• Brandon Smith: Trans Women Are Men And Pretending Otherwise Is Cultural Insanity
  Brandon Smith: Trans Women Are Men And Pretending Otherwise Is Cultural Insanity

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  Let’s get a few points out of the way before anything else is said: There is ZERO scientific evidence to support the notion of gender self identification. There is ZERO scientific evidence to support the claim that gender is merely a social construct. There is more evidence that biology determines gender behaviors and manhood and womanhood are inborn psychological constructs. The vast majority of people develop gender associations directly in line with their biology. Men act like men, women act like women, and these behaviors have been established as biological fact from the beginning of recorded history.

  

  Men and women are biologically different in many respects, even down to how our brains function. Biological sex and gender related behavior are based mostly in nature, not mostly in environment. However, the gender identity religion has deemed these concepts a form of bigotry. The situation has become so unhinged that leftists are now referring to real women as “bleeders” or “people who menstruate,” as if this is the only biological difference between them and trans women.

  Regardless of how one is positioned on the topic, if you are honest you have to admit that transgenderism today is a political issue, not a scientific issue. In the past few years we have seen government funded and globalist foundation funded scientists politicized by the gender issue. But, again, they have zero evidence to support their claims that gender is changeable and malleable. Interestingly, they now argue both sides: That gender is purely a social construct, and that gender is biologically linked and hardwired. The two ideas are mutually exclusive, but hey, we’re living in clown world now, so we should just shut up and enjoy the ride…

  Are there people out there who feel as though their mental acclimation is not the same as their biological acclimation? Yes, there are exceptions to the rule. In most legitimate cases these people suffer from a mental illness called “gender dysphoria.” It’s a relatively harmless psychological problem (except that it tends to cause depression and suicidal tendencies for the trans person); these people are not a threat to me or to you and their existence in our society is not really our concern, unless, that is, they make it our concern.

  For some reason, the authoritarian political left has elevated the transsexual issue to the very top of their oppression Olympics. It’s hard to say why, but they have taken a “group” which represents around 0.4% of the population and determined that they are the pinnacle of the victim totem pole and that the rest of the world needs to walk on egg shells whenever dealing with them.

  But let’s look at this situation objectively for a moment, shall we?

  The trans community is considered a designated “oppressed minority,” but it’s one that any person can join for any reason. It’s not really a minority group so much as a club, and clubs can become trendy when they are marketed effectively. I don’t have to actually have gender dysphoria to join this club, all I have to do is CLAIM that I identify as trans and, suddenly, I am now part of an oppressed class. The problem is, trans people are not oppressed, at least not in the west.

  What the political left deems “oppression” is rather confused and convoluted. In their terminology, oppressing them means not letting them do whatever the hell they please regardless of how destructive their intent. You are victimizing them by not letting them victimize you.

  Let’s expand on that in trans terms: If a man claims he is a woman and is trans, that person now has the social power to demand that the rest of us identify him as a woman and use the pronouns he prefers. In other words, if tomorrow I claim I am trans (even though it’s not true) I then have the right to control your speech. And yes, it is absolutely as simple as that according to leftists.

  A vivid example of this control dynamic is the reaction to the recently passed Florida Anti-Grooming Bill, which SJWs and the media dishonestly labeled the “Don’t Say Gay Bill.” Here we have a law based in logic and reason which victimizes no one, turned into a circus under accusations of bigotry and discrimination. What does the bill do? It prevents public school teachers from exposing children as young as Kindergarten to discussions on sexuality and gender identity, and requires that they talk to parents about their child’s exposure to any such lessons. In other words, Florida is telling teachers they’re not allowed to propagandize children with their cultist nonsense and groom them into the SJW/trans fold.

  Public school teachers are paid by the state and the taxes that parents pay to the state. The teachers work for the parents; the parents are the boss. But leftists don’t see it that way. They say it’s about free speech, and at bottom they they aren’t school employees, they are evangelists for the social justice cause. They are widely against religious ideas being taught in schools, unless it’s their own religion.

  The truth is they are zealots. They believe their ideology supersedes all other concerns and that they have the right to mold your children into that ideology without your approval because they believe you are too ignorant to understand the “greater good” that is being done.

  The anti-grooming bill was designed to protect young children from sexual indoctrination, and leftists are furious about it. They claim ownership of your children, and the trans agenda is a big part of the molding process that leftist teachers say they have a right to pursue.

  As you can imagine, the temptation for narcissistic and sociopathic miscreants to jump on the trans bandwagon is immense. All they have to do to gain control over the people around them is to join a gender identity group? All they have to do to get special treatment and privileges is proclaim they are discriminated against? For people without conscience this is an exciting new world where their narcissism is applauded and protected.

  If people don’t comply, they are “oppressing” the trans individual and are now automatically bigots. Frankly, I will never refer to a trans person according to their preferred pronouns. Why? Because this is a lie. They are not what they claim to be. Their internal fantasies are irrelevant to the facts, and their feelings do not matter where the truth is concerned. There is no such thing as “their truth,” there is only THE TRUTH.

  If the issue at hand is gender dysphoria, then we must approach it like any other mental illness. When dealing with a schizophrenic that believes he is Napoleon or Elvis Presley, we don’t demand that the whole of society agrees with him and enables his fantasies and makes laws protecting the validity of his delusions, right? We ignore his fantasies; we don’t adapt our entire culture to his whims. Why are we doing this with trans activists?

  Much of what the political left does involves making their problems into your problems, and it’s mostly about control, not equality. They claim they are victims, and therefore they believe they have the right to determine what is oppression and what is bigotry. I ask, who made them the virtue police and how are they actually qualified? Most of these people are so stunted and biased they hardly measure up to the high standards that would be required to pass such objective judgments. Leftists aren’t the most virtuous, they are the most unstable, and yet they are being positioned as the arbiters of our morality.

  I focus on trans women specifically in this article because while there are women who pretend they are men, these women generally aren’t trying to invade men’s spaces and take them over. There is something rather predatory and malicious about the trans woman aspect of this movement.

  Most of the world is probably now familiar with the bizarre case of Lia Thomas (aka William Thomas), a biological man cosplaying as a woman so that he can compete in the women’s NCAA swimming championships and destroy all the other real women competitors. Leftists argue that keeping Lia Thomas and those like him out of women’s competitions would be oppressive, but is it really? Is acknowledging scientific fact “bigotry?”

  The most glaring catalyst for the whole scenario is feminism. It’s ironic that feminists have misrepresented the male-to-female social dynamic for so long that regular women actually began to believe the leftist world view, and now it’s coming back to bite them on the ass.

  For decades, feminists have been arguing that women and men are equal in every possible way, including in physicality. This delusion has become dangerously pervasive, not just in Hollywood but in the real world. We have even had the US military recently attempting to integrate women into frontline combat and ranger battalion roles, to the point that they had to rig the standards in the women’s favor just so they could pass the grueling tests. Other more honest experiments, such as those conducted by the US Marines into mixed gender units, show that this is a terrible idea. Not only are mixed units distracted by sexual concern, but male/female units perform poorly in almost every area of training compared to all male units.

  Today, the trans athlete issue is proving beyond a doubt that men are physically superior to women. There is no debate. Even Lia Thomas, a man ranked in the 400s in male swimming, has dominated women’s swimming easily. The examples are becoming widespread, from women’s weightlifting to women’s MMA fighting and women’s track and field. If you want to crush the competition in women’s sports, all you have to be is a man.

  If women want to save their sports, they are going to have to admit that the feminists were wrong and that men are physically superior. And, this is probably one of the primary reasons why very few women in sports have spoken up. They have been conditioned for so long to notions of equity, they can’t handle the truth of biological reality.

  The other reason is that if they do speak up they face the prospect of becoming social pariahs and being ostracize. Of course, the majority of Americans think cancel culture is garbage, but the political left controls the corporate environment including Big Tech and most of government; they can make it appear as if they are the majority when they are not. Even if they were the majority that does not mean they are not crazy. It is pure madness to deny facts that are right in front of your face just to achieve political ends, but leftists have been doing this for some time now.

  There are trans people that are not on board with the leftist agenda. Bruce Jenner (aka Caitlyn Jenner) has been surprisingly outspoken against woke propaganda. Blair White is another example of an anti-leftist trans figure willing to speak out. The liberty movement and conservatives have widely embraced them even though leftists claim we “hate” trans people and want to see them erased. The fact is that most of us don’t care what people do in their private lives. But, when you weaponize and politicize your sexual proclivities and declare that we owe you something, that’s when we’re going to have a problem.

  Ultimately, the trans community is so minuscule it begs the question – Why are these people relevant in the grand scheme of things? Because leftists see an opportunity to use them as tools for social derailment? Why are leftists so obsessed with the idea of indoctrinating children into the trans fold? Why are they so interested in undermining biological fact? What is it with leftists and their need to turn the world upside down?

  Many of them know, deep down, that the ideologies they preach are not based in truth. They know that they lie, and some of them are openly proud when their lies prove effective. They are clearly not interested in enlightenment, they are only interested in winning. But what does it mean for the political left to “win.” Well, in Marxist/communist terms, winning means destroying everything and tearing the target society down to nothing. And if that’s what winning is to them, I’m more than happy to act as a gatekeeper that shuts them down and keeps them out as much as possible. Gatekeeping in this case is good.

  It’s sad that real people with real gender dysphoria are caught in the middle of this battle for the stability of our society. They should no be used as pawns in the culture war. But then again, perhaps it’s time for more of them to speak up if they are not in support of the woke agenda. I think this farce has gone on long enough, don’t you? As insane as leftists are, maybe we are more insane for letting the patients run the asylum.

  *  *  *

  If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 23:40

• Russian Superyachts 'Go Dark' To Avoid Tracking 
  Russian Superyachts ‘Go Dark’ To Avoid Tracking 

  Since the invasion of Ukraine, Russian oligarchs have been panic-moving private jets, superyachts, and other trophy assets away from Western countries to avoid sanctions.

  Marine data compiled by Bloomberg show at least nine superyachts owned by Russian tycoons have switched off tracking systems. These devices, also known as automatic identification systems or AIS, are required for all passenger ships to broadcast positions for other vessels and coastal authorities. 

  “There’s no reason why their AIS transmissions should be off for days,” said Gur Sender, a program manager at Windward Ltd., which specializes in maritime risk and intelligence.

  “Even if you’re in the middle of the ocean you have a satellite picking up your transmission once in at least eight hours. If you’re a big yacht, it’s in your interest to have it on so everyone can see the ship to prevent accidents,” Sender said. 

  Most of the yachts went dark on Feb. 24, the day Russia invaded Ukraine. Then more went dark after President Biden announced sanctions on Russian oligarchs on Mar. 11. The oligarchs are all part of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inner circle.

  Russian oligarchs who have been sanctioned have either had their yachts commandeered by European authorities (like Rosneft CEO’s $120mln superyacht) or have sailed to more friendly waters out of the Mediterranean and Northern Europe to the Indian Ocean and or the Middle East.  

  

  According to vessel data, at least eight ships were last seen near the United Arab Emirates, Oman, or Saudi Arabia. 

  Meanwhile, two superyachts owned by Russian businessman Roman Abramovich fled from Western Europe for Turkey. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 23:20

• China's Belt-And-Road Comes To America's Heartland, Part 2: This Is Not The End
  China’s Belt-And-Road Comes To America’s Heartland, Part 2: This Is Not The End

  Authored by Fortis Analysis via Human Terrain,

  Earlier this year, Fortis Analysis released details on the proposal by Fufeng Group, a CCP-connected company, to build a wet corn mill and amino acid production facility in Grand Forks, ND. In conducting further research, interviewing local residents, and working with recognized experts in national security and United States trade law, it is more and more clear that the Grand Forks city council and mayor Brandon Bochenski are both economically and constitutionally illiterate.

  

  A single line of inquiry into this project is impossible, so we will work to highlight a range of domains where this project falls short of both good sense and the law of the land. To that end, let’s first explore the FAQ on this project released by the Grand Forks Regional Economic Development Council. There are numerous claims so easily rebutted that making them is either knowingly spreading false information, or an inexcusable lack of attention (or ability) to performing due diligence.

  A selection:

  ---

  CLAIM: ”Fufeng USA is a global leading bio-fermentation company manufacturing products that serve fast-growing animal nutrition. Their headquarters is in Chicago, Ill. Fufeng USA has chosen to invest in Grand Forks to establish a wet corn mill processing plant in the United States.”

  FACT: Fufeng USA Incorporated was established in the United States at the address of a private residence in Wheaton, IL. As of this writing, Fufeng USA Incorporated imports to the United States using the same Wheaton location as its official consignee address registered with US Customs and Border Protection. Another Fufeng USA corporate address noted on the Chicago Chinatown Chamber of Commerce website (under the “Manufacturers” section) is located inside a multi-tenant office building in Oak Brook, IL. This entity is wholly-owned by Fufeng USA Holdings Limited, which is domiciled in Hong Kong, and is itself wholly-owned by Trans-Asia Capital Resources Ltd., also domiciled in Hong Kong. Trans-Asia Capital Resources Ltd. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Fufeng Group, which has its principal place of business in Junan in the Shandong Province of China. It is beyond a stretch to say that Fufeng USA is anything more than a shell company to facilitate Fufeng Group’s ability to do business in the United States. This information comes directly from Fufeng Group’s annual report for 2020, published in 2021.

  ---

  CLAIM: “The North Dakota Trade Office has done a search for illegal import/export activity for Fufeng USA and its principles. No red flags or areas of concern were found. NDTO resources include access to 30 federal databases.

  Fufeng USA has been operating in the United States since 2020. Also, First Biotech, Inc., a Fufeng USA subsidiary, has been doing business in the US for over 10 years. Both have filed federal taxes in the US and have established international banking accounts with large financial institutions that have significant federal oversight. The company will be subject to all the same US laws, regulations, and oversight and any US company.

  Fufeng USA Group is publicly traded on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. The US Securities and Exchange Commission has a supervisory oversight relationship with the Exchange. Fufeng USA Group has many US and European institutional investors including TreeTop Management, Vanguard, Fidelity, Mellon, and Blackrock, all heavily regulated.”

  FACT: This is, quite simply, a word salad intended to obscure the real issue at stake here – the absence of correct and proper due diligence. The United States has multiple layers of regulatory oversight beyond basic financial oversight, few if any of which have been notified by GFREDC, the city, or Fufeng, let alone conducted formal inquiries. One other point that must be noted is that “Fufeng USA Group” is not a real entity, nor is any Fufeng USA entity “publicly traded on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange”. The publicly-traded entity is the ultimate parent company, Fufeng Group Limited. More detailed explorations of these points follow further in this analysis. In short, the absurd and incorrect statement that a cursory review of trade databases and some correctly-filed taxes is sufficient proof of Fufeng’s safety to national security should embarrass all involved in this process.

  ---

  CLAIM: “The development of the Fufeng USA plant will create a local market for corn and improve pricing. Regional farmers will have the option to sell to elevators or Fufeng USA.

  The North Dakota Corn Growers Association, a farmer led membership organization focused on policy that impacts North Dakota corn producers, were pleased with the announcement that Fufeng USA will establish a wet corn mill in Grand Forks. They issued a press release indicating the project will have tremendous value to regional farmers.”

