• Escobar: Everybody Wants To Hop On The BRICS Express
  Escobar: Everybody Wants To Hop On The BRICS Express

  Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Cradle,

  Eurasia is about to get a whole lot larger as countries line up to join the Chinese and Russian-led BRICS and SCO, to the detriment of the west…

  

  Let’s start with what is in fact a tale of Global South trade between two members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). At its heart is the already notorious Shahed-136 drone – or Geranium-2, in its Russian denomination: the AK-47 of postmodern aerial warfare.

  The US, in yet another trademark hysteria fit rife with irony, accused Tehran of weaponizing the Russian Armed Forces. For both Tehran and Moscow, the superstar, value-for-money, and terribly efficient drone let loose in the Ukrainian battlefield is a state secret: its deployment prompted a flurry of denials from both sides. Whether these are made in Iran drones, or the design was bought and manufacturing takes place in Russia (the realistic option), is immaterial.

  The record shows that the US weaponizes Ukraine to the hilt against Russia.

  The Empire is a de facto war combatant via an array of “consultants,” advisers, trainers, mercenaries, heavy weapons, munitions, satellite intel, and electronic warfare. And yet imperial functionaries swear they are not part of the war. They are, once again, lying.

  Welcome to yet another graphic instance of the “rules-based international order” at work. The Hegemon always decides which rules apply, and when. Anyone opposing it is an enemy of “freedom,” “democracy,” or whatever platitude du jour, and should be – what else – punished by arbitrary sanctions.

  In the case of sanctioned-to-oblivion Iran, for decades now, the result has been predictably another round of sanctions. That’s irrelevant. What matters is that, according to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), no less than 22 nations – and counting – are joining the queue because they also want to get into the Shahed groove.

  Even Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, gleefully joined the fray, commenting on how the Shahed-136 is no photoshop.

  The race towards BRICS+

  What the new sanctions package against Iran really “accomplished” is to deliver an additional blow to the increasingly problematic signing of the revived nuclear deal in Vienna. More Iranian oil on the market would actually relieve Washington’s predicament after the recent epic snub by OPEC+.

  A categorical imperative though remains. Iranophobia – just like Russophobia – always prevails for the Straussians/neo-con war advocates in charge of US foreign policy and their European vassals.

  So here we have yet another hostile escalation in both Iran-US and Iran-EU relations, as the unelected junta in Brussels also sanctioned manufacturer Shahed Aviation Industries and three Iranian generals.

  Now compare this with the fate of the Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drone – which unlike the “flowers in the sky” (Russia’s Geraniums) has performed miserably in the battlefield.

  Kiev tried to convince the Turks to use a Motor Sich weapons factory in Ukraine or come up with a new company in Transcarpathia/Lviv to build Bayraktars. Motor Sich’s oligarch President Vyacheslav Boguslayev, aged 84, has been charged with treason because of his links to Russia, and may be exchanged for Ukrainian prisoners of war.

  In the end, the deal fizzled out because of Ankara’s exceptional enthusiasm in working to establish a new gas hub in Turkey – a personal suggestion from Russian President Vladimir Putin to his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

  And that bring us to the advancing interconnection between BRICS and the 9-member SCO – to which this Russia-Iran instance of military trade is inextricably linked.

  The SCO, led by China and Russia, is a pan-Eurasian institution originally focused on counter-terrorism but now increasingly geared towards geoeconomic – and geopolitical – cooperation. BRICS, led by the triad of Russia, India, and China overlaps with the SCO agenda geoeconomically and geopoliticallly, expanding it to Africa, Latin America and beyond: that’s the concept of BRICS+, analyzed in detail in a recent Valdai Club report, and fully embraced by the Russia-China strategic partnership.

  The report weighs the pros and cons of three scenarios involving possible, upcoming BRICS+ candidates:

  • First, nations that were invited by Beijing to be part of the 2017 BRICS summit (Egypt, Kenya, Mexico, Thailand, Tajikistan).

  • Second, nations that were part of the BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting in May this year (Argentina, Egypt, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Thailand).

  • Third, key G20 economies (Argentina, Indonesia, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye).

  And then there’s Iran, which has already already shown interest in joining BRICS.

  South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has recently confirmed that “several countries” are absolutely dying to join BRICS. Among them, a crucial West Asia player: Saudi Arabia.

  What makes it even more astonishing is that only three years ago, under former US President Donald Trump’s administration, Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman (MbS) – the kingdom’s de fact ruler – was dead set on joining a sort of Arab NATO as a privileged imperial ally.

  Diplomatic sources confirm that the day after the US pulled out of Afghanistan, MbS’s envoys started seriously negotiating with both Moscow and Beijing.

  Assuming BRICS approves Riyadh’s candidacy in 2023 by the necessary consensus, one can barely imagine its earth-shattering consequences for the petrodollar. At the same time, it is important not to underestimate the capacity of US foreign policy controllers to wreak havoc.

  The only reason Washington tolerates Riyadh’s regime is the petrodollar. The Saudis cannot be allowed to pursue an independent, truly sovereign foreign policy. If that happens, the geopolitical realignment will concern not only Saudi Arabia but the entire Persian Gulf.

  Yet that’s increasingly likely after OPEC+ de facto chose the BRICS/SCO path led by Russia-China – in what can be interpreted as a “soft” preamble for the end of the petrodollar.

  The Riyadh-Tehran-Ankara triad

  Iran made known its interest to join BRICS even before Saudi Arabia. According to Persian Gulf diplomatic sources, they are already engaged in a somewhat secret channel via Iraq trying to get their act together. Turkey will soon follow – certainly on BRICS and possibly the SCO, where Ankara currently carries the status of extremely interested observer.

  Now imagine this triad – Riyadh, Tehran, Ankara – closely joined with Russia, India, China (the actual core of the BRICS), and eventually in the SCO, where Iran is as yet the only West Asian nation to be inducted as a full member.

  The strategic blow to the Empire will go off the charts. The discussions leading to BRICS+ are focusing on the challenging path towards a commodity-backed global currency capable of bypassing US dollar primacy.

  Several interconnected steps point towards increasing symbiosis between BRICS+ and SCO. The latter’s members states have already agreed on a road map for gradually increasing trade in national currencies in mutual settlements.

  The State Bank of India – the nation’s top lender – is opening special rupee accounts for Russia-related trade.

  Russian natural gas to Turkey will be paid 25 percent in rubles and Turkish lira, complete with a 25 percent discount Erdogan personally asked of Putin.

  Russian bank VTB has launched money transfers to China in yuan, bypassing SWIFT, while Sberbank has started lending out money in yuan. Russian energy behemoth Gazprom agreed with China that gas supply payments should shift to rubles and yuan, split evenly.

  Iran and Russia are unifying their banking systems for trade in rubles/rial.

  Egypt’s Central Bank is moving to establish an index for the pound – through a group of currencies plus gold – to move the national currency away from the US dollar.

  And then there’s the TurkStream saga.

  That gas hub gift

  Ankara for years has been trying to position itself as a privileged East-West gas hub. After the sabotage of the Nord Streams, Putin has handed it on a plate by offering Turkey the possibility to increase Russian gas supplies to the EU via such a hub. The Turkish Energy Ministry stated that Ankara and Moscow have already reached an agreement in principle.

  This will mean in practice Turkey controlling the gas flow to Europe not only from Russia but also Azerbaijan and a great deal of West Asia, perhaps even including Iran, as well as Libya in northeast Africa. LNG terminals in Egypt, Greece and Turkiye itself may complete the network.

  Russian gas travels via the TurkStream and Blue Stream pipelines. The total capacity of Russian pipelines is 39 billion cubic meters a year.

  

  Map of Russian gas route via Turkey

  TurkStream was initially projected as a four-strand pipeline, with a nominal capacity of 63 million cubic meters a year. As it stands, only two strands – with a total capacity of 31,5 billion cubic meters – have been built.

  So an extension in theory is more than feasible – with all the equipment made in Russia. The problem, once again, is laying the pipes. The necessary vessels belong to the Swiss Allseas Group – and Switzerland is part of the sanctions craze. In the Baltic Sea, Russian vessels were used to finish building Nord Stream 2. But for a TurkStream extension, they would need to operate much deeper in the ocean.

  TurkStream would not be able to completely replace Nord Stream; it carries much smaller volumes. The upside for Russia is not being canceled from the EU market. Evidently Gazprom would only tackle the substantial investment on an extension if there are ironclad guarantees about its security. And there’s the additional drawback that the extension would also carry gas from Russia’s competitors.

  Whatever happens, the fact remains that the US-UK combo still exerts a lot of influence in Turkey – and BP, Exxon Mobil, and Shell, for instance, are actors in virtually every oil extraction project across West Asia. So they would certainly interfere on the way the Turkish gas hub functions, as well on determining the gas price. Moscow has to weigh all these variables before committing to such a project.

  NATO, of course, will be livid. But never underestimate hedging bet specialist Sultan Erdogan. His love story with both the BRICS and the SCO is just beginning.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/29/2022 – 00:00

• Watch: Chinese Tech Firm Mounts Drone On Car And Flies It
  Watch: Chinese Tech Firm Mounts Drone On Car And Flies It

  We’re noticing some electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft designs are beginning to look more like cars — where they could one day fly across town and then maneuver around city streets. The first view of this revolutionary design was revealed earlier this week by California-based Alef Aeronautics. However, another company based in China actually flew one. 

  Chinese tech company XPeng mounted a drone onto the roof of a vehicle and called it a flying car. While the eVTOL isn’t as sleek as Alef’s, it actually flew. 

  

  The company shared footage of the first flight on YouTube.

  “Unlike most other “flying car” concepts that we’ve seen before, this one actually does look a bit like a normal car. But, unlike most normal cars, this one appears to have a drone strapped to its roof,” said auto blog Jalopnik. 

  Regardless of how viable this flying car is, XPeng wins the award for actually flying one. 

  One would assume there would be an easy, quick release to separate the car from the drone so it can maneuver around city streets. 

  So the trend now is to put wheels on eVTOLs so they can also drive around streets. Just imagine if the Pentagon got their hands on something like this — an eVTOL hummer — now that would be wild and useful for special forces operations on the modern battlefield (we’re sure DARPA already has a design). 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 23:40

• The War Over 'Transgender' Kids: A Pre-Election Battlefield Update
  The War Over ‘Transgender’ Kids: A Pre-Election Battlefield Update

  Authored by Ben Weingarten via The Epoch Times,

  America is in the throes of a cultural and political war over gender ideology, featuring high-profile conflicts over everything from school curricula to athletics to pronouns.  

  

  But among the most explosive battles unfolding within the broader war is that over transgender children. In an inhospitable election year for the left, Democrats, far from being on the back foot, have pushed ahead on this front, including this fall in California, New York, and Virginia with moves to curb parental rights. 

  Days from the election, President Biden made clear the party’s broader position, telling a transgender activist that no state should be able to bar “gender-affirming healthcare” for kids. 

  That can include puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries to remove or replace breasts and genitalia. Promoting such treatment  for the growing number of kids identifying as transgender are, on one side, the Biden administration; blue state governments; much, though not all, of the medical establishment; educators; and activists. Opposing them are red state governments acting on behalf of outraged or concerned parents and other constituents, and buoyed by dissenting doctors.  

  Divisions have deepened despite, as Reuters recently reported, a lack of “strong evidence of the efficacy” of the treatments at issue and despite their possible long-term consequences. Here is a timeline of major developments this year: 

  February 2022

  • Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas issued an opinion concluding that “performing certain ‘sex-change’ procedures on children, and prescribing puberty-blockers to them, is ‘child abuse’ under Texas law.”  

  March

  • Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill into law that forbids instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in kindergarten through third grade, a measure that opponents dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” bill.

  • The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division issued a letter to all state attorneys general emphasizing its position that restrictions on transgender medical treatment could violate federal constitutional protections. 

  • After Idaho’s House passed a bill prohibiting gender reassignment surgeries, puberty blockers, and hormone therapy in connection with transitioning, the Senate killed the bill claiming it undermined parental rights. 

  • Republican Governor Doug Ducey of Arizona signed into law a bill prohibiting sex reassignment surgery for those under 18 years old. 

  April

  • The Justice Department challenged Alabama’s Vulnerable Child Compassion and Protection Act (VCAP), which prohibited doctors from performing surgeries on children in connection with transitioning, or providing children with puberty blockers and hormones. Days after the law went into effect, a federal judge in May temporarily halted the provisions pending an appeal by Alabama supported by 15 other states. 

  May

  • Legislators in 19 states committed to introducing so-called “trans refuge state” bills to protect transgender children and families facing restrictive legislation from other states. 

  June

  • President Biden issued his Executive Order on Advancing Equality for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex Individuals, calling on the Department of Health and Human Services to work with the states to expand access to transgender treatment, while combating – alongside the Federal Trade Commission – so-called “conversion therapy.” This includes simple talk therapy aimed at alleviating gender dysphoria-driven distress, treatment championed by opponents of the transitioning of minors.  

  • Republicans in the Senate and House introduced companion pieces of legislation that would “allow individuals who suffered from an irreversible and potentially sterilizing gender-transition procedure as a minor to seek justice in court.” 

  August  

  • A leaked State Department memo reveals the administration could classify countries permitting conversion therapy as human rights abusers, City Journal reported. 

  • The Department of Justice issued a sweeping subpoena to Eagle Forum of Alabama, a nonprofit advocate for Alabama’s contested VCAP law – a move seen by some as chilling since the subpoena required the organization to produce extensive information regarding its promotion of the legislation. Eagle Forum took the Justice Department to court to quash the subpoena, and the Justice Department backed down, dramatically scaling its subpoena to “1%” of its original demands, in the words of the judge presiding over the case.  

  • Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene introduced legislation that would make providing transgender medical treatment to minors a felony punishable by up to 25 years in prison. 

  September

  • Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom of California signed into law a bill making the Golden State the nation’s first “sanctuary state” for children seeking transgender treatment without the knowledge or consent of their parents. The governor also signed into law a bill co-sponsored by Planned Parenthood that, according to the California Family Council, “prohibits insurance companies from revealing to the policyholder  the ‘sensitive services’ of anyone on their policy, including minor children … ” – such services including transgender treatment. 

  October

  • New York State state Senator Sen. Brad Holyman, a Democrat, introduced a bill that would similarly make New York a sanctuary state for transgender children. 

  • Virginia state delegate Elizabeth Guzman, a Democrat, announced she would introduce legislation under which parents could be criminally prosecuted for child abuse should they refuse to affirm their kids’ transgenderism. Amid national blowback over the bill, Guzman quickly recanted. 

  • Republican Governor Gov. Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma signed legislation conditioning $108.5 million in federal stimulus funds for the University of Oklahoma’s Children’s Hospital on its ceasing “gender reassignment medical treatment” for minors. The governor also called on Oklahoma to bar “irreversible gender transition surgeries and hormone therapies on minors” during the 2023 legislative session. Gov. Stitt finds himself in an unusually close race with Joy Hofmeister – the state superintendent of education – who switched parties from Republican to Democrat in 2021 to challenge him. 

  • Michigan Republican state Rep. Ryan Berman introduced a bill under which doctors, as well as parents or guardians, could face child abuse charges if they “knowingly or intentionally consent to, obtain, or assist with a gender transition procedure for a child” – with a maximum penalty of life in prison. 

  • The American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, and Children’s Hospital Association called on the Department of Justice to police purported social-media threats to doctors and medical facilities by opponents of transgender treatment. 

  • 13 state attorneys general, led by Republican Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, responded to the AMA’s letter to the Justice Department with a letter of their own to Attorney General Merrick Garland, calling for the department to “stand down and allow the national conversation to continue,” citing medical data calling into question the efficacy of transgender treatment.  

  Context 

  • 46 states and Washington D.C. permit “gender-affirming care” for minors.  

  • Four states — Alabama, Arkansas, Alaska, and Tennessee — restrict such care for minors. 

  • 24 states and Washington D.C. prohibit transgender exclusions from health insurance coverage, whether involving a minor or an adult.

  • 26 states and Washington D.C. have Medicaid policies covering such transgender treatment, while 15 states have no explicit policy regarding such coverage and care—but do not prohibit it.   

  • Nine states have Medicaid policies explicitly excluding transgender treatment. 

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 23:20

• Are Polarized Politics Pushing More People Independent?
  Are Polarized Politics Pushing More People Independent?

  The number of people that define themselves as unaffiliated to a party or as “politically independent” is growing in the United States, raising the question of whether the highly polarizing two-party system is still working.

  According to a series of Gallup surveys taken throughout 2022, on average, 42 percent of respondents said they would define themselves as politically independent this year, versus 27 percent as Republicans and 28 percent as Democrats.

  As Statista’s Anna Fleck shows in the chart below, partisanship often peaks in the year of an election, as shown in both 2016 and 2020.

  The year following an election characteristically sees a slight shift back towards more people defining themselves as independent.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  When Gallup conducts their surveys, they initially ask via telephone whether U.S. adults are a Republican, a Democrat or independent. The next question is whether as an independent, they are politically Republican or Democrat leaning. This naturally divides the population into two camps rather than reflecting a broader spectrum of opinions.

  While some analysts argue that independents are really Republicans or Democrats in disguise, the issue perhaps shouldn’t be totally discounted, as Rhona Colvin of the Washington Post writes: “if they choose to vote, numbers suggest nonpartisan voters could swing close races.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 23:00

• Pentagon: US To Scrap Sea-Launched Nuclear Missile Program
  Pentagon: US To Scrap Sea-Launched Nuclear Missile Program

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The United States will stop developing nuclear-armed, sea-launched cruise missiles, according to new documents released by the Department of Defense.

  

  The documents (pdf), released on Oct. 27, stated that the United States will “retire the B83-1 gravity bomb,” and will “cancel the nuclear-armed Sea-Launched Cruise Missile (SLCM-N) program.”

  During a news conference, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin faced questions about retiring the two programs, arguing that “our inventory of nuclear weapons is significant.”

  “I do not believe this sends a message to Putin,” Austin told a reporter. “He understands what our capability is.”

  The Biden administration released three documents on Oct. 27: the National Defense Strategy, Nuclear Posture Review, and Missile Defense Review. Together, they lay out the military’s priorities for the coming years and underscore that Washington plans to maintain “a very high bar for nuclear employment.”

  During the Trump administration, the Pentagon made a decision in 2018 to develop a new nuclear-armed, sea-launched cruise missile, with a focus on the threat from Russia.

  But the Biden administration said in its review that the sea-launched cruise missile program was unnecessary and would be canceled because the United States already had the “means to deter limited nuclear use.”

  One program from the Trump era that Biden is keeping is the W76-2 low-yield submarine-launched ballistic missile, which the Pentagon fielded in 2020 to address Russia’s potential employment of similar-scale tactical nuclear weapons, the kind that Moscow has threatened to use in Ukraine to salvage its war there.

  ‘Very High Bar’

  The document also said that U.S. nuclear policy will maintain “a very high bar for nuclear employment,” but it would “only consider the use of nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its Allies and partners.”

  

  “By the 2030s, the United States will, for the first time in its history, face two major nuclear powers as strategic competitors and potential adversaries. This will create new stresses on stability and new challenges for deterrence, assurance, arms control, and risk reduction,” the document says.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 22:40

• Leaked FBI Pamphlet Lists 'Misinformation' And 'Disinformation' As 'Election Crimes'
  Leaked FBI Pamphlet Lists ‘Misinformation’ And ‘Disinformation’ As ‘Election Crimes’

  An FBI “2022 Midterm Elections Social Media Analysis Cheat Sheet” leaked to Project Veritas by an agency whistleblower lists misinformation and disinformation as ‘election crimes.’

  

  The ‘crimes’ are are defined as; 

  “DISINFORMATION” – False or inaccurate information intended to mislead others. Disinformation campaigns on social media are used to deliberately confuse, trick, or upset the public.

  “MISINFORMATION” – False or misleading information spread mistakenly or unintentionally.

  

  Does a Hillary Clinton-approved media blitz disinformation campaign to smear her political opponent as a Russian asset count?

  What about “MSM censorship campaigns to suppress damaging information about a candidate” such as Hunter Biden’s laptop?

  More via Project Veritas;

  Recently, the Biden administration attempted to create the “Disinformation Governance Board” under the Department of Homeland Security. After severe pushback from the public due to free speech concerns, the federal government pulled the plug on this idea.

  In another section of the leaked document labelled “Things to Consider,” the FBI reminded its agents that the First Amendment and Fourth Amendment exist. Both amendments are in the Bill of Rights and protect Americans’ rights to free speech and against “unreasonable” searches or seizures.

  The Bureau also flagged the potential for “Voter/Ballot Fraud” in this election, an activity that some have attempted to rule out as a threat to the American electoral system.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 22:20

• Mail-In Ballot Total Surges Past 10 Million Across US Ahead Of 2022 Midterms: Research
  Mail-In Ballot Total Surges Past 10 Million Across US Ahead Of 2022 Midterms: Research

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  More than 10 million people have cast mail-in ballots ahead of the Nov. 8 midterm elections, according to an election monitoring project.

  

  Another 5 million or so have voted early and in person, research from the U.S. Elections Project shows as of Oct. 27. This week, a number of states opened early in-person voting, including Texas.

  The project, which is managed by University of Florida professor Michael McDonald, tracks early voting activity among states that have reported data. Texas, California, Florida, and Georgia have reported more than 1.5 million in-person and mail-in votes as of Oct. 27, the project numbers show.

  “It does seem very robust, early voting … I think we’re looking at more like a 2018 election, definitely,” McDonald told ABC News on Oct. 24, referring to the high turnout.

  More than three dozen states have already opened early voting. For the 2022 midterms, early voting phases range from 46 days to three days before Election Day, the National Conference of State Legislatures says.

  “Congratulations, Georgia voters! We’ve reached 1 MILLION cast votes. Election officials deserve our thanks for rising to the challenge & working hard to serve our communities,” Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, wrote on Twitter on Oct. 25.

  Georgia has two key races, including for the U.S. Senate and governor’s office. Incumbent Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) is facing Republican Herschel Walker, a former NFL and college football star, while Gov. Brian Kemp is facing a rematch with Democrat activist Stacey Abrams.

  Early polling places across Maryland were slated to open on Oct. 27, according to its governor.

  Republicans are favored by analysts and betting oddsmakers to win the House in the Nov. 8 elections, buoyed by frustration over the lackadaisical economy and decades-high inflation. Democrats are attempting to hold their ground and are relying heavily on campaign messaging around abortion.

  If Republicans take just five seats, they can win back a majority in the House. In recent decades, the party that has held the White House has lost congressional seats during midterm elections.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 22:00

• A Closer Look At The COVID Mortality Rate
  A Closer Look At The COVID Mortality Rate

  Authored by Ian Miller via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  One of the most consistent efforts made by “experts” during the early stages of the pandemic was to attempt to impress on the public that COVID was an extremely deadly disease.

  

  While it’s clear that for the extremely elderly and severely immunocompromised, COVID does present significant and serious health concerns, the “experts” did their best to convince people of all age groups that they were in danger.

  Initially the World Health Organization (WHO), in their infinite incompetence, made a substantial contribution to this perception by claiming that the mortality rate from COVID was shockingly high.

  In March 2020, with precious little data, the WHO made the alarming claim that 3.4 percent of people who got COVID had died.

  CNBC reported that an early press conference by WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus compared that expected mortality of COVID-19 to the flu:

  “‘Globally, about 3.4 percent of reported COVID-19 cases have died,’ WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said during a press briefing at the agency’s headquarters in Geneva. In comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1 percent of those infected, he said.”

  This stood in contrast to previous estimates, which were also above 2 percent:

  “Early in the outbreak, scientists had concluded the death rate was around 2.3 percent.”

  While “experts” could be forgiven for being unsure about the death rate of a brand new illness with very little data available, the fear-mongering and world-altering policy enacted based on these estimates has caused incalculable damage.

  It’s now widely known and accepted that these estimates were wildly incorrect, off by orders of magnitude.

  But a new paper out from one of the world’s leading experts confirms that they were off even more than we previously realized.

  John Ioannidis is one of the nation’s leading public health experts, employed at Stanford University as Professor of Medicine in Stanford Prevention Research, of Epidemiology and Population Health,” as well as “of Statistics and Biomedical Data Science.”

  You’d think that those impeccable qualifications and a track record of being one of the most published and cited scientists in the modern world would insulate him from criticism, but unfortunately that’s no longer how The Science™ works.

  Ioannidis first drew the ire of The Keepers of The Science™ early in the outbreak, when he cautioned that society might be making tremendous decisions based on limited data that was of poor quality.

  He also took part in the infamous seroprevalence study conducted in Santa Clara County, led by Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.

  That examination, which looked at antibody prevalence in the San Jose area, came to the conclusion that COVID was already significantly more widespread by March and April 2020 than most people realized.

  This had wide-ranging implications, but the most important revelation was that the estimates of COVID’s mortality rate used by “scientists” and the WHO were almost certainly much too high.

  Those estimates were created under the assumption that COVID cases were overwhelmingly detectable; that cases were captured by testing and thus tracking deaths could be achieved with a “case fatality rate,” instead of “infection fatality rate.”

  That was the mistake Tedros and the WHO made two and a half years ago.

  Of course, for providing substantial evidence and data that COVID was less deadly than initially feared, Ioannidis (and Bhattacharya) was attacked from within the “expert community.”

  In what has now become a familiar insult, those behind the study were vilified as COVID minimizers and dangerous conspiracy theorists who would get people killed by not taking the virus seriously enough.

  But Ioannidis remained undeterred, and with several authors, he recently released another review of the infection fatality rate of COVID. Importantly, the paper looks at the pre-vaccination time period and covers the non-elderly age groups; those who were most affected by COVID restrictions and endless mandates.

  The Numbers

  The review begins with a statement of fact that was almost entirely ignored by lockdown “experts” throughout the pandemic, but especially when restrictions, lockdowns and mandates were at their peak early on.

  “The infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID-19 among non-elderly people in the absence of vaccination or prior infection is important to estimate accurately, since 94 percent of the global population is younger than 70 years and 86 percent is younger than 60 years.” [Emphasis added.]

  94 percent of the global population is younger than 70 years old.

  6 percent of is older than 70 years old.

  86 percent is younger than 60 years old.

  This is relevant because restrictions overwhelmingly impacted the 86–94 percent of people who are younger than 60 or 70 years old.

  Ioannidis and his co-writers reviewed 40 national seroprevalence studies that covered 38 countries to come to determine their estimates of infection fatality rate for the overwhelming majority of people.

  Importantly, those seroprevalence studies were conducted before the vaccines were released, meaning the IFR’s were calculated before whatever impact vaccines had on younger age groups.

  So what did they find?

  The median infection fatality rate for those aged 0–59 was 0.035 percent.

  This represents 86 percent of the global population and the survival rate for those who were infected with COVID pre-vaccination was 99.965 percent.

  For those aged 0–69, which covers 94 percent of the global population, the fatality rate was 0.095 percent, meaning the survival rate for nearly 7.3 billion people was 99.905 percent.

  Those survival rates are obviously staggeringly high, which already creates frustration that restrictions were imposed on all age groups, when focused protection for those over 70 or at significantly elevated risk would have been a much more preferable course of action.

  But it gets worse.

  The researchers broke down the demographics into smaller buckets, showing the increase in risk amongst older populations, and conversely, how infinitesimal the risk was amongst younger age groups.

  • Ages 60–69, fatality rate 0.501 percent, survival rate 99.499 percent
  • Ages 50–59, fatality rate 0.129 percent, survival rate 99.871 percent
  • Ages 40–49, fatality rate 0.035 percent survival rate 99.965 percent
  • Ages 30–39, fatality rate 0.011 percent, survival rate 99.989 percent
  • Ages 20–29, fatality rate 0.003 percent, survival rate 99.997 percent
  • Ages 0–19, fatality rate 0.0003 percent, survival rate 99.9997 percent

  They added that “Including data from another 9 countries with imputed age distribution of COVID-19 deaths yielded median IFR of 0.025-0.032 percent for 0-59 years and 0.063-0.082 percent for 0-69 years.”

  These numbers are astounding and reassuringly low, across the board.

  But they’re almost nonexistent for children.

  Yet as late as fall 2021, Fauci was still fear-mongering about the risks of COVID to children in order to increase vaccination uptake, saying in an interview that it was not a “benign situation”:

  “We certainly want to get as many children vaccinated within this age group as we possibly can because as you heard and reported, that this is not, you know, a benign situation.”

  It’s nearly impossible for any illness to be less of a risk, or more “benign” than a 0.0003 percent risk of death.

  Even in October 2021, during that same interview with NPR, Fauci said that masks should continue on children as an “extra step” to protect them, even after vaccination:

  “And when you have that type of viral dynamic, even when you have kids vaccinated, you certainly—when you are in an indoor setting, you want to make sure you go the extra step to protect them. So I can’t give you an exact number of what that would be in the dynamics of virus in the community, but hopefully we will get there within a reasonable period of time. You know, masks often now—as we say, they’re not forever. And hopefully we’ll get to a point where we can remove the masks in schools and in other places. But I don’t believe that that time is right now.”

  Nothing better highlights the incompetence and misinformation from Dr. Fauci than ignoring that pre-vaccination, children were at vanishingly small risks from COVID, that vaccination uptake amongst kids was entirely irrelevant since they do not prevent infection or transmission, and that mask usage is completely ineffective at protecting anyone. Especially for those who didn’t need protection in the first place.

  The CDC, “expert” community, World Health Organization, media figures—all endlessly spread terror that the virus was a mass killer while conflating detected case fatality rates with infection fatality rates.

  Yet now we have another piece of evidence suggesting that the initial WHO estimates were off by 99 percent for 94 percent of the world’s population.

  Just for some perspective, here’s the difference visually portrayed between what the WHO claimed and what Ioannidis found:

  

  Even if the lockdowns, mask mandates, capacity limits, and shuttered playgrounds worked, the dangers of the virus were so minuscule that the collateral damage instantly and immediately outweighed any potential benefit.

  Economic destruction, increased suicide attempts due to seemingly indefinite isolation, horrifying levels of learning loss, increasing obesity amongst kids, plummeting test scores, increased poverty and hunger, supply chain problems, rampant inflation; all of it is a direct result of policies imposed by terrified, incompetent “experts.”

  Their estimates were hopelessly, catastrophically wrong, yet they maintained their unchallenged sense of authority for multiple years, and still receive awards, praise, increased funding and a sense of infallibility amongst politicians and decision-makers.

  If sanity and intellectual honesty still existed, these estimates would be front page news for every major media outlet in the world.

  Instead, because the media and their allies in the tech, corporate, and political classes promoted and encouraged lockdowns and restrictions while censoring dissent, it’s ignored.

  Nothing could be more perfectly COVID than that.

  Originally published on the author’s Substack, reposted from the Brownstone Institute

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 21:40

• "Confidence Shaken:" US Firms In China Look Elsewhere As 'Friendshoring' Gathers Steam
  “Confidence Shaken:” US Firms In China Look Elsewhere As ‘Friendshoring’ Gathers Steam

  The global economy is fracturing as the need to rejigger supply chains is underway. US firms realize China’s Covid-zero policy and shutdowns, along with heightened geopolitical risk across the region, are bad for businesses and reduce capital investments in the country. 

  The American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai’s latest survey of hundreds of US firms in the Asian country found a near doubling of respondents over the past year that are cutting investment.

  Around a fifth of the 307 companies surveyed said they were slashing investments this year because of Covid-related shutdowns, travel restrictions, and supply chain disruptions. This is nearly double the number of respondents who were asked the same question last year. 

  “Confidence has been shaken,” the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai said.

  Eric Zheng, president of the Shanghai chamber, was quoted by Financial Times, indicating Beijing should “pivot to a more sensible approach to managing Covid-19 based on a reasonable balance between public health and the economy,” adding the strict measures have “upended business performance expectations.”

  Even though US firms still expect future growth, business confidence has been shattered as only 55% of respondents are optimistic about China’s five-year business outlook — a record low. 

  And President Xi Jinping’s power grab of a third five-year term could leave US CEOs facing a complex outlook that may spur accelerated rejiggering of critical supply chains out of the country to more friendly shores. The survey has conducted between July 14 and Aug. 18 and didn’t include Xi’s consolidation of power. 

  All of this suggests that Western firms are increasingly likely to divert at least some (if not all) of their supply chains out of China in a move called “friendshoring” — while a play on “offshoring,” this isn’t about companies moving operations back to the US or Europe, but instead seeking foreign alternatives that retain the benefit of low labor costs but with less international controversy. 

  Michael Every, the global strategist at Rabobank, recently outlined in a note to clients which countries will benefit from friendshoring… 

  Every expects a lot of low-tech manufacturing jobs will go to India. 

  

  India, Turkey, and Brazil could be the top beneficiaries of medium-tech jobs. 

  

  France, Japan, Italy, and Canada could be the top beneficiaries of high-tech jobs. 

  

  This decade could be one of the greatest global supply chain resets in a generation.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 21:20

• Lifelong Democrat Lawmaker To Vote Republican In NY Governor Race: 'Hochul Has No Clue'
  Lifelong Democrat Lawmaker To Vote Republican In NY Governor Race: ‘Hochul Has No Clue’

  Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Frustrated with New York Gov. Kathy Hochul’s halfhearted attempt to get serious on crime, a decades-long Democrat state lawmaker says he will vote for her Republican challenger in the upcoming election.

  “The No.1, No.2 and No.3 issues for New Yorkers are crime, crime, crime,” Dov Hikind, a Brooklyn Democrat who had served as an assemblyman in the New York State Legislature for 35 years until 2018, told The Epoch Times’ sister media NTD News after the last and only debate before the Nov. 8 gubernatorial race.

  

  During the hour-long debate on Tuesday night, Hochul faced off with Rep Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) and took on topics including the economy, abortion, and COVID vaccine mandates. But the most heated exchange took place when Zeldin charged Hochul with failing to address rampant subway crimes and hate crimes targeting Jewish and Asian communities.

  Hochul, who ascended to the governorship after former Governor Andrew Cuomo resigned amid a sexual harassment scandal, fired back by accusing the Long Island Republican of trying to “keep people scared” about crimes more than they should, while insisting that her criminal justice policies are “making a difference.”

  “Anyone who commits a crime under our laws, especially with the change they made to bail, has consequences. I don’t know why that’s so important to you,” the Democrat incumbent said at one point.

  Hochul’s response, Hikind said, shows that she “has no clue” whatsoever as to what concerns New Yorkers the most.

  “There’s a 40 percent decrease in the number of people using the New York City subway system. That’s crazy,” he told NTD News. “I don’t blame people. They’re afraid. They’re concerned. They see the things that are happening on the subway system and in the streets of New York.”

  “Hochul has no clue, and I think it was very clear last night,” Hikind continued, adding that he was “dumbfounded” about whether Hochul has a plan for the future at all. He also pointed to the fact that the governor didn’t start campaigning on the issue of crime until very recently when polls showed Zeldin steadily narrowing her lead.

  In a campaign ad launched last week, Hochul highlighted her opponent’s ties to President Donald Trump. The ad features footage of Trump at an April 2022 event at his Mar-a-Lago home saying, “Lee fought for me very, very hard.” It also shows Trump giving Zeldin a supportive tap on the shoulder.

  “Zeldin voted with Trump, too—nearly 90 percent of the time, against tougher gun laws, for extreme anti-abortion laws,” the narrator says in an ominous voice. “Zeldin even voted to overturn the 2020 election to keep Trump in power.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 21:00

• Hawaii On Red Alert As Earthquake Swarms Detected Under World's Largest Active Volcano
  Hawaii On Red Alert As Earthquake Swarms Detected Under World’s Largest Active Volcano

  The Island of Hawaii is on high alert as earthquake swarms continue around the world’s largest active volcano, Mauna Loa. Scientists are worried about an eruption but not sure if one is imminent as magma churns underneath, generating dozens of quakes daily, according to AP News. 

  US Geological Survey’s Hawaiian Volcano Observatory said Mauna Loa has been in a state of “heightened unrest” since mid-month due to daily earthquake swarms jumped from 10-20 per day to 40-50 per day. 

  “Scientists believe more earthquakes are occurring because more magma is flowing into Mauna Loa’s summit reservoir system from the hot spot under the earth’s surface that feeds molten rock to Hawaii’s volcanoes,” AP said.

  Hawaii’s civil defense agency held a meeting earlier this week to educate residents on preparing for a possible eruption. 

  “Not to panic everybody, but they have to be aware of that you live on the slopes of Mauna Loa. There’s a potential for some kind of lava disaster,” said Talmadge Magno, Hawaii County Civil Defense administrator.

  Mauna Loa is about half of the Hawaii Island landmass. So any eruption would immediately impact residents. There are about 200,000 people on the island. It last erupted in 1984, and lava flows took out homes in under two hours. 

  USGS data shows hundreds of quakes have rattled the island in the last 30 days. 

  

  USGS has placed Mauna Loa under “yellow advisory,” ― signifying residents need to be prepared. 

  “We would hope if Mauna Loa rocks that we would have … days so that folks can be evacuated and notified,” Dr. Andria Ellis, a geophysicist at the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory, told Hawaii News Now. 

  Even though an eruption doesn’t appear imminent, the rumblings underground suggest caution at what may be coming, “and at this point in time, like we always say, it’s better to be prepared and be ready,” said Luke Meyers, administrator of the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 20:40

• Congressional Hispanic Caucus Blocks GOP Rep Mayra Flores' Request To Join
  Congressional Hispanic Caucus Blocks GOP Rep Mayra Flores’ Request To Join

  Though Mayra Flores is the country’s first Mexican-born congresswoman, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus has rejected her request to become a member. 

  “As the first Mexican-born American Congresswoman, I thought the Hispanic Caucus would be open in working together,” Flores tweeted on Wednesday.

  “This denial once again proves a bias towards conservative Latinas that don’t fit their narrative or ideology.” 

  The official website of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus gives no hint that it’s a Democrats-only club: “The CHC addresses national and international issues and crafts policies that impact the Hispanic community. The function of the Caucus is to serve as a forum for the Hispanic Members of Congress to coalesce around a collective legislative agenda.”

  The group’s bylaws, however, explicitly bar Republicans from joining, a caucus spokesman told the Texas Tribune. He added, “Rep. Flores’ Extreme MAGA values and their attacks on Latinos and our nation’s democracy on January 6 do not align with CHC values.”

  On Thursday, Flores tweeted “maybe I’m not the right type of taco.” In a July address to a so-called “Latinx” conference in San Antonio, Jill Biden famously compared Mexicans to breakfast tacos. After facing mockery and scorn, she issued an apology. 

  My thoughts after the rejection by the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, maybe I’m not the right type of taco.

  — Mayra Flores (@MayraFlores2022) October 27, 2022

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

  Though Flores across-the-aisle gesture was rebuffed, it should be noted that there’s a Republican-only version too: the Congressional Hispanic Conference. The now-Democrats-only Caucus used to be bipartisan, before a split in the 1970s over U.S. policy toward Cuba. 

  Flores caused a national shockwave in June, by flipping a once-solid-blue and 84%-Hispanic district in South Texas, soundly beating her Democratic opponent 51% to 43%. She became the first Republican to represent that part of Texas since 1870 — over 150 years. Notably, one of her votes came from new Texan Elon Musk, in what he says was his first-ever vote for a Republican. 

  Since that special election was only for the balance of the current term, Flores is now seeking re-election in a redrawn district that raises the hurdle for her demographically while also pitting her against another incumbent. Despite that, the Cook Political Report earlier this month switched the race from “Lean Democrat” to “Toss-Up.” 

  Endorsed by Donald Trump, Flores has campaigned against gun control, abortion and lax border security. A recent poll found that, among Hispanics who know both Flores and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Flores has higher net favorability ratings. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 20:20

• Russia Announces End Of Mobilization After Enlisting 300K New Troops
  Russia Announces End Of Mobilization After Enlisting 300K New Troops

  Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu announced Friday the the end of the partial military mobilization order from last month, having reached the target goal of 300,000 to boost operational support for military action in Ukraine. The moment was captured in a televised event with President Vladimir Putin.

  “The dispatch of citizens called up during mobilization was completed today. The notification of citizens [to report for military duty] has ended,” state-run RIA Novosti quoted the defense chief as saying.

  

  “The task set by you — to mobilize 300,000 people — has been fulfilled. No additional tasks are planned,” Shoigu told Putin during the televised meeting. 

  He specified that among the mobilized recruits, some 82,000 are already in the conflict zone in Ukraine and 218,000 still undergoing training. 

  Putin told Shoigu in the meeting, “Based on the experience of conducting a special military operation, we need to think over and make adjustments to all components of the Armed Forces, including the Ground Forces” – and tasked the defense ministry with implementing the necessary “adjustments” or upgrades.

  “During the partial mobilization, over 1,300 representatives of executive power and over 27,000 businessmen were sent to the armed forces. About 13,000 citizens volunteered before they received their conscription notifications, and were sent to the armed forces as volunteers. The average age of mobilized citizens is 35 years,” Shoigu continued.

  He additionally emphasized that all of those mobilized are now eligible to receive special state benefits as designated combat veterans. “Let’s agree that in December at the annual board after all this work, I repeat once again, including at the expert level, you will report proposals which could be accepted,” Putin told Shoigu in concluding the meeting.

  Meanwhile, after over a month of reports of widespread Ukrainian gains amid the counteroffensive in the east and south, pro-Kiev forces are said to be slowing – and in some cases being pushed back again, per The Moscow Times, citing a Rand Corporation defense analyst: 

  Capturing Bakhmut, a salt mining city in the Donetsk region with a pre-war population of 70,000 people, would give Russia a key foothold to launch offensives toward major cities such as Sloviansk and Kramatorsk —  and vindicate Moscow’s decision to throw thousands of men at the fight in the past month. 

  “Bakhmut is one of the few places where Russia has been going forward rather than backward since the summer,” [James] Black said. 

  Absolutely insane and chaotic combat footage from UKR tank. Russian convoy runs straight into UKR 25th brigade fighting near Kherson. Date Unknown. pic.twitter.com/a0eoJlhqxm

  — D.Emery (@DemeryUK) October 23, 2022

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

  However, a huge concentration of Ukrainian artillery on Russian frontlines – backed and sustained by the recent influx of massive weapons shipments from Western allies – have meant likely big casualty rates for the Russian side, especially as the Kherson area appears to be witnessing a slow Russian retreat. There are signs that Russia is continuing to pull civilians out of the city in preparation for large-scale urban warfare. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 20:00

• Democrats Race To Save A Blue State Gone Purple
  Democrats Race To Save A Blue State Gone Purple

  Authored by Matthew Schantin via RealClear Wire (emphasis ours),

  With Election Day less than a month away, Democrats and Republicans are duking it out to secure majorities in Congress. While both parties funnel record-breaking millions of dollars into several traditional battleground states like Pennsylvania and Nevada, Democrats could lose a state they’ve won since the late 1980s – Oregon.

  

  Though the state is all but guaranteed to re-elect longtime Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, there’s a real possibility Oregonians might just elect their first Republican governor in nearly 35 years. Thanks to a well-funded independent spoiler candidate and an unpopular outgoing governor, Democrats are facing a tight race with serious implications as major issues like abortion are tossed to the states.

  While D.C. insiders are shocked to see Oregon in play after RealClearPolitics shifted the gubernatorial election to a “toss-up,” Oregonians like myself have long seen the writing on the wall.

  Conservatives in the state began gaining steam prior to the pandemic, seizing on hot-button issues like climate legislation to galvanize support from rural and moderate voters. One example was a cap-and-trade bill that had Republican legislators fleeing the state Capitol to avoid a vote and motivated the start of Timber Unity, a group strung together by right-leaning rural Oregonians who were locally famous for leading a log truck protest against the legislation.

  From there, dissatisfaction continued to metastasize over the course of the pandemic. Despite ranking in the top 10 states for lowest COVID-19 cases and resulting deaths, Gov. Kate Brown had the highest disapproval ranking of any governor in the country as recently as last April, triggering three separate recall attempts that ultimately failed to make it on the November ballot.

  Ahead of November, many Democrats have distanced themselves from the outgoing governor and have instead focused on promoting their own detailed plans to tackle things like tent cities and modernizing Oregon’s firefighting capabilities.

  All the while, Republican nominee and former state Senate Minority Leader Christine Drazan has used Oregon’s escalating homelessness and addiction crises as evidence of failed Democratic leadership. Capitalizing on the fact that the president’s party historically loses ground during midterm elections and ongoing inflation woes, Drazan is unusually well-positioned to help flip the state red.

  The Republican nominee received a further boost following state Sen. Betsy Johnson’s early decision to join the race. Johnson, who served in the legislature for over 20 years before leaving both the Democratic party and her state Senate seat, is running for the state’s top spot as an Independent. With backing from Oregon’s business community, she has taken millions of dollars from prominent business leaders and timber company owners. Johnson’s early cash advantage helped position her as the “best of both parties” and an ideal spoiler candidate to draw voters away from the other two choices.

  As a result, what many pundits predicted would be a breezy general election for Democratic nominee Tina Kotek after she fought her way through a crowded primary field, has turned into one of the hottest elections in the country.

  As the longest-tenured Oregon House Speaker, many Democrats have seen Kotek as the heir apparent to the governorship for several years.

  While Kotek has been the ideal candidate for Democrats, more moderate voters see her as the embodiment of top-of-mind, often ignoring issues in the state given that she represents and resides in Portland. She has tried to reject this narrative, claiming her opponents will continue to create problems when it comes to guns and climate change, two traditionally salient concerns for Oregon voters given majority support for stricter gun control and protecting the state’s pristine outdoor environment. Johnson and Drazan both have “A” ratings from the NRA and support from Timber Unity with legislative records to match, offering the Democratic nominee prime campaign ads on a silver platter.

  However, recent polling shows a tight two-way race between Kotek and Drazan, with each courting about a third of the vote, while Johnson’s numbers have stagnated in the upper teens. The competitiveness of this race has been reflected in the outside spending pouring in from the Republican and Democratic Governors Associations. Both have written several million-dollar checks, including a recent $1.25 million from the Democratic Governors Association last month, the single largest donation of the race.

  This may be the best chance Republicans have had in decades to take back the Oregon Governor’s mansion, but with the Supreme Court’s recent Dobbs decision and a tragic shooting in Bend, a major city in the state, Kotek is trying to shift the focus back to issues that have long kept many Oregonians in lockstep with the Democratic Party.

  The question now is whether Drazan and Kotek can consolidate their parties’ voters the way they consolidated support from their peers to earn their former leadership roles. President Biden recently visited Oregon while local and national Republican party organizations double down on their investment in the Republican nominee as both parties make a last minute push. National Democrats haven’t given Oregon a second thought in years, but their early oversight could cost them a key governorship at a time when state leaders, rather than federal officials, are tasked with protecting key Democratic positions.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 19:40

• 'Zero Emissions' From Electric Vehicles? Here's Why That Claim Has Zero Basis
  ‘Zero Emissions’ From Electric Vehicles? Here’s Why That Claim Has Zero Basis

  Authored by John Murawski via RealClear Wire,

  As California, New York, and other states move to phase out the sale of gasoline-powered cars, public officials routinely echo the Biden administration’s claim that electric vehicles are a “zero emissions” solution that can significantly mitigate the effects of climate change. 

  

  Car and energy experts, however, say there is no such thing as a zero-emissions vehicle: For now and the foreseeable future, the energy required to manufacture and power electric cars will leave a sizable carbon footprint. In some cases hybrids can be cleaner alternatives in states that depend on coal to generate electricity, and some suggest that it may be too rash to write off all internal combustion vehicles just yet. 

  “I have a friend who drives a Kia he’s had for about 15 years,” said Ashley Nunes, a research fellow at Harvard Law School.

  “He called me and said, ‘Hey, I’m thinking of buying a Tesla. What do you think?’” 

  “I said, ‘If you care about the environment, keep the Kia,’” Nunes said. 

  Nunes’ advice points to the subtle complexities and numerous variables that challenge the reassuringly simple yet overstated promise of electric vehicles. Few dispute that the complete transition to EVs powered by cleaner electricity from renewable energy sources will have a less dire environmental impact than today’s gas-powered automotive fleet. But that low-carbon landscape exists on a distant horizon that’s booby-trapped with obstacles and popular misconceptions. 

  In the meantime, the growing efforts by governments in this country and abroad to ban people from buying a transportation technology that has shaped modern society for the past century is prompting some electric car advocates to warn against using best-case scenarios to promote unrealistic expectations about the practicalities, costs, and payoffs of EVs. 

  Adding up the environmental costs and benefits of electric cars requires complex computer modeling to calculate an EV’s lifetime carbon footprint, which depends on a host of assumptions and inputs. The cradle-to-grave analysis must factor in industrial processing, refining, manufacturing, recycling, and electricity generation. The upshot: More greenhouse gases are emitted in the manufacture of EVs than by the drilling, refining, smelting, and assembly for gas-powered cars, which means it can take several years of driving an EV before there is any benefit to the climate. 

  The linchpin of the EV revolution is California’s 100% ban on the sale of new gas-powered cars, SUVs, and light trucks, which is scheduled to go into full effect in 2035 and expected to be adopted by other states. California’s mandate includes a phased-in ban on the sale of new hybrids, which only recently were considered technological marvels. California will restrict the sale of plug-in hybrids to just 20% of total EV sales, a significant cap for low-emissions vehicles that are nearly as popular with environmentally conscious California consumers as all-electric EVs. 

  Within the past several years, General Motors, Volvo, and other major car makers have vowed to zero out gas-powered cars, amid a growing consensus of European nations, and with China, India, and Canada announcing plans to restrict or ban the sale of cars with gas tanks. 

  But public demand is lagging, and until that changes, governments will have to incentivize consumers to buy electric cars. Currently EVs appeal to a narrow demographic: affluent, educated, coastal, and liberal, with the highest enthusiasm among 35- to 45-year-olds, according to research by James Archsmith, who researches energy and environmental economics at the University of Maryland, and his co-authors. Their research concludes that under some scenarios, achieving a 50% market share for EVs in 2035 would require paying subsidies in excess of $30,000 per electric car, totaling in the trillions of dollars, and that achieving more modest penetration targets could cost public treasuries in the hundreds of billions of dollars. 

  The electric car’s biggest disadvantage on greenhouse gas emissions is the production of an EV battery, which requires energy-intensive mining and processing, and generates twice as much carbon emissions as the manufacture of an internal combustion engine. This means that the EV starts off with a bigger carbon footprint than a gasoline-powered car when it rolls off the assembly line and takes time to catch up to a gasoline-powered car. 

  One of the big unknowns is whether EV batteries will have to be replaced. While the EV industry says battery technology is improving so that degradation is limited, if that assurance proves overly optimistic and auto warranties have to replace expensive battery packs, the new battery would create a second carbon footprint that the EV would have to work off over time, partially erasing the promised greenhouse-gas benefits. 

  With governments now in the business of mandating electric vehicles, the battery challenge assumes a global scale. The majority of lithium-ion batteries are produced in China, where most electricity comes from coal-burning power plants. 

  The process of mining critical minerals is sometimes described in language that evokes strip mining and fracking, an inconvenient truth that is beginning to attract notice. “Electric cars and renewable energy may not be as green as they appear,” a 2021 New York Times article noted. “Production of raw materials like lithium, cobalt and nickel that are essential to these technologies are often ruinous to land, water, wildlife and people.” The Times has also warned that with global demand for electric vehicles projected to grow sixfold by 2030, “the dirty origins of this otherwise promising green industry have become a looming crisis.” 

  To address this disquieting dependency on a foreign power, the United States and other nations are seeking to break China’s near-monopoly on battery production. The Inflation Reduction Act states that under a phase-in starting in 2024, EVs with battery components or critical minerals sourced from “a foreign entity of concern,” which includes China, can’t qualify for the maximum allowable tax credit of $7,500. The United States is pumping in more than $100 billion to create an entire industry in this country. Just last week, President Biden announced the American Battery Materials Initiative, awarding more than $2.8 billion for 20 battery manufacturing and processing plants to develop and produce domestic lithium, graphite, nickel, silicon oxide, plus critical components and facilities. 

  Over time, a typical EV will catch up and outperform gas-powered cars on greenhouse gas reductions, because electric cars are cleaner to drive. But the amount of mileage that must be driven for the EV to break even on CO2 emissions depends on a host of assumptions and variables. Some researchers say that the EV’s emissions benefits are vastly overstated – by 600%, according to one study – because the variables used for comparison make an EV look better on paper than it performs in real-life situations. 

  All of these CO2 metrics could come into play in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s recently proposed rule that would require publicly traded companies to disclose the greenhouse gas emissions they produce directly, as well emissions produced indirectly through their supply chains around the world. While the implications aren’t clear yet, the new rule could standardize CO2 disclosures and transparency on EV carbon impacts, but some say that such calculations are nearly impossible for global contractors, and automakers would have to rely on the same kinds of estimates and modeling that are used now. Echoing a common concern, EV battery maker Nikola Corp. told the SEC that “some climate data is not readily available, complete, or definitive.” 

  As a result of these uncertainties, many consumers don’t understand the complexity of these analyses and may assume that their electric cars are literally zero-emissions, or that what matters most is that EVs are better for the environment and the precise degree is not that important. 

  Zeb Hallock, president of Tesla Owners Club of NC Triangle in Raleigh, said in an email exchange that he and his wife both drive Teslas, a Model S that replaced a Nissan 350Z in 2014 and a Model 3 that replaced a Toyota Prius in 2018. The Hallocks’ Teslas are charged at home at a cost that he estimates is equivalent to paying 47 cents for a gallon of gasoline. He said by email that the public supercharger network “in some areas of the country can rival the cost of gasoline,” but this is not a concern because the Hallocks do most of their charging at home. 

  When asked about the greenhouse gas deficit of electric cars, Hallock speculated that most EV owners believe the carbon footprint of an EV is minimal and they don’t think much about it. “A small number of owners don’t care at all about environmental benefits and purchased a Tesla for the superior performance and the fact that it’s American made and uses cheap domestic fuel,” he said. 

  EVs: Centerpiece of the Agenda

  But in the universe of climate activism, purported environmental benefits make EVs the international centerpiece of meeting the 2015 Paris Climate Accords to limit the rise of global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, compared with preindustrial levels. Transportation is the single largest source of greenhouse gases in the United States, accounting for more than a quarter of all CO2 emissions, and more than half of those emissions come from passenger cars, pickup trucks and SUVs that are now being slated for replacement by electric vehicles. 

  EV advocates are optimistic that in the coming decades electric cars will become cleaner as power grids are “decarbonized” and the industrialized world reduces its reliance on CO2-spewing fossil fuels, primarily coal and natural gas. Exactly how much cleaner is not easy to pinpoint. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, about 60% of the nation’s electricity was generated from coal and gas in 2021. In its Annual Energy Outlook, the agency projects those two fossil fuels will generate 44% of U.S. electricity by 2050. 

  But those percentages can be misleading. Even as the relative fuel proportions change over time, overall electricity demand is going up, so the total amount of fossil fuels actually burned in the mid-21st century goes down by only about 5%, according to EIA estimates. Future greenhouse gas emissions will depend on the number of EVs on the road and how electricity is generated, and those forecasts swing wildly. The EIA forecasts a mere 18.9 million EVs on U.S. roads in 2050, which is very conservative compared with advocacy group EVAdoption’s prediction of more than 25 million EVs on U.S. roads by 2030, only eight years away. BloombergNEF forecasts 125 million EVs on U.S. roads in 2040, up from 1.61 million at the end of last year, which would constitute about half the cars in this country. 

  “They’re making these forecasts that are basically licking your finger and sticking it up in the air,” David Rapson, a professor of energy economics at the University of California, Davis, who analyzes electric vehicle policy, said about California forecasts, which also applies more broadly. “Nobody knows what’s going to happen.” 

  Weaning the country to an alternative power source is an experiment that will pose a host of logistical and environmental challenges. One challenge will be installing nearly 1.2 million public and 28 private public charging stations by 2030 to accommodate the explosion of EVs to more than 48 million vehicles projected in eight years, according to McKinsey & Co. That projection would be partly covered by the 500,000 public chargers funded by $7.5 billion in the recently passed federal Inflation Reduction Act. It could also require building power plants and renewable generating projects at a truly colossal scale, not factored into EVs’ carbon footprint. One estimate places the demand at 1,700 terawatt-hours per year, or 41% of the U.S. electrical generating capacity, to meet a surge in use if there’s a complete transition and the United States has 350 million electric cars.  

  That power demand will be acutely felt in California, where, just days after the California Air Resources Board decreed the phaseout of internal-combustion cars, the state narrowly averted rolling blackouts during a record heat wave and the California Independent System Operator urged residents to cut back power usage by, among other things, avoiding charging their electric cars during times of peak energy demand. RealClearInvestigations has reported that California’s grid is straining under the load, while The New York Times reported that California faces “the threat of rolling blackouts for years to come,” a consequence of the state’s increasing reliance on solar power and wind farms that make for unpredictable electricity production and render California dependent on importing emergency electricity from neighboring states.

  “To think that we are going to completely eliminate these by far dominant sources of energy and transportation services in our economy in the next 13 years is a fairy tale,” said Rapson, who has authored papers challenging optimistic projections. 

  “They want to articulate a vision of hope and ambition that is pushing society towards a solution to climate change,” Rapson said. “That vision is going to run into massive constraints.” 

  Rapson, who believes the state’s unrealistic goals will still advance EV adoption even if they fall short of their targets, said the California Air Resources Board regulations come with a huge loophole: In their current form they don’t prevent the buying and selling of used cars, and they don’t prevent California residents from buying a new gasoline car in another state. The rules could be modified in future years to make it costly to register new cars bought out of state, but in their current form they create an escape valve for citizens who resist electric cars. 

  Even in the trendsetting auto market of California, which accounts for 40% of all EV purchases in this country, EVs accounted for only 12.5% of all car sales last year, and represent less than 2% of all the cars in the state, indicating that gasoline automobiles remain more popular. Banning the sale of new gas-powered cars “will likely be a boon to that industry and to used-car dealers in the state,” predicts James Sallee, an energy economist at UC-Berkeley. 

  He predicts that California’s mandate will only make gasoline vehicles more valuable, as people hold on to them and extend their lifetimes through care and maintenance, the unintended consequence of government policy making something scarce. 

  California Air Resources Board regulations would fine automakers $20,000 for each combustion engine car sold in violation of the restrictions, but residents could get around the EV mandate by buying used gasoline cars in the state and new gasoline cars out of state, unless California tightens its regulations to disincentivize its residents from buying the cars they prefer to own. 

  “As currently constructed,” Sallee wrote, “California residents would be free to import ICE [internal combustion engine] vehicles from out of state, even after the mandate is fully phased in.” 

  Despite the skeptical outlook of some EV researchers, the general tone of EV advocates is marked by enthusiasm and optimism. According to David Reichmuth, a senior engineer in the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Clean Transportation Program, the motives of EV critics are often tainted: “Some of the opposition will come from auto companies that want to delay the transition to electric vehicles, but others will be from fossil fuel interests or climate deniers.” 

  In his blog, Reichmuth noted: “The important thing is that you know that this is familiar and worn-out disinformation, designed to sow doubt and confusion.” 

  “There’s some questions about how quickly can we get there, and there’s a lot of details that will get worked out,” Reichmuth said in phone interview. 

  “But if you look at the big picture – if the [auto] industry says that’s where we’re going, if the climate science says that’s where we need to go, and you look at other countries around the world that are going in the same direction, too – it does seem really likely that we can make this work.” 

  Despite the obstacles, the Union of Concerned Scientists predicts that California’s new EV regulations will result in about half the cars in the state in 2035 being “zero-emission” models, increasing to nearly 90% of cars on California roads by 2045. 

  The Union’s analysis undercuts its claim of zero emissions. Running the numbers on the mileage it takes for an EV to become cleaner than a new gasoline sedan in terms of burning off its CO2 deficit and pulling ahead in greenhouse gas reductions, the organization determined this summer that an EV’s break-even point is 21,300 miles, or 22 months, based on average annual driving. For pickup trucks, the EV pickup pulls ahead at 17,500 miles, or 17 months, when compared to the average new gasoline pickup truck. 

  Those calculations are consistent with a Wall Street Journal analysis conducted last year by University of Toronto researchers, who determined that a 2021 Tesla Model 3, with an 82 kWh battery, would have to drive 20,600 miles to break even on greenhouse gas emissions with a 2021 Toyota RAV4 with a 30 mpg rating. 

  Reuters conducted a similar analysis and got much more favorable results. Reuters last year concluded that a Tesla Model 3 would need to drive just 13,500 miles to exceed the CO2 emissions benefits of a Toyota Corolla. The Reuters analysis crunched the numbers on a Tesla with a 54 kWh battery, considerably smaller than the Tesla power pack in the WSJ analysis, producing less greenhouse gas emissions during mining, processing, and assembly. Still, Reuters noted that in countries like China and Poland, where coal is the primary energy source used to generate electricity, the same Tesla 3 with the smaller battery would have to be driven 78,700 miles to reach carbon parity with the Corolla, showing how much difference a power grid’s fuel mix can make. 

  Not all studies are that kind to EVs. Some automakers, such as Swedish manufacturers Volvo and Polestar, have run their own numbers based on what they call conservative, precautionary estimates that suggest the payback period even under ideal conditions – 100% renewable wind energy – would be much longer: about 30,000 miles of driving. The payback would be closer to 70,000 miles in parts of the world where the power plant energy mix includes dirty fossil fuels. The expected lifespan of the Swedish cars in these studies is about 125,000 miles, which means that some drivers will reap greenhouse gas benefits for only half their electric vehicle’s expected usage. 

  One of the least understood factors that determine an EV’s greenhouse gas benefits is the alternative vehicle to which the EV is compared. Some researchers have noted that this “reference vehicle” is often a hypothetical car that gives the EV an illusory advantage. 

  “To our knowledge, there is not an awareness of the importance of these modeling choices, despite the large implied emission abatement differences,” UC-Davis energy economist Rapson and colleague Erich Muehlegger wrote in a recent paper. They contend that the EV is typically compared to the U.S. “fleet average,” a statistical composite that averages out the fuel efficiency of all cars purchased in a given year, including SUVs and pickup trucks. 

  But that’s not what happens in real life. Rapson and Muehlegger found that Californians who took advantage of financial incentives to buy Teslas would likely have bought plug-in hybrids or conventional hybrids without the incentive, not an average car or a gas guzzler, and comparing a Tesla to the average car skews the results. They contend that as a result of the sloppy comparison, the CO2 benefits of Teslas are overestimated by 600% in California. That overestimate would be considerably higher in parts of the country where the EVs are charged with less clean electricity derived from a higher mix of fossil fuels. 

  Cleaner Gasoline Cars

  The cleaner the car that the EV is replacing, the longer it takes the EV to catch up on CO2 emissions, and the existing gas car in the garage can be optimal because a new gas car comes with a carbon footprint from metals processing and manufacturing. 

  That’s why Nunes, the Harvard Law fellow, advised his friend to keep his Kia. Nunes was comparing the greenhouse gas effects of a new Tesla to a 15-year-old Kia that’s driven only about 4,000 miles a year, and concluded that at that rate it would take his friend more than a decade to burn off the Tesla’s carbon footprint. 

  According to research by Nunes and others, many EV owners use their electric car as a secondary vehicle, logging fewer miles and requiring more time to break even on CO2 emissions. Comparing four different scenarios, he concluded that the requisite break-even mileage for an EV with an 85 kWh battery is either 28,069 miles or 68,160 miles, and it would take the EV owner between 2.73 and 10.49 years to drive that distance, depending on a variety of circumstances. In all of Nunes’ scenarios, the alternative to buying an EV was either buying a new gasoline car or driving the old gas car. 

  Another major factor is the CO2 level of the electricity used to power EVs. The U.S. Department of Energy concludes that hybrids are actually cleaner than EVs in six states, but the key to that analysis is that it’s based on combining all the energy sources – such as natural gas, hydropower, wind farms – used to make electricity in those states. Another way of assessing the environmental impact of EVs is to look at the extra demand EVs put on a regional power grid, requiring power generation that comes primarily from fossil fuels. From this perspective, assuming more coal-fired and natural gas-burning electricity added to the grid, hybrids would generate less CO2 than EVs in several dozen states, according to a recent study.   

  “It’s long past the time to retire the phrase ‘zero emissions,’” said Tristan Burton, a computational mathematician who co-authored that study. “If you market something as a zero emissions vehicle, then people out there will think it’s really zero emissions.” 

  email: jmurawski@realclearinvestigations.com

  Twitter: @johnmurawski

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 19:20

• Is Saudi Arabia's Neom Project Too Ambitious?
  Is Saudi Arabia’s Neom Project Too Ambitious?

  By Felicity Bradstock of OilPrice.com

  Earlier this year, Saudi Arabia announced plans to dedicate an $80 billion fund to develop the Neom megaproject, aimed at establishing a futuristic living space in the northwest of the country. This forms part of Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030, which aims to diversify the national economy and make the country less reliant on its oil revenues. Saudi Arabia plans to develop Neom as a mega clean-energy city on a plot of land the size of Belgium. The space is expected to eventually become self-sufficient and provide a return on investment of between 13 and 14 percent. It will have no cars, roads, or greenhouse gas emissions and will be powered by 100 percent renewable energy, with 95 percent of the land being preserved for nature. 

  

  Bin Salman suggested that funds could increase to up to $106 billion if required, with the state investing most of the funds. Neom is expected to be one of the most complex construction developments in the world. Phase one will require $160 billion in funding, with the additional investment being provided through an initial public offering (IPO). 

  The much-talked-about Neom project will see the 10 regions developed in the northwest of Saudi Arabia. The most ambitious project is called ‘The Line’, two parallel skyscrapers aimed at housing 9 million people, a 170-kilometre building that juts into the Red Sea but is just 200 metres wide. What it lacks in width it makes up for in height at a staggering 500 metres tall, complete with a mirrored facade. If successful, this structure will be a major feat of engineering. The development will also include Oxagon, an industrial city with a manufacturing hub centred around tech industries, to be built on the sea and the mountainous region of Trojena. Neom will include a residential area, an industrial city, and a mountain tourism destination. 

  The Saudi Crown Prince, Mohammed bin Salman, said, “The designs revealed today for the city’s vertically layered communities will challenge the traditional flat, horizontal cities and create a model for nature preservation and enhanced human livability. The Line will tackle the challenges facing humanity in urban life today and will shine a light on alternative ways to live.”  Foundations for The Line superstructure are already being laid, but many architects are doubtful the building will ever be completed due to the major engineering hurdles. Others question the potential for the project to become net-zero in its lifetime, as pledged by the Saudi government, due to the high carbon emissions expected to be released during its construction. But these criticisms are not dampening Saudi Arabia’s high hopes for the project. 

  Antoni Vives, chief urban planning officer at Neom, believes the development is, so far, going to plan. Vives stated: “I want to be clear about this — Neom is a complex, bold, and highly ambitious undertaking and is most certainly not an easy one to deliver… “But we are making strong progress, and it’s exciting to see the vision come to life.” The most recent budget for the project has soared to $500 billion, part of Saudi Arabia’s National Transformation Plan in 2016, valued at $1.1 trillion.

  The structure is expected to be out of this world, with flying taxis, and a high-speed rail network with an end-to-end transit time of just 20 minutes. Planners also expect to see robotic avatars and holograms in its future. In addition to its ambitions to be a trailblazer in several new technologies, the Saudi government has also put connectivity at the centre of the Neom development. Located on the Red Sea, it is expected to form a major trade hub, with 13 percent of the world’s trade passing through the waters at present. Further, 40 percent of the world’s population currently live within a six-hour flight of the region, making it easily accessible. 

  In terms of renewable power, ENOWA, a subsidiary company of Neom will be tasked with developing sustainable energy and water systems in the region. The firm will oversee the development of a green hydrogen production plant as well as desalination plants for the provision of sustainable water, according to the Saudi Press Agency. ENOWA will work with ACWA Power and the U.S. chemical company Air Products to develop Neom’s green hydrogen capacity. Neom is expected to be powered entirely by renewable energy once completed. Although the country has been criticised for ‘greenwashing’ by proposing ambitious green energy targets with no clear strategy to achieve them, as well as using its renewable energy successes to distract from its human rights issues.

  Saudi Arabia has broken ground on its ambitious Neom development, the first of its kind worldwide, with the potential to provide a prototype for other sustainable megastructures. However, many experts across several industries are questioning whether the superstructure and renewable energy goals are realistic and whether the project will actually come to fruition. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 19:00

• The Key Issues For US Voters Right Now
  The Key Issues For US Voters Right Now

  Eight in ten U.S. voters would say that the economy is a very important factor when it comes to deciding who to vote for in the 2022 midterm elections, according to a poll by Morning Consult.

  As Statista’s Anna Fleck notes, the issue has remained an important topic for around 80 percent of respondents consistently since the start of the year.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Other topics likely to sway voters when they head to the ballots include education, immigration and gun policy. The latter has seen greater variation in terms of the number of people who consider it highly important through the past year, with the question of guns concerning more respondents through the summer months, and only in the past three months seeing a fall in numbers of people that would rate it as “very important.”

  The topic of abortion, on the other hand, has seen an uptick since the start of the year, with the latest survey finding that it is the second most frequently cited concern, with 53 percent of respondents saying it would be “very important” for them when deciding who they want in office.

  Meanwhile, where nearly two thirds of voters said that policies on the coronavirus would impact their decisions as of January this year, now only one third hold the same opinion.

  The relative importance of these topics varies depending on which side of the aisle voters are aligned with. For instance, where 66 percent of Republican voters considered immigration an important issue as of this month, only 38 percent of Democrats thought the same.

