearly 1,000. 

  Henry Harteveldt, president of travel consulting firm Atmosphere Research Group, told Bloomberg that air travel disruptions might extend into the next week. 

  Flight cancellations are a “concern at a time when people are traveling to spend time with family and friends for the holidays,” Harteveldt said. “No airline wants to be viewed as the Grinch who stole Christmas.”

  In our reporting of the travel chaos that began on Christmas Eve and continued through the weekend (read: here & here), we noted Delta Air Lines Inc. and United Airlines Holdings Inc. were the carriers most affected by labor shortages. Both airlines acknowledged cancellations were due to an outbreak of the omicron variant. 

  Flight cancellations due to staffing shortages have been nothing new for airlines. 

  • “People Slept In Airports” – Spirit, American Cancel Hundreds of Flights Amid Staffing Shortage
  • “Get Your Sh*t Together” – Angry American Airline Customers Hit With Travel Delays Due To Labor Shortage
  • Southwest Blames Cancellations On Worker Shortage, Union Denies ‘Sick-Out’ Over Vaccine Mandate

  Many travelers who had their flights canceled or delayed vented on social media this weekend. 

  Let’s hope Harteveldt isn’t right that travel disruptions could persist through New Year’s Eve because that would officially make this holiday travel season one of the worst in years. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 13:01

• Russia Withdraws 10,000 Troops From "Drills" Near Ukraine In Christmas De-escalation
  Russia Withdraws 10,000 Troops From “Drills” Near Ukraine In Christmas De-escalation

  For weeks Kiev officials and many corners of Western media and the Washington national security establishment have hyped the Russian troop build-up in regions of Russia that are within 400km of Ukraine’s border, accusing the Kremlin of planning an invasion of Donbass sometime in January. This month started, for example, with The Washington Post citing US intelligence to claim this would involve a whopping 175,000 Russian troops mustered near the border. 

  But like with prior similar instances (such as failed predictions last spring that never materialized), it’s looking like the opposite is set to happen, with on Saturday Reuters reporting a draw down of at least 10,000 troops back to their permanent bases. It’s being widely perceived as the clearest sign yet that the “invasion” being talked about for the past nearly two months is not going to happen. Maybe we could chalk it up to a “Christmas miracle” – or perhaps from the start it was all about Putin using the maneuvers to get what he’s wanted all along: security and legal guarantees from NATO pledging no more Eastward expansion. And Putin got his talks, which are planned for next month, likely in Geneva.

  “A stage of combat coordination of divisions, combat crews, squads at motorized units… has been completed. More than 10,000 military servicemen… will march to their permanent deployment from the territory of the combined arms’ area of drills,” the Russian army announced this weekend, according to Interfax. The Kremlin has been describing extra troop movements as “drills” and “training exercises” throughout the heightened standoff.

  

  The defense ministry described this as the conclusion of large-scale drills which took place among Southern Military District forces, in regions that included Crimea, Rostov, and Krasnodar – and additionally in Stavropol, Astrakhan, and some in North Caucasus republics. “The defense ministry said the troops were returning to their permanent bases and that stand-by units would be readied for the New Year’s holidays,” European media reports indicated further.

  There are additional signs that de-escalation is in the air, as we reported on Christmas Day based on Reuters that according to a German government source, senior German and Russian government officials agreed to a rare in-person meeting next month in an effort to ease political tensions over Ukraine. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s foreign policy adviser Jens Ploetner and Russia’s Ukraine negotiator Dmitry Kozak agreed to meet after a lengthy phone conversation on Thursday.

  The Reuters sources added that “Berlin doubts more than Washington whether Russia actually wants to attack Ukraine” and is keen to de-escalate tensions. This much should have been obvious the whole time, in what’s been largely a manufactured crisis which Western media was eager to hype, also as the Pentagon repeatedly demanded that Moscow explain the presence of Russian troops… on Russia’s own soil.

  Meanwhile, on Sunday Anadolu Agency is reporting that NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg is convening a meeting of the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) on January 12. The Russian draw down of 10,000 troops from near the Ukraine border region is perhaps a Kremlin good faith action to ensure the continued momentum of the recent flurry of diplomatic activity geared toward deconfliction. Russia’s TASS news agency details as follows:

  The source noted that NATO was in talks with Russia on this issue. Earlier, the NATO press service said that on January 12-13, Brussels would host a meeting of the NATO Military Committee at the level of the Chiefs of Defense of the member states.

  On Tuesday, Stoltenberg stated that NATO offered Moscow to hold a meeting of the NATO-Russia Council in early 2022 to address the developments in Ukraine. Meanwhile, he emphasized that NATO would never compromise on Ukraine’s right to choose its own path and apply for joining the alliance as well as on the right of NATO states to defend their allies.

  Likely none of this is still to satisfy Ukraine’s leaders or pro-Kiev media, which is already suggesting any limited draw down is but a ruse…

  #Russia announces withdrawal of 10K troops from Crimea and Ukrainian border. What about 112K troops that remain near #Ukraine? | EMPR https://t.co/Fu6LNOGOXg #russiaukrainewar pic.twitter.com/kCT9L9gx9r

  — Euromaidan PR (@EuromaidanPR) December 25, 2021

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

  Of course, this current chapter of the rise in Russia-Ukraine tensions, which drew vague threats issued from President Biden two weeks ago, is far from closed. President Putin in his latest weekend comments said that if NATO and the US didn’t agree to the required security guarantees halting further NATO expansion near Russia, then the Kremlin has a range of “options” in terms of a serious response.

  “It may vary,” he said in an interview with state sources. “It will depend on the proposals that our military experts will make to me.” He said that while he remains hopeful of a peaceful and positive resolution, Russia will not accept anything that stops short of reaching “a legally binding outcome of diplomatic talks on the documents,” he said referencing last week’s draft proposals submitted to Brussels and Washington. “That’s what we will strive for.”

  But without doubt the situation is still dangerous, given that at any moment a provocation on the ground could unravel any positive traction toward an agreement. Both sides have been busy over the past week accusing the other of allowing mercenaries to pour into war-torn Eastern Ukraine, complete with warnings over ‘false flag’ scenarios. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/26/2021 – 12:00