  FACT: The claim made elsewhere by the city about the economic impact to farmers betrays a startling ignorance about the mechanisms of grain production and sales. The estimate of $.20 to $.40 per bushel of corn in premium versus current market conditions was not derived from careful analysis conducted by third-party experts. When pressed on the matter by Shaun Beauclair, himself a farmer and former board member of a regional corn processing facility, the GFREDC admitted that the premium assumption was given by a single farmer. In a February interview with AgWeek about the Fufeng project, Dr. Frayne Olson of North Dakota State University said that he believes the $.40 per bushel claim is only realistic for the first year or two to incentivize sales to the corn mill. Once the market settles back in future years, the realistic premium is closer to $.10 to $.20 per bushel. In practice, the grain elevators in the area who do not have direct interest in a value-added market for their purchased corn will quickly be faced with the choice of becoming a de facto origination and storage facility for Fufeng, or closing their doors.

  ---

  As one can see from this selection of “facts”, the Grand Forks Regional Economic Development Council has not done its best work to provide complete or accurate information to its stakeholders. Now, if this was the only vector of misinformation and all others involved were honest brokers, one might understand how an economic development group would choose to shade the truth a bit in order to bring a splashy, high-revenue project to town. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Multiple other individuals in positions of city leadership have also willingly promoted dishonest talking points, or chosen unscrupulous partners for the city, all in the interest of pushing the project forward. Let’s examine a few of these.

  Fufeng Group Has No Financial Connection to the Chinese Government

  On November 17, 2021, in a publicly-posted comment on his official Facebook account, Grand Forks mayor Brandon Bochenski stated that:

  “…the company is an American subsidiary of a publicly traded company that has zero govt. ownership. They are investing in an American facility built by American contractors, using American corn stock to produce products sold in America and manufactured by American workers. The company is more American than Apple, Nike and Amazon quite frankly in the global economy of today.”

  Members of the city council have used similar talking points in publicly-available council discussions.

  Now, this particular formulation of the zero-affiliation claim is intended to reassure listeners that as Fufeng Group Limited is a publicly-traded company on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange (a subsidiary of HKEx, or Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing), it is not reasonable to believe that the firm or any of its subsidiaries would choose (or be forced) to act in any way outside the direct fiduciary interests of its global shareholders. A complete overview of the complicated (and compromised) relationship between the HKEx and the Chinese Communist Party is beyond the scope of this piece, but for now, the following data will more than suffice to rebut this talking point.

  HKEx’s largest single shareholder is the Hong Kong Government, which also has the right to appoint six of thirteen directors to HKEx’s board. This matters for a number of reasons, but perhaps the most important is the Hong Kong national security law unanimously passed by China’s Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on 30 June 2020 in the wake of widespread pro-democracy protests throughout Hong Kong. Among the various deeply anti-democratic provisions of the law are the requirement that companies listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange act in accordance with the security directives of a secret body called the Committee for Safeguarding National Security.

  This entity has the ability to at any time investigate, indict, prosecute, or ruin any non-compliant company who has any business interest in Hong Kong – and extend these enforcement protocols anywhere in the world in violation of sovereign law and international norms. It is impossible to believe that HKEx will push back in any way if the Chinese Communist Party directs Fufeng Group to perform certain actions or disclose confidential business, community, or employee information in any of its subsidiaries – including Fufeng USA Incorporated. In simplified form, if the secret national security entity in mainland China or Hong Kong creates any pretext whatsoever, it will be able to force Fufeng USA to reveal all personal details of any employee, contractor, or even guests of the corn mill, regardless of the laws of the United States. This is an extremely important detail that as of yet, has not been properly addressed by Fufeng or city officials.

  Moreover, it is not even accurate to say that Fufeng Group does not have a financial connection to the Chinese government. In the same annual report referenced earlier, Fufeng Group Limited lists an interesting disclosure: a 30% ownership stake in Jilin COFCO Biomaterial Co Ltd. This joint venture between Fufeng Group and China Oil and Foodstuffs Corporation (COFCO) is notable because COFCO is the largest agribusiness in China, and is a 100% state-owned enterprise under the management of the hyperpowerful State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council (SASAC). Note that SASAC manages numerous entities that are currently sanctioned by the United States for espionage activities, use of forced labor in Xinjiang and elsewhere, and violation of international treaties or laws. Though COFCO has as yet not been similarly sanctioned, it is important to note that its sister companies under SASAC were penalized for carrying out the will of the Chinese Communist Party, and that COFCO can at any time be similarly leveraged by the CCP to perform illegal activities against the United States.

  As with numerous other claims made by the North Dakota Trade Office, Mayor Bochenski, GFREDC, and the Grand Forks city council, one cannot help but wonder how much due diligence has actually been put into this project.

  The City Is Taking All Appropriate Steps to Examine the Impact on U.S. National Security Interests

  This omnibus talking point, used repeatedly by city officials, is also completely inaccurate. There are numerous checks and balances that exist at the federal level concerning real estate acquisitions and foreign investments into the U.S. economy.

  The most well-known of these, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), is a multi-agency group under the Executive Branch that has the mandate of reviewing transactions by foreign entities into companies or technologies designated as “critical” to national security, and/or real estate transactions located within 100 miles of designated military installations. An examination of the facts shows that the Fufeng project may fall into the category of a “covered real estate transaction”, which means CFIUS expects voluntary disclosure of the project’s details. The risk is that if stakeholders do not disclose and CFIUS chooses to open an inquiry at some point, then an adverse finding from CFIUS will result in significant penalties for all involved, up to and including the forced sale of the property and assets to an approved third party. That the city and county have been courting Fufeng Group since mid-2020 and as of yet have not sought out independent legal review for compliance with FIRRMA (the law governing CFIUS’ activities), or submitted for a free voluntary review with CFIUS since the public reveal of this project in November 2021, does not argue well for the city council’s competence or motives in continuing to ignore public outcry and push the process forward at a breakneck pace.

  Another talking point used by the city and GFREDC is that the county and city’s “base retention” consultant, retired USAF General David Deptula, has reviewed the proposal and discussed it with the leadership at Grand Forks Air Force Base. The claim is that no one has issued an objection to the Fufeng proposal. There are a few things about this, however, that raise red flags. First, Deptula was the subject of a multi-year investigation by Department of Defense into illicit contracting activities and fraud while he was in uniform. In February 2015, Deptula agreed with the Department of Justice to pay a fine of $125,000, and was barred by the Air Force from conducting business with the federal government from November 2014 to February 2016.

  Despite this, the Grand Forks city council continues to authorize a $5,000 per month direct payment to The Deptula Group (Deptula’s lobbying and consulting firm) for base retention activities. When questioned about this, city council president Dana Sande initially insisted that Grand Forks County employs Deptula, not the city. After being reminded of the monthly expense approved by Sande and the rest of the city council, Sande admitted that the city pays a portion of the funding for base retention activities, but the county is in charge of selecting and coordinating with Deptula. However, a review of the county’s 2021 budget does not show a request or approval for funding to be allocated under the Base Retention line item, nor do county minutes throughout 2021 show approvals to remit any funds to Deptula, his company, or for base retention activities.

  It is possible that the county has allocated funding under a different line item to pay for Deptula’s services, but such is not noted. However, if the county is indeed not contributing to paying Deptula, then the city of Grand Forks appears to be willingly carrying the cost of Mr. Deptula for “base retention” activities, even as the Air Force already publicly committed in 2021 to expanding the base’s role and increasing its footprint in Grand Forks. Regardless, the ongoing payment of Deptula for at least $5,000 per month from city funds reflects the council’s comfort with employing fixers who have a questionable at best code of ethics when it comes to personal enrichment at the expense of taxpayers.

  Moreover, it is not for the leadership of the local military installation to make a determination on if a particular project is compliant with national security regulations. Thus, the constant talking points by city officials that Grand Forks Air Force Base has reviewed the project and not issued a complaint is misleading and wholly incorrect. The base leadership cannot review and rule on the Fufeng project, or any other potential commercial investment by foreign entities in the area of the base. The fact that city officials have continuously asserted that the Grand Forks Air Force Base commander has done so is incorrect, and jeopardizes the careers of both the commanding officer and any active duty personnel so connected to the claim. It also opens the door to civilian law enforcement involvement, as active duty military personnel allegedly issuing inappropriate and unauthorized statements in support of foreign investment may also entangle the civilians making such claims into criminal or civil charges. This is a tightrope for city officials to publicly walk, and it would seem from the outside that they have created a fiasco in the making in their haste to justify a lack of responsible and legal due diligence.

  There Are No Other Conflicts of Interest on the City Council with This Project

  Before each City Council vote on this project, the council brings up councilmember Jeannie Mock’s conflict of interest in the project and votes to force her to abstain. Mock’s company, AE2S, was involved in the preparation of land-use and infrastructure data before the project was publicly revealed, as can be seen on Slide 12 of the city’s pitch deck for the project. It is not known for certain how Mock would vote on the project, but it is proper for her to abstain on the basis of conflicts of interests and good ethics. However, there are other potential future conflicts of interest on the council not discussed or considered as exclusionary by the council.

  Kyle Kvamme is employed by ICON Architectural Group, a regional commercial project design firm headquartered in Grand Forks. Kvamme is the Director of Community Engagement and Project Development. He also recently became an owner in the firm. ICON is an obvious potential beneficiary of such a massive development as Fufeng’s, being a prominent local firm specializing in the design of buildings and layouts for large-scope projects.

  Bret Weber, who has been one of the most supportive voices on the council for the Fufeng project, is employed by the University of North Dakota as Department Chair and Professor of Social Work. Also employed by UND is Danny Weigel, who is the Investigations Commander and Public Information Officer for the UND Police force. Both have disclaimed any conflicts of interest. However, neither has disclosed that Fufeng USA is a tenant of the UND Center for Innovation, the university’s on-campus “entrepreneurial incubator”. Nor has Weigel shared if he has conducted any background checks on Fufeng Group or its representatives prior to them establishing occupancy in campus facilities. It is currently unknown if Fufeng USA is simply paying rent for part of the Center’s co-working office space in order to have a local presence, or if the company is a more integrated user of Center resources, such as the wet lab. The Center touts the wet lab as such: “High tech, bioscience, and scientific companies are all welcome at the UND Center for Innovation. Our state of the art wet lab makes innovations happen.”

  Given that Fufeng USA is, fundamentally, a biotech company that must cultivate and maintain various strains of bacteria to manufacture amino acids, it is not unreasonable to assume that the company has been, or will be, a major stakeholder in the Center. As the university already financially benefits from Fufeng’s presence in Grand Forks, the full scope of UND’s interest in current and future projects involving Fufeng should be disclosed. So, too, should it be considered a potential conflict of interest for university employees to vote as city council members on favorable considerations for a company that is an active revenue stream for the entity that cuts their paychecks.

  The obvious rebuttal of “it’s a drop in the bucket in the university’s overall revenue stream” is beside the point, and frankly, is an inappropriate attitude for a public official to hold. Just as with the city utilizing a disgraced former general to help gain Department of Defense approval for the project, or Weber indicating in the March 7th city council meeting that he feels public concerns about the project’s impact to national security are overblown, it seems that a number of city officials involved with this project are willing to excuse impropriety and ethical lapses as the cost of doing business with Chinese companies.

  Fufeng USA and Its Parent Companies Have No Known Connection to Forced Labor or Human Rights Crimes In China

  This is the murkiest and most troubling of all the accusations Fortis Analysis and other groups have leveled against Fufeng, yet has been hand-waived away by project proponents as unfounded innuendo because the firm has not been sanctioned specifically by U.S. authorities. But like most of the complex issues involved with this project, such casual dismissals betray a malignant ignorance of how and why sanctions law functions as it does in our nation. Fortunately for the Grand Forks city officials, we are here to provide accurate and detailed information that can help those officials make informed decisions in line with their sworn duty to their offices.

  The United States takes very seriously the issue of China’s human rights abuses, particularly in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of western China. In fact, the devastating suppression of non-Han ethnic groups in Xinjiang has been so intense that on 13 July 2021, the U.S. State Department issued its “Xinjiang Supply Chain Business Advisory”, with the summary reading as such:

  The People’s Republic of China (PRC) government continues to carry out genocide and crimes against humanity against Uyghurs and members of other ethnic and religious minority groups in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (Xinjiang), China.

  The PRC’s crimes against humanity include imprisonment, torture, rape, forced sterilization, and persecution, including through forced labor and the imposition of draconian restrictions on freedom of religion or belief, freedom of expression, and freedom of movement.

  Businesses, individuals, and other persons, including but not limited to investors, consultants, labor brokers, academic institutions, and research service providers (hereafter “businesses and individuals”) with potential exposure to or connection with operations, supply chains, or laborers from the Xinjiang-region, should be aware of the significant reputational, economic, and legal risks of involvement with entities or individuals in or linked to Xinjiang that engage in human rights abuses, including but not limited to forced labor and intrusive surveillance.

  Given the severity and extent of these abuses, including widespread, state-sponsored forced labor and intrusive surveillance taking place amid ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, businesses and individuals that do not exit supply chains, ventures, and/or investments connected to Xinjiang could run a high risk of violating U.S. law.

  Potential legal risks include: violation of statutes criminalizing forced labor including knowingly benefitting from participation in a venture, while knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that the venture has engaged in forced labor; sanctions violations if dealing with designated persons; export control violations; and violation of the prohibition of importations of goods produced in whole or in part with forced labor or convict labor.

  Now, given how adept Chinese companies are at masking their participation in, or benefit derived in part from, these evil activities, the U.S. will utilize a standard called “rebuttable presumption” when investigating abuses and issuing sanctions under the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act and future similar laws. What this means is that a company accused of connection to human rights abuses in Xinjiang (or other provinces) in China are treated by U.S. authorities as essentially being guilty until proven innocent. Importantly, this does not just mean that the company in question is directly employing forced laborers. Any company that uses raw materials, goods, or labor at any point in its supply chain where forced labor is involved is considered just as guilty of the abuse – a presumption of illegal benefit that extends to every single subsidiary, wherever it may be located.

  As just one example of the new risk to American stakeholders from this expanded enforcement against China’s human rights abuse, Fufeng Group lists in its annual report that coal is the primary energy feedstock for its corn mills in China. Coal is one of the sectors most heavily targeted for enforcement and sanctions due to Chinese coal mining companies making extensive use of forced labor to keep production costs low. Fufeng Group specifically notes that it strategically locates its facilities close to coal-fired power plants, and that such practice is “instrumental in strengthening the Group’s pricing power.”

  Even more so than coal, Fufeng consumes corn at enormous rates. Thus, it makes sense that Fufeng tends to locate its operations not only close to coal power production, but also major agriculture regions. Here, too, Fufeng should be assumed to benefit substantially from lower raw material prices derived from the involvement of forced labor.

  In Heilongjiang province, Fufeng’s subsidiary Qiqihar Fufeng is located less than 50 miles from the sprawling Liusan Prison farm, managed by the Communist Party Committee Deputy Secretary of Liusan. Only a few miles further southwest from Liusan inside Inner Mongolia, there are numerous other farms at Wutaqi, Ulan, and the notorious Bao’anzhao Prison.

  Hulunbeier Northeast Fufeng Biotechnologies is located approximately 200 miles from the large prison farm at “Genghis Kahn Ranch” in Zalantun City. One of Fufeng’s largest plants, Neimenggu Fufeng Biotechnologies, is located in Hohhot City in Inner Mongolia. The entire administrative apparatus for the corporation that sells forced prison labor goods to Chinese and international consumers is called Inner Mongolia Hengzheng Industrial Group Co., Ltd., and also happens to be located in Hohhot City. As of October 2019, the company was run by Xu Hongguang, a CCP member and the Deputy Director of the Ministry of Justice of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. Among the company’s primary goods produced in the prisons and sold to companies in China are grains, processed agriculture commodities, and food ingredients. Notably, the company was sanctioned by the United States in October of 2020 for use of forced labor in manufacturing stevia sweetener, which like Fufeng’s products, are a derivative of biological processing. [Edit, 21 March 2022 – The original comment that stevia sweetener is a derivative of corn processing is not correct. The author has corrected the article.]