  The topic of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, however, is very important to 47 percent of Democrats versus only 25 percent of Republicans.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 18:40

• China Rebuffing US Requests To Resume Military Dialogue Until "Red Lines" Respected
  China Rebuffing US Requests To Resume Military Dialogue Until “Red Lines” Respected

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via The Libertarian Institute, 

  China on Thursday responded to a US call for the resumption of military communication channels that Beijing suspended in response to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) visiting Taiwan in August.

  Tan Kefei, a spokesman for the Chinese Defense Ministry, said that the US was responsible for the channels being suspended and that Washington must respect China’s concerns for them to be resumed.

  

  “If the US side wants to improve military communication between China and the US, then it should match words with deeds, demonstrate its sincerity, and earnestly respect China’s interests and major concerns, and remove the negative factors that impede the development of ties between the two militaries,” Tan said, according to The South China Morning Post.

  After Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, China called off three separate dialogues with the US military, but other lines of communication remain open. Earlier this month, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin spoke with his Chinese counterpart, Wei Fenghe, and the two military leaders agreed communication was important.

  Austin has said the Pentagon is working to reestablish the channels that were suspended. But at the same time, the US is looking to significantly increase support for Taiwan despite Beijing’s warnings over the issue. Tan said that the US needs to understand China’s “red lines.”

  The Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman further explained: 

  “Everything happens for a reason,” Tan told a monthly press conference in Beijing, adding that the suspension of the dialogues was China’s response in “safeguarding national sovereignty and dignity” against “malicious provocation” by the US.

  With an increased US military presence in the South China Sea and Taiwan, less communication between the two militaries increases the risk of an accident. And with US-China relations at their lowest point in decades, an accident could potentially spiral into a conflict.

  * * *

  Russian President Putin in a major Thursday speech called Taiwan “part of China”…

  Taiwan is an inherent part of the People’s Republic of China. This is the position we have & it remains unchanged. All positive gestures such as visits to Taiwan by US highest dignitaries are seen in Russia as nothing but provocation: Russian President Vladimir Putin pic.twitter.com/5lR7zeeAvs

  — ANI (@ANI) October 27, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 18:20

• Watch: Ilhan Omar Calls Anti-War Protesters "Dangerous Propagandists" For Disrupting Town Hall
  Watch: Ilhan Omar Calls Anti-War Protesters “Dangerous Propagandists” For Disrupting Town Hall

  After protesters crashed an AOC town hall earlier this month, calling her a sellout on foreign policy despite her being labeled a “progressive” – now it’s another member of ‘the Squad’ whose political rallies are getting crashed. 

  Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar held a town hall Thursday night in Richfield, Minnesota – which came days after she was among 30 Progressive Dems to issue a letter to President Biden urging a diplomatic solution on Ukraine, but which was retracted merely less than a day later after backlash from fellow Democrats. Like AOC before, anti-war activists demanded answers from Rep Omar on Ukraine. Journalist and independent political commentator Michael Tracy observed of a video clip of the exchange, “Pressed on her Ukraine war position for what may be the first time since February, Ilhan Omar just starts incoherently scream-crying”….

  Ilhan Omar doubles down on backing Ukraine and yells at anti-war protesters pic.twitter.com/MbIkuug52z

  — samirah (@SameeraKhan) October 28, 2022

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

  “You are supposed to be a progressive democrat! Anti-war! Anti-war!” – a protester can be heard shouting during her talk. She then responded: “We are helping Ukraine defend themselves…”

  “$80 billion to Ukraine is not anti war” – the man continued interrupting. She then struggled to explain as tensions in the room grew that the aid is saving Ukrainian lives amid the Russian onslaught. 

  Immediately after the town hall incident in which Omar was called a “warmonger” she took to Twitter to denounce the activists as “dangerous propagandists”.

  “I am sorry, you all aren’t ‘anti-war protesters,’ you are dangerous propagandists who are literally making a mockery of the anti-war movement,” she wrote in a pair of tweets.

  She added: “I have never had the pleasure of responding to [Russia’s] ridiculous internet disinformation in person before. Thank you for the opportunity”

  She defended her yes votes in support of massive US aid to Ukraine as not at all ‘promoting war’. “I am amazed at the nerve that some people have to not be upset with the country literally waging war, but at the country defending itself and those helping them do that,” the Minnesota Democrat commented additionally.

  I am sorry, you all aren’t “anti war protesters”, you are dangerous propagandists who are literally making a mockery of the anti war movement.

  I have never had the pleasure of responding to 🇷🇺 ridiculous internet disinformation in person before. Thank you for the opportunity ✌🏽 https://t.co/xzTLQCymgO

  — Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) October 28, 2022

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

  And further: “I was even told by one of these people tonight, ‘it’s America that started the Russia war,’ seriously wtf,” she said in the aftermath.

  But some have noted that seven months ago, and early on in the Russian invasion, Rep Omar was tweeting about how dangerous it would be to flood Ukraine with West-supplied weapons…

  Back in March, Ilhan Omar sounded a lot like the antiwar protesters she demonizes today as Putin puppets.

  Her rhetoric then was purely performative, while her actions ultimately reinforced the objectives of Empire.

  This is why we call them the #fraudsquad. pic.twitter.com/RM64jQCP6Y

  — Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) October 28, 2022

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

  And yet now Omar, AOC, and fellow Progressives in Congress have proven they are afraid to so much as raise the potential for diplomacy with Russia, in the face of nuclear-armed confrontation – even after President Biden himself admitted the world is staring down nuclear “Armageddon”. 

  The #FraudSquad surrenders yet again 🏳🏳🏳 https://t.co/ITfNUm0yt2

  — Gramsci en colère (@AmericanDevine) October 25, 2022

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

  During the town hall fiasco with the protesters, Omar defended her policies by broadly invoking the children of Ukraine…

  “We are helping little children like me that had been helped,” she said, in reference to her own experience of coming to America as a young refugee.

  

  “Listen. Unless you have not been paying attention to what is happening, there are millions of Ukrainians that have been displaced. There are piles of bodies that are being found in mass graves,” she said while raising her voice. “There are little children [whose] lives are being lost…” The protesters then cited the killings of civilians by Ukrainian forces in the Donbas going back to 2014.

  By the end of the back-and-forth, Omar is seen getting emotional and almost screaming, with her voice cracking in anger and frustration as she shouts down the heckler.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 17:44

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Finland Willing To Host NATO Nuclear Weapons On Border With Russia
  Finland Willing To Host NATO Nuclear Weapons On Border With Russia

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  NATO nuclear weapons could potentially be placed on Russia’s border with Finland if Helsinki joins the Western military alliance, Newsweek reported on Wednesday, citing a Finnish newspaper.

  The newspaper Iltalehti reported that the bill the Finnish government will put before the country’s parliament on joining NATO doesn’t include any opt-outs for hosting nuclear weapons.

  Finnish military sources told the paper that Finland’s foreign minister and defense minister committed to NATO back in July that they wouldn’t seek “restrictions or national reservations” if their application to join the alliance is accepted. Finnish President Sauli Niinisto said earlier this month that Finland had “no preconditions” for joining NATO.

  

  While Finland may be willing to host nuclear weapons, it’s unlikely they would be placed in the country after it joins NATO, at least in the near future. Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin has previously said the alliance has expressed no interest in placing nuclear warheads in Finland.

  Currently, the alliance keeps no nuclear warheads in countries that joined NATO after the end of the Cold War, although Poland recently said it’s had discussions with the US on hosting the weapons.

  Placing nuclear weapons in Finland, which shares an over 800-mile border with Russia, would be a major provocation toward Moscow. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said he doesn’t view Sweden and Finland joining NATO as a threat but said he will respond to the expansion of NATO military infrastructure in the region.

  Finland and Sweden’s NATO memberships have been ratified by 28 out of 30 alliance members, with only Hungary and Turkey to go.

  

  Turkey has threatened to block the Nordic nations from joining if they don’t live up to sign a memorandum signed back in June, but Ankara’s issues seem to be mainly with Sweden, and the new Swedish government has said it’s ready to fulfill the deal.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 10/28/2022 – 02:00

• If Red States Want Protection From Collapse They Will Have To Build Alternative Economies
  If Red States Want Protection From Collapse They Will Have To Build Alternative Economies

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

  Economic centralization is the ultimate form of organized conspiratorial power, because it allows a small group of people to dictate the terms of trade for a society and therefore dictate the terms of each person’s individual survival.

  For example, the Federal Reserve as a banking entity has free rein to assert policy controls that can disrupt the very fabric of the US economy and the buying power of our currency. They can (and do) arbitrarily create trillions of dollars from thin air causing inflation, or arbitrarily raise interest rates and crash stock markets. And according to former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan, they answer to no one, including the US government.

  I have started to see a new narrative being spread within mainstream media platforms as well as alternative media platforms suggesting that the Fed is necessary because it is working to “counter” the agenda of Joe Biden and the Democrats. Some people claim the central bank is “protecting” America from the schemes of the UN and European interests.

  This is perhaps the most moronic theory I’ve ever heard, but it makes sense that the central bank and its puppets would be trying to plant the notion that the Fed is some kind of “hero” secretly fighting a war on our behalf. The money elites associated with the Fed have inflated perhaps the largest financial bubble in the history of the world over the past 14 years. They did this with bailouts, they did this with QE, they did this with covid pandemic checks and loans, and now the bubble is popping. They know it is popping, because they WANT it to pop.

  As I have warned for years, the Fed has been staging a massive controlled demolition of the US economy. Why? Because the US economy must be diminished in order to make way for the “Great Reset,” a term created by the World Economic Forum to describe an unprecedented paradigm shift in the global economy and how it operates, and a complete upending of society. The end game is openly admitted – A one world digital currency system and one world governance controlled by a league of corporate partners working in concert with politicians.

  This is not conspiracy theory, this is conspiracy reality. This is undeniable fact.

  The Fed does not care about the US economy, its loyalty is to a global agenda and it takes its marching orders from a consortium of banking institutions called the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). This is how global central banking policies are coordinated to either work in harmony to create artificial stability, or to work in conflict, creating artificial crisis events.

  The truth is, the foundations of global governance already exist, but what the establishment does not have is public acceptance and total submission to their authority. What the banks want is to create a crisis so profound that the masses will run to THEM, begging for help. Once a population begs their captors for relief or resolution and it is given, it’s far less likely that the people will revolt against those captors in the future.

  Psychologically, the central banks and the establishment elites are trying to create a planetary Stockholm Syndrome, and we are seeing it already with the Federal Reserve being painted as the “shield” holding back the tide of economic ruin that they actually engineered.

  The initial stages of the Great Reset have already been launched. With the economic bubble expanded to incredible levels, the Fed is now staging an aggressive implosion using interest rate hikes into economic weakness.

  There are multiple threats that come with this dynamic:

  Stagflation

  With stagflation, normal credit market interventions do not necessarily work right away. As we saw recently with the official CPI print rising despite the Fed’s rate hikes, prices are not going to go down that easily. During the last stagflation event 40 years ago, the Fed raised rates to around 20% before prices finally stopped their epic climb, and back then the US did not have $31 trillion in debt nor did it just print over $8 trillions in the span of two years. Rates are likely to go much higher than many people expect.

  Treasury Bond Crisis

  The Fed replaced foreign investors like Japan and China as the primary buyers of US government Treasury Bonds, and they did so years ago. Now, with the Fed cutting purchases, reducing its balance sheet and raising rates, who is going to buy all that US debt and keep the government funded? Well, the answer is no one. For now, foreign purchases are enough to give a semblance of stability, but with geopolitical tensions rising it’s only a matter of time before countries like China dump their T-bond and dollar holdings completely. Then, the dollar’s world reserve status will come into question and inflation becomes an even greater threat as the trillions of greenbacks held overseas come flooding into the US again.

  Stock Market Spiral

  Without the Federal Reserve as the backstop fueling corporate share buybacks with cheap money, stocks will continue to slide. They’ll jump every now and then on rumors that the Fed will pivot away from tightening, and when the Fed doesn’t, stocks will start dropping again. Without stimulus and near zero rates there is no hope for equities beyond the occasional jawboning.

  The Fed has the ability to slow down or speed up all of the conditions above, and so far they appear to be speeding things up. We obviously can’t rely on the Biden Administration to do anything about these problems; in all likelihood Biden and his handlers are joyful in the prospect of the inevitable calamity. No one in government is trying to do anything legitimate to stop the landslide and no one is trying to prepare Americans for the consequences.

  In fact, Americans are being told there are no consequences. Thus, it’s up to individuals to prepare and warn their friends and family, but what about a larger organized response?

  Despite numerous claims that conservatives would “do nothing” to stop the rise of medical fascism in the name of the covid pandemic, almost half the states in the US stood their ground against the mandates and the push for vaccine passports. If this had not happened, America would look like China does today with endless lockdowns and draconian tracking apps. I don’t think enough people understand just how close we came to losing every freedom we have left – We were on the doorstep of an Orwellian hell, and probably civil war.

  The red state defiance of covid restrictions represented an organized action at the state and interstate level. What if these states did the same thing in the face of the economic crisis?

  Without organization at the state level to create alternatives to the mainstream economy the plight of the public becomes much more daunting and dangerous. Rather than trying to start completely from scratch, there are solutions that can be pursued at the state level to help mitigate the disaster.

  

  Currency Alternatives

  States like Texas, Utah and Louisiana (currently Dem controlled) all have legislation in place to utilize gold and silver as legal tender. Such efforts need to be expanded to as many states as possible, and the list of alternatives needs to grow. Gold, silver, copper, and other commodities like oil, electricity, wheat and grains could be used to back a state recognized currency system. Is it constitutional? Not technically, but the federal government violated the constitutional money creation mandate over a century ago when they allowed the institution of the Federal Reserve. The system is already broken.

  If states were to offer commodity backed currencies in parallel with the dollar, then they could actually stave off price inflation and possibly reverse it. This can’t be achieved by only one or two states, though. It would have to be organized among multiple states with multiple trade agreements in place.

  State Banks

  North Dakota has its own state run bank that provides credit opportunities specifically to ND locals and ND businesses. It has operated successfully for decades. Why has no other state adopted this model? Why should we rely on banks that are all tied back to corporate conglomerates that want to destroy us? State banks are the answer to the problem of leftists and globalists using corporate banks as a weapon against conservatives and liberty activists.

  Localized Trade Alternatives

  States should be utilizing the resources within their own borders to generate real jobs (rather than precarious and temporary service sector jobs) and economic prosperity. Why are states and citizens in those states allowing the federal government under Biden to dictate the terms of how they grow their economies?

  Leftists will claim that resource management needs to be supervised by federal agencies, but why? These people have consistently proven themselves to be incompetent and destructive. Why should they be trusted to control our ability to expand in our own states?

  Conservation and intelligent handling of state resources should not be relegated to bureaucrats who live outside of those states and who care nothing about the citizens of those states.

  State Incentives For Industry

  The vast majority of retail goods purchased by US citizens are made outside the US. It is a simple matter of profit incentives involving cheap labor overseas. But, what if there were big tax reductions for companies that manufacture in America? What if state banks offered easier credit to companies that build factories within that state’s borders and hire American workers at a reasonable wage? It can be done in the US – It’s been done in the past. If we don’t restart domestic production, our country is doomed to remain dependent on international corporations and foreign entities that do not have our best interests in mind.

  The only hope any state has to weather the coming storm is to localize production and manage their resources to kick-start trade. Local production would act as a redundancy should the mainstream economy collapse (which it will). States don’t need Biden’s permission to make this happen. They don;t need the Federal Reserve’s permission either. They can and should take action now before it’s too late.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 23:40

• US Military Conducts Successful Hypersonic Weapon Experiments In Virginia
  US Military Conducts Successful Hypersonic Weapon Experiments In Virginia

  A joint US Army-Navy advanced weapons program successfully tested hypersonic weapon components using a sounding rocket from a coastal launch pad in Virginia on Wednesday, amid continued efforts to catch up with Russia and China. So far, the US has no hypersonic weapons deployed — and this is a huge national security threat as nuclear war drums get louder. 

  Reuters said the sounding rocket (research rocket or a suborbital rocket) was launched from NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia, carrying eleven experiments designed to test and collect data for a future hypersonic weapons flight. Some of the tests included weapon communications, navigation equipment, and advanced materials to see if they could withstand the heat in a “realistic hypersonic environment,” according to a Navy statement.

  “This test will be used to inform the development of the Navy’s Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) and the Army’s Long Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) offensive hypersonic strike capability,” the Navy said, adding they’re “on track to support the first fielding of a hypersonic capability to the Army” in 2023.

  According to Epoch Times, a second sounding rocket is scheduled for launch on Thursday and will have 13 experiments with classified hypersonic weapon components. 

  

  In response to yesterday’s launch, Vice Admiral Johnny Wolfe, the director of Strategic Systems Programs who supervised the test, told CNN:

  “The launch today went extremely well.

  “As a matter of fact, we’ve just gotten done looking through our key observables, and every piece of data that we wanted to collect – at least preliminarily – has shown that we collected all that data.”

  Over the years, the one big problem we’ve outlined is that the US is falling behind in the hypersonic weapons race. Russia has already used hypersonic missiles in its war in Ukraine, while China launched one around the world.

  Not too long ago, Gregory Hayes, CEO of Raytheon Technologies Corp., said the US is “at least several years behind” China in developing hypersonic technology. 

  Meanwhile, the threat of nuclear war is increasing by the day, and we’ve told readers the next major conflict will be won with hypersonic weapons, fifth-generation stealth fighters and bombers, and drones. The Pentagon better get its act together and field a hypersonic weapon, as a conflict between Russia and/or China seems almost inevitable. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 23:00

• The Rise Of The Biomedical Security State
  The Rise Of The Biomedical Security State

  Authored by Aaron Kheriaty via RealClear Wire (emphasis ours),

  This essay is adapted from the forthcoming book, The New Abnormal: The Rise of the Biomedical Security State (Regnery Publishing, November 1).

  “History doesn’t repeat itself,” said Mark Twain, “but it often rhymes.” This is among the reasons we look to the past, straining as best we can through the deepening fog of time to discern lessons for our own day. Analogies to the events that came before are always imperfect, but nevertheless often useful for understanding our present moment. Thus, only a historical myopia can explain why it’s become so common to describe the events involving the covid pandemic as “unprecedented,” even though pandemics have tended to occur every hundred years or so. This nearsightedness is also perilous given, for instance, the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset Initiative” and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s recent pledge to spend $200 million on developing international biometric-based digital identifications. 

  

  Consider prior regimes for which the pretext of “public safety” during an emergency paved the way for excessive state-sanctioned powers and to, in some cases, totalitarianism. Going back centuries, whenever the Roman Republic faced an acute existential threat, such as an invading army, the Senate would appoint a dictator with immense and far-reaching authority. Over a period of three-hundred years, dictators were appointed on ninety-five occasions. Upon termination of the crisis, each was required to quickly relinquish their authority. And they did so every time––except once, and that marked the beginning of imperial overstretch, and, ultimately, the collapse of the Roman Republic.

  We should also recall that it was the unabashedly named Committee of Public Safety that carried out the French Revolution’s infamous Reign of Terror. Now I recognize that almost anyone who draws an analogy to the Third Reich is met with the charge of hyperbole. But one would be remiss not to mention Nazi Germany when specifically discussing historical cases of state-sanctioned authoritarian power being used in the name of “public safety.” It remains a sobering, instructive, and undeniable fact that Nazi Germany was governed for virtually the entirety of its existence under Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution, which allowed for the suspension of German law in times of an “emergency.”

  If these historical examples seem alarmist, consider that Australia rounded up citizens exposed to covid, including asymptomatic people, and shipped them to detention facilities against their will. Videos of Australian detention centers made their way onto social media before tech censors dutifully scrubbed them from the internet. Canada likewise built detention facilities for infected and exposed persons.

  Authoritarian measures during the pandemic went beyond detention of suspected or actual cases. The Medical Indemnity Protection Society (MIPS) is the singular authority for providing medical malpractice insurance in Australia. MIPS published “12 Commandments” to help physicians avoid disciplinary “notifications” by the country’s governing agency. MIPS Commandment #9 ominously warns Australian doctors that mentioning findings of a published scientific study not consistent with “public health messaging” could potentially result in them losing their ability to practice medicine.

  Likewise, in the United States, the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB), an authority on medical licensure and physician discipline, passed a policy in May 2022 on disciplining physicians for “misinformation” and “disinformation” that will guide all state medical boards and, in turn, the nation’s physicians they license. It might even become state law. Stunningly, the very first example of non-compliance cited involves the FSMB’s October 6, 2020 assertion about the efficacy of cloth masks—an assertion later shown to be false. If the FSMB genuinely wanted to combat falsehoods, it would start by addressing the ones it promulgated during the pandemic. It could then move on to those disseminated by our public health authorities, who routinely flip-flopped on “The Science.”

  My home state, California, took up the FSMB’s suggestion to codify its recommendations. I recently traveled to Sacramento to testify against this legislation in the State Senate. The law empowers the state medical board to discipline physicians for spreading “misinformation,” defined as statements that contradict the current scientific consensus (an ill-defined legal standard). Undermining its own central claims, the text of Assembly Bill 2098 made multiple statements about covid that were already outdated by the time I arrived in the capital, because—despite what our bureaucratic overlords posit—science constantly evolves. Alas, the controversial bill was ultimately voted into law last month, passing strictly along party lines.

  Fortunately, biomedical authoritarianism is meeting additional resistance. Both physicians and patients in California oppose AB 2098 because they recognize that a doctor with a gag order is not a doctor that can be trusted. They also understand that censorship is anathema to scientific progress. Along with other physicians in California, I will soon file a lawsuit in federal court challenging AB 2098 on First Amendment free-speech grounds. I am confident that this law—which undermines the medical-informed consent process, and, ultimately, harms patients—will not withstand judicial scrutiny. The burgeoning grassroots medical-freedom movement constitutes the necessary corrective to what has with frightening rapidity become the new abnormal.

  Dr. Aaron Kheriaty is a practicing psychiatric physician, Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and Senior Fellow at the Zephyr Institute. Follow @akheriaty

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 22:40

• State & Local Agencies Went All-In On Chinese Telecom Gear Despite Federal Ban
  State & Local Agencies Went All-In On Chinese Telecom Gear Despite Federal Ban

  While the federal government went to great lengths to block Chinese telecom equipment from US supply chains, state and local governments across the country continued to acquire all sorts of products designated a threat to national security, Axios reports, citing a new report published Wednesday by Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET).

  

  Federal officials, particularly under the Trump administration, have been warning that Chinese telecom equipment could open US systems to economic espionage or digital sabotage.

  As Axios notes;

  • State and local governments should better align themselves with federal policies in order to keep the gear out of schools, hospitals and other critical infrastructure across the country, according to a report published today by Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET).

  Background: Federal agencies have been banned since 2018 from procuring products from Chinese tech companies Huawei, ZTE, Hikvision, Dahua, and Hytera.

  • However, federal-level bans don’t apply to state agencies.
  • Only five states — Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas and Vermont — have enacted some measures to limit procurement of such equipment on national security grounds, though the report warns loopholes still exist in some of those states.

  The report highlights that between 2015 and 2021, at least 1,681 state and local entities bought equipment and services tied to five Chinese companies. The total value of these purchases was around $45 million, of which around 75% came from public school districts, colleges, and universities.

  

  Prisons, public hospitals and public transit systems also bought equipment.

  

  While the number of transactions has fallen since 2018, there were more than 600 procurements in 2021, and no indication that they’ve stopped according to the report’s co-author Jack Corrigan, a research analyst at CSET. “State and local governments can proactively take steps to purge these technologies from their supply chains, by adopting measures that are connected to federal guidance,” Corrigan said.

  More via Axios;

  Details: The purchases covered a wide range of products, including smartphones, surveillance cameras and networking equipment, according to the report, which is based on procurement records scraped from public documents.

  • The largest buyer, a mid-size public university in Michigan, invested more than $15 million in Huawei networking equipment and services during the seven-year period.
  • Two public school districts in Arkansas each spent more than $1 million dollars on Hikvision surveillance systems.
  • The report didn’t name these entities.

  Between the lines: Chinese telecom equipment is generally less expensive than gear from non-Chinese companies, making it an appealing procurement option for cash-strapped local U.S. agencies.

  • Local agencies also often lack the in-house technical expertise and procedures to understand and address the threats posed by foreign technology.

  “When the technologies are deployed in government networks, they can serve as entry points for any other networks that are connected to them,” co-author Michael Kratsios, former US CTO, told Axios. “If adversaries or hackers are looking to cripple public services, they could use this hardware as entry points to pursue these activities,” he added.

  Axios reports that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) plans to ban the sales of new equipment from Huawei and ZTE on national security grounds.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 22:20

• El Paso Mayor Says White House Asked Not To Declare Immigration Disaster As Border Crossings Spike
  El Paso Mayor Says White House Asked Not To Declare Immigration Disaster As Border Crossings Spike

  Authored by Charlotte Cuthbertson  via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Border Patrol agents in the area of El Paso, Texas, have apprehended more than 38,500 illegal immigrants in the 21 days since Oct. 1—averaging almost 13,000 per week, according to provisional Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data obtained by The Epoch Times.

  

  In January, agents in El Paso arrested an average of 4,500 per week.

  As with the whole southern border, illegal crossings in El Paso have trended up all year; the region has become the new hotspot after the Del Rio, Texas, area for most apprehensions per month.

  “If you think the lawlessness at the border and the millions illegally crashing it has been bad during Biden’s term so far, wait until the numbers keep rolling in for this FY. Already shattering records again,” the National Border Patrol Council wrote on its Twitter page on Oct. 24. The new federal fiscal year began on Oct. 1.

  “We said months ago he was just getting started. And he was.”

  The city of El Paso is receiving millions of dollars from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to feed, house, and transport the illegal aliens once they’re released by Border Patrol.

  Since May, when the city issued an emergency ordinance, it has set up a mammoth operation in conjunction with local NGOs to provide thousands of illegal immigrants with meals, hotel rooms, and help with bus or plane tickets to their chosen destination.

  More than 100 city employees are working full-time to assist with the operation, and several council members have expressed concern that local projects are being delayed because of the shift in resources.

  Venezuelan nationals have made up the bulk of the sudden increase in illegal crossings into El Paso since August (up to 70 percent, according to El Paso’s city manager).

  In September, more than 20,000 Venezuelan nationals turned up in El Paso; during the months of July and August, border agents had apprehended 611 and 3,539 Venezuelans respectively, according to CBP data.

  On Oct. 12, the Biden administration began returning Venezuelans to Mexico and promised that 24,000 will be approved to fly directly into the United States. Still, the overall illegal border crossing numbers have yet to decline.

  

  El Paso officials said that, traditionally, many illegal aliens have family members already in the United States, which means those family members can help pay for transportation and initial costs.

  However, recently, up to 50 percent of the aliens that the city is assisting have no ties in this country—making it more burdensome to provide support.

  Some city council members were pushing to declare a local disaster during a meeting at the end of September as the costs went through the roof.

  “Costs have risen from $55,000 a day to upwards to $250,000 a day,” City Manager Tommy Gonzalez said during the meeting.

  However, Mayor Oscar Leeser said, “The White House has asked at this point not to [declare a disaster].”

  Leeser said he, too, is against a disaster declaration, as is U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas), and El Paso County Judge Ricardo A. Samaniego.

  The White House didn’t respond to a request for confirmation of Leeser’s claim.

  Leeser said a declaration is unnecessary because he’s working with the Biden administration on solutions. As the issue began to escalate, Leeser said the federal government increased its flights transporting illegal immigrants to other parts of the country—easing the drain on El Paso city resources.

  Leeser said as long as the flights keep departing and the city can absorb the remaining aliens without Border Patrol having to release them onto the streets, a disaster declaration is unnecessary.

  El Paso Deputy City Manager Mario D’Agostino said CBP had increased its flights of illegal aliens out of the city to up to six per day, as well as multiple charter bus trips.

  “Now, instead of releasing to the streets, they’re using a lot more chartered flights and buses,” D’Agostino said during the Sept. 27 meeting.

  City Manager Tommy Gonzalez said FEMA has pledged $2 million upfront to cover costs from Oct. 1, but once that runs out (potentially within two weeks), the city will need to continue dipping into its general fund before being reimbursed.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 22:00

• Here's Every EV Charging Station Across The US
  Here’s Every EV Charging Station Across The US

  As the electric vehicle market continues to expand, having enough EV charging stations is essential to enable longer driving ranges and lower wait times at chargers.

  Currently, the U.S. has about 140,000 public EV chargers distributed across almost 53,000 charging stations, which are still far outnumbered by the 145,000 gas fueling stations in the country.

  In the graphic below, Visual Capitalist’s Niccolo Conte and Christina Kostandi map out EV charging stations across the U.S. using data from the National Renewable Energy Lab.

  The map has interactive features when viewed on desktop, showing pricing structures and the connector types when hovering over a charging station, along with filtering options.

  

  <!–

  <!–

  //–>

  //–>

  Which States Lead in EV Charging Infrastructure?

  As seen in the map above, most electric vehicle charging stations in the U.S. are located on the west and east coasts of the nation, while the Midwest strip is fairly barren aside from the state of Colorado.

  California has the highest number of EV charging stations at 15,182, making up an impressive 29% of all charging stations in America. In fact, the Golden State has nearly double the chargers of the following three states, New York (3,085), Florida (2,858), and Texas (2,419) combined.

  

   

  It’s no surprise the four top states by GDP have the highest number of EV chargers, and California’s significant lead is also unsurprising considering its ambition to completely phase out the sale of new gas vehicles by 2035.

   

  The Best States for EV Charging Speeds and Cost

  While having many charging stations distributed across a state is important, two other factors determine charging convenience: cost and charger level availability.

  EV charger pricing structures and charger level availability across the nation are a Wild West with no set rules and few clear expectations.

  Finding Free Electric Vehicle Chargers Across States

  Generous electric vehicle charging locations will offer unlimited free charging or a time cap between 30 minutes and 4 hours of free charging before payment is required. Some EV charging stations located in parking structures simply require a parking fee, while others might have a flat charging fee per session, charge by kWh consumed, or have an hourly rate.

  While California leads in terms of the raw amount of free chargers available in the state, it’s actually the second-worst in the top 10 states when it comes to the share of chargers, at only 11% of them free for 30 minutes or more.

  

   

  Meanwhile, Maryland leads with almost 30% of the chargers in the state that offer a minimum of 30 minutes of free charging. On the other hand, Massachusetts is the stingiest state of the top 10, with only 6% of charging stations (150 total) in the state offering free charging for electric vehicle drivers.

   

  The States with the Best DC Fast Charger Availability

  While free EV chargers are great, having access to fast chargers can matter just as much, depending on how much you value your time. Most EV drivers across the U.S. will have access to level 2 chargers, with more than 86% of charging stations in the country having level 2 chargers available.

  Although level 2 charging (4-10 hours from empty to full charge) beats the snail’s pace of level 1 charging (40-50 hours from empty to full charge), between busy schedules and many charging stations that are only free for the first 30 minutes, DC fast charger availability is almost a necessity.

  Direct current fast chargers can charge an electric vehicle from empty to 80% in 20-60 minutes but are only available at 12% of America’s EV charging stations today.

  

   

  Just like free stations, Maryland leads the top 10 states in having the highest share of DC fast chargers at 16%. While Massachusetts was the worst state for DC charger availability at 6%, the state of New York was second worst at 8% despite its large number of chargers overall. All other states in the top 10 have DC chargers available in at least one in 10 charging stations.

   

  As for the holy grail of charging stations, with free charging and DC fast charger availability, almost 1% of the country’s charging stations are there. So if you’re hoping for free and DC fast charging, the chances in most states are around one in 100.

  The Future of America’s EV Charging Infrastructure

  As America works towards Biden’s goal of having half of all new vehicles sold in 2030 be zero-emissions vehicles (battery electric, plug-in hybrid electric, or fuel cell electric), charging infrastructure across the nation is essential in improving accessibility and convenience for drivers.

  The Biden administration has given early approval to 35 states’ EV infrastructure plans, granting them access to $900 million in funding as part of the $5 billion National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program set to be distributed over the next five years.

  Along with this program, a $2.5 billion Discretionary Grant Program aims to increase EV charging access in rural, undeserved, and overburdened communities, along with the Inflation Reduction Act’s $3 billion dedicated to supporting access to EV charging for economically disadvantaged communities.

  With more than $10 billion being invested into EV charging infrastructure over the next five years and more than half the sum focused on communities with poor current access, charger availability across America is set to continue improving in the coming years.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 21:40

• US Hits More Iranian Officials With Sanctions As Protests Reach 40 Days
  US Hits More Iranian Officials With Sanctions As Protests Reach 40 Days

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The US on Wednesday announced new sanctions on Iranian officials for their alleged role in cracking down on protesters inside Iran as demonstrations and violence continue across the country.

  Announcing the sanctions, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the US will “continue to find ways to support” protesters inside Iran. He said the measures target 14 individuals and three entities.

  

  The new sanctions come as negotiations between the US and Iran to revive the nuclear deal, the JCPOA, have been stalled. US officials have said the JCPOA is not their “focus” now as they look for ways to support Iranian protesters. An Israeli official told The Times of Israel on Wednesday that the US has soured on the possibility of resuming talks with Tehran.

  The new sanctions hit members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Iranians that work in the country’s prison system. The entities targeted by the sanctions are accused of participating in censorship and the surveillance of Iranians.

  The protests were sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini in police custody, and Wednesday marked the 40th day since she died. Iran has accused the US and Israel of fomenting the protests, which Iranian officials have denounced as riots.

  Iranian officials have said at least 30 security officials have been killed by demonstrators, including members of the IRGC. On Wednesday, Iranian media reported that an IRGC member was shot dead by “rioters” in the Iranian city of Malayer.

  It’s not clear if the US and Israel are involved in the violence, but Israel does have a long history of carrying out covert attacks inside Iran, including assassinations. Back in May, Israel was said to be behind the killing of an IRGC colonel in Tehran and was suspected of involvement in a string of other mysterious deaths around the same time.

  1. Now in their sixth week, nationwide protests in Iran continue with intensity. In the city of Mahabad–Iranian Kurdistan– thousands of protesters chant “woman, life freedom” (zhan, zhian, azadi) pic.twitter.com/9Z6gJlsErg

  — Karim Sadjadpour (@ksadjadpour) October 27, 2022

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

  The US has signaled that it’s trying to give material support to the Iranian protesters by giving them better access to the internet, which has been restricted. When asked if the US was getting involved in the protests, CIA Director William Burns said, “All I can say is we are going to continue to be strongly supportive as a government in the free flow of information.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 21:20

• Russia Warns US Non-Military Satellites Are "Legitimate Targets"
  Russia Warns US Non-Military Satellites Are “Legitimate Targets”

  Russia has issued a new warning Thursday aimed at the United States at a moment Moscow-appointed officials appear to be retreating from tge southern city of Kherson as it comes under increased Ukrainian shelling. 

  The Associated Press reports of the new Kremlin warning as follows, “Amid the battles, Russia issued a warning that the United States could be drawn into the conflict, adding it could target Western commercial satellites used for military purposes in support of Ukraine.”

  The statement came from the deputy chief of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s arms control and nonproliferation department, Konstantin Vorontsov, who said “Quasi-civilian infrastructure could be a legitimate target for retaliation.”

  

  It also comes soon on the heels of the question of potential Pentagon funding for Elon Musk’s Starlink systems, after SpaceX said it can’t be expected to foot the bill indefinitely.

  Ukraine’s forces have called Starlink essential to its ability to repel the Russian advance, as it’s often used in frontline communications where no other comms links exist. 

  According to The Moscow Times: 

  Commercial satellites used by the United States to assist Ukraine in its war against Russia are “legitimate” targets for attacks, a Russian diplomat said Wednesday.

  Private assets like Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite internet constellation, as well as Maxar and Planet Labs earth observation satellites, have proven critical in keeping Ukrainians online and piercing the fog of war.

  This is not the first time the Kremlin suggested such a threat. Vorontsov had warned just last month that non-military satellites used by Ukraine “constitute indirect involvement in military conflicts” – hinting that they could eventually be targeted. 

  Vorontsov didn’t mention Starlink by name in his new statement to the United Nations…

  Vorontsov did not mention any specific satellite companies though Elon Musk said earlier this month that his rocket company SpaceX would continue to fund its Starlink internet service in Ukraine, citing the need for ‘good deeds’ https://t.co/9z4a3EewHZ pic.twitter.com/8y4GbIvsOo

  — Reuters (@Reuters) October 27, 2022

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

  Also on Thursday, Foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova charged that Washington is pursuing “thoughtless and mad” escalation.

  “The more the US is drawn into supporting the Kyiv regime on the battlefield, the more they risk provoking a direct military confrontation between the biggest nuclear powers fraught with catastrophic consequences,” said Zakharova.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 21:00

• The Firings Begin: Twitter CEO, CFO, & Top Censor Escorted Out
  The Firings Begin: Twitter CEO, CFO, & Top Censor Escorted Out

  As the bell tolls for the end of the first chapter of Twitter’s life as a deep state narrative-enabling machine, the firings have begun with Musk becoming ‘Chief Twit’.

  

  Just minutes after the world’s richest man has reportedly closed the $44 billion deal, The NYTimes reports that, according to sources that declined to be identified, the Twitter executives who were fired include:

  • Parag Agrawal, Twitter’s chief executive,

  • Ned Segal, the chief financial officer,

  • Sean Edgett, the general counsel, and

  • Vijaya Gadde, the top legal and policy executive, (or censorship czar).

  

  We suspect she was first on the list given this tweet from Musk earlier in the year…

  pic.twitter.com/1CE7rjBrNH

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 27, 2022

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

  As a reminder, having been with Twitter since 2011, Gadde was the key executive in charge of ‘trust and safety, legal and public policy functions‘ – described by Politico as the company’s “moral authority.” 

  Gadde holds one of the most controversial positions at Twitter: Her teams decide how to moderate content. That’s made her a target of right-wing criticism, particularly when Twitter blocked the distribution of a New York Post article about President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, in 2020. She faced a renewed wave of criticism after multiple reports confirmed she was behind the decision to ban Trump from Twitter. -Politico

  In other words, Gadde is likely the exec who signed off on ZeroHedge’s February 2020 ban for speculating that Covid-19 may have emerged from a Wuhan Lab, and President Trump’s January 2021 ban in connection with the capitol riot.

  And we are not surprised at the others…

  In all seriousness, imagine being such an arrogant, incompetent, entitled litttle wokester that your pissy texts provoked the richest man on earth to buy your employer just so he could fire you in his first act as owner. pic.twitter.com/NjpCOB9gbM

  — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) October 28, 2022

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

  At least one of the executives who was fired was escorted out of Twitter’s office, NYTimes reports.

  Please do not feel too bad for these poor, dejected executives, as Insider reports, through “change in control” provisions in employment contracts for top leadership, they will receive a certain amount of severance and an automatic acceleration of their shares, so long as Musk fires them.

  The provisions are disclosed in regulatory filings.

  • Agrawal is set to receive the largest payout of $38.7 million, due largely to the entirety of his shares vesting upon his firing.

  • Segal is set to receive a $25.4 million payout for getting fired.

  • Gadde will leave with $12.5 million.

  As we detailed earlier, over 1,100 employees have left Twitter since Musk announced his intention to buy the company back in January, with almost a third going to Google or Meta.

  

  The figures come from a new analysis of LinkedIn data, with the report noting that other workers have moved to the likes of Pinterest, LinkedIn, Snap, and TikTok.

  We suspect, as Elon warned, it’s sinking now for some…

  Will we see this tomorrow?

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 20:53

• Violent Crime Is Driving A Red Wave
  Violent Crime Is Driving A Red Wave

  Authored by Charles Lipson via RealClear Wire,

  Two weeks before the 2022 midterms, fear of crime is second only to worries over inflation and recession. Both issues – personal security and economic security – affect voters directly. They arise every time voters ride the subway, walk down a dark street, pay the cashier at the grocery, or fill up their truck. That’s why survey after survey says they are the top issues motivating voters this November. That’s bad news for Democrats. Pollsters say Republicans hold huge advantages on the economy, inflation, and crime, the issues that matter most to voters.

  

  Since crime is essentially a local issue, why does it hurt Democrats running for national or statewide office? Because the Democratic Party has associated itself with the notion that “social justice” and “racial equality” require fundamentally changing policing and incarceration. The problem, they say, is police, not criminals. In practice, that means Democrats, especially progressives, favor weaker law enforcement, easier conditions for bail (even for those charged with violent offenses), and less funding for police officers. That message was encapsulated in the slogans “defund the police” and “reimagine policing,” which took hold in 2020 after George Floyd was killed by a Minneapolis cop.

  Not all Democrats embraced this self-defeating fad. Joe Biden, notably, spoke out against it. But progressives marched in lock-step, and their policies became the party’s dominant message on crime. Not just dominant, uncontested. Left-wing prosecutors ran on that message, won in city after city, and implemented it with disastrous effects. They had strong backing from state and local Democratic politicians. Pushback inside the party was tepid, for fear of alienating white progressives as well black leaders and activists.

  Now Democrats are stuck with the consequences on the streets and, soon, at the ballot box. The party’s “soft on crime” image has become a political albatross, which candidates cannot readily discard. They are weighed down for two reasons. First, they hold power nationally and in almost every major city, so voters hold them responsible for bad outcomes. The party’s unwillingness to enforce basic laws and protect the public is exemplified by the porous Southern border, a deliberate policy choice by the Biden administration. The result has been an unprecedented influx of illegal immigrants (some 2.4 million in the last fiscal year alone), plus a surge of deadly drugs. Mexican cartels have reaped billions in profits, five or six times as much as they made before Biden threw open the border.

  Second, when the movement to defund police was at its height, no prominent national Democrats were willing to push back forcefully. That means candidates today cannot appeal to the public on these issues. None chose to follow Bill Clinton’s path during the 1992 presidential campaign, when he denounced Sister Souljah’s openly racist statements. None, including Joe Biden, were willing to become the pro-law enforcement face of the party, to denounce widespread rioting during the summer of 2020, to urge a crackdown on arsonists, looters, muggers, carjackers, and killers. Far from it. When Democrats held their nominating convention in Milwaukee that summer, they remained silent about the violence. Biden chose as his running mate a California senator who personally urged her Twitter followers to send money to a Minnesota nonprofit that helped post bail for protestors accused of breaking the law.

  Voters get the point – and they don’t like it. They link the rise in crime to Democratic policies, to their unwillingness to make public safety a high priority, to their refusal to enforce the law. They don’t believe candidates who blame these problems mainly on bad policing or “systemic racism.” Voters do recognize the serious problems plaguing poor, minority communities and, for some six decades, have supported social-welfare programs to address them (with uneven results). But that doesn’t mean they accept crime, especially violent crime, whatever its social roots.

  Voters are saying they want more public safety, which means more policing, not less. They don’t think their position is racist because they want fair, unbiased treatment of blacks, whites, Hispanics, and Asians. They don’t want to ignore persistent poverty and crime in inner cities. They want effective programs to deal with them. But they do not believe, as progressives do, that these problems are somehow due mainly to “white supremacy.” On the contrary, voters have witnessed a steep, long-term decline in those noxious attitudes.

  On criminal justice issues, Americans see sharp differences between the two major political parties. They know Republicans have long favored more support for law enforcement, more funding, and more policies like “broken windows” policing, which seek to reduce crime by punishing minor offenses before the perpetrators succeed and move on to larger ones. They know Democrats have consistently opposed these policies and dismantled them in cities they govern. They can see the results for themselves.

  The Democrats’ message on crime is failing for another reason: They control the cities where crime is rampant. Voters around the country see the connection, and it hurts Democrats everywhere. The pain is compounded because the party has no good answers about what to do next, aside from more spending on social services and mental health (which are badly needed) and controlling guns (which faces formidable constitutional obstacles, as well as practical obstacles since millions of people already own millions of guns).

  Voters aren’t inventing their fear of crime. They see it daily on local news, followed by interviews with the victims’ anguished families. They see videos of local stores being ransacked by organized gangs – none ever arrested. They see it firsthand when they walk into Walgreens and have to ask a clerk to unlock the Plexiglas case to get a tube of toothpaste. They see it again when they walk on local streets, trying to avoid homeless camps, open-air drug markets, and discarded needles.

  National data tells a similar story. Violent crime, in particular, has reached record levels. The problems are not limited to big cities like Chicago or Philadelphia or progressive bastions like Seattle, Portland, and San Francisco. Small and mid-sized cities face the same problems, without the media spotlight. In 2022, the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program lists the ten most dangerous cities as Little Rock, Memphis, Tacoma, Detroit, Pueblo, Cleveland, Springfield, Lansing, Kansas City, and Chattanooga. Democrats govern all of them except Chattanooga, whose mayor does not list a party affiliation. Once again, voters have no trouble making the connection.

  The desire for better law enforcement became national news earlier this year when San Francisco voters recalled their uber-progressive prosecutor, Chesa Boudin. Savvy Democrats saw that as a warning. But by then, it was too late for many of them. They were locked into weak positions on crime. There wasn’t much they could do besides change the subject.

  Voters don’t want to change the subject. They want to change policies. They want much better public safety, fairly administered. They are sick of virtue signaling, wishful thinking, and criminals released to repeat their offenses. That’s what they are saying to pollsters. Soon, that’s what they will say at the ballot box.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 20:40

• China Praises Iran's Fight Against Extremists After ISIS Mosque Attack
  China Praises Iran’s Fight Against Extremists After ISIS Mosque Attack

  ISIS has claimed responsibility for a major terror attack against Iranian civilians at the Shahcheragh Shrine in the city of Shiraz, southern Iran, which killed at least 15 and injured 40 more. 

  A manhunt is still underway for a third attacker after two were apprehended at the scene. Hours after the gunmen stormed the mosque Amaq news agency, which is an ISIS propaganda outlet, issued a statement saying its members “targeted groups of Sunni refusal infidels inside the shrine with his machine gun, causing the death of tens of them.”

  PressTV reported in the aftermath that there were two children among the victims, in the biggest terror attack on Shiraz since 2008, when a mosque bombing killed 14 people.

  

  Iran’s IRNA cited eyewitnesses who described the attackers as “takfiri terrorists” – a reference to hardline Sunni groups like ISIS or al-Qaeda. Iran-linked Nour news in early reporting described the men as “not Iranian nationals.” 

  As we underscored previously, it is likely that Iranian security services will use this latest incident to justify the need to crack down harder on anti-government protesters. What have been dubbed “anti-hijab” demonstrations have become progressively fiercer in the weeks since the death of 22-year old Mahsa Amin in police custody. 

  The White House has since alleged that Russian advisors could be assisting security forces of the Islamic Republic in stamping out the protests. There have been reports this week of multiple thousands gathered in major cities shouting anti-government slogans. 

  Meanwhile, in a rare statement of solidarity, China’s foreign ministry “strongly” condemned the Shiraz mosque attack while praising Iran’s fight against “extremists”. 

  Spokesperson Mao Ning said in a Thursday briefing, “China is shocked by and strongly condemns the attack. China firmly opposes all forms of terrorism and supports the government and people of Iran in fighting extremists and terrorists and upholding peace and stability in the country.”

  

  Both China and Russia have been seen of late as more closely aligning themselves with Tehran, at a moment all three are being isolated and put under increased political pressure by the United States, including sanctions. As for Iran-China, the US Treasury has continued to ramp up targeting of sanctions-busting oil shipments, particularly punishing Chinese shipping companies alleged to be involved in Iranian crude imports.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 20:20

• Dozens Of Former Charlie Crist Staffers And Colleagues Endorse Ron DeSantis For Governor
  Dozens Of Former Charlie Crist Staffers And Colleagues Endorse Ron DeSantis For Governor

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Dozens of former staffers and colleagues of gubernatorial candidate Charlie Crist have endorsed his opponent, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

  

  Crist is the former Republican governor of Florida who later became an Independent before he joined the Democratic Party and was elected to the House of Representatives. He’s currently running against DeSantis, a Republican.

  “Together, we have known Charlie in virtually all phases of his career and public life,” the open letter stated. “We are well-qualified to endorse in the Florida Governors’ race because we have significant experience in public service to the state of Florida.”

  George LeMieux, former U.S. Senator of Florida and Crist’s former chief of staff, signed onto the letter. Other individuals who signed include former Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp, former Agricultural Commissioner Charles Bronson, former Attorney General Bill McCollum, former Crist chief counsel Jason Gonzales, and former State Senate President Kenn Pruitt, as well as dozens more.

  “Governor DeSantis has delivered for Florida. He has led our state with courage and conviction. He has demonstrated his ability to lead us through difficult times,” they added. “We stand with Governor DeSantis because the stakes are too high. We urge Florida to re-elect Ron DeSantis as our Governor.”

  Crist won his gubernatorial election as a Republican in 2006 but didn’t seek reelection and instead ran for the Senate in 2010, ultimately losing to now-Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). As he ran for Senate, Crist left the GOP and became an Independent before becoming a Democrat, running for governor in 2014, and losing. He was elected to Congress in 2016 and stepped down earlier this year.

  On Monday evening, DeSantis and Crist held their first and only debate. At one point, DeSantis brushed off Crist’s claims that the Republican governor wants to run for president in 2024.

  “You’re running for governor,” Crist said. “Why don’t you look in the eyes of the people of the state of Florida and say to them if you’re re-elected, you will serve a full four-year term as governor. Yes or no?” DeSantis said he’s only looking to defeat Crist and be reelected as Florida’s governor.

  “I know that Charlie’s interested in talking about 2024 and Joe Biden, but I just want to make things very, very clear,” DeSantis said. “The only worn out old donkey I’m looking to put out to pasture is Charlie Crist.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 20:00

• Watch: Tesla With Gas-Generator Range Extender Completes 1,800-Mile Trip
  Watch: Tesla With Gas-Generator Range Extender Completes 1,800-Mile Trip

  Recent comments from Elon Musk show that the ‘green’ billionaire still believes in fossil fuels, at least in the “short-term,” to keep society moving. One YouTuber has taken Musk’s comment to heart and created a gas-powered range extender for his Tesla. 

  YouTube channel Warped Perception said in the video’s description he built the “first ever Cordless Tesla” powered by a small gas power plant generator on the back of his Model S.

  “This is the first version of the cordless Tesla which is burning gasoline to charge the car instead of the conventional plug-in charger,” said Matt Mikka, who runs the YouTube channel. 

  

  Mikka told Bussiness Insider: “I really like my Tesla, but what I don’t like is stopping to charge, especially on a road trip. I don’t even like stopping to fill up my gas-powered car, and that’s way faster than charging.” 

  He told the Insider the 1,800-mile trip encountered some problems: 

  Since the car consumed more energy than the generator could produce while driving, Mikka had to stop for 5-6 hours per day while the Tesla sat and charged. At hotels, he left the noisy generator running overnight in the parking lot so he could have a nearly full battery by morning. During one highway stint, he was pulled over for driving too slowly as he tried to keep energy consumption down. 

  “This was a cool build but to me it was basically useless. It just didn’t have enough energy,” Mikka said in the video. “My goal is to drive at road-trip speeds for as long as I want until I get tired, not until the car needs to be charged.”

  He told Insider he’s working on a new generator-powered Tesla that improves upon the original design. 

  “I believe with version 2 I will be approaching the perfect car overall and definitely the ultimate road trip car,” he said. –Insider 

  What Mikka got wrong was the size of the power plant due to the inability to meet the power demands of the Model S. If he had a light enough electric vehicle with a power plant that produced enough power — maybe he could be onto something. 

  However, the supercar maker Ariel Atom has already beaten Mikka to the punch by recently unveiling its jet turbine range extender for a new EV race car. 

  “The jet turbine is a range extender – it exists to charge the 56kWh battery, not drive the wheels,” Top Gear wrote in the video description. 

  Since fossil fuels aren’t going anywhere and the move to decarbonize the grid and everything within steams ahead, perhaps the best of both worlds is an EV with a fossil fuel range extender power plant: making it cordless. It could save the government billions of dollars in EV infrastructure spending. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 19:40

• Most Catholic Voters Don’t Share Catholic President’s Priorities
  Most Catholic Voters Don’t Share Catholic President’s Priorities

  Authored by Philip Wegmann via RealClear Wire (emphasis ours),

  President Biden walked on stage in the dark of the Howard Theatre and declared the coming midterms, then just three weeks away, “the most consequential election in our history.” Insisting that abortion was on the ballot this year, Biden promised that if Democrats kept their majorities, they would codify Roe v. Wade in federal law.

  “I want to remind us all how we felt that day,” Biden told a congregation gathered by the Democratic National Committee of the Supreme Court decision to repeal Roe. “The anger, the worry, the disbelief.” He added, “If you care about the right to choose, you got to vote.”

  

  It was a call to action from the man who is only the second Roman Catholic president in U.S. history – and America’s first and only pro-choice Catholic president. But in swing states Democrats must win if they are to preserve their Senate majority, and on the eve of the midterms, a majority of Catholic voters do not necessarily share the president’s priorities.

  A new RealClear Opinion Research poll, done in concert with Catholic television network EWTN, shows that a majority of Catholic voters in six key battleground states would rather let states determine abortion policy; believe that the economy remains the most significant concern for the country; and generally favor Republican challengers and incumbents in the coming electoral contests.

  Topline findings: Full polling breakdown

  Those results are significant given that Catholic voters, who make up roughly one-fourth of the U.S. electorate, were an influential demographic in the last presidential election. With the Senate split 50-50, they may be positioned not just to determine who controls that body, but also to help define the next two years of Biden’s first term. Democrats currently hold the Senate only by virtue of the fact that Vice President Kamala Harris casts the deciding vote in case of a tie. If Republicans net one seat, they take control of that body and perhaps the destiny of the White House legislative agenda.

  Georgia

  Sen. Raphael Warnock was widely considered one of the most vulnerable Democrats up for reelection this year. Allegations that challenger Herschel Walker paid for a girlfriend’s abortion, however, seemed to put Republicans on the back foot. With Election Day only two weeks away, the race is a toss-up, with Warnock leading Walker by just one percentage point in the RealClearPolitics polling average.

  But recent headlines have not swayed the Catholic electorate in Georgia. Among these voters, Walker leads Warnock 64.7% to 32.7%. In the governor’s race there, they also favor incumbent Republican Brian Kemp, 67.1%, over Democrat Stacey Abrams, 31.1%.

  Biden is seriously underwater among Georgia Catholics, as more than two-thirds (68%) disapprove of his performance in office while only 30% approve. An overwhelming majority, 59.6%, believe abortion should be decided by the people through their elected representatives or ballot initiatives rather than the courts. Just 6.4% say that the issue is the most important facing the country right now, compared to 67.1% who identify economic issues as their top concern.

  Pennsylvania

  Pennsylvania may prove the best chance for the Democrats to pick up a Senate seat this year. Republican Dr. Mehmet Oz currently trails Lt. Gov. John Fetterman in the RCP average by 1.3 points. And even though a majority of Catholic voters, 56.5%, don’t approve of Biden’s job performance, they favor the Republican Senate candidate by a smaller margin: 50.7% support Oz while 45.2% are backing Fetterman.

  At least in the Keystone state, Catholic voters seem prepared to split the ticket. A majority support the Democrat in the race for governor: Josh Shapiro leads Republican Doug Mastriano 50.8% to 44.5% on the eve of the election.

  The economy is the driving factor among Catholic voters in Pennsylvania, although abortion remains a significant factor. A majority, 60.6%, identified jobs, inflation, and rising interest rates as the top concerns facing the nation, while nearly 10% say the abortion issue is the chief challenge.

  A majority of Catholics there, 55.7%, still would like to see the abortion issue handled by elected representatives and through ballot initiatives, rather than through the courts.

  Arizona

  This state has been viewed as a pick-up opportunity for Republicans, and Sen. Mark Kelly remains at risk there, but his challenger Blake Masters has never wrested away the lead. The Democrat has, however, seen his advantage shrink steadily. Kelly leads Masters by just 2.5 points.

  Among Arizona Catholics, the race is also tight. They favor Masters by a margin of about five percentage points over Kelly, 51.4% to 46.3%. The numbers are similar in the governor’s race, where 52.5% of that electorate backs broadcaster Kari Lake over Secretary of State Katie Hobbs with 46.9%.

  The president is not popular among Arizona Catholics. A clear majority, 58.5%, disapprove of the way he does his job compared to 39.5% who approve, meaning that he may turn off more Catholics than he draws to the polls.

  Abortion is not a top concern for these voters. Only 7.6% identify the issue as the most important facing the nation, and 60% want abortion policy determined at the state level through elected representatives and ballot referenda.

  Catholic voters in Arizona are much more concerned about the state of the economy, with 58.5% identifying jobs, inflation, and interest rates as the chief national problems. In this border state, immigration and border security rank second, with 14.2% of Catholics identifying it as their top concern.

  Nevada

  Nevada may prove the most pivotal Senate race this cycle. Former Republican Attorney General Adam Laxalt and Democrat Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto are running neck and neck in a race in which the RCP average has Laxalt’s margin as less than a single percentage point. This is the incumbent’s first reelection bid, and Nevada Catholics haven’t yet warmed up to the Democrat. A clear majority, 56.7%, favor Laxalt over Cortez Masto with 36.4%. The numbers are nearly identical in the governor’s race: 55.6% of Catholic voters favor Republican challenger Joe Lombardo over Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak with 34.2%.

  Just 33% of Catholics in Nevada approve of Biden compared to 63.3% who disapprove. And even in this famously libertarian state, abortion is not a top concern. When asked to identify the most important issue facing the nation, 64.3% said economic issues, 12.4% replied with immigration and the border, and 10.3% pointed to climate change.

  Only 5.4% said the top challenge facing the country today was abortion. As far as that issue is concerned, 59.8% said it should be dealt with at the local level through elected representatives.

  Florida

  For a while, Florida was seen as an opportunity for Democrats to go on the offense. But Sen. Marco Rubio has pulled away in the final stretch against Democratic challenger Rep. Val Demings and now leads in the RCP average by 6.4 points. Here, Catholics clearly favor the incumbent, supporting Rubio, 59.1%, over Demings, 36.9%. That preference for Republicans expands in the race for governor where 61.4% prefer Gov. Ron DeSantis over former Gov. Charlie Crist, 34.5%.

  Catholic voters here are much more likely to identify economic concerns as a top priority over social issues. A whopping 67.6% say that economic issues are the top challenge compared to just 7% who identified abortion policy as the country’s chief concern. Overall, 59% want abortion policy to be set at the local level. The Catholic electorate has soured on Biden: Just 35.9% of these voters approve of the president, while 61.4% disapprove.

  Ohio

  The open Ohio Senate race leans Republican, and here the GOP is on the defensive to preserve the seat vacated by retiring Sen. Rob Portman. J.D. Vance leads Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan by a slim 2.4-point margin.

  If the race was up to Catholic voters, the seat would stay red. A majority, 55.5%, favor Vance over Ryan, 41%. Catholic voters are even more enthusiastic about backing a Republican in the governor’s race there. They much prefer Gov. Mike DeWine, 61.3%, over Democratic challenger Nan Whaley, 34.4%.

  Just like their brethren in other swing states, Ohio Catholics have soured on the president. A sizable majority, 62.4%, do not believe Biden has done a good job in the White House. If they agree with him that the coming elections are the most important in recent memory, it isn’t for the same reason. Just 7.3% of Catholic voters believe that abortion is a top national concern, compared with 59.8% who identified the economy in that category.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 19:20

• Amazon Implodes More Than 20% After Missing on Revenues, Disappointing On AWS, Catastrophic Guidance
  Amazon Implodes More Than 20% After Missing on Revenues, Disappointing On AWS, Catastrophic Guidance

  Update (1645ET): During the earnings call, Amazon says sales growth moderated as the third quarter progressed and it expects the challenges of inflation, rising fuel costs and weaker demand to persist through the holiday quarter.

  Additionally, Amazon CFO Brian Olsavsky suggests more cuts could be coming. The company will continue to invest in growth businesses like Amazon advertising and cloud computing. But it will be “looking at our cost structure and areas where we can save money.”

  *  *  *

  With the bulk of the FAAMG stocks – which is now GAMMA following Facebook’s rebranding to Meta (at least until the company  quietly changes its name back now that the whole Metaverse farce has blown up in its Metaface) – having reported Q3 results (which have uniformly been a disaster, sending megatech stocks tumbling), investors were keenly looking to Amazon and Apple earnings after the close today, to round out the picture for the (former?) market generals and set the tone for the rest of 2022, or at least until after the midterms when the BLS reports that real payrolls were actually -1,000,000, and also to conclude whether the ongoing Nasdaq implosion has been justified.

  Focusing on Amazon, investors are expecting Amazon to outperform digital advertising peers Facebook and Google through an ad slump. The theory, as Bloomberg notes, is Amazon is closer to the customer at the time they are prepared to buy something, so that advertising is more valuable when consumers are penny-pinching when compared to broader marketing campaigns aimed at awareness on social-media sites like Instagram or Google’s search engine where users aren’t necessarily shopping.

  Investors also expect a slight slowdown in Amazon Web Services sales growth (thank you Microsoft and Google), with third-quarter revenues expected to come in at $21 billion, up 30% from a year earlier. Cloud-industry peer Microsoft reported earlier this week that rising energy prices cut into cloud computing profits, so there will likely be some focus on Amazon’s cloud profit margins as well to see if they are under similar pressure. Investors expect operating income of $6.1 billion in the third quarter from Amazon’s cloud business.

  Poonam Goyal, senior retail industry analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence, and Anurag Rana, BI’s senior software analyst, point to Microsoft’s projection of a slowdown as a harbinger for AWS. “Amazon Web Services’ sales growth in constant currency could dip in 4Q to about 26%-27% from consensus of 29%,” they wrote in a recent note. “The slump is probably going to stretch through 2023, with recovery possible in 2024.”

  Amazon’s employee count will also be an interesting metric to watch. The company has been busy cutting some experimental projects, which would reduce its numbers, but it also announced plans to hire 150,000 people for the holidays, which is the same as last year. As of June 30, Amazon had 1.52 million employees globally. If that figure goes down, it will be the first time Amazon has reduced its number of employees for two consecutive quarters since 2001 and gives a clearer picture of how deep the cuts have been.

  But while Q3 earnings will matter, all eyes will likely be on the forecast for the busy holiday quarter. Investors expect earnings of 39 cents per share on sales of $156 billion. Investors are counting on Amazon to boost profits and sales while trimming costs through hiring freezes and cutting experimental projects.

  That said, like the rest of the tech sector, rising labor and energy costs coupled with slower spending growth have put a strain on Amazon’s business model. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy has taken several steps this year to boost revenues, including increasing the price of Prime membership and tacking new fees on merchants selling goods on the web store. Investors want to see if Amazon can maintain that strong connection with Prime subscribers and win their spending during the holidays, or if more expensive Prime membership compels them to shop elsewhere.

  Heading into earning, Amazon shares suffered steep declines, falling as much as 5.1%. The e-commerce giant’s shares are down 8.5% over the past two days, the worst two-day slump since June.

  So with all that in mind moments ago AMZN just reported Q3 results which were an absolute disaster and nailed the coffin of the FAAMGs shut, because not only did Amzn miss sales, and report disappointing AQS metrics but its forecast was a disaster.

  • EPS 28c, beating estimates 22c

  • With all that in mind, moments ago AMZN just reported Q3 results and they were an absolute disaster.

  • Net sales $127.10 billion, +15% y/y, missing estimate $127.64 billion

    • Physical Stores net sales $4.69 billion, +10% y/y, beating estimate $4.68 billion

    • Online stores net sales $53.49 billion, +7.1% y/y, missing estimates $54 billion

    • Third-Party Seller Services net sales $28.67 billion, +18% y/y, beating estimates $28.49 billion

    • Subscription Services net sales $8.90 billion, +9.3% y/y, missing estimate $9.18 billion

    • AWS net sales $20.5 billion, +27% y/y, missing estimate $21.0 billion

    • North America net sales $78.84 billion, +20% y/y, beating estimate $76.95 billion

    • International net sales $27.72 billion, -4.9% y/y, missing estimate $29.28 billion

  • Third-party seller services net sales excluding F/X +23% vs. +18% y/y, beating estimate +18.7%

  • Subscription services net sales excluding F/X +14% vs. +23% y/y, estimate +20% (2 estimates)

  • Amazon Web Services net sales excluding F/X +27% vs. +39% y/y, estimate +31.9%

  • Operating income $2.53 billion, -48% y/y, missing estimate $3.11 billion

  • Operating margin 2% vs. 4.4% y/y, missing estimate 2.48%

  • Intl oper margin -8.9% vs. -3.1% y/y, missing estimate -7.71%

  • Fulfillment expense $20.58 billion, +11% y/y, below the estimate $21.58 billion

  But while revenue was disappointing and AWS was subpar at best, the reason why AMZN stock is imploding after hours is because the company’s guidance was absolutely catastrophic

  • Sees net sales $140.0 billion to $148.0 billion, the midline coming far below the median estimate of $155.52 billion
  • Sees operating income to be between $0 and $4 billion, also missing the median estimate of $4.66BN

  In short: ugly earnings, catastrophic guidance!

  Digging into the numbers we find that operating margins tumbled to 2.0%, down from 4.0% and missing the estimate of 2.5%. In fact as shown below, the only reason this number wasn’t positive is thanks to AWS.

  

  And while the market was not happy with the overall profit margin, it was even less enthused with the profit margin breakdown where despite a modest improvement in AWS, the international operating margin collapsed to the lowest in the past decade, with US online sales still unable to turn green. In fact, if it wasn’t for AWS, AMZN would have negative operating income.

  

  The chart above shows that Amazon’s online retail business in North America and international both lost money. This is after hiking the cost of Amazon Prime $20 a year and adding fees to online merchants that sell on the platform. If Amazon Web Services is subsidizing the e-commerce side, it makes it harder to justify keeping the businesses together.

  And while AWS did post a modest improvement in profit margins, where it did disappoint was in revenue growth, which rose 27% Y/Y to $20.54 billion, missing the estimate of $21.01 billion.

  

  But all these disappointing data points aside, what markets are mostly focused on is that forecast revenue growth in a range of $140-$148BN (midline at $144BN), notably below the $155BN expected…

  

  …which suggests that very soon the company may see an unheard of event: shrinking revenues!

  

  As Bloomberg puts it, the results will ramp up pressure for CEO Andy Jassy – and all the other tech giants – to further cut costs. Amazon has a hiring freeze in its retail team and has been cutting experimental projects. But investors will be hungry for deeper cuts if sales are falling flat.

  And speaking of Bloomberg, BBG Intel’s Poonam Goyal was rather adamant “It’s actually pretty bad across the board. It’s hard to find something good in this press release….It’s kind of humming the same tune of results we saw earlier. The consumer is slowing.”

  In light of these catastrophic earnings and terrible guidance, it is not surprising that the kneejerk reaction may have been the worst in post-earnings plunge Amazon history: the stock was down as much as 21% after hours, plunging to the lowest level since the March 2020 covid crash when the entire economy was locked down!

  

  This is the lowest price for AMZN shares since the trough of the COVID lockdown collapse in March 2020 (and drops the market cap below $1 trillion)…

  

  Not surprisingly, Wayfair and EBay shares are falling postmarket after Amazon’s forecast miss. Wayfair is down as much as 6.2% while EBay declines as much as 3.6%. Alibaba is down 1.7%.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 19:11

• White House Seeks "Large Amount" Of Funding For Domestic Uranium Strategy
  White House Seeks “Large Amount” Of Funding For Domestic Uranium Strategy

  Our view from December 2020 was that sooner or later, nuclear would be included in the ESG basket (see “Is This The Beginning Of The Next ESG Craze“). There have been multiple signals from the US Energy Department to develop a domestic uranium strategy. 

  We first pointed this out in March in a note titled “Uranium Stocks Soar After US Signals Aid For Nuclear Power.” Then in June, in a note titled “Uranium Stocks Soar On Report US Seeking Billions To End Reliance On Russian Enriched Uranium.”

  On Wednesday, Jennifer Granholm, the US energy secretary, gave even more clues about a domestic uranium strategy that would eventually eliminate the US reliance on Russia and its allies Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan for about 50% of its uranium needs, according to Reuters. 

  “The United States wants to be able to source its own fuel from ourselves and that’s why we are developing a uranium strategy,” Granholm told reporters at the International Atomic Energy Agency conference in Washington. 

  “We’ll be working on … enhancing that and making sure that we can fuel our own reactors as well as the partners to those who also have those ambitions,” she added.

  In August, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act, which helps pave the way for nuclear energy to reduce US emissions before the decade’s end. 

  Momentum is certainly building for expanding zero-emission nuclear power production and sourcing uranium domestically, outlined in the IRA via increased investments and tax incentives. 

  IRA contained $700 million to produce a high assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) supply for advanced nuclear power plants. Then in September, the White House requested Congress to allocate $1.5 billion in a temporary government funding bill to boost domestic HALEU supply. 

  Granholm said the White House will “seek an additional large amount by the year-end for a more fulsome strategy.”

  The move by the Energy Department is to remove Russia’s critical leverage to throttle US nuclear power. There’s a big push to increase US mining and processing of uranium to ensure US energy security. 

  The broader Uranium space has been on an upswing for the last two years. 

  

  Like the US, other countries around the world, including Germany and Japan, are developing plans or implementing strategies to revamp their nuclear power plants after years of neglect. It seems like climate alarmist Greta Thunberg’s war against nuclear is finally being ignored.  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 19:00

• Early Voting And Mail Ballot Turnout Trends Point To 2020 Replay
  Early Voting And Mail Ballot Turnout Trends Point To 2020 Replay

  Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Nationwide early voting and vote-by-mail turnout trends for the 2022 midterm election reflect a pattern similar to that of the pandemic-skewered 2020 election.