  It would require an absurd leap of faith to state that Fufeng has no plausible connections to, or benefit from, the expansive use of forced labor in agriculture production so logistically close to Fufeng’s major corn- and coal-consuming plants in Xingang, Heilongjiang, and Inner Mongolia. Should an investigation be raised by Commerce, State, or Treasury into the activities of any Fufeng Group subsidiary in connection to forced labor, it is highly likely that Fufeng would be unable to satisfy the rebuttable presumption of participation in the forced labor and abusive regimes in place in China.

  This would trigger automatic sanctions not only against Fufeng Group in China, but also their international subsidiaries such as First Biotech and Fufeng USA. Such sanctions would make it impossible for banks to lend to any of the affected entities in the United States or conduct normal business operations, shutting down the entire project in Grand Forks and invalidating the letter of credit the city proclaims as providing a no-risk guarantee to local taxpayers the city has not wasted money chasing a pot of gold at the end of the CCP’s genocidal rainbow.

  This Is Not the End

  As one can see, there is not much more that needs to be said about the Fufeng Group’s bid to purchase 370 acres of land in Grand Forks and build its wet corn mill. Nearly every single major talking point used by city officials and Fufeng USA is provably false or shaded with just enough truth to pass scrutiny of low-information voters. This is how it works when one chooses to do business with CCP-aligned entities who deliberately target local and state officials to circumvent the United States’ federal national security countermeasures. The officials, craving a big win to build their next campaign on, or perhaps finding some compelling self-interest in the economic aspects of the project, suspend all good sense and dive headfirst into extreme legal and moral hazard at the expense of their communities, their state, and their nation.

  Grand Forks Mayor Brandon Bochenski, City Council president Dana Sande, and their grasping enablers have (to this point) made the choice to do just that.

  And at least for now, we know that the most powerful weapon in the CCP’s gray zone war against the United States is not hypersonic missiles, cyberespionage, or theft of intellectual property.

  It’s 30 pieces of silver wrapped in a box of false promises to our elected officials.

  ---

  Addendum

  A number of Grand Forks residents and concerned stakeholders around the nation have expressed to this author their alarm and despair at the ease with which the Chinese Communist Party continues to corrupt and undermine the United States. That it all feels hopeless, and that our collapse as a nation is both certain and imminent.

  I will share this, then – Winston Churchill’s words to the Harrow School on 29 October 1941, in the midst of the darkest hours of Great Britain’s seemingly hopeless defense against the mighty Nazi war machine.

  “…Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never – in nothing, great or small, large or petty – never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy…

  Do not let us speak of darker days: let us speak rather of sterner days. These are not dark days; these are great days – the greatest days our country has ever lived; and we must all thank God that we have been allowed, each of us according to our stations, to play a part in making these days memorable in the history of our race.”

  Dum spiro spero.

  Subscribe to Human Terrain

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 23:00

• Mapped: Gas Prices Across America Reach All-Time Highs
  Mapped: Gas Prices Across America Reach All-Time Highs

  In recent days, gas prices have skyrocketed to all-time highs.

  According to the American Automobile Association (AAA), the national average price of regular unleaded gas has reached $4.25 per gallon as of March 21st, 2022. This is the first time since 2008 that gas prices had exceeded the $4 per gallon mark.

  The price of gas was already rising two weeks before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, owing to the increased demand due to the lifting of COVID restrictions. But, as Visual Capitalist’s Raul Amoros details below, when the war broke out, the price of regular gas jumped 41¢ during the first week. This surge in prices could add up to $2,000 in annual cost to the average American household.

  While the price at the pump sits at $4.25 per gallon on average, it’s worth mentioning that prices range quite substantially depending on the state. California has the highest average price at $5.86 per gallon. On the other extreme, Kansas has an average price of $3.77 per gallon.

  

  Where is Gas the Most Expensive in America?

  There are eight states where gas prices are above $4.50 per gallon, and three states where the price is above $5: California, Hawaii, and Nevada.

  Here are the 10 states or districts with the highest gas prices:

  

  Where is Gas the Least Expensive in America?

  There are 16 states where gas prices are under $4 per gallon. Here are the 10 states with the lowest gas prices:

  

  There are a few reasons why gas prices can vary from state to state. State taxes play a big role in the final price at the pump, and they can range from 57.6¢ per gallon in Pennsylvania to 8¢ per gallon in Alaska.

  Proximity to refineries is another contributing factor for cheaper gas. States like Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama often have lower prices than other regions.

  When Will Gas Prices Go Down?

  Gas prices were on the rise due to an oil supply shortage. When war broke out, there was an additional price surge due to sanctions or bans on Russian oil exports by the West.

  It’s also worth noting that even as the price of oil begins to fall once again, there is typically a lag before prices at the pump begin to ease for consumers.

  The Energy Information Administration projects that average spot price of Brent crude oil will be $105.22 per barrel this year, a $22 difference compared to its original February forecast. As a result, many experts are expecting that gas prices could stay near or above $4 per gallon for the rest of the year.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 22:40

• ATF Declares Some FRT-15 Triggers "Prohibited Machineguns" 
  ATF Declares Some FRT-15 Triggers “Prohibited Machineguns” 

  Submitted by The Machine Gun Nest (TMGN).,

  The ATF has sent out an open letter to all Federal Firearms Licensees stating that they are now classifying “some“ FRTs or Forced Reset Triggers as machine guns. The letter also mentions that the ATF intends to take “appropriate remedial action with respect to sellers and possessors of these devices.”

  

  This letter is a culmination of events that we’ve covered since the last year, starting with the ATF contacting Rare Breed (the manufacturer of the most popular FRT) and informing them that they were considering the FRT to be a machine gun. In response, Rare Breed challenged the ATF’s decision in court.

  ATF issued an Open Letter on Forced Reset Triggers. Marketed as replacement triggers, some FRTs allow a firearm to automatically expel more than one shot w/ a single, continuous pull of the trigger, making them prohibited machineguns per the GCA & NFA. https://t.co/1w8wueebz3 pic.twitter.com/N3MCSFDpcj

  — ATF HQ (@ATFHQ) March 24, 2022

  More recently, Gun Owners of America reported evidence of a leaked email from ATF documenting plans to give Field Agents the green light to start demanding forfeiture of Forced Reset Triggers and documents relating to the sale/transfer of these devices.

  ATF has finally announced that FRT owners violate the NFA and GCA. In their open letter, ATF states that “Current possessors of these devices are encouraged to contact ATF for further guidance on how they may divest possession.” So, ATF asks that gun owners call them and make them aware that they own what ATF has determined is an illegal machine gun.

  But as always, with the ATF and gun control, there’s a larger story here.

  Forced Reset Triggers or FRTs are not machine guns or machine gun parts. They’re semiautomatic triggers. Interestingly enough, in ATF’s letter, they say that what determined that FRT devices are machine guns was that “some FRT devices allow a firearm to automatically expel more than one shot with a single, continuous pull of the trigger.” Keep in mind the use of the word “continuous.”

  “Unless the ATF doesn’t understand the difference between resetting and pulling a trigger, the statement is further evidence of the agency’s underhandedness,” said Firearms Policy Coalition. 

  Let’s compare this finding with the definition of “machine gun” as defined in 26 USC § 5845(b)

  “The term ‘machinegun‘ means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.”

  Notice how the word “continuous” is missing from the legal definition?

  While it is true that FRT devices do increase a shooter’s rate of semiautomatic fire, the FRT does not convert a semiautomatic firearm into a machine gun. Like the name “Forced Reset” implies, the trigger is reset after firing via spring tension and a mechanical assist.

  Nowhere in the definition of “machine gun” is the rate of fire mentioned. By this logic, match triggers, belt loops, and Jerry Miculek’s fingers should be considered machine guns.

  If this situation sounds familiar, that’s because it is—the ATF in 2019 classified bump stock devices in a similar fashion.

  The ATF did this by considering bump stock devices to be machine guns. Companies made no bump stock devices before 1986, so all bump stocks were effectively banned using the NFA, GCA & FOPA. The ATF uses this same process to ban and criminalize possession of Forced Reset Triggers.

  This overreach is a tactic straight out of the David Chipman Playbook. Chipman was Biden’s nominee to lead the ATF, and a Senior Policy Advisor at Giffords, one of the largest anti-gun organizations. While Chipman proved to be too divisive of a nominee for ATF and had to withdraw his nomination, his thought process and policies still significantly influence the federal government.

  In 2018, Chipman wrote an article called “Legal & Lethal: 9 Products That Could Be The Next Bump Stock,” and while Forced Reset Triggers did not exist at the time, they surely would have made the list.

  So, what’s so important about a four-year-old article, and how does this relate to FRTs?

  Well, this article reveals the process in which the anti-gun lobby and their allies in the ATF seek to erode American gun rights.

  In Section 9 of Legal & Lethal, Chipman details his idea that semiautomatic firearms with “large-capacity magazines” in his mind are the same as machine guns. He does this by arguing the definition of “manual reloading,” saying that; “semiautomatic firearms with large capacity magazines rarely require manual reloading, but they can expel a lot of ammunition in a brief period of time. They do so by allowing a trigger to be pulled many times very easily and ensuring that there is almost always another bullet ready to go. Despite this, large-capacity magazines and semiautomatic firearms equipped with them (sometimes called “assault weapons”) are not regulated under the NFA, even though they pose incredible danger to our communities.”

  If the definition of machine gun can be co-opted to include semiautomatic rifles, it would be disastrous for the firearms community, yet this is precisely where we’re headed with the disastrous bump stock decision, and now one step closer with the FRT situation.

  Watch: Here’s a complete breakdown of the ATF’s open letter on FRTs and what it means for you. 

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

• This Three Bedroom North Toronto Home Just Sold For $613,000 Over Its Asking Price
  This Three Bedroom North Toronto Home Just Sold For $613,000 Over Its Asking Price

  Today in “the housing market definitely isn’t in an inflationary bubble” news, an extensively remodeled 3 bedroom North Toronto home, located at 174 Cranbrooke Ave., sold for more than $600,000 over its asking price this week.

  The home sold after being on the market for just 6 days, according to The Globe and Mail.

  

  It had previously sold in August 2014 for $1,065,000 and sold in February 2022 – less than 8 years later – for almost triple what it went for in 2014. The seller was asking $1.995 million and the home sold for $2.608 million. 

  The house was “extensively remodeled in 2017”, the report notes. The remodel – which included “a modern bathroom upstairs and downstairs a new open dining area and kitchen with stainless steel appliances, Caesarstone countertops and a massive island” – attracted about 80 potential buyers when the home went on the market, the report noted. 

  

  Brayden Irwin, one of the agents who listed the home, said: “We did not do any open houses because we feel serious buyers want to see the house in a private setting and walk through on their own with their agents.”

  He continued: “It gets a better response from the market when they’re able to do that and not being disturbed by other people.”

  

  Seven serious offers had come in by the house’s offer date. Irwin told The Globe and Mail: “Three offers were really above the rest, so it shows that there are a lot of serious buyers in the market.”

  “It seemed like almost every property coming to market was either selling in multiple offer [scenarios] or were selling pre-emptively,” he continued. “It’s a classic North Toronto detached house on a 25-foot lot, but these sellers opened up the main floor and did a really beautiful renovation.”

  

  He concluded: “A lot of people were looking at this house because of its proximity to John Wanless, which is a popular elementary school, and its proximity to Yonge Street.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 22:00

• Ukrainian Refugees Welcomed In Latin America, Though Few Are Staying
  Ukrainian Refugees Welcomed In Latin America, Though Few Are Staying

  By Autumn Spredemann of the Epoch Times

  Nations outside Europe are now seeing Ukrainians fleeing Russia’s war turn up at their borders. In Latin America, countries like Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, Guatemala, and Bolivia, have made immigration policy adjustments and are taking on refugees amid the region’s latest crisis of displaced people arriving from conflict zones.

  Though even in the early stages of this humanitarian dilemma a trend has begun to emerge: Ukrainians are arriving in Latin America, but many aren’t staying.

  

  Nearly 900 asylum seekers have arrived in Brazil from Feb. 24 to March 17 after President Jair Bolsonaro announced a humanitarian visa for Ukrainian refugees on Feb. 28.

  “We will do everything possible to welcome the Ukrainian people,” the Brazilian head of state said.

  

  Brazil offers a unique attraction for the refugees, as it boasts the largest number of Ukrainian residents in the region.

  The majority of resettled and Ukrainian expatriates live in Parana, which is the sixth most populated state in Brazil and home to upwards of 400,000 Ukrainians. The South American giant also has a strong economy and a diverse language profile, including many English and other Western language speakers.

  The Brazilian humanitarian visa allows Ukrainians arriving from the war in their home country to work and study as normal. The initial paperwork is valid for 180 days, however, refugees will be able to live in the country for up to two years after the initial visa expires.

  A volunteer welcome wagon bearing kits filled with clothes, hygiene products, and food greeted 29 Ukrainian refugees who arrived Curitiba, Parana, on March 18.

  Welcome committee coordinator Natalia Waszcynskie, who is the daughter of Ukrainian immigrants, said, “I feel obliged and happy to be able to help refugees. It doesn’t hurt to help, it’s a humanitarian issue.”

  Though despite the warm welcome from government officials and residents, few of the 894 refugees have seized the opportunity for longer-term resettlement.

  As of March 18, the federal police in Brazil reported there were only 21 requests for temporary visas, five for residency, and two inquiries for other visa classifications.

  In Mexico, a similar pattern has evolved with Ukrainian refugees are arriving but not lingering. Like so many, asylum seekers are approaching the U.S. southern border.

  

  President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said on March 2 that Mexico will offer asylum to all people who request it regardless of their nationality. Immigration officials are offering tourist visas good for up to six months for those seeking refuge from the conflict in Ukraine.

  “We would like to shelter everyone, embrace everyone, that there were no borders. We are from the party of universal fraternity,” Obrador said.

  Hundreds of Ukrainians have been arriving in Mexico, many through Tijuana’s international airport, and traveling north to the U.S. border crossing near San Diego. The surge of newly displaced people began with rumors of war and a Russian military build-up last year.

  From October 2021 to February of this year alone, U.S. Border Patrol agents encountered more than 1,300 Ukrainians.

  A federal delegate representing the state of Baja California, Jesus Alejandro Ruiz Uribe, noted that since the beginning of Russia’s attack on Ukraine on Feb. 24, 487 refugees have arrived in the state, with 310 of those making the journey in March alone.

  The push for Ukrainians to enter the United States through the besieged southern land border began in earnest after a mother and her three children, who arrived in Latin America via Mexico City, were granted special entry by the White House after initially being denied entry at San Ysidro due to Title 42 pandemic health restrictions.

  Center for Immigration Studies analyst Todd Bensman believes this sets the wrong tone for Ukrainians seeking asylum in America, especially since more than 3 million refugees have already fled the embattled European nation and are looking for resettlement.

  Bensman said exceptions made at the border for Ukrainian refugees will “undoubtedly draw even more to the southern border and into an asylum system that helps neither Ukrainians nor the American national interest.”

  Meanwhile, Latin American countries are rolling out the welcome mat for their displaced European neighbors.

  Argentina is offering a humanitarian visa to those fleeing the conflict. The National Directorate of Migration authorized the entry of Ukrainian citizens and their direct relatives for up to three years as part of the crisis response effort.

  The South American nation is also home to the second-largest population of Ukrainian immigrants in the region.

  In Central America, Guatemala began accepting refugees from Ukraine on March 11, when two families arrived at the La Aurora International Airport in Guatemala City.

  The director for the Institute of Migration, Stuard Rodriguez, met the families in person and said the country “receives them with open arms and is at their complete disposal to help in whatever is pertinent.”

  

  Bolivia’s national director of migration Katherine Calderon reinforced the country’s open visa policy for refugees fleeing war on March 13. This arrived on the heels of a debacle with a Ukrainian refugee couple that was illegally detained and deported by immigration officials on March 12, despite having the correct paperwork to enter the country.

  Further, Calderon invited Ukrainian citizens to come to Bolivia, offering immediate refugee status as the conflict in Europe enters its second month.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 21:40

• Chinese Factories Set Up Self-Contained "Bubbles" To Keep Production Rolling Despite Lockdowns
  Chinese Factories Set Up Self-Contained “Bubbles” To Keep Production Rolling Despite Lockdowns

  Anybody who has seen the video (censored in China but freely available in the West) of frustrated Shanghaiers and others protesting China’s draconian anti-COVID lockdowns probably understands that, after more than two years of China’s “Zero COVID” policy, the country’s workers have nearly reached their breaking point.

  China is in a tough spot 😬 pic.twitter.com/HqzepoBapi

  — Gabriel Hébert-Mild™ ⓥ (@Gab_H_R) March 24, 2022

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

  Unfortunately for them, the CCP’s best efforts have failed to subdue to daily COVID case numbers, which continued to climb late this week, with yesterday’s daily tally nearing 5K once again.

  

  Fearful of the economic chaos that more lockdowns could unleash, President Xi recently instructed local authorities to shift to a more “targeted” approach to COVID restrictions, with the goal being to find a healthy medium that balances the CCP’s stated priority to protect the lives of its citizens without sacrificing economic growth.

  

  Most recently, this has led Chinese authorities to try a new approach. According to the FT, manufacturers across China are preparing to transform their factories into isolated “bubbles” that can continue to operate for weeks, even during government-ordered lockdowns, by forcing workers to quarantine at work instead of at home.

  The practice reportedly began in southern Guangdong Province, and is presently spreading throughout China. In some cases, hundreds of workers have essentially been forced to live in on-site dormitories – all to keep the production lines rolling.

  Bosch Unipoint, one of the world’s biggest car part manufacturers, was able to maintain production at its factory in Longgang District in Shenzhen because about 200 workers agreed to live at dormitories on site during a week-long lockdown this month. “Their commitment to help the business survive this week was amazing,” said Marco Morea, Bosch Unipoint general manager in China, adding that the plant had co-operated with its most critical suppliers to put in place stocks of essential materials before the lockdown began.

  “People called to ask how we were still producing,” Morea said. Bosch Unipoint has now launched similar preparations at plants in other cities to cope with potential future lockdowns. Morea said the company aimed to ensure that its brake pad factory in eastern Nanjing city, which has 500 employees, would be able to operate for four weeks even in a lockdown as strict as Shenzhen’s. “We have already start getting raw materials and organising beds for staff in order to be prepared,” he said.

  When no dormitories  were available, some workers were simply forced to sleep on the factory floor…

  In Shanghai, where there have been localised movement restrictions on individual residential compounds, some workers have opted to sleep on factory floors in order to make sure they can get to work and so continue to get paid.

  …with only a thin piece of cardboard as a mattress.

  One female Dongguan Fuqiang worker who chose to stay at the factory said that instead of a tent she found space on the factory floor for six days. “We all slept over at the plant with cardboard serving as a mattress,” she told the Financial Times.

  As a team of Goldman analysts explained earlier this week, the alternative could be the loss of an entire percentage point of annual GDP growth – or worse.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 21:20

• If Bitcoin Dies, Freedom Dies With It
  If Bitcoin Dies, Freedom Dies With It

  Authored by Andrew Throuvalas via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  This article was inspired by Max Gagliardi’s thread on Twitter.

  Bitcoin’s prolonged stability and global adoption are not only beneficial, but necessary for free societies to thrive…

  

  The Bitcoin community is one of the most passionate, idealistic and driven groups of people on the internet. Besides a love for Bitcoin’s capabilities and ethics, most Bitcoiners are overwhelmingly optimistic that it will eventually bloom to total fruition.

  The enthusiasm is hardly unwarranted. Bitcoin’s price has roughly doubled every year since 2013. Major corporations are adding the asset to their balance sheets in droves. Twitter founder Jack Dorsey has seemingly dedicated his life to it, and one country has even made it an official national currency.

  Yet Bitcoin doesn’t exist in a vacuum. There are a host of global forces at play that would stand to see the protocol fail.

  And while “failure” for Bitcoin can be defined in a range of ways, it’s only because there are a plethora of issues that humanity desperately needs Bitcoin to address. If it doesn’t successfully address the many issues plaguing humanity, there will likely never be a better technology for guaranteeing global rights and freedoms in our lifetime.

  The best way to appreciate something is to know what we’d lose without it. In that respect, there are five crises we can expect the world to face in a future without Bitcoin.

  WHAT HAPPENS IF BITCOIN DIES?

  1. PRIVACY FAILS

  Bitcoin is an open and neutral monetary network. Anybody can join, set up a public address and take advantage of its functionality — without permission and free of charge. As such, the network need not know nor store any information about its users. It does not discriminate between good and bad participants on the network. It simply executes.

  Compare that to legacy social and financial networks on the internet. From YouTube to Facebook to Twitter, even those networks that are “free to access” require users to create personal profiles linking to various forms of user info. Then, the user effectively “pays” the platforms by providing them more valuable data about their consumer behavior, including every action they take on site. Facebook’s data scandal is a premier example of this.

  Financial networks are even worse culprits, as they are legally bound to collect private data from their users due to anti-money-laundering (AML) and know your customer (KYC) data from their users. These companies source sensitive and personally identifiable information from everyone accessing their services, in the name of fighting money laundering and terrorist financing.

  The result? According to one study, less than 0.1% of all criminal finances are actually impacted by such laws, which successfully recover fewer funds than the cost of implementing the laws themselves. Meanwhile, users of companies who require AML and KYC data must forfeit all semblance of financial privacy. Prior to Bitcoin, there was no reliable alternative for long-term money transfer in existence.

  This doesn’t mean that Bitcoin is a perfect solution. After all, its blockchain is literally a public ledger tracking every transaction that’s ever taken place on the network. Even Bitcoin supporters understand this as a bane for user privacy and sovereignty, not least of whom is Edward Snowden.

  The blockchain is at least pseudonymous because addresses do not directly link to individuals or groups. Furthermore, upgrades like Taproot alongside Layer 2 payment solutions like the Lightning Network help make the tracing of funds more difficult.

  2. CENSORSHIP WINS

  The same social media and financial networks that infringe on users’ privacy are now notorious for violating users’ free speech and financial sovereignty.

  Those who espouse views disapproved by the establishment media class can be banned from every social platform in lockstep. Similarly, those that wish to support causes deemed immoral or illegal by governments may find that these governments can simply order payment platforms to block or seize their funds.

  Bitcoin fixes this. As a truly peer-to-peer payment network, no third-party intermediary can choose to prevent one’s bitcoin from reaching its destination, nor can they be pressured by governments to do so.

  This isn’t just an issue in developing nations. This month, police in Ottawa, Canada, cooperated with popular crowdsourcing platform GoFundMe to block donations from the Freedom Convoy protestors. In a similar fashion, an Ontario Supreme Court justice recently ordered Christian fundraising site GiveSendGo to not distribute funds to the movement either. Across both platforms, that’s over $19 million in donations that governments have attempted to block against the senders’ wishes.

  Bitcoin fixes this and a host of Canadian Bitcoiners already know this. A new Bitcoin-native crowdsourcing platform called Tallycoin has been used to raise almost $1 million for the convoy.

  Unlike other sites, Tallycoin is only used to connect donors and causes, but not to intermediate payments. As a peer-to-peer and global network, Bitcoin itself handles that, sending money directly to truckers on the ground without the threat of seizure or censorship.

  Whether or not one supports the specific movement is beside the point. Protection of property means protection of property for all, and Bitcoin guarantees it cryptographically in an indiscriminate manner.

  3. BIG GOVERNMENT WINS

  For those who have been paying attention to the regulatory conversation surrounding Bitcoin, it’s clear that it’s become a partisan issue. While Republican lawmakers like Wendy Rogers and Cynthia Lummis are fanatical about the asset, Democrats fear it for its use in illicit finance and as a threat to the U.S. dollar.

  The divide makes sense. Republicans are typically for smaller government and freer markets. Democrats are often for relatively larger government, market restrictions and wealth redistribution. Bitcoin fundamentally enables the Republican vision, and limits the Democratic one, as described.

  If adopted as currency, bitcoin’s hard supply cap of 21 million coins firmly restricts government largesse produced by irresponsible money printing. It would force governments to source funds for various programs through taxes only.

  In a money-printing paradigm, citizens effectively “pay” for the cost of money printing through inflation. With more money chasing the same products in an economy, prices of those products naturally start to rise.

  However, this effect often takes a few months to appear after quantitative easing begins. As such, average citizens are often unable to link the responsibility for inflation costs directly to government and central bank decision-making. Because of this, authorities are then given room to obfuscate, blaming supply chain issues and labor shortages for inflation once it arrives, rather than their own incompetence.

  By contrast, when citizens incur taxes, they know the cost came from their government, and they know the exact amount. It is a far more transparent form of payment that they can concretely oppose and hold their politicians accountable for.

  Dr. Saifedean Ammous, independent economist and author of “The Bitcoin Standard,” thoroughly explains how government largesse from money printing hurts economic productivity. He argues that capital is regularly misallocated to the industries that the market has no interest in trading with or sustaining. The war industry is offered as a powerful example in the American context.

  “As it stands, a large number of firms in all advanced economies specialize in warfare as a business, and are thus reliant on perpetuating war to continue being in business. They live off government spending exclusively, and have their entire existence reliant on there being perpetual wars necessitating ever-larger arms spending.

  “This, more than any strategic, cultural, ideological, or security operations, explains why the United States has been involved in so many conflicts in parts of the world that cannot possibly have any bearing on the life of the average American. Only with unsound money can these firms grow to such enormous magnitude that they can influence the press, academia, and think tanks to continuously beat the drums of more war.”  – Dr. Saifedean Ammous

  To summarize: Political decisions would become far more transparent and consequential on a Bitcoin standard. The market would allocate resources far more efficiently and without big-government interference.

  4. CENTRAL BANKS WIN

  Central banks have existed since the 17th century as a type of “bank for bankers” and as buyers of government debt. Many even held monopolies on the issuance of their nation’s currency, which they still hold today.

  However, it was only in 1913 that the establishment of the Federal Reserve System redefined the mandate for central banks across the world. These authorities are now responsible for not only stabilizing a nation’s currency but also its entire economy. The latter objective theoretically requires a more “elastic” (inflationary) money, and thus comes at the expense of currency stability.

  The results haven’t been pretty. Following this transition, the first half of the 20th century featured the greatest two wars humanity has ever known. It also featured an ever-failing commitment to the gold standard, which required that dollars only be printed if redeemable for hard gold.

  In fact, when faced with this restriction, the U.S. government has proven that it need not play fair with its own citizens. In 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 6102, forbidding citizens’ private ownership of gold. He forced them to redeem their holdings at a rate of $20.67 per ounce to the Federal Reserve, only to see their holdings revalued to $35 per ounce with the passage of the Gold Reserve Act in the following year.

  In effect, citizens’ wealth was forcibly stolen from them so that their government could fund whichever programs they desired to “stimulate” the economy. Meanwhile, those citizens’ ability to resist inflationary pressures by holding hard gold was stripped from them up until 1974, when Order 6102 was repealed. The same gold worth $20 per ounce, when confiscated from citizens, is now worth over $1,800 per ounce.

  Bitcoin solves this problem by not only being non-inflationary but also non-confiscatable. As long as one knows his private key, a government cannot seize it, even by force. In return, Bitcoin “forces” central bank money to compete against a harder form of money on the free market, rather than forcibly subjecting people to its devaluation.

  5. THE ENERGY TRANSITION FAILS

  Bitcoin is often criticized for being wasteful, planet searing, and abusive to the environment. Its energy-intensive mining process has caused people otherwise enthusiastic about the asset to distance themselves from it over ESG (environmental, social and governance) concerns. These include Tesla CEO Elon Musk and New York City Mayor Eric Adams, among others.

  In the long term, the opposite will likely prove to be true. Bitcoin’s proof of work, which now consumes more power annually than Finland, will help transition the world to a greener, more renewable energy standard.

  How can this be? As bitcoin’s price appreciates, the demand for newly-minted units grows stronger. With a $700 billion-plus market cap today, mining isn’t just a game, but an entire industry. And with industry comes innovation.

  A study conducted collaboratively by Square and Ark Invest last year argued that Bitcoin mining can incentivize renewable energy production. By acting as an energy buyer of first and last resort, it can stabilize electricity grids with varying supply and demand for energy through an all-new, economically productive use case.

  This is especially important for renewable power sources. Solar, for example, produces highly excessive demand during the day, while producing nothing at night. Wind power is even less predictable. Mining can absorb the excess energy these technologies produce at certain times, thus making them more profitable.

  Ultimately, this will also help address energy shortages around the world. Developers will be willing to build more energy sources in areas of unstable demand, knowing they can subsidize their excess energy through Bitcoin mining when demand is low. That way, they’ll always be there to deliver when demand is high.

  Texas Governor Greg Abbott recognizes this. Last year, his state’s grid was overwhelmed with demand, leading to blackouts that left hundreds dead. As such, he is currently inviting Bitcoin mining as fast as he can in a counterintuitive attempt to help stabilize his grid long term. In the short term, Bitcoin miners get paid to cease operations when asked during times of peak demand.

  Bitcoin presents a free-market solution to renewable energy development and adoption. It is distinct from coercive government attempts to enforce the use of renewables, tax non-renewables and hurt the economy to achieve cleaner energy. With Bitcoin, a green future can be realized without putting more money and power in government hands.

  CONCLUSION

  Bitcoin must not fail. More than just an avenue for making money, the network promises freedom, privacy and property protection like no technology or government before it.

  The forces that serve to lose from Bitcoin’s success will undoubtedly try to stop it. However, if the network is so powerful and secure as we believe, then their attempts should prove futile. The network was built to last: durable amid stress, a threat to authoritarian regimes and an economic boon to free societies.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 21:00

• Deutsche Bank Fires Senior Bankers For Expensing Trip To Strip Club
  Deutsche Bank Fires Senior Bankers For Expensing Trip To Strip Club

  If expensing your strip club receipts is a fireable offense, then maybe every executive on Wall Street should be terminated.

  *DEUTSCHE BANK FIRED TOP BANKERS OVER EXPENSED STRIP CLUB BILL

  if that’s a fireable offense, on Monday all of Wall Street should be laid off

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 25, 2022

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

  Several senior New York-based Deutsche Bank executives were recently fired by the German banking powerhouse after they expensed their strip club tab as a legitimate cost of doing business, according to several inside sources quoted by Bloomberg.