  

  As a result, it may take several days after polls close on Nov. 8 for results to be confirmed in several key battleground states, including Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan.

  In-person early voting periods and vote-by-mail have grown increasingly popular over the last two decades. They became mainstream during the 2020 election when more than 101 million Americans cast early in-person votes or vote-by-mail ballots.

  The 2022 early vote and vote-by-mail turnout is expected to easily eclipse the record for midterm elections set in 2018, when more than 5 million voters cast early in-person ballots and 30.4 million voted by mail. The totals this year may come close to matching the number of ballots cast before Election Day in 2020.

  According to the University of Florida’s United States Elections Project, as of Oct. 23, more than 7.46 million Americans have already cast their midterm ballots.

  

  Turnout

  Of those 7.46 million ballots, nearly 1.65 million were cast in-person in the 27 states where early voting is under way. Early voting periods range from four to 45 days before Election Day.

  By week’s end, another 18 states will open polls for in-person early voting, beginning with seven states on Oct. 24—including Florida, Texas, Colorado—and ending with New York and New Jersey on Oct. 29.

  More than 5.8 million mail ballots of 41.52 million requested nationwide have been returned to local election offices as of Oct. 23, according to U.S. Elections Project. All 50 states offer voting by mail, or absentee ballot options. Nine states, including California, Colorado, Nevada, and New Jersey, send mail ballots to all registered voters.

  Not all states break down early votes and mailed votes by political affiliation when posting turnout figures. In Kansas, North Carolina, and New Mexico,  138,406 Democrats (40.5 percent) and 112,047 (32.8 percent) Republicans voted early in-person.

  Georgia, which opened its early voting period on Oct. 17, reported more than 740,600 early ballots cast as of Oct. 23. Early voting ends Nov. 5 in the state.

  The Georgia tally includes a record midterm first-day early voting turnout of 131,000, twice as high as the 71,000 first-day early voters in 2018, and nearly matching the 136,739 who showed up on the first day early-voting polls opened in 2020.

  “We’re extremely pleased that so many Georgians are able to cast their votes, in record numbers and without any reports of substantial delays,” Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said in a statement. “This is a testament to the hard work of Georgia’s election workers, the professionals who keep our elections convenient and secure.”

  Georgia, which does not provide party affiliations with early voting and vote-by-mail turnout tallies, reported Oct,. 23 that more than 31 percent of requested mail-in ballots had been returned.

  

  Vote-by-Mail Turnout

  Of 17 states that provide party affiliations for more than 3.74 million vote-by-mail tallies to the U.S. Elections Project, 51.3 percent came from registered Democrats, and 30 percent were mailed in by registered Republicans.

  Florida, where early in-person voting begins Oct. 24 and ends Nov. 5, has registered the largest vote-by-mail turnout thus far with more than 1.16 million of 4.23 million requested mail ballots already filed with local elections offices as of Oct. 23. Registered Democrats cast 42.2 percent of the mail-ballot votes, and Republicans cast 38.2 percent. Nearly 20 percent of the mail ballots were cast by non-affiliated voters.

  Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, in early October signed an executive order that allows four Southwest Florida counties that remain devastated in Hurricane Ian’s wake more flexibility in expanding in-person voting and voting by mail. Among those emergency measures is allowing three more days of early in-person voting.

  During an Oct. 15 press conference, the Republican governor encouraged residents in Southwest Florida to vote by mail.

  “What I would say is whatever you like is fine. We’ve got good returns on absentee, and I have confidence in early voting, in person (voting) and, of course, Election Day” voting, DeSantis said.

  The only state that comes close to the 1.16 million who’ve returned vote-by-mail ballots in Florida is California, where all 21.87 million registered voters get ballots in the mail. As of Oct. 23, nearly 1.08 million Californians had returned mail ballots, according to the U.S. Elections Project.

  Of those returned California VBM ballots, nearly half were mailed in by Democrats while 28 percent came from registered Republican voters.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 18:40

• Boston Surpasses San Francisco As Second Priciest City For Renters
  Boston Surpasses San Francisco As Second Priciest City For Renters

  The US rental market is beginning to cool down, but not in all areas. Boston surpassed San Francisco as the second most expensive rental market, with New York in the number one spot, according to Bloomberg. 

  Rental listing company Zumper published new data that showed median one-bedroom rent in Boston increased by 5.9% in October from the prior month to $3,060. San Francisco dropped to the third spot with a 2.6% decline to $3,020. New York City is still the most expensive city for median one-bedroom rent, even though prices fell 2.3% to $3,860. 

  

  “These eye-popping prices shine a light on Boston’s ongoing housing crisis,” Zumper said in the report, adding, “New inventory coming online is skewed towards the luxury market, pushing median asking prices even higher.”

  

  Even though Boston rents are increasing, residential real estate brokerage Redfin’s latest report showed median rents across the country recorded their first notable decline in almost two years last month. 

  

  “The rental market is coming back down to earth because high rents and economic uncertainty have put an end to the pandemic moving frenzy of 2020 and 2021, when remote work fueled an enormous surge in housing demand that would’ve otherwise been spread out over the coming years,” said Redfin Deputy Chief Economist Taylor Marr.

  Marr continued: “Rising supply is also causing rent growth to slow. Scores of apartments that have been under construction are now coming on the market, and more homeowners are choosing to become landlords instead of selling in order to hold on to their record-low mortgage rates.”

  And he expects “rent growth to slow further into 2023 as Americans continue to hunker down and more new rentals hit the market.”

  So the takeaway is that some rental markets are cooling while others continue to boil. Avoid the ones that continue to see rising prices, and if you can, wait until next year to lock in a rental contract when prices are expected to be much lower. It doesn’t make sense to sign a two-year contract at the peak. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• German Court Blocks Intelligence Service From Spying On AfD Party In Bavaria
  German Court Blocks Intelligence Service From Spying On AfD Party In Bavaria

  Authored by John Cody via Remix News,

  This is the second German court ruling in a week backing the conservative AfD party…

  

  In a number of German states, the country’s main conservative opposition party, Alternative for Germany (AfD), is already listed as a “potential threat” to democracy and is being monitored by security services. However, in Bavaria, the party just won at least a partial victory against similar surveillance efforts.

  The Administrative Court of Munich has blocked the Bavarian Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), Germany’s main domestic intelligence service, from monitoring the Bavarian state chapter of the AfD party. In other states like Thuringia, the BfV can read all emails and monitor the telephone calls of all AfD members without a warrant, but the Munich judges blocked these methods in Bavaria. The judges found that such an operation “severely interferes with the party’s activities with the risk of clandestine spying.”

  In addition, the BfV is prohibited from making public statements claiming the AfD was threatening democracy or the German constitution.

  There is “the danger of an impairment of the equal chances of the party in particular regarding the future federal state election campaign,” the court ruled. However, the party must accept “at least to be observed from publicly accessible sources.”

  Currently, there is a push to list the entire AfD as suspects in an anti-democracy case at the federal level, essentially putting the entire party structure under surveillance. In addition, politicians from a wide range of parties, including the Social Democrats (SPD), the Greens, the Left, and the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), have pushed for an outright ban on their electoral rival during a time when, according to polling, the AfD has exploded in popularity,

  However, the Munich court only issued an interim ruling, and proceedings are still ongoing. The judges indicated that they want to “carry out their own evaluation of the material submitted, which comprises several thousand pages.”

  The Bavarian Interior Ministry can also appeal the decision within the next two weeks.

  The AfD expressed its support for the decision.

  “Neither in the pre-trial proceedings nor in court could the Office for the Protection of the Constitution substantiate its reasons for the surveillance,” the state AfD branch wrote.

  The party’s state organization chairman and Bundestag representative Stephan Protschka also accused the BfV of being “incapable of any orderly record keeping.”

  “In court, they presented 4,000 chaotically pieced together documents, some of them illegible and unsorted, which they dumped as justification,” Protschka said.

  The BfV lost a similar case in Hessen last week, with the court in Wiesbaden ordering the BfV to halt investigations into the AfD.

  Both Bavaria and Hessen will see elections take place next year, raising fears among the left that the AfD could make major gains. In Bavaria, the AfD has improved from 10 to 12 percent, according to the latest polling.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 10/27/2022 – 02:00

• Dictatorship In Disguise: Authoritarian Monsters Wreak Havoc On Our Freedoms
  Dictatorship In Disguise: Authoritarian Monsters Wreak Havoc On Our Freedoms

  Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “You see them on the street. You watch them on TV. You might even vote for one this fall. You think they’re people just like you. You’re wrong. Dead wrong.”

  –  They Live 

  We’re living in two worlds.

  

  There’s the world we see (or are made to see) and then there’s the one we sense (and occasionally catch a glimpse of), the latter of which is a far cry from the propaganda-driven reality manufactured by the government and its corporate sponsors, including the media.

  Indeed, what most Americans perceive as life in America—privileged, progressive and free—is a far cry from reality, where economic inequality is growing, real agendas and real power are buried beneath layers of Orwellian doublespeak and corporate obfuscation, and “freedom,” such that it is, is meted out in small, legalistic doses by militarized police and federal agents armed to the teeth.

  All is not as it seems.

  Monsters with human faces walk among us. Many of them work for the U.S. government.

  This is the premise of John Carpenter’s film They Live, which was released in November 1988 and remains unnervingly, chillingly appropriate for our modern age.

  Best known for his horror film Halloween, which assumes that there is a form of evil so dark that it can’t be killed, Carpenter’s larger body of work is infused with a strong anti-authoritarian, anti-establishment, laconic bent that speaks to the filmmaker’s concerns about the unraveling of our society, particularly our government.

  Time and again, Carpenter portrays the government working against its own citizens, a populace out of touch with reality, technology run amok, and a future more horrific than any horror film.

  In Escape from New York, Carpenter presents fascism as the future of America.

  In The Thing, a remake of the 1951 sci-fi classic of the same name, Carpenter presupposes that increasingly we are all becoming dehumanized.

  In Christine, the film adaptation of Stephen King’s novel about a demon-possessed car, technology exhibits a will and consciousness of its own and goes on a murderous rampage.

  In In the Mouth of Madness, Carpenter notes that evil grows when people lose “the ability to know the difference between reality and fantasy.”

  And then there is Carpenter’s They Live, in which two migrant workers discover that the world is not as it seems. In fact, the population is actually being controlled and exploited by aliens working in partnership with an oligarchic elite. All the while, the populace—blissfully unaware of the real agenda at work in their lives—has been lulled into complacency, indoctrinated into compliance, bombarded with media distractions, and hypnotized by subliminal messages beamed out of television and various electronic devices, billboards and the like.

  It is only when homeless drifter John Nada (played to the hilt by the late Roddy Piper) discovers a pair of doctored sunglasses—Hoffman lenses—that Nada sees what lies beneath the elite’s fabricated reality: control and bondage.

  When viewed through the lens of truth, the elite, who appear human until stripped of their disguises, are shown to be monsters who have enslaved the citizenry in order to prey on them.

  Likewise, billboards blare out hidden, authoritative messages: a bikini-clad woman in one ad is actually ordering viewers to “MARRY AND REPRODUCE.” Magazine racks scream “CONSUME” and “OBEY.” A wad of dollar bills in a vendor’s hand proclaims, “THIS IS YOUR GOD.”

  When viewed through Nada’s Hoffman lenses, some of the other hidden messages being drummed into the people’s subconscious include: NO INDEPENDENT THOUGHT, CONFORM, SUBMIT, STAY ASLEEP, BUY, WATCH TV, NO IMAGINATION, and DO NOT QUESTION AUTHORITY.

  This indoctrination campaign engineered by the elite in They Live is painfully familiar to anyone who has studied the decline of American culture.

  A citizenry that does not think for themselves, obeys without question, is submissive, does not challenge authority, does not think outside the box, and is content to sit back and be entertained is a citizenry that can be easily controlled.

  In this way, the subtle message of They Live provides an apt analogy of our own distorted vision of life in the American police state, what philosopher Slavoj Žižek refers to as dictatorship in democracy, “the invisible order which sustains your apparent freedom.”

  We’re being fed a series of carefully contrived fictions that bear no resemblance to reality.

  Tune out the government’s attempts to distract, divert and befuddle us and tune into what’s really going on in this country, and you’ll run headlong into an unmistakable, unpalatable truth: what we are dealing with today is an authoritarian beast that has outgrown its chains and will not be restrained.

  Through its acts of power grabs, brutality, meanness, inhumanity, immorality, greed, corruption, debauchery and tyranny, the government has become almost indistinguishable from the evil it claims to be fighting, whether that evil takes the form of terrorism, torture, disease, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, murder, violence, theft, pornography, scientific experimentations or some other diabolical means of inflicting pain, suffering and servitude on humanity.

  We have let the government’s evil-doing and abuses go on for too long.

  We’re being fed a series of carefully contrived fictions that bear no resemblance to reality.

  Despite the fact that we are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack; 11,000 times more likely to die from an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane; 1,048 times more likely to die from a car accident than a terrorist attack, and 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist , we have handed over control of our lives to government officials who treat us as a means to an end—the source of money and power.

  As the Bearded Man in They Live warns, “They are dismantling the sleeping middle class. More and more people are becoming poor. We are their cattle. We are being bred for slavery.”

  We have bought into the illusion and refused to grasp the truth.

  From the moment we are born until we die, we are indoctrinated into believing that those who rule us do it for our own good. The truth is far different.

  The powers-that-be want us to feel threatened by forces beyond our control (terrorists, pandemics, mass shootings, etc.).

  They want us afraid and dependent on the government and its militarized armies for our safety and well-being.

  They want us distrustful of each other, divided by our prejudices, and at each other’s throats.

  Most of all, they want us to continue to march in lockstep with their dictates as fearful, controlled, pacified zombies.

  This brings me back to They Live, in which the real zombies are not the aliens calling the shots but the populace who are content to remain controlled.

  When all is said and done, the world of They Live is not so different from our own. As one of the characters points out, “The poor and the underclass are growing. Racial justice and human rights are nonexistent. They have created a repressive society and we are their unwitting accomplices. Their intention to rule rests with the annihilation of consciousness. We have been lulled into a trance. They have made us indifferent to ourselves, to others. We are focused only on our own gain.”

  We, too, are focused only on our own pleasures, prejudices and gains. Our poor and underclasses are also growing. Injustice is growing. Inequality is growing. A concern for human rights is nearly nonexistent. We too have been lulled into a trance, indifferent to others.

  Oblivious to what lies ahead, we’ve been manipulated into believing that if we continue to consume, obey, and have faith, things will work out. But that’s never been true of emerging regimes. And by the time we feel the hammer coming down upon us, it will be too late.

  So where does that leave us?

  The characters who populate Carpenter’s films provide some insight.

  Underneath their machismo, they still believe in the ideals of liberty and equal opportunity. Their beliefs place them in constant opposition with the law and the establishment, but they are nonetheless freedom fighters.

  When, for example, John Nada destroys the alien hypno-transmitter in They Live, he delivers a wake-up call for freedom. As Nada memorably declares, “I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I’m all out of bubblegum.”

  In other words: we need to get active and take a stand for what’s really important.

  Stop allowing yourselves to be easily distracted by pointless political spectacles and pay attention to what’s really going on in the country.

  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 real battle for control of this nation is taking place on roadsides, in police cars, on witness stands, over phone lines, in government offices, in corporate offices, in public school hallways and classrooms, in parks and city council meetings, and in towns and cities across this country.

  All the trappings of the American police state are now in plain sight.

  Wake up, America.

  If they live (the tyrants, the oppressors, the invaders, the overlords), it is only because “we the people” sleep.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 23:25

• US Ready To Protect Asian Allies With Nukes, Biden Official Says In Tokyo
  US Ready To Protect Asian Allies With Nukes, Biden Official Says In Tokyo

  It’s a hugely alarming scenario when world leaders and government officials representing nuclear-armed superpowers appear to increasingly be spouting nuclear rhetoric and warnings in an almost casual manner.

  US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman on Tuesday said Washington is ready to protect its Asian allies using nukes if they came under attack, spelling out the US would deploy its “nuclear, conventional and missile defense.”

  

  Washington “will use the full range of US defense capabilities to defend our allies, including nuclear, conventional and missile defense capabilities,” the deputy secretary told a Tuesday meeting with South Korean and Japanese officials, ahead of a series of talks this week. She hailed America’s commitment to defense of Seoul and Tokyo as “ironclad”.

  The region is currently on edge after early this week South Korea announced that its intelligence concluded Pyongyang has finalized preparations for what will be its first nuclear test in a half-decade. These warnings of an imminent North Korean nuclear test have been growing louder since early August, with the US backing Seoul’s assessment. 

  Sherman in her comments condemned the recent series of ballistic missile launches by North Korea, calling the record number of tests over the course of the year “deeply irresponsible, dangerous, and destabilizing.”

  One of the more provocative among the latest tests saw a ballistic missile soar over Japan itself. The Asian officials meeting with Sherman in Tokyo agreed that Pyongyang is “creating serious tension on the Korean Peninsula.”

  U.S. to cooperate with South Korea, Japan for Taiwan’s self-defense – Dep. Secy. of State Wendy Sherman.
  I didn’t hear Sherman’s counterparts second that assertion. Also haven’t heard Seoul and Tokyo have policies to provide for Taiwan’s self-defense. https://t.co/TgUgpS83As

  — Anthony Kuhn (@akuhnNPRnews) October 26, 2022

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

  Patrol ships from the north and south exchanged warning fire along the shared marine-time border on Monday in but the latest sign tensions are at boiling point. The north is meanwhile angry that the US military has in the last month stepped up its presence in waters off the peninsula, while participating in joint military drills with South Korea.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 23:05

• Forget Musk's Tunnels, Early Tesla Investor Seeds First-Ever eVTOL Car
  Forget Musk’s Tunnels, Early Tesla Investor Seeds First-Ever eVTOL Car

  We’ve come across many companies debuting futuristic designs of electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft. Some have even tested (see: here & here) and/or have begun selling eVTOLs on the market (see: here). But when it comes to a driveable eVTOL, Alef Aeronautics has a revolutionary design.

  California-based Alef is the only eVTOL with street-driving capabilities. Alef’s Model A prototype was first unveiled last Wednesday.

  

  The Alef Model A is not a distant dream, expected to enter series production with first deliveries in 4Q25. The cost of the eVTOL that drives on roads and soars over traffic starts at around $300,000. It has a driving range of 200 miles and flies about 110 miles. 

  

  Reuters said, “The unusual appearance—which features a body that flips on its side to become the wing after lift-off—is just one aspect that attracted Tim Draper, an early investor in Elon Musk’s Tesla Inc and SpaceX whose Draper Associates Fund V has backed Alef with $3 million in seed money.” 

  

  Draper told Reuters via email: “The design is extraordinary. The sides of the car become the wings when the plane goes horizontal.”

  

  In a company release, Alef’s CEO, Jim Dukhovny, said the eVTOL is a “modern solution for both urban and rural transportation needs in the 21st century because it is the fastest and most convenient transport ever created from the point of origin to the final destination. By enabling consumers to choose driving or flying mode, the Alef flying car allows the optimal path depending on road conditions, weather and infrastructure.”

  Dukhovny told CNET: “We can actually solve all traffic in the world for the next hundred years.”

  … and there goes Elon Musk’s idea of building tunnels to reduce major cities’ traffic congestion problems. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 22:25

• Putin's 'Viceroy Of The Donbas' & Top Confidant Seen As Likely Successor To Presidency
  Putin’s ‘Viceroy Of The Donbas’ & Top Confidant Seen As Likely Successor To Presidency

  During the opening months of the Ukraine war top US generals and officials went on record predicting that the conflict is likely to drag on for “years” to come. For example a headline in March observed it will turn into a quagmire, and that lawmakers at the Capitol were briefed “it is likely to last 10, 15, or 20 years.”

  And now, fast-forward to the invasion’s eight-month mark, where it does look to be settling in to a protracted stalemated situation. All the while speculation over the future of “Putin’s war” and even his personal health abounds, with sensational headlines such as this in the UK Times this month: “Putin at 70: isolated, irrational and fearing for his health.”

  Speculation over whether the 70-year old Putin will stay in power (and good health) long enough to see his own war in neighboring Ukraine through to a conclusion has naturally given way to questions over a potential successor for leadership, at a moment US and EU sanctions and global condemnation have left Russia more isolated than ever, and at the same time power under Putin’s administration has become the most centralized since the collapse of the USSR.

  

  A fresh report in The Telegraph this week suggests that a career politician and Kremlin insider is likely Putin’s top pick to inherit power, as he was singularly hailed for overseeing the ‘successful’ annexation of the four occupied regions of Ukraine. “For 60-year-old Sergei Kiriyenko, this was the culmination of a mission that he’d been given by Putin,” the report introduces. “Everybody was celebrating and he’d played a major role in the enlargement of Russia.”

  “Kiriyenko was in charge of referendums in these regions even if it was the FSB that managed them in the end,” said think tank analyst and Russia-watcher Tatiana Stanovaya. The Telegraph observes, “And now, perhaps mischievously, Kyrylo Budanov, Ukraine’s military spy chief, has said that Putin is even lining up the loyal Mr Kiriyenko as a successor.”

  The report gives a further snapshot of Kiriyenko’s early political career, who in the late 1990’s served as prime minister under Boris Yeltsin, as follows:

  Nobody knows the paranoid Putin’s succession plans but the Russian leader trusts Mr Kiriyenko, who has made the philosophical journey from supporting Western liberalism in the 1990s to promoting Putin’s authoritarianism now.

  A technocrat and a follower of the philosopher-founder of the Moscow Methodological Circle, which believes that people and society can be programmed, Mr Kiriyenko has had to rely on patronage from more powerful Russians to make his career.

  He was appointed Russia’s youngest prime minister at the age of 35 in 1998 by then-president Boris Yeltsin on the suggestion of Boris Nemtsov, the poster boy of Russian liberalism who was murdered on a bridge next to the Kremlin in 2015.

  

  Currently he serves as First Deputy Chief of Staff of the Presidential Administration of Russia – a role he’s occupied all the way back to 2016, when he was appointed by Putin. Some European outlets have lately dubbed him the ‘Viceroy of the Donas’ for his role in the annexation votes in eastern Ukraine.

  Kiriyenko is also considered the man who is personally responsible for Putin’s path to the presidency, being the first to put him forward to head up the FSB intelligence agency under Yeltsin in 1998.

  France24 recently featured the following description of Kiriyenko: “The bald and stern-faced 60-year-old entered Putin’s deepest inner circle in 2016, when he was named first deputy head of the presidential office.”

  

  His influence has only grown alongside Putin’s in the meantime, as France24 writes further, “Since then, and thanks to the convenient catch-all title he was given, Putin has been able to task him with any mission he desires, including last week’s sham referendums in the disputed regions in Ukraine, according to American geopolitical think tank GlobalSecurity.org.”

  As for Kiriyenko playing the role of personal envoy overseeing political assimilation of occupied regions of Ukraine, this has seen some very “hands on” moments. The Telegraph notes that recently, “Videos show him inspecting damage to the Crimea Bridge and unveiling a statue of a patriotic granny in Mariupol, the Ukraine city that Russian forces had bombed to the ground.”

  Russian spetsnaz providing security for First Deputy CoS of the Presidential Office Sergei Kiriyenko during a visit to Kharkiv Oblast. https://t.co/8wq63uAyGL pic.twitter.com/euYq2UJT9R

  — Rob Lee (@RALee85) July 2, 2022

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

  However, the report also concludes there are reasons to think that his power won’t outlast Putin’s own… “But Mr Kiriyenko doesn’t have his own power base and no influence within Russia’s powerful security services. His closeness to Putin is a strength and weakness, said Prof Petrov.”

  Petrov told the publication, “He is strong now because of his proximity to Putin but with Putin weakening this could change,” as it remains that Kiriyenko “is a tool, a loyal tool for his boss.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 21:45

• Federal Data Quietly Reveals 100 Terror Suspects Caught At Southern Border
  Federal Data Quietly Reveals 100 Terror Suspects Caught At Southern Border

  Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

  Newly published federal data reveals that close to a hundred individuals listed on the FBI terror watchlist have been apprehended at the Southern border in the last year, a record high and a huge uptick in recent months.

  

  The Customs and Border Protection agency data, released without fanfare on Friday night, reveals that so far this year 98 individuals apprehended attempting to get into the U.S. at the southern border were suspected terrorists or closely affiliated with terrorist organizations.

  BREAKING ~ FRI PM DUMP ~ @CBP rls record-breaking migrant encounter numbers for Sept – 227,547 – bringing the FY22 total to: 2,378,944 – the highest ever in history.

  Also unprecedented – 20 arrests of known/suspected terrorists on FBI list – for total of 98 in FY22 @FoxNews pic.twitter.com/BA7mCyLeCf

  — Griff Jenkins (@GriffJenkins) October 22, 2022

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

  The figure has jumped from just 27 in early April.

  In September alone, 20 terror suspects were arrested on the border, up from 12 in August.

  The data was highlighted by Fox News reporter Bill Melugin in a report this week, as he noted that the figure is almost four times the previous five years combined:

  BREAKING: There were 20 arrests of known or suspected terrorists on the FBI’s terror watchlist at the border in September, according to new CBP numbers.

  FY’22 ended with 98 terror watchlist arrests.

  That’s almost quadruple the previous 5 years combined.

  FY17-FY21 = 26@FoxNews

  — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) October 22, 2022

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

  Previous data from 2019 indicated that zero terror suspects had been encountered at the border.

  If you would like to view the numbers for yourself, here is a CBP link to the data. Scroll down to the “Terrorist Screening Dataset Encounters”, and look at Border Patrol arrests (in between ports of entry), OFO is ports of entry which is CBP, not BP. https://t.co/RqigZLtdrt

  — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) October 24, 2022

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

  As Melugin previously highlighted, CBP sources say there have been more than half a million ‘gotaways’ this year alone (that figure is now close to 600,000), and close to a million since the beginning of last year, begging the question how many of them were on the terror watchlist and are now roaming around the country freely?

  ARTICLE: https://t.co/40nuLq6EwL

  — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) September 20, 2022

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

  Fox News’ @BillFOXLA: 78 people on the terror watchlist have been arrested at the border in 2022, “triple the previous 5 years combined.”

  How many of the 850,000 “gotaways” are on the terror watchlist? pic.twitter.com/s2RurD4UY8

  — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) September 20, 2022

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

  The number of migrants encountered at the border now stands at almost 2.4 million for the year, with over 227,000 in September alone.

  BORDER RECAP

  – 227,547 migrant encounters in September ‘22, highest Sept. ever recorded.
  – 2.37 million encounters in FY’22, the highest fiscal year ever recorded.
  – 856 migrant deaths at border in FY’22, highest ever recorded.
  – 599,000 *known* gotaways in FY’22.@FoxNews

  — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) October 22, 2022

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

  There were also a record number of deaths.

  HIGHEST NUMBER EVER RECORDED: FY 2022 had 856 migrant deaths.
  In addition, CBP reports:
  -Migrant Encounters Sept 2022: 227,547
  -Migrant Encounters FY 2022: 2,378,944@BillFOXLA continues to cover live from Eagle Pass:@BillHemmer @DanaPerino pic.twitter.com/A42prYE1kt

  — America’s Newsroom (@AmericaNewsroom) October 24, 2022

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

  Responding to the latest data release, Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), the top Republican on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said in a statement Monday “Our adversaries know they can enter our country through our failed border.”

  Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), the top Republican on the Senate homeland security appropriations subcommittee, added that the Border Patrol is “overrun” and the “consequences of these lax enforcement actions should concern every single American.”

  In addition, the new data shows that Feds seized close to 15 thousand pounds of fentanyl from smugglers attempting to get it across the border, seven times as much compared to five years ago.

  One port of entry, one weekend. 5 major fentanyl smuggling busts by CBP. https://t.co/t78zlMmYqc

  — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) October 25, 2022

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

  HAPPENING NOW: @TxDPS disrupted a human smuggling attempt on IH 35 in Cotulla. The driver attempted to smuggle 60+ illegal immigrants concealed inside a dump truck. Driver arrested & illegal immigrants turned over to #USBP – more details to come. #OperationLoneStar pic.twitter.com/7AbYwP2AFg

  — Chris Olivarez (@LtChrisOlivarez) October 25, 2022

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

  The driver, seen smirking in a photo, was an 18-year-old U.S. citizen, per @TxDPS. They say he had 10 bundles of what turned out to be 240lbs of marijuana. The other drug smugglers successfully made it back to Mexico without apprehension. @FoxNews pic.twitter.com/s6cQMFBjVu

  — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) October 24, 2022

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

  Biden officials continue to claim the border is secure.

  *  *  *

  Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

  In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here. Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 21:25

• Republicans Find Their Footing On Abortion
  Republicans Find Their Footing On Abortion

  Authored by Susan Crabtree via RealClear Wire,

  Earlier this week, Republican Sen. Marco Rubio stood his ground on a debate stage at the Lake Worth campus of Palm Beach College. His opponent is seasoned Democratic lawmaker Val Demings, a black congresswoman and former police chief, and the discussion had turned to abortion rights – terrain that Democrats believe favor them and give Demings and other Senate candidates a chance to alter the expected outcome of the 2022 midterms.

  “I’m 100% pro-life not because I want to deny anyone their rights but because I believe that innocent human life is worthy of the protection under the law,” Rubio said. While noting he has supported legislation that includes exceptions for rape, incest, and the mother’s health, he then went on offense, arguing that “the extremist on abortion in this campaign” is his opponent.

  

  Like Democrats around the country, Demings had been running ads hitting her Republican opponent on abortion for more than a month. During their debate, Rubio delivered his rebuttal. “She supports no restrictions, no limitations of any kind – she’s against a four-month ban, she voted against a five-month ban,” he said. “She supports taxpayer-funded abortion on demand for any reason any time up until the moment of birth.”

  Demings, the former chief of police in Orlando who investigated rape and incest cases while in uniform, was equally forceful in her response. She accused Rubio of being dishonest with Florida voters because he had previously said he personally opposes all abortions without exceptions, including for victims of rape and incest. “How gullible do you think Florida voters are?” she retorted.  

  Both sides strongly articulated their points and defended their views. But Rubio’s decision to come out swinging won rave reviews from pro-life groups. For months, these advocates have pressed Republicans to fight fire with fire when it comes to abortion because, they argued, Americans’ positions on the issue are much more nuanced than many topline poll results have shown.

  “It’s a basic rule of politics that you identify the contrast with your opponent, and you leverage it to your advantage,” Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, told RealClearPolitics. “I think that after a little bit of clearing of the throat, our candidates are doing an excellent job. And in places where they don’t do that the abortion issue may get the better of them, but in places where they do, they’ll gain the advantage.”

  Yet, if this summer’s headlines were to be believed, Republicans were doing far more serious faltering than minor throat-clearing.

  “In sprint to November, Democrats seize on shifting landscape over abortion: No issue has upended the battle for Congress and state races so abruptly,” the Washington Post proclaimed in early September.

  “‘Pink Wave’ Poised to Upend Republican Midterm Prospects,” proclaimed U.S. News & World Report, citing a surge in women planning to vote in November. 

  In the weeks following the Supreme Court’s late June decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Democrats aggressively took the fight to Republicans, many of whom either downplayed their anti-abortion stances or sought to avoid the topic altogether. Democrats were especially jubilant in late August after Republicans lost a special election in a swing New York district in which their candidate laid out clear battle lines on abortion.

  “Republicans can say good-bye to their ‘Red Wave’ because voters are clearly coming out in force to elect a pro-choice majority to Congress this November,” declared Sean Patrick Maloney, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. .

  In the final sprint toward November, however, Maloney himself is in a more competitive race than expected, against GOP Assemblyman Mike Lawler in a newly redrawn district. Nearly every poll shows that voters’ concerns over inflation and the economy are greatly surpassing any other issue in the race, including abortion.

  A few weeks ago, the political dynamic shifted as inflation continued to climb, and many economists predicted that the economy is on the brink of a recession. Several prominent voices on the left, including veteran strategist James Carville and Sen. Bernie Sanders, started warning fellow Democrats that their hyper-focus on abortion could backfire.

  “It’s a good issue. But if you just sit there and they’re pummeling you on crime and pummeling you on cost of living, you’ve got to be more aggressive than just yelling abortion every other word,” Carville told the Associated Press.

  There was plenty of criticism on the right too, as anti-abortion groups griped that GOP candidates were overreacting to the Dobbs decision by cowering in fear and hoping the issue would somehow just go away.

  Dannenfelser and others pointed to what they cast as encouraging data from a late June Harvard CAPS/Harris poll on the question of where Americans stand on late-term abortions. Even amid the huge media outcry over the overturning of Roe, 72% of Americans agreed that abortion should be banned no later than 15 weeks, while only 10% said it should be allowed up until viability, when the fetus can live outside the womb – or approximately 24 weeks.

  Anti-abortion advocates argue that the findings directly undermine the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would enshrine Roe v. Wade protections into law and make abortion legal until the point of viability. Every House Democrat except one voted for the bill in the wake of Dobbs, but the measure sank in the Senate, where Republicans opposed it.

  After the poll results were released, abortion opponents pressed Republicans to turn the tables and force Democrats to define precisely when during pregnancy they would draw the line and say abortion should be barred. “If candidates support laws that permit abortion all the way up to birth, they are out of step with the American public, and Republicans should not be afraid to call them out on it,” Dannenfelser wrote in a Washington Post op-ed in late August.

  Over the last month, J.D. Vance and Blake Masters, as well as Rep. Ted Budd, GOP candidates running for Senate in Ohio, Arizona, and North Carolina, respectively, have been doing just that – vigorously defended their pro-life positions while calling on their Democratic opponents to define theirs more precisely.

  “[Ryan] says he wants to codify Roe … he voted for a piece of legislation that would have overturned Roe and required abortion on demand at 40 weeks for fully elective reasons,” Vance said during his debate with Democrat Rep. Tim Ryan in mid-October. “He also voted for a piece of legislation that would have prevented doctors from providing medical care to babies who survived botched abortions.”

  All three – Vance, Masters, and Budd – have remained ahead by roughly the same margin or have strengthened their standing in the polls. Other GOP candidates – from those running for governor to others trying to knock off Democratic House incumbents – have also sharpened their anti-abortion rhetoric in recent weeks. In some key battleground states, however, the abortion issue has put Republican candidates at a disadvantage.

  During the Georgia Senate debate last week, football great Herschel Walker took Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock to task for what he cast as extreme abortion positions. But the issue was already causing Walker trouble after a former girlfriend accused him of asking her to have an abortion and paying for it. Walker has denied the story, but his standing in the polls has ticked down a few points from when the story first broke.

  Adam Laxalt, Nevada’s former attorney general who is trying to unseat Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto in the decidedly pro-choice Silver State, is running a careful, focused campaign on the economy. Instead of pressing his opponent to define her limits on abortion, he’s accusing Democrats of mistakenly using all their energy and resources to make the midterms an abortion referendum when voters are far more worried about the skyrocketing cost of living.

  Laxalt has promised to oppose a national abortion ban and said Nevada will remain a pro-choice state, arguing that the state level is where abortion should be decided. Aside from a few races, however, most Republicans appear to be finding their footing on abortion, while Democrats show no indication of taking their foot off the gas.

  Three weeks ahead of the election, President Biden promised to codify Roe v. Wade if Democrats win the midterms – a pledge he could only keep if the party wins several more seats in the Senate and avoids the off-year midterm losses that so many of his predecessors have suffered. Ahead of his speech, Planned Parenthood, EMILY’s List and NARAL sent out a press release reminding reporters that they had pledged to spend an unprecedented $150 million mobilizing and energizing voters around the country “at levels never seen.”

  Abortion rights activists argue that Republicans like Rubio and other unabashedly pro-life conservatives are throwing up smokescreens by focusing on late-term abortions to distract from their previously stated beliefs that there should be no exceptions for rape, incest, or the mother’s health.

  “What they’re doing now is a clever political trick to try to change the subject and say a little bit about abortion and just move on,” Christina Reynolds, a spokeswoman for EMILY’s List, told RCP. “I hope that voters see through it and understand that, and we’re working to make sure they understand the real positions of people [in office or campaigning for office] and what they actually plan to do.”

  Late-term abortions occur in a very small number of cases that usually involve “incredibly tragic medical issues and decisions that women need to make on their own with their doctors,” she said, adding that the decision comes down to whether you want the government involved in those decisions. Even if economic issues are front and center in voters’ minds, Democrats say they will keep fighting on abortion because it helps turn out the vote in an election year when their party is facing severe headwinds.

  “We were facing a significant enthusiasm gap, and the Dobbs decision changed that almost overnight,” Reynolds said. “It’s energized people who maybe wouldn’t have otherwise turned out … it reminded us that you’ve got to get out there and fight in every election. People were talking about a huge Republican wave, and I don’t think we’re going to see that.”

  Only the election returns – and the exit polls – will tell us for sure, but for now, both sides are using whatever abortion ammunition they have at their disposal. While Democrats up and down the ballot continue hammering away on the issue in television ads and debates, many Republicans are finally standing their ground, firing off their salvos with new confidence.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 20:45

• After Sending Out 240,000 Unverified Ballots, Pennsylvania Now Warns Of 'Delays' Counting Midterm Votes
  After Sending Out 240,000 Unverified Ballots, Pennsylvania Now Warns Of ‘Delays’ Counting Midterm Votes

  Here we go again…

  Just one day after 15 Pennsylvania House Republicans sent a letter to acting Secretary of State Leigh Chapman demanding to know why 240,000 unverified ballots had been mailed out (“which, according to the law, must be set aside and not counted for the 2022 General Election unless the voter produces lD,” the lawmakers wrote), Chapman revealed that there will likely be delays posting the results after the midterm elections.

  

  “It’s really important for us to get accurate information about the election process in Pennsylvania,” Chapman said during a virtual conference, where she said it would likely take ‘several days’ to count and certify the votes.

  “So voters and the public know that when there are delays in counting, it doesn’t mean that there’s anything nefarious happening. It’s just what the law is in Pennsylvania.”

  According to Chapman, the delays would be attributed to poll workers not being able to pre-canvas, or count mail-in ballots prior to election day.

  She also encouraged voters to go ahead and send in their ballots, contrary to Republican messaging which urged voters to hold onto their mail-in ballots and turn them in to their local board of elections on election day – which Chapman said could (somehow) cause voters to become disenfranchised.

  “We have heard that there’s messaging out there in Pennsylvania, as far as instructing voters to hold onto their mail-in ballots,” she said, adding “As part of our voter education campaign, we encourage voters to request that mail-in ballot now and return it as soon as possible. We don’t want voters to delay.”

  Chapman took the opportunity to convey concerns she says stem from ‘misinformation’ – threats to interrupt voting and calls to delay the sending of mail-in ballots.

  While she didn’t detail a specific incident, Chapman said there have been reports of threats aimed at the voting process throughout the state. She promised that her office has worked to investigate any threat made toward a free and fair election.

  “Since I’ve been in office in January, we have constantly met with the FBI and Homeland Security just to talk through what the current threat landscape is and tools that we can give our counties to make sure that they have physical security protection as well as cyber security protection,” she said.

  “So it’s been great to partner with both the federal and state law enforcement organizations. We are in constant communication with them and it’s a situation that we are monitoring,” Chapman added. –Lehigh Valley News

  According to Chapman, over 1.2 million mail-in ballots have been requested across the state, and 43% – or 556,000, have been returned.

  So does that mean that nearly 25% of mail-in ballots sent out were unverified?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 20:25

• Uranium, Energy And Oil Still Have Room To Run
  Uranium, Energy And Oil Still Have Room To Run

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

  This is the latest from Harris Kupperman, founder of Praetorian Capital, a hedge fund focused on using macro trends to guide stock selection. Mr. Kupperman is also the chief adventurer at Adventures in Capitalism, a website that details his investments and travels.

  I published recent thoughts from Harris just days ago, in a post outlining his thoughts on why the Fed has backed themselves into a corner they can’t get out of.

  

  Harris is one of my favorite Twitter follows and I find his opinions – especially on macro and commodities – to be extremely resourceful. I’m certain my readers will find the same. I was excited when he offered up his latest investor letter to Fringe Finance, which is published in part below.

  ---

  Harris On Markets and Macro

  I have genuinely been surprised at the vigor with which the Federal Reserve has raised rates in their campaign to quash inflation. For my entire investing career, the Fed has been dovish, standing by and ready to reassure speculators at every market gyration. For the first time in my career, they’re actively targeting the stock market in an effort to create a recession and reduce the “wealth effect” when it comes to consumer spending. This is a terrifying policy change that was unexpected by most market observers—including myself. 

  At the same time, I feel that they have no real heart for this campaign. As political animals, they’ll be forced to pivot after they succeed in breaking something. Unfortunately, breaking something may lead to scary outcomes in the shorter term and we’ve kept our exposures at reduced levels until it is clear that they’re ready to pivot. When they do pivot, I believe that energy will be the primary beneficiary as both oil and uranium currently exhibit structural deficits that will be difficult to overcome absent substantial increases in capital spending. 

  In fact, I think that the magnitude of the movements in energy pricing will stun people who are accustomed to gradual changes in commodity price regimes. If anything, the volatility in European energy prices ought to be a wake-up call for all market participants. It would seem that with structural deficits and rapidly growing demand, the rules have adjusted, and many investors are unprepared for the change. To me, this creates opportunity.   

  Unfortunately for the Fed, higher energy prices will feed into higher structural inflation levels and at some point, the Fed will have to decide if they want to continue fighting inflation (which is likely impossible to quash outside of a global depression that dramatically reduces energy demand) or if they want to adjust their mandate and accept an increased level of inflation. Despite them clinging to their inflation-fighting mandate all year, I believe they have no desire to inflict a depression on voters. They’ll eventually pivot and accept dramatically higher inflation levels, while continuing to subsidize interest rates to avert the depression that they seem fixated on creating. As a result, we have continued to increase our exposure to US housing on this pullback, as that will be a prime beneficiary of this set of macroeconomic outcomes.

  Thoughts On Portfolio Valuations

  Despite only experiencing a -2.87% net decline (performance net of fees) in our fund since the start of the year, many of our largest positions have experienced far more dramatic declines and now represent unusual value. As a way of demonstrating the magnitude of the declines, as of the end of the third quarter, these are our top 5 positions and the declines experienced from their peak price points during 2022. 

   

  

  Now, you should be asking yourself how it is possible that so many positions have declined dramatically, yet the fund hasn’t performed demonstrably worse. The answer would be a combination of continued gains from the Event-Driven book, realized gains on a number of profitable investments and loss mitigation strategies when trading around core positions. Additionally, we did not own BLDR or BNO at the start of the year, so they are new additions, purchased at depressed prices. Absent these factors, our returns for the year would have been a good deal worse. While the percentage decline from the peak price in a year, is a somewhat arbitrary way to think about a portfolio’s return, I think it is important to point out that the portfolio itself is doing a whole lot better than its larger components. Additionally, the magnitude of the declines from the peak prices is likely indicative of the relative value inherent in our portfolio. 

  ---

  Get 50% off: If you would like to support my work and have the means, I would love to have you as a subscriber and can offer you 50% off for life: Get 50% off forever

  ---

  As an absolute performance vehicle, I believe that a benchmark would be a foolish metric to use when referencing this fund’s performance. At the same time, it’s hard to ignore the fact that many global equity and bond markets are down dramatically, and our fund is down a good deal less despite being more than 100% net long for most of the year and rarely utilizing shorts or hedges. I believe this is due to my constant focus on sectors that are positively inflecting with strong macro tailwinds. History has shown that despite what happens in global economics or geopolitics, there is always a bull market somewhere. The key is to identify those bull markets and then find the components within those markets that offer exponential upside with a reduced opportunity for a permanent loss of capital. Discipline in this regard often trumps simple valuation, as cheap stocks can always get cheaper. Meanwhile, those with strong tailwinds rarely stay cheap for long. 

  As a result of focusing on inflecting trends, we’ve side-stepped a good deal of the carnage in global risk markets, while capturing returns from the Event-Driven book. As a result, I think that we’ve set ourselves up for the continuation of the various trends that we are most fixated on. While history only somewhat repeats when it comes to the markets, my experience has been that strong trends often struggle to produce price positive performance during periods of overall market weakness. Then, when there is a pause in the decline of the overall market, those positions that declined the least with the broader market, tend to lead the next charge higher. The overall strength of many of our positions is indicative to me that we may be setting up for a similar explosive move higher in our portfolio positions when the market eventually bottoms. 

  For now, my focus is on avoiding unforced errors, keeping exposure down and being prepared to dramatically increase our exposure to inflation assets when the Fed finally pauses in its rate cycle. 

  Russian Securities

  During last quarter’s letter, I gave an update on our Russian securities positions and noted that we had moved them into a side-pocket and marked them all at zero. Nothing has changed regarding the side-pocket or the mark on the positions. However, we did succeed in removing the GDR wrapper from 3 of our Russian positions and now own Russian shares. Our fourth position is a Cypriot company and thus far, we have not been capable of removing the GDR wrapper. Fortunately, it does not appear to be at the same risk of disappearing if we do not remove the wrapper.

  While it may require some time until we can liquidate these positions, we believe that we’ll ultimately realize sizable gains on them. 

  Position Review (top 5 position weightings at quarter end from largest to smallest)

  Uranium Basket (Entities holding physical uranium along with production and exploration companies)

  It may take some time still, but I believe that society will eventually settle on nuclear power as a compromise solution for baseload power generation. This will come at a time when there is a deficit of uranium production, compared with growing demand. As aboveground stocks are consumed, uranium prices should appreciate towards the marginal cost of production. Additionally, there is currently an entity named Sprott Physical Uranium Trust (U-U – Canada) that is aggressively issuing shares through an At-The-Market offering, or ATM, in order to purchase uranium (we are long this entity). I believe that these uranium purchases will accelerate the price realization function by sequestering much of the available above-ground stockpile at a time when utilities have run down their inventories and need substantial purchases to re-stock. The combination of these factors ought to lead to a dramatic increase in the price of uranium as it will take at least two years for incremental supply to come online—even if the re-start decision were made today. 

  While most of our exposure to physical uranium is within the Sprott trust, because it allows us to express this view with reduced risk, we also own shares of Kazatomprom (KAP – UK). I am well aware that mining is one of the riskiest businesses out there, but Kazatomprom is the lowest-cost diversified producer globally, with incredible scale in what is a highly-consolidated industry. At the same time, I recognize that we take on certain risks when owning a company engaged in mineral extraction, especially in a country like Kazakhstan that can be politically unstable at times. That said, I believe that the recent change in government will do little to impact the operating environment in Kazakhstan, though the tax rate may expand moderately. 

  

  Ironically, uranium will be a prime beneficiary of sanctions on Russia as Russia is one of the world’s largest enrichers of uranium. As the West is forced to enrich more of the uranium that ultimately goes into reactors, underfeeding of tails will flip to an overfeeding of tails. The net effect could be anywhere between 10% and 30% of the global supply of uranium disappearing—which may dramatically accelerate the timing of my thesis while increasing the ultimate magnitude of the upward swing in uranium prices.  

  Energy Services Basket (Positions Not Currently Disclosed)

  In 2020 when oil traded below zero, drilling activity ground to a halt and many energy service providers declared bankruptcy. Many of these businesses had teetered on the verge of bankruptcy for years due to reduced demand and over-leveraged balance sheets. The bankruptcies led to consolidation and reduced future industry capacity, removing future competition in the recovery. 

  With oil prices now at multi-year highs, I believe that demand for drilling and other services will recover. While producers have been slow to increase spending on exploration, despite dramatic recoveries in energy prices, I believe that this only extends the timing on the thesis. In the end, the only way to reduce energy prices is to see a dramatic increase in global oilfield services spending. Any postponement of this spending only leads to higher prices and more wealth transfer from the global economy to the oil producers, which will likely end up resulting in an increase in spending on exploration and production. 

  We purchased many of these positions at fractions of the equipment’s replacement cost, despite restored balance sheets and positive operating cash flow. As spending in the sector recovers, I believe that the potential for cash flow will become more apparent and this equipment will trade up to valuations closer to replacement cost. 

  Oil Futures, Futures and ETF Options and Call Spreads

  I believe that years of reduced capital expenditures, along with ESG restricting capital access, combined with Western governments that are openly hostile to fossil fuels, have created an environment for dramatically higher oil prices. While we could purchase oil producers, I feel it is far more conservative to simply own the physical commodity itself. We own December 2025 oil futures, along with various futures calls and call spreads, an ETF and ETF call options and call spreads. I believe that this leveraged play on oil gives us the most upside to oil and ultimately inflation, while exposing us to reduced risk when compared to producers. 

  St. Joe (JOE – USA)

  JOE owns approximately 175,000 acres in the Florida Panhandle. It has been widely known that JOE traded for a tiny fraction of its liquidation value for years, but without a catalyst, it was always perceived to be “dead money.”  

  Over the past few years, the population of the Panhandle has hit a critical mass where the Panhandle now has a center of gravity that is attracting people who want to live in one of the prettiest places in the country, with zero state income taxes and few of the problems of large cities. 

  The oddity of the current disdain for so-called “value investments” is that many of them are growing quite fast. I believe that JOE will grow revenue at 30% to 50% each year for the foreseeable future, with earnings growing at a much faster clip. Meanwhile, I believe the shares trade at a single-digit multiple on Adjusted Funds from Operations (AFFO) looking out to 2024, while substantial asset value is tossed in for free. 

  Besides the valuation, growth, and high Return on Invested Capital (ROIC) of the business, why else do I like JOE? For starters, land tends to appreciate rapidly during periods of high inflation— particularly an inflationary period where interest rates are likely to remain suppressed by the Federal Reserve. More importantly, I believe we are about to witness a massive population migration as people with means choose to flee big cities for somewhere peaceful. 

  I suspect that every convulsion of urban chaos and/or tax-the-rich scheming will launch JOE shares higher, and it will ultimately be seen as the way to “play” the stream of very wealthy refugees fleeing for somewhere better. 

  Builders FirstSource (BLDR – USA)

  Builders FirstSource produces and distributes building materials, primarily for the home building industry. It trades at a low-single digit cash flow multiple on recent earnings and is using that cash flow to rapidly repurchase shares. One could say that the low multiple is due to peak cyclical earnings. I take a different view and believe that we’re in the early stages of a long-term housing boom caused by migration to low tax states along with a catch-up phase as home construction rates were below trendline over the past decade.

  I believe that the US needs in excess of 1 million new single-family homes each year, just to provide for population growth, ignoring the other factors. As a result, this business does not appear to be at peak earnings; instead, I believe we are seeing a new baseline for earnings—though the earnings will be quite volatile—particularly if interest rates remain elevated or increase further. 

  Summary

  In summary, during the third quarter of 2022, the fund experienced a pullback in many of its core positions. I have used this pullback to moderately increase a number of our positions, which has increased our overall exposure. Our exposure is a bit more concentrated in inflation, particularly in energy, than I’d normally expect it to be, but those are also my favorite themes. We’ve expressed this view through instruments like physical uranium, long-dated oil futures and futures options, energy equipment services companies, and land plays, which I believe should have a reduced risk of permanent impairment. 

  I also believe we are in the early stages of this inflationary boom and while there will be sizable volatility going forward, we are positioned well. 

  ---

  Harris’ Disclaimer:

  Nothing set forth herein shall constitute an offer to sell any securities or constitute a solicitation of an offer to purchase any securities.  Any such offer to sell or solicitation of an offer to purchase shall be made only by formal offering documents for Praetorian Capital Fund LLC (the “Fund”) which include, among others, a confidential offering memorandum, operating agreement and subscription agreement.  Such formal offering documents contain additional information not set forth herein, including information regarding certain risks of investing in the Fund, which are material to any decision to invest in the Fund.

  No information is warranted by PCM or its affiliates or subsidiaries as to completeness or accuracy, express or implied, and is subject to change without notice.  This document contains forward-looking statements, including observations about markets and industry and regulatory trends as of the original date of this document.  Forward-looking statements may be identified by, among other things, the use of words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “believes,” or “estimates,” or the negatives of these terms, and similar expressions.  Forwardlooking statements reflect PCM’s views as of such date with respect to possible future events.  Actual results could differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements as a result of factors beyond PCM’s control.  Investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such statements. No party has an obligation to update any of the forward-looking statements in this document.

  Opinions, estimates, and forward-looking statements in these materials constitute PCM’s judgment and should be considered current only as of the date of publication without regard to the date on which you may receive or access the information.  PCM maintains the right to delete or modify information without prior notice.  Statements made herein that are not attributed to a third-party source reflect the views and opinions of PCM.  

  Return targets or objectives, if any, are used for measurement or comparison purposes and only as a guideline for prospective investors to evaluate a particular investment program’s investment strategies and accompanying information.  Targeted returns reflect subjective determinations by PCM based on a variety of factors, including, among others, internal modeling, investment strategy, prior performance of similar products (if any), volatility measures, risk tolerance and market conditions.  Performance may fluctuate, especially over short periods.  Targeted returns should be evaluated over the time period indicated and not over shorter periods.  Targeted returns are not intended to be actual performance and should not be relied upon as an indication of actual or future performance. 

  The past performance of the Fund, or PCM, its principals, members, or employees is not indicative of future returns.  The performance reflected herein and the performance for any given investor may differ due to various factors including, without limitation, the timing of subscriptions and withdrawals, applicable management fees and incentive allocations, and the investor’s ability to participate in new issues.

  All references to a “net return” or “performance, net of fees” within this letter are for a net return of an investor that is subject to all standard fees and accrued incentive allocation, if any, at Praetorian Capital Fund LLC (“PCF”), as provided for in the PCF’s offering documents, and has been an investor in the PCF since the beginning of the current year or period.

  There is no guarantee that PCM will be successful in achieving the Fund’s investment objectives.  An investment in the Fund contains risks, including the risk of complete loss.

  The investments discussed herein are not meant to be indicative or reflective of the portfolio of the fund.  Rather, such examples are meant to exemplify PCM’s analysis for the fund and the execution of the fund’s investment strategy.  While these examples may reflect successful trading, obviously not all trades are successful and profitable. As such, the examples contained herein should not be viewed as representative of all trades made by PCM.

  

  QTR’s Disclaimer: I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. These positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important. I have no business relationship with Harris and am not an investor with him.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 20:05

• Democrat Scheme To Alienate 'Election Denier' GOP Candidates Backfires Spectacularly
  Democrat Scheme To Alienate ‘Election Denier’ GOP Candidates Backfires Spectacularly

  Democrat attempts to dehumanize their ‘election denier’ GOP opponents is backfiring spectacularly, as a new report from Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight reveals there are ‘well over a hundred’ midterm GOP candidates who have denied the legitimacy of the 2020 election ‘have a strong chance of winning their race.’

  

  Of the 185 Republican candidates running for House, Senate and governor’s seats who have denied the legitimacy of the 2020 election, 124 — or 67 percent — are in races our forecast currently pins at “Solid R,” meaning they have a 95-in-100 or better chance of winning. Overall, a bigger share of election deniers are running in Solid R races than Republican candidates in general: Of the 496 Republican candidates running for House, Senate and governor, 225 — or 45 percent — are in Solid R races. -FiveThirtyEight

  One such wrong-thinker is Anna Paulina Luna – a GOP candidate for Florida’s 13th district who, per the report, “donned a red-carpet-worthy ball gown to a screening of “2000 Mules,” a debunked documentary that falsely claims to show evidence of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.” (The ‘debunking’ makes for great bathroom reading, by the way)

  In June, Luna proclaimed “I believe that President Trump won that election, and I do believe that voter fraud occurred.”

  And now she’s likely to be elected to Congress…

  Luna is the Republican candidate for Florida’s 13th District, on the Gulf Coast around St. Petersburg. During redistricting last year, Republicans redrew this previously competitive district to be much redder, and as a result, Luna has a 97-in-100 shot at beating her Democrat opponent, according to FiveThirtyEight’s Deluxe forecast, as of Monday at 12 p.m. Eastern. (All numbers in this story are as of that same time and date.)

  

  Interestingly, candidates running for the House who question the 2020 election are fairing better than those running to be governor or Senator, with 70% running in “Solid R” races (likely to win), while just two out of seven running for Governor are favored to win. In the Senate, three out of eight ‘election deniers’ (Katie Britt (AL), Eric Schmitt (MO) and Markwayne Mullin (OK)) have better than 95-100 odds.

  Also interesting is that GOP candidates who have accepted the legitimacy of the 2020 election are less likely than their ‘election-denying’ counterparts to be in ‘Solid R’ races.

  Of the 67 Republican candidates who accept the 2020 election, 30 — or 45 percent — are running in races where they have 95-in-100 or better odds. This includes candidates such as North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven, who is running for reelection and is one of the Republicans who voted to certify the 2020 election results. 

  

  On the other side of the coin, around 19% of election denying candidates (36) are running in races where a Democrat is likely to win.

  There are currently four toss-ups involving ‘election-denying’ candidates; Kari Lake, who’s running for governor in Arizona; Monica De La Cruz and Mike Garcia, who are running for House seats in Texas and California, respectively; and Senate candidate Adam Laxalt in Nevada.

  It may also be the case that Democrats have steered the country into such a tailspin that a GOP sack of flour would win, but ‘election denier’ status doesn’t seem to have hurt conservative candidates.

  Maybe Nate Silver can tally how the 2016 Democrat election deniers are doing?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 19:45

• Justice Alito: Leak Of Supreme Court's Abortion Decision Made Conservative Justices "Targets For Assassination"
  Justice Alito: Leak Of Supreme Court’s Abortion Decision Made Conservative Justices “Targets For Assassination”

  Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

  Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said the leak earlier this year of a draft opinion reversing Roe v. Wade made conservative justices “targets for assassination” and changed the atmosphere at the court.

  

  Alito’s comments came during a moderated conversation at the Heritage Foundation in the nation’s capital on Oct. 25. At the end of the discussion, Alito was given Heritage’s Defender of the Constitution Award.

  At the event, Alito also lamented the lack of freedom of speech in higher education, said legal precedent was overrated as a means of deciding cases and said that the court’s Citizens United ruling years ago allowing corporations to fund political campaigns has been misunderstood by critics.

  The leak took place while the court’s members were considering how to rule in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

  An early version of Alito’s draft majority opinion in Dobbs made its way to the media, an unprecedented leak of a full high court opinion. Politico published the draft document dated Feb. 10 on May 2 without disclosing its source. In both the draft and the final version of the Dobbs decision issued June 24, the court overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 precedent that legalized abortion nationwide. The Dobbs ruling, which held that there is no constitutional right to abortion, returned the regulation of abortion to the states. In Dobbs, the court also reversed a related 1992 precedent, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, which declared that a woman had a right to obtain an abortion before fetal viability without undue interference from the state.

  The leak “was a great betrayal of trust by somebody,” Alito said, without providing any new information about the leak investigation being conducted by court officials. Suspicions and theories abound, but the identity of the leaker or leakers is still unknown.

  “It certainly changed the atmosphere at the court for the remainder of the last term. The leak also made those of us who were thought to be in the majority in support of overruling Roe and Casey targets for assassination because it gave people a rational reason to think they could prevent that from happening by killing one of us.”

  

  Police stand outside the home of Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh as pro-abortion advocates protest in Chevy Chase, Md., on May 11, 2022. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

  Alito noted that a man has been charged in connection with a plot to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, but refused to say more because the matter is still before the courts.

  Hostility to Free Speech

  Alito said he was concerned about hostility to free speech in colleges and universities.

  Based on reports he has read, the situation is “pretty abysmal, and it’s really dangerous for our future as a united democratic country.”

  “We depend on freedom of speech … [which] is essential. Colleges and universities should be setting the example, and law schools should be setting the example for the university because our adversary system is based on the principle that the best way to get at the truth is to have a strong presentation of opposing views, so law students should be free to speak their minds without worrying about the consequences.

  “And they should have their ideas tested in rational debate and if law schools are not doing that and according to these reports, some of them are not doing that, they are really not carrying out their responsibility.”

  Alito’s comments came after two federal judges appointed by then-President Donald Trump vowed in recent weeks not to hire judicial clerks from Yale Law School because they say its campus is dominated by cancel culture. The two judges are James Ho of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit and Elizabeth Branch of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.

  Ho was incensed by the treatment of Kristen Waggoner of the conservative Alliance Defending Freedom at a March 10 event at the law school. Students physically threatened and shouted down Waggoner during a panel discussion about Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski in which the Supreme Court found another college violated students’ right to religious free speech on campus. Waggoner was their lawyer.

  According to National Review, 14 federal judges have joined the Yale boycott.

  Alito also defended the court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC (2010), which held that the free speech protections of the First Amendment applied not only to individuals but also to corporations, nonprofits, and labor unions.

  The ruling, which has been bitterly attacked by the left for more than a decade, struck down part of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 that forbade independent expenditure-funded “electioneering communication” by such organizations within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election, or from making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time.

  The case arose when Citizens United, a conservative not-for-profit corporation, wanted to broadcast a film it made critical of then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton before the Democratic Party’s presidential primaries in 2008.

  Alito said that Citizens United “held that a little corporation, Citizens United, had the right to talk about the qualifications of a candidate for high public office in the period shortly before the election—that goes to the very core of what the First Amendment protects.

  “The main popular criticism of the decision that you hear is … that freedom of speech applies to human beings. It doesn’t apply to corporations. To this day, I think you can get bumper stickers that make the point. And I think to ordinary people, it has immediate appeal.”

  But what would it mean if corporations were denied freedom of speech, the justice asked rhetorically.

  …

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 19:25

• As Physical Silver Demand Soars, Bullion Dealers Offer Huge Buy-Back Premiums
  As Physical Silver Demand Soars, Bullion Dealers Offer Huge Buy-Back Premiums

  Updated 2055ET with comments from SD Bullion President Dr. Tyler Wall.

  For those who have been keeping an eye on silver, things are getting a little tight.

  

  Earlier Wednesday we noted a report from Ronan Manly of BullionStar.com, who revealed that more than 50% of deliverable silver on COMEX is suddenly ‘not available.’ Manly brought up this Oct. 19 tweet from metals expert Nicky Shiels, who said of delegates in attendance at the annual LBMA (Gold) conference in Lisbon; “they are mildly bearish Gold for the year ahead ($1830 by 2023s conference) but super bullish Silver ($28.30!) as the focus was on physical tightness driven by unprecedented demand.“

  Just attended the annual LBMA (Gold) conference in Lisbon. Polling takeaways from delegates: they are mildly bearish Gold for the year ahead ($1830 by 2023s conference) but super bullish Silver ($28.30!) as the focus was on physical tightness driven by unprecedented demand

  — Nicky Shiels (@nixsa84) October 19, 2022

  Second, the spot market for silver remains in backwardation – meaning that the spot price of silver is above the futures price, which indicates an extremely strong demand for physical metal right now. ..

  

  And as the chart below shows, while silver futures have gone nowhere in the last four months, the price of physical coins has been soaring…

  

  Demand has become so strong that, as the chart below shows, the extent of the physical silver percentage premium over spot is almost unprecedented…

  

  The result? Bullion dealers are offering giant premiums over spot to buy silver.

  APMEX, for example, is offering $10 over spot per coin right now.

  This is fine pic.twitter.com/ts9IVduAgP

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 26, 2022

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

  While SD Bullion is offering $10.50 and $11 over bid. Update: CEO Dr. Tyler Wall says that the physical silver market “is as tight as I’ve ever seen it,” adding that his company has been offering $11.00 over spot for US Mint Silver Eagles for over a week.

  

  More from Dr. Wall;

  Silver stackers we talk to on a regular basis seem to be getting tired of hearing about the market tightness without any movement in the bank spot price. However, obviously that could be about to change if the COMEX and LBMA vault drain continues for much longer. One of the individuals I speak to regularly who has first hand knowledge of a COMEX depository’s operation told me recently that they didn’t think there’s any unspoken silver left, just people haven’t figured it out yet. An interesting comment, given that there is supposedly 35 million ounces of registered silver left at the COMEX.

  Some silver bullion production is ordered out through March 2023 and nearly every silver round/coin is at least 4 weeks delayed from purchase, most 6-8 weeks. There already exists on the wholesale market what will be manifesting in retail trading across the space in the coming weeks: a complete uncoupling of price for live, deliverable Silver. You can already see that in the US Silver Mint Eagles where premiums are now nearly 100% of spot price. In the rare occurrence someone is quoting inventory that’s actually there, on a shelf and ready to ship that day, premium becomes almost irrelevant in this market. There’s virtually no price quoted that is too high with the benefit of 3 hours hindsight. You snooze, you lose. -Dr. Tyler Wall, SD Bullion, Inc.

  The big question, as always – where do we go from here?

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 19:05

• Learning All The Wrong Lessons From America’s Energy Crisis
  Learning All The Wrong Lessons From America’s Energy Crisis

  Authored by Jakob Puckett via RealClear Wire,

  Self-inflicted wounds create teachable moments, but the architects of America’s current energy crisis are learning all the wrong lessons.

  

  Skyrocketing energy costs are one of America’s harsh post-Covid realities. And with one in four American households struggling to pay for their energy needs before Covid, policymakers should have set their sights on making energy more affordable for more Americans.

  Instead, as Joseph Toomey points out in his new report RealClearEnergy report, Energy Inflation Was by Design, policymakers squeezed supply everywhere they could, so it would become impossible to meet demand.

  From the beginning, the Biden administration has prioritized restricting access to the fuels that power nearly 80% of America’s economy and roughly three-quarters of American homes. Revoking permits for the long-embattled Keystone XL Pipeline was one of President Biden’s first executive orders, making it harder and more dangerous to transport Canadian fossil fuels to American refineries. This decision was all the more hypocritical when, weeks later, President Biden gave his approval of Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline to Germany. 

  In a like manner, the Biden administration is helping speed up the closure of the refineries that turn oil into gasoline. Escalating biofuel mandates are signaling to refineries to close up shop, as blending levels are reaching unsustainably high levels. Moreover, the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) revoking of biofuel waivers for small refineries will only cause more refining capacity to buckle under those mandates’ costly weight. Gasoline and diesel refining capacity has been declining for decades, and is in no position to reverse course. 

  The Biden administration is simultaneously cracking down on drilling for the fuels that power everyday life. One quarter of America’s oil and gas is produced from federal property by way of leasing drilling rights to companies. However, the Biden administration recently cut onshore drilling leases by 80%, as well as notably curtailing offshore drilling. For the leases that were not cut, the Interior Department significantly increased royalty fees, making federal lands a less attractive drilling option, as well as allowing lawsuits to delay several already-purchased leases based on environmentally and economically squishy climate change metrics.

  On private lands the situation is no different, as the EPA is attempting to regulate oil and gas drilling out of business. The EPA lacks the authority to ban fracking on private lands, but is considering using burdensome ozone standards to stifle drilling in the Permian Basin. The Permian Basin in Texas and New Mexico is America’s most productive oil and gas field, accounting for 40% of America’s oil production and 20% of its natural gas supply. Taking the end use of these products into consideration, the EPA’s rules could jeopardize 25% of the country’s gasoline supply. 

  The Biden administration’s more stringent power plant regulations would prove deleterious to grid stability, too. Several of the nation’s power grid operators have opposed the EPA’s proposed aggressive power plant regulations, as forcing reliable fossil fuel generation out of service invites risks to grid stability. In fact, grid operators have pushed for keeping soon-to-be-retired coal plants operating longer for this very reason. 

  Nor is the pressure resulting from a staunch campaign against fossil fuels limited to domestic policy. Rather than increasing American oil production, President Biden has, hat in hand, approached Venezuela and OPEC with the goal of boosting oil production. Despite the stated goal of curbing fossil fuel production being reducing CO2 emissions, these policies overlook the role that American-made fossil fuels have to play in reducing global CO2 emissions. American oil and gas has lower lifecycle emissions than top competitors, and boosting exports can enrich Americans while draining dictators’ war chests.

  In its latest move, the Biden administration is resorting again to draining the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, this time to its lowest level in 40 years, in a last-ditch effort to lower gasoline prices before the November election. Periodically releasing oil from the country’s strategic reserves to score political points is not an energy policy strategy, especially when that oil ends up in China. 

  The international embarrassment and domestic hardship resulting from the Biden administration’s decisions should be a clue to change course, but learning the right lesson is not on the syllabus for the policymakers responsible. As Toomey points out in his report, creating a hostile policy environment that leads to the ending of fossil fuels is the real motive behind the web of energy policies the Biden administration is spinning. 

  Indeed, Marlo Lewis also confirms all of this on RealClearEnergy: the disastrous outcomes of these rushed climate policies are a feature of the system, not a bug.

  Jakob Puckett is an energy analyst.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 18:45

• Facebook Craters 20% To 6-Year-Low After Dismal Earnings, Massive CapEx Guidance, Revenue Warning
  Facebook Craters 20% To 6-Year-Low After Dismal Earnings, Massive CapEx Guidance, Revenue Warning

  Heading into today’s earning from Facebook, which still has the bizarro ticker META (Ok, Zuck, we got the joke, time to change the name and the ticker), the option-implied move was for a staggering 12% swing in the stock price as nobody had any idea what to expect: yes, the recent results from SNAP and GOOGL were ugly, but sentiment was so beaten down that it was unlikely Facebook could really surprise to the downside (and, boy, was sentiment wrong in retrospect).

  Well, moments ago the company reported earnings, and it appears that the options market was correct, because after first surging almost 10% higher, the stock has since tumbled a whopping 12% all in the span of a few seconds as traders digest what the world’s largest social network reported for Q3, which is the following:

  • EPS $1.64, missing the estimate of $1.89, down 49% from a year ago.

  • Revenue $27.71BN, beating the consensus estimate of $27.41BN, but down 4% from a year ago.