  

  According to the report, the unlucky executives included Ben Darsney, former Americas head of equity capital markets, Ravi Raghunathan, Brandon Sun and Daniel Gaona. Once the bank discovered the issue, it decided to terminate all the executives involved.

  “Deutsche Bank thoroughly investigates allegations of possible misconduct comprehensively and without bias,” a spokesperson for the Frankfurt-based bank said in an emailed statement. “We do not condone violations of our code of conduct or company policy and take remedial action as appropriate based on the severity of circumstances.” The bank declined to comment further on the circumstances of the matter.

  Darsney, Raghunathan, Sun and Gaona didn’t respond to requests for comment. Darsney and Raghunathan were managing directors while Sun was a director and Gaona an associate.

  The firings come as DB CEO Christian Sewing struggles to improve the bank’s internal controls after a string of mishaps, including an incident where the bank breached a deferred prosecution agreement with the US DoJ after it was slow in reporting allegations by a whistleblower, leading to a slap on the wrist.

  As we noted earlier this week, 2021 was a banner year for Wall Street banks and bankers. According to the latest compensation report from the New York State Comptroller’s office, the average bonus on the Street rose more than 20% to a new record high $257,500.

  They better hope their former employer doesn’t try to claw that money back.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 20:40

• NATO And Russia – Whistling Past Each Other's Graveyards
  NATO And Russia – Whistling Past Each Other’s Graveyards

  Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

  “What we have here, is a failure to communicate.”

  – Cool Hand Luke

  There are so many angles from which to view the war in Ukraine. I’ve tried my best to cover them to get a sense of why we are where we are… which is headed towards a much larger conflict.

  

  Despite my deep cynicism, I am essentially an optimist. I tend to see opportunities for end games that result in humanity walking away from any kind of final solution. And sometimes that means having to look beyond the boundary conditions of the current conflict and see it in the grander context of what humanity is trying to achieve.

  So remember, this is my bias. There’s a solution even if things look bleak because humanity has always recoiled from the worst of its excesses when personally confronted with them, at least for a few generations until the memories fade.

  In WWII the nominal good guys, the Allies, defeated the nominal bad guys, the Axis, but mainly the Nazis. I’m not one to subscribe to that caricature of events. I know the issues are far deeper than that.

  During war both sides’ propaganda becomes the height of reductionist. The other side is bad.

  Putin, for his part, is calling Ukrainians both brothers of Russia and Nazis at the same time, overplaying the genocide of Russians in the Donbass. While in the US we’re just calling the Russians by names we would normally reserve for ants invading our kitchen.

  This conflict between West and East is a civilizational one where each side uses words in very specific ways which creates the opportunity for this type of reductionist propaganda. Joaquin Flores in my podcast with him tried to elucidate this idea from the Russians’ perspective.

  There he talked about what Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov means by the word ‘neutral’ as it regards Ukraine. Neutral to Lavrov and Russia means part of the greater Russian Union State, making Ukraine a partner to Russia similar to Belarus and soon to be Kazakhstan.

  The US and those angry ants at British Intelligence who craft the talking points for this war, define neutral like the Swiss: not aligned, a buffer state. And that mismatch in definition is used cynically to promote this idea by NATO and the West that the Russians are not fulfilling their international obligations and justify their helping Ukraine’s heroic defense of itself from a hostile invader.

  And Russia is now a hostile invader. That much is true, certainly.

  To promote the simplistic narrative is to ignore the last eight years in Ukraine as well as NATO’s advance across Europe over the last 30.

  But this is where the unbridgeable gap between East and West lies.

  The fault for this gap lies wholly with NATO and the West who have steadily advanced until they reached the Russian border at the Donbass. To discuss this in any other terms is pathetic and just an excuse to exercise one’s inherent racism and bloodlust against Russians.

  That is what everyone putting a Ukrainian flag on their Twitter feed is doing whether they realize it or not.

  You are not supporting the right to self-determination by a people acting freely here. Ukraine is a puppet state crucial to an aggressive war of conquest by the very people who brought you two years of privation and humiliation over COVID and now want to farm you as tax cattle while living in an unescapable Orwellian Panopticon.

  Russia’s list of grievances are as long as any bill that passes through a Congressional committee these days. But the big ones have been the attempts on flipping Belarus and Kazakhstan. These two pivotal countries were victims of failed revolutions to overthrow the governments there and install NATO-controlled puppets, trying to replicate the ‘victory’ in Ukraine in 2014.

  Not only did they fail miserably, if anything they furthered Russia’s aims to bring the former Soviet republics back into their orbit and end their flirtations with the West. The only one of these left, really, is Ukraine, the Baltics simply do not matter in any strategic sense.

  To discuss this war in anything other than these terms is to purposefully miss the point. And our Neoconservatives in the State Dept. and the White House have absolutely prosecuted foreign policy in that way, showing a level of disingenuousness and willful obtuseness that frankly beggars description without resorting to swearing like a sailor.

  That can only lead to the conclusion I have made multiple times. This war was chosen by the West. It was designed this way. All “attempts” at diplomacy by NATO, the UK, France and the US were simply nothing more than time-buying exercises to build up Ukraine’s strength to launch a blitz of the Donbass and sanction Russia for even responding.

  Why? Well, frankly, to win and subjugate Russia to our oligarchic system of control, c.f. that Orwellian Panopticon I just mentioned. So, we purposefully use the term ‘Ukraine’ to mean something completely different than what the Russians mean by the name. Ukraine to the West is the pre-2014 border. That hasn’t been reality for eight years.

  To the Russians Crimea is Russia, not Ukraine. The Donbass could have been negotiated down but that was refused by the West completely, rejecting the implementation of the Minsk Agreements.

  Make no mistake, Minsk II was nothing more than another time-buying exercise by NATO and former German Chancellor Angela Merkel to get Nordstream 2 completed and allow NATO to build up the Ukrainian military to the point where it could credibly blitz the Donbass.

  When Putin ordered a massive multi-front invasion he was simply pre-empting an attack that was coming.

  The sanctions packages implemented since then were already prepared. They were happening no matter what move Putin made. There was no different outcome here, only the dates on which these events were going to take place.

  NATO chose the place. Putin chose the time. Everything else is chatter and noise.

  So where are we today?

  Both sides believe just enough of their own propaganda as to dig in on their strategies.

  Putin and Russia are methodically turning Ukraine into a meat grinder with a 1000 mile front the UAF cannot possibly keep supplied. The initial attack by Russia was designed to knock out logistics behind UAF lines and make it all but impossible for the cells of Ukrainian forces to support each other without ceding large amounts of territory, if they could even get out from under Russian fire control.

  

  LiveEUMap.com Map of Ukraine 25 March 2022

  The US and NATO think they can now fight a proxy war turning Ukraine into Afghanistan in the 1980’s by sending in billions in weapons and doing everything short of sending in official troops to turn this into an official NATO v. Russia war.

  The losses on both sides will be horrific and high. The chaos unleashed on Ukrainian civilians is terrible. The scenes in recently ‘liberated’ Mariupol are heart breaking.

  Ukraine should have surrendered early on but Davos and NATO do not want that, because that would end their legal justification to send aid in and the dreams of bleeding Russia white through sanctions and outright theft of their foreign assets.

  But the evolution of this war is proceeding exactly as I told you early on. Opening salvos have been fired, now the real war for the future of humanity begins at the legal and financial level.

  Russia has made many smart moves in shoring up its financial position. It kept the gas flowing to Europe to leave the communications lines open there. But since the EU are not reliable actors Russia put them on the published ‘unfriendly list’ of countries that now are allowed to pay for their Russian exports in either rubles (announced by Putin earlier this week) or gold (announced yesterday).

  

  The response to this move by the Twitterati today has been hilarious. It’s clear the talking point went out of PR central that Russia is ‘violating its contracts’ by demanding payment in something other than the contracted currency.

  In a post-sanctions environment where the currency of the contract is useless to one party of the contract that contract is no longer valid. This is a basic contract of adhesion issue where one party has forced another into a subordinate position vis a vis the contract.

  And when that’s the case, the contract as written is invalid. Period.

  This lesson can be applied all across this conflict to see where NATO, the US and Europe have abrogated their responsibilities towards Russia over and over again — START, INF, Budapest, Minsk, etc. — and yet still feel they have the justification under international law to call Russia the aggressor and escalate the conflict.

  It’s childish and irresponsible but it’s also so endemically Davos. When you’re the superior power you can enforce contract rules or break them and leave the other person twisting. Contracts only matter when people abide by them.

  As everyone with some working gray matter has pointed out, Russia has the real power here because it produces what the world needs while the people pushing this war are doing so from an increasingly shaky foundation of paper assets.

  So, contracts be damned, it’s gold or rubles for natural gas, unfriendly Europe.

  It’s bitcoin or local currencies for everyone else.

  Ukraine will be neutral. China will remain friendly. Words matter when a person wants them to matter.

  And from where I’ve sat these past ten years the Russians have honored their words while the West has used them as weapons.

  If we live in a world where agreements are simply a tactical extension of war then Russia tearing off the band-aid in Ukraine ended that illusion.

  Both sides here aren’t listening to the other until one side is forced to, by facts on the ground or in the plumbing of the financial system. The end result will be a world with a new Iron Curtain. The sanctions will stay in place until there is a full political revolution on either side.

  

  My bet is on that happening in the West since it is psychologically and culturally far weaker.

  The West and NATO believe they can effect regime change in Russia by costing some oligarchs their yachts. The Russians feel they can grind out a victory on the ground in Ukraine while running out the clock on the petrodollar-and-paper-gold-inflated monetary system of the West.

  Neither side has yet taken enough damage to back off from their positions. Biden stood up at NATO in Brussels and told the world food shortages are coming and we must endure them because Russia.

  Davos is intentionally, through Biden, Blinken and NATO, trying to destroy the world economy so no one needs Russian energy while killing off millions more useless eaters.

  The Russians responded with: We take gold or rubles for wheat and gas, just not useless euros or dollars. At the same time they finished cleaning the Azov battalion animals out of the important port city of Mariupol, key to the chip industry.

  Then I read on Zerohedge that the Russians are so thoroughly tired of listening to lying US officials that they aren’t even taking calls on their ‘deconfliction hot lines’ between senior military staff. Only the low-level operators are talking.

  But Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said in a statement that the Russian officials “have so far declined to engage.”

  …“We must avoid a scenario of NATO and Russia sleepwalking into war because senior leaders can’t pick up a phone and explain to each other what is happening,” he added.

  The only ones sleepwalking into a NATO/Russia war will be the Neocons who still think some logistics failures around Kharkov and Kiev equal a Russian military weak enough to force into submission. Very soon, Davos will come to the realization they can’t win a war against a united Global South intent on de-dollarizing and repricing their trade in real gold, not their paper, and real barrels of oil.

  Then they’ll want to talk.

  At that point, unfortunately, the graveyards all across Ukraine, Russia and the West will be overflowing.

  *  *  *

  Join my Patreon if you don’t whistle

  BTC: 3GSkAe8PhENyMWQb7orjtnJK9VX8mMf7Zf
  BCH: qq9pvwq26d8fjfk0f6k5mmnn09vzkmeh3sffxd6ryt
  DCR: DsV2x4kJ4gWCPSpHmS4czbLz2fJNqms78oE
  LTC: MWWdCHbMmn1yuyMSZX55ENJnQo8DXCFg5k
  DASH: XjWQKXJuxYzaNV6WMC4zhuQ43uBw8mN4Va
  WAVES: 3PF58yzAghxPJad5rM44ZpH5fUZJug4kBSa
  ETH: 0x1dd2e6cddb02e3839700b33e9dd45859344c9edc
  DGB: SXygreEdaAWESbgW6mG15dgfH6qVUE5FSE

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 20:20

• Demand Destruction Has Begun
  Demand Destruction Has Begun

  One month ago, Brent jumped above $100/bbl for the first time in eight years as Russia executed a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and it became clear that western governments would impose sanctions. The oil market has been in triple digits for practically the entire time since.

  And, after a month of oil prices we have not seen in nearly a decade and weeks of record-high fuel prices, JPMorgan has published a research report (available to pro subs) which finds that high-frequency data suggest that consumers are beginning to react resulting in what the Fed has desperately wanted to achieve all along: commodity demand destruction.

  That said, high prices are clearly not the only demand-destructive force in the world at the moment, however. The crisis in Ukraine, crippling financial sanctions in Russia, and the continued spread of the highly infectious Omicron variant in China have an even more direct impact on regional fuel consumption than high prices.

  As a result, JPMorgan has cut 1.1 mpd off its 2Q22 demand forecasts, followed by about 0.5 mbd cuts to both 3Q and 4Q. On net, this trims 420 kbd on average from the bank’s expectations for 2022 global oil demand as high prices, COVID restrictions, and geopolitical conflict drive demand destruction in Russia, China, India, and Europe.

  While the US has been relatively isolated so far (despite the highest gasoline prices on record), JPM’s demand revisions are heavily concentrated in Europe, which remains the epicenter of the geopolitical shock. Since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war, the bank’s economists have downgraded the growth in the region by over 2%-pts and have raised inflation forecasts by nearly 3%-pts.

  Moreover, after sliding sharply in February and bottoming in early March, COVID infections are up over 40% in the past two weeks across Europe with large increases across the UK, Germany, France, and Italy. Zero-tolerance COVID policy, combined with less effective vaccines and lack of natural immunity, presents a challenge to China’s growth outlook.

  As a result, JPM now sees activity contracting in March and April, prompting a 1.1%-pts cut to China’s 2Q GDP growth. With the downward revisions to the Euro area and China, the largest US commercial bank now projects 1H22 global growth dipping below potential. Displaying limited sensitivity to near-term downside growth risks, major central banks continue to tilt hawkish. Chair Powell reiterated prospects for an accelerated pace of hikes and reinforced the notion that the Fed could soon start moving in 50bp increments. EM central banks also remain on the move.

  The clearest example of demand destruction can be seen in Eurasia, a region which includes both Russia and Ukraine, where mobility has fallen to its lowest level since early 2021.

  

  And in Europe, while mobility trends have reversed after a recovery from Omicron-driven lows earlier this year, they are now once again declining.

  Consequently, JPM has cut its expectations for 2022 Eurasia oil demand by 270 kbd due to sanctions imposed on Russia. Eurasia demand for jet fuel will come in 130 kbd lower than the previous estimate as roughly half of Russian civil aircraft will end up grounded as a result of airspace bans and shortages of parts. JPM also revised Europe oil demand down by 160 kbd on average for 2022 due to sensitivity to high prices and lower expectations for economic growth in the region

  The good news is that for now, US mobility has been relatively resilient in spite of higher oil prices, but here too we are seeing the first signs of hampered driving demand recovery in California, where on-road fuel prices are more than $1.50 above the national average. California vehicle miles traveled (VMT) has been tracking closely to 2018-19 levels since late last year, but has deviated from the 2019 trend twice so far this year: once, as Omicron cases spread through the state, and again starting at the end of February.

  

  This flattening in VMT growth is likely due to the increase in gasoline prices following the Russian invasion and, while if this trend persists or spreads to other regions in the US, JPM said that it will likely revisit its assumptions for US fuel demand for 2022 as well.

  JPM then does a similar exercise for China and India, and likewise cuts its forecasts for Q2 2022 oil demand there too (by 520kb/d and 120lb/s, respectively), and turns its attention to the mounting concerns over stability of Russian supplies.

  Here, as reported previously, JPM finds that large quantities of Russian oil continue to be boycotted by Western refiners. Meanwhile, logistical issues are becoming entrenched as transport remains a significant challenge for Russian sales, with UK and European ports banning vessels flagged, operated or owned by Russia from docking at their ports. Reports of Saudi Arabia actively discussing pricing some of its oil sales to China in Yuan further point to difficulties facing Russia in shifting large volumes from Western consumers to China, where Saudi Arabia is a main supplier of crude. Given that Russia has very limited onshore storage capacity, a halt in exports would trigger production shut-ins within weeks, perhaps on an even larger scale than seen in April 2020.

  Equally important are the developments in Kazakhstan— a country that ships around 1 mbd of its crude oil production through the CPC pipeline to the Russia’s Black Sea port of Novorossiysk. The pipeline was “damaged” on Tuesday, impacting around 1 mbd of export volumes for up to two months. The supply interruption was timed to coincide with the EU’s meeting on Thursday, prompting speculation that Moscow was prepared to retaliate against western sanctions by curbing both its own and Kazakh energy supplies, possibly leading to significantly larger disruptions than the current consensus base case assumes. Needless to say, finding alternative routes for all CPC volumes would be difficult, likely forcing the shut-in of fields in Kazakhstan. For now, JPM has removed 1 mbd from Kazakhstan’s April production.

  Despite the nascent demand destruction, JPM writes that its baseline still assumes that the market’s current extreme aversion to Russian oil will subside. Volumetrically, this means that stranded Russian oil barrels will decline from 3.0-3.5 mbd in March to 2 mbd
  in April and a perpetual 1 mbd thereafter, leading to Brent oil price averaging $114/bbl in 2Q22 and $101/bbl in 2H22, with prices rising over $120 in the interim.

  That said, the bank’s commodity strategist recognize that the European consumer could force the governments’ hand as the human toll from Russia’s invasion mounts. Ominously, JPM cautions that as the single largest buyer of Russian oil, “the more rapidly Europe seeks to cut Russia’s imports, the higher global oil prices will rise” and in the event of a full 3.8 mbd drop in Russian exports, crude oil prices could soar to $185/bbl.

  Of course, all of the above is predicated upon an “all else equal” framework, however as we have reported recently, it now appears that developed government such as the US, UK and Europe are planning to offset demand destruction with what gas stimmies or cutting gas taxes, what some have called “demand construction” which will achieve just the opposite of what it hopes to achieve as Bloomberg’s  Kavier Blas noted two days ago: “Exactly the opposite that the current market requires. Rather than support poorer families, it goes for a blanket, regressive tax policy.“

  OIL DEMAND ‘CONSTRUCTION’⛽️🚗🚛💶

  Germany will cut tax on fuel for 3months by **30 cents of euro for gasoline** and **14 cents for diesel**, Finance Minister Christian Lindner said. Taxpayers will also receive a **one-off subsidy of €300** to help with energy costs | #OOTT

  — Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) March 24, 2022

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

  The UK government joins some European countries in “demand construction” for the oil market, lowering fuel taxes. Exactly the opposite that the current market requires. Rather than support poorer families, it goes for a blanket, regressive tax policy | #OOTT

  — Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) March 23, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 20:00

• Beijing Tells Chinese Business-People To Fill Void In Russian Market Amid Ukraine Crisis
  Beijing Tells Chinese Business-People To Fill Void In Russian Market Amid Ukraine Crisis

  By Rita Li of the Epoch Times

  China’s ambassador to Russia has called on Chinese business-people in Moscow to expand their enterprises by leveraging the Ukraine crisis as severe international sanctions have crippled Russia’s economy in the wake of the invasion.

  

  Ambassador Zhang Hanhui urged Chinese businessmen in Moscow to make good use of the current Russia–Ukraine war as he met with representatives earlier this week. According to a March 21 social media post by the Russian Confucius Culture Promotion Association, the ambassador told business heads to waste no time and “fill the void” in the Russian economy.

  “The current international situation is complex. Big enterprises are facing great challenges or even disruptions in payment and supply chains,” he said at the meeting, according to the post.

  The conference summary made no mention of the Western sanctions, yet Zhang said it was the right time for the private, small-, and medium-sized enterprises to make a difference.

  In response to a question about the ambassador’s remarks, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said during a daily briefing in Beijing on March 22 that the two sides have long been in “normal economic and trade cooperation,” without mentioning the meeting in Moscow.

  In a bid to force an end to the Ukraine crisis, the West has pushed to isolate Russia from the global economic and financial system, including cutting off a number of Russian banks from SWIFT, the main international payment system. Yet concerns remain that China would aid the sanction-slammed Russian economy.

  Despite seeking to portray a neutral stance amid the conflict between Russia and the West, Beijing is widely viewed as tacitly supporting Moscow and has vowed to trade with Russia as normal. Russian banks have switched to China’s state-owned UnionPay as an alternative to Visa and Mastercard, which announced their suspension of credit card services to Russian banks in early March.

  However, analysts at research firm Gavekal Dragonomics said earlier this month that China won’t ride to Russia’s rescue.

  “Even though China’s government probably wishes to assist Russia, it cannot shield its companies from the potentially crippling punishments for violating sanctions,” the analysts wrote.

  “Most large institutions in China are not willing to take the risk of falling afoul of U.S. sanctions,” Martin Chorzempa, a research fellow at the Washington-based think tank Peterson Institute for International Economics, told The Washington Post. “And so any sanction busting is likely to be done by smaller institutions that have less to lose.”

  Officials at the Chinese Embassy in Moscow and the Russia Confucius Culture Promotion Association didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

  The United States and many European Union countries have imposed unprecedented sanctions on Russia, including a ban on Russian oil and gas by Washington, which could further boost Russian energy giants’ presence in China. Beijing also announced a lifting of import restrictions on Russian wheat, just hours after Moscow launched the war in Ukraine on Feb. 24.

  In a two-hour video call with Chinese leader Xi Jinping on March 18, U.S. President Joe Biden warned Beijing of unspecified “implications and consequences” if it were to provide material support to Russia.

  White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a March 7 press briefing that Moscow can’t backfill the effect of Western sanctions by relying on China.

  “It’s just not possible,” she said. “We’ve also seen China abide by the sanctions that have been put in place.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 19:40

• US & G7 Allies Go After Russia's Ability To Sell Its Gold As Sanctions Evasion 'Lifeline' 
  US & G7 Allies Go After Russia’s Ability To Sell Its Gold As Sanctions Evasion ‘Lifeline’ 

  G7 leaders by week’s end following Thursday’s trio of Ukraine-related summits, for which Biden was present in Brussels, agreed to launch new measures seeking to crack down on Russia’s ability to evade US and EU led financial sanctions. As a Thursday White House statement announced, “G7 and EU announce sanctions evasion initiative to prevent circumvention and backfilling of our unprecedented sanctions; continue to blunt Central Bank of the Russian Federation’s ability to deploy international reserves including gold.”

  The statement additionally detailed that the US and its allies will “continue to work jointly to blunt Russia’s ability to deploy its international reserves to prop up Russia’s economy and fund Putin’s war, including by making clear that any transaction involving gold related to the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is covered by existing sanctions.”

  It’s part of what Prime Minister Boris Johnson at Thursday’s G7 meeting dubbed tightening “the economic vice” around Putin, ensuring that he can’t sell the country’s gold elsewhere – and to thwart this perhaps vital final lifeline (the possible crypto lifeline notwithstanding) for the Russian economy and to prop up the rouble. 

  

  After years of building up its reserves – perhaps in anticipation for just such a showdown with the West as is happening now – Russia currently ranks fifth among countries with the largest gold stockpiles, commonly estimated at 2,300 tons, at a worth of just under $140 billion.

  And on Friday, a day after Biden and his pals in Brussels discussed ways to stop Russia utilizing its gold reserves to maintain some stability in an increasingly chaotic economy, the Bank of Russia announced plans to begin buying gold from its banks at a fixed price. This could serve two purposes: 1) provide a path to liquidity for SWIFT-constrained banks, and 2) centralize more of the nation’s gold as Putin accelerates his de-dollarization plans.

  It bears recalling that chairman of the Russia’s Congressional energy committee, Pavel Zavalny, said in a press conference on Thursday – as we detailed earlier – that Russia is open to accepting different currencies for its exports, beginning with natural gas, depending on the buyer’s preferred method of payment, and also “hard money” like gold. However, the chairman said terms will depend on the importing country’s foreign relations status with Russia.

  “When it comes to our ‘friendly’ countries, like China or Turkey, which don’t pressure us, then we have been offering them for a while to switch payments to national currencies, like rubles and yuan,” Zavalny said during the press conference.

  “With Turkey, it can be lira and rubles. So there can be a variety of currencies, and that’s a standard practice. If they want bitcoin, we will trade in bitcoin.”

  Zavalny’s statement comes on the heels of President Vladimir Putin’s comments on Wednesday demanding that ‘unfriendly’ countries pay for Russian gas in rubles. Putin’s message was clear, but it is unclear whether Russia can unilaterally change existing contracts agreed upon in euros.

  #G7 and the #EU are working together to stop #Russia from accessing its $132 billion worth of gold reserves to evade Western sanctions.https://t.co/hmVyyLtQbk pic.twitter.com/pJIAoPuP4y

  — Forbes Middle East (@Forbes_MENA_) March 24, 2022

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

  The State Duma’s energy committee chair echoed Putin’s decision while adding that the country should also accept gold.

  “When we exchange with Western countries…they should pay in hard money,” Zavalny said.

  “And hard money is gold, or they must pay in currencies which are convenient for us, and that is the national currency – ruble. That relates to our ‘unfriendly’ countries.”

  Russia also being open to ‘alternatives’ like accepting bitcoin shifts the tide as Putin last year had dismissed the possibility in an interview at the Russian Energy Week event in Moscow.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 19:20

• Return Of "Go-Stop" Fed Will Lead To Sky High Rates
  Return Of “Go-Stop” Fed Will Lead To Sky High Rates

  By Simon White, Bloomberg Markets Live Commentator and reporter

  The Federal Reserve in the 1960s and 1970s vacillated between responding to inflation and employment, leading to volatile business cycles, rampant inflation, and weak growth. This so-called “go-stop” approach is akin to today’s environment, and led in the 1970s to the Fed initially underdelivering on rate rises, which then forced it to over-compensate with the eye-watering 20%-rates of the Volcker era in the early 1980s.

  The 70s have several differences to today’s environment, but there are a number of key similarities that make the lessons worth heeding. For a start, the late 1960s — when the seeds were sown for the Great Inflation of the 70s — resemble today’s backdrop.

  Back then, the Fed underestimated the so-called NAIRU (non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment) meaning it thought it had more room to ease than it really did. Real-time estimates of the NAIRU were over a percentage point lower than retrospective estimates.

  

  Political pressure from the LBJ and Nixon administrations to pay for social programs and the Vietnam War kept Fed policy easy while the budget deficit was allowed to swell to the widest since the WWII. That combination was highly conducive to the genesis of runaway inflation in the 1970s.

  That inflation is blamed on many things — Nixon closing the Gold Window in 1971, the Arab oil embargo in 1973, the ending of the Nixon price-wage controls in 1971-74, among others — but in reality those were just kerosene on a fire that had already been lit due to excessively loose monetary and fiscal policy.

  The Fed has made the same mistake under a different guise in the current cycle. Over the last two years, the Fed moved to average inflation targeting and a commitment to maximum employment. Rather than underestimating NAIRU, the Fed jettisoned the concept altogether! It openly stated it would “over-loosen” if necessary to achieve full employment.

  That’s reminiscent of the “go-stop” central banking of the 60s and 70s. The Fed would keep policy loose in the “go” stage of the cycle, until the public became concerned about inflation. Then it would move to the “stop” phase of tightening policy until rising unemployment became a concern.

  Today we have already had the “go” phase, and now we are entering the “stop” phase as political concern grows about the “cost of living crisis”.

  However, the Fed is likely to lose its nerve in the face of slowing growth and financial-market volatility, the same way it lost its nerve when it said inflation was transitory, only to see it accelerate to almost 8%. Unemployment will begin to rise, and the political pressure will be on the Fed to revert to “go” mode again.

  This we saw in the 1970s when then Fed Chair Arthur Burns began to re-loosen policy in 1974 in response to rising unemployment, even though the embers of inflation were still glowing. Inflation came back with a vengeance in the second half of the decade, and was not finally tamed until the sky-high rates of the Volcker era in the early 1980s.

  

  There is a similar risk in this cycle of seemingly tamed inflation re-rearing its head, and rates having to be jacked significantly higher — causing a deep recession — as political pressure to temper prices eases, the mid-term elections pass and unemployment begins to rise.

  Arthur Burns oversaw the Great Inflation of the 1970s, but it required a Paul Volcker to crush it. Like a general fighting the last war, Jay Powell is unlikely to be the man who finally slays today’s inflation demon.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 19:00

• Arizona Legislature Passes Bill Requiring Proof Of US Citizenship To Vote
  Arizona Legislature Passes Bill Requiring Proof Of US Citizenship To Vote

  Authored by Isabel van Brugen via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Arizona Legislature passed a bill this week that would ensure only U.S. citizens with proof of identification are eligible to register to vote in the state.

  

  Under House Bill 2492, Arizona voters would be required to provide proof of citizenship on voter registration forms. 

  The state Senate passed the bill March 23 in a 16–12 vote, with 12 Democrats voting against the bill and two others—Democratic Sens. Lela Alston and Juan Mendez—opting not to vote. The state House already passed the bill, which now heads to Republican Gov. Doug Ducey’s desk to be signed into state law.

  The bill requires that every voter is a citizen of the United States and is able to provide satisfactory evidence as such. The legislation states that the county recorder or other officer in charge of elections must reject any application for registration that is not accompanied by satisfactory evidence of citizenship.

  “The Attorney General shall prosecute individuals who are found to not be United States citizens,” the bill states, referring to non-citizens who attempt to register to vote.

  Democrats say the measure is part of an effort to suppress voting in the battleground state.

  Arizona’s Secretary of State Katie Hobbs called on Ducey to veto the bill, saying in a Twitter post that it “creates new, unnecessary barriers for people registering to vote.”

  Testifying March 23 on why House Bill 2492 should become state law, Republican Sen. Warren Petersen, chairman of the state Senate’s Judiciary Committee, said it would bolster election integrity.

  “The issue is making sure the citizens of our country are voting … and if you’re not a citizen of this country, you’re not allowed to vote,” he said.

  Republican Rep. Jake Hoffman, who sponsored the bill, told the Arizona Daily Independent in February 2022 that the bill is to ensure that only U.S. citizens are able to vote in U.S. elections.

  “Non-citizens should never be allowed to vote in American elections, yet shockingly nearly 12,000 people voted in the 2020 general election for federal office without any proof of U.S. citizenship,” he said. 

  “Republicans at the Capitol are fighting like hell to protect the integrity of Arizona’s elections with bills like HB2492, so that voters can have confidence that every legally cast ballot matters,” added Hoffman.

  Hoffman also said that the number of people using the federal form without providing proof of citizenship had jumped between 2018 and 2020.

  “So clearly this is a trend that is increasing,” Hoffman said. “This bill ensures that there is maximum flexibility to provide documentary proof of citizenship, but we don’t want foreign interference in our elections.”