    • Advertising rev. $27.24 billion, beating estimates of $26.86 billion

    • Family of Apps revenue $27.43 billion, beating estimates of $27.07 billion

    • Reality Labs revenue $285 million, missing estimates of $406.3 million

    • Other revenue $192 million, in line with the est. $193.9 million

  Despite the revenue beat, this was the second straight quarter of revenue declines from the year earlier (after the first decline ever last quarter). As for Net Income, forgetaboutit…

  

  … As Bloomgerg notes, this is a company that got so used to growing with no end in sight, that they now have to adjust to a period of intense prioritization. Needless to say,  a mixed picture at best, especially since the number of total ad impressions rose by a higher than expected +17% (est. +11.8%) and yet the average price per ad tumbled -18%, much worse than the estimate -15.3%. In fact, ad revenue was so ugly, it dropped in every user geography.

  

  Looking at the number of users, we get more mixed results:

  • Facebook daily active users 1.98 billion, beating the est. 1.86 billion

  • Facebook monthly active users 2.96 billion, missing the est. 2.97 billion

  Some more headlines from the quarter:

  • Meta Sees Reality Labs Op Losses in 2023 Significantly Higher

  • Meta Making Changes Across Board to Operate More Efficiently

  • Meta Has Increased Scrutiny on All Areas of Operating Expenses

  • Meta Holding Some Teams Flat in Headcount, Shrinking Others

  • Meta: Beyond 2023 to Pace Reality Labs Investments

  • Meta: Boost in AI Capacity Driving Capex Growth in 2023

  But it was the company’s guidance that prompted the after hours reversal from high to low, as the company now sees:

  • Revenue of $30 billion to $32.5 billion, on the weak side of the estimate $32.2 billion

  And while FB trimmed its expense forecast for full year 2022 to $85 billion-$87 billion, from $85 billion-$88 billion (est. 85.11BN), it was the company 2023 full year forecast that was ugly, as a result of far more spending than previously expected:

  • Sees total expenses $96 billion to $101 billion, estimate $93.2 billion

  

  • Sees capital expenditure $34 billion to $39 billion, estimate $28.99 billion

  

  Another problem: the metaverse may be the next sliced bread, but it costs a lot of money to convince the world, and even more cash burn, to wit:

  “We do anticipate that Reality Labs operating losses in 2023 will grow significantly year-over-year. Beyond 2023, we expect to pace Reality Labs investments such that we can achieve our goal of growing overall company operating income in the long run.”

  Reality Labs’ revenues are tumbling and losses are soaring…

  

  Finally, what assured that META stock would crater is the warning from CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who admitted that “we face near-term challenges on revenue.”

  While he tried to walk it back by promising that “the fundamentals are there for a return to stronger revenue growth” and that he is “approaching 2023 with a focus on prioritization and efficiency that will help us navigate the current environment and emerge an even stronger company” all investors saw was “revenue challenges” and hammered the stock accordingly.

  It gets worse: the company said that FX would be a ~7% headwind to Y/Y total revenue growth in 4Q.

  Amazingly, despite the ugly results, Meta said it sees headcount end 2023 about in-Line With 3Q 2022. Don’t worry, after Zuck sees the crash in the stock he will change his mind.

   Not even extended outlook commentary from the CFO did anything to stop the bleeding: “To provide some context on the approach we are taking towards setting our 2023 budget, we are making significant changes across the board to operate more efficiently. We are holding some teams flat in terms of headcount, shrinking others and investing headcount growth only in our highest priorities. As a result, we expect headcount at the end of 2023 will be approximately in-line with third quarter 2022 levels.”

  

  Bottom line: what little good news there is, is that Facebook is still growing on both a DAU…

  

  … and MAU basis.

  

  To some, such as Bloomberg Intel’s Singh, this was enough: “If you look at the numbers, it’s a beat. Look at the impressions growth — that’s pretty impressive. That goes to show that people are spending time on Facebook properties because that is how you are driving those impressions.”

  As Zuckerberg has told his employees, once you have the attention, you can make money off of that. And that’s what’s going to fund this metaverse transition.

  The bad news is that so far the transition is going from bad to worse, with the company plowing ever more dollars into its new strategic vision, and has nothing to show for it.

  Putting the above together, here are the five main lessons from Bloomberg:

  • Meta is in a revenue slump for the long haul. The company sees $30 billion to $32.5 billion for the holiday quarter, missing the midpoint of consensus.
  • Expenses for 2023 are higher than expected, at $96 billion to $101 billion, as Zuckerberg pursues that metaverse vision.
  • Reality Labs and other metaverse initiatives are going to keep losing money. Operating loss is $3.67 billion.
  • Earnings also missed estimates, at $1.64 per share compared to the $1.89 per share estimate.
  • Zuckerberg says “prioritization and efficiency” are the focus for 2023. Some teams will be downsized, only priority teams get to grow headcount.

  Or rather it has a crashing stock price to show: remember what we said that META options were pricing in a 13% swing after earnings? Well, they got just that- first to the upside, and then down…

  

  … with the stock plunging 70% from its recent highs, and tumbling to a fresh 2016 low of $114…

  

  … and still dropping, now down more than 19% on the day, and 14.5% after hours, the second biggest one-day drop in Facebook history.

  

  And while it’s clear why anyone who bought the stock in the past year is beating themselves on the head, nobody is as bad an investor here as Facebook itself: over the past 12 months, META has repurchased $42BN of stock at an average price of roughly $300. It is now trading at $112.

  The company’s full earnings presentation is below.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 18:30

• Pimco, Apollo To Buy Credit Suisse Securitized Products Unit
  Pimco, Apollo To Buy Credit Suisse Securitized Products Unit

  Amid ebbing and flowing speculation that Credit Suisse is next Lehman – which may be a stretch but the math that the 2nd largest Swiss bank desperately needs billions in fresh capital is all too real – some were wondering who is the buyer that would get the crown jewels of the CS empire: its securitized products group.

  

  Moments ago, the WSJ delivered the answer: Credit Suisse is nearing a deal to sell the securitized-products group to financial giants Apollo Global and PIMCO, as part of the bank’s retreat from Wall Street.

  The Swiss bank is set to give details of the sale, and other measures for a planned strategy change, on Thursday the Journal reports.

  Two bidding groups emerged as the favorites for the business, The Wall Street Journal earlier reported. One consortium included Pimco, a big bond manager, and Apollo, a large alternative asset manager. It beat out a second group comprised of Centerbridge Partners and Martello Re Ltd., a life and reinsurance company, according to some of the people familiar with the effort.

  The securitized-products group, which underwrites financing and packages up mortgage bonds and other securities for resale, has long been rumored to be on the selling block. It generated high returns but Credit Suisse executives said in July it wasn’t a good fit with its envisioned future shape. Since then, as CS entered a solvency and liquidity spiral which pushed its CDS to record wides, the company had no choice but to liquidate the unit to the most generous buyer.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 18:25

• RNC Files 73 Election Integrity Lawsuits Ahead Of 2022 Midterms
  RNC Files 73 Election Integrity Lawsuits Ahead Of 2022 Midterms

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Republican National Committee (RNC) has filed 73 lawsuits on election issues during the 2022 midterm election cycle, according to its chair.

  

  RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel confirmed that the committee filed its 73rd lawsuit of 2022 last week, against officials in Kalamazoo, Michigan.

  “The RNC has filed a new lawsuit against Kalamazoo, MI. Michiganders deserve election transparency, and we are going to court to get it. This is our 73rd case of election integrity litigation this cycle with more to come,” she wrote on Twitter.

  Some advocacy groups hailed the bevy of legal challenges.

  “After the shortcomings of the last election, a proactive and pre-emptive legal strategy is critical to the election integrity voters deserve in 2022, 2024, and beyond,” Michael Bars, executive director of the Election Transparency Initiative, told Fox News on Oct. 24, adding that there have been “significant strides” to try to bolster voters’ trust in the U.S. election system after allegations of fraud in 2020.

  The lawsuits come after widespread complaints about the security of the 2020 election in which former President Donald Trump and his allies said there was significant fraud in key battleground states.

  The lawsuits are part of a “multimillion-dollar investment into building an election integrity operations infrastructure that draws on its legal, political, data and communications resources,” RNC spokesperson Gates McGavick told the outlet. It reported that the six dozen lawsuits were filed in 20 states.

  In recent days, the RNC has had some success in court. A New York judge recently struck down a law that would have added noncitizens to voter rolls.

  A court in Michigan also found that Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, updated an election manual to impose new restrictions on poll observers and challengers without going through the correct rulemaking process. Court of Claims Judge Brock Swartzle ruled that Benson’s office must either remove a May manual or amend specific sections that he said violate state and federal law.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 18:05

• US Gives Ukraine Most Advanced Air Defense System To Date
  US Gives Ukraine Most Advanced Air Defense System To Date

  The United States has given Ukraine the most advanced anti-air defense systems to date, after President Biden in a phone call with Ukraine’s Volodymy Zelensky vowed to expedite shipments of NASAMS. Already Ukraine has been receiving the HIMARS – a 1990’s era light multiple rocket launcher, but Kiev has repeatedly asked for more sophisticated anti-air missiles, including from Israel.

  Raytheon CEO Greg Hayes has confirmed in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” that it delivered two of the NASAMS systems to the US government this month, which were subsequently transferred and are being set up for use by Ukrainian forces. 

  “We did just deliver two NASAMS systems… We delivered two of them to the government a couple of weeks ago. They’re being installed in Ukraine [imminently],” Hayes said.

  

  “It is a short-range air defense system, and it can fire [an AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile] and it could knock down everything in the sky from drones to ballistic missiles to fighter jets,” the Raytheon CEO detailed. 

  The surface-to-air system is produced by Raytheon in partnership with Norwegian defense company Kongsberg, and is considered a mid-range system, but can be outfitted with longer range missiles. 

  “We’re also seeing significant global demand for advanced air defense systems, especially in Eastern Europe, as the Russians and Ukraine conflict unfortunately continues,” Hayes added in the CNBC interview. 

  The NASAMS is used by the military to protect federal buildings and the White House in Washington D.C. from any inbound aerial threats, and is capable of intercepting even very low flying projectiles. The first foreign country to purchase the sophisticated system was Qatar in 2019. 

  Ukraine said that when it puts the NASAMS into operation, this will mark a “new era of air defense” for the country. President Zelensky told a summit of Group of Seven leaders last week, “When Ukraine receives a sufficient quantity of modern and effective air defence systems, the key element of Russia’s terror — rocket strikes — will cease to work.”

  Each unit costs $23 million according to the US Department of Defense. “Systems will be provided as fast as we can physically get them there,” Pentagon chief Lloyd Austin said two weeks ago. “We’re going to do everything we can, as fast as we can, to help the Ukrainian forces get the capability they need to protect the Ukrainian people.” This was in reference to Russia having stepped up the intensity of its aerial attacks, especially targeting and degrading Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 17:45

• If You Liked Big Brother, Meet Google's Big MUM
  If You Liked Big Brother, Meet Google’s Big MUM

  Authored by Daniel Greenfield via The Gatestone Institute,

  Forget Big Brother, Big MUM is Google’s new tool for suppressing conservatives…

  

  MUM or Multitask Unified Model was hyped last year as the company’s new machine learning algorithm. MUM had been initially described as an innovative way to allow Google’s dying search service to answer natural language questions by drawing on multiple sources.

  While MUM’s applications initially appeared to be apolitical, that quickly changed.

  Google first unleashed MUM to fight what it considered COVID “misinformation” by making sure that everyone saw “high quality and timely information from trusted health authorities like the World Health Organization”. By reducing the number of sources to only those that agree with its agenda, Google is able to deliver fast results while getting rid of different points of view.

  A Forbes article described how MUM would “check information across multiple reliable sources” to allow “the system to come to a general consensus”. Google had once built its search around the vast diversity of a bygone internet, but it has spent the last decade draining the diversity and depth of the pool and replacing it with the shallow manufactured consensus of its agenda.

  Google long ago ceased being a way to find different answers and its search results are deliberately repetitive. Search is an illusion. The user thinks that he’s browsing the internet when he’s actually spinning his wheels in Google’s walled garden. This is most obvious in shopping and in politics: two areas where Google has strong interests and tries to manipulate users into believing that they are exploring options when they’re being hand fed variations on a theme.

  Or as Pandu Nayak, VP of search at Google, wrote in a recent post, “By using our latest AI model, Multitask Unified Model (MUM), our systems can now understand the notion of consensus, which is when multiple high-quality sources on the web all agree on the same fact.”

  The last thing the world needs is another centralized computer system enforcing a consensus.

  Google disagrees with many of its users about what “reliable sources” or “high-quality sources” entail. MUM helps the Big Tech search monopoly manufacture a consensus, on what it claims is a universal fact, and to promote snippets on its own site that promote that consensus.

  The monopoly doesn’t see its search service as a way to rank sites. The Big Tech monopoly, like its counterparts, doesn’t want users actually leaving its sites, and wants to force a “consensus” answer on them in its search engine. MUM is another tool for keeping users on its digital plantation. The underlying notion behind MUM is a continuing redefinition of search, not as browsing an array of sources, but as a way of delivering a single instantaneous answer.

  Googlers have long been obsessed with the idea of replicating Star Trek’s fictional computer which would offer the answer to any question in a robotic female voice.

  MUM is the next step in this Big Sister quest.

  “The Star Trek computer is not just a metaphor that we use to explain to others what we’re building. It is the ideal that we’re aiming to build—the ideal version done realistically,” Amit Singhal, then the head of Google’s search rankings team, boasted.

  Singhal was later forced to leave the company over sexual harassment allegations.

  “It was the perfect search engine,” he gushed about the Star Trek computer. “You could ask it a question and it would tell you exactly the right answer, one right answer—and sometimes it would tell you things you needed to know in advance, before you could ask it.”

  In 2022, Google’s search is hopelessly broken because the company no longer has any interest in providing the search service that made it a monopoly, giving a ranked list of diverse results, but wants everyone to speak into their phones and receive a single answer. The consensus.

  Google’s snippets and knowledge panels displace links to actual sites and provide what the monopoly claims is the definitive answer. Its search assistant is similarly set up to provide a single answer. Google doesn’t want you to compare answers, but to listen to MUM.

  And sometimes Google wants to give you the information before you ask it.

  If you own an advanced Android phone, you may find that Google Assistant will interrupt conversations to offer its own “insights”.

  Google is also pursuing “prebunking” of what it considers “misinformation” with preemptive propaganda campaigns.

  Jigsaw, the company’s most explicitly political arm, is researching what it calls “prebunking” or attacking views it opposes before they can even gain traction. Prebunking is currently being experimentally tested by Google’s Jigsaw to fight “misinformation” in Poland and other Eastern European countries against Ukrainian migrants. This is only a test and Jigsaw expects there to be much wider application for the information techniques that its “researchers” are developing.

  Google’s YouTube already has a broad set of bans covering everything from questioning global warming, contradicting medical experts, and debating 2020 election results. These are a window into the company’s political agendas and how it seeks to enforce political conformity.

  While it seeks to narrow the sphere of acceptable information in its platforms, Google is working with the leftist Poynter Institute, one of the most notoriously biased fact check spammers, to develop “media literacy.”. The company claims to have spent $75 million on efforts to fight “misinformation.” And who determines what misinformation is? He who controls the algorithms.

  As the midterm elections approach, YouTube spokeswoman Ivy Choi, promised that the video site’s recommendations are “continuously and prominently surfacing midterms-related content from authoritative news sources and limiting the spread of harmful midterms-related misinformation.” The technical term for this is mass propaganda. That’s what Big Tech does.

  The internet was revolutionary because it upended the central systems of mass propaganda which allowed a government and a handful of men to enforce their consensus on a helpless public through the mass media of newspapers, radio stations, movie theaters and television sets. Big Tech’s Web 2.0 killed the revolution and restored the oligarchy. Its monopolists see the internet as only a faster way to deliver more immersive propaganda to the masses.

  The Big Tech monopolies took off by taming the web, shrinking its vast promise and diversity of content into smaller walled gardens that they could dominate and monetize. Facebook inhaled most of the social interactions on the internet and locked it up in its private platform. Google is determined to do the same thing to the bewildering parade of ideas of the entire internet.

  When Google’s senior VP Prabhakar Raghavan first introduced MUM, he suggested that the goal was to “develop not only a better understanding of information on the Web, but a better understanding of the world.” What happens on the internet doesn’t stay on the internet.

  Conservatives are one of the cultural barriers because their existence is a marked reminder that Big Tech does not control everything. While its executives and employees are socially insulated wokes operating in major urban centers, they manage systems that extend around the country and the world. When they encounter different points of view, they seek to wipe them out.

  MUM is yet another tool for enforcing a totalitarian conformity on the diversity of the internet.

  Google doesn’t want you to think differently or to think for yourself. What it wants users to do is to shut up and listen to Big MUM.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 17:25

• Tesla Under Criminal Investigation For Claims That Its Cars Can Drive Themselves
  Tesla Under Criminal Investigation For Claims That Its Cars Can Drive Themselves

  While it has been widely known that Tesla was facing scrutiny by the NHTSA regarding its Autopilot and Full Self Driving features, it is now being reported that other Federal agencies are looking into the automaker for the same issues.

  Namely, the Department of Justice.

  It broke on Wednesday that Tesla is under criminal investigation “over claims that the company’s electric vehicles can drive themselves”, according to an exclusive by Reuters. 

  The DOJ reportedly launched an investigation into the company last year after more than a dozen crashes took place involving Autopilot, the report says. 

  According to Reuters, the DOJ investigation “potentially represents a more serious level of scrutiny because of the possibility of criminal charges against the company or individual executives, the people familiar with the inquiry said.”

  Washington and San Francisco DOJ prosecutors are looking at whether or not the company misled consumers with its claims of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving’s capabilities. All options are still on the table with regard to the investigation, Reuters noted: “Officials conducting their inquiry could ultimately pursue criminal charges, seek civil sanctions or close the probe without taking any action, they said.”

  And the DOJ investigation in Autopilot appears to be yielding to additional DOJ investigations into the company, the report says:

  The Justice Department’s Autopilot probe is far from recommending any action partly because it is competing with two other DOJ investigations involving Tesla, one of the sources said. Investigators still have much work to do and no decision on charges is imminent, this source said.

  The investigation may need “smoking gun” style evidence to proceed, one U.S. attorney told Reuters:

  Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. attorney in Detroit who prosecuted automotive companies and employees in fraud cases and is not involved in the current probe, said investigators likely would need to uncover evidence such as emails or other internal communications showing that Tesla and Musk made misleading statements about Autopilot’s capabilities on purpose.

  

  Recall, about a week ago we wrote that there had been yet another grim development involving Tesla’s Autopilot and motorcycles – a disturbing trend we first started pointing out months ago when we talked about two accidents that occurred this summer. 

  Driver crash assist data that automakers are forced to report in such incidents was made available about a week ago and confirmed that Autopilot was engaged during a third incident. 

  The incident involved Ingrid Eva Noon, the report says, who was riding her motorcycle in Palm Beach County, Florida at 2:11 a.m. on August 26.

  An impaired driver who had Tesla’s Autopilot engaged hit the back of the motorcycle, throwing her “onto the Tesla’s windshield and killing her”, according to the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s office.

  Motorcycle advocates have claimed that “recent crashes suggest the Tesla system is insufficient”, according to the CNN report. They are concerned that “the software fails to see motorcycles and lulls Tesla drivers into a sense of complacency and inattentiveness” and that “the government’s vehicle safety regulations do not adequately protect motorcycle riders”. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 17:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Escobar: The 'War Of Terror' May Be About To Hit Europe
  Escobar: The ‘War Of Terror’ May Be About To Hit Europe

  Authored by Pepe Escobar,

  Never underestimate a wounded and decaying Empire collapsing in real time…

  Imperial functionaries, even in a “diplomatic” capacity, continue to brazenly declare that their exceptionalist control over the world is mandatory.

  If that’s not the case, competitors may emerge and steal the limelight – monopolized by US oligarchies. That, of course, is absolute anathema.

  The imperial modus operandi against geopolitical and geoeconomic competitors remains the same: avalanche of sanctions, embargos, economic blockades, protectionist measures, cancel culture, military uptick in neighboring nations, and assorted threats. But most of all, warmongering rhetoric – currently elevated to fever pitch.

  The hegemon may be “transparent” at least in this domain because it still controls a massive international network of institutions, financial bodies, politicos, CEOs, propaganda agencies and the pop culture industry. Hence this supposed invulnerability breeding insolence.

  

  Panic in the “garden”

  The blowing up of Nord Stream (NS) and Nord Stream 2 (NS2) – everybody knows who did it, but the suspect cannot be named – took to the next level the two-pronged imperial project of cutting off cheap Russian energy from Europe and destroying the German economy.

  From the imperial perspective, the ideal subplot is the emergence of a US-controlled Intermarium – from the Baltic and the Adriatic to the Black Sea – led by Poland, exercising some sort of new hegemony in Europe, on the heels of the Three Seas Initiative.

  But as it stands, that remains a wet dream.

  On the dodgy “investigation” of what really happened to NS and NS2, Sweden was cast as The Cleaner, as if this was a sequel of Quentin Tarantino’s crime thriller Pulp Fiction.

  That’s why the results of the “investigation” cannot be shared with Russia. The Cleaner was there to erase any incriminating evidence.

  As for the Germans, they willingly accepted the role of patsies. Berlin claimed it was sabotage, but would not dare to say by whom.

  This is actually as sinister as it gets, because Sweden, Denmark and Germany, and the whole EU, know that if you really confront the Empire, in public, the Empire will strike back, manufacturing a war on European soil. This is about fear – and not fear of Russia.

  The Empire simply cannot afford to lose the “garden.” And the “garden” elites with an IQ over room temperature know they are dealing with a psychopathic serial killer entity which simply cannot be appeased.

  Meanwhile, the arrival of General Winter in Europe portends a socio-economic descent into a maelstrom of darkness – unimaginable only a few months ago in the supposedly “garden” of humanity, so far away from the rumbles across the “jungle.”

  Well, from now on barbarism begins at home. And Europeans should thank the American “ally” for it, skillfully manipulating fearful, vassalized EU elites.

  Way more dangerous though is a specter that very few are able to identify: the imminent Syrianization of Europe. That will be a direct consequence of the NATO debacle in Ukraine.

  From an imperial perspective, the prospects in the Ukrainian battlefield are gloomy. Russia’s Special Military Operation (SMO) has seamlessly morphed into a Counter-Terror Operation (CTO): Moscow now openly characterizes Kiev as a terrorist regime.

  The pain dial is incrementally going up, with surgical strikes against Ukrainian power/electricity infrastructure about to totally cripple Kiev’s economy and its military. And by December, there’s the arrival on the front lines and in the rear of a properly trained and highly motivated partial mobilization contingent.

  The only question concerns the timetable. Moscow is now in the process of slowly but surely decapitating the Kiev proxy, and ultimately smashing NATO “unity.”

  The process of torturing the EU economy is relentless. And the real world outside of the collective West – the Global South – is with Russia, from Africa and Latin America to West Asia and even sections of the EU.

  It is Moscow – and significantly not Beijing – that is tearing apart the hegemon-coined “rules-based international order,” supported by its natural resources, the provision of food and reliable security.

  And in coordination with China, Iran and major Eurasian players, Russia is working to eventually decommission all those US-controlled international organizations – as the Global South becomes virtually immune to the spread of NATO psyops.

  The Syrianization of Europe

  In the Ukrainian battlefield, NATO’s crusade against Russia is doomed – even as in several nodes as much as 80 percent of the fighting forces feature NATO personnel. Wunderwaffen such as HIMARS are few and far between. And depending on the result of the US mid-term elections, weaponization will dry out in 2023.

  Ukraine, by the spring of 2023, may be reduced to no more than an impoverished, rump black hole. The imperial Plan A remains  Afghanization: to operate an army of mercenaries capable of targeted destabilization and or/terrorist incursions into the Russian Federation.

  In parallel, Europe is peppered with American military bases.

  All those bases may play the role of major terror bases – very much like in Syria, in al-Tanf and the Eastern Euphrates. The US lost the long proxy war in Syria – where it instrumentalized jihadis – but still has not been expelled.

  In this process of Syrianization of Europe, US military bases may become ideal centers to regiment and/or “train” squads of Eastern Europe émigrés, whose only job opportunity, apart from the drug business and organ trafficking, will be as – what else – imperial mercenaries, fighting whatever focus of civil disobedience emerges across an impoverished EU.

  It goes without saying that this New Model Army will be fully sanctioned by the Brussels EUrocracy – which is merely the public relations arm of NATO.

  A de-industrialized EU enmeshed into several layers of toxic intra-war, where NATO plays its time-tested role of Robocop, is the perfect Mad Max scenario juxtaposed to what would be, at least in the reveries of American Straussians/neo-cons, an island of prosperity: the US economy, the ideal destination for Global Capital, including European Capital.

  The Empire will “lose” its pet project, Ukraine. But it will never accept losing the European “garden.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 02:00

• Meet The 7 Men Who Will Rule China
  Meet The 7 Men Who Will Rule China

  Authored by Dorothy Li via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Led by Xi Jinping, the seven men strode on the red carpet at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Oct. 23, revealing the new generation of China’s ruling elites.

  

  These powerful officials are members of the Politburo Standing Committee, the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP’s) top decision-making body. Current leader Xi heads the committee again after closed-door meetings at which roughly 370 hand-picked Party representatives rubber-stamped the committee’s members.

  The lineup at the conclusion of the 20th Party Congress demonstrates Xi’s further consolidation of power, with all four newly appointed members being his protégés and allies.

  The following are the members who will run the Party for the next five years.

  Xi Jinping

  

  Xi confirmed his third five-year term as Party general secretary, a feat that no one since Mao has accomplished. Mao ruled the country for 27 years until his death in 1976.

  Xi also retained his position as head of the Central Military Commission and is almost certain to remain the Chinese leader, which will be unveiled after the rubber-stamp legislative meetings next spring. He had already scrapped term limits by revising the constitution in 2018.

  The lack of a possible successor to the 69-year-old leader suggests he may intend to extend his term further, which would normally end in 2027.

  When Xi first joined the Standing Committee in 2007, it was clear from his age and from the makeup of the committee that he would replace then-Party leader Hu Jintao when Hu’s term ended in 2012.

  Now, five of seven of the Standing Committee members, including Xi, are over 65, with Ding Xuexiang, now 60, being the youngest. It means none of them would be young enough to take over the Party’s top position in 2027. The CCP’s decades-long norm is that those who are 68 or older at the time of the Congress would retire.

  Li Qiang

  

   

  Taking over the Party’s No. 2 position is Li Qiang, Shanghai’s Party chief. The financial hub’s most powerful position is often seen as a stepping stone to the CCP’s top decision-making body. Li’s predecessor, Han Zheng, was promoted to the Standing Committee in 2017.

  But earlier this year, speculation abounded that Li’s political career was doomed because of the COVID-19 lockdown in Shanghai. Confined to their homes for two months, the city’s 25 million residents struggled to obtain food and medicine, which angered the public and provoked numerous small-scale protests.

  The political rise of Li shows “Xi Jinping’s criteria is the connection with him, absolute loyalty to him, and obedience to him,” said Feng Chongyi, a professor of China studies at the University of Technology Sydney.

  The 63-year-old is Xi’s close ally. When Xi was a Party secretary of Zhejiang Province, Li was in charge of Wenzhou, a major city within Zhejiang. In 2004, Li was promoted to secretary-general of Zhejiang, becoming Xi’s right-hand man.

  After Xi took the helm at the 18th National Congress in 2012, he promoted Li to governor of Zhejiang Province. Three years later, Li became Jiangsu Province Party secretary, the top position in the rich, coastal province that abuts Shanghai. In 2017, Li became Party secretary of Shanghai. Now, Li is widely expected to be the next premier.

  Zhao Leji

  

  Anti-corruption czar Zhao Leji is one of two people maintaining their positions on the Standing Committee. Zhao most recently headed the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, the driving force behind Xi’s campaign to rid the Party of political enemies—namely officials still loyal to former CCP leader Jiang Zemin.

  The 65-year-old also led the Party’s Organization Department, a powerful body responsible for appointments of senior officials. Zhao helped promote many of Xi’s allies, according to the Brookings Institute.

  Zhao started his political career in the northwestern Qinghai Province, where he was born, and worked his way up in the provincial bureaucracy. He became Qinghai’s Party secretary in 2003. Zhao then served as the Party chief of Shaanxi Province before arriving in Beijing in 2012.

  Wang Huning

  

  Another person who retains a position in the Party’s top governing body is Wang Huning, a veteran theorist.

  The 67-year-old Wang is a rare political figure who has served three Party chiefs amid fierce political infighting and the once-in-five-year reshuffles.

  “He [Wang] is not loyal to any leader,” Feng told The Epoch Times. “He is just a theorist that the Party found useful.”

  The former professor and dean of the law school at Fudan University defined core ideologies for the three leaders, from Jiang Zemin’s Three Representatives, to Hu Jintao’s Scientific View on Development, to Xi Jinping Thoughts.

  “Wang Huning’s presence also indicates to me that the ideological bent of the Party and Xi will continue and even deepen,” Dylan Loh, assistant professor at Nanyang Technology University, told Reuters.

  Cai Qi

  

  A newcomer to the elite standing committee, Cai Qi has known Xi for more than two decades. Cai worked under Xi when he held top posts in Fujian and Zhejiang provinces. After Xi took power, Cai was promoted to Beijing before he became the city’s Party boss in 2017. In the same year, he joined the Politburo, despite public anger over his forced eviction of migrant workers on Beijing’s outskirts.

  On Oct. 30, Cai takes over as First Secretary of the Secretariat, overseeing the Party’s propaganda and ideology work.

  Ding Xuexiang

  

  As Xi’s right-hand man, Ding Xuexiang’s elevation to the Standing Committee is no surprise to observers, although he has never been a provincial-level Party secretary.

  Ding’s ties to Xi could date back to 2007. When Xi briefly served as Shanghai’s Party secretary, Ding was the city’s secretary-general and Xi’s top aide. In 2013, just a few months after Xi took office, Ding moved to Beijing first as the deputy director of the General Office, then as leader of the powerful office that manages the top leadership’s administrative affairs.

  The 60-year-old has accompanied Xi on many trips abroad.

  “[Ding] has probably spent more time with Xi Jinping than any other official over the past five years,” Neil Thomas, a senior analyst for China and Northeast Asia at the Eurasia Group, told Reuters.

  Li Xi

  

  Li Xi, Party chief of the southern economic powerhouse Guangdong Province, is also a new face on the Standing Committee. The 66-year-old’s bond to Xi could be traced to indirect links to Xi’s late father, Xi Zhongxun, who was a Party revolutionary, according to the Brookings Institute.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/26/2022 – 00:05

• These Are America's Violent Crime Hotspots
  These Are America’s Violent Crime Hotspots

  The District of Columbia had the highest rates of violent crime in the United States in 2020, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s data.

  “Residents are scared,” said Michael D. Shankle, chair of the Advisory Neighborhood Commission in the Chinatown area, after three people were shot one night last month, one fatally, in two separate incidents.

  He added, “They are angry. … We feel like we don’t have enough support.”

  Nearly 1,000 cases of violent crime per 100,000 people were recorded in the state.

  

  Alaska also has a high rate of violent crime, at 838 cases per 100,000 population.

  As Statista’s Anna Fleck shows in the map below, the south-eastern states of New Mexico, Arkansas, Tennessee and Louisiana also show higher figures than much of the rest of the country.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  At the other end of the spectrum placed Maine (109 per 100,000), New Hampshire (146), and Vermont (173).

  Finally, we note that even with some of the country’s toughest gun laws, the District is awash in firearms.

  Police so far this year have seized 2,249 guns, 815 more than this time last year…

  

  …they seem to be fighting a losing battle as the bad guys just won’t follow their rules!

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 23:45

• Multipolar World Order – Part 4
  Multipolar World Order – Part 4

  Authored by Iain Davis via Off-Guardian.org,

  Part 1 of this series looked at the various models of world order.

  Part 2 examined how the shift towards the multipolar world order has been led by some surprising characters.

  Part 3 explored the history of the idea of a world ordered as a “balance of power,” or multipolar system. Those who have advocated this model over the generations have consistently sought the same goal: global governance.

  In Part 4 we will consider the theories underpinning the imminent multipolar order, the nature of Russia and China’s public-private oligarchies and the emergence of these two nations’ military power.

  

  THE WIDER CONTEXT OF THE UKRAINE WAR

  There is no evidence to suggest that the war in Ukraine is, in any sense, “fake.” The political and cultural differences among the populace of Ukraine are older than the nation-state, and the current conflict is rooted in long-standing and very real tensions. People are suffering and dying, and they deserve the chance to live in peace.

  Yet, beyond the specific factors that led to and have perpetuated the conflict in Ukraine, there is a wider context that also deserves discussion.

  The so-called leaders in the West and in the East have had ample opportunity and power to bring both sides in the Donbas war to the negotiating table. Their attempts to broker ceasefires and to implement the various Minsk agreements over the years were weak and half-hearted. Both sides, it seems, chose instead to play politics with Ukrainian lives. And both sides ultimately fuelled the conflict.

  The West has done little but exacerbate the situation. And, though it faced a tough economic choice, the Russian government could certainly have leveraged its commanding position in the European energy market to better effect.

  If, that is, avoiding war were the objective.

  Whatever else it is, the war in Ukraine is the fulcrum for a transition in the balance of geopolitic power. Like the pseudopandemic that immediately preceded it, the war is accelerating the polarity shift.

  

  UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace was right to observe that the Ukraine war is “a gift to NATO.” Just as the West has delivered the Russian government’s monetary policy to them, so Putin’s administration has rescued NATO from vanishing relevance. Both poles are strengthened, if for different reasons.

  At the same time the European Union (EU) is capitalising on both the war and the sanctions it imposed in order to reinvigorate its push towards EU military unification.

  The UK is involved in this push, even though in 2016 its population elected, via referendum, to leave the EU, specifically because a majority of voters did not want to give “national sovereignty” away to the union leadership.

  But, as we can see, it doesn’t matter what the people vote for or against. Despite having supposedly left the EU, the UK’s newly unelected Prime Minister has just signed up the UK as a “Third State,” bound by Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) agreements, under the direct military command of Brussels. As the UK partly hands its independent defence capability to the EU, it is playing its part in assisting the emergence of another pole.

  The International Monetary and Financial System (IMFS), which has thus far underwritten unipolar domination, is being transformed now that it’s reaching the end of its life cycle. Economic growth is being deliberately stifled in the West via sanctions but encouraged in the East. Energy flows and consumption patterns are being redirected eastward. Simultaneously, effective military power is being “rebalanced.”

  During the pseudopandemic, we saw much evidence of global coordination. Most unusually, almost every government acted in lockstep. China, the US, Russia, Germany, Iran, the UK and many other nations followed the same false narrative. All participated in shutting down global supply chains and limiting world trade. Most countries assiduously heeded the World Economic Forum’s preferred path of global “regionalisation.” The few that resisted were considered international pariahs.

  What has happened since then? We’re told the war in Ukraine has reintroduced the same old East-vs-West division that most of us are more familiar with. Yet in nearly every other significant way nations remain strangely in total agreement. It seems The war in Ukraine is practically the only dispute.

  MULTIPOLAR THEORY

  The proposed multipolar world order does not constitute a defence of the nation-state. We have already discussed how the multipolar model dovetails quite precisely with the “Great Reset” (GR) agenda, so it should come as little surprise that multipolar theory also rejects the suggested Westphalian concept of national sovereignty.

  Russia has numerous think tanks and GONGOs (government organized non-governmental organizations). Just as in the West, these are funded and influenced by both the public and private sectors, working in partnership. As noted by the Swedish Defense Research Agency, Russian think tank funding “part comes from the government and the rest from private actors and clients, usually big business.”

  Katehon is the “independent” think tank established by Russian oligarch Konstantin Malofyev (Malofeev), who has been sanctioned by the US since 2014 for his support of Ukrainian Russians, first in Crimea and then in the Donbas. The Katehon board includes Sergey Glazyev, the economist and politician who is the current Commissioner of Macroeconomic Integration for the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).

  In 2018, Katehon pointed out that, despite all talk to the contrary, multipolarity had largely been defined as opposition to unipolarity. That is, expressed in terms of what it isn’t rather than what it is. Katehon sought to rectify this, offering its Theory of the Multipolar World (TWM):

  Multipolarity does not coincide with the national model of world organization according to the logic of the Westphalian system. [. . .] This Westphalian model assumes full legal equality between all sovereign states. In this model, there are as many poles of foreign policy decisions in the world as there are sovereign states [. . .] and all of international law is based on it. In practice, of course, there is inequality and hierarchical subordination between various sovereign states. [. . .] The multipolar world differs from the classical Westphalian system by the fact that it does not recognize the separate nation-state, legally and formally sovereign, to have the status of a full-fledged pole. This means that the number of poles in a multipolar world should be substantially less than the number of recognized (and therefore, unrecognised) nation-states. Multipolarity is not a system of international relations that insists upon the legal equality of nation-states[.]

  The unipolar world doesn’t protect the nation-state any more than the multipolar model does, Katehon observed. According to Katehon, the Westphalian model, in its application, has always been a myth. We might say it is just another “idea” political leaders peddle to delude us into accepting the policy goals they create. They occasionally exploit “nationalism” because it is useful.

  EURASIANISM

  In their efforts to cast Vladimir Putin as a comic book villain, the Western mainstream media (MSM) has attempted to personally link him to the controversial Russian political-philosopher and strategist Aleksandre Dugin. They have labelled Dugin Putin’s Rasputin or Putin’s “brain” and have alleged that Putin considers Dugin a close ally and his favourite philosopher.

  There was never any foundation to these stories, however. Speaking in 2018, Dugin said

  “I do not hold an official position within the state apparatus. I don’t have a direct line with Putin, I’ve never even met him.”

  In 2022, the Western MSM’s allegations prompted Alain de Benoist, Dugin’s political and philosophical collaborator and friend of more than 30 years, to observe:

  Putin’s “brain!” The fact that Dugin and Putin have never met once face-to-face is a good measure of the seriousness of those who use this expression. [. . .] Dugin undoubtedly knows Putin’s entourage well, but he was never one of his intimates or his “special advisers.” [. . .] The book he wrote a few years ago on Putin is far from being an exercise in admiration: Dugin on the contrary explains both what he approves of in Putin and what he dislikes.

  Although Dugin has no special relationship with the Kremlin, this doesn’t mean his ideas aren’t influential there. He has acted as an advisor to the Chairman of the State Duma, Sergey Naryshkin, and to the Chairman of the State Duma, Gennadiy Seleznyov, so he certainly has political connections and is heard by the Russian political class.

  Dugin is perhaps the leading modern voice for Eurasianism. In a 2014 interview, he explained his interpretation of both Eurasianism and its place within multipolarity this way:

  Eurasianism is based on the multipolar vision and on the rejection of the unipolar vision of the continuation of American hegemony. The pole of this multipolarism is not the national state or the ideological bloc, but rather the great space (Grossraum) strategically united within the borders of a common civilization. The typical great space[s] [are] Europe, the unified USA, Canada and Mexico, or united Latin America, Greater China, Greater India, and in our case Eurasia.[. . .] The multipolar vision recognizes integration on the basis of a common civilization. [. . .] Putin’s foreign policy is centred on multipolarity and the Eurasian integration which is necessary to create a truly solid pole.

  Neither the oligarchs nor the global political class are deluded enough to believe that they can simply commend one political philosophy or another, or one cultural ideology or another, and thereby control the behaviour and beliefs of humanity. There will always be the need for some Machiavellian skulduggery.

  Putin has frequently espoused Eurasianist ideas. Conversely, Dugin is among those who have criticised Putin for his lack of a clear ideology:

  He must translate his individual intuition into a doctrine intended to secure the future order. He just doesn’t have a declared ideology, and that’s becoming more and more problematic. Every Russian feels that Putin’s hyper-individual approach poses a huge risk.

  In 2011, Putin announced his plan to create the Eurasian Union, much to the delight of Dugin and other the Eurasianists like Malofyev and Glazyev. Putin published an accompanying article:

  We suggest a powerful supranational association capable of becoming one of the poles in the modern world and serving as an efficient bridge between Europe and the dynamic Asia-Pacific region. [. . . .] It is clear today that the 2008 global crisis was structural in nature. We still witness acute reverberations of the crisis that was rooted in accumulated global imbalances. [. . .] Thus, our integration project is moving to a qualitatively new level, opening up broad prospects for economic development and creating additional competitive advantages. This consolidation of efforts will help us establish ourselves within the global economy and trade system and play a real role in decision-making, setting the rules and shaping the future.

  

  Alexander Dugin

  Putin pointed towards a global crisis that led to the claimed need for a supranational body that could act as a pole for decision-making in a global system based upon a balance of power. What he said follows a pattern; all those who extol global governance have used the same rhetorical trick.

  This pattern is currently being repeated again. Irrespective of any other beliefs he may hold, Putin’s commitment to resetting the global polity is clear.

  Eurasianism renders the Russian Federation a “partner” within a wider union. Currently the Eurasian Union only exists in the economic sense, and Russia is overwhelmingly dominant within it. Similarly, Russia’s permanent position in the UN Security Council affords Russia relative dominance within the UN.

  Nonetheless, while the Russian government may hope to benefit from such unions and councils, by forming “poles” in a multipolar system and setting policies influenced by ideas like Eurasianism, it has diluted and declared a plan to eventually cede Russian “national sovereignty” to the union—to the pole. Putin’s pursuit of Eurasianism and multipolarity doesn’t necessarily indicate anything other than pragmatism. Nor does it represent a defence of the Russian nation-state.

  We can only guess, but Putin’s preference for Eurasianism and multipolarity is unlikely to be rooted in any particular ideology. Rather, it serves a purpose, providing his government and its partners a bigger stake in “the game.”

  TIANXIA

  Putin’s notion of “Eurasian integration” jibes with the Chinese ideology of “tianxia,” which can be translated as “everything under heaven.” In Chinese antiquity, tianxia placed the empire at the pinnacle of a global moral hierarchy. Confucian universal care dictates that a civilised state cares for its own, first and foremost, but cannot consider itself civilised if it doesn’t care for others, too.

  Other states are considered civilised if they care for their citizens and barbaric if they don’t. Therefore, all civilised states should care more for the interests of other peaceful and civilised states than they do for the needs or desires of barbaric states. Consequently, bonds are naturally formed between caring states, creating a kind of organic geopolitical order, as each state places its own people at the centre of a network of civilised relationships.

  In tianxia, the practice of Confucian universal care also operates within all institutions that comprise a state. For instance, civilised individuals naturally care for their families and their immediate communities more than they care for people outside those circles. However, no one is to act selfishly at the expense of other citizens, no matter where they reside, without falling into barbarism themselves.

  This is a model of state that is not based upon ethnic or “blood” ties or even national borders, but rather upon a hierarchical system of morality.

  Tianxia has been promoted by a few Western commentators as a “beautiful” idea. Like a philosophical Mandelbrot set it suggests a perfect moral symmetry at both at the micro and the macro scale. The multipolar world order, supposedly with tianxia at its heart, is therefore recommended as a wonderful new model of global governance and is frequently described as “win, win cooperation.”

  Academics like Professors Zhao Tingyang and Xiang Lanxin have said that the global adoption of tianxia would establish a “post-Westphalian world.” This view stems from their assessment that the Westphalian order is ideologically stagnant, limited to nothing more than an expedient balance of power system wherein “might is right.”

  The criticism from these tianxian scholars is not a fair reflection of the moral precepts expressed by the Peace of Westphalia—treaties that extolled the Christian values of forgiveness, tolerance and peaceful cooperation. The scholars’ assessment is, however, a reasonable appraisal of the actual conduct of Western states that only pretend to honour Westphalian principles.

  Professor Lanxin points out that China “has no ontological tradition.” That is, philosophically tianxia doesn’t ask “what is this?” but rather “what path does this suggest?” If tianxia were applied to China’s strategic foreign policy, it would be ambivalent to ideas like national sovereignty.

  Much like the moral foundations of Westphalian international relations, tianxia is professed but not practised. Currently, for example, China is arming the UAE and the Saudi regimes to wage war in Yemen and is also stealing Yemen’s natural resources. Is this tianxia? Where is the “win” for the Yemeni people in China’s behaviour?

  The drawback of noble ideas is that they can be exploited by hard-nosed geostrategists to sell any policy agenda they like. The theories of tianxia and Eurasianism provide a grounding for multipolarity. The philosophy isn’t the problem, it is its exploitation by the engineers of multipolar global governance.

  They don’t care what the intent of an idea is. They care only how they can use that ideology or philosophy to justify their actions if anyone asks. If philosophical thought suggests some useful strategies, all the better.

  When global governance over a multipolar system is the goal, then tianxia, like Eurasianism, certainly is “beautiful.”

  Consider the words of Professor Zhou:

  [Some are] concerned that tianxia would lead to “Pax Sinica” replacing “Pax Americana.” However, this concern is misplaced because under tianxia, there would be no place for a king — the system itself is king. In this sense, it would be a bit like Switzerland, where various language groups (French, German, Italian, Romansh) and local cantons all coexist in a commonwealth of roughly equal parts where the center in Bern is essentially a coordination point with a rotating president whose power is so constrained that some Swiss citizens can’t even name the person occupying the post.

  Tianxia relegates the political voice of the people to an irrelevance. It is multipolar, defining political power as a networked system that is not limited by national sovereignty or unipolar authority but rather operates “constrained” centres of power. For those who manipulate geopolitics covertly, it is perfect: the system itself is king.

  Tianxia may be a serene philosophy, but what really matters is how the theory is applied to policy. The 2017 authorised publication titled Forge Ahead under the Guidance of General Secretary Xi Jinping’s Thought on Diplomacy by China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi gives us a glimpse of the kind of thing China’s political class and others call “win, win cooperation.”

  Xi Jinping […] puts forward new propositions on security, development and global governance. […] Xi Jinping […] has underscored China’s role and contribution to world peace and development and to upholding the international order. […] China has […] played a leading role in the Asia-Pacific cooperation, the G20’s transformation and the course of economic globalization[.]

  […] China has promoted the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the Silk Road Fund and the BRICS New Development Bank, and has taken an active part in the formulation of rules governing such emerging areas as marine and polar affairs, cyberspace, nuclear security and climate change.

  […] The [Belt and Road] initiative has been widely commended for lending impetus to global growth and boosting confidence in economic globalization.

  […] We have taken an active part […] and worked with other countries to tackle global challenges such as terrorism, climate change, cyber security and refugees. […] We advocated the formulation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and became the first country to release its national plan on implementation.

  It turns out that the alleged application of tianxia means upholding the international order, international financial and monetary system reform, Agenda 2030, counterterrorism, controlling human capital, exercising global cybersecurity, economic globalization and, of course, global governance.

  It seems Xi Jinping’s tianxia-inspired “thoughts” are just the same as the thoughts of the Rockefellers, Vladimir Putin, Klaus Schwab and all other members of the multipolar sales team.

  RUSSIA – THE FUSION OF THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE OLIGARCHY

  The Russian government and its think tanks and and oligarchs are not alone in advocating a “regionalized” world of poles. With its five “groups,” a nascent multipolar world order already exists in the form of the G20. The G20’s enthusiasm for a single global tax system demonstrates the intention to move toward a much firmer system of global governance.

  Previously we noted that Putin purged the oligarch collaborators of the West in fairly short succession after becoming President. Much has been written about his war against the “5th columnists.” This often infers that Putin is somehow opposed to the power of oligarchs. That isn’t true at all.

  The Russian government has no problem with people making huge amounts of money and then using it to exercise political power. It is just that political power must promote the Russian government’s aspirations.

  In fact, one of the perks of being in Putin’s circle is the opportunity to become fabulously wealthy. We have already discussed the obscene levels of wealth inequality in Russia, particularly in terms of its concentration in the hands of the oligarchs. Putin hasn’t put an end to this elitism; he has facilitated it on a grand scale.

  To put the matter in perspective: when Putin became President in 1999—that is, “elected” in 2000—there were a handful of Russian billionaires and oligarchs. Today, according to Forbes, there are more than 100.

  Perhaps it is just another coincidence, but the sanctions have provided an impetus for Russian oligarchs living overseas to return to the motherland, a trend that has effectively strengthened the Kremlin’s bond with its oligarch “partners.”

  In 1999, Putin inherited a Russian economy that had been holed out. Between 1999 and 2014, he oversaw a remarkable Russian economic recovery. Living standards improved significantly, GDP rose from $200 billion in 1999 to $2.2 trillion in 2014.

  Putin led Russia from the 20th largest economy in the world to the 7th (now 11th). It seems that luck—or price fixing!—may have played a part in this apparent economic miracle. Russia’s GDP growth tracks the global oil price quite precisely.

  While the Russian people benefited from some of this growth, fuelling a consumer boom, the same period also saw a huge increase in wealth inequality. A new class of Russian oligarchs hoovered up a disproportionate share of Russia’s national wealth. During his 2000 campaign to be formally anointed as President, when a radio journalist asked Putin how he would define “oligarch” and what he thought of them, he said:

  [The] fusion of power and capital — there will be no oligarchs of this kind as a class.

  Once secured in power, though, Putin’s team constructed a crony capitalist regime that is the epitome of the “fusion of power and capital.” He and his entourage effectively inverted the Western model of oligarch control, where capital is converted into political power. In Russia, political power enables the accumulation of capital, creating an almost unique class of oligarchs.

  Gazprom, the world’s largest publicly listed gas company, provides a case study demonstrating how the Russian oligarchy functions.

  Dmitry Medvedev and Alexei Miller worked in St Petersburg alongside Putin during the 1990s. Medvedev was the mayoral campaign manager for Anatoly Sobchak, who subsequently co-authored the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Putin was an advisor and then deputy to Sobchak. Miller served on the mayor’s Committee for External Relations.

  When Putin became President, he gave Medvedev the highest civil service rank in Russia and made Miller the Deputy Minister of Energy.

  Meanwhile, Putin decreed that Gazprom was a “national champion”—meaning a “private” corporation the Russian government considers essential to the Russian economy. Through various funds, the Russian government retained its 50.2% controlling interest in Gazprom, which makes Gazprom a public-private partnership.

  Putin appointed Medvedev and Miller to the Gazprom board. Medvedev acted as chairman until 2008, when he was selected as the nominal President of the Russian Federation, while Putin temporarily acted as Prime Minister for a few years. Miller was appointed as Gazprom CEO in 2001 and is still in that post.

  In 2006, Gazprom released the construction cost of its Altay pipeline from West Siberia to China. The same year it also released the expenditure figures for its Gryazovets-Vyborg pipeline. The per-kilometer cost of the Gryazovets-Vyborg pipeline was four times higher than the comparable Altay pipeline or similar pipelines, such as the OPAL pipeline in Germany.

  In 2008, the Russian firm PiterGaz Engineering estimated the total construction cost of the Sochi pipeline to be $155 million—at the current exchange rate. Yet Gazprom paid the present-day equivalent of $395 million.

  This inflated price prompted the East European Gas Analysis (EEGA) to note:

  Russian pipeline engineering institutions, including the corresponding divisions of Gazprom, give realistic estimations of pipeline construction costs, comparable with those of western projects. However, it looks like, on the way to the top management of Gazprom, these cost estimations get at least tripled. [. . .] Apparently, after getting a realistic cost estimation, Gazprom executives add a generous margin for contractors and brokers, so the total project cost gets 3-4 times higher.

  Such slush funds are found in every sector of the Russian economy, most notably in defence, infrastructure development and healthcare. The proceeds are then doled out to loyal oligarchs.

  They are “oligarchs” in the fullest sense of the word. Their wealth is dependent upon their partnership with the political state. In return, they use their wealth to forward the policies of the state. Their capital couldn’t be more “political.”

  For example, Alexey Mordachov owns the steel giant Servestal that supplies gas pipeline to Gazprom for its development projects, such as the Yakutia-Khabarovsk-Vladivostok pipeline (aka the China–Russia East-Route).

  Other oligarchs profiting from the scheme include Putin’s personal friends Gennady Timchenko, who owns the OAO Stroytransgaz construction company, and Arkady Rotenberg, whose Stroygazmontazh (S.G.M. Group) forms Russia’s largest gas pipeline and power grid construction company.

  The oligarchs are profiting from the construction of the Arctic Silk Road.

  They deploy their resources to ensure that the Russian government’s foreign policy objectives are realised. The Russian oligarchs and the Russian political class are in a symbiotic relationship: a public-private partnership constructing the multipolar world order.

  In so doing, they are engaging in the Great Reset, implementing the Rockefellers’ vision and fulfilling the dreams of Carroll Quigley’s Anglo-American network. The Russian state is more than just a public-private partnership. Moving beyond mere contractual arrangements and shared strategic goals, Russia’s government has fused the corporate and the political into a single public-private nation-state.

  Despite the slaughter going on in the Ukraine war and all sides’ refusal to unconditionally negotiate, Russia’s “state-owned” private energy corporation Gazprom has apparently settled its dispute with Ukrainian “state-owned” energy corporation Naftogaz and is pumping 42.4 million cubic meters of natural gas a day through Ukraine to Western Europe energy markets.

  The Russian Federation is paying the Ukrainian government substantial transit fees. It is effectively funding Ukraine’s war effort. The war is only for the little people.

  CHINA – THE FUSION OF THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE OLIGARCHY

  The only major developed economy in the world to have gone further than Russia in fusing the public and private sectors is China. China is a neo-fuedal capitalist state operating as a technocracy under the leadership of an oligarch dynasty.

  The great military and political leaders of Mao Zedong’s revolution who later successfully evaded Mao’s Cultural Revolution (1966–1976) were collectively referred to as the “eight immortals.”

  When the Rockefellers and the Trilateral Commission dispatched Henry Kissinger to prepare the ground for US President Nixon’s visit to China in the early 1970s, seven of the immortals decided to throw their collective political weight behind fellow immortal Deng Xiaoping’s economic reforms.

  

  Deng Xiaoping

  The process of opening up China’s economy began in earnest following Mao’s death in 1976. Prominent Trilateralists such as then-US President Bill Clinton, global investment firms, Western-based multinational corporations and private investors stepped up foreign direct investment to assist China’s immortals in modernising the country’s economy, financial sector, military, industrial and technological capability. The modernisation enabled the rise of China’s oligarchy.

  For example, the immortal General Wang Zhen supported Deng’s economic liberalism but also sliced off huge chunks of China’s state assets and placed them in trust to his son, Wang Jun.

  Subsequently, Wang Jun collaborated with Deng’s economic advisor, Rong Yiren, to seed his now private capital into Citic Group Corp, which then became China’s “state-owned” investment company.

  Citic Group is a public-private partnership that today has significant influence over China’s financial services, advanced manufacturing technology, production of modern materials and urban development.

  In this way the immortals effectively created a public-private dynasty in China. Their immensely wealthy offspring are now collectively referred to as the “Princelings.”

  The Princelings can broadly be divided into three groups, each influencing important Chinese sectors and industry:

  • political Princelings, such as Xi Jinping, manage the public sector

  • military Princelings manage the defence and national security sectors

  • entrepreneur Princelings manage the private sector.

  As a group, they have huge influence over China’s domestic and foreign policy.

  China is a one-party state but has not abandoned politics. The selection of Xi Jinping as Paramount Leader in 2012 marked an effective power-shift toward the Princelings, who many consider to represent the “elite.”

  They are “opposed” by the “Tuanpai,” whose power base stems from the Communist Youth League movement established by former president Hu Jintao. The Tuanpai are broadly popularist and more focused on the issues of working Chinese people.

  Other factions, such as the “Shangai Gang” and the “Tsinghua Clique,” add to the political mix.

  Technocracy controls citizens through the allocation of resources. China leads on the technocratic aspects of the Great Reset. It is the world’s first operational Technate, wherein the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) oversees the surveillance and control of the population through its social credit system:

  The establishment of a social credit system is an important foundation for comprehensively implementing the scientific viewpoint of development. [. . .] Accelerating and advancing the establishment of the social credit system is an important precondition for promoting the optimized allocation of resources.

  The idea is that citizens can be rewarded for good behaviour and penalised for bad. Speaking to French Television, one of the lead developers of China’s social credit system was asked how French adoption of it might have impacted the Yellow Vest protests in France. Lin Jinyue replied:

  I really hope that we will manage to export it in a capitalist country. [. . .] I believe that France should quickly adopt our system of social credit, to regulate their social movements. [. . .] If you had had the system of social credit, the Yellow Vests would never have been.

  Coincidentally, social credit-style surveillance has been greatly enhanced as a result of the pseudopandemic that began in China. To travel on public transport, enter civic buildings, be admitted to the workplace and so on, it is necessary for China’s citizens to scan their COVID Pass QR code. Green allows them to move freely; Red prevents their free movement.

  Biometric identification via facial recognition scanning is required to register a sim card in China. The biometric data system allows the NDRC to track the movements of every citizen and allows biosecurity to be enforced nationally.

  Covid QR codes, combined with digital ID, means that China’s Technate is on its way to meeting the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 3 and 16.

  SDG 3 reads:

  Strengthen the capacity of all countries, in particular developing countries, for early warning, risk reduction and management of national and global health risks

  And SDG 16 says:

  By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration

  “Legal identity” is UN code for digital identity.

  The Chinese technocratic oligarchy is also ahead of other countries in its development and implementation of Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). Bo li recently vacated his position as the Deputy Governor of the Bank of China to join the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as its Deputy Managing Director.

  Speaking at the IMF’s Central Bank Digital Currencies for Financial Inclusion: Risks and Rewards symposium, Bo Li discussed the claim that CBDC would improve so-called “financial inclusion”:

  CBDC can allow government agencies and private sector players to program [CBDC] to create smart-contracts, to allow targetted policy functions. For example[,] welfare payments [. . .], consumptions coupons, [. . .] food stamps. By programming, CBDC money can be precisely targeted [to] what kind of [things] people can own, and what kind of use [for which] this money can be utilised. For example[,] for food. So this potential programmability can help government agencies precisely target their support to those people who need support. So, in that way we can also improve financial inclusion.

  Perhaps so—although the improvement will only be afforded tothe citizen who obeys the”government agencies and private sector players”—the Princelings. Engage in “bad” behaviour and and CBDC will be used to target you for financial “exclusion.”

  With CBDC in place, there would be no need to switch people’s QR code to red to stop them from attending a protest. Simply program their CBDC to prevent train ticket purchases or the use of money more than a mile from home. Physical lockdowns of Covid days are replaced by CBDC lockouts, which are much easier to enforce.

  

  Bo Li speaking at the IMF symposium

  THE MULTIPOLAR MILITARY DIMENSION

  Global economic and financial power is backed up by military force. So if the powers-that-be are serious about building a new system of super-powered poles, they need to have the muscle to hold their respective positions. After all, a multipolar world order cannot be stabilised and enforced unless each pole presents a genuine military threat to the other.

  For most of the post-WWII period, the US-led unipolar NATO alliance possessed the most advanced military technology. Not only did the West dominate monetarily, financially and economically, it had the military advantage to go with it. Yet, just like every other aspect of former Western dominance, that, too, has disappeared, and military power has blossomed elsewhere.

  Suddenly, as if from nowhere, Russia is claiming technological military supremacy. It is now ahead in the arms race. The US has confirmed that Russia used a functioning hypersonic missile in Ukraine, a fact that Joe Biden called “consequential” and frankly admitted “is almost impossible to stop.”

  China, too, has fired a hypersonic missile. It apparently circled the globe. It then dispatched a hypersonic glide missile that struck its target in China. Again, confirmation came from senior US military officials, who called the technological advance “stunning.”

  Now China says it may soon be able to arm its navy with these superior weapons.

  Meanwhile, the West’s dunderheads, who until relatively recently dominated militarily, simply can’t wrap their minds around the ramjet engine technology (or scramjet) that powers this new breed of missiles.

  While China has confirmed global flight tests and pinpoint hypersonic accuracy and Russia has actually used them in the battlefield, the Pentagon and the US Defence Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) and its private-sector partners like Raytheon are still fumbling about with limited tests, hoping they might be able to develop the same operational capability sometime soon.

  If you can believe that!

  The British can’t build ships that function in warm water, and their aircraft carriers can’t sail more than a few nautical miles without breaking down.

  The US Navy can’t sail its ships at all.

  And no one in the West can build a fighter aircraft that actually works. Yet Russia has taken submarine technology to a new level, and everyone is pretty sure China has developed AI “intelligentized” fighting capability.

  The West’s sudden inability to stay in, let alone lead, the technological arms race certainly seems to mark a polar shift in the global military balance of power. It is likely that the Western military-industrial complex is kicking itself after spending the last 30 years handing its military technology over to the East.

  Now look what they’ve done!

  

  CONCLUSION

  The Russian government and the Chinese government are not “worse” than the US, the UK or the French government. They are just governments doing what governments do. They represent the interests of those who can keep them in power—or remove them.

  The multipolar world order ends the last vestiges of national sovereignty. It is the geopolitical Great Reset: the culmination of the oligarch’s longstanding plan to establish a system of global governance that affords them dominion over all.

  If the multipolar system proceeds, which seems likely, the 193 nations—give or take—of the world will eventually be incorporated into a few global poles. Who knows how many, but probably no more than half a dozen or so.

  There are some potential benefits to multipolarity. Perhaps tianxia will break out, thus reducing the risk of conflict. A “balance of power” between global poles of states could limit aggression. But if we consider how this might be achieved and who is supposedly leading it, there is reason for concern.

  Assuming that the Pax Americana, Pax Europa, Pax Eurasia and Pax Sinica poles, or whatever, don’t intend to disarm, wouldn’t this logically infer a proliferation of armaments globally, including hypersonic nuclear weapons? How will these poles maintain internal security? What is to stop warfare from breaking out within each pole as disputes emerge? Will other poles have to, or choose to, intervene?

  Let’s be honest. The omens don’t look too encouraging. We are accelerating towards the multipolar world order due in large part to a war currently being waged by one of multipolarity’s leading proponents. Similarly, the activities of the other leading proponent—in places like Yemen, for instance—hardly inspire confidence.

  There is no evidence to suggest that the conduct of either Russia or China is or will be intrinsically “better” than the conduct of the leading nations of the previous “order.”

  By far the most concerning aspect of the multipolar world order is that fewer “poles” will empower global governance. The consistent trajectory, throughout history, toward the centralisation of power hasn’t just happened by accident. The strategy of diminishing the clique of people who exercise control over the global population is a purposeful one. Were it not, it wouldn’t have been engineered in the first place.

  The goal of these technocrats is to possess unopposed power. We know what they desire to do with that power should they ever achieve it:

  • enhanced biosecurity

  • population control

  • population surveillance

  • digital IDs

  • social credit systems

  • AI automated censorship

  • Universal Basic Income

  • control of the food supply, of water, of energy, of housing, of education

  • ultimately, the total control and enslavement of humanity through Central Bank Digital Currency, or some variation of it.

  The nation-states advocating the new multipolar world order don’t reject these control mechanisms. On the contrary, they are leading in of their development. The multipolar system is one giant leap toward global technocratic tyranny, a system they fully endorse.

  In Part 1, we noted that US geostrategist Zbigniew Brzezinski had identified Eurasia—”extending from Lisbon to Vladivostok”—as the setting for what he called “the game.” He observed:

  America must absolutely take over Ukraine, because Ukraine is the pivot of Russian power in Europe. Once Ukraine is separated from Russia, Russia will no longer be a threat.

  US-led Western powers, having orchestrated the 2014 Euromaidan Coup and having failed to seize control through the Ukrainian ballot box, have since then demonstrated their intent to incorporate Ukraine into the West’s strategic orbit by any means. Conflict of some sort became inevitable from that point onwards. The next eight years saw an escalating proxy conflict unfold, with virtually no serious attempts to stop it, which has led to this entirely predictable Ukraine War.

  The people of Ukraine and the people in the new Russian republics and oblasts of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson are viewed as expendable pawns. The conflict is all too real for them, as they fight and die and long to live in peace without the perpetual threat of violence. Yet neither the “great powers” nor their puppet leaders care about the lives of the people beyond their strategic value.

  The war in Ukraine is a deadly tactical ploy. The point is to fight it out, down to the last Ukrainian, if necessary, in order to facilitate the transition to the multipolar world order, thus enabling the abhorrent Great Reset and finally delivering full-blown global governance.

  The vulnerable ones who will freeze to death in Europe this winter—and they could number in the thousands—are mere collateral damage in “the game.”

  Yet war needn’t get in the way of business as usual: Russia continues to supply gas to Europe, if in greatly reduced quantities and at elevated prices, through Ukrainian pipelines.

  The mainstream media and much of the alternative media, in both the West and the East, market the Ukraine war as a battle for “freedom,” “sovereignty” or some such drivel. As the death toll mounts among those forced to fight for their existence, we in the wider international community, taking one side or the other, fall for the same old monstrous lies.

  We plant our little flags, online and off, and argue about our respective delusions, imagining that we are participating in the war, in our own small way. We act like jeering football crowds who cheer on our side to win.

  Globalist think tanks have long considered war a strategic catalyst for change, a point we should have learned from Norman Dodd’s investigation and report for the Reece Committee on Foundations in 1954. We are being hopelessly naive if we imagine the war in Ukraine couldn’t possibly lead to a horrific global conflict. We have no reason to “trust” the lunatics whom we allow to remain in charge.

  Equally, we should recognise that we are being manipulated by tactics designed to produce fear. Nuclear brinkmanship should always be seen in its fear-inducing context.

  The oligarchs of the world are united as they seek to establish a regionalized, multipolar system of global governance that will rule the nation-states we live in.

  Our political leaders, wherever they exert their claimed authority, are wholly complicit with the oligarchs’ agenda. They are selling us all out as they vie for a better seat at the table while breaking our backs in their obsequious desire to polish it.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 23:25

• Just How Big Is America's 'Strategic Cheese Reserve'?
  Just How Big Is America’s ‘Strategic Cheese Reserve’?

  As of August 2022, the U.S. had 1.5 billion pounds of cheese in cold storage across the country. That’s around $3.4 billion worth of cheese.

  Using data from USDA, this graphic looks at just how big the U.S. cheese stockpile has gotten over the last few years, and compares it to notable landmarks to help put things into perspective.

  

  But before diving into the data, Visual Capitalist’s Omri Wallach and Carmen Ang take a step back to quickly explain why America’s cheese stockpile has gotten so big in the first place.

  Why So Much Cheese?

  Over the last 30 years, milk production in the U.S. has increased by 50%.

  Yet, while milk production has climbed, milk consumption has declined. In 2004, Americans consumed the equivalent of about 0.57 cups of milk per day. By 2018, average milk consumption had dropped to 0.33 cup-equivalents.

  In response to this predicament, the U.S. government and dairy companies have been purchasing the extra milk and storing it as cheese for years.

  So, where does one store such a large amount of cheese? A sizable portion of the stockpile is stored in a massive underground warehouse (a former limestone quarry) outside of Springfield, Missouri.

  The Stockpile Keeps Growing

  Apart from a small dip in 2021 during the global pandemic, America’s stockpile of cheese has increased steadily over the last five years:

  

   

  Between April 2018 and April 2022, U.S. cheese holdings increased by 130 million pounds to reach 1.48 billion pounds. After climbing up to 1.52 billion pounds in July, the stockpile settled once again at 1.48 billion pounds at the end of August 2022.

  Now, the U.S. cheese stockpile weighs more than the Eiffel Tower, Statue of Liberty, Tower of Pisa, and the Great Sphinx of Giza—combined.

  Is the Cheese Stockpile Here to Stay?

  Attempts have been made to get rid of the cheese stockpile. Over the years, the government has established federal food welfare programs and encouraged milk consumption in schools throughout the country.

  Yet, despite their best efforts to decrease the surplus, America’s cheese stockpile continues to grow.

  As domestic consumers continue to decrease their milk consumption, and switch out their dairy milk for milk alternatives like almond or oat milk, how much bigger will this cheese stockpile get before the government comes up with an alternative solution to deal with its surplus of dairy?

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 23:05

• One Bank Makes A Stunning Discovery: The Bank Of Japan's YCC Is Broken And Soon The Entire JGB Market Will Cease To Exist
  One Bank Makes A Stunning Discovery: The Bank Of Japan’s YCC Is Broken And Soon The Entire JGB Market Will Cease To Exist

  Several days ago, around the time of Friday’s historic, largest-ever BOJ intervention in the FX market, we pointed out something which almost nobody had noticed: the BOJ’s Yield Curve Control had already failed on several occasions, with 10Y yields crossing well above the 0.25% Yield-Curve Controlled barrier…

  Everyone was so focused on lettuce and the Fed blowing up the US economy, nobody noticed that YCC has now failed and the grand MMT experiment is hanging by a thread. pic.twitter.com/6MJglr248f

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 21, 2022

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

  … and that Kuroda was valiantly injecting trillions of yen in the financial system to defend a barn door that has already been blown open.

  

  But one person did notice what was quietly going on below the unmoving surface of the JGB market, where the BOJ now owns more than half of the entire Japanese bond market and where days can pass without a single trade crossing: that person is DB’s FX strategist George Saravelos and in his Monday FX blog titled “Broken”, writes that “the below chart shows something striking: the Bank of Japan’s yield curve control policy is, for all intents and purposes, already broken. Only the three 10-year government bond yields that are now eligible for the BoJ’s fixed rate buying operations trade at or below the 25 basis point yield cap. Bonds maturing on either side of the targeted maturity now trade with yields materially higher than the cap.”

  

  Of course, just because YCC is broken doesn’t mean it couldn’t be far worse. Or rather, far, far, far, worse.

  As Saravelos explains  “if it wasn’t for the Bank of Japan’s unlimited fixed rate tenders and broader QE, the entire Japanese yield curve would likely be significantly higher.” But the “broken” curve not only demonstrates the scale of policy distortion but its likely limits too: according to the FX strategist, with the Bank of Japan reaching near-full ownership of those three specific bonds, the time is soon approaching where these bonds will stop trading in their entirety and the market will simply cease to exist.

  Yes, with the BOJ owning all of the fulcrum securities of the JGB bond market, that will be game over for the world’s foremost MMT experiment. At that moment of singularity, there will be no willing seller of ten-year bonds at the Bank of Japan’s designated purchase “price”.

  As for the idiocy that is the BOJ’s continued intervention in the FX market, here Saravelos agrees 100% with us when he says that FX intervention from the Japanese authorities will not work when the move higher in USDJPY is driven by Bank of Japan policy itself!

  Indeed, it is either the BoJ or the broad USD anti-risk parity dynamics that need to shift to change USD/JPY direction. So long as neither is materializing, FX intervention looks completely futile – especially if it ultimately leads to foreign exchange reserve sales which ultimately push global yields even higher.

  The question then becomes: since the JGB market is effectively dead, does it not make sense for the BOJ to formally and fully nationalize the bond market, and to at least allow the yen to trade (somewhat) freely? Of course, with the entire Japanese financial experiment now counting down to extinction, at best Tokyo will buy itself a few months time, but as any terminal cancer patient will attest, those few last months are more valuable than anything.

  While such a revolutionary reassessment may eventually happen, it won’t be tonight because one day after the BOJ unleashed its biggest – and most futile – FX market intervention in history, selling some $50 billion in US reserve to buy worthless funny-money, it also offered to buy more bonds than planned at its regular market operation on Wednesday to continue the Kabuki theater that its YCC is still functioning.

  • BOJ will buy 575b yen of 3-to-5 year notes, vs 475b yen planned
  • BOJ will buy 650b yen of 5-to-10 year debt, vs 550b yen planned
  • BOJ will buy 350b yen of 10-to-25 year bonds, vs 250b yen planned
  • BOJ will buy 150b yen of debt due in 25 years, vs 100b yen planned

  Translation: one day the BOJ does everything in its power to prevent the yen from imploding, the very next day it does, well, precisely the opposite as it unleashes the yen firehose assuring new record lows for the doomed currency.

  Idiocy? Yes. But once you are in the endgame of MMT and helicopter money, that’s all you have left.

  The full DB note is available to pro subs in the usual place.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 22:47

• Wealthy Chinese Activate Financial "Escape Plans" Terrified Of Xi's Coming Reign Of Terror, And Why This Is Good News For Bitcoin
  Wealthy Chinese Activate Financial “Escape Plans” Terrified Of Xi’s Coming Reign Of Terror, And Why This Is Good News For Bitcoin

  Back in September 2015, more than seven years ago, when bitcoin was trading around $225, and just after China had stunned markets with its (relatively modest) yuan devaluation, we made a modest prediction:

  In summary: while China is doing everything in its power to not give the impression that it is panicking, the truth is that it is one viral capital outflow report away from an outright scramble to enforce the most draconian capital controls in its history, which – as every Cypriot and Greek knows by now – is a self-defeating exercise and assures an ever accelerating decline in the currency, which authorities are trying to both keep stable while also devaluing at a pace of their choosing. Said pace never quite works out.

  So what happens then: well, China’s propensity for gold is well-known. We would not be surprised to see a surge of gold imports into China, only instead of going to the traditional Commodity Financing Deals we have written extensively about before, where gold is merely a commodity used to fund domestic carry trades, it ends up in domestic households. However, while gold has historically been the best store of value in history and has outlasted every currency known to man, it is problematic when it comes to transferring funds in and out of a nation – it tends to show up quite distinctly on X-rays.

  Which is why we would not be surprised to see another push higher in the value of bitcoin: it was earlier this summer when the digital currency, which can bypass capital controls and national borders with the click of a button, surged on Grexit concerns and fears a Drachma return would crush the savings of an entire nation. Since then, BTC has dropped, however if a few hundred million Chinese decide that the time has come to use bitcoin as the capital controls bypassing currency of choice, and decide to invest even a tiny fraction of the $22 trillion in Chinese deposits…

  

  … in bitcoin (whose total market cap at last check was just over $3 billion), sit back and watch as we witness the second coming of the bitcoin bubble, one which could make the previous all time highs in the digital currency, seems like a low print as bitcoin soars past $500, past $1,000 and rises as high as $10,000 or more.

  Well, we got the direction spot on, but not even we could anticipate just how much “or more” bitcoin would soar to some 6 years later when it nearly topped $70,000.

  Of course, far be it for us to claim that Chinese capital outflows were the only driver behind the exponential rise in bitcoin, but they certainly were one of the earliest catalysts behind what would be a truly fantastic, generational wealth-creating meltup, and certainly explains Beijing’s relentless crusade to crush bitcoin (and crypto in general), and to launch its own laughable attempt at a CBDC, which not unexpectedly has been a completely disaster.

  Why do we bring this up? For three reasons:

  First, as we noted yesterday, China is aggressively engaged in stealth devaluation, and while it pretends to be trying to contain the yuan from collapsing, the plunge in the currency has been historic. Even CFR analyst Brad Setser admitted today that “until China proves otherwise, it is effectively engaged in a controlled depreciation” but so far nobody in the US pretends to notice.

  

  Second, back in 2015 total Chinese bank deposits were $22 trillion. Fast forward to today when they are two and a half times larger at $55 trillion, or more than double their US equivalent! That’s a lot of domestic deposits that will need to be quietly ferried offshore once China admits it is aggressively pursuing yuan devaluation (which it is doing right now).

  

  Third, back in September 2015, millions of Chinese rushed to park their savings offshore, terrified that Beijing’s ongoing devaluation wave would wipe out the value of their financial assets. Well, it’s time for another offshore funding scramble because as the FT writes, today, “thousands of wealthy people across China are headed for the exits as President Xi Jinping secures a third term, making him and the ruling Chinese Communist party even stronger than before.”

  Recall that just hours after Xi not only was declared dictator for life but unceremoniously and in full view of the entire world had his centrist, globalist and pro-reform predecessor Hu Zintao escorted out of the building, guaranteeing that the rest of his rule will be a radical departure from heretofore accepted norms, and calling for the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” based on revitalizing the CCP’s role as the economic, social, and cultural leader, Chinese stocks cratered to multi-decade lows and the yuan plunged to a record low as the growing realization of the horror that is coming swept across the land.

  As a result, China’s wealthiest were met with market turmoil on Monday when Chinese stocks crashed the most since 2008. According to Bloomberg’s billionaire list, the 13 richest Chinese lost $12.7 billion in just one day after mounting fears about Xi’s consolidation of power. But of course, it wasn’t just them looking terrified at the glowing green color on their screens (as a reminder, in China stock colors are inverted as red means up and green means down): it was everyone.

  In any case, as hundreds of millions of Chinese savers now scramble to move as much of their assets as far away off shore from the lunatic fringe in Beijing as possible, we have been flooded with reports that wealthy families across Hong Kong and China are at a “tipping point” about triggering so-called financial “fire escape plans” to avoid the wrath of Xi and CCP, according to David Lesperance, a Europe-based lawyer who works with elite Chinese businessmen and who spoke with Financial Times. 

  “Now that ‘the chairman’ is firmly in place . . . I have already received three ‘proceed’ instructions from various ultra-high net worth Chinese business families to execute their fire escape plans,” Lesperance said.

  Ahead of the run-up to the 20th Party Congress, there was much concern that if Xi cemented his third term, there would be no pivot to his controversial policies, including the Covid-zero strategy and increased regulatory measures on companies, which have devastated parts of the economy. The actual outcome – in which Xi crowned himself undisputed ruler and surrounded himself with fawning sycophants while threatening a full-blown putch of the upper class – was far worse.

  Kia Meng Loh, a senior partner at Dentons Rodyk bank in Singapore which in the past two decades has emerged as the world’s “Swiss bank account”, or the only place in the world where accounts remain truly anonymous, said that some Chinese elites have been inquiring about setting up “family offices” even before last weekend, as a way to protect wealth from the CCP:

  “The clients I work with saw [Xi’s] third term as a foregone conclusion much earlier than this week,” Loh said, adding many of these families who generally shield wealth in Hong Kong found it less attractive since Beijing now has authority over the territory. 

  Sure enough, new data from Citi Private Bank shows the number of family offices in Singapore soared 5x between 2017 and 2019 and nearly doubled from 400 at the end of 2020 to more than 700 a year later as wealthy Chinese rushed to park their wealth offshore.

  Ryan Lin, director of Bayfront Law, also located in Singapore, said he was contacted by five wealthy Chinese families last week to establish a Singapore family office, and of those, three are quickly moving forward. Lin has helped establish 30 ultra-wealthy family offices in Singapore in the past year, as many of these families hope not just to relocate their money but also family. 

  Lesperance admitted that many of his clients had spent years preparing to exit China, legally moving money to safe offshore places that CCP cannot touch. Some of these families are even applying for citizenship abroad. 

  Xi is expected to unleash a broad range of wealth taxes (under the populist campaign “common prosperity”) that has spooked the wealthy. But hiding wealth could be the least of their worries considering there have been numerous accounts of some billionaires forced into hiding, such as Alibaba’s Jack Ma. Ongoing chaotic lockdowns under the Covid-Zero policy and common prosperity as Xi secured a third term push high-net-worth residents to the exits.

  The obvious question then is how long until China battens down the hatches and makes money transfers to Singapore impossible.

  “The family motto has always been: ‘Keep a fast junk in the harbour with gold bars and a second set of papers’. The modern equivalent would be a private jet, a couple of passports and foreign bank accounts,” Lesperance said. “That is the world we are in . . . it is tough stuff.”

  Of course, to fund said foreign bank accounts, one needs either gold bars to flee China’s infamous financial firewall… or their modern equivalent: bitcoin. And while gold shows up on X-ray, crypto does not, whether it is sent by instant transfer across the blockchain or through unobservable flash drives.

  Indeed, one has to wonder if capital outflows from China are already starting to push Bitcoin higher, as fears of another round of draconian capital controls by Beijing spark outbound money flight…

  

  … and if it was capital flight from China back in 2015 that helped propel bitcoin nearly 100x from $250 to $20,000 during the first Asia-driven bitcoin bubble of 2017/2018, one also has to wonder how high another full-blown Chinese capital flight will push the digital gold this time.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 22:25

• Man Taken Into Custody After Sen. Rubio Reports Canvasser 'Brutally Attacked'
  Man Taken Into Custody After Sen. Rubio Reports Canvasser ‘Brutally Attacked’

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

  A man has been arrested for allegedly beating a person in Florida, authorities confirmed on Oct. 24.

  

  Javier Jesus Lopez, 22, was taken into custody for beating a man who was walking around the neighborhood “handing out fliers,” according to a Hialeah Police Department report obtained by The Epoch Times.

  Lopez allegedly confronted the man and told him he couldn’t pass by him, to which the man responded by moving across the street.

  But Lopez pursued the man, prompting the man to say he was on public property, authorities said.

  Lopez is accused of slamming the man against the ground and striking him multiple times, causing severe swelling to the man’s face and leaving his right eye completely swollen shut.

  The incident took place on Sunday evening on East 60th Street.

  The 27-year-old victim has not been identified.

  Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) posted pictures of the man who was beaten. Rubio said on Twitter that the man was one of his campaign’s canvassers and was canvassing when he was “brutally attacked” by people “who told him Republicans weren’t allowed in their neighborhood in #Hialeah.”

  The pictures showed the male victim whose face was badly beaten being transported from the scene in an ambulance.

  The man was wearing a Marco Rubio shirt. Rubio said he was also wearing a Ron DeSantis hat when he was attacked.

  Both Rubio and Gov. Ron DeSantis are both running for re-election. Both are Republicans.

  The man suffered internal bleeding, a broken jaw & will need facial reconstructive surgery,” Rubio said of his supporter.

  Last night one of our canvassers wearing my T-shirt and a Desantis hat was brutally attacked by 4 animals who told him Republicans weren’t allowed in their neighborhood in #Hialeah #Florida

  He suffered internal bleeding, a broken jaw & will need facial reconstructive surgery pic.twitter.com/36QpbySg58

  — Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) October 24, 2022

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

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 22:05

• Oz Odds Of Winning PA Soar After Historic Fetterman Debate Meltdown
  Oz Odds Of Winning PA Soar After Historic Fetterman Debate Meltdown

  The Fetterman campaign may have just watched what remained of its prospects in Pennsylvania circle the drain after tonight’s sole debate between him and PA Senate candidate Dr. Oz.

  Fetterman, who suffered a severe stroke days before the May primary and cast his vote from a hospital bed, appeared unable to put together nearly a single coherent sentence throughout the entire debate while TV veteran Dr. Oz deftly and “surgically” sliced and diced his way through an hour of questioning, using Fetterman as a lifeless sparring dummy for a majority of the debate. 

  Recovering from his stroke, Fetterman’s answers ranged between somewhat inept and completely incomprehensible. The ugly performance started right from the beginning, with Fetterman bidding viewers “good night” as part of his opening statement. 

  Fetterman opens the debate:

  “Hi. Good night everybody.” pic.twitter.com/mg0X3Iwf5D

  — Greg Price (@greg_price11) October 26, 2022

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

  It only got worse from that point forward. Fetterman was unable to coherently respond to an allegation that he hadn’t paid his taxes:

  [Oz has] said you have not paid your taxes … how do you respond?”

  Fetterman: “It was helping two students 17 years ago to help them buy their own homes. They for and didn’t pay the bills and got are paid and it has never been an issue in any of the campaign before.” pic.twitter.com/hv5M4YWc0a

  — Washington Free Beacon (@FreeBeacon) October 26, 2022

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

  He was also unable to provide reasoning for not releasing his medical records, which would be of obvious concern due to the fact that he is recovering from a stroke and PA citizens will likely want to know that their Senate candidate is lucid:

  Mod: “Why haven’t you released your medical records?”

  Fetterman: “My doctors believe I am ready to be served.”

  Mod: “Why won’t you release the records?”

  Fetterman: “My doctor believes I am fit to be serving and I believe that is where I am standing.” pic.twitter.com/kTH88tPH0Q

  — Greg Price (@greg_price11) October 26, 2022

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

  Fetterman also seemed to take an inordinate amount of time in grasping and responding to questions as they were asked:

  Moderator: “Are there any of Biden’s policy positions that you disagree with.”

  *seven Mississippi pause* pic.twitter.com/uAf1iPMcoC

  — Greg Price (@greg_price11) October 26, 2022

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

  He tried to take several “jabs” at Oz – needless to say that none of them landed:

  Fetterman: “Dr. Oz loves free money when it’s a half a million dollar on one of his down on the ranch in Florida and whether it was a $50 tax break you know about his farm in Montgomery County.” pic.twitter.com/LvLFRMb68v

  — Greg Price (@greg_price11) October 26, 2022

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

  The disaster culminated in Fetterman attempting to square statements from 2018 where he said he was against Fracking with statements he made in 2022, where he claimed to be pro-fracking. 

  Oh my god pic.twitter.com/TVAAPNXYiU

  — Quoth the Raven (@QTRResearch) October 26, 2022

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

  His campaign manager similarly had a meltdown in the spin room, dropping the “F” bomb while trying to convince the media that his campaign hadn’t completely melted down. “He took it to Dr. Oz pretty f*cking hard tonight,” he said:

  The spin got a little heated at times.

  For those who don’t like curse words in their feeds skip this video. pic.twitter.com/ccAwjJdEPl

  — Oliver Morrison (@ORMorrison) October 26, 2022

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

  But no amount of spin was able to convince social media that the debate was a success.

  “I can’t impress upon you how much of a disaster this debate is… I’ve never seen anything like it. This race is completely and totally over,” said Clay Travis of Clay and Buck. 

  Former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of PA William McSwain commented: “That debate was hard to watch. How in the world — in a country of 330 million people — could John Fetterman be in the running for one of a hundred seats in the world’s greatest deliberative body? This is embarrassing.”

  “Just so we are all clear: that was Fetterman WITH weeks of prep and specialized computer assistance throughout. So what you just saw is the very, very best Fetterman can do. Which is terrifying,” said Senior Advisor to President Trump Stephen Miller. 

  Donald Trump Jr. called it “worse than any of us could have ever imagined”.

  OMG John Fetterman it’s worse than any of us could have ever imagined. At this point the moderator is filibustering to make sure he doesn’t get any more Qs. I think that’s 4 in a row to @DrOz. Even today’s partisan hack media can’t cover for Fetterman being brain dead! #PASen

  — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) October 26, 2022

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

  The reaction in the PredictIt voting market after the debate was stark. As noted by Steven Rattner, the former head of the Obama Auto Task Force, NY Times op-ed author and economic analyst for Morning Joe, the “prediction market quickly moved against Fetterman post debate”. 

  

  Some pundits clearly felt bad for Fetterman’s state:

  I cant believe it’s this bad

  I feel bad for Fetterman

  This is sick

  — Tim Pool (@Timcast) October 26, 2022

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

  While others pulled no punches for him continuing:

  I have no sympathy for Fetterman. He could have stepped down and preserved his dignity, but his thirst for power drove him to this. https://t.co/yy3746bYsC

  — Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) October 26, 2022

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

  You can watch a full replay of the debate here and decide for yourself:

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 21:46

• Thanksgiving Dinner Will Cost A Lot More This Year
  Thanksgiving Dinner Will Cost A Lot More This Year

  Authored by Andrew Moran via The Epoch Times,

  It is going to cost more to feast on turkey, ham, and mashed potatoes at this year’s Thanksgiving dinner. 

  

  According to the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), the typical Thanksgiving dinner includes the staples of a 16-pound turkey, a gallon of milk, potatoes, ham, and dinner rolls.  

  U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) data (pdf) show that an 8- to 16-pound turkey costed $1.99 per pound last week, up from $1.15 a year ago. This represents almost a 75 percent increase. 

  Boneless ham has increased 13.6 percent in September from a year ago to $5.50 per pound, data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) show. White potatoes have spiked 27.7 percent to $1.02 per pound, while white bread has climbed 10.7 percent to $1.75 a pound. A gallon of fresh whole milk has surged 16.6 percent to $4.18. 

  The wide range of miscellaneous ingredients has also increased at a significant rate over the last year, including butter (26.6 percent), flour (24.4 percent), spices and seasoning (13.8 percent), sugar (17.1 percent), sauces and gravies (16.3 percent), and coffee (15.7 percent). 

  Overall, food prices have soared over the last year, with the BLS food index climbing at an annualized pace of 11.2 percent. Grocery store prices spiked 13 percent year-over-year in September, while the cost of visiting a restaurant has risen 8.5 percent compared to the same time a year ago. 

  

  People shop at a grocery store in New York City on May 31, 2022. (Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times)

  Soaring food prices have been driven by a broad array of factors, including volatile weather conditions in key growing areas, the Ukraine-Russia conflict, surging energy prices and labor costs, and the Avian flu. 

  Bird Flu 

  The continued Avian outbreak has impacted the price and supply of turkey, chicken, and eggs. The highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus usually occurs in the colder months, but commercial turkey producers contended with the bird flu in July. This is the time when farmers begin raising flocks for the coming holiday season.  

  So far this year, nearly 48 million birds have been affected, with the flu identified in 42 states. The only way to limit its spread is to kill entire flocks, which consist of approximately 15,000 birds. 

  The issue is not only widespread in the United States. There are a vast number of bird flu cases being reported in Canada, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and the European Union. Millions of birds have been culled as a result.  

  Experts purport that transmission has increased immensely over the last year, and the illness is spreading to mammals at a faster pace. Scientists are unsure why the outbreak is intensifying, but some theories argue that mutations have let the virus infect a variety of bird species, and the mutations have allowed the virus to replicate. 

  “All of us are feeling the pain of higher prices at the grocery store,” said AFBF President Zippy Duvall in a statement.

  “HPAI outbreaks in the spring and an uptick in cases in the fall are taking a toll, but farmers remain dedicated to ensuring America’s food supply remains strong.” 

  Meanwhile, another aspect has been the notable 8.1 percent year-over-year increase in turkey feed prices. This is in addition to rising energy, fertilizer, and labor costs that farmers are facing.

  The USDA’s latest Farm Sector Income Forecast anticipates record-high total overall production costs, skyrocketing nearly 18 percent from 2021 to $437.4 billion this year.

  Can Americans Afford Thanksgiving? 

  With the annual inflation rate north of 8 percent, real wage growth (inflation-adjusted) still in negative territory, and consumers exhausting their pandemic-era savings, can Americans afford Thanksgiving this year? 

  According to a recent Personal Capital survey, one-quarter of Americans plan to skip Thanksgiving dinners this year to save money. 

  Others are adjusting their Thanksgiving to adapt to the increasing cost of living. The survey learned that more than one-third of Americans would have smaller dinners, while 88 percent say they will eliminate at least one dish from the dinner table. Another quarter of consumers will budget up to $100 for their 2022 Thanksgiving dinner. 

  “As the holidays creep closer and food prices continue to rise, this year’s food-centered festivities may require an extra focus on finances. Some hosts are tightening their budgets by trimming the guest list, editing the menu, or asking for contributions. Others are skipping the holiday altogether,” the report stated. 

  With the national average price for a gallon of gasoline nearly $4 again, visiting family members for Thanksgiving might also be an exorbitant trip, adding to the growing cost of Thanksgiving.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 21:25

• Visualizing The Largest Public Companies By Market Cap (2000–2022)
  Visualizing The Largest Public Companies By Market Cap (2000–2022)

  The 10 largest public companies in the world had a combined market capitalization of nearly $12 trillion as of July 2022.

  But, as Visual Capitalist’s Carmen Ang and Jeff Desjsardins detail below, two decades ago, the players that made up the list of the largest companies by market capitalization were radically different – and as the years ticked by, emerging megatrends and market sentiment have worked to shuffle the deck multiple times.

  This racing bar chart by Truman Du shows how the ranking of the top 10 largest public companies has changed from 2000 to 2022.

  Market Cap vs. Market Value

  Before diving in, it’s worth noting that market capitalization is just one of many metrics that can be used to help value a company.

  Simply put, a company’s market cap measures the combined price of a company’s outstanding shares—in other words, it’s the price someone would pay if they wanted to purchase the company outright at current stock prices (theoretically speaking).

  But while a market cap provides insight into what equity is worth at a given time, calculating the market value is far more complicated and nuanced. After all, a price paid might not reflect the actual value of a business. To get a measure of value, other metrics like a company’s price-to-sales (P/S) ratio, price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio, or return-on-equity (ROE) may be considered.

  The Largest Public Companies by Market Cap (2000–2022)

  Over the last two decades, investor sentiment has shifted as different trends have played out, and the types of companies buoyed up by the market have changed as well.

  For instance, tech and telecom companies were big in the very early 2000s, as investors got excited about the seemingly endless potential of the newly-introduced World Wide Web.

  

  In the middle of the Dotcom bubble, investors were pouring money into internet-related tech startups. As PC and internet adoption picked up, investors hoped to “get in early” before these companies started to really turn a profit. This overzealous sentiment is reflected in the market capitalizations of public companies at the time, especially in the tech or telecom companies that were seen as benefitting from the internet boom.

  Of course, the Dotcom bubble was not meant to last, and by January 2004 the top 10 list was looking much more diverse. At this time, Microsoft had lost the top spot to General Electric, which had a market cap of $309 billion. Then in the late 2000s, energy companies such as ExxonMobil, PetroChina, Gazprom, and BP took over the list as oil prices spiked well over $100 per barrel.

  But fast forward to 2022, and we’ve come full circle, with Big Tech back in the limelight again.

  Largest Companies by Market Cap (July 1, 2022)

  

  Four of the five largest companies are in tech, and Tencent also cracks the list. Meanwhile, Tesla is classified as an automotive company, but it is thought of as an “internet of cars” company by many investors.

  Big Picture Trends in the Top 10 by Market Cap List

  

   

  *As of July 1, 2022. Since then, Saudi Aramco has been re-surpassed by Apple due to a reversal in oil prices.

  Trending Downwards?

  Amidst rising interest rates, crippling inflation, and political issues like the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, signs point towards a potential global recession. Tech companies fared well during the COVID-19 pandemic, but will likely not be immune to the impacts of a generalized economic slowdown.

  It’ll be interesting to see how things pan out in 2023, and which companies (if any) will manage to stay on top throughout the turmoil.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 21:05

• China's Congress Is Over: Has PBOC Just Let The Yuan Go?
  China’s Congress Is Over: Has PBOC Just Let The Yuan Go?

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and analyst

  Until Tuesday, the People’s Bank of China had been fighting against yuan depreciation via strong fixings. However, the defense crumbled a bit as soon as the Communist Party Congress was over. The fixing on Tuesday wasn’t as strong as it was in previous sessions, even as the yuan fell to the lowest since 2007.

  Is that a fluke or has the PBOC showed more tolerance for yuan depreciation? Wednesday’s fixing will tell us if the PBOC has indeed decided to “lie flat.”

  In the days before and during the Party Congress, the central bank effectively kept the fixing unchanged around 7.1 per dollar, putting a temporary floor under the currency. The fixing surpassed analysts survey by Bloomberg by a record last Thursday, suggesting a strong willingness to defend the yuan.

  But the depreciation pressure didn’t go away. As a result, traders pushed the yuan almost to the weaker end of its 2% limit relative to the fixing Monday. On Tuesday, the PBOC finally loosened its grip, allowing the reference rate to fall by the most since June. It was still about 5 bps stronger than analysts surveyed, but the deviation was the smallest in a week. As if on cue, the onshore yuan weakened to 7.31 per dollar, the lowest since December 2007, and fell to the lowest against the basket in more than a year. 

  

  That marked a change in the PBOC’s strategy, according to Jens Nordvig, founder of Exante Data. It used to be that the PBOC forced the markets to converge to its fixing. Now, the markets are leading the central bank in dictating the currency’s moves.

  “The fact that they have been trying to create a big gap between fixing and spot, and then have to move to spot, rather than the other way around, is the key,” said Nordvig.  “We are breaking big levels in the process.”

  

  Why such a shift?

  The PBOC is “more out of bullets than in the past,” said Nordvig. The central bank doesn’t want to burn through its foreign reserves, and it cannot raise interest rates to reduce the depreciation pressure. In addition, the authorities have already closed a lot of capital-account holes. In other words, the PBOC is running out of “easy” ways to control the yuan, he said.

  It’s not that the PBOC has completely stopped resisting the depreciation pressure. Right before the PBOC released its fixing on Tuesday, the central bank tweaked a policy to make it easier for companies to seek funding offshore, a move that could potentially add more dollar supply to the onshore market.

  But these are only token measures of support for the currency. Brad Setser,  a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, tweeted: “Until China proves otherwise, it is effectively engaged in a controlled depreciation.”

  [ZH: And while all these after-the-fact takes are great, all of this is what we predicted 7 months before it happened]

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 20:45

• Elon Musk Tweeted Neuralink "Show & Tell" Event Delayed
  Elon Musk Tweeted Neuralink “Show & Tell” Event Delayed

  Elon Musk’s Neuralink’s “show & tell” event was initially scheduled for Halloween day but has been pushed back until the end of November for unknown reasons. 

  Musk tweeted Sunday, “Neuralink show & tell now on Nov 30.”

  Neuralink show & tell now on Nov 30

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 23, 2022

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

  The delay led some on Twitter to say, “you are a stupid loser and your bad products are going to fail,” while others were excited about possible new developments of Neuralink’s transhumanistic technology. 

  Neuralink, based out of San Francisco, aims to “implant wireless brain-computer interfaces that include thousands of electrodes in the most complex human organ to help cure neurological conditions like Alzheimer’s, dementia, and spinal cord injuries and ultimately fuse humankind with artificial intelligence.” 

  

  In 2020 and 2021, the brain-machine interface startup held demonstrations of the chip implant at work in pigs and monkeys, but the SpaceX and Tesla founder has voiced concerns about the slow rate of progress. 

  The billionaire said he is “cautiously optimistic” the chip implant can restore full-body functionality for tetraplegics and quadriplegics and has said human testing could be next. Neuralink’s efforts have yet to receive FDA approval.

  Musk, of course, is neither a doctor nor a scientist… and actual scientists at MIT recently wrote in the MIT Technology Review: 

  “Elon Musk’s livestreamed brain implant event made promises that will be hard to keep.” 

  “None of these advances are close at hand, and some are unlikely to ever come about,” the article stated, calling most of the company’s medical claims “highly speculative.”

  It also points out that – just like with solar panels, electric cars, reusable rockets, and busses on skates in tunnels – that Musk isn’t the first entrant into the space: 

  “Researchers began placing probes in the brains of paralyzed people in the late 1990s in order to show that signals could let them move robot arms or computer cursors. And mice with visual implants really can perceive infrared rays.”

  And let’s hope Musk’s upcoming Neuralink “show & tell” event isn’t “next level cringe-worthy” and a “complete and utter scam” like some said when he revealed the Optimus robot earlier this month. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 20:25

• GOP Could Gain Up To 7 Seats In Senate, 50 Seats In House, Gingrich Says
  GOP Could Gain Up To 7 Seats In Senate, 50 Seats In House, Gingrich Says

  Authored by Eva Fu via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Republicans could see large gains in both chambers of Congress in November, according to Epoch Times contributor and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

  “I would say we’ll be between plus three and plus seven … in the Senate; and we’ll be between plus 20 and plus 50 in the House, with the most likely number being plus 44,” Gingrich told The Epoch Times.

  

  The GOP needs to flip five seats to win back House control. In the evenly-divided Senate, Republicans need to win one more seat to claim the majority.

  With the November election day fast approaching, Democratic optimism appears to be fading as GOP candidates close in on key races across the country.

  In New Hampshire, Republican challenger Don Bolduc has narrowed the gap between him and Democratic Sen. Maggie Hassan down to 2 points, according to an Oct. 20 poll by GOP pollster Fabrezio, Lee and Associates, well within the 4 percent margin of error. The poll, which was commissioned by Bolduc’s campaign, placed Hassan at 49 percent to Buldoc’s 47 percent.

  In Arizona, the Trump-backed Republican Senate candidate Blake Masters is gaining ground after earlier stumbles. Polling data aggregator RealClearPolitics predicts the state to be a tossup, and gives the Democrat incumbent only a 2.5-point lead.

  In Pennsylvania, Lt. Gov. John Fetterman’s double-digit edge has evaporated in recent weeks. A recent AARP Pennsylvania poll conducted by Fabrizio Ward and Impact Research showed Fetterman with a 48 percent to 46 percent lead, which is within the margin of error of 4.4 percentage points.

  

  In Georgia, Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock’s lead over the Republican nominee Herschel Walker is sliding too. A recent Landmark Communication poll had the two tied at 46 percent, while an InsiderAdvantage survey showed Warnock only 2 points ahead, within the margin of error of 4.2 percent.

  “Almost everywhere in the country, races are showing the Republicans tightening up,” said Gingrich. And according to him, Democrats have only themselves to blame.

  Key Voter Concerns

  Crime, inflation, border security, and “woke policies,” he said, all “coming together” against Democrats’ favor.

  “When you have sort of insane left-wing Democrats who believe that you don’t need prisons and that things can be dealt with by just being nice to murderers, I think the average person just thinks this is crazy,” he said, pointing to the crime concerns in New York as an example.

  

  For gubernatorial candidate Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), who has made crime a campaign focus, the issue hit close to home on Oct. 9 when a shooting wounded two minors outside of his front porch with Zeldin’s two 16-year-old daughters inside the house. Zeldin, who was out campaigning at the time, said that one bullet landed 30 feet away from the kitchen table where his two teenage daughters were doing homework.

  With near-daily press conferences to highlight the city’s crime crisis and his opponent’s failure to address it, Zeldin’s been closing in on Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul in the gubernatorial contest, with the gap tightening to low single digits, positioning him for a potential upset victory in a deep blue state.

  Hochul, facing political pressure, on Oct. 22 announced a plan with New York City Mayor Eric Adams to hire another 1,200 officers to address transit crime.

  Inflation, crime, and immigration are Republicans’ key campaign issues. In a handful of recent polls, voters appear to find them their biggest concerns at the moment.

  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Oct. 18 claimed that a New York Times/Siena poll showing that the economy and inflation ranked as voters’ top two concerns was an “outlier,” and that abortion is on top of voters’ minds.

  “I can tell you that women’s concerns about their freedom are very, very much still very significant in terms of how they will vote,” she told MSNBC. “It’s a matter of who turns out to vote,” she said, adding that she feels “pretty good” about her party’s chances.

  Abortion Issue Not Paying Off for Democrats

  The abortion issue, however, is unlikely to help the Democrats as much as Pelosi and other Democratics may think, according to Gingrich.

  “Republicans are actually winning the argument, because it’s a question of who’s the more extreme,” he said.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 20:05

• Watch Live: Oz-Fetterman Pennsylvania Senate Race Debate
  Watch Live: Oz-Fetterman Pennsylvania Senate Race Debate

  One of the most anticipated events leading up to Election Day on Nov. 8 will unfold tonight when Democrat John Fetterman and Republican Mehmet Oz take the stage in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, for their only scheduled debate.

  The 60-minute debate will be televised live and begin at 8 p.m. ET.

  As Jeff Louderbeck write at The Epoch Times, the candidates are vying to replace retiring Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Pat Toomey in a race that will help determine which party has control of the chamber in 2023.

  

  Fetterman suffered a severe stroke days before the May primary and cast his vote from a hospital bed. Since then, he has made limited public appearances and conducted a handful of media interviews.

  Fetterman made his first public appearance since his stroke on Aug. 12. Oz immediately challenged him to appear on the debate stage. Oz asked for five debates from Sept. 6 to Oct. 5. Fetterman eventually agreed to one on Oct. 25, two weeks before election day. Early voting started in Pennsylvania on Sept. 19.

  During the debate in Harrisburg, Fetterman is expected to use closed captioning, which he has relied on in interviews and public appearances as he continued to recover.

  According to recent polls, the race is tightly contested and within the margin of error. The high-stakes debate could be a decisive moment in a contentious campaign.

  “I have not spoken to a Democrat in Pennsylvania or in Washington, D.C., who is not concerned about the debate,” a senior Democrat strategist from Pennsylvania told Reuters.

  A Fetterman campaign spokesperson also expressed apprehension about the forum.

  “Even before the stroke, John was not a great debater. Meanwhile, Oz is a showman who spent years in front of a camera, so we know what we are up against,” the Fetterman spokesperson said.

  Oz will likely discuss his plans for fighting crime and talk about Fetterman’s progressive record on criminal justice reform.  On Oct. 24, Oz announced a six-point plan to fight crime. The highlights, according to a press release, include stopping drug crimes, smart sentencing reform, increasing resources for safer streets, prosecuting crime, relief for victims and users, and reducing crime in prisons.

  As Pennsylvania’s lieutenant governor, Fetterman heads the Board of Pardons.

  Fetterman has bragged that he “conferred more pardons in Pennsylvania than any administration in history” while also saying that one-third of the prisoners in Pennsylvania state prisons could be released and “we wouldn’t be any less safe.”

  Last week, Jahmir Harris surrendered to police in connection to a Philadelphia shooting that killed 50-year-old Charles Gossett after security footage showed he was the alleged getaway driver.

  Harris served eight years in prison for a 2012 first-degree murder before he was exonerated and released last year by Philadelphia’s “Conviction Integrity Unit,” which is led by progressive district attorney Larry Krasner.

  Fetterman has praised the unit for being “crucial” and “truly groundbreaking.”

  In 2021, Fetterman endorsed Krasner, who is facing impeachment as a Pennsylvania House investigates his prosecutorial policies in a city afflicted with rampant crime.

  Fetterman has declined to comment on Krasner’s current issues. In May 2021, he tweeted:

  “[Krasner’s] unwavering commitment to systemic criminal justice reform was resoundingly affirmed with a true mandate. His efforts have literally saved the innocent from dying in prison.

  “His Conviction Integrity Unit model should be mandatory in all of PA’s 67 counties,” Fetterman added.

  Fetterman is endorsed by Brand New Congress and Reclaim Philadelphia. Both groups have called for defunding the police.

  Recently, he told reporters that, “I think we need to be having a better relationship with the police. And making sure that the police feel they feel supported by the DA.”

  In an interview with Fox & Friends last weekend, Oz addressed the Harris case and hinted at what would be discussed in the debate.

  “If you walk through the streets of Philadelphia and most of the large cities in Pennsylvania, it’s the same story,” Oz said. “People feel like the folks in charge value the criminals more than the innocent. The families are in pain. No one seems to care.

  “The fact that Jamir Harris could have been released from prison by this Conviction Integrity Unit, which sounds Orwellian, is shocking to me, and it is to everybody else. But only days ago, John Fetterman praised it, and talked about how it was groundbreaking. It was a beacon of light,” Oz added.

  “He actually said we should have similar mandatory programs in all the counties of Pennsylvania. The parole board that he serves. He wanted to have it do exactly what this conviction integrity unit was doing, which is go back, find people who are guilty, and get them out in the streets.”

  Fetterman’s health is another topic likely to be addressed in the forum.

  He has used a closed captioning system during interviews with reporters. His campaign says it helps compensate for auditory processing challenges. He will use the system on stage during the debate.

  Under frequent scrutiny from Oz and multiple media outlets regarding questions about his health, Fetterman released a letter on Oct. 19 from a doctor who wrote that he “is recovering well from his stroke” and “has no work restrictions and can work full duty in public office.”

  The author—Dr. Clifford Chen—has donated to Fetterman’s campaign at least four times, according to Federal Elections Commission records.

  In September, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette editorial board called on Fetterman and Oz to release their medical records in September. Oz agreed, and the results indicated that he was in “excellent health,” according to his doctor.

  Fetterman had repeatedly refused to reveal medical information until the report from Chen.

  The letter was released days after Fetterman stumbled over his words and used a closed-captioning monitor to read questions in an interview with NBC News reporter Dasha Burns that aired on Oct. 11.

  “I hear and understand everything in terms of words, on paper, and understand what I hear, but when we are talking about very specific and heavy things like this, we’re going to need captioning. I need captioning,” Fetterman told reporters earlier this month.

  How Oz addresses Fetterman’s health issues is among the many anticipated parts of the debate. Oz and his campaign have drawn criticism over “mocking” Fetterman’s health conditions.

  After Chen’s letter was published, Oz’s campaign released a statement saying it was “good news that John Fetterman’s doctor gave him a clean bill of health.”

  “The bad news is that John Fetterman still supports releasing convicted murderers out on the streets and has zero explanation for why he didn’t pay his taxes 67 times,” an Oz campaign spokesperson said. “And now that he apparently is healthy, he can debate for 90 minutes, start taking live questions from voters and reporters, and do a second debate now too.”

  Political pundits also believe that Oz will link Fetterman to rising inflation and gas prices, and the overall cost of living increase.

  Fetterman’s campaign has focused on bolstering the working class, battling corporate greed, and supporting abortion rights.

  Fetterman has attacked Oz for his backing of Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) proposed nationwide 15-week abortion ban.

  On Oct. 24, Fetterman’s campaign released a statement referencing a Rolling Stone article that claims former president Donald Trump is encouraging Pennsylvania lawmakers to repeal a 2019 no-excuse mail-in voting law. The story also alleged that Trump is setting the groundwork to challenge the results of the Pennsylvania Senate race if Oz loses.

  “It’s clear that Donald Trump, Dr. Oz, and the GOP will do whatever it takes to try and steal this race on Election Night. Trump has already said he ‘needs’ people like Oz in office to challenge the 2024 election,” Fetterman spokesperson Joe Calvello said in a statement.

  “Trump is trying to steal the 2022 election for Oz so that Trump can steal the 2024 election for himself.”

  Pennsylvania is considered one of the Democrats’ top chances to at least maintain control of the Senate.

  The current makeup is 50-50 with Vice President Kamala Harris having the tie-breaking vote.

  A victory in Pennsylvania could offset Democratic party defeats in Arizona, Georgia, and Nevada.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 19:55

• North Korea Completes Prep For Nuclear Test, South Korea Warns
  North Korea Completes Prep For Nuclear Test, South Korea Warns

  South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol has briefed his parliament on what he described as imminent plans of North Korea to conduct its first nuclear test in five years.

  “We assess that it has already completed preparations for a seventh nuclear test,” President Yoon Suk-yeol said Tuesday. He reminded lawmakers that Kim Jong-un has already justified the preemptive use of nuclear weapons, making a test if carried through a severe threat to Seoul’s as well as the broader region’s security. 

  White House national security official John Kirby has also lately reiterated the US intelligence belief that the north “could conduct a nuclear test at any time.”

  

  According to Bloomberg, “The US, South Korea and Japan have all pledged stern and united punishment for a nuclear test, which would be in violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions.” Likely this would come in the form of more sanctions – though we wonder what is left in North Korea to sanction at this point, in terms of making actual impact on the regime.

  In early August, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken began warning that such a test remains imminent. He said at the time in an address to the 10th NPT Review Conference (or Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) at UN headquarters in New York that “The DPRK continues to expand its unlawful nuclear program and continues its ongoing provocations against the region.”

  This week, Foreign Affairs has described Washington’s broader alarm over what a nuclear test could mean for the region: nothing less than a new regional atomic arms race…

  “The fact that North Korea has had nuclear weapons for so long (its first nuclear test was in 2006) has inured analysts and policymakers to the gravity of the threat,” the publication observed. “The North can now credibly threaten the continental United States with nuclear weapons. But the threat goes beyond U.S. domestic security: North Korea’s development of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) could spark an arms race in northeast Asia.”

  “Kim’s saber rattling has increased public support in South Korea for that country to acquire its own nuclear capability, something that previously would have been regarded as implausible. A South Korean decision to go nuclear would prod China and Japan to augment their own weapon arsenals,” Foreign Affairs continued. With no easy solutions, the Biden administration has failed to articulate a policy response to these developments. It needs to get more engaged to prevent another crisis from spinning out of control.”

  Pyongyang and Washington haven’t had any real communications or honest dialogue since the last two years of the Trump administration, with the Biden White House appearing to not so much as attempt open lines of communication. Instead, there’s been a build-up of joint US-S.Korea military exercises off the peninsula.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 19:45

• Military Whistleblowers Sound Alarm On 'Devastating' Consequences Of Pentagon’s Vaccine Mandate
  Military Whistleblowers Sound Alarm On ‘Devastating’ Consequences Of Pentagon’s Vaccine Mandate

  Authored by J.M. Phelps via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Whistleblower service members are speaking out on behalf of thousands of service members whose careers have been jeopardized for objecting to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s 2021 military COVID-19 vaccine mandate. They’ve expressed concern over the vaccine mandate’s legality, as well as its health effects.

  

  Alongside three members of the Armed Forces, attorney and former Marine Corps Capt. Dale Saran participated in a live-streamed military whistleblowers press conference on Oct. 18 to highlight concerns about the military vaccine mandate. The video has garnered more than 40,000 views, to date.

  Saran once defended service members involved in a fight against the Pentagon’s mandatory anthrax vaccination program. He is also challenging the Pentagon’s vaccine mandate in a class-action lawsuit. He noted in the press conference the current case bears striking similarities to the legal battle against the anthrax vaccine program almost 20 years ago.

  Saran said that “at the heart of most of the legal claims” against today’s military COVID-19 vaccine mandate is the fact that “there is no licensed vaccine” available to service members.

  The attorney and many service members argue that the Pentagon’s vaccine mandate, which covers “COVID-19 vaccines that receive full licensure from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in accordance with FDA-approved labeling and guidance,” does not apply to any vaccines issued under emergency use authorization (EUA), such as the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

  They say that the military has mainly offered service members EUA Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, rather than the FDA-approved Cominarty vaccine, and thus cannot compel personnel to take them. They also argue that a Pentagon policy that says the Cominarty and EUA Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines are interchangeable is illegal.

  Saran said the continued push to vaccinate service members is “done just to break them.”

  At the press conference, Air Force First Lieutenant John Bowes, an F-16 student pilot, pointed out various reports that have been sent to congress concerning the military vaccine mandate’s effect on military readiness and the health of service members.

  “We were there to advocate for the 80,000 service members who aren’t being heard,” Bowes told The Epoch Times after the conference.

  “We’re making a call for help to both Congress and the American people to stand up for us and give us some protection from the Department of Defense so that we can continue to serve—which is all we want to do,” he said.

  The press conference allowed active-duty service members and “an exceptional lawyer” to speak out against the military vaccine mandate, Bowes said. And according to him, each is risking their career in order to bring awareness to “the absolutely dire problem that we’re facing right now.”

  Like Saran, Bowes considers the current COVID-19 vaccine mandate to be “almost a carbon copy of what happened with anthrax nearly two decades ago.” He added that “anthrax ended up being ruled as a vaccine that couldn’t be forced on service members because it was experimental.”

  “It’s shocking to see this exact same thing happen 20 years later.”

  Bowes added that the whistleblower service members involved in the press conference “will continue to respectfully bring up the devasting consequences [of the vaccine mandate] to both national security and the health and safety of our force at every opportunity they are given.”

  The officer emphasized that his views do not reflect those of the Department of Defense or Air Force.

  Continued Concern

  Navy Cmdr. Olivia Degenkolb, who has served for 20 years, also participated in the press conference.

  Early on, Degenkolb had “significant concerns” regarding the vaccine’s effect on fertility and its carcinogenicity prior to the military vaccine mandate, which she said were dismissed by military medical staff, she told The Epoch Times, emphasizing that her views do not represent those of the Department of Defense or Navy.

  She pointed out that the Comirnaty package insert reads: “COMIRNATY has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, or impairment of male fertility. In a developmental toxicity study in rats with COMIRNATY there were no vaccine-related effects on female fertility”.

  In addition to health concerns, Degenkolb also raised concerns with military leadership about the legality of mandating EUA products, as well as the legality of compelling COVID-19 testing, and mask wearing.

  “These EUA products are not formally licensed by the FDA and by federal law, they cannot be mandated,” she said.

  She said the Navy ignored those concerns.

  Degenkolb’s initial religious accommodation request was denied in December 2021, but her appeal is still pending. Her religious and legal objections have resulted in the loss of an assignment in China, denial of leave, loss of training opportunities, lack of access to her family’s belongings, and other family hardships, she said.

  “On top of that, I received a career-ending performance evaluation in August 2022 and have been recommended for a show cause board to terminate my service with the Navy,” Degenkolb said.

  Like others who oppose the vaccine mandate, Degenkolb said that the policy has harmed military readiness, at a time when the United States faces increased threats.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 19:25

• Zelensky Blasts Israel For Turning "A Blind Eye To Russian Terror"
  Zelensky Blasts Israel For Turning “A Blind Eye To Russian Terror”

  Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has continued urging Israel to help “close the sky” over Ukraine even after statements from the Knesset made clear it will not send military aid to Kiev.

  Zelensky made the repeat appeal in a virtual speech to a conference organized by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. “Isn’t it time for your state to choose who you are with as well?” he said. That’s when he charged that in refusing to send arms Israel is turning “a blind eye to Russian terror”.

  ⚡️⚡️There would be no alliance between Russia and Iran if Israel helped close the sky | Zelensky pic.twitter.com/o7x4EzjLO5

  — War Monitor (@WarMonitors) October 24, 2022

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

  “Is it with the democratic world, which is fighting side by side against the existential threat to its existence? Or with those who turn a blind eye to Russian terror, even when the cost of continued terror is the complete destruction of global security,” Zelensky said provocatively of Israel.

  The Ukrainian government has made multiple formal appeals for Israeli defense aid, particularly to obtain the Iron Dome anti-air defense system, since the Russian invasion began in February, after only humanitarian and protective aid has been sent. This limited aid has thus far included items like helmets and bulletproof vests.

  “This is the decision of your governments… not to annoy the Kremlin, which was adopted a long time ago,” Zelensky said. “If we had immediately secured our skies when faced with a missile and drone threat, Russia would not even have a motive now to go to Iran and offer it something in exchange for assistance in terror.”

  In essence Zelensky charged that Israel’s inaction is facilitating Iran’s expanding influence and its moving toward a nuclear weapon, as Axios described of his Monday remarks:  

  The Ukrainian president claimed the alliance between Russia and Iran would not have happened if Israel had made a decision to provide air defense systems to Ukraine when Russia invaded Crimea in 2014 — a decision Zelensky said was made under former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and hasn’t changed under the current Israeli government.

  

  All of this comes at a sensitive moment in which Israel is fully aware of the widespread reports of Iranian drones deployed inside Ukraine by Russian forces.

  Also on Monday Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz and his Ukrainian counterpart Oleksii Reznikov spoke by phone. Gantz stressed that Israel stands by Ukraine. But the call readout also stated: “Gantz emphasized the operational limitations faced by the State of Israel. As a result, Israel will not provide weapon systems to Ukraine.”

  These “limitations” are likely a reference to Syria, where Russia needs to maintain a strategic understanding with Russia concerning Iran’s military presence there in support of Syria’s Assad. Russia has in effect given a greenlight for Israel to strike Iranian forces and assets over recent years of the war.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 19:05

• 'Woke' Businesses, Meet The New Republican Congress
  ‘Woke’ Businesses, Meet The New Republican Congress

  Authored by Ron Bonjean & Steve Rochlin via RealClear Wire,

  In a nation bitterly divided between political partisans, corporations face fraught choices. The staying power of the new “woke” will likely face its greatest test if Republicans, as expected, capture a majority in the House of Representatives after the November elections.

  

  For example, CPAC’s Matt Schlapp recently sent a letter to House Republicans warning that his organization won’t endorse any candidate for a leadership race unless they vow to reject meetings with “woke” corporations. “Pledge you will not meet with these CEOs or their leadership teams, especially their Government Affairs staff, who have been hostile to policies that help all Americans, until they change their ways.” 

  Companies increasingly find themselves caught between two intractable forces: a majority of their customers, fueled by social media activism, who expect them to take a stand on issues that are important to them, and a growing backlash from conservatives who say consumer products have no business dictating social and environmental policy. 

  Just look at J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon’s notable pivot at a hearing on Capitol Hill when he said his bank would not refrain from making new investments in major oil and gas development projects, telling House Democratic members, “Absolutely not, and that would be the road to hell for America.”

  The shift is a harbinger of broader political expectations: an emboldened Republican majority with more populists in its ranks itching to take on companies for a variety of perceived transgressions, including statements and policies that are seen as nods to political correctness, as well as “socially responsible” and environmental investment policies.

  One only has to look at the recent past. When Major League Baseball moved the 2021 All-Star Game from Atlanta to protest Georgia’s voter law, a handful of Republican lawmakers moved to strip the league of its antitrust protections. Governor Ron DeSantis signed a law to abolish Disney World’s self-governing district. He signed another law dubbed the “Stop WOKE Act” to restrict how race is discussed in schools, colleges, and workplaces. Additionally, 19 Republican state attorneys general are calling on BlackRock to justify its ESG policies.

  With risks jumping out from every corner, what’s a conscientious brand leader to do?

  With decades of experience supporting business decisions and communications related to social impact, we can point to a few answers. Our research with Penn State University found that 76% of voters feel that companies should be held accountable for making a positive impact on the communities in which they operate – with the sentiment shared almost equally among Democrats and Republicans. Yet only 37% of companies think they are doing a good job and, what’s worse, the gap between voters’ preferences and political rhetoric seems to be growing. 

  There’s no one-size-fits-all approach for businesses and other brands to turn the ship. The C-suite must identify social risks that may require a response because of their impact on employees, customers, or other key stakeholders – and this requires a self-assessment 

  Specifically, self-assessments to understand a company’s unique position in the marketplace from not only the product perspective but also a reputational one are critical. Paired with an analysis of internal and external stakeholders, as well as a review of the relationship between business lines and relevant external issues, this kind of audit prepares companies to build a framework for response that is cross-functional, aligned to priorities, and authentic. Finally, companies should be prepared to pressure-test their system for responding to external issues to ensure they have considered all potential landmines. 

  These recommendations may seem easier said than done, but for those companies seeking a measured approach that allows them to both act on their values and maintain key relationships with policymakers, avoiding the preparation for a Republican Congress now all but ensures crisis down the road. By assessing the connection between business and brand values and creating structure around their decision-making frameworks, modern brand leaders, too, can emerge from the very different challenges of today with renewed bonds with policymakers, customers, and their communities.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 18:45

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• 26 Of France's 56 Nuclear Reactors Are Offline For Pipe Corrosion Or Maintenance
  26 Of France’s 56 Nuclear Reactors Are Offline For Pipe Corrosion Or Maintenance

  Authored by Mike Shedlock via MIshTalk.com,

  Gear up for a cold Winter in France. The protests have started already…

  

  Nuclear reactor image from WSJ Tweet below

  Pipe corrosion, maintenance, and labor unrest have nearly half of French nuclear reactors offline. 

  France is falling behind in its plans to return the country’s nuclear reactors to full power this winter after a rash of outages https://t.co/3Xi7CZPmeJ

  — The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) October 23, 2022

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

  The result is France’s Worst Energy Crisis Since the 1970s.

  Twenty-six of France’s 56 nuclear reactors are offline for maintenance or because of corrosion on piping that cools the reactor cores. Fixing the corrosion is taking longer than expected at several reactors, delaying their restart by as much as six weeks, according to regulatory filings and a French nuclear executive familiar with the matter.

  Labor unrest is another obstacle. Strikes at 18 reactors owned by EDF SA, France’s state-controlled power giant, have delayed their restart by several weeks, threatening the government’s plans to have all of them back online by the end of the winter. EDF and union leaders said they reached an agreement Friday on salary increases, ending the strikes.

  EDF, the world’s largest owner of nuclear plants, is one of Western Europe’s most important power companies. Its fleet of reactors normally exports large quantities of low-cost nuclear power to neighboring countries, helping stabilize prices across the region.

  The situation changed drastically this year, when France swung from being one of Europe’s largest exporters of electricity to a net importer because of the outages at its reactors. The rash of outages has officials worried that France and the broader region might run short of electricity in the winter, when power demand in Europe peaks.

  The outages have forced EDF to absorb huge losses because the company was forced to buy replacement power on Europe’s wholesale market, where prices have soared, for sale to retail clients at much lower prices.

  Labor Unions Call for General Strike

  Labor unions in France are calling for a general strike to protest soaring inflationpic.twitter.com/ELhy6sfEQ8

  — Fifty Shades of Whey (@davenewworld_2) October 18, 2022

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

  Protests in France, Italy Holland

  Protests are still going in Europe in France, Italy, Holland and
  The home of the EU, Brussels, packed to the rafters with people protesting against EU green policies killing the farming industry, the WEF, amongst other things. pic.twitter.com/Q1yOThRFAr

  — Awake in Belfast (@AwakeinBelfast) October 16, 2022

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

  Irritated Farmers Dump Merde

  In France, irritated farmers dump you know what on the street to protest worsening economic conditions and surging inflation. Pres. Macron is in trouble.pic.twitter.com/WFVv0pydCu

  — Steve Hanke (@steve_hanke) October 22, 2022

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

  Protests in France, Serbia, Germany, Italy, and Spain

  🇫🇷🇷🇸🇩🇪🇮🇹🇪🇸 Protests against government policies in almost all of Europe! France, Serbia, Germany, Italy, Spain, etc. People are beginning to understand, despite media manipulation: EU policies have brought poverty, hunger and cold. 😨 pic.twitter.com/XSfZ2r3SWR

  — 🅰pocalypsis 🅰pocalypseos 🇷🇺 🇨🇳 🅉 (@apocalypseos) October 17, 2022

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

  Check Out This Line of People in France

  140,000 people took part in the France protest.
  There were calls for France to withdraw from NATO.
  Leftists and trade unions organized protests against soaring living costs, inflation EU NATO #France #Parispic.twitter.com/vWVbqziEFh

  — UkraineNews (@Ukraine66251776) October 19, 2022

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

  140,000 people took part in the France protest. There were calls for France to withdraw from NATO. Leftists and trade unions organized protests against soaring living costs, inflation EU NATO 

  Just a Prelude

  If those reactors don’t come back on line in time, and that’s a good bet, things are going to get really messy in Europe.

  *  *  *

  Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 10/25/2022 – 02:00

• China After The Party Congress: What Now?
  China After The Party Congress: What Now?

  Authored by Roger Garside via The Epoch Times,

  When Xi Jinping’s predecessor as leader of China and its Communist Party, Hu Jintao, was removed from the closing session of the Party Congress on Oct. 22 in full view of the 2,300 delegates, it was a demonstration to the world that Xi had swept aside all rivals and is now the undisputed ruler of the nation.

  Yet, in his political report to the Congress, Xi listed an array of deep-seated problems, which his victory does nothing to resolve because they are the product of the political system he is determined to defend. Indeed, his victory will exacerbate these problems because in choosing subordinates, he has given priority to loyalty to him over experience and competence in government.

  

  More importantly, the problems have essentially been caused by the very political system that Xi and his supporters are ever more determined to defend. They include economic problems like the debt mountain, an ecological catastrophe, a “zero-COVID” strategy that has led to isolation and perpetual lockdown, and the increasing hostility of the United States and its allies.

  China’s body politic is terminally sick. It is like a person suffering from an advanced stage of uremia who can only be saved by a kidney transplant. China requires a political transplant: a democratic revolution.

  Instead of systemic change, Xi has chosen a trajectory that has intensified China’s problems. He has replaced the “reform and opening” of Deng Xiaoping with regression and closure. He prioritizes state-owned enterprises over the private sector that produces the wealth. To rule, he relies upon techno-totalitarianism, not trust. His premature strategic challenge to the United States and its allies has turned their benign partnership into hostility and distrust. In all this, he is alienating 500 million Chinese who produce wealth, and enjoyed the newfound freedoms to create businesses, and travel and study abroad that Deng’s strategy brought them.

  As unsolved problems give birth to crises – the debt mountain led first to the collapse of the property sector, and now to a slow-motion financial crisis – Xi will intensify confrontation with the United States and its allies, to mobilize nationalist sentiment behind him, exploiting the chauvinism long nurtured by the regime. This will be very dangerous for the world. Xi will be surrounded by yes-men who will not dare to restrain him.

  We cannot sit back and wait for China’s autocracy to implode. We must be proactive.

  We have great assets to mobilize, such as the world’s major reserve currencies, capital markets, pools of investment finance, and centers of scientific and technological creativity. After a slow start, the United States is taking decisive action; its allies must follow suit.

  We cannot dictate how China is governed, but we can enable those Chinese who want systemic change to achieve it. Occasions such as the 20th Congress give a false picture. This is a regime that is outwardly strong and inwardly weak. If Xi were truly strong, he would not need to have his predecessor dragged out of the Congress. If the Party were truly confident, it would submit itself to the judgment of the people in free elections in place of this charade of strength and unity.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 23:40

• La Nina Transforms Australian Desert Into Wetlands
  La Nina Transforms Australian Desert Into Wetlands

  Australia is experiencing the third consecutive year of La Nina — an oceanic and atmospheric phenomenon that usually brings above-average rainfall to the country. Cooling of the western Indian Ocean is one of the drivers of La Nina and has transformed deserts into wetlands this year. 

  “With a third consecutive La Nina period on the way for only the fourth time since records began, large parts of Australia have seen unrelenting rainfall with little chance for the ground to dry up,” according to the Australian website news.com.au.

  

  Sydney has already exceeded rainfall records dating back more than a century. The recent deluge of wet weather has been a relief for a country battling extreme drought, which sparked intense wildfires in 2019-20. 

  Rain has transformed deserts into areas overflowing with water in the country’s remote central region, especially in Channel Country, Queensland. 

  

   One cattle farmer about 300 miles West of Charleville told The Australian he was ‘blessed’ with rain. 

  “We couldn’t ask for anything better. We’re getting good rains at the right time,” farmer Nathan Keogh said.

  “The stars couldn’t have aligned more perfectly. The cattle are fat and the pastures couldn’t be better.

  “It lifts everybody’s spirits. It can be hard out here in drought times, but this is a game-changer. It’s a lot easier when it’s green.”

  Another area in Channel Country shows rivers coming to life after all the rainfall. 

  

  “The region experiences flooding rains roughly once a decade, which spread across floodplains through Queensland, South Australia and the Northern Territory into Lake Eyre, bringing out some of the most unique wildflower scenery in the country,” news.com.au explained. 

  And mainstream media outlets like WaPo cite researchers who blame “climate change” for Australia’s flooding. We will note the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, stating: “El Nino and La Nina are naturally occurring climate patterns and humans have no direct ability to influence their onset, intensity or duration.” 

  And for those wondering what type of weather La Nina will bring to the Western Hemisphere … read “When Can You Expect El Niño And La Niña?” 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 23:20

• JPMorgan's Bullish China Stock Call Is Backed By History
  JPMorgan’s Bullish China Stock Call Is Backed By History

  By Ye Xie and Amy Li, Bloomberg Markets Live reporters and analysts

  The meltdown that engulfed Chinese stocks Monday is a clear sign investors are worried that President Xi Jinping’s tightening grip on power will exact a heavy toll on free enterprise and economic growth. But some Wall Street banks haven’t given up on China just yet. JPMorgan’s strategist Marko Kolanovic, for one, is urging investors to buy the dip (ZH: as he always does with everything).

  While the quant guru’s bullish call on the nation’s assets has misfired this year, history shows a market rebound after a rout of this scale is more than likely.

  Monday’s selloff in Chinese assets was savage with few precedents outside economic crises.

  Following the Party Congress where Xi stuff the Politburo Standing Committee with his allies, the Nasdaq Golden Dragon China Index of 65 Chinese stocks sank as much as 21%. The MSCI China Index fell more than 8%, the most since 2008. Foreign investors took out a record 18 billion yuan ($2.5 billion) from the mainland’s stock market via the connect programs — more than wiping out the inflows this year. 

  

  Markets are clearly worried that Xi’s consolidation of power means a likely continuation of recent economically damaging policies, including Covid Zero and the campaign to rein in private-sector enterprises. “The market got the feeling of a continuous lack of focus on the state of the Chinese economy,” said Giuliano Gasparet, head of equity at Generali Insurance Asset Management.

  For some investors, though, the selloff may be overdone. “We believe this is a good opportunity to add given an expected growth recovery, gradual COVID reopening, and monetary and fiscal stimulus,” JPMorgan’s Kolanovic wrote in a note Monday.

  The widely followed strategist has been one of the most vocal China bulls throughout the year, even as his colleague at one point controversially labeled Chinese stocks as “uninvestable.” (The word was never meant to see the light of day, Bloomberg later reported.)

  Kolanovic’s thesis has been that China’s economic stimulus would lead to a recovery. Yet the call has floundered as continued Covid restrictions severely hampered the economy.

  Still, he may be on to something this time. Prior to Monday, there have been only 13 times when the MSCI China Index tumbled at least 8% over the past three decades. The index rebounded in 11 out of those 13 occasions in the the next five days, and advanced 10 times in the following 60 days. In fact, since 1998, the hit ratio for the next 60 days is 100%.

  

  These historic stats looks encouraging. But for the markets to have a sustained recovery, Beijing needs to retool its Covid policies and rebuild investor confidence. As Yan Wang, China strategist at Alpine Macro, puts it, “market volatility will remain high until investors get better clarity on how Xi Jinping will manage the country going forward.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 23:00

• US Wants To Break Up Taiwan's Chip Hub To Shield Supply Chains In Event Of China Invasion
  US Wants To Break Up Taiwan’s Chip Hub To Shield Supply Chains In Event Of China Invasion

  The global semiconductor industry is entirely dominated by Taiwan. And that is a significant security risk for Western countries if China were to invade the island nation. 

  “If you allow yourself to think about a scenario where the United States no longer had access to the chips currently being made in Taiwan, it’s a scary scenario.

  “It’s a deep and immediate recession. It’s an inability to protect ourselves by making military equipment. We need to make this in America,” US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo told CNBC this past summer. 

  In August, US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made a controversial trip to Taiwan. In one of her meetings, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. founder Morris Chang told Pelosi very bluntly that Washington’s efforts to rebuild domestic chip manufacturing would fail. 

  “He was pretty blunt, and the esteemed guests were a bit surprised,” one person familiar with the talks told Financial Times. 

  As tensions between Taiwan and China mount, Washington plans to shift the global semiconductor supply chain out of the region to the US and elsewhere. And the reason for it is due to a scenario where China invades or blockades Taiwan, which would mean the global chip industry would grind to a halt overnight. 

  “If China cuts off TSMC’s supply chain, it could cause a major crisis in the world economy,” said Paul Clifford, a non-resident fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School. TSMC is moving toward shifting “some of their production out of Taiwan because of that concern.”

  Jason Hsu, a former Taiwanese lawmaker and now a senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, said the US is playing a delicate balancing act by pressuring TSMC to move production lines to the US while it unleashes an economic war on China’s semiconductor industry. He said that puts Taiwan at risk.

  

  The West’s concerns around Taiwan’s security and independence are why the Biden administration is pursuing the CHIPS Act to expand domestic semiconductor output. One problem for TSMC is that Washington is beginning to diversify chip manufacturing away from Taiwan. 

  For example, the Pentagon’s dependency on Taiwan for chips that power leading-edge devices and weapons is central to the battle for tech supremacy between the US and China. Due to future disruption risks, the DoD has to source chips from more secure supply chains. 

  Besides the US, there are efforts in Europe, Japan, Singapore, and India to increase semiconductor manufacturing. New manufacturing plants could take a couple of years to start producing chips. 

  The West’s strategy to diversify semiconductor supply chains out of Taiwan is becoming more clear:

  “Everyone realizes that there is a big watershed moment here for the whole industry,” said Peter Hanbury, a partner and expert in semiconductor and technology supply chains at Bain, the consultancy. “But it kind of snuck up on people.”

  Credit Suisse analysts recently pointed out if Taiwan’s chip plants were disrupted for any reason. The production of automobiles to computers would be severely impacted. 

  As of right now, the West’s goal is to break up Taiwan’s chip hub, though, as we noted earlier, TSMC’s Chang warned that any such move would fail. 

  However, TSMC customers are already looking to diversify production out of the region, as explained by Sebastian Hou, managing director at Neuberger Berman, an investment management company:

  “There have been some concerns among TSMC customers since two years ago … It was the time when in Taiwan we started to have more fighter jets from China hovering around the Taiwan Strait, and that has become a daily routine.”

  So far, those customers include Qualcomm and Nvidia, who have recently stated that some chip production from TSMC’s facilities would be shifted elsewhere. 

  Hanbury said the big question would be if Apple changes manufacturing partners due to the increasing risks in the Taiwan Strait. 

  “Taiwan’s monopoly in semiconductor production creates instability,” Brad Martin, director of the National Security Supply Chain Institute at the Rand Corporation, said. “If the US is faced with a need to make a decision between protecting its economy and defending Taiwan, that starts to become a very stark decision.”

  It’s becoming increasingly clear that the West wants TSMC and others in Taiwan to shift chip production elsewhere, so chip supplies aren’t drastically disrupted in the event of a China invasion. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 22:40

• Chinese Yuan Craters As PBOC Continues Stealth Devaluation With Weakest Fix In 14 Years
  Chinese Yuan Craters As PBOC Continues Stealth Devaluation With Weakest Fix In 14 Years

  Back on March 30, when the downward move in the yen was only just starting, we explained why the “Yen Is At Risk Of “Explosive” Downward Spiral With Kuroda Trapped, And Why China May Soon Devalue.”

  We won’t waste our readers’ time going into the details (they can click on the hyperlink above for the details), suffice to point out that since then, the yen has cratered by about 30 big figures…

  

  … prompting the BOJ to intervene, in an act of futile desperation, in the FX market by blowing what now appears to be $50 billion (and rising fast) in open market yen purchases to contain the collapse of the currency. Of course, until and unless the BOJ ends YCC, all interventions will be completely pointless, and the USDJPY can easily hit 200 within the next 12 months unless Kuroda allows the 10Y yield to rise above 0.25%… which he won’t do as the alternative is an immediate bond market collapse.

  But while the yen has been remarkable, it is the move in the yuan that has been the real stunner… just as we predicted. Behold the biggest stealth devaluation in modern Chinese history!

  

  And tonight, one day after the biggest drop in US-traded Chinese stocks following the absolute revulstion to what happened in China over the weekend, it went from bad to worse for the offshore yuan which cratered as low as 7.3686, a relentless drop in recent days and the lowest level on record for the offshore yuan…

  

  … which was sparked by the official fixing of the onshore yuan at 7.1668, which while still stronger than the estimate of 7.2198 (if well of record spreads observed in the past few weeks), was still the weakest reference rate in 14 years. In kneejerk reaction, the USDCNY, which is limited how far away from the reference rate it can trade, immediately proceeded to dump by 0.6% to 7.3050, the highest (i.e., weakest) since Dec. 2007.

  Commenting on the move, Mizuho Bank Asia FX strategist Ken Cheung said that the yuan fixing at 7.1668 is “a clear sign of the PBOC letting go of the currency as outflow pressure mounts” adding that “the weaker fixing means the policies are going back to normal after the 20th party congress.”

  Cheung also wrote that “the previous CNY fixing guidance could be a temporary measure and the PBOC is now letting the CNY to be more driven by market forces.”

  Which begs just two questions: how long until the current stealth devaluation which has seen the yuan drop the fastest 15% on record, is called for what it is, especially when compared to the dwarf of an official devlauation that took place back in August 2015.