  The Epoch Times has reached out to Ducey’s office for comment. 

  The Associated Press contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 18:20

• "I Was Stunned And Disgusted" – Kansas Applebee's Forced To Close As Workers Revolt Over Wage-Cut Plans
  “I Was Stunned And Disgusted” – Kansas Applebee’s Forced To Close As Workers Revolt Over Wage-Cut Plans

  As American workers and businesses struggle with the fallout from the most vicious bout of inflation in 40 years, workers across the US are struggling as wage growth lags behind inflation. For example, federal jobs data released last month showed that wage growth was disappointingly slow, as the YoY growth rate actually declined from January, coming in at just 5.1% (and missing the Wall Street consensus forecast of 5.8%).

  

  Since the start of the pandemic, most economists expected near-record numbers of open jobs would force employers to hike wages significantly. And while wages did indeed climb for public-facing workers during the pandemic, that once-torrid growth has since leveled off.

  While businesses with large numbers of white-collar workers have the option of saving on office rents by shifting to a permanent all-remote or hybrid model, restaurants, brick-and-mortar retail businesses, restaurants and other businesses that rely on a permanent in-person workforce simply don’t have that luxury.

  This has created new tensions between management and labor that is, in some cases, leading to conflict. And one particularly interesting example of this tension played out at an Applebees in Lawrence, Kansas, when workers quit en masse in protest of a suggestion by management to try and hire new workers at a lower wage, based on the notion that higher gas prices would force more of the millions of Americans currently on the sidelines of the labor market to seek employment.

  Here’s what happened, according to a report in the Lawrence Journal-World.

  The restaurant on south Iowa Street was closed for large parts of Tuesday because of high gasoline prices, but perhaps not for the reasons you would think. Multiple employees of the chain quit after seeing an email from a regional manager urging the restaurant to begin hiring employees at lower wages, under the theory that people are becoming more desperate to take a job as fuel prices increase.

  “Everyone has heard that gas prices continue to rise,” read an email that came from the account of Wayne Pankratz, executive director of operations for Applebee’s franchisee Apple Central LLC. “The advantage this has for us is that it will increase application flow and has the potential to lower our average wage. How you ask?

  “Most of our employee base and potential employee base live paycheck to paycheck. Any increase in gas price cuts into their disposable income. As inflation continues to climb and gas prices continue to go up, that means more hours employees will need to work to maintain their current level of living.”

  The workers’ revolt started when one of the managers at the restaurant saw the email, and was so enraged, he made copies and distributed them to other employees. By the time the restaurant was set to open on Tuesday, the staff refused to work, and a walkout began.

  When Jake Holcomb, one of several managers at the Lawrence restaurant, ended up seeing the email on Monday, it upset him enough that he made copies of the email and distributed them to several employees of the restaurant.

  When opening time arrived on Tuesday, the manager who was scheduled to open the restaurant at 2520 Iowa St. declined to open the restaurant after reading the emails. She has since quit over the email. Holcomb has too. In total, Holcomb said three of the six managers at the restaurant quit in protest of the email.

  “I was just stunned and disgusted,” said Holcomb, who had worked at Applebee’s in Lawrence and elsewhere since 2020.

  By Wednesday, the Lawrence restaurant had reopened. A spokesman for Apple Central LLC confirmed the Lawrence location was closed for a time on Tuesday, but he couldn’t confirm how many employees had quit or what role a lack of employees played in Tuesday’s closing.

  The restaurant reopened on Wednesday, but word was out, and now Applebee’s corporate has stepped in to do damage control.

  But the spokesman said he agreed that the email was stunning.

  “It is embarrassing. It really is,” said Scott Fischer, director of communications for Apple Central, which is based in Kansas City and has 47 Applebee’s restaurants in the Midwest.

  As the cost of everything from housing to gas to food continues to surge, America’s hourly workers are indeed feeling the pinch far worse than their white collar peers. Let this be a warning to any other businesses looking for savings by lowering wages: America’s wage laborers are officially stretched to the breaking point.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 18:00

• Rickards: The Newest Case For Gold
  Rickards: The Newest Case For Gold

  Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

  The stars are aligning for gold. A combination of geopolitical tumult, supply chain problems and inflation all point to much higher gold prices.

  

  Today, I’ll break it all down.

  If you believe that the war in Ukraine will end soon, that global supply chains will heal quickly and that inflation is transitory, then you’re probably in for a rude awakening. In fact, none of those things is likely.

  Even if the shooting stops in Ukraine soon, something that is not at all assured, the geopolitical consequences will dominate events for years or decades.

  Putin will have asserted Russian de facto control over eastern Ukraine, if not outright annexation. Ukraine’s hope of NATO and EU membership will be permanently denied.

  And the divisions in the West between the U.S. and the U.K. on the one hand and France and Germany on the other with respect to energy and trade with Russia will be on full display.

  The Western alliance will lie in ruins. But Ukraine isn’t the only international security crisis underway.

  Simmering Tensions

  China has been rattling sabers in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea.

  Iran is in the late stages of renegotiating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that deals with Iran’s uranium enrichment plans and efforts to build a nuclear warhead that can be fitted on a missile.

  North Korea is again testing intermediate-range missiles and may be preparing to test an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of reaching Guam, Hawaii, Alaska and the West Coast of the United States.

  Furthermore, there are ongoing crises in Syria, Lebanon, Venezuela, Sudan, Ethiopia and elsewhere around the world. The bottom line is there are plenty of geopolitical tensions to go around.

  Besides the geopolitics, there’s the geoeconomics…

  “The War Is Already Damaging Global Supply Chains”

  Supply chains will be in even worse shape. The global supply chain crisis was underway well before the war in Ukraine. The pandemic particularly hurt supply chains as buyer and seller facilities in plants, ports, shipping, trucking, warehouses and distribution centers were all closed temporarily (and at different times depending on the location of the outbreaks).

  This created tremendous bottlenecks and backlogs. Now comes the war in Ukraine with extensive sanctions, retaliation and physical disruption from the war itself. The war is already damaging global supply chains.

  For example, BMW and Volkswagen have both shut down automobile production lines because of their inability to obtain a simple cable wiring harness part that is supplied by production facilities in Ukraine.

  In some cases, you can assemble most of the automobile and then install a delayed part near the end of the process. That’s not true for wiring harnesses. They are installed almost at the beginning of the manufacturing process. This means that the assembly line is halted at an early stage of production and nothing else can be done in the meantime.

  This is a pointed example but far from the only one. The manufacture of many products all over the world is suffering disruption due to supply chain delays with their origin in Ukraine. Agriculture and wheat exports may be the worst affected.

  The Breadbasket Is Empty

  The planting season begins soon and Ukraine cannot obtain the fertilizer it needs to plant crops. Those crop shortages will impact global supplies next fall when the harvest season begins.

  Ukraine’s nickname is the Breadbasket of Europe. It along with Russia supply about 25% of the global wheat supply and 20% of the global corn supply. What do you think will happen when that supply dries up?

  The problem is actually worse than that because most of the grain in the world is not raised for human consumption. It’s raised to feed the animals that we eat. If you want a nice hamburger, for example, it’s going to come from a cow that ate wheat probably produced in Ukraine. And now that’s offline.

  Then there’s the impact on semiconductors and strategic metals. Airbus gets 50% of its titanium from Russia and Boeing gets 35% of its titanium from Russia. Russia and Ukraine together control 30% of the global output of titanium, so they’re not going to be getting any new airplanes for a while.

  “Good Luck Making Semiconductors”

  Meanwhile, we’ve cut off semiconductor shipments to Russia. If you cut off semiconductors to Russia, yes, that will damage their economy. But how do you make semiconductors? You take silicon chips and etch them with lasers.

  How do you power a laser? With a processed neon gas. Sixty-five percent of all the processed neon gas in the world comes from one company in Odessa, Ukraine. So Putin says, oh, you’re cutting off my semiconductors? Fine. I’m going to cut off your neon gas. Good luck making semiconductors.

  Basically, you’re talking about shutting down much of the world’s semiconductor industry. Think about that for a second. There are over 1,400 semiconductors in your car alone.

  Supply chains take decades to build but can be fractured in a matter of weeks when extreme sanctions are imposed, as they have been on Russia.

  Pick Your Poison

  Meanwhile, Russia’s exports will not stop, but they will be rerouted to China, India and the Middle East instead of Europe and the U.S. The result will be higher costs, longer lead times and persistent shortages.

  Inflation is also not temporary or “transitory.” Once prices of oil, natural gas, strategic metals and agricultural exports spike, they do not retreat unless there is something like a global depression.

  So, your choices are permanently higher prices or a new great depression. Take your pick. All of these scenarios are bad for the global economy but good for gold. The stars are aligning for gold.

  Inflation is obviously also good for gold because inflation generally runs ahead of interest rate hikes. The interest rates do catch up eventually, but for the first year or two, higher inflation with lagging rate hikes means real rates are going negative.

  That’s the ideal condition for gold price increases.

  A Golden Anchor

  Contrary to most investors’ expectations, a serious recession or even depression is also good for gold. Gold prices rose almost 75% during the Great Depression (from $20.67 per ounce to $35.00 per ounce) as the government engineered a dollar devaluation to cause inflation in all commodities as a way to defeat the prevalent deflation.

  With this as the investment backdrop, gold investors should get ready for what I call $100 days.

  At current price levels, making large profits in gold gets easier by the day. Here’s why: If you own gold and it goes up $100 per ounce, you make $100 per ounce. But each $100 per ounce gain is easier than the one before because it’s a smaller percentage gain from a higher denominator.

  If gold is $1000 per ounce and it goes up $100 per ounce, that’s a 10% gain. But, if gold is $2,000 per ounce and it goes up $100 per ounce, that’s a 5% gain.

  The Sooner You Buy Gold, the Better

  Carrying that logic forward, if gold is $3,000 per ounce and it goes up $100 per ounce, that’s a 3.3% gain. Each increase is easier because it represents a smaller percentage of the new base price.

  But you still make $100 per ounce.

  That’s why it’s important to buy gold now because this process is just beginning. We’ll see $100 per ounce gains on a weekly basis. Soon, we’ll see those gains on a daily basis. At $5,000 per ounce, a $100 per ounce gain is a 2% gain, which is almost normal daily volatility.

  The sooner you buy gold, the sooner you can start to enjoy those $100 days … or maybe $10,000 days if you own 100 ounces.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 17:40

• Pacific Fleet Commander Says US Must Be "Prepared" For China To Retake Taiwan
  Pacific Fleet Commander Says US Must Be “Prepared” For China To Retake Taiwan

  Earlier today, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen told CNBC that the US presently has no plans to sanction China for tacitly aiding Russia in the Ukrainian war effort. Of course, that will likely change when Beijing finally makes its move on Taiwan.

  

  Following yesterday’s report about a landmark new security deal between the PRC and the Solomon Islands, the commander of the US Pacific Fleet – who has repeatedly warned about China’s increasingly aggressive military “boldness” that has been on display over the past year – told the FT in an interview that the US must be “prepared” for China to move on Taiwan (which Washington would be treaty-bound to defend).

  Admiral John Aquilino, head of Indo-Pacific Command, said China had displayed a “boldness” over the past year that ranged from its increasingly assertive military activity near Taiwan and other parts of the South China Sea to its rapid nuclear expansion and a hypersonic weapon test in July.

  While many Americans remain ignorant of the possibility of an imminent invasion, Aquilino noted that a lot can change in the span of just a few months. Take the situation in Ukraine, for example. Five months ago, few expected that Russia would launch such a “special military operation.”

  “I don’t think anyone five months ago would have predicted an invasion of the Ukraine. So I think the number one lesson is: ‘Hey, this could really happen.'”

  Aquilino told the Financial Times during his first visit to Australia as head of US forces in the Indo-Pacific. “Number two, don’t be complacent…We have to be prepared at all times.”

  One indication of China’s increasingly aggressive military posture: it’s increasingly aggressive military drills, as it sends warplanes to intimidate Taiwan by flying through the island’s airspace.

  “Their operations have certainly changed specifically as it applies to their operations around Taiwan – increased maritime and air operations that are designed as a pressure campaign against the people of Taiwan,” Aquilino said in his first wide-ranging interview since assuming command at Indo-Pacom last April.

  “I wouldn’t say I’m more concerned, but I do see increased pressure, and we have to make sure we are prepared should any actions get taken,” added Aquilino, who commanded the US Pacific Fleet before Indo-Pacom.

  Aquilino also discussed China’s development of Hypersonic weapons: missiles that fly faster than the speed of sound. The weapons have recently been employed by the Russian military in targeted strikes on Ukrainian targets.

  Asked whether the hypersonic weapon was designed to target the US or facilitate an attack on Taiwan, Aquilino said it was an “offensive capability” – not a defensive weapon – that had “many applications”.

  “I don’t think it was built for a specific one, but it certainly destabilises the region,” he said. “That capability that could be applied against any partner in the region.”

  The “very steep increase” in China’s nuclear arsenal is another cause for alarm, Aquilino said. The Pentagon projects the PRC’s nuclear arsenal will surpass 1,000 warheads this decade. He added that Indo-Pacom was working with Strategic Command, which overseas US nuclear forces, to provide an “integrated deterrence” against the growing nuclear threat.

  In the face of an increasingly aggressive China, the US is relying more and more on security cooperation with its allies, particularly its partners in “the Quad”, the security-oriented cooperation between the US, Australia, Japan and India that Beijing has obliquely criticized as a “Pacific NATO”.

  “We’re synchronising more and more with our allies and partners,” said Aquilino, pointing to a recent military exercise that involved seven countries and four aircraft carriers. “Bringing that credible combat deterrent force and operating forward with our allies and partners is one of the key focus areas.” Asked what role Australia and Japan would play in any Taiwan conflict, he said they would have to decide for themselves but said the US wanted to be ready to operate with its allies. “What we want to continue to do is to operate together, train together…so that whatever decisions those policymakers choose, we’re ready to be able to respond as tasked.”

  Cooperation in peacetime is one thing. But the big question is: can these partners be relied upon to assist the US in helping the Taiwanese repel an invasion? That, of course, remains to be seen.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 17:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Visualizing The EU's Energy Dependency
  Visualizing The EU’s Energy Dependency

  In response to Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. and EU have imposed heavy sanctions aimed at crippling the Russian economy. However, as Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu details below, these bold actions also come with some potentially messy complications: Russia is not only one of the world’s largest exporters of energy products, but it is also Europe’s biggest supplier of these fuels.

  As of October 2021, Russia supplied 25% of all oil imported by the EU, which is three times more than the second-largest trade partner. Naturally, the policies and circumstances that have led to this dependency have been under major scrutiny in recent weeks.

  To help you learn more, this infographic visualizes energy data from Eurostat.

  

  Energy Dependency, by Country

  To start, let’s compare the energy dependence of each EU member, both in 2000 and 2020 (the latest year available). This metric shows the extent to which a country relies upon imports to meet its energy needs.

  Note that Denmark’s value of -35.9% for the year 2000 is not a typo. Rather, it means that the country was a net exporter of energy.

  

  Over this 20-year timeframe, the EU-27 average country’s energy dependence has increased from 56.3% to 57.5%, meaning EU members became slightly more reliant on energy imports over those two decades.

  Where Do EU’s Energy Imports Come From?

  Looking further into energy imports reveals that Russia is the main supplier of crude oil, coal, and natural gas. Continue below for more details.

  Crude Oil Imports

  The EU imports more crude oil from Russia than the next three countries combined.