  

  The second question: the last time China devalued aggressively – and officially – bitcoin saw its first sizable move from the low-hundreds into four digits. Will this time Beijing be successful at blocking off the capital flight firewall, or will those $55 trillion in Chinese bank assets finally starting moving out again…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 22:38

• Ferguson: How Cold War II Could Turn Into World War III
  Ferguson: How Cold War II Could Turn Into World War III

  Authored by Niall Ferguson, op-ed via Bloomberg,

  History shows that nothing causes fiscal and monetary instability quite like multiple big, long conflicts…

  

  A large proportion of the world’s top tourist destinations are the remains of dead empires. A week of sightseeing with my younger children in Italy reminded me of this. The city of Rome was the capital of an empire that at its height stretched from Britannia to Babylonia. The city of Venice once ruled a realm that extended across what are now Albania, Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Montenegro and Slovenia.

  To walk among the monuments of the most Serene City and the Eternal City is at once inspiring and melancholy. Like Edward Gibbon, “I sat musing amid the ruins of the Capitol” — but musing about the decline and fall of other empires.

  My grandparents and parents witnessed the decline and fall of the British Empire, but not before it had helped polish off the more ephemeral empires of Mussolini, Hitler and Hirohito. I experienced the decline and fall of the Soviet empire built by Lenin and Stalin. There are those who subscribe to the delusion that the age of empires is over. But all history is the history of empires.

  The world today is dominated by two empires: the US, which originated in the British colonization of North America, and the ethnic-Han-dominated Middle Kingdom we call the People’s Republic of China. But a number of former empires continue to play disproportionate roles in world politics: The Russian empire limps on in the guise of the Russian Federation; the Persian empire is now the Islamic Republic of Iran; one might say the Holy Roman Empire has been reincarnated in the form of the European Union, at once extensive, German-centered and weak.

  It is not civilizations that clash, but empires. Indeed, it is often border clashes that define their extents. As a schoolboy, I was taught the world wars as if they had been contests between European nation states. Only later did I see that they were struggles between empires. That was why they were global and not just European conflicts.

  More recently, I saw that the term “world war” was a kind of optical illusion. What my paternal grandfather’s Victory Medal called “The Great War for Civilisation, 1914-1919” was really many conflicts: Austria’s against Serbia; Germany’s against Russia and its ally France; Britain’s to preserve Belgian neutrality (the one my grandad fought in); Britain’s and France’s to acquire Germany’s overseas colonies and to partition the Ottoman Empire between themselves.

  My mother’s father served in the Royal Air Force in Burma and India between 1942 and 1945, returning home via the ruins of Germany. His was Britain’s imperial war to prevent its vast Asian empire from being taken over by the Japanese. But there were many other wars: Japan’s against China; Germany’s with the Soviet Union against the rest of Europe; then Germany’s with much of Europe against the Soviet Union; America’s war against all the Axis powers.

  And after the world wars came the Cold War. We think of this as a struggle between two empires that pretended not to be empires: the US and the Soviet Union. But its conflict zones were largely defined by the process of decolonization, as the European empires disintegrated.

  Like the world wars, the Cold War was an agglomeration of conflicts. What happened in Vietnam had little to do with what happened in the Middle East or southern Africa, aside from the fact that both superpowers had dogs in each fight — dogs that they armed and financed, enlarging and prolonging local conflicts by turning them into proxy wars.

  These great conflicts were the dominant phenomena of the 20th century, transforming economic, social and political life almost everywhere. But in recent times, their importance has somewhat faded in most minds. It would not be too much to say that during the interwar era of 1991 to 2018 — in other words, the period between Cold War I and Cold War II — many economists and policymakers lost interest in war.

  Because the wars of the interwar era were relatively small (Bosnia, Afghanistan, Iraq), more closely resembling colonial policing operations, we forgot that war is history’s most consistent driver of inflation, debt defaults — even famines.

  Large-scale war is simultaneously destructive of productive capacity, disruptive of trade, and destabilizing of fiscal and monetary policies. Compare global battle deaths from interstate conflict with international inflation data from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. You will see that behind the era of economic stability known as the Great Moderation, there was period of declining conflict that lasted from the early 1970s until the outbreak of the war in Ukraine. The coming of peace, like monetary policy, acted with lag.

  Rising Prices, Rising Tensions

  

  Source: OECD

  Seven Decades of Casualties

  

  Source: Our World in Data

  The events of this year have reminded us of what is at stake in cases of great-power conflict. The war in Ukraine qualifies because Russia is still clearly a great enough power that it would probably have achieved its annexationist aims by now had it not been for large-scale financial, military and technological assistance to Ukraine from the US, the European Union and other associated states. This is a big war, measured by both casualties and costs.

  There are honorable exceptions to the modern economists’ neglect of war. For example, in a nice 2008 paper on “Macroeconomic Crises since 1870,” Robert Barro and José Ursúa pointed out that of the 70 consumption and output disasters they identified for OECD countries in the modern period, one-third (23) were war-related.

  A new paper I have co-authored with Martin Kornejew, Paul Schmelzing and Moritz Schularick, which draws on four centuries of data, shows that central bank balance sheets have been as much affected by geopolitical crises as by financial crises. The large quantities of government bonds held by central banks today are not exceptional by the standards of the 18th and 20th centuries. (The years 1815-1914 saw few really big, expensive wars.)

  Economists tend to treat wars as “exogenous shocks,” generally omitting them from their models. From the historian’s standpoint, however, war is not exogenous, but the endogenous prime mover of the historical process — “the father of all things,” as Heraclitus said.

  Two general points are especially worthy of notice. First, wars have played a very noticeable role in the history of inflation expectations. Thanks to the excellent historical work of the Bank of England, we can trace the history of UK inflation expectations all the way back to the late 17th century. The peaks in short-run expectations nearly all align with wars (generally years when they weren’t going well): 1709 (the Spanish War of Succession); 1757 (the Seven Years’ War); 1800 (Napoleonic Wars); 1917 (World War I); 1940 (World War II). The upward move in 1975 is the exception. (See here for the chart.)

  Second, wars have often been responsible for discontinuities in the history of interest rates. As Schmelzing has argued, there has been a long-term “supra-secular” decline in nominal and real interest rates, dating back to the period after the Black Death of the 14th century (probably the greatest pandemic in history). The major breaks in the downward trend were nearly all associated with wars, particularly those that destroyed capital stock and generated monetary financing of debt.

  An unusual feature of the recent past is that in 2020 a pandemic had the fiscal and monetary consequences of a world war. This was unprecedented. No previous pandemic, including the much more devastating 1918-19 influenza, had elicited comparable responses from finance ministries and central banks.

  Because most (not all) countries followed the US in offsetting the supply-shock caused by lockdowns and spontaneous behavioral changes with generous transfers and significant monetary expansion, the first pandemic year was associated with extraordinarily large deficits and monetary growth rates — comparable in their size with those of the world wars.

  Regrettably, major policy errors were committed in the second plague year of 2021. The newly elected Joe Biden administration embarked on an overambitious and supposedly “transformative” fiscal stimulus, while the Federal Reserve retained its accommodative stance, even as the rapid rollout of vaccines permitted a gradual return to normal social and economic behavior. Like those who thought the pandemic would last forever, those who argued that inflation would be “transitory,” as it was after World War II, turned out to be wrong. Those who saw a better analogy with the Fed’s “great mistake” of the late 1960s have been vindicated by the persistence of inflation.

  Most accounts of the Great Inflation of the 1970s tend to underestimate the role that war played. Obviously, the 1973 Yom Kippur War played a significant part in driving up inflation in 1974 because of the oil embargo imposed by the Arab members of OPEC on the US and other countries supporting Israel.

  But it is worth remembering that the August 1968 monetary policy mistake (cutting rates by 25 basis points, despite the fact that inflation was creeping up) coincided with the peak of US intervention in the Vietnam war, a conflict that played as big a part as President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society” policies in widening the US fiscal deficit — tiny though it was by modern standards — and ultimately breaking the dollar’s peg to gold in 1971. In 2022, a war played an analogous role in pouring kerosene on the inflationary fire. Food and energy prices were driven up the outbreak of the war in Ukraine and the sanctions imposed on Russia by the US and the EU.

  It goes without saying that the return of great-power conflict has made the life of policymakers difficult, just as it did in 1973. I recently heard it said that the 2020s are not likely to be as inflationary as the 1970s because labor is less organized, so the risk of a wage-price spiral is lower. But I would draw your attention to a number of important differences that make our contemporary circumstances more worrisome than the situation in the 1970s.

  Monetary growth rates were significantly higher between the second quarter of 2020 and that of 2021 than at any point in the 1970s. Year over year, they remained in double digits even after velocity, the rate at which money changes hands, had recovered.

  Productivity growth is lower today in nearly all OECD countries than it was 50 years ago. Demographic trends are worse today, with a significantly higher ratio of dependents to the working-age population. Fiscal positions are worse today, with much larger amounts of government debt and projected deficits relative to GDP, not least in the US.

  Financial markets are more complex today and therefore more fragile. There were no such things as liability-driven investments for pension funds in the 1970s. The onset of Covid in March 2020 exposed fragility in the US Treasury market not dissimilar to what we saw in the UK gilts market at the end of last month.

  Then we had pollution; now we have climate change. Our political stability looks even worse than it seemed at the time of Watergate. In a recent poll, Americans were asked: “Do you think the nation’s democracy is in danger of collapse, or don’t you think so?” — 69% of Republicans and 69% of Democrats answered in the affirmative.

  The war in Ukraine is lasting much longer than the war of 1973 (approaching eight months compared with 19 days). So far, there is no sign of détente in Cold War II — quite the opposite, in fact — so there is a non-trivial risk that we could soon witness a confrontation between the US and China over Taiwan.

  Finally, although media attention currently focuses on the women’s protests sweeping Iranian cities, they coincide with the failure of the attempt to revive the Iran nuclear deal. The Tehran regime will likely speed up its effort to acquire a nuclear weapon, increasing the probability of war in the region, as no Israeli government will countenance a nuclear-armed Iran.

  We may get lucky. We may get away with just re-running the 1970s — though judging by recent events in the UK, we may do it at a rather higher speed: from the inflationary Barber budget (1972) to the Winter of Discontent (1978-9) in a matter of weeks rather than years. (When a head of lettuce has a longer shelf-life than a prime minister, British politics has entered the realm of Monty Python, the best of 1970s comedy.)

  Yet there is a much worse scenario, in which we get something closer to the 1940s, with regional conflicts coalescing into something like World War III — albeit with smaller armies, many unmanned weapons systems, and far more powerful and accurate bombs.

  What makes me worry more about this scenario is the Biden-Harris administration’s new National Security Strategy, belatedly published last week. “We do not seek conflict or a new Cold War,” write the authors, presumably led by National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan. They then proceed to delineate an unmistakable cold war strategy. As they say, “the post-Cold War era is definitively over and a competition is underway between the major powers to shape what comes next.” In other words, Cold War II has begun, in all but name.

  Strip away the woke stuff about “climate change … the greatest and potentially existential [problem] for all nations” and “the needs of the most marginalized, including the LGBTQI+ community,” and you are left with a significant amount of President Donald Trump’s NSS from five years ago, which was all about “great power competition.” In fact, the word “competition” appears 44 times in the new NSS, compared with just 25 in the 2017 edition.

  See if you can spot the difference. “China and Russia challenge American power, influence, and interests, attempting to erode American security and prosperity. They are determined to make economies less free and less fair, to grow their militaries, and to control information and data to repress their societies and expand their influence.” That’s 2017.

  “Russia poses an immediate threat to the free and open international system, recklessly flouting the basic laws of the international order today, as its brutal war of aggression against Ukraine has shown. The PRC, by contrast, is the only competitor with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to advance that objective. … Russia and the PRC … seek to remake the international order to create a world conducive to their highly personalized and repressive type of autocracy.” That’s 2022.

  “We will work with our partners to contest China’s unfair trade and economic practices and restrict its acquisition of sensitive technologies.” 2017.

  “We must ensure strategic competitors cannot exploit foundational American and allied technologies, know-how, or data to undermine American and allied security.” 2022.

  Biden’s plan for Russia might be described cynically as fighting to the last Ukrainian, but to what end? Ostensibly the US is determined to “support Ukraine in its fight for its freedom,” but the real goal is “to degrade Russia’s ability to wage future wars of aggression.” That is why the administration has made almost no effort to broker a cease-fire, much less peace. The White House seems to want this war to keep going, though I suspect that will change after the mid-term elections.

  Given that China is clearly the administration’s higher priority, it is not immediately apparent what purpose is served by a protracted war in Eastern Europe. But a recent speech by Sullivan provided the answer.

  “On export controls” against China, he said, “we have to revisit the longstanding premise of maintaining ‘relative’ advantages over competitors in certain key technologies. We previously maintained a ‘sliding scale’ approach that said we need to stay only a couple of generations ahead. That is not the strategic environment we are in today. Given the foundational nature of certain technologies, such as advanced logic and memory chips, we must maintain as large of a lead as possible.”

  And here’s the key point. Sanctions on Russia, Sullivan declared, have “demonstrated that technology export controls can be more than just a preventative tool … they can be a new strategic asset in the U.S. and allied toolkit.” In other words, the US-led economic war against Russia is like a demo for China’s benefit: This is what we can do to you, too.

  The remarkable thing is that the US has not waited for China to invade Taiwan to go ahead and do it. New restrictions just imposed by the US limit the transfer of advanced graphics processor units to China. (These are chips used in AI applications in data centers.) Washington has also limited the use of US chips and expertise in Chinese supercomputers, and China’s imports of chipmaking technology.

  The aim is to impair Beijing’s ability to deploy artificial intelligence by driving up the cost of computing in China, whether for companies or the government. In short, the Biden administration aims to halt technological progress in China — rather in the way Trisolarans try to stunt Earth’s technological progress in Liu Cixin’s science-fiction novel The Three-Body Problem.

  As Edward Luce noted in the Financial Times, “The new restrictions are not confined to the export of high-end US semiconductor chips. They extend to any advanced chips made with US equipment. This incorporates almost every non-Chinese high-end exporter, whether based in Taiwan, South Korea or the Netherlands. The ban also extends to ‘US persons,’ which includes green card holders as well as US citizens.”

  The most extraordinary thing about these measures is how little comment they have elicited in the media. Trump did nothing so radical.  As Luce put it: “A superpower declared war on a great power and nobody noticed.”

  To understand the full significance of this move, you need to read Chris Miller’s brilliant new history of the microprocessor, Chip War: The Fight for the World’s Most Critical Technology. Last week, I interviewed Miller, and asked him if this might be a repeat of the mistake the US made with Japan between 1939 and 1941, when economic sanctions so boxed in the imperial government that in the end there seemed no better option than to gamble on surprise attack.

  Miller thought this was the wrong analogy, because US sanctions against China today are more targeted than those against Japan. I am not so sure. Cutting China off from high-end chips today seems a lot like cutting Japan off from oil in 1941. And it is an especially hazardous move when more than 90% of the production of those chips takes place in Taiwan, an island that China claims as its own.

  “Taiwan is China’s Taiwan,” President Xi Jinping declared at the 20th Chinese Communist Party Congress last Tuesday. “Resolving the Taiwan question is a matter for the Chinese, a matter that must be resolved by the Chinese. We will continue to strive for peaceful reunification with the greatest sincerity and the utmost effort, but we will never promise to renounce the use of force, and we reserve the option of taking all measures necessary.”

  The spectacle of Xi’s predecessor, Hu Jintao, being humiliatingly and publicly removed from the closing ceremony of the party congress on Saturday was a chilling one. The intent was clear: to signal to the world that China now has, for the first time since 1976, a leader as powerful and as ruthless as Mao Zedong. What did Xi say so coldly as Hu seemed to remonstrate? “You’re out, Tom,” from The Godfather came to mind. (And why did Michael Corleone drop Tom Hagen? Because he was not a “wartime consigliere.”)

  Empires fall. Two weeks ago, I optimistically suggested that I would live to see the fall of the empires of the Chinese Communists, the Russian fascists and the Iranian theocrats. But we must not make the mistake of assuming that the US is an indestructible empire, for there is no such thing. The Biden administration would not be the first Democratic administration elected on a progressive domestic program that stumbled into a major war: Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman and Johnson — they all did it. The record is: won two, tied one, lost one.

  The city of Washington once ruled over an empire that stretched from North America across both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans — and beyond. I was in the nation’s capital last weekend for the International Monetary Fund meetings and saw abundant evidence that the empire still rules. The restaurants were crowded with the representatives of poorer countries — the “global South” as they sometimes call themselves — whose principal goal was debt renegotiation, not tourism. The governors of lesser central banks sat on panels; the mighty Fed chair, Jerome Powell, absented himself.

  Yet can one imagine the White House as a future Palazzo Ducale, our Capitol like the Roman Capitol, a ruin where some future historian will one day “sit musing”?

  The answer is: All too easily, if we pursue Cold War II to the extent of stumbling into World War III.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 22:20

• The Danger Of Bubble Wrap (Or How Democrats Learned To Love Ignoring Voters)
  The Danger Of Bubble Wrap (Or How Democrats Learned To Love Ignoring Voters)

  Authored by Thomas Buckley via ‘The Point’ Substack,

  There is thinking inside the box.

  Then there is living inside a bubble.

  

  And then there is thinking inside a bubble which is in a box in a cage in the basement tucked behind the furnace with a giant sign “Beware of the Leopard!” draped across it (apologies to Douglas Adams.)

  In politics – as in some many aspects of life – it’s always handy to know where your enemies are.  In this case the DC Democrats are right there, which is right where we want them.

  From the utterly oblivious nonsense coming out of Nancy Pelosi – inflation and crime are not big issues this November – to the inability of any major Democrat to even hint about being open to any limits on abortion – well, they may get Cartman’s mom from “South Park” vote at least –

  – to doubling down on “climate change” as people are facing utility rate hikes and power grid instability, the tone deafness is astonishing.

  But why is this happening – why are the Democrats focusing on what, the polls clearly state, are not the major concerns of voters?

  One possibility is that they are true believers and absolutely mean everything they say and are cretain they are making the world better and are just fighting an honest and truthful fight.

  Mm-hmm.

  Another possibility is that they are rock paper stupid, but there is a difference between intellectual dishonesty and intellectual deficiency and it would seem the former, not the latter, would make more sense (though one must also wonder if it is inconceivable to them that they may not represent the feelings and ideas of the general public –

  Then there is the knowledge that they can win because the game is so rigged by the media, voting systems, and the power to shame away from polite society anyone or thing that would dare to ask for better explanations of the whys and wherefores of their policies, let alone disagree with them.  This confidence that they can run a hamster on a platform of giving each and every tweaker in the nation a bag of cash and a machete and still prevail definitely plays a role in the Democrat mindset.  Look at New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Portland, Seattle, etc. and it’s pretty much what they’ve been running on locally and winning so it seems to work.

  Of course, a major difficulty with running on the issues voters care about is that the voters care about them because the Democrats made them care by causing the problems in the first place – inflation, crime, energy instability, etc. can all be appropriately laid at their feet

  But it may be a combination of all those things plus one extra very important fact: they are only talking amongst themselves.

  Imagine a conference room full of Democratic operatives strategizing campaign themes and one says “hey, maybe we should layoff the January 6 stuff and focus on issues that the vast majority of everyday Americans really care about?”

  The first sound heard in response would be crickets.  The second sound would be of a pink slip hitting the table.  The third sound would be the revocation of a building security clearance.  The fourth sound would be the pinging of cell phones as the entire room simultaneously engages in ritualized contact info removal.

  In other words, many Democratic candidates are engaged in campaigns that are not being run by people who are- first and foremost – interested in winning but by people who are deathly afraid of saying the wrong thing, being socially ostracized, and seeing their future careers instantaneously evaporate in a woke cloud of revenge. 

  It’s one of the reasons why excuses for the upcoming mid-term bloodbath are already coming out – it wasn’t us or our ideas but it was the Saudis and the oil companies conspiring to raise gas prices – https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/10/gas-prices-biden-approval-rating-midterms-democrats.html– and Trump is a liar and people are stupid and evil – MSNBC’s execrable Joy Reid tweeted “It’s terrifying how many Americans will choose literal fascism, female serfdom, climate collapse and the reversal of everything from Social Security & Medicare to student loan relief bc they think giving Republicans the power to investigate Hunter Biden will bring down gas prices” – and Trump is evil and people can’t vote – https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/10/democrats-bad-midterm-polls-bad-vibes.html – and on and on.

  It’s also the reason for this –

  For those unaware, Allan Fung is a Republican who may very well take – it’s a toss-up, maybe even leaning his way, right now – a congressional seat in deep blue Rhode Island.  This race has gained the attention of the House Majority PAC – which was created by Pelosi as part of her effort to indenture to herself every other Democrat in Congress by controlling huge amounts of campaign cash – that has just begun airing the above advertisement on the state.

  A short breakdown of the ad (do watch if you have 30 seconds):  It begins by invoking Charlottesville (really?) kids in cages (again, really?) and January 6 (no surprise there), then has Trump inciting a riot “resulting in the death of five police officers (huh? are they counting Ashli Babbitt?) to overturn the election, and finishing with the obligatory “Fung is too loyal to Trump, too extreme” boilerplate.

  The most fascinating part of the ad is the photo the Democrat creators chose to end the spot with – Fung happily standing with two people; their faces are pixelated but one is a woman wearing an American flag scarf and the other is a man dressed as a Revolutionary War soldier, complete with tri-corner hat and red, white, and blue uniform.  That means that someone specifically chose to represent evil Trumpian fascism with the flag and Independence Day.

  Seriously.

  Locally, Fung is running inflation and heating oil price increases and opposing tax hikes ads; Pelosi – and Fung’s opponent Seth Magaziner – are running things like the above and commercials about abortion and the standard “Kevin McCarthy will end Social Security” claptrap.

  Yes, Rhode Island is “blue” but, more importantly, it’s pretty blue collar (outside of Brown University, East Greenwich, Jamestown, Barrington, and half of Newport, of course, and only one of which is in the district) so the disconnect between potential Democratic voters and existing Democratic politicians and strategists is all the more glaring.

  That failed campaign managers – see Steve Schmidt, who went from Meg Whitman’s malpractice of a California gubernatorial campaign to the Lincoln Project grift and Donna Brazile, who ran Al Gore’s 2000 poorly targeted effort and after still got a number of sweet gigs – can go on with their lives as long as they can blame something else for losing is a well-known fact in DC circles as long as you keep the consultanocracy and media establishment well and truly oiled. 

  This fact is obvious to the folks behind Katie Hobbs’ desert disaster, Kathy Hochul’s “empire strikes back” campaign, and Nevada’s Sisolak betting on the hard way.

  And, staying in Nevada, there is the issue of rank incompetence caused by the groupthink political blinders.  The House Majority PAC has run an abortion-related advertisement against April Becker, the Republican running in the 3rd congressional district.  The ad features Dr. Adam Levy, intoning against “botched, back-alley abortions…far too many women died…” etc.  The problem with the ad, beyond the obvious, is that Dr. Levy not only has himself caused the death of a patient during a botched abortion but was also charged with sexual assault of a minor under 16 years old and lewdness with a child under 14 years old, eventually entering an “Alford” plea to lesser charges of abuse and neglect.

  Here is the ad – https://www.thehousemajoritypac.com/our-work/led-us-here – here is his easily available background information – https://abortiondocs.org/abortionists/adam-vincent-levy/ (see license/incident details under “documented deaths or serious injury”) – and here is story that broke the news – https://thenevadaglobe.com/articles/house-majority-pac-ad-features-doctor-criminally-charged-of-sexual-assault-lewd-acts-with-a-minor/ .

  But if you don’t play along and actually try to win by ignoring the hivemind obsessed with identity politics and Trump and abortion and Trump and January 6 and Trump and suggest trying – somehow – to connect on issues that matter to typical voters?

  Adios, sayonara, goodbye, and never darken our doors again.

  And it’s very very cold outside the bubble. 

  And the leopard might still be there, too…

  *  *  *

  The Point is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 21:40

• Hong Kong Government Loses Court Bid To Invalidate 20,000 Vaccine Exemptions
  Hong Kong Government Loses Court Bid To Invalidate 20,000 Vaccine Exemptions

  A challenge that mounted earlier this month in Hong Kong to invalidate Covid vaccine exemptions issued by certain doctors has lost in court.

  In late September, Hong Kong sought to invalidate certain Covid exemptions issues by doctors who were suspected of malpractice.

  Big brother really seems to be scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point. As if enough people hadn’t already been forced into getting the jab, Hong Kong police “arrested six doctors last month for allegedly issuing vaccination exemption letters without conducting proper consultations,” SCMP wrote last week. 

  From there, the government made a legal challenge to 20,000 vaccination exemption certificates linked to doctors over suspected malpractice in the country’s High Court. But the court then ruled that the government has no power to invalidate the exemptions and a temporary ban on a plan to revoke the exemptions will now likely become permanent. 

  The country’s health secretary couldn’t identify the source of his authority, Mr Justice Russell Coleman ruled: “A government minister gets his or her legal powers from legislation – and not from an announcement made in a press release.”

  

  “It does not seem to me to be correct to leap from the desirability of enabling the secretary to ‘do something’ when some [medical exemption certificates] are called into question to the conclusion that [the law] must be read as conferring such a power,” his ruling continued. 

  “The question does not identify a choice between being ‘pro-government’ or ‘anti-government’; it identifies a distinction between what is lawful and what is unlawful,” the ruling continued. 

  Litigant Kwok Cheuk-kin was granted an application to restrain authorities from invalidating the certificates. According to reporting by SCMP, he then called the ruling a “miserable loss” for the government and a “disgrace” to city leader John Lee Ka-chiu.

  Executive councillor and barrister Ronny Tong Ka-wah said that the government was considering an appeal. “Amending the laws is not moving the goalposts. The goalposts are in the wrong position so, of course, we have to put them in the right place,” he said. 

  “The citizens of Hong Kong are the biggest winners of the present judicial challenge,” Kwok concluded. You can read the full SCMP writeup here. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 21:20

• Ron Paul Rages Against "Political Justice" In America
  Ron Paul Rages Against “Political Justice” In America

  Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

  Josef Stalin’s top henchman famously said, “show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.” What it meant was that Soviet justice was about politics, not the rule of law. First decide who, for political reasons, is to be punished, and then the state will provide the crimes for which he will be charged.

  

  This dark era of politicized “justice” has returned with former Trump campaign advisor Steve Bannon’s recent sentence to four months in jail for “contempt of Congress” over his refusal to appear before the House January 6th Committee.

  How is it politicized justice for Bannon to be punished for ignoring a subpoena from the US Congress? Because many before him have been charged with contempt of Congress – including Democratic Party luminaries such as Eric Holder, Janet Reno, and Lois Lerner – and were never sentenced to jail time.

  Bannon’s sentence is meant to convey a political message to America: if you support Trump you are a criminal and you may find yourself in a cell next to Steve Bannon.

  And you do not have to support Trump to understand the danger in this. Everyone should be afraid of political justice. It cuts both ways and there is no guarantee that Republicans if they capture Congress will not also follow this precedent.

  Sending your political opponents to jail is what happens in a banana republic. It is un-American. But here we are.

  The goal of the January 6th Committee is not to seek justice for the “crime” of trespassing and putting feet on Pelosi’s sacred desk, but to make sure that Donald Trump is never allowed to run for President again. That is the reason hundreds have been unjustly arrested and held in terrible conditions for non-crimes. As they say, if you want to make an omelet you have to break some eggs.

  Speaking of contempt of Congress, the real contempt is the existence of the January 6th Committee in the first place.

  It has been a partisan show trial from the beginning, where the only two “Republican” Members were not chosen by Republicans but by Nancy Pelosi. The purpose of the Committee has been to prop up the false narrative that somehow a few rowdy protesters who broke into the Capitol Building were the equivalent of the storming of the Bastille.

  The US Administration is also involved in narrative control in other areas.

  The media reported last week that Tesla and Space-X chief Elon Musk has come under a “national security review” over, it seems, his on-again-off-again purchase of Twitter and perhaps even his proposing a peace plan for Russia and Ukraine that does not include a nuclear strike on Moscow.

  Musk has also come under fire from the “cancel culture” Left over his repeated vows to return Twitter to a free speech platform once he is in charge. As we have seen in so many cases, including with former New York Times journalist Alex Berenson, Twitter has been working closely with the Biden Administration to silence and ban any users who dare challenge the “accepted wisdom” on Covid, Ukraine, and a number of other things.

  When justice becomes tangled in politics, freedom and liberty go out the window. We are not so naïve to think this is something that just arrived with the Biden Administration, but there seems little doubt it is spreading like a cancer. We must reject political justice if the Republic is to survive.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 21:00

• Democrats In Panic Mode As Midterm Momentum Favors GOP
  Democrats In Panic Mode As Midterm Momentum Favors GOP

  With midterm elections weeks away, desperation among Democrats is palpable.

  

  After horrendous polling which shows that Americans not only care most about inflation and the economy (‘Change the subject!‘), and a mass exodus of independent voters, Democrats have even resorted to shuffling a clearly-impaired President Biden around to stump for candidates and reassure the base how wonderful things are.

  Here he is discussing ‘ramrod-spined’ VP Kamala Harris – who apparently has “enormous integrity.”

  60 seconds to prove Joe Biden has dementia pic.twitter.com/RQF3IHTeGC

  — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) October 24, 2022

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

  “Enormous integrity.”

  Yesterday, Kamala Harris said it’s “misinformation” to say she urged people to donate to a bail fund that has bailed violent criminals out of jail.

  She’s lying. Her tweet is still up: pic.twitter.com/EKBuM7uT9O

  — Ronna McDaniel (@GOPChairwoman) October 24, 2022

  

  Anyway… 

  As The Hill makes abundantly clear, Democrats are freaking out right now as momentum into midterms is clearly with the GOP.

  As recently as a few weeks ago, Democrats were bullish about their chances of defying harsh historical and political headwinds, believing that voter anger over the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and lingering GOP concerns about the quality of Republican candidates might allow them to not only hold, but expand their paper-thin Senate majority.

  But the political winds appear to be shifting once again in the GOP’s favor. Recent polling has found Republicans regaining an edge on the so-called generic ballot, a survey question that asks voters which party they plan to vote for in November. Meanwhile, the data website FiveThirtyEight’s Senate forecast shows Democrats’ chances of holding the Senate dropping by 11 percent over the past month. -The Hill

  “A month ago, it looked like not only were the Democrats poised to hold the Senate, the question was: were they going to be able to get, you know, two extra seats?” said former Democratic pollster, Fernand Amandi, who worked on former President Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns. “Now I think the hope is just to hang on.“

  “Perhaps Democratic messaging hasn’t been as strong as it could be,” he continued. “But we’re talking about things tightening when the choice is between chaos and competency. The Democrats have governed with a competent, steady hand in a very volatile environment. What we’ve seen from the Republican Party over the last six years has been wholesale unhinged chaos. And what they’re offering is more chaos.“

  Really?

  Marie Yovanovitch — the former US Ambassador to Ukraine under Trump who testified against him in the 2019 impeachment, and was lauded as a hero — suggests that if Trump were in office, he’d have averted the war diplomatically. But she thinks this would’ve been a terrible thing pic.twitter.com/1Q4qp5cNOA

  — Michael Tracey (@mtracey) April 23, 2022

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

  According to Democratic strategist and former Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) aide Jon Reinish, “If you look at the Dobbs decision — that seems to have come a little too early for the Democrats,” referring to the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe vs Wade.

  “And I think there [are] other currents — inflation is probably the biggest one — that have kind of interfered with the singularity of that argument.”

  So – the timing of the USSC overturning Roe wasn’t ideal for maximum outrage, and inflation is highly inconvenient.

  Maybe Democrats can simply campaign on the economy being “strong as hell”?

  Joe Biden saying, “Our economy is strong as hell,” while eating an ice cream cone is so tone deaf and out of touch to what Americans actually see in their lives that it feels like the Democrats are intentionally tanking the election. pic.twitter.com/blkc4omdhd

  — Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) October 16, 2022

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

  According to the most recnt NYT-Siena College poll, the economy and inflation top the list of problems facing the country, while just 5% of voter said abortion is the most pressing issue. January 6th came in at 7%. Nobody cares about the hill Democrats have chosen to die on.

  In one of the poll’s more alarming findings for Democrats, women who identified as independents said they preferred Republicans by an 18-point margin, a stark reversal from September, when those voters favored Democrats by a 14-point margin. Democrats have sought relentlessly to sway those voters by warning of threats to abortion rights. -The Hill

  “The voters who would be most susceptible to the Democrats’ messaging on abortion are shifting,” said former GOP strategist and congressional candidate, Ford O’Connell.

  “As long as the Republicans stay focused on two things — my money, my family — then they’ll win in 2022,” he added. “They’ll win in 2024. Because the Democrats aren’t showing any sign of changing their approach.”

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 20:40

• Ex-Treasury Secretary Warns Of Deficit "Doom Loop", Says Fiscal Debates Need To Be "Back On The Table"
  Ex-Treasury Secretary Warns Of Deficit “Doom Loop”, Says Fiscal Debates Need To Be “Back On The Table”

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

  Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers said in a recent Bloomberg interview that fiscal debates need to be put “back on the table” as surging borrowing costs risk a potential deficit “doom loop.”

  

  Summers made the remarks during Friday’s edition of Bloomberg’s “Wall Street Week,” in which he said that the Biden administration’s big spending initiatives, including the student-loan forgiveness that caused the monthly deficit to jump 562 percent, could shake investor confidence.

  “If your deficit projection starts to get out of control and your real interest rates start to rise rapidly, you can get into a kind of doom loop,” Summers told the outlet.

  “We’re going to need to be watching our own fiscal projections in the United States very carefully.”

  While the federal budget deficit is down to $1.38 trillion this year from $2.78 trillion in fiscal 2021, it was 562 percent higher on a monthly basis compared with September 2021. The monthly jump mostly reflects Biden’s student debt forgiveness as several years’ worth of costs were compressed into a single month.

  ‘Stagflationary Debt Crisis’

  Another prominent economist who has warned about the risks of high debt as borrowing costs rise is Nouriel Roubini, a professor of economics at New York University’s Stern School of Business who got the nickname “Dr. Doom” for his accurate prediction of the market meltdown of 2008–09.

  Roubini said in an opinion piece for Time magazine that under conditions of much higher private and public debt levels now than in the past, central bank rate hikes to tame soaring inflation carry a major downside risk.

  “Rapid normalization of monetary policy and rising interest rates will drive highly leveraged households, companies, financial institutions, and governments into bankruptcy and default,” he wrote.

  Roubini expects the next crisis to be some combination of 1970s stagflation and the 2008–09 debt crisis, predicting a toxic mix where “the decade ahead may well be a Stagflationary Debt Crisis the likes of which we’ve never seen before.”

  It comes as Republicans have criticized the Biden administration’s big-ticket spending and have been flagging the need for spending cuts.

  “You can’t just continue down the path to keep spending and adding to the debt,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said in a recent interview on Punchbowl News.

  The GOP lawmaker said that if Republicans win control of the House, they should consider using debt-limit negotiations to pressure Democrats to cut spending.

  “And if people want to make a debt ceiling [for a longer period of time], just like anything else, there comes a point in time where, OK, we’ll provide you more money, but you got to change your current behavior.”

  “We’re not just going to keep lifting your credit card limit,” he added. “And we should seriously sit together and [figure out] where can we eliminate some waste? Where can we make the economy grow stronger?”

  ‘Force as Much Spending Reduction’ as Possible

  In a recent interview for The Epoch Times’ sister outlet NTD, Stephen Moore, former senior economic adviser to former President Donald Trump, blamed soaring inflation on the Biden administration’s massive spending packages and said the only thing that will cool price pressures is a GOP win in the midterm elections so they can pressure Democrats to “stop the spending.”

  Moore acknowledged that there are limits to what a Republican-controlled Congress could do to rein in spending, as some of it is on “automatic pilot” and can’t be stopped by a vote.

  “Republicans should not over-promise,” he said. “They can stop new spending, they can—in a fight over the debt ceiling—pull back some spending, as we did with [former President Barack] Obama.”

  He said a GOP win would likely mean more political friction in Washington.

  “Neither side is going to be very happy,” he said.

  “But the more the Republicans can bring spending and regulations and taxes down, the stronger the economy.”

  In order to tame soaring inflation, Republicans should “force as much spending reduction” as possible, Moore argued.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 20:20

• Amid European Energy Crisis, US Pipeline Capacity Pushes Permian NatGas Prices Near Zero
  Amid European Energy Crisis, US Pipeline Capacity Pushes Permian NatGas Prices Near Zero

  While European NatGas prices have fallen in recent weeks, they remain extremely high relative to ‘old norms’ as Russian supply restrictions amid EU self-sacrificing sanctions are leading to fears of deaths and starvation as ‘winter is coming’.

  However, things are a little different in the US where Bloomberg reports that booming production in the vast Permian basis known as Waha is overwhelming pipeline networks, creating a regional glut of the fuel.

  That glut has meant that, according to traders, Waha gas was trading for as little as 20 cents to 70 cents per mmBTU this morning (which compares to around $5 for the US benchmark NG contract and around $30 in Europe)…

  

  If West Texas prices tumble into negative territory, energy producers will effectively be paying someone to take gas off their hands – something that hasn’t happened since October 2020.

  

  Waha gas went negative eight times times in 2020 and more than two dozen times in 2019, data compiled by Bloomberg shows.

  Bloomberg reports that the Texas price plunge stems from maintenance scheduled for Kinder Morgan’s Gulf Coast Express and El Paso Natural Gas pipeline systems.

  Permian pipeline constraints “have never been relieved,” making the region more susceptible to sudden gluts and price volatility, said Campbell Faulkner, chief data analyst at OTC Global Holdings LP.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 20:00

• Cheney Says She'll Do "Whatever It Takes", Including Presidential Run, To Stop Trump In 2024
  Cheney Says She’ll Do “Whatever It Takes”, Including Presidential Run, To Stop Trump In 2024

  Authored by Lorenz Duscamps via The Epoch Times,

  Outgoing Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) said on Sunday that she will do everything possible, including a potential 2024 presidential run, to prevent former President Donald Trump from entering the Oval Office again.

  

  Cheney, who has become one of the most vocal voices in the Republican Party against Trump, made the comment in an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” arguing the Republican Party “will shatter” if Trump becomes the GOP presidential nominee.

  “I think the party has either to come back from where we are right now, which is a very dangerous and toxic place, or the party will splinter and there will be a new conservative party that rises,” Cheney told anchor Chuck Todd, adding that if Trump becomes the Republican nominee, “the party will shatter and there will be a conservative party that rises in its place.”

  Todd continued by telling Cheney that some Americans believe that if she “would be a third-party candidate” in the 2024 presidential elections, it would potentially “be enough to stop Trump” from becoming president again.

  “Well, we’ll do whatever it takes as I said,” she responded.

  “He will not be president again.”

  Trump has not made any definitive statements on whether he would run for the nation’s highest office, but he has strongly suggested that he would in numerous speeches and interviews after departing office in January 2021.

  Todd also asked Cheney, who said in mid-August that she was considering running for president but hasn’t yet made a decision on the matter, what it would take for her to run for president and face Trump.

  “Look, I’m going to be very focused on all the things we’ve been talking about and I care deeply, as I know you do, as millions of people do, about this nation and about the blessing that we have as a constitutional republic,” Cheney said.

  “I am focused on what we’ve got to do to save the country from this very dangerous moment we’re in,” she added, “not right now on whether I’m going to be a candidate or not.”

  Cheney, who has been called a “Republican in name only” by others in her party and lost the Republican primary to Trump-backed challenger Harriet Hageman in August, said in September that she will not remain a Republican if Trump is the GOP presidential nominee in 2024.

  

  Arizona Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake in Tuscon, Ariz., on Oct. 2, 2022. (Otabius Williams/The Epoch Times)

  Cheney also said that she would be willing to campaign for Democrats to stop GOP nominee Kari Lake from being elected in the Arizona gubernatorial race.

  “I’m going to do everything I can to make sure Kari Lake is not elected,” Cheney said.

  When asked by Texas Tribune CEO Evan Smith whether doing everything she can to ensure Lake is not elected includes campaigning for Democrats, Cheney simply stated, “Yes.”

  Former television anchor Lake, who is endorsed by Trump, won the Republican nomination in the Arizona primary election in August. Lake has been vocal in alleging fraud in the 2020 election and has pledged to improve election security if she wins the gubernatorial race.

  Cheney was one of 10 House Republicans to vote to impeach Trump. She is also one of two Republican members sitting on the Democrat-led House panel investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 19:40

• Last Four US Cities Where Renters Can Afford A Starter Home
  Last Four US Cities Where Renters Can Afford A Starter Home

  Homebuyers feel the squeeze as vanishing inventory, soaring mortgage rates, and near-record-high home prices spark one of the worst affordability crises in decades. Homeownership has doubled in the last year, making many large metro areas unaffordable for renters to purchase their starter homes. 

  “Vanishing inventory is just the tip of the unaffordability iceberg as daunting mortgage rates crush renters’ homeownership goals overnight,” real estate research firm Point2 said. 

  The good news is that Point2’s new study found the last four metro areas where renters can afford starter homes. Those cities include Detroit, Michigan; Tulsa, Oklahoma; Memphis, Tennessee; and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. 

  Point2’s data shows the percentage of starter homes built over the years has collapsed. 

  Once upon a time, nearly 70% of all new builds were starter homes — single-family houses with 1,400 square feet or less that started at $6,990. But that was in the 1940s. Fast forward to 1980 and that share fell to 40%. Then, in 2019, the U.S. Census Bureau reported that a mere 7% of all new homes were represented by the small, entry-level homes that are affordable for first-time buyers — and the prices aren’t even remotely similar.

  Due to the increasing cost of land, as well as zoning restrictions and skyrocketing costs for building materials, the modest, bare-bones homes of yesteryear have become the stuff of myths and legends — the actual unicorns of the real estate market. More elusive than ever, this type of home seems almost extinct.

  

  Point2′s analysis showed that as mortgage rates skyrocketed, the number of metro areas offering affordable starter homes shrank from six in August to just four this month. 

  In August, when interest rates were hovering around 5.5%, renters in 6 large U.S. cities could comfortably afford to buy a starter home. One month and an interest hike later, that number swiftly fell to 5… and then 4.

  To estimate affordability, Point2 follows the standard personal finance rule that a mortgage payment shouldn’t exceed 30% of a homeowner’s gross monthly income. 

  What does it mean that renters could comfortably afford to buy a starter home? Well, the accepted rule is that a mortgage payment should not exceed 30% of your gross monthly income. Accordingly, after calculating how much the mortgage would be in each of the 50 cities (taking into consideration the median price of a starter home and assuming a 20% down payment), we calculated a renter’s required income and compared it to their actual income. The result? Renters in only four cities earned enough to cover their monthly mortgage payments.

  

  Lawrence Yun, the chief economist at the National Association of Realtors, expanded more on the affordability crisis:

  “Trying to balance the housing market by choking off demand via higher mortgage rates is damaging to consumers and the economy.” 

  Yun is correct. Inflation has outpaced wage growth for the last 16 months. 

  

  Under the Biden administration and Powell-led Federal Reserve, the new “American dream” is a starter home in the dangerous neighborhoods of Detroit. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 19:20

• China's Coming Clash With Economic Reality
  China’s Coming Clash With Economic Reality

  Authored by Jim O’Neill via Project Syndicate,

  As expected, Chinese President Xi Jinping has been given an unprecedented third five-year term. More surprising was the absence of any sign that Xi intends to revise the policies that have done so much economic damage in recent years.

  

  Judging by the reporting from the Communist Party of China’s 20th National Congress, Xi Jinping, newly anointed to an unprecedented third term as president, is tightening his political grip and strengthening the CPC’s control over society. Can successful economic development continue in this environment?

  I have been thinking for many months now that one day, I would wake up to read that China was revisiting its zero-COVID strategy, overhauling the CPC’s interaction with domestic private business, truly reforming the country’s hukou system of residence permits, and rethinking crucial aspects of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its recent tactical stance on international governance. It is proving to be a very long wait.

  At a meeting with a senior Chinese official a few months ago, I jokingly said that my 30-plus years of “understanding” China may have been a fluke, because I couldn’t comprehend some policies the country had adopted in recent years. The only way I could rationalize them was to conclude that they must be part of some tactical maneuver to neutralize factions within the CPC’s upper echelons ahead of the Congress. Judging by who the Congress has chosen to be next to Xi in the new leadership, there have certainly been further purges of opponents – and very few signs of a reversal of the policies of recent years.

  Unless the post-Congress days and weeks produce a big surprise, I see growing dilemmas emerging for Xi and the CPC.

  In the BRICs analysis (the purported rise of Brazil, Russia, India, and China) that my then-colleagues and I produced a generation ago, the decade 2021-30 was supposed to be when China’s economy closed in on the US in nominal terms. This was why the BRICs economies collectively might go on in the next decade to become larger than the G7, which would of course represent an enormous change to the modern world order.

  This assumed that countries would achieve their long-term potential productivity rate, because Chinese GDP growth would decelerate as its labor-force growth peaked, implying that most of the 4.5-5% GDP growth we had assumed would reflect productivity gains. This growth rate is consistent with what China has stated is both required and desired to double its GDP per capita by 2035 from the 2020 level.

  But the last three years suggest that China is unlikely to achieve this target unless it reconsiders its current policies. Virtually all scientific evidence suggests that it is impossible to eradicate COVID-19. The only plausible way to manage it is with proven vaccines. Chinese leaders’ fear that abandoning the zero-COVID policy would overrun the health system and cause mortality to rise is understandable, but the policy is entirely inconsistent with the path to the 2035 goal. It has been clear for some time that China can achieve its goal only if Chinese consumers become a central part of the country’s growth model. Rolling lockdowns make this virtually impossible.

  Surely the time has come to import the best Western vaccines and change course. Among other benefits, such a step would send a powerful signal to the rest of the world that China wants to open again. In such a scenario, there could even be a reversal of the ongoing economic decoupling between China and Western countries, as well as of the growing difficulties surrounding most global governance bodies, such as the G20, the World Health Organization, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank.

  COVID-19 is hardly the only policy area in need of rapid reform. In particular, the authorities must address the growing signs of a vicious circular weakening of the housing market and construction, as well as the lack of success of Xi’s signature BRI.

  I hope these words will be read as constructive criticism from someone who saw China’s potential over 30 years ago and imagined a world where it could become the biggest economy. Back then, I thought this would benefit not only China, especially its citizens, but also the rest of us.

  This month, the US National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) published a study, “The Future of Global Economic Power,” looking all the way to 2100. It follows an analytical framework very similar to that of our BRICs analysis, and its main scenario still concludes that China will become the world’s largest economy by the end of the century, with another BRIC country, India, in second place. But there are two other scenarios with less favorable paths of productivity growth. In one of them, India, not China, is the world’s largest economy by 2100. And in the second, productivity falls short of the path of the past three decades, as it has in recent years, and China’s share of global GDP declines notably.

  One can only hope that whoever Xi surrounds himself with in the coming years takes the NBER report to heart.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 19:00

• American Students Have A Math Problem
  American Students Have A Math Problem

  American students have a math problem. That’s according to the latest findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known as The Nation’s Report Card.

  As Statista’s Felix Richter reports, the new batch of results, published by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics on Monday, confirms fears about the pandemic’s disruptive effect on education, showing significant declines in mathematics and reading scores among fourth and eighth graders.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  In fact, the decline in national average math scores was the largest ever recorded in the nationally representative assessment of student performance dating back to 1969. In the test’s first results since the pandemic began, just 26 percent of eighth graders showed proficiency in math, down from 34 percent in 2019. That’s the worst result since 2000, as math performance among eighth graders declined in 51 participating states and jurisdictions. Fourth graders fared just a little better with 36 percent achieving a proficient score, down from 41 percent three years earlier.

  “The results show the profound toll on student learning during the pandemic, as the size and scope of the declines are the largest ever in mathematics,” NCES Commissioner Peggy G. Carr said in a statement on Monday, while her colleague Daniel J. McGrath, acting as NCES associate commissioner for assessment, warns of possible long-term effects.

  “Eighth grade is a pivotal moment in students’ mathematics education, as they develop key mathematics skills for further learning and potential careers in mathematics and science,” McGrath said.

  “If left unaddressed, this could alter the trajectories and life opportunities of a whole cohort of young people, potentially reducing their abilities to pursue rewarding and productive careers in mathematics, science, and technology.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 18:40

• Illegal Immigrant Arrests At Border Soar In September, Set New Fiscal Year Record
  Illegal Immigrant Arrests At Border Soar In September, Set New Fiscal Year Record

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  President Joe Biden is facing fresh criticism after his administration released illegal immigrant apprehension numbers from September, showing the number of arrests soared to a record high.

  

  Customs and Border Protection (CBP) made 227,547 arrests in September at the U.S.–Mexico border… the most in history.

  That was by far the highest number for a September, coming in at some 35,000 more than the first September under Biden, the previous record, and up 12 percent from August.

  It was also one of the highest numbers in fiscal year 2022, despite September traditionally being one of the months in which illegal immigration slows because of weather and other patterns.

  The number “reflects an accelerating pace of apprehensions when they should be declining seasonally,” Steven Kopits, president of Princeton Policy Advisors, said in a statement.

  “This speaks to both a strong U.S. labor market and deteriorating enforcement at the border.”

  Biden, a Democrat, reversed or weakened various Trump-era border policies, including halting construction of the border wall. His administration has also curtailed the deportation of illegal immigrants.

  “Over the past 21 months, we have witnessed the devastating harm wrought by a rogue administration that is asserting near-dictatorial powers in a relentless effort to keep our borders open,” R.J. Hauman, head of government relations and communications for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said in a statement.

  “The endless flow of illegal immigrants and the incursion of lethal narcotics pouring across our border will not end until this administration demonstrates a willingness to secure the border and enforce the law.”

  Fiscal year 2021 already set a new record of apprehensions, 1.7 million, despite including nearly four months of below-average illegal immigration under former President Donald Trump. Fiscal year 2022 apprehensions reached more than 2.3 million. The new fiscal year started on Oct. 1.

  In September, some 182,700 illegal immigrants were captured. Some were arrested more than once. The figure was a 15 percent jump from August.

  Neither the White House nor Biden has reacted to the latest numbers, which don’t include “gotaways,” or illegal immigrants who evaded capture after entering the United States.

  CBP Commissioner Chris Magnus, a Biden appointee, blamed the wave of illegal immigrants on “failing regimes in Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua” but said the administration has been taking action with Mexico in a bid to slow the illegal immigration “and create a more fair, orderly, and safe process for people fleeing the humanitarian and economic crisis in their country.”

  Of the illegal immigrants arrested in September, 42 percent were from Venezuela, Cuba, or Nicaragua. About half of the rest were from Mexico or northern Central America.

  About three-quarters of those arrested were single adults. The rest were family units or unaccompanied children.

  According to CBP figures, the number of Venezuelans trying to enter the United States dropped more than 80 percent after “additional joint enforcement actions with Mexico,” Magnus said.

  CBP is part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

  “CBP and DHS will continue to work with our partners in the region to address the root causes of migration, expand legal pathways, facilitate removals, and take thousands of smugglers off the streets,” Magnus said.

  “No matter what smugglers say, those who do not have a legal basis to remain in the country will be removed and people should not make the dangerous journey.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 18:20

• US Oil Industry Mocks Biden Offer To Refill SPR At $72 As "Inadequate To Lift Oil Output"
  US Oil Industry Mocks Biden Offer To Refill SPR At $72 As “Inadequate To Lift Oil Output”

  Several months ago, we mocked the ridiculous idea spawned by some of the “best and brightest” progressives currently cogitating in the US, according to which even as Biden was actively steamrolling US energy companies by vowing to end US fossil fuel usage in a few decades and single-handedly crushing the price of oil through the biggest ever release of crude from the strategic petroleum reserve (where the term “emergency” now means not war or a natural disaster but Democrats lagging Republicans in midterm polling) he would be throwing them a bone by “promising” to buy oil if and when it tumbled much lower as otherwise US producers would have zero incentive ever to invest even one dollar in growth (or even maintenance) capex…. or so the “best and brightest” progressive thought went.

  Progressives cheering the latest SPR news unaware that the government is literally giving out tens of billions in risk-free dollars to US energy producers arbing the SPR trade. https://t.co/572IYI8t9L

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) July 26, 2022

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

  This is how the pro-socialist, far-leftist outlet Vox described this “brilliant plan”:

  In the summer of 2022, President Joe Biden had a problem. Gas prices had been soaring for most of 2021 and 2022, due to a combination of overhang from reduced production during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And American voters hate when gas prices go up. Biden’s approval rating plunged over his first two years in office. He needed some kind of policy response to address the problem and prevent his party from getting slaughtered in the midterms.

  The plan he ultimately arrived at entailed massive releases from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve combined with a new policy of buying oil futures to provide producers with an incentive to pump more in the near to medium term, preventing another shortage from arising. This approach followed very closely a proposal put out in March by the advocacy and research group Employ America, written by its executive director Skanda Amarnath and his colleagues Alex Williams and Arnab Datta. The Employ America plan explained how the administration could use the petroleum reserve to durably lower gas prices, while also setting a price floor so the cost of gas didn’t fall so far that it imperiled the transition to electric vehicles and renewable energy.

  The brain (we use the term loosely) behind this plan, Skanda Amaranth, also sarcastically dubs himself “Neoliberal sellout” (actually, we merely assume it is sarcastic), and at least on paper, his master plan was noble – to lower prices while also boosting oil sector employment. Alas, as progressives so often find out, there is an gaping chasm between their idealistic vision of the future and what actually ends up happening (for the best example of this just ask Europeans who blindly followed the delightfully insane ideas of a petulant Scandinavian teenager for their energy policy).

  While this plan bore some fruit at least early on, when oil and gas prices did tumble (if only because the SPR was being drained by 1 million barrels every week), the drop has since reversed sharply after OPEC+ openly defied the Biden admin (the neoliberal model did not account for that “eventuality”), and Brent is now trading well above $90, and many banks are warning that oil will soar as high as $120 after the midterms once the SPR drain ends.

  But what about the brilliant progressive plan to collar oil prices while encouraging employment with the stated SPR purchase price floor? Well – and this is why we said the plan was “ridiculous” – as Reuters reports, US shale oil executive Matt Gallagher this week took a poll on Twitter to gauge sentiment toward President Joe Biden’s offer to stock the U.S. emergency oil reserve at prices around $72 a barrel, to give producers an incentive to drill more.

  WH dribbling out last authorized 15million barrels of SPR in december, a 50% cut to summertime SPR release rate just as EU price cap sanctions hit Russia. Also authorized buybacks for SPR @$67-$72. Will prompt hit $72 in 2023 #OOTT

  — Matt Gallagher (@MattG_PE) October 19, 2022

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

  The result: nearly 80% of respondents said they did not expect oil futures next year will fall to a level that would trigger any U.S. purchases – negating any boost from what analysts called the “U.S. put,” or using proposed Strategic Petroleum Reserve buys to set a minimum price for new oil production. In other words, the “forward guidance” on where the US would buy SPR oil would by itself assure that the price never fell that low.

  “That announcement was making it appear like he was throwing a bone to the oil industry,” said Trisha Curtis, CEO of consultancy PetroNerds, who dismissed the offer. But “what if oil does not fall to that price: Do we just keep our reserves low?” she asked rhetorically (the answer is of course).

  The release of the last of a 180 million barrel sale coupled with a repurchase price was Biden “trying to walk a fine line between supporting his green base and trying to lower fuel prices. And he did neither,” said Curtis.

  Another reason why the Biden plan is idiotic: with oil now selling for about $85 a barrel, the offer price of about $70 “is a price where there is no supply growth,” said Abhiram Rajendran, a director at consultancy Energy Intelligence.

  But what was so patently obvious to everyone – except a handful of intellectually challenged progressives – is that even though US oil prices hit $120 per barrel this year, that did not trigger a production boom because of shortages and high costs for labor and equipment, said Hunter Kornfeind, oil market analyst at Rapidan Energy Group. The sheer intellectual arrogance of believing that there will be a capex boom if oil tumbles $50 lower but is propped up just because the US is refilling the same SPR it was draining to keep oil from rising above $100, is truly staggering.

  Meanwhile, as Rebecca Babin, senior energy trader at CIBC Private Wealth said, it is tight oil supplies have pushed up price expectations into 2024. But that occurred apart from the SPR offer, she said.

  If the Biden administration wants to boost oil supplies, it “should change its policies around producing more oil and gas in the United States,” said Frank Macchiarola, a senior vice president at trade group American Petroleum Institute.

  Of course, that won’t happen as the same progressive groups that came up with this idiotic idea will be screaming from the rooftops, demanding that they know the oil industry better than, well, the oil industry.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• These Global Cities Show The Highest Real Estate Bubble Risk
  These Global Cities Show The Highest Real Estate Bubble Risk

  Housing bubbles are a tricky phenomenon. As a market gathers steam and prices increase, it remains a matter of debate whether that market is overvalued and flooded with speculation, or it’s simply experiencing robust demand.

  Of course, once a bubble bursts, it’s all obvious in hindsight.

  One common red flag is when prices decouple from local incomes and rents. As well, imbalances in the real economy, such as excessive construction activity and lending can signal a bubble in the making.

  Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley created the map below, based on data from the Real Estate Bubble Index by UBS, to examine 25 global cities, scoring them based on their bubble risk.

  

  Overinflated Markets

  In the 2022 edition of the Real Estate Bubble Index, nine of the cities covered were classified as having extreme bubble risk (1.5 or higher score).

  

   

  Canada’s largest city finds itself at the top of a ranking no city wants to end up on. Toronto’s home prices have been rising steadily for years now, and many, including UBS, believe that the city is now firmly in bubble territory.

   

  

  Vancouver also finds itself in a similar position. Both Canadian cities have a high quality of life and have thriving tech industries.

  Notably, none of the U.S. cities analyzed find themselves in the most extreme bubble risk category. The closest scoring U.S. city was Miami, which sits firmly in overvalued territory (0.5-1.5 range) with a score of 1.39.

  Examining the Trends

  In recent years, low interest rates helped push home prices and incomes further apart.

  For cities in the bubble risk zone, prices have climbed by an average of 60% in inflation-adjusted terms over the past decade, while rents and real incomes increased by just 12%. And, while COVID-19 briefly put a dent in urban demand, rents in the cities analyzed rose at around the same pace as pre-pandemic times.

  As a result, all but three of the cities saw positive price growth over the past year from a nominal price perspective:

  

  U.S. cities occupy a number of spots at the top of this chart. Miami, in particular, is seeing strong internal migration patterns, as well as renewed interest from foreign investors.

  Hong Kong experienced the biggest one-year nominal drop of all the cities analyzed. The report notes that since around 2019 Hong Kong “has broadly stagnated as the lack of affordability, economic woes, and pandemic restrictions all took a major toll on demand.”

  Prices can’t rise forever. According to UBS, most cities with high valuations, price corrections have already begun, or could be right around the corner.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 02:45

• Germany Could Witness A Cash Renaissance As Its Economy Continues To Deteriorate
  Germany Could Witness A Cash Renaissance As Its Economy Continues To Deteriorate

  By Remix News

  It may already have seemed that inflation in the West is slowly approaching its peak, but that is not the case. Considering the numbers coming from Germany, inflation may be far from peaking.

  

  Producer prices in Germany increased by a record 45.8 percent year-over-year in September, the same as in August. Energy prices, which rose by 132.2 percent year-over-year, had the most impact on this. The only positive thing about this is that the month-over-month growth slowed a little due to the drop in commodity prices. However, for consumers, it follows that consumer inflation, which lags behind the so-called production inflation, must still climb. We cannot lie about this.

  For Germans, however, the following sentence, which German statisticians added as a comment to the numbers, sounds the most frightening: “Compared to the same period last year, August and September recorded the highest increase in producer prices since the start of the survey in 1949.”

  Germany is extremely sensitive to mentions of inflation or public debt. To understand why, we have to go back in history. The pre-war hyperinflation in Germany was caused by the fact that Germany could not finance the reparations from World War I. It began to pay its reparations with debt and started to monetize this debt, printing uncovered inflationary money and using it to pay off the debt. The result was hyperinflation and total economic disruption. Many historians believe it was this economic undergrowth that brought Hitler to power and marked World War II.

  After the war, Germany, therefore, made a literal 180-degree turn. While before the war it showed enormous fiscal indiscipline, went into debt, printed money, and faced hyperinflation, after the war, on the contrary, it became Europe’s top-of-the-class in fiscal policy. It began scrupulously taking care to keep its public finances under control, not excessively inflating its debt, and not even remotely playing with anything resembling monetization. Jens Wiedmann, former governor of the German central bank, has been the most vocal central banker in Europe when it comes to criticizing the monetization of southern European debt and the policy of negative interest rates that the European Central Bank has begun to commit to in recent years. And it was the German Constitutional Court, through which some of the ECB’s plans of monetizing public debt did not pass.

  So we have to understand that for Germany, the current inflation and debt monetization are much more sensitive topics than for any other European country. So far, consumer inflation in Germany is “only” 10 percent, a drop above the average inflation rate in the entire Eurozone, which reached 9.9 percent. Inflation, however, continues to rise.

  Economics is not mathematics; economics is mainly about psychology. And here, we begin to encounter very sensitive limits of psychological tolerance. At this moment, inflation has several dimensions. In the first place, the Germans are becoming alarmed and irritated, although they are not yet venting such emtions via mass riots.

  Secondly, it is politically very tricky to call a spade a spade. Given the German sensitivities on the mentioned topics, it is simply not politically appropriate to say that inflation is caused by the monetization of European sovereign debt. Rather, they talk about expensive energy, which in turn is linked to the war in Ukraine. They do not directly name the causes. But if we do not identify the causes, we cannot eliminate them, so we cannot solve the problem. The fact that the presidents and prime ministers of the countries of the European Union are trying to find the solution to expensive energy, and talk in particular about the regulation of gas prices, is a testament to this blind stumbling. This is what’s happening instead of admitting the simple facts that, on the one hand, there is more money than goods in circulation and, on the other hand, energy demand is greater than the supply after we voluntarily switched off energy as part of the Green Deal.

  And thirdly, people are increasingly fleeing inflation by going into real assets. They can no longer run to mortgages due to the rapidly rising interest rates. Although gold is in great demand in Europe, having a choice between gold and gold is not enough for somebody. And so the demand for such things as historical weapons, aged alcohol, or Swiss watches is growing. Exports of Swiss watches rose by 19 percent in September and could be a record this year. A time is coming when people will increasingly use cash instead of bank accounts and pour cash into cashable durables.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 02:00

• Why The Censors Fear Information Freedom
  Why The Censors Fear Information Freedom

  Authored b y Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

  This is the age of censorship, pushed by government and interests and enacted by wholly captured Big Tech firms.

  If you doubt it, look through the hundred or so pages of emails dug up in court discovery between government agencies and social media firms during the COVID crisis. The relationship is warm and wholly normalized.

  

  If, for three years, you had a sense that you were being fed a canned line through all major media platforms, that the science was being filtered, that the talking heads were merely telling you what they were told to tell you, that dissent was being crushed, you aren’t wrong. This is exactly what was happening.

  COVID was a major test case, but the model has been rolled out to cover a whole range of other topics, including election fraud, vaccine safety, and climate change. If an issue is important to a powerful interest and prevailing government priorities, the censors are tasked to get to work. The platform you have today could be gone tomorrow, no matter how much of a personal investment you have in it. In fact, large accounts seem more likely to be attacked than small ones.

  We now know about a series of emails between former FDA commissioner and Pfizer board member Scott Gottlieb (now at the American Enterprise Institute) and tech firms concerning the writings of Alex Berenson. Berenson was an early critic of COVID policies and among the first to sound the alarm about vaccine efficacy and safety. Gottlieb targeted Berenson by name and told Twitter and others precisely what needed to happen as soon as possible. Berenson had to be silenced.

  It’s true that Gottlieb wasn’t a government employee at the time, but these things can get murky. We know from many reports inside the White House that Jared Kushner consulted him directly in the days when they were twisting Trump’s arm to approve a lockdown of society. Gottlieb’s connections in and out of government regulatory agencies are vast.

  It’s one case of hundreds, thousands, and countless other cases. People write to me daily to report that LinkedIn has taken down a message without warning, that Facebook has slapped a warning on a post, that Twitter has taken down their account, or that Google’s YouTube has dinged or deleted their account.

  More intense forms are happening in web hosting (Amazon can throw you off) and even finance. PayPal has cut many individuals and institutions from access and even dared floating a fee for “misinformation”—a word we now understand to mean opinions not approved by ruling class censors. If this practice is rolled out further—and there’s no question that many intend to do so—we could find ourselves surrounded in a Chinese-like social credit system.

  This raises serious legal issues which are now being litigated across the country. Governments can’t simply privatize their censorious ambitions to the private sector and pretend that is entirely consistent with the First Amendment. The freedom of speech is a general principle that prohibits government from muscling speech platforms to comply with their edicts. And this is true even with private entities who sign up willingly for the job like earnest members of the Red Guard.

  There’s another reason why censorship is more pervasive than at any time in our lifetime. It’s because we have never had such access to so many varied information portals. Imagine if the whole lockdown scenario had taken place in the early 1970s. There were three television networks. Each offered 30 minutes of news each day; 10 minutes or so were devoted to national and international affairs and the rest to sports and weather. The news anchors all said essentially the same thing, which led most people to believe that this was all they needed to know.

  Why did we have a sense that there was no arbitrary censorship? Probably because there didn’t need to be. The information cartel was fully intact. The ruling class was perfectly positioned to script the prevailing narrative. Not even newspapers were distributed outside their region of influence. The New York Times was for New York, The Washington Post for Washington, and so on.

  There were no websites, podcasts, Substacks, discussion forums, group messages, and not even emails. There was no way to send documents except by government mail because not even the fax machine had yet been invented.

  Yes, there were alternative newsletters and things, but they were often expensive, and you had to know about them to get them. Other than that, the whole population was largely in the dark. Looking back, it’s amazing that there ever were protests for civil rights or against the Vietnam War at all. This is why arts and music were so hugely important to both movements: They were a way to get the message out that the news cartel couldn’t control.

  Maybe many people like that world. It seemed orderly. There was a “national culture” mostly informed by prevailing news control. No one knew a better system. But then came technology. Even by the late 1980s, things were opening up. Ronald Reagan himself credited new information flows for provoking the unrest in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union that led to so many revolutions.

  By 1995, the end of the orderly and controlled information cartel had been shattered by the web browser and the explosive growth of the internet beyond a few to everyone. It seemed to many at the time to be the beginning of a great and new renaissance. Information is the light, and with the light comes emancipation from old forms and new opportunities for everyone. It seemed like “the end of history,” and those years spawned a kind of wild optimism that humanity would forever escape the despots.

  At the same time, this created a major problem for ruling class elites who once enjoyed complete hegemony over the public mind. Their control was collapsing before their eyes. We loved it.

  The fix has been a quarter century in the making, one step at a time, toward somehow rebuilding what they lost. This is precisely why this is all happening now. In other words, it’s the age of censorship precisely because it’s the age of information. One follows the other.

  Why is information so dangerous to some people? Because information is about ideas, and history is shaped by the ideas we hold. They’re more powerful than armies because ideas are mentally and emotionally powerful, and infinitely reproducible and malleable, and they inspire action. Once an idea takes hold in a population, nothing can stop its forward advance and eventual victory.

  In other words, there’s a strange way in which censorship itself should give us hope simply because elites find it’s so desperately needed right now. Censorship is the tribute that lies pay to truth. If truth were not so powerful, no censorship would be necessary. Also, if the system of information distribution were as highly controlled and narrow as it was in the 1970s and earlier, there would be no real need to silence anyone.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 10/24/2022 – 00:00

• When Can You Expect El Niño And La Niña?
  When Can You Expect El Niño And La Niña?

  The heavy rains recorded earlier this month in the Venezuelan city of Las Tejerías, south of Caracas, led to major flooding and landslides that claimed the lives of dozens and left at least 50 missing.

  The region was hit with more devastating news as at least another 28 people died and thousands more were evacuated when Hurricane Julia made landfall in several Central American countries, including Nicaragua, Guatemala and El Salvador.

  As Statista’s Anna Fleck notes, both tragedies are, to a great extent, a consequence of the phenomenon known as “La Niña.”

  As the map below shows, using data from the International Research Institute for Climate and Society at Columbia University, climatic conditions during La Niña result in increased rainfall in northern South America, Central America, and the Caribbean, and dryer periods in Chile, Argentina, Uruguay and southern Brazil.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  El Niño and La Niña are both a part of the global climate cycle known as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO).

  El Niño is produced by the warming of the equatorial Pacific waters, while La Niña is what happens in the cooling phase.

  When it comes to El Niño, the extreme south of South America can expect to experience heavier rainfall, leading to higher water levels.

  Meanwhile, in the north of the subcontinent and much of Central America and the Caribbean, the lack of rainfall means droughts and a higher risk of forest fires are far more likely.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 23:30

• The Road To Mediocrity
  The Road To Mediocrity

  Authored by J.A.Frascino via AmericanThinker.com,

  Woke progressivism seeks to strengthen the weak by weakening the strong…

  

  We are told that the MAGA cult, Trump voters, and Republicans in general are a threat to democracy, who, if not neutralized, will lead the nation into fascism.  In theory, a politically divided nation such as ours could evolve into fascism or socialism, should a political faction gain autocratic control.  In reality, however, we are confronted with the threat of evolving into a much more unique political structure – a Mediocracy.

  A Mediocracy is a social structure in which mediocrity prevails.  Those who would change America pursue mediocrity under the banner of our moral obligation to elevate the status of the underachievers, marginalized, and minorities in our society.  The basic ploy is to lump such individuals into groups and to define them as victims of oppression.  They suffer solely from the oppressive social structure of patriarchal white supremacy, which must be dismantled.  

  To entertain other reasons for the obstacles they might face is hateful, immoral, and racist.  White underachievers are dispensed with as irredeemable deplorables and deserve no further attention.  Our society, based in racism and xenophobia, is deemed illegitimate.  The fact that it has grown to become the most honored and respected on earth does not redeem it.  We must throw out the baby with the bath water and restructure society.

  This message is delivered to the masses via mediacracy, the utilization of the media to control, mislead, and manipulate public thought through ambiguous and deceptive language, analogous to Orwellian newspeak.  Those not adhering to the mediocracy are debased as deniers, haters, or purveyors of disinformation, and need to be silenced.  

  (Cancel culture is a natural extension of political correctness; from “you shouldn’t say that” to “you can’t say that”.)

  To elevate the status of those defined as oppressed, we must embark upon a program of diversity, equity, and inclusivity.  “Diversity is our strength!”  Is it?  The strength of our society lies in its ability to achieve its constitutional purpose, requiring it to align its forces with sufficient magnitude and direction so as to achieve its goals.  In physics, this thrust is referred to as a primary vector.  Diverse forces flying off in all directions only serve to weaken the vector forces.  

  Strength lies in overcoming the diverse forces and aligning them with the primary vector.  In society this is achieved through assimilation.  Woke progressivism thwarts assimilation by dividing social elements into adversarial factions – the oppressors v. the oppressed – via identity politics.  Facilitating diversity, per se, in such a confrontational manner already divides and weakens our nation.

  Equity is the quest of equal outcomes.  A seemingly noble quest, eclipsing that for equal opportunity.  It equates meritocracy with white privilege and mandates that advancement be based instead on race or gender – “checking the boxes”.  Checking the boxes produces a Vice President of the caliber of Kamala Harris.  When universally applied, a major step down the pathway to mediocrity.

  Inclusivity relates to a union of the oppressed and their woke advocates.  Oppressors need not apply, since they are largely incapable of overcoming their white privilege, unconscious bias, and white fragility.  The left, once advocating for assimilation of the disadvantaged into the mainstream, now seeks to demonize and eliminate the mainstream.  They say that we must also legalize drugs, ignore homelessness, family breakdown, depression, suicide, crime, and an influx of unskilled labor – hardly strengthening measures.

  Woke progressivism, under the banner of racism, preaches that our society, solely a product of white supremacy, is irredeemably immoral and unsustainable.  All the products of such a society, its greatness included, must be sacrificed.  The ensuing Mediocracy then will be ripe for control by the ruling elite.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 23:00

• After Xi's 'Crowning', China 'Surprises' World With GDP Growth Beat; Yuan Slides
  After Xi’s ‘Crowning’, China ‘Surprises’ World With GDP Growth Beat; Yuan Slides

  Having delayed the avalanche of macro data just ahead of the Party Congress (with no explanation), and having now ‘crowned’ Xi to his third term, it appears China is more than willing to share what data it decides the rest of the world needs to know now.

  With just two minutes notice, China dumped everything from import/export data to GDP to unemployment at 2130ET… and it will likely surprise no one at all that the data was significantly better than expected (well you can’t start a third term on a down note can you?).

  Chinese GDP grew 3.9% in Q3 – significantly better than the +3.3% expected – and far better than the +0.4% recorded in Q2.

  Chinese Industrial Production also beat expectations in September (+6.3% YoY vs +4.8% exp)

  However, Chinese Retail Sales disappointed in September (+2.5% YoY vs +3.0% YoY exp), as did Fixed Asset Investment (+5.9% YoU vs +6.0% exp) as Property Investment continued to plunge (-8.0% YoY).

  Finally, the Surveyed Jobless Rate rose to 54.5% in September (youth unemployment ticked lower in the month, which is interesting given the increase in broader unemployment. Perhaps there are seasonal issues at play such as the new academic year).

  

  And all of this in the face of major rolling lockdowns as Zero-COVID policies remain in place.

  Additionally, in dollar terms, China imports and exports were better than expected:

  • China Sept. Exports Rise 5.7% Y/Y in Dollar Terms; Est. 4.0%

  • China Sept. Imports Rise 0.3% Y/Y in Dollar Terms; Est. 0.0%

  Meanwhile real estate blues persist. New-home prices in 70 cities, excluding state-subsidized housing, dropped 0.28% last month from August as September residential property sales tumbled 15.3% YoY.

  Offshore Yuan is falling on the news, despite yet another strong RMB Fix…

  

  The data (and the Yuan slide) comes after significant changes at the top in China, which were not necessarily good for those hoping for a market-friendly government that’s keen on opening to the world.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 22:30

• Lawyers Prepare To Sue Any State That Requires COVID-19 Vaccination To Attend School
  Lawyers Prepare To Sue Any State That Requires COVID-19 Vaccination To Attend School

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  Any state that requires COVID-19 vaccination to attend school will face a lawsuit, lawyers said this week.

  

  The Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN), run by TV host Del Bigtree, has pledged to finance up to 50 lawsuits, Aaron Siri, who frequently represents the group, said.

  “ICAN has told us it will financially support a challenge against any state. So, if all 50 states require it to attend school, ICAN will support challenging the mandate in every single one of those states,” Siri told The Epoch Times.

  The process would require finding parents or others who want to challenge any mandate that arises, but the funding and legal representation for such suits are in place.

  The pledge comes after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) advisory panel on Oct. 20 recommended adding COVID-19 vaccines to the child and adolescent immunization schedules.

  The CDC still has to accept the recommendation, but is expected to do so given its stance on vaccines throughout the pandemic. The agency did not respond to a request for comment.

  Some states require most vaccines on the immunization schedules for school and daycare attendance, including Virginia, though none require annual influenza vaccines for school attendance, according to Immunize.org.

  Some governors and gubernatorial hopefuls have vowed to block COVID-19 vaccine mandates for children, including the governors of Florida, Colorado, Tennessee, and Virginia.

  Other states are expected to mandate the vaccines, including California.

  Authorities there were preparing to require the vaccines for schoolchildren but have delayed the statewide mandate until at least July 2023. Some local governments started to mandate the shots, but at least one mandate was blocked due to a legal challenge—from Siri.

  The updated CDC schedules won’t take effect until 2023, and Siri expects any mandates would not take effect until the start of the 2023–2024 school year.

  But the mandates would be announced well before they take effect, to give parents time to vaccinate their children.

  Siri declined to speak about the basis for any challenges.

  “I don’t discuss litigation strategy for potential matters,” he said.

  The basis for the San Diego case was separation of powers. Plaintiffs said the mandate, which lacked religious exemptions, violated state law. Only the state legislature can impose such mandates, San Diego Superior Court Judge John Meyer ruled.

  “In a long-awaited victory by those seeking to retain the right to informed consent and medical decision-making free from coercion, the Court found that it was ‘compelled’ to invalidate the mandate as the school district had no authority to implement or enforce such a requirement,” Siri wrote on his blog at the time. “The basis for this decision, that school boards in California do not have the authority to require a COVID-19 vaccine, would apply to all school boards across California that are seeking to mandate a COVID-19 vaccine.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 22:00

• Soaring AmEx Bad Loan Provisions Confirm Rot Spreading To Upper-Income Consumers
  Soaring AmEx Bad Loan Provisions Confirm Rot Spreading To Upper-Income Consumers

  Investors may have been ok with banks reporting a jump in bad loan provisions, but when it comes to credit card companies, they are in full-blown “Death Con 3” mode.

  On Friday, American Express – which traditionally targets the upper classes of US society – tumbled the most in four months after the credit card processing giant set aside much more for bad loans than analysts expected, suggesting the fastest ever surge in interest rates is adversely impacting customers’ ability to pay their bills.

  Provisions for souring loans were $778 million in the quarter, worse than the $573 million analysts in a Bloomberg survey were expecting, and the most since Q2 2022 when the US economy was still in lockdown due to covid. The move should probably not have come as a surprise after AmEx warned investors for months that charge-offs would rise as consumers begin borrowing more in the wake of the pandemic. The net write-off rate jumped to 1.1% from 0.8% a year ago.

  

  “They’re just reverting to somewhat higher levels, exactly as we would have expected,” Chief Financial Officer Jeff Campbell said in an interview.

  The unexpected surge in bad loans came even as the company reported another quarter of year-over-year spending growth and strong credit performance, not to mention an impressive 24% increase in year-over-year revenue growth: the net write-off rate on card-member loans was unchanged from the second quarter, and the rate of card-member loan payments 30-plus-days past due was up to 0.9% from 0.7%. They remain better than many other card-lenders’ metrics, even at big banks that also tend toward an affluent customer base.

  There was more good news: while additional provisions crimped profits, earnings per share still topped estimates. AmEx said it added a record number of Platinum customers in the third quarter, pushing revenue up 24% to an all-time high and prompting executives to boost their profit forecast. The credit-card giant said it now expects per-share profit will be above the $9.25 to $9.65 range it previously expected.

  AmEx also said spending on travel – which generates more lucrative transactions – jumped 57% during the third quarter. But overall volume on the firm’s network increased 19% to $394.4 billion, missing the $401.7 billion average estimate.

  According to the company, Millennial and Gen Z-aged consumers were more than 60% of new proprietary card acquisitions in the quarter. It said that without giving them the option of using revolving debt, that group may have started out with a competitor’s card before later turning to a higher-fee, higher-reward Amex charge card. And these are good customers: Millennial and Gen-Z U.S. consumer spending grew nearly 40% year-over-year in the third quarter, almost twice the rate of Gen X and more than triple the rate of baby boomers.

  For now, AmEx and its rivals are benefiting from historically high prices. That’s because the firm takes a slice of the purchase price each time a consumer uses one of its cards at checkout. But investors are concerned that the Federal Reserve’s efforts to raise interest rates and tamp down inflation may spark a recession and lead to higher card losses even as overall card volumes crater.

  So far though, as the WSJ notes, credit is the dog that has not yet barked, especially for higher-income consumers. But when even the premium spender-targeting AmEx warns that the dam is starting to crack, not even the NBER will be able to avoid the reality of US recession.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 21:33

• Taibbi: Who Blew Up The Nord Stream Pipelines? "Russia, Russia, Russia!"
  Taibbi: Who Blew Up The Nord Stream Pipelines? “Russia, Russia, Russia!”

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via TK News,

  About a month ago, on September 26th, explosions rocked the undersea “Nord Stream” natural gas pipelines connecting Russia to Germany, sending boiling methane rushing to the surface in masses big enough to be seen from space.

  We’ve all seen the video of Joe Biden promising last February, “There will no longer be a Nord Stream 2” and “We will bring an end to it.”

  The history of America’s bellicose threats with regard to Nord Stream were far more expansive than just a clip or two.

  Stopping Nord Stream was a central goal of American foreign policy for nearly a decade, with politicians from both parties pounding the table to stop it, and all that history was disappeared the moment the blasts took place.

  We can’t say yet who blew up the pipelines.

  Matt Orfalea’s video captures three troubling things we already know about the Nord Stream blasts:

  TK News subscribers can read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 21:00

• The Recession In The Productive Sector Is Here
  The Recession In The Productive Sector Is Here

  Authored by Daniel Lacalle via The Mises Institute,

  Governments and central banks have become the lender of first resort instead of the last resort, and this is immensely dangerous. Global debt soars, inflation creeps in, and many of the so-called supply chain disruptions are the result of zombification after years of subsidizing low productivity and penalizing high productivity with increased taxes.

  

  There are many reasons why nations should not “spend now and deal with the consequences later.”

  • First, the spending is made by politicians that will not be held accountable for the malinvestment and unwise outlay decisions. Furthermore, the cost will always be paid by taxpayers and businesses. Think about the irony of promoting an “Inflation Reduction Act” that means spending more and monetizing more debt. But it is even more ironic to launch an “inflation reduction act” after creating massive inflation with multitrillion-dollar stimulus plans and central bank balance sheet expansion. Government presents itself as the solution to the problems it creates and passes the bill twice to taxpayers.

  • Second, governments are extremely bad at picking winners but even worse at picking losers. Policy nudging, subsidies, and grants are often aimed at obsolete or politically favored sectors which in turn leads to the rise in zombie companies. Government spending to “save” businesses tends to support those who are already highly indebted and with relevant challenges to pay their debts. This is bad, but picking losers is even worse. The world would not have a food and energy crisis because of a disruption from countries that mean less than 10 percent of supply if regulation and laws would not have placed enormous burdens on investment in farming, energy, and trade in general.

  • Third, the negative impact outweighs the positive. I remember a conversation with Judy Shelton in which she mentioned in 2021 how the US economy would be stronger if the stimulus plan had not been implemented. She was right. The enormous spending plans have created an unsurmountable structural deficit, as many programs are consolidated and increased, and the negative impact on growth, inflation, and real wages only a year and a half later are undeniable.

  It is undeniable that economies come out of every crisis with higher debt, lower growth, weaker real wage growth and poorer job creation. Yet, somehow, people think that the next time will be different. They said the same about 2020. And it was different. You had your cheque and paid for it multiple times over with higher inflation and more taxes.

  Critics may say that this is easy to say in a recovery, but how do we explain to citizens that governments should do nothing? Herein lies another of the tricks from interventionists. We have grown accustomed to the idea that if the government does no spend massively in a crisis, then it is doing “nothing.” Enormous demand-side policies are essential even when the problem has nothing to do with demand. Even worse, a trillion-dollar plan must be followed by a two trillion one or it will seem too small, no matter what the problem of the outcome is.

  Policies should not be judged by their intentions, as Milton Friedman said, but by their results. And when the results are so poor as the ones we have witnessed for almost two decades, we must warn about this constant decision to spend more.

  Why is it so dangerous to use central banks and governments as the lender and solution of first resort? Because their main resource to implement those policies is you. Your wealth. Expropriation of wealth is the other side of the “social policy” coin. Taxes and inflation, or both. Some readers might think it is a clever idea to expropriate the wealth of the rich to support the economy, but by now they should know that it is a lie. When you give extraordinary powers to a government based on the idea that stealing from the rich is valid, you are giving power to politicians to steal from you as well. And they do. There is no single example of massive government spending plans financed with higher taxes on the rich that did not end meaning higher taxes for all or more inflation, the tax on the poor.

  When you read “spend now, deal with the consequences later” what you are reading is give me your wallet because you will deal with the credit card balance later.

  The next time you read the dreaded sentence that titles this article, remember: there is nothing that the government gives “for free” that you do not pay one way or the other.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 20:35

• "There Is Too Much Debt In The World, So They Must Inflate It Away, Which They Will. That's The Only Thing You Need To Know"
  “There Is Too Much Debt In The World, So They Must Inflate It Away, Which They Will. That’s The Only Thing You Need To Know”

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

  “Investors are beginning to come to terms with the fact that many things they believed to be true are myths,” said Sasquatch, his already enormous market footprint having deepened markedly post-pandemic. “They assumed the 60/40 portfolio was robust, and sometimes it is, but other times it is not,” he said, winding our way through the streets of London, crooked, cracked cobblestones in his footsteps. “They assumed inflation would remain low forever, expectations too. That TIPS hedge inflation. Tech outperforms. It turns out these things are not always true.”

  

  “Real estate, it turns out, is not always a hedge for inflation. Nor is gold. And before this cycle is over, investors will discover things they believed to be true about infrastructure, private equity, and a variety of illiquid investments are also just assumptions,” continued Sasquatch, CEO of one of the world’s largest investment firms, his returns surging. “The portfolio adjustments required are dramatic, and clients need help solving such problems, so it’s unsurprising that our solutions business, like yours, is seeing strong inflows.”  

  “Well it’s obvious isn’t it,” he asked, answering rhetorically, dismissive of my question, almost irritated, which made me laugh. We’d spent a couple hours together and had finally gotten onto markets. “Well, isn’t it?” he repeated, louder. I’d asked what he thinks is the most important thing to focus on. He’s one of the greatest CIOs of our generation, and keeps his macro trades liquid, his risk management tight. “There is too much debt in the world, so they must inflate it away, which they can do. They will. That’s the only thing you need to know.”  

  

  “Well, we have gotten the inflation we last discussed,” said the Viking, leading tactical asset allocation for one of the mighty Scandinavian pools of assets. I had last visited pre-pandemic, when we had agreed that whenever the next recession arrived, it would spark an aggressive fiscal stimulus, and catapult us into a new inflationary regime. “But the firms that believed their commercial real estate investments would insulate them from this, have not done too well with that I think,” he continued, a beautiful turn of Swedish understatement.

  “If you look at listed commercial real estate companies here on our stock exchange – which is overall down 35% – you find that these names are down 60-80%,” said the same Viking. “Still, you must also consider that inflation has risen by 10% which is a real loss, and the kronor is down 20% against the dollar too.” Stockholm itself was as magnificent as ever, cold but clear, leaves turning. But invisible, its highly leveraged financial architecture sagged, groaned, like everywhere. “And we have not yet seen the private markets marked lower really.”

  “We are 200% funded,” said the chief risk officer for one of the largest private pension plans. “What does that mean?” I asked. “We have twice as many assets as liabilities,” he said, patiently. “Ah, apologies. I am just used to US pensions which in some cases are just 40% funded. I haven’t ever heard of 200%. How are you so well-funded?” I asked. “Good investing, I think, perhaps some good luck too,” he said, smiling. “And so you are well-positioned for the coming distressed selling, by your poorly funded and leveraged peers?” I asked. He smiled.

  “How do we invest for this new environment?” asked a CIO in Stockholm. “I don’t yet know what you currently own, so that’s hard to answer,” I said. “But in general, I think we should all re-underwrite what has worked for the past couple decades of low inflation, low interest rates, financialization, mean-reversion, leverage, globalization, and peace. Ask how such strategies will perform as these dynamics reverse. Ask how your strategies will fare in a long period of financial repression, where central banks inflate away government debt.”

  “Re-underwriting is hard, because we are all anchored to what has been, and the future will look very different,” I continued. “To capitalize on new opportunities and insulate yourself from risks, you’ll need to be quite open-minded. My all-in commitment to digital assets reflects this embrace of change. And systematic trend-following strategies are a highly effective way to capitalize on quantum change in traditional markets. That change has only just started. We combine trend-following with volatility trading. These were unloved strategies for the past decade. I think strategies that struggled then will now work well for years. And vice versa.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 20:10

• NY Judge Declares 'Vote By Mail' Law Unconstitutional
  NY Judge Declares ‘Vote By Mail’ Law Unconstitutional

  The way New York counts ballots was thrown into chaos on Friday after a judge ruled that several of the state’s recent voting reforms are unconstitutional.

  

  State Supreme Court Justice Dianne Freestone sided with Republicans in a lawsuit brought in late September, which argued against a law which allows people to vote absentee if they fear contracting a disease like Covid-19. Freestone also ruled that the new process for “canvassing,” or ensuring that absentee ballots are inspected and prepared for counting – violates candidates’ rights in several ways, including by making it more difficult to raise a legal challenge when there are questions over a ballot’s validity.

  “The framers of the Constitution did not intend to grant (and did not grant) the Legislature carte blanche to enact legislation over absentee voting,” she wrote.

  That said, Friday’s 28-page ruling fell just short of invalidating hundreds of thousands of absentee ballots already issued to New York voters, which the Republicans asked the judge to do.

  For now, the ruling means local election officials will have to soon pause the inspection of absentee ballots, which were being processed on a rolling basis prior to Election Day for the first time this year. The Democrat-led state Legislature approved the new process in a 2021 law meant to expedite the state’s notoriously slow procedures for counting mail-in ballots.

  It also means the more than 427,000 New York voters — including more than 187,000 in New York City — who have already requested and received their absentee ballots will still be able to cast their ballots for the Nov. 8 election, regardless of whether they elected to receive mail-in ballots due to fears of spreading illness. Currently, 108,000 New Yorkers have completed and returned their absentee ballots. -Gothamist

  Democratic official immediately responded with a notice that they would appeal the decision.

  According to Freestone, the Democrat-controlled Legislature “appears poised to continue the expanded absentee voting provisions of New York State Election Law … in an Orwellian perpetual state of health emergency and cloaked in the veneer of ‘voter enfranchisement.'”

  The ruling was a blow to the State Board of Elections, with Freestone arguing that there are “uncounted reasons for this Court to second-guess the wisdom of the Legislature.”

  The decision could hurt Gov. Kathy Huchul (D) who has been losing ground to GOP challenger Lee Zeldin in recent polls.

  “The (state) constitution has been on our side and we will continue to fight to uphold the will of the voters and to ensure honest elections in New York,” said plaintiff Nick Langworthy, the state GOP Chairman.

  “Just like their illegal Hochulmander and their non-citizen voting scheme, Democrats’ attempt to rig our elections was slapped down by the courts,” he continued, adding “When I took over as chairman of the New York GOP, I promised to usher in a new, fighting era that took on Democrats’ brazen lawlessness and this victory is another win for election integrity.”

  Another plaintiff, Conservative Party Chairman Gerald Kassar, said, “This decision helps uphold the integrity of the electoral process, a major victory for New York voters and the rule of law.”

  “Absentee-ballot voters have had the right to amend their votes on Election Day for decades, and cynical attempts by Gov. Hochul and the Democrat Party to strip them of those rights were wrong,” he added.

  Last year, state voters rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that would have allowed no-excuse absentee voting in New York.

  But lawmakers subsequently enacted a measure that allowed people to vote by mail if they feared catching COVID-19 by voting in person. That expansion of absentee voting is set to expire at the end of this year. -NY Post

  On Friday, a BOE spokesperson said “Our office is still reviewing the ruling and its impact on the upcoming election.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 19:45

• Former SAC Portfolio Manager Breaks Down His Trading Day Routine
  Former SAC Portfolio Manager Breaks Down His Trading Day Routine

  In a time of daily market chaos, former SAC PM and founder of DataTrek Research Nick Colas shares a review of his daily market-watching routine. The 3 key events are the open, the trading session itself, and the close. Each has its own dynamics, and collectively they are a conversation between markets and traders/investors. As Colas notes, “even the longest-term “buy and holder” can benefit from a bit of daily market awareness. The year, after all, is 220 trading days strung together. Even if most of them mean nothing to long-run returns, there is always a reason the critical days turn out the way they do.”

  * * *

  “Nicky … Let’s hold hands and watch the open.”

  That odd invitation came from a veteran salesperson just after I started my first sell-side analyst job at the old First Boston in the fall of 1991. He was dead serious. I was, well, confused. Not wanting to offend one of the firm’s top producers, I acceded. Thankfully, the rest of his row on the trading desk joined hands as well. We all stood in line, watching the screens as US markets opened at 9:30am.

  As each symbol came to life, the group cheered or groaned. I was still confused.

  “What’s so important about the open?” I asked. The salesperson, seemingly happy to teach a rookie, responded “It’s the first tick of the day … We are watching our clients’ biggest positions. Once everything opens, we know if they will be in a good mood when we call them to pitch new ideas.”

  I thought this was overly simplistic until, many years later, I started managing a trading book myself. Then I learned that, in fact, not only the open matters a lot. Every trader knows that three things happen every day: stocks open, they trade, and they close. The dynamics of each slice of the day are quite different, and there is money/knowledge to be made/gained in each of them.

  Basically, I think of the trading day as a conversation between the market and investors/traders. There is a beginning, middle, and end of that interaction. It can be a happy interaction, or confusing, or just downright nasty. And every day brings a new conversation based on new information and refreshed market expectations.

  Here are some of the key datapoints I look at every day going into the open, then through the session, and finally at the close:

  8:00 am – 9:30 am

  • The first thing I look at when I wake up is US equity index futures. I also glance at them before I go to bed, and the difference between the two can be instructive in terms of market sentiment when the cash market finally opens.

  • Then I move on to overseas stock and non-equity markets: is anything really breaking down/up? The latter category includes currencies, gold, oil, and European sovereign bonds (mostly the German bund). I don’t really bother to track virtual currency prices, but plenty of smart traders I know do monitor them, especially on Sundays before equity index futures open at 6pm.

  • If there is any pre-open economic news, I look to see how markets respond as those datapoints are released.

  • Watching to see how US Big Tech is trading pre-open is also helpful, since these names make up almost a quarter of the S&P 500. For example, this morning I was very curious to see how Tesla was trading after its earnings call. Specifically, I wanted to see if it would break or hold its 1-year low of $205/share.

  What I am looking for is consistency and, separately, any new 52-week highs and lows. For example, if US Treasury yields are making new highs and stock futures are up, that’s an internal inconsistency that makes me suspicious of any pop at the open. The same idea goes for non-US currencies just now given how relentlessly weak they have been all year.

  9:30am – 4:00 pm

  • Lately I have been watching how the VIX trades intraday. If stocks are selling off and the VIX gets to 32 – 33, I start looking for a reversal higher. If we are not at a +32 VIX, I tend to not trust any intraday rallies.

  • I also look at the 5-day intraday S&P 500 chart throughout the session. This is especially important just now, as many traders are looking for a bounce in US equities. They will want to see a consistent uptrend to hold their courage.

  • I also keep tabs on 2- and 10-year Treasuries and Fed Funds Futures via the CME FedWatch tool throughout the day, as well as intraday US equity sector performance.

  • This may just be an old trader’s superstition, but I tend to discount any large moves between 11:00 am and 2:00 pm unless there is a clear catalyst that explains them.

  • The last 40 minutes of the day matter a lot. This is when human and algorithmic traders start evaluating how much they have left of the day’s buy/sell orders and if/how to get them done by the close.

  4:00pm and after

  • My primary focus is on whether the close is higher or lower than the open as an indicator of how the day really went. If we opened up 2 percent but close only up 0.5 pct, that’s a bad day from a market psychology perspective. If we opened down 2 percent and ended the day up 0.1 pct, that is a very good day. We could use some of those days right now, but they have been thin on the ground.

  • There is an old saying that “retail investors open the market, but institutions close it”. The data we look at suggests that is true, and it provides some context for the previous point. It is more important to overall market direction that institutions be net buyers at the close rather than retail bid up stocks at the open.

  • I finish the day by looking at how any important stocks with market-moving news traded after hours.

  If you are a buy and hold investor, you might rightly ask “why do I need to pay attention to daily moves?”. The short answer is that you don’t. The longer reply is that, in my view, it makes you a better steward of your and (if applicable) your clients’ capital. Over the years I have found that the ability to weather volatility is directly correlated to knowledge about the fundamental drivers of asset prices. A calendar year is 220 consecutive trading days. Even if daily volatility makes most of them irrelevant to annual returns it is still helpful to keep tabs on the issues moving asset prices.

  I will close out with a somewhat related story, this time from my B-school days at the University of Chicago. On the very first day of Corporate Finance/Investments class, the professor announced a pop quiz by unveiling a chalkboard with 10 questions. Each was simple: where did the S&P, 10-year Treasury, yen/$, and other major markets close the prior day. When he collected all our answer sheets and looked at them, he let out a long sigh. They were mostly blank.

  Then he said “Every answer to these questions is in the Wall Street Journal almost all of you have folded up on your desks. If you can’t be bothered to know them, I’m not sure it’s worth my time to teach you anything.” His point, in case it needs clarification, is that keeping close tabs on asset price movements across a wide range of markets is the prerequisite for being able to contextualize future returns.

  I have never forgotten that lesson and, combined with all the years I have spent staring at screens, they all deeply inform everything we write for you each day. Both devils and angels are in the details.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 19:20

• Watch: Pelosi Admits Democrats Need To 'Change The Subject' From Inflation
  Watch: Pelosi Admits Democrats Need To ‘Change The Subject’ From Inflation

  While inflation and the economy are polling as the top concerns among American voters, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says Democrats need to “change the subject.”

  

  While appearing on CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday, Pelosi said: “When I hear people talk about inflation… we have to change that subject. Inflation is a global phenomenon,” adding “Face the Nation” with Margaret Brennan. “The EU, the European Union, the UK, the British, have higher inflation rate than we do here… The fight is not about inflation. It’s about the cost of living.“

  So – should we also ignore murders, rapes and home invasions because other countries have it worse?

  NANCY PELOSI: “When I hear people talk about inflation…we have to change that subject!” pic.twitter.com/Ck1DaPVrCc

  — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) October 23, 2022

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

  “If you look at what we [Democrats] have done, to bring down the cost of prescription drugs, to bring down the cost of- of energy and the rest in our legislation, you will see that that has been opposed every step of the way by the Republicans, and they have no plan for lowering the cost of living or helping with inflation,” Pelosi continued.

  Tell us more about how Democrats have brought down the cost of energy, Nancy.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 18:55

• Dems' Senate Worries Mount As Arizona Race Now A Dead Heat
  Dems’ Senate Worries Mount As Arizona Race Now A Dead Heat

  Though it was once widely projected as a Democratic Party “hold,” the Arizona Senate seat occupied by Mark Kelly is now in serious jeopardy, as the latest polls show him in a virtual tie with GOP challenger Blake Masters.  

  In early September, Kelly led the RealClearPolitics poll average by 6 points. Now, despite being outspent by Democrats– and abandoned by Mitch McConnell’s super PAC — Masters is within just 2.5 points. 

  However, given pollsters’ well-established tendency to undercount GOP support, the race is likely even tighter than that. In the 2020 election, the RealClearPolitics average ended up overstating Biden’s support in Arizona by 3.7%.

  Applying that adjustment puts Masters ahead by aggregate 1.2%. Note, however, that 2020 Arizona Senate polls were even farther off the mark, overstating Democratic strength by 6.5%. 

  

  The polling trend has some Democratic political operatives sounding anonymous alarms:  

  “We believe this is a race that’s within a point in either direction, and there’s still a good chance that we would lose,” a person close to the Kelly campaign tells Politico. “And it’s important people understand that.”

  As observed in other tight Senate races — like Nevada’s, where another Democratic-held seat is in great danger of flipping — previously undecided Arizona voters are swinging toward the Republican down the stretch. That’s especially true of a particular demographic, reports Politico: 

  One of the biggest shifts seen since this summer is older voters moving to Masters, said Chuck Coughlin, CEO of HighGround. Just after the Aug. 2 primary — a bitter Republican contest — voters 65 and older “were all over the map,” Coughlin said. In the firm’s most recent poll, many of those voters were committed to the GOP, which is consistent with historic precedent.

  Over the same period, former NASA astronaut Kelly’s lead among women has been slashed in half, from 20 to 10 points. Men favor Masters by 10. 

  “Are you ready for a United States Senator who will be fearless and bold and make Arizona great again, and send Mark Kelly back into outer space in search of his brain? Then you got to vote for Blake Masters!” @KariLake 🔥 pic.twitter.com/Qd3BN7yh4Y

  — Blake Masters for U.S. Senate Press (@MastersPress) October 23, 2022

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

  The strength of feisty Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake may also provide a tailwind for Masters. “Between Lake’s rise in popularity and the woeful economic news lately, Blake is seeing his best chance to win just as voting is under way,” Arizona GOP strategist Barrett Marson tells The Wall Street Journal. 

  Surging prices are weighing on Democratic candidates everywhere, and perhaps especially so in Arizona: Phoenix had the country’s highest inflation rate in September.  

  The Masters comeback is happening despite his being outspent by a two-to-one factor since the start of October. As his chances of victory become more apparent, though, Republican spending is now rising sharply. Over the last week, the GOP bought $3.2 million in ads compared to $2.7 million for the Democrats. 

  Back when his prospects looked dim, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s Senate Leadership Fund super PAC cancelled $18 million of planned ads in Arizona. However, PACs associated with Donald Trump and with billionaire Peter Thiel have picked up some of the slack. Masters, a venture capitalist, was previously chief operating officer of Thiel’s investment firm and president of the Thiel Foundation.   

  The difference in the candidates’ own campaign fundraising is jarring: Incumbent Kelly has a seven-fold lead, having raised more than $73 million, compared to under $10 million raised by Masters. 

  Despite that, Democrats find themselves with a vulnerable new front in their defense of their 50-seat-plus-the-vice-president hold on the Senate. As Democratic consultant Roy Herrera tells Politico, “There’s a very narrow path to victory for Democrats in Arizona.” It’s getting narrower by the day. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 18:05

• How Bernanke Broke The World
  How Bernanke Broke The World

  Authored by Porter Stansberry  via Porter & Company,

  • THE BIGGEST BUBBLE IN HISTORY DEFLATES

  • YOUR STANDARD OF LIVING IS GOING TO FALL IN HALF

  Soon, you’ll wake up to hear reports on CNBC and Twitter about ATM machines not working across the country.

  JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon will appear on CNBC, to explain that for the good of the country, his bank and all the other banks in the country are buying long-dated Treasury bonds. And, to protect America, it’s important that we all take a pause and stop withdrawing cash from the system, which means a “temporary” shutdown of other banking operations for a week or two.

  It will happen. It’s unavoidable.

  A couple of interesting facts…

  The price of U.S. Treasury bonds is collapsing. Since the end of July, the 10-year Treasury rate has risen sharply, from a yield of 2.65% to over 4.3% now. There haven’t been bigger losses in the U.S. Treasury bond market, EVER.

  [ZH: The 1-year drawdown of US Equity and Treasury Market Cap is $14 Trillion, the largest draw that we have ever seen in absolute terms…]

  

  Signs of inflation are fading, and the American economy is obviously heading into a severe recession.

  But rather than stabilizing – which is what usually happens – the selloff in longer-dated U.S. Treasury securities is intensifying, and liquidity is at its lowest levels since March 2020.

  

  That suggests that the market doesn’t trust the dollar anymore. And that means the entire system is at risk.

  

  Payback’s A Witch

  The sell-off in long-dated Treasuries isn’t because of last year’s inflation. It’s because the market knows that the U.S. Treasury cannot possibly afford a real rate of interest on its massive $31 trillion in debt.

  Think about it: this year’s increase in Social Security benefits payments is 8.7%. At even half that rate of inflation, a 2% real yield on a 10-year U.S. Treasury bond would be well above 6%. If the U.S. government has to pay anything like that rate of interest to roll over its debts (average duration is 5 years) in the coming years, it is already bankrupt.

  There are $24 trillion worth of publicly traded U.S. Treasury securities. At 6% interest, that’s $1.4 trillion a year in payments. That’s roughly 40% of total federal tax receipts.

  This same kind of panic struck last month in the long-dated bonds of Great Britain. Now, along with big declines in long-dated U.S. sovereign bonds, the Japanese yen is falling apart, and the Swiss National Bank is suddenly accessing currency swap loan facilities from the Federal Reserve.

  Most worryingly, liquidity is disappearing in the U.S. Treasury market, the most liquid financial market in the world. Analysts at Bank of America wrote yesterday that “the [U.S. Treasury] market is fragile and potentially one shock away from functioning challenges.” That’s broker-speak for “we’re in uncharted territory here.”

  We are on the cusp of a complete panic in the world’s bond markets. Like we explained last week, a global “Minsky Moment” is looming.

  We think this crisis will be the largest the world has seen since World War II. That brought the end of sterling’s role as the world’s reserve currency. This will end the U.S. dollar’s reign as the world’s reserve currency.

  What’s next is going to be incredibly painful. Most of the developed world is going to see its standard of living decline 30% to 50% over the next 4-6 years. There’s going to be a lot of anger and a lot of violence.

  It’s worth remembering how we got here.

  Lies, Damned Lies, And Printing Presses

  I’m talking about Ben Bernanke. As the Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 2006-2014, he decided in the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis that the banking system had to be saved, by any means necessary. To finance the massive losses – which were over $10 trillion in the U.S. alone – the world’s central banks began printing money and buying government bonds to finance massive bailouts.

  Like squirrels watching a bank robbery, the members of the Nobel Committee – which recently awarded Bernanke the prize in economics – saw everything that happened and knew nothing about what it meant.

  Printing money doesn’t cure economic problems: it simply skews who pays for them.

  Printing trillions to paper over the financial system’s losses moved the egregious errors of Bank of America, Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, General Electric, General Motors and others from their balance sheets, onto the balance sheet of the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve.

  Morally these actions are repugnant – much like requiring that taxpayers finance hundreds of billions’ worth of second-rate college educations for 10 million lazy, underachieving students – but on a vastly bigger scale.

  The real problem isn’t financial. Printing money changes societies by giving the government virtually unlimited amounts of power. That warps the ambitions of politicians and gives socialists unlimited budgets. People soon believe every problem can be solved by the government and the printing press. Trade-offs are no longer required. Costs are no longer relevant. In this kind of environment, no problem is too big to solve through politics and the central bank. And if there isn’t a crisis, then one will soon be invented.

  And, sure enough, as soon as the U.S. central bank began to sell assets and return to “normal” policies in 2018 and 2019, a new, even bigger crisis was “found.”

  A novel coronavirus. Never mind that coronaviruses appear all the time and that most people will get and survive the flu a half dozen times in their lives… this time the world went completely nuts.

  Everything was shut down for two years – except politics. Trillions were spent on vaccines – vaccines that don’t prevent you from getting Covid or from transmitting Covid. It was definitely a government vaccine: it cost trillions, everyone was forced to use it, and it didn’t work.

  Nothing else worked during the Covid lockdown either. Kids don’t learn at home. Employees don’t work at home. Flimsy surgical masks don’t prevent you from contracting or spreading Covid – they don’t work, but they were required too. Fauci wore two masks, everywhere. He received four different shots of the “vaccine.” Guess who got Covid anyway?

  Worst of all, the government spent unlimited sums of money on things like the ridiculous “paycheck protection program,” which might as well have been called “Fraud on a Federal Scale For You.”

  The lie that we could print over the mortgage losses led directly to the lie that wearing a paper mask can stop a virus. Or that a vaccine created in a few weeks and tested only on a handful of people could stop a coronavirus that constantly mutates. With a printing press, there’s no problem that appears too big for the government to handle.

  But, much like the “vaccine” and the paper masks, the printing press is just a lie too.

  Altogether, the world’s central banks have printed over $25 trillion over the last 12 years.

  In the United States, the printing was equal to more than 30% of our GDP. In the Eurozone, the printing was twice as large – over 60% of GDP. In Japan, the printing has been equal to over 100% of GDP.

  You can think of these figures as being the size of the mirage we’ve been living in.

  Reality looms.

  Time to Opt-Out of “Money” Entirely

  Our advice? Do everything you can to avoid holding the currency or the bonds of bankrupt western nations that have been trying to print their way to prosperity. And most importantly, do not let the current rally in the U.S. dollar fool you.

  Yes, it’s the basis of the current monetary standard and, as such, in a crisis it is where all the banks will hide. It could continue to strengthen for several more weeks or months. But it has no more legitimacy than the euro or the yen. And it is only a matter of time – maybe only hours – before it will begin printing again, trying to keep the system from coming apart at the seams. Maybe it will work – but only after the value of the dollar (and the rest of the paper money) has fallen by 50% or more.

  What will survive this crisis? Energy. Bitcoin. Land. Timber. Critical metals, like copper. High-quality, capital efficient businesses that aren’t in debt.

  What will fail? Anything that has to refinance debt in the next 5-7 years.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 17:40

• Trump Vows To 'Take Back Our Magnificent White House' In 2024
  Trump Vows To ‘Take Back Our Magnificent White House’ In 2024

  Former President Donald Trump told a packed crowd of supporters on Saturday night that he’ll ‘probably’ have to run again in 2024.

  

  “In order to make our country successful, safe, and glorious again, I will probably have to do it again,” Trump told the crowd in Robson, Texas.

  He then said “In 2024, most importantly, we are going to take back our magnificent White House…“

  TRUMP: “In 2024, most importantly, we are going to take back out magnificent White House…” #SaveAmerica

  MORE: https://t.co/0ncd1IUDYD pic.twitter.com/ANPgfEY84x

  — Newsmax (@newsmax) October 23, 2022

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

  Trump spent part of the evening comparing his record to the first two years of Joe Biden, suggesting multiple times that Democrats have no plan or competence, Just the News reports.

  “We have people who don’t know what the hell they’re doing,” said the 45th president.

  “They’re against oil, God, and guns, and they say they’re going to do well in Texas. I don’t think so.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 17:15

• Morgan Stanley Warns Banks Facing "Capital Crunch With Liquidity Squeeze On Top"
  Morgan Stanley Warns Banks Facing “Capital Crunch With Liquidity Squeeze On Top”

  By Vishwanath Tirupattur, Betsy L. Graseck, Morgan Stanley strategist, as excepted from Sunday Start

  After 2Q bank earnings, we wrote about the regulatory capital challenges facing US banks (particularly the large caps) and the implications for risk markets, especially fixed income. Using insights from Betsy Graseck, our banks and consumer finance equity analyst, we noted that banks would need to keep dividends flat, eliminate buybacks, and reduce risk-weighted assets (RWAs) to generate a capital ratio above their required minimums, while making tough choices in their lending books. For the three largest banks (JPMorgan Chase & Co, Bank of America, and Citigroup), it meant lowering their RWAs by more than US$150 billion in aggregate by year end to maintain a 100bp management buffer on top of their regulatory capital minimums. We expected different reactions to RWA pressures across the banks, but in aggregate we looked for lower credit formation, reduced market liquidity and continued pressure on spreads for capital-intensive assets.

  After banks reported 3Q earnings this week, we take a fresh look at bank capital, the banks’ strategies to address these challenges, and their effect on fixed income markets. The good news is that the three largest banks have made notable progress on the RWA front, reducing their RWAs by about $90 billion. With these reductions and other factors such as strong net income, Bank of America has met its RWA reduction needs, JPMorgan Chase & Co and Citigroup have completed two-thirds and one-third, respectively, to maintain a 100bp capital buffer. While JPM management has suggested that it might only run with a 50bp buffer, we view that as thin and see it easily increasing to historical 100bp levels if macroeconomic and FX volatility persist.

  The progress in RWA reduction is not without costs. The Federal Reserve’s H.8 data show a notable deceleration in loan growth across banks in aggregate – the Q/Q change fell from US$454 billion in 2Q to $240 billion in 3Q. The deceleration at the largest three banks was notably greater, and their share of the overall loan market – auto, credit card, HELOC, CRE, residential mortgage and C&I loans combined – dropped, mainly as a result of RWA reductions. In the most recent Senior Loan Officer survey, every question on lending conditions flipped to tightening, further evidence of how US banks are approaching their lending books.

  

  What about market liquidity in secondary markets?

  Amid the forced selling dynamic in US corporate credit on the back of the volatility in the UK markets, the issue has received much attention. Condensing liquidity to a single measure is hard. Bid-offer spreads in credit are one measure of liquidity. Even though secondary markets in corporate credit have been largely well behaved, bid-offer spreads for credit have widened from the lows of 2021, suggesting deteriorating market liquidity. In our view, RWA pressures on dealer balance sheets have contributed to this widening.

  The deterioration of market liquidity is by no means limited to corporate credit markets. The effects of RWA reduction are more pronounced in securitized product markets, with banks reducing their footprint in trading and their portfolio assets with higher RWAs. Banks have traditionally been major buyers in their portfolios of conventional agency MBS and AAA tranches of securitized products such as CLOs, both of which carry a 20% risk weight. Agency MBS, which are backed by the US government, have virtually no credit risk. Senior tranches of securitized products like CLOs are structured to be credit-risk remote and their structural resilience has been tested over multiple default cycles. Banks are not big buyers of corporate bonds.

  Comparing the moves in corporate credit spreads with agency MBS and CLO AAAs illustrates their relative dependency on bank buying. As shown in Exhibit 1, spreads on agency MBS and CLO AAAs currently sit at or near the wides of their post-Covid ranges, while corporate credit spreads are around the middle of the range. Spreads have widened meaningfully in products that need bank sponsorship – in our view, a direct consequence of RWA reductions.

  

  What does this mean for investors? First, there is more wood to chop on the RWA front, which means the deceleration in loan growth will likely continue in 4Q. Second, market turbulence (e.g., the recent volatility in UK markets) in one market could magnify the moves in other markets. Thus, low liquidity will likely remain a headwind to the smooth functioning of markets. Third, the incrementally greater widening in certain spread products thanks to bank buyers stepping away could create an opportunity for investors that do not face the same capital pressures. The fundamentals of these instruments have not changed but market valuations are cheaper for reasons that are not grounded in fundamentals.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 16:50

• Russia Warns Of 'Dirty Bomb' False Flag Plot In Flurry Of Rare Calls To Western Leaders
  Russia Warns Of ‘Dirty Bomb’ False Flag Plot In Flurry Of Rare Calls To Western Leaders

  Update(1645ET): A major new and sensational charge of a Ukrainian false flag plot in the making issued by Russia’s defense chief has set off a string of tit-for-tat accusations and statements Sunday.

  Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu claimed in rare phone calls that included his counterparts from the United States, Britain, France, and Turkey that Ukrainian forces are preparing a “provocation” with a radioactive device. A Kremlin statement cited that he conveyed a warning over “possible Ukrainian provocations involving a ‘dirty bomb'”.

  Shoigu’s office said in follow-up that he conveyed the warning to all the above-named countries’ defense chiefs. As for his conversation with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, it was the second phone call in merely three days. The Pentagon in the hours after said Austin told Shoigu he “rejected any pretext for Russian escalation” – which strongly suggests the US perceives that Moscow is about to heighten attacks on Ukrainian cities further:

  Russian authorities repeatedly have made allegations that Ukraine could detonate a dirty bomb in a false flag attack and blame it on Moscow. Ukrainian authorities, in turn, have accused the Kremlin of hatching such a plan.

  The Kremlin is further charging that this low-intensity nuclear provocation is being prepared with the help of Great Britain; however, the Western allies have said no evidence whatsoever was presented in the phone calls alongside the accusations.

  The UK defense ministry said in its statement following Shoigu’s phone call with Secretary Ben Wallace that the Russian side “alleged that Ukraine was planning actions facilitated by Western countries, including the UK, to escalate the conflict in Ukraine.”

  “The Defense Secretary refuted these claims and cautioned that such allegations should not be used as a pretext for greater escalation,” the ministry said.

  Russia is saying that such a ‘dirty bomb’ detonation, which would spread radioactive waste and potentially contaminate large urban areas, would then be blamed on Moscow in order to justify greater Western intervention.

  Ukraine, for its part, blasted what the presidency’s office called an “absolute and quite predictable absurdity” and blatant “lie”. France too agreed with Ukraine’s assessment, and a statement from the French Foreign Ministry has ominously warned that the crisis is “trending towards uncontrollable escalation.” But Macron on Sunday admitted that “peace is possible” – yet it depends on when the Ukrainians “decide it”.

  Who exactly endowed this person with the authority to decide when the US must launch World War III on his behalf https://t.co/GYc98QnH89

  — Michael Tracey (@mtracey) October 23, 2022

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

  Meanwhile, Zelensky’s own rhetoric urging Western military intervention has escalated as well, all of which strongly suggests the war will soon grow hotter.

  * * *

  earlier

  Now much of Western Ukraine, which lies far away from the front lines of fighting with Russia in the east, is without power due to fresh weekend airstrikes across the country. 

  Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in a Saturday night address said new “massive” strikes targeted Dnipropetrovsk, Khmelnytsky, Kirovohrad, Mykolaiv, Odessa, Rivne, Volyn and Zaporizhia regions.

  “We continue eliminating the aftermath of today’s terrorist attacks on our infrastructure,” Zelensky said. “The geography of this new massive strike is very wide.”

  

  The past days have already seen power outages in Kyiv, with energy grid authorities warning of rolling blackouts, and urging residents to take power-saving measures such as the avoidance of running large appliances. 

  On Saturday the national power utility operator Ukrenergo said that damage from the latest round of Russian strikes set a new record. The Saturday air offensive by Russia was bigger than an initial major wave of strikes from earlier this month:

  Over 1.4 million Ukrainian households have lost electricity after a morning of repeated Russian air raids, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s office says.

  The Ukrainian General Staff reported that 40 cruise missiles and 16 allegedly Iranian-made drones hit Ukraine throughout the day.

  Oleksandr Kharchenko, a Ukrainian energy official, said in an interview with US media that national infrastructure vital for the people is facing “really huge trouble”.

  “When you don’t have electricity in a city, it means you have no water, you have no supply of gas, you have nothing,” Kharchenko said. Days prior to the stepped-up Saturday assault the government said one-third of all power stations had been hit or damaged in Russian strikes. 

  The right bank of Kyiv covered in darkness this evening as the Ukrainian authorities began to implement planned power outages to save energy, due to continued Russian strikes targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. pic.twitter.com/QeR6AEvYwG

  — Status-6 (@Archer83Able) October 20, 2022

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

  Most new damage to energy has been recorded in the country’s west, south and center, with some hospitals since reporting they are running on backup generators. Reserves of oxygen and fresh water are also being tapped by hospitals. 

  Ukrenegro has on Sunday introduced phased blackouts to “avoid accidents”, per The Guardian: 

  The blackouts began at 11.13am local time (09.30am BST), with households in Kyiv divided into three groups that will be “disconnected for a certain period of time”, DTEK said.

  It added that the blackouts should last “no more than four hours” but may be longer “due to the scale of damage to the power supply system”.

  According to the latest estimate of the damage reported in Reuters, “Russia has hit at least half of Ukraine’s thermal generation capacity and caused billions of dollars of damage in attacks since Oct. 10, but not all stricken power units have stopped working completely, Ukraine’s energy minister said on Friday.”

  ⚠️ Confirmed: Live network data show internet outages in south #Ukraine corresponding to new Russian missile attacks this morning targeting critical infrastructure; the bombardment of civilian energy utilities has intensified since 10 Oct.

  📰 Background: https://t.co/S0qJQ7CJD3 pic.twitter.com/M832lukdy5

  — NetBlocks (@netblocks) October 22, 2022

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

  Further, “Herman Halushchenko told Reuters in an interview that 30-40% of overall national power infrastructure had been hit in attacks that he depicted as intended to destroy Ukraine’s energy system — a goal that he said had not been achieved.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 10/23/2022 – 16:45

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Soros, Thornton, Hawke: New Book Details How Beijing Manipulated Western Elites
  Soros, Thornton, Hawke: New Book Details How Beijing Manipulated Western Elites

  Authored by Daniel Teng via The Epoch Times,

  Beijing’s highly secretive Ministry of State Security (MSS) leveraged and manipulated leading Western political and business elites to deepen the Chinese Communist Party’s influence around the world, according to a new book by Alex Joske, an expert on Chinese foreign interference.

  The early pages of “Spies and Lies: How China’s Greatest Covert Operations Fooled the World” detail how billionaire George Soros, inspired by his work establishing the Open Society Foundation in post-communist Hungary, carried out similar work for China during Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping’s economic reform era.

  The vehicle devised by Soros, and partner Liang Heng, was to establish the Fund for the Reform and Opening of China (the China Fund) to support cultural, business, and scientific research to assist with the country’s opening up, according to Joske, a senior analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

  Yet amid political manoeuvring between factions in the 1980s, the China Fund was forced to partner with the China International Culture Exchange Center (CICEC), an organisation claiming to be under the control of the Ministry of Culture.

  

  George Soros, founder and chairman of the Open Society Foundations, arrives for a meeting in Brussels, Belgium, on April 27, 2017. (Olivier Hoslet/AFP/Getty Images)

  Joske alleges that Soros and Liang soon discovered, however, that CICEC had its own motives for the China Fund, and that was to support political initiatives rather than activities associated with liberalising China.

  Soros later closed the China Fund with CICEC co-chair Yu Enguang, revealed to be a “high-ranking official in the external police” or the MSS.

  “The MSS seizure of the China Fund was an impressive display of the agency’s confidence in engaging with one of America’s best-connected and wealthiest men. What it learnt could be applied to future operations as the agency grew more aggressive and internationally focused over the following decade,” Joske wrote.

  CICEC itself would continue to be a “custom-made organ” for meeting and secretly influencing recruits from around the world.

  “Politically sensitive missions like engaging directly with George Soros or posing as liberals with the Party in order to gain the trust of foreigners are home turf for these officers,” he said.

  Exploiting Ambition

  Joske also notes that the MSS was very adept at exploiting the ambition of Western elites and cites the example of the former co-president of Goldman Sachs, John Thornton.

  After quitting the banking giant, Thornton held several prominent positions with major Chinese institutions, including a directorship at the well-known Tsinghua University.

  Journalist Josh Rogin alleged Thornton developed one of the “most reliable and high-level networks with the families that run the CCP,” which shaped Thornton’s views on how to manage China relations.

  

  John L. Thornton, guest professor and director of Global Leadership Program at Tsinghua SEM and chairman of the board of the Brookings Institution, speaks during the 2011 Tsinghua Management Global Forum at Tsinghua SEM Auditorium in Beijing on Oct. 25, 2011. (VCG/VCG via Getty Images)

  “Thornton’s beliefs about China’s future have been characterised by the same false narratives the MSS Social Investigation Bureau pushed on foreign scholars, diplomats, and elites. In 2008, he argued in an essay for Foreign Affairs magazine that the Party was actively considering moving towards democracy,” Joske wrote.

  “Thornton’s writings reflect the same optimism about China that Party leaders and the MSS learnt to capitalise on decades earlier.”

  The former Goldman Sachs executive went on to encourage the Trump administration to befriend Chinese leader Xi Jinping directly. Yet these efforts at diplomatic engagement with the Chinese leadership would eventually give way to tough sanctions on China to correct years of intellectual property theft and unbalanced trade.

  Thornton, along with several major Wall Street figures, also allegedly attempted to sway the Biden administration on its China policy, but these efforts have also fallen to the wayside as scrutiny of the Chinese Communist Party becomes more widespread.

  Exploiting a Love of China

  Joske also draws attention to the Chinese regime’s use of people’s love for China outlining the example involving former Australian Labor Prime Minister Bob Hawke.

  Hawke was distraught in the aftermath of the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989 and famously responded by granting 42,000 Chinese nationals’ asylum.

  Joske says four years after the massacre, Hawke received a message from the Chinese consul in Sydney inviting him to visit China.

  

  Former Prime Minister Bob Hawke in Brisbane, Australia, on Aug. 16, 2010. (William West/AFP/Getty Images)

  Hawke felt it was important that Australia-China relations grew, so agreed to do so. There he was received and welcomed by then-Chinese leader Jiang Zemin and then-Premier Li Peng.

  “The special bromance between Chinese and Australian leaders was back on track. Hawke thought the fate of [former Premier] Zhao Ziyang, who eventually died in house arrest, was ‘extremely sad,’ but the importance of building ties to the Party leadership came first,” Joske wrote.

  He further added that the issue of Tiananmen was eventually “swept under the rug,” and Hawke would go on to play a valuable role in selling China to the rest of the world.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 23:30

• Visualizing 20 Years Of Top Trending Google Searches
  Visualizing 20 Years Of Top Trending Google Searches

  For decades, Google search has been a go-to source for many when looking up directions, keeping up with the news, or seeking information on new and unfamiliar topics.

  Today, Google processes about 3.5 billion searches per day. Because of its dominant market share, Google holds a vast archive of keyword searches that, when analyzed, provide an interesting glimpse into the key themes that have captured the world’s attention over the years.

  Visual Capitalist’s Carmen Ang and Nick Routley show in the infographic below, using data from Google Trends going back 20 years, some of the top keyword searches since 2001.

  

  Visual Capitalist’s editorial team dug through hundreds of top trending search terms from global and U.S. data and hand-selected their top picks, which are featured in the graphic above.

  Trending vs. Volume

  Before diving in, it’s worth emphasizing how top trending searches differ from popular searches, which are measured by sheer volume.

  Trending searches are terms that have recently spiked in popularity. They focus on growth rather than total volume, and in this dataset, trending terms gauge year-over-year growth.

  A good example is Donald Trump, who popped up in the news cycle during the 2016 presidential campaign. After the election, interest in Trump remained high. But his name doesn’t pop up on the Google trends list after 2017, since by that point, search volume for Trump had plateaued.

  What are the most popular Google search terms, by volume? To be honest, they’re slightly less interesting than the top trending searches — YouTube is number one, followed by Facebook, then WhatsApp web.

  The Globalization of Search Trends

  The people and topics featured in Google’s top trends lists evolves as time goes on, reflecting broader adoption of the internet (and Google Search) around the world over time. Early themes are tied to mainstream U.S. pop culture and tech trends.

  As time goes on, social media and smartphone adoption increase the granularity and volume of searches, resulting in top trends that are more participatory, diverse, and global in nature.

  One final variable to keep in mind is that Google itself began to share more detailed search highlights with each passing year.

  Two Decades of Google Searches: Macro Insights

  Now that we’ve explained what trending searches actually measure, let’s dig into some of the key themes that have emerged over the last two decades of Google searches.

  ① People Love Sports

  Over the last 20 years, sports have remained a continuous trend.

  Every four years, the World Cup shows up as a top trending keyword across the globe. The Olympics also makes a regular appearance, along with Olympic athletes like Michael Phelps and McKayla Maroney.

  Although the U.S. dominates the list, particularly when it comes to athletes, there’s still a good variety of international sports that go viral, especially as time goes on. In the last two years, cricket, rugby, and soccer have all made the top five trending lists.

  ② The Emergence of Celebrity 2.0

  Over time, you can also see a transition from the conventional celebrity to celebrity 2.0, also known as the social media celebrity. 

  In the early 2000s, pop culture icons like Britney Spears, Eminem, and Jennifer Lopez flooded the trending searches, and traditional media forms like TV shows and Movies dominated the mass media categories.  

  But by 2011, YouTube stars like Rebecca Black started to make their way on the trending search lists. And in 2014, Meme emerged as a top trending category.

  This transition nods to a larger shift in media, as digital has gradually overtaken traditional media as the dominant form of entertainment.

  ③ Natural Disasters are Top of Mind

  Natural Disasters are a key trend throughout this data set as well.

  Hurricanes are a particularly trendy word, showing up almost half the time—in eight of the 20 years. In 2005, Hurricane Katrina ranked second in the most searched category across the globe.

  It continued to gain global attention—by 2006, Hurricane Katrina was still in the top five trending news searches.

  Dig Deeper into Trending Google Searches

  Our team enjoyed sifting through 20 years of Google data, and we hope you enjoyed this blast from the past too. If you’d like to dive deeper, you can explore Google’s full dataset here.

  Happy searching.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 23:00

• Alaskan Locals Pointing Fingers At Causes Behind Record Number Of Marauding Bears
  Alaskan Locals Pointing Fingers At Causes Behind Record Number Of Marauding Bears

  Authored by Autumn Spredemann via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Spotting a bear in the Alaskan wilderness is an exciting and terrifying prospect for nearly 2 million visitors who make the trip up north annually.

  

  However, dealing with bears is a chore and just part of life for locals.

  On a good day, that means constant vigilance and being conscious about little things—like where you stash your fishing gear and old take-out containers.

  On a bad day, dealing with bears can be dangerous and very expensive.

  Nestled in the winding waterways of Southeastern Alaska is the town of Haines. Touted as the “adventure capital” of the state, it has the spirit of a true frontier outpost.

  

  It’s the kind of place where you can buy hunting rifles and liquor directly across the street from the cruise ship dock.

  It’s also the location of a record-high number of bear killings out of self-defense in 2020.

  That year, police received an astonishing 452 phone calls requesting help with bears breaking into homes, restaurants, and cars in search of food.

  Haines police chief Heath Scott indicated the number of calls was eight times higher than in 2019.

  The outcome was grim.

  Official counts stated a total of 46 bears—an unprecedented number—were culled out of necessity to protect human life and property. Some Haines locals say the unofficial number was closer to 60 bears.

  Last year, Haines police received more than 50 bear-related calls. That’s still above the average, which is around 35-50 calls per year.

  Quick to sound the alarm, some climate alarmists cite lower fish populations resulting from rising water temperatures as the cause for higher numbers of bear rampages over the past two years.

  But some Haines residents aren’t so quick to sweep marauding bears under the rug of climate change.

  Locals say fluctuating fish populations are not unusual.

  Compounding this is irresponsible trash management and nearby fish farms. The latter is something many Alaskans assert has quietly fueled this problem for years.

   Bear Necessities

  “This isn’t anything new. It’s an ongoing thing,” Shori Long told The Epoch Times.

  Long has had more than her fair share of encounters with intrepid bears in the past 36 years. She grew up fishing in Alaska’s vast wildlands around the Aleutian Islands and Haines.

  “I remember playing on the beach as a kid and never really worried about bears,” she said, adding there was no electricity where she grew up until 2009.

  Long described sunny days as a young girl spent catching salmon barefoot with her dog. But since then, she’s noticed increasingly bold behavior among the local bear population.

  She attributes this to a shift in perception where bears now associate humans directly with food.

  Much of this derives from negligent behavior with trash and fish scraps.

  Uneducated fishermen—many of whom are visitors—will often feed bears directly or leave scraps nearby. After years of this dangerous practice, bears now see humans as walking food trucks.

  “They would throw their fish to the bears or leave the chum on the beach. Bears have learned from this and now they think, ‘Oh hey, there’s another human with a pole. That means food,” Long said.

  She also noted there were two key elements behind the historic 2020 bear rampage. They’re the same factors that underscore any year with a higher than average amount of bear damage.

  

  “That was a really bad year for fish and berries combined. The berries weren’t there, and the fish just weren’t there,” she said.

  Other than fish, wild berries provide another important food source for Alaska’s ursid population. A combined scarcity can force hungry bears to shift from regular hunting and foraging to full-blown ransacking.

  “It’s the availability of natural foods. In 2020, it was a very low fish year and there weren’t many berries around,” Roy Churchwell, told The Epoch Times.

  Churchwell is a biologist for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. He said the fish and berry supply was a little better in 2021 but “still not great.”

  He also says that bear rampages aren’t on the rise, per se. It completely depends on food availability, which varies from year to year.

  “For example, if wild foods become available again, it’s very common for bears to go back to those wild resources,” Churchwell said.

  

  When hungry bears can’t find enough to eat in the woods, they often wander into cities and towns.

  Every year, they cause thousands of dollars in property and vehicle damage. They tear open doors to homes and cars, break through windows, and demolish storage sheds.

  Churchwell noted that Haines has problems with both black and brown bears, which are the species normally encountered in Southeastern Alaska.

  Confrontations with grizzlies are more common in the interior portion of the state.

  Despite the fierce reputation of Alaskan grizzlies, black bears alone account for upwards of 40,000 damage complaints to agencies throughout North America every year.

  Trash and Fish Farms

  Preventing bear damage goes far beyond rookie stuff like leaving unsecured food out in the open. A black bear’s scent capacity is estimated to be seven times greater than that of a bloodhound.

  That means leaving something as simple as a recently used fishing pole in your car will entice unwanted attention from bears. Moreover, things like empty fast food boxes and wrappers offer a nearly irresistible temptation.

  Though sometimes even smelling “too fishy” after a day on the water is enough to prompt an attack, according to Long.

  She recalled an episode in 2019 where a bear attempted to maul her after she returned from a pleasant day of beach fishing. Long said the prompt response of her dog, which launched a counterattack on the aggressive bear, proved to be enough of a deterrent to allow her to escape.

  Long laughed while recalling the incident. “When I saw that bear reaching for me, I thought, ‘here we go.’”

  Other locals in Long’s circle have had their own ugly run-ins with local bears.

  “One of my best friends and her neighbor had their cars totally destroyed because a bear got in and just tore it apart,” she said.

  In addition to cars, garages, mudrooms, and storage sheds, sunrooms are inviting targets for bears due to the prevalence of food storage in deep freezers along with hunting and fishing equipment.

  

   

  “We’ve learned how to deter them,” Long explained. “You store your crab gear, your longline gear, outside in a shed. Then use plywood with screws sticking out that will injure the bear’s paws if they try to press on the door. It works as a fantastic deterrent.”

  Gear storage aside, there’s still a trash problem to address.

  Haines local Charlene Jones told The Epoch Times area bears near town have literally been “trained by the trash.”

  Jones says that 2022 has been a better year for fish and berries, which allows residents to breathe a little easier.

  This year, all she had to do was yell at the bears nosing around her property to make them leave.

  Yet even with a more abundant food supply, vigilance must still be maintained. Jones said that, along with her neighbor, “We tame our trash like we’re on a mission from god.”

  “Because all the bears taught their bear children to go and eat human trash. It’s a generational thing,” Jones said.

  Churchwell agrees that appropriate waste management is critical. “It’s difficult to get people to secure their garbage … and other bear attractants. If we can do that, it goes a long way.”

  Though looming in the backdrop of food supply and waste management is the impact of nearby farms on Alaska’s aquatic culture.

  Research suggests farmed fish is linked to spawning issues, disease, and smaller subsequent generations. Finfish farming isn’t legal in Alaskan state waters, but only up to three miles offshore. Also, in neighboring Canada, fish farming is a booming industry.

  That means fish farms may inadvertently contribute to the lower populations impacting bear behavior.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 22:30

• 401(k) Contribution Limit Leaps By Record Amount As Inflation Rages
  401(k) Contribution Limit Leaps By Record Amount As Inflation Rages

  The IRS on Friday announced that contribution limits for 401(k) plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) are rising in 2023 in response to price inflation that’s running at the fastest pace in about 40 years.

  The limits are linked to the headline Consumer Price Index, or CPI-U, and September’s reading saw an 8.2% year-over-year increase. 

  The boost to the 401(k) maximum is the biggest one ever in both dollar and percentage terms, as retirement investors will be able to contribute $2,000 more in 2023 than they can this year. The limit on so-called “catch-up contributions”– available to those age 50 and over — is rising by $1,000, to $7,500. 

  That puts 2023’s annual 401(k) limit at $22,500 for workers under 50, and $30,000 for those 50 and older. The same new maximums apply to participants in 403(b) and most 457 plans, as well as the Thrift Savings Plan for federal government employees.  

  IRA investors will be able to put away an extra $500 in 2023, as the limit rises to $6,500. Unlike most other contribution amounts, the IRA “catch-up” for the 50+ crowd isn’t indexed to inflation and will remain at $1,000. 

  The income ranges that drive eligibility for deductible contributions to Traditional IRAs and contributions to Roth IRAs are also rising. See the IRS announcement for those and other details. 

  Of course, higher limits are only useful to the extent Americans can actually find the extra money to put away — at the same time when rising prices for gasoline, energy and food are hammering their cash flow. 

  Hey! The IRS is raising the 401k contribution limit by a record amount! Just what the American people who are struggling to afford basics need.

  — David Allen (@davidallen595) October 21, 2022

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

  It’s not as if Americans are even treading water against inflation — they’re already sinking: August saw revolving credit balances soar by 18%, as Americans continue to pay for inflation with credit cards. “Americans are burning up their plastic in order to make ends meet,” writes SchiffGold’s Michael Maharrey.  

  Meanwhile, a boost in workplace contribution limits is of limited use when salaries and wages aren’t keeping pace with inflation. In a recent Bankrate survey, only 39% of people who received a raise in the past year or moved to a higher-paying job said the boost had kept up with rising prices. 

  Only about 14% of 401(k) contributors maxed out in 2021, the Employee Benefits Research Institute’s Craig Copeland tells Bloomberg: “It’s really the people making $100,000 and especially those making $150,000 or more who save the maximum.”

  All that said, if you’re among those with the capacity to put away more money for retirement, it could make a difference down the road.

  • Assuming a 5% return, a 40-year-old who boosts his 401(k) contribution by $2,000 a year ends up with roughly an extra $100,000 at age 65. At an 8% return, it’s an extra $159,000. 
  • For a 50-year old who’s already maxing out and takes advantage of the new limits by increasing 401(k) contributions by $3,000, it yields roughly an extra $67,000 at age 65 at a 5% return, and $87,000 at 8%.  

  Of course, we realize the more fatalist readers of these pages will be more inclined to invest in food, brass and lead.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 22:00

• Illinois Now Has The Worst Unemployment Rate In The Nation
  Illinois Now Has The Worst Unemployment Rate In The Nation

  Authored by Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner via Wirepoints.org,

  We’ve warned consistently that Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s inaction on Illinois’ biggest fiscal problems – pensions, property taxes, unbalanced budgets – would eventually come back to bite the state. Sure, he’s used the near-$200 billion in federal Covid bailout money to cover the state’s financial cracks in the short-term, but the governor can’t hide from the reality of his failures on jobs and growth.

  At 4.5 percent in September, no other state has a higher unemployment rate than Illinois, according to the latest U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics release. 

  

  Illinoisans have been suffering in one the worst five states for unemployment for several months, but now the state has jumped to the number one position. This is what comes from pursuing policies that drive out companies like Boeing, Citadel, Caterpillar and Tyson.

  Gov. Pritzker’s administration is already attempting to spin the data. Below is a quote from today’s press release from IDES:

  “Today’s data is a clear indicator that the Illinois labor market continues to remain strong and stable,” said Deputy Governor Andy Manar.

  Nothing state officials say can change the fact that Illinois is an extreme laggard both regionally and nationally when it comes to creating jobs.

  Nor does it change the fact that Illinoisans are now poised to suffer the most during the next economic downturn. Bloomberg says there’s a 100% probability of a recession within the next 12 months and Illinois’ jobs climate is now the worst-positioned to deal with the impact. 

  All of Illinois’ neighboring states are in far better shape. Their unemployment rates are significantly below those in Illinois, most notably in Wisconsin, Indiana, Iowa and Missouri, where unemployment is 1 to 2 percentage points lower.

  

  That difference in jobless rates represent a big difference in Illinoisans’ lives. Catching up with states like Missouri would mean 130,000 residents back at work – equivalent to the entire population of Springfield and then some.

  Illinois’ worst-in-nation jobs climate was never preordained. With its central location, abundant resources and hard-working residents, it should be leading the nation in jobs and growth.

  Illinoisans should blame the difference on state lawmakers’ many failed policies, from not addressing crime to ignoring the nation’s biggest pension debts to papering over the state’s financial problems to letting public unions dominate state policy to fostering rampant corruption.

  Until those policy failures are finally addressed, expect both businesses and Illinoisans to continue to leave for better prospects. Which, as of September, means every other state in the nation.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 21:30

• China's CPC Congress Passes Resolution To Boost Armed Forces, Speed Up 'Taiwan Reunification'
  China’s CPC Congress Passes Resolution To Boost Armed Forces, Speed Up ‘Taiwan Reunification’

  A final Congress resolution issued Saturday by the Communist Party of China spelled out that the national armed forces will continue to be modernized and expanded with an eye toward preventing Taiwan independence.

  While praising efforts over the past half-decade of Beijing devoting “great energy to modernizing” its “national defense and armed forces”, the CPC called for “resolute steps to oppose ‘Taiwan independence’ and promote reunification, maintain the initiative and the ability to steer in cross-Strait relations, and unswervingly advance the cause of national reunification.”

  

  Importantly, Congress spokesperson Sun Yeli said last week leading into the Saturday resolution that China does not rule out the possibility of using force, but it would only be in response to interference from outside countries. 

  “We do not promise to renounce the use of force and reserve the possibility of taking all necessary measures against the interference of external forces and the extremely small number of pro-Taiwan independence separatist forces and their separatist activities,” Sun had said says before the opening of the 20th National Congress.

  President Xi Jinping, who emerged from the Congress even more powerful, securing a precedent-breaking third term, emphasized China reserves the right to use force in certain scenarios regarding Taiwan: 

  Chinese President Xi Jinping said China reserves the option of “taking all measures necessary” against “interference by outside forces” on the issue of Taiwan.

  In a wide-ranging speech Sunday, Xi spoke firmly about China’s resolve for reunification with the self-governed island, which Beijing considers part of its territory...

  “We will continue to strive for peaceful reunification with the greatest sincerity and the utmost effort,” Xi said in Chinese, according to an official translation. “But, we will never promise to renounce the use of force. And we reserve the option of taking all measures necessary.”

  Consistent with prior statements on the issue, he stressed they key caveat that “This is directed solely at interference by outside forces and a few separatists seeking Taiwan independence.”

  BREAKING: Xi Jinping opens CCP summit by announcing full control of Hong Kong has been achieved, that Taiwan is next pic.twitter.com/Y5PGVXg9Sj

  — ShapiroExposed.com (@JackPosobiec) October 16, 2022

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

  With this context being laid out in Xi’s speech, the newly passed resolution reads: “We must enhance the military’s strategic capabilities for defending China’s sovereignty, security, and development interests and see that the people’s armed forces effectively fulfill their missions and tasks in the new era.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 21:00

• 17 Out-Of-Place Artifacts That Suggest High-Tech Civilizations Existed Thousands (Or Millions) Of Years Ago
  17 Out-Of-Place Artifacts That Suggest High-Tech Civilizations Existed Thousands (Or Millions) Of Years Ago

  Authored by Tara Macisaac via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  According to our conventional view of history, humans have only walked the Earth in our present form for some 200,000 years. Much of the mechanical ingenuity we know of in modern times began to develop only a couple hundred years ago, during the Industrial Revolution. However, evidence today alludes to advanced civilizations existing as long as several thousand years ago—or possibly even earlier.

  

  “Oopart”—or “out-of-place artifact”—is the term given to numerous prehistoric objects found in various places across the world today that show a level of technological sophistication incongruous with our present paradigm.

  Many scientists attempt to explain these ooparts away as natural phenomena. Yet others say that such dismissive explanations only whitewash over the mounting evidence: that prehistoric civilizations had advanced knowledge, and this knowledge was lost over the ages only to be developed anew in modern times.

  We will look at a variety of ooparts here, ranging from millions to hundreds of years old in purported age, but all supposedly demonstrating advancement well beyond their time.

  Whether these are fact or merely fiction we cannot say. We can only offer a glimpse at what’s known, supposed, or hypothesized regarding these phenomena, in the spirit of being open-minded and geared toward real scientific discovery.

  17. 2,000-Year-Old Batteries?

  Clay jars with asphalt stoppers and iron rods made some 2,000 years ago have been proven capable of generating more than a volt of electricity. These ancient “batteries” were found by German archaeologist Wilhelm Konig in 1938, just outside of Baghdad, Iraq.

  

  “The batteries have always attracted interest as curios,” Dr. Paul Craddock, a metallurgy expert at the British Museum, told the BBC in 2003. “They are a one-off. As far as we know, nobody else has found anything like these. They are odd things; they are one of life’s enigmas.”

  16. Ancient Egyptian Light Bulb?

  A relief beneath the Temple of Hathor at Dendera, Egypt, depicts figures standing around a large light-bulb-like object. Erich Von Däniken, who wrote “Chariot of the Gods,” created a model of the bulb which works when connected to a power source, emitting an eerie, purplish light.

  

  15. Great Wall of Texas

  In 1852, in what is now known as Rockwall County, Texas, farmers digging a well discovered what appeared to be an ancient rock wall. Estimated to be some 200,000 to 400,000 years old, some say it’s a natural formation while others say it’s clearly man-made.

  

  Dr. John Geissman at the University of Texas in Dallas tested the rocks as part of a History Channel documentary. He found they were all magnetized the same way, suggesting they formed where they are and were not moved to that site from elsewhere. But some remain unconvinced by this single TV-show test and call for further studies.

  Geologist James Shelton and Harvard-trained architect John Lindsey have noted elements that seem to be of architectural design, including archways, linteled portals, and square openings that resemble windows.

  14. 1.8-Billion-Year-Old Nuclear Reactor?

  In 1972, a French factory imported uranium ore from Oklo, in Africa’s Gabon Republic. The uranium had already been extracted. They found the site of origin to have apparently functioned as a large-scale nuclear reactor that came into being 1.8 billion years ago and was in operation for some 500,000 years.

  

  Dr. Glenn T. Seaborg, former head of the United States Atomic Energy Commission and Nobel Prize winner for his work in the synthesis of heavy elements, believed it wasn’t a natural phenomenon, and thus must be a man-made nuclear reactor.

  For uranium to “burn” in a reaction, very precise conditions are needed. The water must be extremely pure, for one—much purer than exists naturally. The material U-235 is necessary for nuclear fission to occur. It is one of the isotopes found naturally in uranium. Several specialists in reactor engineering have said they believe the uranium in Oklo could not have been rich enough in U-235 for a reaction to take place naturally.

  13. Sea-Faring Map Makers Before Antarctica Was Covered in Ice?

  A map created by Turkish admiral and cartographer Piri Reis in 1513, but sourced from various earlier maps, is thought by some to depict Antarctica as it was in a very remote age before it was covered with ice.

  

  A landmass is shown to jut out from the southern coastline of South America. Captain Lorenzo W. Burroughs, a U.S. Air Force captain in the cartographic section, wrote a letter to Dr. Charles Hapgood in 1961 saying that this landmass seems to accurately show Antarctica’s coast as it is under the ice.

  Dr. Hapgood (1904–1982) was one of the first to publicly suggest that the Piri Reis map depicts Antarctica during a prehistoric time. He was a Harvard-educated historian whose theories about geological shifts earned the admiration of Albert Einstein. He hypothesized that the land masses shifted, explaining why Antarctica is shown as connected to South America.

  Modern studies refute Hapgood’s theory that such a shift could have taken place within thousands of years, but they show it could have happened within millions of years.

  12. 2,000-Year-Old Earthquake Detector

  In 132 A.D., Zhang Heng created the world’s first seismoscope. How exactly it works remains a mystery, but replicas have worked with a precision comparable to modern instruments.

  

  In 138 A.D., it correctly indicated that an earthquake occurred about 300 miles west of Luoyang, the capital city. No one had felt the quake in Luoyang and dismissed the warning until a messenger arrived days later, requesting aid.

  11. 150,000-Year-Old Pipes?

  Caves near Mount Baigong in China contain pipes leading to a nearby lake. They were dated by the Beijing Institute of Geology to about 150,000 years ago, according to Brian Dunning of Skeptoid.com.

  

  State-run media Xinhua reported that the pipes were analyzed at a local smeltery and 8 percent of the material could not be identified. Zheng Jiandong, a geology research fellow from the China Earthquake Administration, told state-run newspaper People’s Daily, in 2007, that some of the pipes were found to be highly radioactive.

  Jiandong said iron-rich magma may have risen from deep in the Earth, bringing the iron into fissures where it may have solidified into tubes; though he admitted, “There is indeed something mysterious about these pipes.” He cited the radioactivity as an example of the strange qualities of the pipes.

  10. Antikythera Mechanism

  A mechanism often referred to as an ancient “computer,” which was built by Greeks around 150 B.C., was able to calculate astronomical changes with great precision.

  

  “If it hadn’t been discovered … no one would possibly believe that it could exist because it’s so sophisticated,” said Mathematician Tony Freeth in a NOVA documentary. Mathias Buttet, director of research and development for watch-maker Hublot, said in a video released by the Hellenic Republic Ministry of Culture and Tourism, “This Antikythera Mechanism includes ingenious features which are not found in modern watch-making.”

  9. Drill Bit in Coal

  John Buchanan, Esq., presented a mysterious object to a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland on Dec. 13, 1852. A drill bit had been found encapsulated in coal about 22 inches thick, buried in a bed of clay mixed with boulders about 7 feet thick.

  

  The Earth’s coal is said to have formed hundreds of millions of years ago. The Society decided that the instrument was of a modern level of advancement. But it concluded that “the iron instrument might have been part of a borer broken during some former search for coal.”

  Buchanan’s detailed report did not include any signs that the coal surrounding the instrument had been punctured by drilling.

  8. 2.8-Billion-Year-Old Spheres?

  Spheres with fine grooves around them, found in mines in South Africa, have been said by some to be naturally formed masses of mineral matter. Others have said they were precisely shaped by a prehistoric human hand.

  

  “The globes, which have a fibrous structure on the inside with a shell around it, are very hard and cannot be scratched, even by steel,” said Roelf Marx, curator of the museum of Klerksdorp, South Africa, according to Michael Cremo’s book, “Forbidden Archaeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race.” Marx said the spheres are about 2.8 billion years old.

  If they are mineral masses, it is unclear how exactly they formed.

  7. Iron Pillar of Delhi

  This pillar is at least 1,500 years old but could be older. It remains rust-free and is of astounding purity. It is 99.72 percent iron, according to professor A.P. Gupta, head of the Department of Applied Sciences and Humanities at the Institute of Technology and Management in India.

  

  In modern times, wrought iron has been made with a purity of 99.8 percent, but it contains manganese and sulfur, two ingredients absent in the pillar.

  It was made at least “400 years before the largest known foundry of the world could have produced it,” wrote John Rowlett in “A Study of the Craftsmen of Ancient and Medieval Civilizations to Show the Influence of their Training on our Present Day Method of Trade Education.”

  6. Viking Sword Ulfberht

  When archaeologists found the Viking sword Ulfberht, dating from 800 to 1000 A.D., they were stunned. They couldn’t see how the technology to make such a sword would have been available until the Industrial Revolution, 800 years later.

  

  Its carbon content is three times higher than other swords of its time and impurities were removed to such a degree that the iron ore must have been heated to at least 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit.

  With great effort and precision, modern blacksmith Richard Furrer of Wisconsin forged a sword of Ulfberht quality using technology that would have been available in the Middle Ages. He said it was the most complicated thing he’d ever made, and he used methods not known to have been used by people of that time.

  5. 100-Million-Year-Old Hammer?

  A hammer was found in London, Texas, in 1934, encased in stone that had formed around it. The rock surrounding the hammer is said to be more than 100 million years old.

  Glen J. Kuban, a vocal skeptic of claims that the hammer was made millions of years ago, said the stone may contain materials that are more than 100 million years old, but that doesn’t mean the rock formed around the hammer so long ago.

  He said that some limestone has formed around artifacts known to be from the 20th century, so concretions can form fairly quickly around objects. (Concretions are masses of hardened mineral matter).

  Carl Baugh, who was in possession of the artifact, has said the wooden handle has turned to coal (evidence of its great age) and that the metal its made of has a strange composition. Critics have called for independent testing to verify these claims, but so far no such testing has been conducted.

  4. Prehistoric Work Site?

  Workers at a stone quarry near Aix-en-Provence, France, in the 18th century, came across tools stuck in a layer of limestone 50 feet underground.

  The find was recorded in the American Journal of Science and Arts in 1820 by T. D. Porter, who was translating Count Bournon’s work, “Mineralogy.”

  

  The wooden instruments had turned into agate, a hard stone. Porter wrote: “Everything tended to prove that this work had been executed upon the spot where the traces existed. The presence of man had then preceded the formation of this stone, and that very considerably since he was already arrived at such a degree of civilization that the arts were known to him, and that he wrought the stone and formed columns out of it.”

  As stated in the case of the hammer above, limestone has been known to form relatively quickly around modern tools.

  3. Million-Year-Old Bridge?

  According to ancient Indian legend, King Rama built a bridge between India and Sri Lanka more than a million years ago. What appears to be remnants of such a bridge have been seen from satellite images, but many say its a natural formation.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 20:30

• Last-Mile Automation Carnage: Fedex And Amazon Give Up On Delivery Robots
  Last-Mile Automation Carnage: Fedex And Amazon Give Up On Delivery Robots

  October has been a rough month for the last-mile delivery robot industry as Amazon called it quits on their six-wheeled robot “Scout” for home deliveries. Now FedEx is doing the same. 

  Robotics 24/7 has obtained an internal memo written by Sriram Krishnasam, chief transformation officer at FedEx, who told employees its last-mile delivery robot, Roxo, will be scaled back. 

  “Although robotics and automation are key pillars of our innovation strategy, Roxo did not meet necessary near-term value requirements for DRIVE,” Krishnasam wrote in the memo. “Although we are ending the research and development efforts, Roxo served a valuable purpose: to rapidly advance our understanding and use of robotic technology.”

  

  FedEx launched Roxo in 2019 in collaboration with DEKA Research and Development Corp. The robot uses multiple sets of wheels to traverse steps and obstacles while hauling up to 100 pounds. It navigates sidewalks and city streets using cameras and LIDAR sensors. Human operators can intervene with remote controls if need be. 

  “We are immensely proud of our role in working with DEKA to advance this cutting-edge technology that has put it on the path to future implementation, and we remain committed to exploring last-mile innovations that align with our business strategy,” the company said. “The collaboration with DEKA has been outstanding, and we will continue to explore compelling opportunities arising from the technologies we have developed together.”

  FedEx and Amazon are some of the largest shippers moving packages around the country and the world. When these two companies simultaneously decide to axe their last-mile delivery robots, it indicates the program has been a complete and utter failure. This is excellent news for the humans working at FedEx, Amazon, UPS, USPS, Uber Eats, Instacart, and other last-mile companies that your jobs will be safe for now. However, when the Federal Aviation Administration clears airspace for delivery drones, that could be a different story but won’t happen at scale until the end of this decade. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 20:05

• Weaponized Governmental Failure: A Primer
  Weaponized Governmental Failure: A Primer

  Authored by Scott McKay via The American Spectator,

  Democrats rule over a ruin, but they rule…

  

  The following contains an excerpt from Scott McKay’s book The Revivalist Manifesto: How Patriots Can Win the Next American Era. It discusses a key concept which has appeared in several of his more recent columns to describe the decline of America’s cities.

  With the 2022 midterm elections less than three weeks away and the alarming dysfunction of urban areas run by Democrats contributing in large measure to the public’s unease as expressed in countless right track/wrong track surveys, Scott says nothing about any of this is accidental.

  *  *  *

  Let’s call it Weaponized Governmental Failure. It’s the single most explicative factor in the breakdown of American political consensus in the 21st century, even though it’s been around since the latter part of the 20th century.

  The simple definition of Weaponized Governmental Failure is this: it’s the deliberate refusal to perform the basic tasks of urban governance for a specific political purpose.

  The crime and the graft and the potholes and the bad drainage, not to mention the spotty trash collection or nonexistent snow shoveling, aren’t incompetence. In fact, none of what you see in the American public sector is incompetence. The people responsible for it are quite highly educated and well-trained in their craft. You just need to understand what their craft is.

  It’s a choice to do a poor job with the more mundane tasks of running a city, and an educated and purposeful choice at that. If you do those things effectively, after all, what you will get is middle-class voters moving in. Middle-class voters tend to choose to live in places where they can expect to get actual value out of their tax dollars — good roads, safe streets, functional drainage, decent schools, a friendly business climate, and a growing economy, among other things — and those things are hard to produce when you govern the way the Left does.

  Put a different way, middle-class voters are a pain in the ass.

  They want lots of things that make for unrewarding grunt work for a mayor, and a Democrat blowhard like a Mitch Landrieu or Ted Wheeler of Portland would rather spend his time on vacuous cultural aggressions like “social change” and offering wealth redistribution and excuses for the bad personal habits that cause so many people to be poor.

  Not to mention tilting at bronze statues of better men long dead and nearly forgotten as a means of “making a difference.”

  For a Landrieu, or a Kwame Kilpatrick, Marion Barry, Bill de Blasio, or Lori Lightfoot, it is no great loss if those middle-class voters declare themselves fed up and decamp to the suburbs.

  Their exodus simply makes for an electorate that is a lot less demanding and easier to control.

  That “white flight” is a feature. It’s not a bug. And it isn’t all that white either. Those suburbs the folks are leaving for? Their minority population share usually increases as their population does. Why do you think that is? Simple: the black middle class has no more use for these woke urban Democrats than the white middle class does.

  And it’s quite a mutual sentiment, to be sure.

  The urban socialist Left wants a manageably small core of rich residents and a teeming mass of poor ones, and nothing in between. That’s what Weaponized Governmental Failure produces, and it’s a wide-scale success. New Orleans votes 90 percent Democrat. Philadelphia is 80 percent Democrat. Chicago is 85 percent. Los Angeles? Seventy-one percent. None of those cities will have a Republican mayor or city council again, or at least not in the foreseeable future.

  Because there are very few middle-class voters left in the cities.

  Rich voters don’t really ask for anything, because they can generally pay for whatever they need out of pocket (for example, their kids go to private schools, and they’ve got private security in their neighborhoods). All they require is that the WGF politicians give them access and the occasional favor, and they’ll not only vote for them but write campaign checks.

  Poor voters? Please. They’re generally unsophisticated and susceptible to government dependency, and thus manipulating them is no great task. Give them the occasional crumbs from the table, and keep them busy with stupidities like bowdlerizing old monuments, or midnight basketball, or Black Lives Matter “defund the police” pandering, and you can get them to vote however you want without ever lifting a finger to provide real opportunity for social and economic advancement.

  Or even by vigorously promoting policies and outcomes that actively hold back the social mobility of the urban poor.

  You don’t really think the public schools in those cities spend $15,000 or $20,000 per student per year to turn out functional illiterates because the people involved in making all that money disappear are all idiots, do you?

  Louis Miriani was the last Republican mayor of Detroit. He left office on January 2, 1962. When Miriani gave up the mayor’s gavel to Jerome Cavanagh following a major upset in the 1961 elections, Detroit was the richest, most productive city in the world with a population of nearly two million. It had the richest black community in the world and an industrial output that dwarfed the vast majority of nations on earth.

  By 1967 Detroit was in flames thanks to the 12th Street Riots. Coleman Young, elected as the city’s first black mayor in 1973 and the third in a string of Democrat mayors, which as of this writing appears impossible to break, would oversee such an economic rout that a peculiar tradition called “Devil’s Night” was born. Arsonists would descend upon the city and burn large swaths of its dead industrial base the night before Halloween, with little response from the fire department. This went on for years.

  Today, Detroit’s population stands at 639,000, less than a third of what it was when Miriani said his farewell. It’s one of the poorest cities in America; the poverty rate in Detroit in 2019 was 31 percent, compared to 13 percent in Michigan as a whole and 10.5 percent nationally. Detroit’s public schools spend some $14,750 per student per year, ranking among the top ten most expensive in America, and yet in 2018 just 5 percent of fourth graders were proficient in reading and 4 percent proficient in math, the worst scores in the nation.

  The more middle-class voters you drive out of the city, and the fewer middle-class voters your public school system creates, the more pliable the electorate becomes.

  A pliable electorate is one you can rule forever without successfully governing.

  They rule over a ruin, but they rule.

  And the Democrat Party barely exists outside of the ruins those urban machines produce. Check out any county-by-country or congressional district-by-congressional district electoral map from the 2016 or 2020 presidential elections, and what you’ll see is a few islands of blue in a sea of red. Even in blue states like Washington, Oregon, Illinois, and Minnesota most of the territory is solidly Republican; it’s the dense population of Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Chicago, Minneapolis, and the other big cities that always, or at least often, overwhelms Republican votes in the suburbs, exurbs, and small towns.

  *  *  *

  Scott McKay is publisher of the Hayride, which offers news and commentary on Louisiana and national politics, and RVIVR.com, a national political news aggregation and opinion site. Additionally, he’s the author of the new book The Revivalist Manifesto: How Patriots Can Win The Next American Era, available at Amazon.com. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 19:40

• Judge Blocks Los Angeles County's "Unconstitutionally Vague" Eviction Moratorium
  Judge Blocks Los Angeles County’s “Unconstitutionally Vague” Eviction Moratorium

  Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times,

  A U.S. District Court judge has granted a preliminary injunction against Los Angeles County’s pandemic-era eviction moratorium.

  

  The Oct. 19 ruling by District Court Judge Dean Pregerson requires the county to end by Dec. 1 its policy of allowing residents to forego paying rent.

  The Apartment Owners Association of Greater Los Angeles and the Apartment Owners Association of California filed a lawsuit in March asking the judge to stop enforcement of the rent moratorium, saying the policy was “unconstitutionally vague.” They also asked for monetary relief.

  “There’s no rational basis for the County keeping its eviction moratorium in effect for nearly three years especially since the health crisis ended long ago,” Jeffery Faller, president of the Apartment Owners Association of California, said in a statement.

  In the ruling, Pregerson granted the preliminary injunction based on the vagueness of the policy and lack of specific standards for how to legally apply the moratorium.

  

  A “For Lease” sign is posted outside a house available for rent in Los Angeles on March 15, 2022. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)

  Los Angeles County enacted the eviction moratorium in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. As a result, many landlords have been unable to collect rent and have lost their properties to foreclosure or fire sales, according to Faller.

  Some renters have taken advantage of the situation by not paying rent as they claimed COVID-related impacts and used their money to travel or purchase cars and homes for themselves, Faller said.

  The county’s Board of Supervisors voted in January to extend the moratorium through the end of the year while leaving in place some protections until June 2023. California’s mortarium ended in September 2021.

  The state’s COVID-19 state of emergency is also expected to end Feb. 28, 2023, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Oct. 17.

  

  California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, speaks to reporters during a visit the Antioch Water Treatment Plant in Antioch, Calif., on Aug. 11, 2022. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

  The county is reviewing the court’s decision and has no comment on ongoing legal matters, County spokesman Jesus Ruiz told The Epoch Times.

  The county encourages renters and property owners who have questions about the county’s COVID Tenant Protections Resolution, which is still in effect, to visit its website or call 800-593-8222 to speak with a counselor at the Department of Consumer and Business Affairs, Ruiz said.

  The extension allowed COVID-affected tenants to withhold payments and declare themselves unable to pay rent beginning April 1. Landlords were also prohibited from evicting tenants for causing a nuisance, allowing others to live with them, or keeping unauthorized pets.

  For landlords, the court’s ruling—coming two months before the moratorium’s end date—is overdue.

  “While this ruling is certainly great news for rental housing providers in Los Angeles County, the Court’s decision comes a little too late,” Apartment Owners Association of Greater Los Angeles Executive Director Daniel Yukelson said in a statement.

  

  Graffiti calling for a rent strike is seen on a wall on La Brea Ave in Los Angeles on May 1, 2020. (Valerie Macon/AFP via Getty Images)

  The groups intend to continue pursuing the case and to obtain a final order declaring the county’s ordinance unconstitutional to allow association members to seek compensation to cover billions of dollars in losses, he said.

  Cheryl Turner, president of the Apartment Owners Association of Greater Los Angeles and State Senate candidate, said the county “used the excuse of the global pandemic to wield unlimited power over private property owners.”

  “No business other than the rental housing business had been singled out and forced to provide services for free,” Turner said in the statement.

  There have been other challenges to eviction moratoriums across the United States but none of them have been successful, according to attorney Douglas J. Dennington of Rutan & Tucker of Irvine, who represented the landlord groups.

  The Apartment Owners Association of Greater Los Angeles has also filed a lawsuit against the City of Los Angeles challenging the constitutionality of its moratoriums on evictions and rent increases. The case is still pending.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 18:30

• Justin Trudeau Uses "Administrative Action" To Ban All Handgun Sales In Canada
  Justin Trudeau Uses “Administrative Action” To Ban All Handgun Sales In Canada

  Using mass shooting events in the US as an excuse, PM Justin Trudeau has been tinkering with the idea of banning or “freezing” firearms in Canada since this summer and now it appears that he is ready to take unilateral measures.  Trudeau is placing a nationwide freeze on the sale, purchase and transfer of handguns, effective immediately and sidestepping legislators and political opponents in parliament. 

  The measure is considered an “administrative action,” much like executive orders used by presidents in the US as a means to circumvent the constitution and checks and balances in government.  Such direct restrictions are often subject to extensive legal obstacles and, at least in the US, can be ignored by states and the public at large (as we witnessed with the covod mandates over the past two years).    

  “When people are being killed, when people are being hurt, responsible leadership requires us to act,” Trudeau said at a news conference on Friday, announcing the new measure. “Recently again, we have seen too many examples of horrific tragedies involving firearms.”  

  

  Again, the trigger for Trudeau’s war on firearms rights in Canada started with mass shootings in the US, not Canada.  Though, it might not be far fetched to point out that the Prime Minister and regular attendee of the World Economic Forum took a sudden strong interest in gun control not long after the enormous Trucker Convoy protests against Canada’s draconian attempts at vaccine passport laws.

  The trucker protests inspired widespread dissent in Canada and the refusal of freight workers to comply could have paralyzed the country’s supply chain.  This led to an attack campaign by the government and the mainstream media, seeking to portray the anti-passport movement as “terrorists” simply for not wanting what they felt was a suspect mRNA cocktail injected into their bodies.  As pharma giant Pfizer recently admitted under oath, they never tested the vaccine to see if it prevents transmission.

  A realization that non-compliance was far more prevalent than the establishment assumed resulted in numerous bizarre narratives and legislative actions in the US and Canada in an attempt to suffocate rebellion.  Gun control has been consistently broached as a primary goal of the same people that were desperate to enforce mandates and passport requirements but failed.  It is unlikely that this is pure coincidence.      

  Canada is one of the few countries in the world with gun access on a wide scale similar to the US, though permits are still required, making firearms more of a privilege than a right.  Trudeau is hellbent on whittling away Canadian gun ownership, and seems to be following a model similar to the UK. The UK banned the majority of guns starting with handguns and then incrementally restricting the rest.  

  Propagandists in the UK and the EU will claim that gun ownership is “legal” when calling for further limitations in the US.  This is a bit of a con based on the fact that permits can be had, but are rarely given by the government.  In most countries in Europe the ownership of a firearm is relegated to the upper middle class and the rich – People who can afford the permit process, classes and high fees involved.  These people usually have a spotless record, own property and must be able to provide a “reason” for owning a gun that government bureaucrats will accept.

  A large portion of firearms in private hands in the UK are shotguns, perhaps the most useless weapon for rebellion given its limited range, which is why most authoritarian regimes will still allow citizens to own them long after banning everything else.  Permit holders in the UK are only around 3% of the total population. 

  At bottom, gun control laws tend to follow a pattern which gives the public a false sense that they still have firearms access when the majority of them actually do not and never will.  The rich get the guns while the middle class gets nothing, and this is by design.  The differences with the US in terms of individual rights is vast.  Canada may be going in the same direction as the UK and Europe if Canadians do not act accordingly.          

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 18:00

• Lawmakers Seek To Pass $50BN In New Ukraine Aid Before Next Congress
  Lawmakers Seek To Pass $50BN In New Ukraine Aid Before Next Congress

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  Amid talk that it may be harder to push Ukraine aid through a Republican-controlled House if they win the majority in midterms, lawmakers from both parties are considering passing a new massive piece of legislation before newly elected members are sworn in this January.

  NBC News reported Thursday that the bipartisan idea under consideration would be to pass a bill for Ukraine aid that could cover an entire year during the lame-duck period. The bill is expected to be worth roughly $50 billion, which would bring total US spending on the war to over $115 billion.

  The new aid would likely be attached to an omnibus spending bill. An unnamed Republican senator told NBC that the legislation would make $12 billion of Ukraine aid that was included in a recent stopgap funding bill “look like pocket change.”

  

  News of the plan comes after House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) suggested that Ukraine aid may be more difficult to pass in a GOP-majority House by saying they’re not going to “write a blank check” for Ukraine. Other Republicans have insisted that most in the party support shipping billions in aid to Ukraine and that the concerns are more over the lack of oversight.

  So far, the Biden administration has not asked Congress for more Ukraine aid. President Biden on Thursday said that he was “worried” a Republican majority House would “cut” Ukraine aid, signaling that a request may be coming soon.

  Over in Ukraine, David Arakhamia, the leader of Voldymr Zelensky’s Servant of the People party in parliament, said he was “shocked” by Mcarthy’s comments. 

  “Just a few weeks ago, our delegation visited the US and had a meeting with Mr. McCarthy. We were assured that bipartisan support of Ukraine in its war with Russia will remain a top priority even if they win in the elections,” Arakhamia said.

  Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov brushed off McCarthy’s comments, chalking them up to campaign rhetoric. McCarthy himself has been very supportive of spending billions on the war in Ukraine, but questioning the policy could appeal to voters in the US as Americans are facing high inflation and gas prices.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 17:30

• CDC Director Infected With COVID, Despite Max Vax And Boosters
  CDC Director Infected With COVID, Despite Max Vax And Boosters

  CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky – who confidently lied last year when she proclaimed “Vaccinated people do not carry the virus and don’t get sick,” has come down with Covid-19 just one month after receiving the latest bivalent ‘omicron-tuned’ booster for the disease.

  

  The CDC said on Saturday that Walensky will isolate at home and attend meetings remotely.

  September 22nd: CDC director Rochelle Walensky gets updated bivalent booster that “provides added protection against COVID-19 and the Omicron variant”

  October 22nd: CDC director Rochelle Walensky tests positive for COVID-19 https://t.co/9DtXocvC9l

  — Ian Miller (@ianmSC) October 22, 2022

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

  Which makes this clip particularly infuriating in light of revelations that Pfizer never tested their experimental mRNA therapeutic to see if it actually prevented transmission.

  5x vaxxed CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky infected with COVID.

  Walensky one year ago: “Vaccinated people do not carry the virus and don’t get sick”.

  Fact check: False.pic.twitter.com/5kq3le8lkp

  — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) October 22, 2022

  Walensky took over at the CDC in January 2021 after President Joe Biden appointed her. 

  I hope she said the thing pic.twitter.com/8v6leDE2Er

  — Mindless Droid 🇺🇸😃 (@Mindlessdroid) October 22, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 17:00

• US Taxpayers Funding 'Drag Theater' Shows In Ecuador To Promote 'Diversity And Inclusion': State Department
  US Taxpayers Funding ‘Drag Theater’ Shows In Ecuador To Promote ‘Diversity And Inclusion’: State Department

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The U.S. State Department has given $20,600 in taxpayer money to an organization in Ecuador to promote tolerance, diversity, and inclusion through a series of initiatives that include hosting “12 drag theater performances.”

  

  The funds were awarded on Sept. 30 to a non-profit called Centro Cultural Ecuatoriano Norteamericano Abraham Lincoln, a U.S.-Ecuadorian cultural center in Cuenca, Ecuador, the State Department confirmed to The Epoch Times in an emailed statement.

  Among its various programs, the Ecuadorian center runs English classes for children aged 8–11, teenagers, and adults.

  The money for the initiatives, which besides drag theater performances also includes three workshops and a 2-minute documentary film, was provided under the 19.040 Public Diplomacy Programs scheme, the State Department said in a grant summary fact sheet.

  The aim of the 19.040 scheme is, according to the State Department, “to support the achievement of U.S. foreign policy goals and objectives, advance national interests, and enhance national security by informing and influencing foreign publics and by expanding and strengthening the relationship between the people and government of the United States and citizens of the rest of the world.”

  Asked how the State Department considers this particular grant as furthering the objectives of the 19.040 program, the agency told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement that it “supports a wide range of strategic programs in Ecuador that incorporate concepts from diversity, inclusion, and representation to equity and accessibility.”

  “The program’s goal is to promote tolerance, and the arts provide new opportunities for LGBTQI+ Ecuadorians to express themselves freely and safely,” the spokesperson added.

  “The program will advance key U.S. values of diversity and the inclusion of LGBTQI+ communities as well as promote the acceptance of communities that are disproportionately affected by violence,” the spokesperson said, adding that recent data suggest “an alarming and deadly rise in violence against LGBTQI+ persons in Ecuador.”

  The Epoch Times has also reached out to the Ecuadorian North American Center “Abraham Lincoln” with a request for comment on the target audience of the initiatives but did not receive a response by publication.

  Over the past three years, the State Department has awarded $388.2 million in funds for a variety of 19.040 programs to recipients across the globe, according to Govtribe.com.

  The State Department spokesperson noted that, in fiscal year 2021 and 2022, U.S. public diplomacy programs supported 18 grants totaling nearly $900,000 for educational programs and entrepreneurship capacity building programs to reach traditionally marginalized communities in Ecuador. This includes women, at-risk youth, indigenous and afro-descendent communities, LGBTQI+ populations, and persons with disabilities, the spokesperson added.

  While it remains unclear who the target audience is for the drag theater performances at the Ecuador center, it comes amid national controversy over drag queen shows in the United States oriented at young children.

  While some proponents have argued that exposing kids to drag performances “can be a good thing,” a child advocate told The Epoch Times that drag shows for children are part of a dangerous push to normalize inappropriate behavior for youngsters.

  House Republicans, meanwhile, introduced a bill on Oct. 18 that would ban the use of federal funds for drag queen performances and other sexually oriented programs aimed at young children.

  The Stop the Sexualization of Children Act of 2022 bill (pdf) would prohibit federal, state, and local governments and private organizations from using federal tax dollars to expose children under 10 to sexually explicit material.

  “The Democrat Party and their cultural allies are on a misguided crusade to immerse young children in sexual imagery and radical gender ideology,” the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), said in a statement.

  “This commonsense bill is straightforward,” Johnson continued. “No federal tax dollars should go to any federal, state, or local government agencies, or private organizations that intentionally expose children under 10 years of age to sexually explicit material.”

  According to the bill, federal taxpayer dollars have been used to fund sexual education for children under 10, including the purchase of literature and materials that teach preadolescent children about masturbation, pornography, sexual acts, and gender transition.

  Patricia Tolson contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 16:30

• Fauci, Biden Officials Ordered To Be Deposed In Social Media Collusion Case
  Fauci, Biden Officials Ordered To Be Deposed In Social Media Collusion Case

  A federal judge on Friday ordered Dr. Anthony Fauci, former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, and other officials from the Biden administration and the FBI, to testify under oath at depositions in a lawsuit over alleged collusion to censor information on social media during the pandemic.

  

  District Court Judge Terry Doughty granted a request by the National Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) for depositions in the lawsuit, State of Missouri ex rel. Schmitt, et al. v. Biden, et al. 

  🚨 🚨🚨 The court has granted our request to depose Dr. Anthony Fauci, former White House Press Secretary Jennifer Psaki, FBI Supervisory
  Special Agent Elvis Chan, and other Biden Administration officials relating to collusion with social media to suppress free speech.

  — AG Jeff Landry (@AGJeffLandry) October 21, 2022

  The NCLA joined the states’ lawsuit in August, representing renowned epidemiologists Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, as well as Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Jill Hines.

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

  Earlier interrogatories in this lawsuit identified 45 federal officials from the Department of Homeland Security, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the CDC, Dr. Fauci’s NIAID, the Office of the Surgeon General, and others who communicated with social media companies about “misinformation” and censorship.

  …

  The plaintiffs believe those named have specific individual details by virtue of their position. For example, CDC Chief of the Digital Media Branch Carol Crawford leads the agency’s digital media activities. Interrogatory responses revealed Crawford was holding regular “Be On the Lookout” meetings with staff from the social media companies. In these meetings, attendees reviewed specific social media posts containing “misinformation.” –PJ Media

  For example, a look at the timeline shows that in February of 2020, Fauci, former NIH Director Francis Collins, and several other advisers were discussing a ZeroHedge article on a pre-print paper out of India suggesting that Covid-19 had similar features to HIV. Within a day, Twitter suspended us for publishing evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology – which was conducting NIH-funded experiments to make bat Covid more transmissible to humans – might have something to do with the exotic new Covid-19 strain that broke out across town at a wet market.

  Twitter’s excuse? That we ‘doxxed’ a Chinese scientist, using publicly available information (i.e. not doxxing), who created a job posting related to his research on bat Covid.

  Well this should get very interesting… https://t.co/rPfGWO55eo pic.twitter.com/sVAyTMiYZQ

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 21, 2022

  And then of course there’s the case of Alex Berenson, who sued his way back onto Twitter and obtained evidence of top-down censorship of his opinion (and receipts) that mRNA vaccines were a failure.

  Also notable is that Peter Daszak, head of New York-based nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, was both deeply involved in manipulating bat Covid at the WIV – and also wanted to create ‘chimeric viruses, genetically enhanced to infect humans more easily,’ but his $14 million request to DARPA was declined for being too risky.

  

  And after Sars-CoV-2 broke out in the same town where Daszak was manipulating Bat Covid, The Lancet published a screed by Daszak (signed by over two-dozen scientists), which insisted Covid could have only come from a natural spillover event, likely from a wet market, and that the scientists “stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.” The Lancet only later noted Daszak’s conflicts of interest.

  Did Fauci or the NIH play a role in Daszak’s attempt at damage control and narrative-shaping?

  In the case of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the plaintiffs seek specific underlying information regarding some communications that are already public. Younes cited the email exchange between Fauci and former NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins discussing a takedown of the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration and NCLA clients Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff. Fauci also did not complete or sign his own interrogatory as is customary.

  Judge Doughty noted this breach of custom in his ruling (emphasis added): “Lastly, Plaintiffs argue that Dr. Fauci’s credibility has been in question on matters related to supposed COVID-19 ‘misinformation’ since 2020. Specifically, Plaintiffs state that Dr. Fauci has made public statements on the efficacy of masks, the percentage of the population needed for herd immunity, NIAID’s funding of ‘gain-of-function’ virus research in Wuhan, the lab-leak theory, and more. Plaintiffs urge that his comments on these important issues are relevant to the matter at hand and are further reasons why Dr. Fauci should be deposed. Plaintiffs assert that they should not be required to simply accept Dr. Fauci’s ‘self-serving blanket denials’ that were issued from someone other than himself at face value. The Court agrees.” -PJ Media

  “For the first time, Dr. Fauci and seven other federal officials responsible for running an unlawful censorship enterprise will have to answer questions under oath about the nature and extent of their communications with tech companies,” NCLA attorney Jenin Younes told the Epoch Times.

  More via The Epoch Times;

  Fauci’s ‘Self-Serving Blanket Denials’

  In his ruling, Doughty said he agreed with plaintiffs that Fauci’s previous “self-serving blanket denials” about his role in censoring views on social media couldn’t be taken at face value.

  “Plaintiffs argue that even if Dr. Fauci can prove he never communicated with social media platforms about censorship, there are compelling reasons that suggest Dr. Fauci has acted through intermediaries, and acted on behalf of others, in procuring the social-media censorship of credible scientific opinions.

  “Plaintiffs argue that even if Dr. Fauci acted indirectly or as an intermediary on behalf of others, it is still relevant to Plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion. The Court agrees.

  “Lastly, Plaintiffs argue that Dr. Fauci’s credibility has been in question on matters related to supposed COVID-19 ‘misinformation’ since 2020. Specifically, Plaintiffs state that Dr. Fauci has made public statements on the efficacy of masks, the percentage of the population needed for herd immunity, NIAID’s funding of ‘gain-of-function’ virus research in Wuhan, the lab-leak theory, and more.

  “Plaintiffs urge that his comments on these important issues are relevant to the matter at hand and are further reasons why Dr. Fauci should be deposed. Plaintiffs assert that they should not be required to simply accept Dr. Fauci’s ‘self-serving blanket denials’ that were issued from someone other than himself at face value. The Court agrees,” Doughty said in his ruling (pdf).

  Censoring Lab Leak Theory

  The plaintiffs argued that Fauci allegedly insisted on the censorship of “speech backed by great scientific credibility and with enormous potential nationwide impact” that contradicted Fauci’s views.

  Fauci, for example, communicated in a long-shielded phone call with some scientists to discredit any theory that COVID-19 was the result of a “lab leak” in Wuhan, China. The scientists went on to write a paper severely reprimanding others who were open to the theory.

  If the lab leak theory were true, in turn, it would mean Fauci could be potentially implicated in funding the research on viruses that caused the pandemic which killed millions worldwide, plaintiffs argued. This is because Fauci funded risky “gain-of-function” research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through intermediaries such as EcoHealth Alliance.

  In late January 2020 and early February 2020, Fauci was also in touch with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in oral communications about the government’s COVID-19 response. Facebook then allegedly went on censor the lab leak theory, plaintiffs argued.

  ‘Overwhelming’ Need to Depose Officials

  The court also found that Flaherty, Slavitt, Psaki, and other officials also have personal knowledge about the alleged censorship issues and ordered them to be deposed.

  Doughty said there is an “overwhelming” need for Flaherty to be deposed to determine whether fundamental rights to free speech were “abridged” as a result of alleged collusion between senior Biden administration officials and Big Tech.

  Plaintiffs argued Flaherty had “extensive” oral meetings with Twitter, Meta, and YouTube on vaccine hesitancy and combatting misinformation related to COVID-19.

  The judge said there is a “substantive need” for the deposition of Slavitt, who served as the White House’s senior COVID-19 advisor. Doughty noted Slavitt’s remarks on a podcast which “showed he has specific knowledge as it relates” to the issues in the lawsuit.

  The court order cited a series of public comments made by Psaki when she served as White House press secretary, including calling on social media platforms for consistency in banning disfavored speakers.

  “Psaki has made a number of statements that are relevant to the Government’s involvement in a number of social-media platforms’ efforts to censor its users across the board for sharing information related to COVID-19,” Doughty said in his ruling.

  *  *  *

  Of course, nothing like a realist to put things in perspective…

  NOTHING WILL HAPPEN

  — The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) October 22, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 16:00

• Tverberg: Why Financial Approaches Won't Fix The World's Economic Problems This Time
  Tverberg: Why Financial Approaches Won’t Fix The World’s Economic Problems This Time

  Authored by Gail Tverberg via Our Finite World blog,

  Time and time again, financial approaches have worked to fix economic problems. Raising interest rates has acted to slow the economy and lowering them has acted to speed up the economy. Governments overspending their incomes also acts to push the economy ahead; doing the reverse seems to slow economies down.

  What could possibly go wrong? The issue is a physics problem. The economy doesn’t run simply on money and debt. It operates on resources of many kinds, including energy-related resources. As the population grows, the need for energy-related resources grows. The bottleneck that occurs is something that is hard to see in advance; it is an affordability bottleneck.

  For a very long time, financial manipulations have been able to adjust affordability in a way that is optimal for most players. At some point, resources, especially energy resources, get stretched too thin, relative to the rising population and all the commitments that have been made, such as pension commitments. As a result, there is no way for the quantity of goods and services produced to grow sufficiently to match the promises that the financial system has made. This is the real bottleneck that the world economy reaches.

  I believe that we are closely approaching this bottleneck today. I recently gave a talk to a group of European officials at the 2nd Luxembourg Strategy Conference, discussing the issue from the European point of view. Europeans seem to be especially vulnerable because Europe, with its early entry into the Industrial Revolution, substantially depleted its fossil fuel resources many years ago. The topic I was asked to discuss was, “Energy: The interconnection of energy limits and the economy and what this means for the future.”

  In this post, I write about this presentation.

  

  The major issue is that money, by itself, cannot operate the economy, because we cannot eat money. Any model of the economy must include energy and other resources. In a finite world, these resources tend to deplete. Also, human population tends to grow. At some point, not enough goods and services are produced for the growing population.

  I believe that the major reason we have not been told about how the economy really works is because it would simply be too disturbing to understand the real situation. If today’s economy is dependent on finite fossil fuel supplies, it becomes clear that, at some point, these will run short. Then the world economy is likely to face a very difficult time.

  A secondary reason for the confusion about how the economy operates is too much specialization by researchers studying the issue. Physicists (who are concerned about energy) don’t study economics; politicians and economists don’t study physics. As a result, neither group has a very broad understanding of the situation.

  I am an actuary. I come from a different perspective: Will physical resources be adequate to meet financial promises being made? I have had the privilege of learning a little from both economic and physics sides of the discussion. I have also learned about the issue from a historical perspective.

  

  World energy consumption has been growing very rapidly at the same time that the world economy has been growing. This makes it hard to tell whether the growing energy supply enabled the economic growth, or whether the higher demand created by the growing economy encouraged the world economy to use more resources, including energy resources.

  Physics says that it is energy resources that enable economic growth.

  

  The R-squared of GDP as a function of energy is .98, relative to the equation shown.

  

  Physicists talk about the “dissipation” of energy. In this process, the ability of an energy product to do “useful work” is depleted. For example, food is an energy product. When food is digested, its ability to do useful work (provide energy for our body) is used up. Cooking food, whether using a campfire or electricity or by burning natural gas, is another way of dissipating energy.

  Humans are clearly part of the economy. Every type of work that is done depends upon energy dissipation. If energy supplies deplete, the form of the economy must change to match.

  

  There are a huge number of systems that seem to grow by themselves using a process called self-organization. I have listed a few of these on Slide 8. Some of these things are alive; most are not. They are all called “dissipative structures.”

  The key input that allows these systems to stay in a “non-dead” state is dissipation of energy of the appropriate type. For example, we know that humans need about 2,000 calories a day to continue to function properly. The mix of food must be approximately correct, too. Humans probably could not live on a diet of lettuce alone, for example.

  Economies have their own need for energy supplies of the proper kind, or they don’t function properly. For example, today’s agricultural equipment, as well as today’s long-distance trucks, operate on diesel fuel. Without enough diesel fuel, it becomes impossible to plant and harvest crops and bring them to market. A transition to an all-electric system would take many, many years, if it could be done at all.

  

  I think of an economy as being like a child’s building toy. Gradually, new participants are added, both in the form of new citizens and new businesses. Businesses are formed in response to expected changes in the markets. Governments gradually add new laws and new taxes. Supply and demand seem to set market prices. When the system seems to be operating poorly, regulators step in, typically adjusting interest rates and the availability of debt.

  One key to keeping the economy working well is the fact that those who are “consumers” closely overlap those who are “employees.” The consumers (= employees) need to be paid well enough, or they cannot purchase the goods and services made by the economy.

  A less obvious key to keeping the economy working well is that the whole system needs to be growing. This is necessary so that there are enough goods and services available for the growing population. A growing economy is also needed so that debt can be repaid with interest, and so that pension obligations can be paid as promised.

  

  World population has been growing year after year, but arable land stays close to constant. To provide enough food for this rising population, more intensive agriculture is required, often including irrigation, fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides.

  Furthermore, an increasing amount of fresh water is needed, leading to a need for deeper wells and, in some places, desalination to supplement other water sources. All these additional efforts add energy usage, as well as costs.

  In addition, mineral ores and energy supplies of all kinds tend to become depleted because the best resources are accessed first. This leaves the more expensive-to-extract resources for later.

  

  The issues in Slide 11 are a continuation of the issues described on Slide 10. The result is that the cost of energy production eventually rises so much that its higher costs spill over into the cost of all other goods and services. Workers find that their paychecks are not high enough to cover the items they usually purchased in the past. Some poor people cannot even afford food and fresh water.

  

   

  Increasing debt is helpful as an economy grows. A farmer can borrow money for seed to grow a crop, and he can repay the debt, once the crop has grown. Or an entrepreneur can finance a factory using debt.

  On the consumer side, debt at a sufficiently low interest rate can be used to make the purchase of a home or vehicle affordable.

  Central banks and others involved in the financial world figured out many years ago that if they manipulate interest rates and the availability of credit, they are generally able to get the economy to grow as fast as they would like.

  

  It is hard for most people to imagine how much interest rates have varied over the last century. Back during the Great Depression of the 1930s and the early 1940s, interest rates were very close to zero. As large amounts of inexpensive energy were added to the economy in the post-World War II period, the world economy raced ahead. It was possible to hold back growth by raising interest rates.

  Oil supply was constrained in the 1970s, but demand and prices kept rising. US Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volker is known for raising interest rates to unheard of heights (over 15%) with a peak in 1981 to end inflation brought on by high oil prices. This high inflation rate brought on a huge recession from which the economy eventually recovered, as the higher prices brought more oil supply online (Alaska, North Sea, and Mexico), and as substitution was made for some oil use. For example, home heating was moved away from burning oil; electricity-production was mostly moved from oil to nuclear, coal and natural gas.

  Another thing that has helped the economy since 1981 has been the ability to stimulate demand by lowering interest rates, making monthly payments more affordable. In 2008, the US added Quantitative Easing as a way of further holding interest rates down. A huge debt bubble has thus been built up since 1981, as the world economy has increasingly been operated with an increasing amount of debt at ever-lower interest rates. (See 3-month and 10 year interest rates shown on Slide 14.) This cheap debt has allowed rapidly rising asset prices.

  

  The world economy starts hitting major obstacles when energy supply stops growing faster than population because the supply of finished goods and services (such as new automobile, new homes, paved roads, and airplane trips for passengers) produced stops growing as rapidly as population. These obstacles take the form of affordability obstacles. The physics of the situation somehow causes the wages and wealth to be increasingly be concentrated among the top 10% or 1%. Lower-paid individuals are increasingly left out. While goods are still produced, ever-fewer workers can afford more than basic necessities. Such a situation makes for unhappy workers.

  World energy consumption per capita hit a peak in 2018 and began to slide in 2019, with an even bigger drop in 2020. With less energy consumption, world automobile sales began to slide in 2019 and fell even lower in 2020. Protests, often indirectly related to inadequate wages or benefits, became an increasing problem in 2019. The year 2020 is known for Covid-19 related shutdowns and flight cancellations, but the indirect effect was to reduce energy consumption by less travel and by broken supply lines leading to unavailable goods. Prices of fossil fuels dropped far too low for producers.

  Governments tried to get their own economies growing by various techniques, including spending more than the tax revenue they took in, leading to a need for more government debt, and by Quantitative Easing, acting to hold down interest rates. The result was a big increase in the money supply in many countries. This increased money supply was often distributed to individual citizens as subsidies of various kinds.

  The higher demand caused by this additional money tended to cause inflation. It tended to raise fossil fuel prices because the inexpensive-to-extract fuels have mostly been extracted. In the days of Paul Volker, more energy supply at a little higher price was available within a few years. This seems extremely unlikely today because of diminishing returns. The problem is that there is little new oil supply available unless prices can stay above at least $120 per barrel on a consistent basis, and prices this high, or higher, do not seem to be available.

  Oil prices are not rising this high, even with all of the stimulus funds because of the physics-based wage disparity problem mentioned previously. Also, those with political power try to keep fuel prices down so that the standards of living of citizens will not fall. Because of these low oil prices, OPEC+ continues to make cuts in production. The existence of chronically low prices for fossil fuels is likely the reason why Russia behaves in as belligerent a manner as it does today.

  Today, with rising interest rates and Quantitative Tightening instead of Quantitative Easing, a major concern is that the debt bubble that has grown since in 1981 will start to collapse. With falling debt levels, prices of assets, such as homes, farms, and shares of stock, can be expected to fall. Many borrowers will be unable to repay their loans.

  If this combination of events occurs, deflation is a likely outcome because banks and pension funds are likely to fail. If, somehow, local governments are able to bail out banks and pension funds, then there is a substantial likelihood of local hyperinflation. In such a case, people will have huge quantities of money, but practically nothing available to buy. In either case, the world economy will shrink because of inadequate energy supply.

  

  Most people have a “normalcy bias.” They assume that if economic growth has continued for a long time in the past, it necessarily will occur in the future. Yet, we all know that all dissipative structures somehow come to an end. Humans can come to an end in many ways: They can get hit by a car; they can catch an illness and succumb to it; they can die of old age; they can starve to death.

  History tells us that economies nearly always collapse, usually over a period of years. Sometimes, population rises so high that the food production margin becomes tight; it becomes difficult to set aside enough food if the cycle of weather should turn for the worse. Thus, population drops when crops fail.

  In the years leading up to collapse, it is common that the wages of ordinary citizens fall too low for them to be able to afford an adequate diet. In such a situation, epidemics can spread easily and kill many citizens. With so much poverty, it becomes impossible for governments to collect enough taxes to maintain services they have promised. Sometimes, nations lose at war because they cannot afford a suitable army. Very often, governmental debt becomes non-repayable.

  The world economy today seems to be approaching some of the same bottlenecks that more local economies hit in the past.

  

  The basic problem is that with inadequate energy supplies, the total quantity of goods and services provided by the economy must shrink. Thus, on average, people must become poorer. Most individual citizens, as well as most governments, will not be happy about this situation.

  The situation becomes very much like the game of musical chairs. In this game, one chair at a time is removed. The players walk around the chairs while music plays. When the music stops, all participants grab for a chair. Someone gets left out. In the case of energy supplies, the stronger countries will try to push aside the weaker competitors.

  

  Countries that understand the importance of adequate energy supplies recognize that Europe is relatively weak because of its dependence on imported fuel. However, Europe seems to be oblivious to its poor position, attempting to dictate to others how important it is to prevent climate change by eliminating fossil fuels. With this view, it can easily keep its high opinion of itself.

  If we think about the musical chairs’ situation and not enough energy supplies to go around, everyone in the world (except Europe) would be better off if Europe were to be forced out of its high imports of fossil fuels. Russia could perhaps obtain higher energy export prices in Asia and the Far East. The whole situation becomes very strange. Europe tells itself it is cutting off imports to punish Russia. But, if Europe’s imports can remain very low, everyone else, from the US, to Russia, to China, to Japan would benefit.

  

  The benefits of wind and solar energy are glorified in Europe, with people being led to believe that it would be easy to transition from fossil fuels, and perhaps leave nuclear, as well. The problem is that wind, solar, and even hydroelectric energy supply are very undependable. They cannot ever be ramped up to provide year-round heat. They are poorly adapted for agricultural use (except for sunshine helping crops grow).

  Few people realize that the benefits that wind and solar provide are tiny. They cannot be depended on, so companies providing electricity need to maintain duplicate generating capacity. Wind and solar require far more transmission than fossil-fuel-generated electricity because the best sources are often far from population centers. When all costs are included (without subsidy), wind and solar electricity tend to be more expensive than fossil-fuel generated electricity. They are especially difficult to rely on in winter. Therefore, many people in Europe are concerned about possibly “freezing in the dark,” as soon as this winter.

  There is no possibility of ever transitioning to a system that operates only on intermittent electricity with the population that Europe has today, or that the world has today. Wind turbines and solar panels are built and maintained using fossil fuel energy. Transmission lines cannot be maintained using intermittent electricity alone.

  

   

  Basically, Europe must use very much less fossil fuel energy, for the long term. Citizens cannot assume that the war with Ukraine will soon be over, and everything will be back to the way it was several years ago. It is much more likely that the freeze-in-the-dark problem will be present every winter, from now on. In fact, European citizens might actually be happier if the climate would warm up a bit.

  With this as background, there is a need to figure out how to use less energy without hurting lifestyles too badly. To some extent, changes from the Covid-19 shutdowns can be used, since these indirectly were ways of saving energy. Furthermore, if families can move in together, fewer buildings in total will need to be heated. Cooking can perhaps be done for larger groups at a time, saving on fuel.

  If families can home-school their children, this saves both the energy for transportation to school and the energy for heating the school. If families can keep younger children at home, instead of sending them to daycare, this saves energy, as well.

  A major issue that I do not point out directly in this presentation is the high energy cost of supporting the elderly in the lifestyles to which they have become accustomed. One issue is the huge amount and cost of healthcare. Another is the cost of separate residences. These costs can be reduced if the elderly can be persuaded to move in with family members, as was done in the past. Pension programs worldwide are running into financial difficulty now, with interest rates rising. Countries with large elderly populations are likely to be especially affected.

  

  Besides conserving energy, the other thing people in Europe can do is attempt to understand the dynamics of our current situation. We are in a different world now, with not enough energy of the right kinds to go around.

  The dynamics in a world of energy shortages are like those of the musical chairs’ game. We can expect more fighting. We cannot expect that countries that have been on our side in the past will necessarily be on our side in the future. It is more like being in an undeclared war with many participants.

  Under ideal circumstances, Europe would be on good terms with energy exporters, even Russia. I suppose at this late date, nothing can be done.

  A major issue is that if Europe attempts to hold down fossil fuel prices, the indirect result will be to reduce supply. Oil, natural gas and coal producers will all reduce supply before they will accept a price that they consider too low. Given the dependence of the world economy on energy supplies, especially fossil fuel energy supplies, this will make the situation worse, rather than better.

  Wind and solar are not replacements for fossil fuels. They are made with fossil fuels. We don’t have the ability to store up solar energy from summer to winter. Wind is also too undependable, and battery capacity too low, to compensate for need for storage from season to season. Thus, without a growing supply of fossil fuels, it is impossible for today’s economy to continue in its current form.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 15:30

• Putting All The Pieces Together
  Putting All The Pieces Together

  Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

  We start our podcast today more than 2,500 years ago at a time when the dominant superpower in the western world was the Achaemenid Empire of Persia.

  Their civilization had reached an unfathomable level of wealth and sophistication; historical records show that, at peak, the Persian treasury had more than $300 BILLION in savings (in today’s money).

  They had an intricate road network, a highly-functioning postal system, impressive engineering works, and had even invented a crude form of refrigeration and air conditioning.

  Most of all they had a fearsome military. It was huge. And it was terrifying. Simply put, an invading Persian Army had never been defeated.

  And yet, early in the 5th century BC, when they went to war against a rapidly rising power in Greece, the Persians suffered a humiliating defeat. Then again. And again. And again.

  The losses changed the perception of their Empire forever.

  Practically overnight their reputation sank, and they were no longer viewed as a terrifying superpower able to dominate the world.

  We’ve seen this story over and over again throughout history, from Ancient Rome to the Mongols to Imperial Portugal in the early 1800s.

  Simply put, dominant superpowers almost invariably have an equally dominant, fearsome military that inspires awe and intimidation in the rest of the world… and especially in the superpower’s adversaries.

  But superpowers have a life cycle. They rise, peak, and decline. And at some point during the decline, the military begins to show signs of weakness.

  Often times there’s some specific event– something happens that’s so humiliating to the superpower that it shocks the world.

  This is what happened to the Persians in 490 BC. And it’s what happened to the United States in 2021.

  As a West Point graduate and US Army veteran, I still hold in my heart that the US military is the finest fighting force on the planet.

  But facts are facts, and the US military is showing clear signs of decline. Most of it is due to incomprehensible failures of leadership.

  Today we discuss that decline; I reference a brand new report by the Heritage Foundation, its 2023 Index of US Military Strength, which provides an extremely honest (and distressing) analysis of the US military’s capabilities, capacity, and readiness.

  The report spells out in nearly 600 pages of painstaking detail how the US military is rapidly losing (or has already lost) its technological advantages. It shows how there are not enough forces to defend American interests against a major adversary like China. And most importantly, the report concludes that the military is simply not ready.

  These conclusions have far-reaching implications.

  

  History has shown over and over again that once a superpower’s veneer of invincibility is pierced, it rapidly loses its status. And that’s even more true when another competing power is on the rise.

  Loss of status as the world’s sole superpower goes far beyond reputation and military conflict.

  The economic consequences are devastating.

  That’s because dominant superpowers also tend to own the world’s primary reserve currency– in this case, the US dollar.

  Being the world’s reserve currency means that commercial and financial transactions around the world are conducted primarily in US dollars.

  So for example, a Brazilian merchant and its supplier in India do business with each other in US dollars. Futures contracts for gold, copper, crude oil, etc. that are traded in foreign commodities exchanges (like the Dubai Gold & Commodities Exchange) are denominated in US dollars.

  The dollar is so dominant that when Airbus (a European aircraft manufacturer) sells its jets to European airlines, they typically close those deals using US dollars instead of euros. And giant European companies (like Nestle, BP, and Volkswagen Group) issue corporate bonds in US dollars.

  You get the idea.

  All of these USD financial and business transactions around the world mean that foreign investors, corporations, governments, and banks HAVE to stockpile US dollars, simply because the dollar is the global reserve currency.

  And foreign institutions tend to hold the majority of their dollar assets in US government bonds (which is the largest and most liquid USD asset class in the world).

  In total, foreigners collectively own $7.5 trillion worth of US government bonds, equivalent to 25% of the national debt… because they HAVE to own the world’s reserve currency.

  This allows the US government to get away with the financial equivalent of murder.

  The US government can run outrageous budget deficits, fund endless wars, and pay people to NOT work… and foreigners will still hold US dollars and buy US government bonds.

  But this unparalleled privilege would dry up very quickly if the US dollar loses its status as the world’s dominant reserve currency.

  I wrote about this briefly earlier in the week. But in today’s podcast, we put all the pieces together.

  Specifically, I show you how US military dominance is linked to US superpower status… and the US dollar’s position as the world’s reserve currency.

  We look at the lessons from history to examine the trajectory of a superpower in decline. And we try to connect the dots to see where our currency trajectory will lead us.

  This fate is not necessarily imminent; strong leadership and better performance from government could arrest the decline.

  Unfortunately, the US government seems completely incapable of solving problems.

  Their entire approach to problems, in fact, is very cyclical. It goes something like this:

  1) The government does something stupid that creates a problem.

  2) They ignore the problem they just created and let it fester.

  3) When the problem becomes obvious, they offer a symbolic gesture– ‘thoughts and prayers’

  4) When the problem becomes so extreme, they panic and do “whatever it takes”

  5) “Whatever it takes” is reckless, expensive, and usually destructive, causing the cycle to start over again.

  We cover all of this, and more, in today’s episode, which you can download here, or access in iTunes and Spotify…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 14:30

• Former China President Abruptly Escorted From Party Congress
  Former China President Abruptly Escorted From Party Congress

  The former leader of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was ushered from his seat beside General Secretary Xi Jinping during the final session of the 20th National Congress Saturday.

  As WSJ reports, midway through the otherwise carefully-choreographed closing session, Hu Jintao, 79, Xi Jinping’s immediate predecessor, was helped out of his chair next to Mr. Xi and inexplicably led out of the hall.

  

  Footage shot by foreign media in the hall, which wasn’t included in the official China Central Television broadcast, showed Mr. Hu seemingly reluctant or unable to stand up when an aide tried to lift him off his chair.

  In the commotion, Mr. Xi leaned toward Mr. Hu and appeared to speak with him.

  Mr. Hu was ushered off the center dais, briefly looking back at Mr. Xi and patting outgoing Premier Li Keqiang on the shoulder as he departed.

  

  It wasn’t clear why Mr. Hu left or where he went. The incident has gone unmentioned in Chinese state media coverage of the event.

  By Saturday evening, however, the comments section of almost all Weibo posts containing Hu’s name were no longer visible, according to a Reuters review.

  On Twitter, Xinhua news agency suggested Mr. Hu’s issue was health related.

  In English, indicating the report was aimed at an international audience, the government-run agency said Mr. Hu “was not feeling well during the session” and left to rest in a room next to the meeting venue. “Now, he is much better,” the account said.

  When he was not feeling well during the session, his staff, for his health, accompanied him to a room next to the meeting venue for a rest. Now, he is much better.

  — China Xinhua News (@XHNews) October 22, 2022

  Reuters also adds that Hu had appeared slightly unsteady last Sunday when he was assisted onto the same stage for the opening ceremony of the congress.

  As some China-watchers have noted, if Hu were really “purged” as some are speculating “i highly doubt that CCTV would show him like this in the report.”

  further on this, the sequence of leadership appearance matters greatly. in this cctv report, which they had plenty of time to arrange after the ceremony, the shots of leaders starts with xi, then hu, then the rest of current and retired standing committee members. https://t.co/X17npjTQgx

  — Bill Bishop (@niubi) October 22, 2022

  Still… does this look like the face of a man who ‘wants’ to leave for health reasons?

  

  Meanwhile, Xi has set the stage to extend his rule into a second decade, and on Saturday the Communist Party announced new names for some top spots as some of his rivals head toward retirement.

  Michael J. Abramowitz, president of Freedom House, warned China’s human rights situation would deteriorate in a statement issued on Oct. 12.

  “Another five years of Xi’s leadership is bad news for the cause of democracy and freedom, and worse news for the Chinese people,” Abramowitz said.

  “If past is prologue, a third term for Xi will result in more human rights abuses within China and more aggressive suppression of free speech globally, even as his domestic and foreign policies backfire and public outrage intensifies.” 

  As a reminder, Hu advocated maintaining good relations with the U.S., and was also an opponent of a military solution to the Taiwan issue. As SouthFront suggests, the former CPC Chairman’s escorting out of the hall is a clear demonstration of the renewed anti-Western foreign policy of Beijing, which, apparently, is ready for all measures, defending its sovereignty and the role of a superpower in the modern world.

  Of course, the question remains, is it now in the Deep State’s favor to make it seem like there is political discord at the top in China – remember, an unstable China is a ‘dangerous’ China, that will require much bigger State and Defense Department budgets to battle not to mention serve as a generous source of revenue for the Lockheeds and Raytheons of the world for years to come.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 14:02

• Container Imports To Los Angeles And Long Beach Are Plummeting
  Container Imports To Los Angeles And Long Beach Are Plummeting

  By Greg Miller of FreightWaves

  September is usually a strong month for West Coast imports as U.S. companies bring in their year-end holiday goods. Not so in 2022.

  On Wednesday, the Port of Los Angeles reported its lowest import total for September since 2009, amid the Great Recession. The day before, the neighboring Port of Long Beach posted its weakest import total for September since 2016.

  Imports to Southern California ports are falling fast because shippers have shifted volumes to East and Gulf coast ports, fearing disruptions from West Coast port labor negotiations. Simultaneously, volumes are now pulling back nationwide due to falling demand.

  

  Holiday imports ‘dropped precipitously’

  “In the month of September is where the real story lies,” explained Gene Seroka, executive director of the Port of Los Angeles, during a news conference on Wednesday. 

  Earlier this year, imports of durable goods bought heavily during the pandemic — furniture, appliances, etc. — began pulling back. In September, declines were heavily driven by reductions in holiday goods, as well.

  “September is traditionally a high-volume month for end-of-year products,” said Seroka. “Think toys and games, clothing, footwear and other products. Those holiday gift items dropped precipitously compared to last September, mainly because they came in earlier. This year our peak season was in June and July, as savvy importers moved up the arrival of these goods to bring some certainty back to when they could get to market.”

  Commenting on the shift to East and Gulf coast ports, Seroka said “concern over the dockworkers labor contract negotiations [was] a major factor contributing to volume declines.” He believes the shift “is likely to continue until a West Coast labor contract is in place — and that can’t happen soon enough.” The previous contract expired July 1.

  Asked by American Shipper how October’s volumes are shaping up versus September’s, he said they will be “probably about the same or a little bit lighter. It’s going to be a soft October.”

  LA September imports down 15% vs. August

  The Port of Los Angeles reported total throughput of 709,873 twenty-foot equivalent units in September, down 21.5% year on year (y/y). Exports came in at 77,680 TEUS, up 2.6% y/y, while empties totaled 288,731 TEUs, down 19.8% y/y.

  Loaded imports to Los Angeles totaled just 343,462 TEUs, down 26.6% y/y. Imports fell 15.1% sequentially versus August, following a 16.7% drop in August versus July.

  Los Angeles’ imports reached their highest level this year in May. September imports were down 31.3% compared to that month. Imports in September were the lowest for any month since May 2020, when the U.S. was in the midst of COVID-19 lockdowns.

  

  Long Beach September imports down 11% vs. August

  The Port of Long Beach reported total throughput of 741,823 TEUs for September, down 0.9% y/y. Exports came in at 112,940 TEUs, up 1.9% y/y, and empties totaled 286,212 TEUs, up 7% y/y.

  Long Beach handled 342,671 TEUs of imports in September, down 7.4% y/y and down 10.9% sequentially versus August. As in Los Angeles, Long Beach’s imports peaked this year in May. September was down 27.5% from that high. Monthly imports have not been this low since June 2020.

  

  Port of Long Beach Executive Director Mario Cordero blamed the import decline on consumer and retail concerns about inflation, “leading to warehouses filled with inventory and fewer product orders from Asia.”

  Fewer ships being worked at berths

  The focus during the supply chain crisis was on the massive number of container ships at anchorages or loitering offshore as they waited for berths in Los Angeles or Long Beach. Statistics from the Marine Exchange of Southern California show a steep drop throughout this year, from a high of 109 waiting container ships Jan. 9 to just four on Wednesday, the lowest number since October 2020.

  The Marine Exchange also collects data on the number of container ships at the berths in the two ports. This data also shows a major — and more recent — change.

  As the supply crisis intensified, there were often over 30 ships at the two ports’ berths each day. Between August 2021 and February 2022, there were an average of 28.8 container vessels alongside in Los Angeles and Long Beach daily.

  In recent weeks, however, the numbers have sunk to much lower levels. The average from Sept. 1 through Tuesday was 19 ships alongside, down over 30% from peak levels. There were 18 ships at the ports’ berths Tuesday. There were only 10 ships alongside on Sept. 12.

  This is getting closer to pre-COVID levels. The average number of ships at the ports’ berths daily in full-year 2019 was 14.8.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 10/22/2022 – 13:30