  

  This shouldn’t come as a surprise, as Russia was the world’s third largest producer of oil in 2020. The country has several state-owned oil companies including Rosneft and Gazprom.

  Coal Imports

  Coal-fired power plants are still being used across the EU, though most member states expect to completely phase them out by 2030.

  

  Russia has the second largest coal reserves in the world. In 2020, it mined 328 million metric tons, making it the sixth largest producer globally.

  Natural Gas Imports

  Natural gas is commonly used to heat buildings and water. A majority of the EU’s supply comes from Russia via the Nord Stream series of pipelines.

  

  Nord Stream 1 is the longest sub-sea pipeline in the world and was completed in 2011. It starts from the Russian city of Vyborg and connects to the EU through Germany.

  Nord Stream 2 is a recently constructed expansion which was expected to double the project’s capacity. Germany has since halted the approval process for this pipeline in response to Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

  What Happens Now?

  In retaliation against Western sanctions, Russia has announced an impending ban on exports of certain goods and raw materials.

  European gas prices skyrocketed in response, as many fear that Russia could cut off natural gas supplies. This, of course, would have very negative effects on both consumers and businesses.

  In early March 2022, both the European Commission and the International Energy Agency (IEA) introduced proposals on how Europe could reduce its energy dependency.

  We must become independent from Russian oil, coal and gas. We simply cannot rely on a supplier who explicitly threatens us.

  – URSULA VON DER LEYEN, PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION

  Cutting off one’s biggest supplier is likely to cause issues, especially when dealing with something as critical as energy. Few countries have the capacity (or willingness) to immediately replace Russian imports.

  The proposals also discussed options for boosting Europe’s domestic output, though the commission’s report notably excluded nuclear power. For various reasons, nuclear remains a polarizing topic in Europe, with countries taking either a pro or anti stance.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 02:45

• Pentagon Says Russian Military Leaders Repeatedly Declining 'Deconfliction' Calls
  Pentagon Says Russian Military Leaders Repeatedly Declining ‘Deconfliction’ Calls

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  Top Russian military officials have repeatedly declined calls with US military leaders since the attack on Ukraine started on February 24, The Washington Post reported on Wednesday, raising fears of a miscalculation between the two nuclear powers.

  Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley have tried to set up calls with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Gen. Valery Gerasimov. But Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said in a statement that the Russian officials “have so far declined to engage.”

  

  The US and Russian militaries have set up a deconfliction line meant to avoid miscalculations, but it is operated by lower-level officials. US officials told the Post that higher-level contacts are needed.

  Consider the following deeply alarming quote from a former NATO commander:

  “There is a high risk of escalation without the firebreak of direct contact between the most senior officials,” said James Stavridis, who served as the Supreme Allied Commander at NATO from 2009 to 2013. “Very young people are flying in jets, operating warships, and conducting combat operations in the Ukrainian war. They are not seasoned diplomats, and their actions in the heat of operations can be misunderstood.”

  “We must avoid a scenario of NATO and Russia sleepwalking into war because senior leaders can’t pick up a phone and explain to each other what is happening,” he added.

  The lack of high-level contact comes as the US and NATO are building up forces in Eastern Europe, stepping up flights in the region, and are pouring weapons into Ukraine via the Polish border. In a message to the Western powers, Russia recently launched a missile strike on a Ukrainian base housing foreign arms and volunteers only 15 miles from the Polish border.

  While the Pentagon has been attempting high-level talks with Russia, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, the US’s top diplomat, has not. US officials told the Post that since Russia’s invasion began, Blinken hasn’t even tried to speak with his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov.

  The US hasn’t shown an interest in pushing for a diplomatic solution in the conflict and is instead pledging more weapons for the Ukrainians and preparing more sanctions on Russia.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/25/2022 – 02:00

• Victor Davis Hanson: The Real 'Reset' Is Coming
  Victor Davis Hanson: The Real ‘Reset’ Is Coming

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  President Joe Biden believes the Ukraine war will mark the start of a “new world order.”

  In the middle of the COVID global pandemic, Klaus Schwab and global elites likewise announced a “great reset.”

  Accordingly, the nations of the world would have to surrender their sovereignty to an international body of experts. They would enlighten us on taxes, diversity, and green policies.

  When former President Donald Trump got elected in 2016, marquee journalists announced partisan reporting would have to displace the old, supposedly disinterested approach to the news.

  There is a common theme here.

  

  In normal times progressives worry that they do not have public support for their policies. Only in crises do they feel that the political Left and media can merge to use apocalyptic times to ram through usually unpopular approaches to foreign and domestic problems.

  We saw that last year: fleeing from Afghanistan, the embrace of critical race theory, trying to end the filibuster, pack the court, junk the Electoral College, and nationalize voting laws.

  These “new orders” and “resets” always entail far bigger government and more unelected, powerful bureaucracies. Elites assume that their radical changes in energy use, media reporting, voting, sovereignty, and racial and ethnic quotas will never quite apply to themselves, the architects of such top-down changes.

  So we common folk must quit fossil fuels, but not those who need to use corporate jets. Walls will not mar our borders but will protect the homes of Nancy Pelosi, Mark Zuckerberg, and Bill Gates.

  Hunter Biden’s lost laptop will be declared, by fiat, not news. In contrast, the fake Alfa Bank “collusion” narrative will be national headline news for weeks.

  Middle class lifestyles will be curbed as we are instructed to strive for sustainability and transition to apartment living and mass transit. But the Obamas will still keep their three mansions, and Silicon Valley futurists will insist on exemptions for their yachts.

  In truth, we are about to see a radical reset – of the current reset. It will be a different sort of transformation than the elites are expecting and one that they should greatly fear.

  The world and the United States are furious over hyperinflation that may soon exceed 10% per year. We will be lucky if it ends only in recession or stagflation, rather than a global depression.

  The mess was created by the same apparat who bought into “modern monetary theory.” That silly university idea claimed prosperity would follow vastly expanding the money supply, keeping interest rates at de facto zero levels, running huge annual deficits, piling up unsustainable national debt, and subsidizing workers to stay home.

  Natural gas and oil costs are now soaring to unsustainable levels – and to the point where the middle class simply will not be able to travel, keep warm in winter, or cool in summer.

  Both in Europe and the United States left-wing governments deliberately curbed drilling and non-Russian pipelines. They shut down nuclear power plants and subsidized costly, inefficient solar and wind projects. They ended up not with utopia, but with fuel shortages, high prices, and energy dependency on the world’s most repressive regimes.

  The woke revolution in the West was supposed to teach us that the “white male”-dominated Western world is toxic. Its origins, ascendence, and current leisure and affluence were supposedly due only to systemic exploitation, racism, and sexism.

  Elites introduced cancel culture, doxxing, deplatforming, and social ostracism to shame these supposed exploiters and to destroy their lives and careers.

  Few asked how a supposedly noxious West of some 2,500 years duration became the number one destination of millions of global non-Western migrants and offered the greatest degree of global prosperity and freedom for its citizens.

  So a reset reckoning is coming – in reaction to the “new orders” championed by Biden and the Davos set.

  In the November 2022 midterms, we are likely to see a historic “No!” to the orthodox left-wing agenda that has resulted in unsustainable inflation, unaffordable energy, war, and humiliation abroad, spiraling crime, racial hostility – as well as arrogant defiance from those who deliberately enacted these disastrous policies.

  What will replace it is a return to what until recently had worked.

  Closed and secure borders with only legal and measured immigration will return. Americans will demand tough police enforcement and deterrent sentencing, and a return to integration and the primacy of individual character rather than separatist fixations on the “color our skin.”

  The public will continue to tune out of the partisan and mediocre “mainstream” media. We will see greater increased production of oil and natural gas to transition us slowly to a wider variety of energy, strong national defense, and deterrent foreign policies.

  The prophets of the new world order sowed the wind and they will soon reap the whirlwind of an angry public worn out by elite incompetence, arrogance, and ignorance.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 23:40

• China's Pursuit Of Food Security Comes As Crop Conditions Set To Be "Worst In History" 
  China’s Pursuit Of Food Security Comes As Crop Conditions Set To Be “Worst In History” 

  In September 2020, Michael Every of Rabobank floated the question: What possible disruption is coming that requires China to start massive stockpiling of all possible commodities? 

  It was no secret by 2021, China panic hoarded half of the world’s maize and other grains resulting in increased food inflation. 

  China’s buying spree of all commodities left many market observers puzzled by Beijing’s stockpiling motives. Now we understand the second-largest economy in the world was forecasting a global catastrophe of widespread famine due to disrupted food supply chains. 

  Global food supplies were already tight on a post-COVID basis due to snarled supply chains and adverse weather conditions in key growing areas worldwide. The Ukraine invasion by Russia was a shock. It fractured global food supply chains and sent food prices to record highs with the very risk shortages will materialize in emerging market economies dependent on the eastern European country. 

  

  Ukraine is one of the world’s largest agricultural exporters of corn and wheat. Before the invasion, Ukraine was the second-largest supplier of grains for the European Union and one of the largest suppliers for emerging markets in Asia and Africa. Breaking down the numbers, Ukraine produced 49.6% of global sunflower oil, 10% of global wheat, 12.6% of global barley, and 15.3% of global maize. This year harvest will be severely reduced because of war. 

  Last week, the United Nations (UN) World Food Programme (WFP) warned that disruptions in Ukraine “risk imminent famine and starvation in more places around the world.” 

  So it’s apparent President Xi Jinping made the right decision in prioritizing food stockpiling ahead of the global food supply chains fracturing. However, Xi has an emerging food production problem. 

  Bloomberg cites Tang Renjian, China’s agriculture minister, who warned that last year’s record-breaking floods had sparked “big difficulties” with food production. 

   “China faces big difficulties in food production because of the unusual floods last autumn. 

  “Many faming experts and technicians told us that crop conditions this year could be the worst in history,” he said. 

  Next, food protectionism may flourish in agricultural-centric countries that want to first satisfy domestic supplies before exporting. This is already beginning and may increase food prices and induce shortages. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 23:20

• DOJ Accused Of Assault On Free Speech And Press In Project Veritas Case
  DOJ Accused Of Assault On Free Speech And Press In Project Veritas Case

  Authored by Jonathan Turley via jonathanturley.org,

  I previously wrote about deep concerns over the FBI investigation of Project Veritas over the missing diary of Ashley Biden, daughter of President Joe Biden. The use of the FBI in a case involving a missing diary is itself difficult to square with its priorities, let alone the different treatment given the New York Times.  Now, counsel for Project Veritas has filed a motion detailing what could be a very serious violation of court orders as well as an attack on free speech and free press.

  

  There has been relatively little attention to the extraordinary efforts of the Biden Justice Department in pursuing those connected with the disappearance of the diary of the President’s daughter. The concern is that the FBI is acting like a Praetorian Guard in acting on what is a crime ordinarily handled on a local level.

  The controversy over Ashley Biden‘s diary began during her father’s campaign for the presidency in 2020. Like her brother Hunter, Ashley has struggled with addiction and was living in a two-bedroom house in Delray Beach, Fla., with a friend. According to the New York Times, she decided to go to Philadelphia but to leave some belongings in two bags in the Delray house. The owner later allowed a friend named Aimee Harris and her two children to move in. The Times strongly suggests that Ms. Harris searched the possessions, noting that she was hard up for money and was also a Trump supporter. The Times then simply says “exactly what happened next remains the subject of the federal investigation.”

  Project Veritas and its founder, James O’Keefe, maintained that they were given the diary by a “tipster” but decided not to use it. Indeed, the group later turned over the material to law enforcement.

  As noted by the New York Times, court records show that on Oct. 12, 2020, O’Keefe told Project Veritas staff that said they would not publish a story about the diary. He explained that, while they had “no doubt the document is real,” he was concerned that publishing the diary would be seen “as a cheap shot.”

  Now we have new details of the lengths that the government has gone in this case, including allegedly evading a court order to protect the confidentiality of journalistic and attorney-client material.

  In its 45-page court filing, counsel accused the Department of Justice of such circumvention after Microsoft recently revealed that the DOJ had previously seized Project Veritas documents from a cloud account using a warrant. I testified on such abuses recently in Congress.

  The Project describes the investigation as “retributive” on behalf of the Biden Administration. It did so with “extreme measures that violate the First Amendment and corrode freedom of the press,” according to the filing.

  Judge Torres appointed a special master, retired U.S. District Judge Barbara S. Jones, to protect confidential information on Dec. 8, 2021 in the Southern District of New York. The court specifically recognized that “potential First Amendment concerns that may be implicated by the review of the materials seized from Petitioners.” However, the letter from Project Veritas counsel states:

  “We have recently learned, however, that the government already had in place mechanisms for circumventing these protective processes and invading the First Amendment and attorney- client privileges of Project Veritas and its journalists, the existence of which the government concealed from counsel for Project Veritas and its journalists and, we believe, from this Court. We have discovered that from November 2020 to April 2021, the government used compulsory demands, including secret warrants and 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) orders, to obtain voluminous materials from Microsoft, the email services provider used by Project Veritas, spanning the email accounts of eight journalists and Project Veritas’s Human Resources Manager.

  …It appears that the government misled this Court by omission, failing to disclose during the briefing and arguments over the appointment of a Special Master that the government had already obtained through these surreptitious actions many of the privileged communications this Court charged the Special Master with protecting. The government’s clandestine invasions of journalist’s communications corrode the rule of law.”

  That is a familiar pattern and was discussed at the prior congressional hearing.

  Some of the search demands clearly would implicate areas that the court previously sought to protect with the appointment of Judge Brown as special master. That includes:

  According to court papers attached to the letter, here is some of what the feds were after:

  b. Evidence of communications regarding or in furtherance of the Subject Offenses, such as communications with or regarding Ashley Biden, President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (and representatives thereof), and/or Ashley Biden’s associates regarding her stolen property.

  c. Evidence of the location of Ashley Biden’s property and the location of the user of the Subject Account at times relevant to the Subject Offenses, such as communications that reference particular geographic locations or refer to the property being located in a particular place.

  d. Evidence of the identity and locations of potential co-conspirators, such as communications with other individuals about obtaining, transporting, transferring, disseminating, or otherwise disposing of Ashley Biden’s stolen property, including but not limited to communications reflecting the knowledge of co-conspirators that the property obtained from Ashley Biden had been stolen, and communications that contain personally identifiable information of co-conspirators and references to co-conspirators’ places of residence or locations at particular points in time.

  e. Evidence regarding the value of any of Ashley Biden’s stolen property, such as communications about the resale or market value of any of the items stolen from her, or any plans to sell or market the same.

  f. Evidence of steps taken in preparation for or in furtherance of the Subject Offenses, such as surveillance of Ashley Biden or property associated with her, and drafts of communications to Ashley Biden, President Biden, and Ashley Biden’s associates regarding her stolen property and communications among co-conspirators discussing what to do with her property.

  Any search of those sweeping terms would net confidential and privileged information.

  Putting aside the concerns over a crackdown on a journalistic organization, there remain unanswered questions over why this extraordinary effort was launched by the FBI over a missing diary.

  The concerns over the Project Veritas investigation continue to mount, but neither Congress nor the media have demanded answers from the Biden Administration.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 23:00

• Israelis Refused To Share 'World's Most Powerful Cyberweapon' With Ukraine And Estonia Over Russia Concerns
  Israelis Refused To Share ‘World’s Most Powerful Cyberweapon’ With Ukraine And Estonia Over Russia Concerns

  After being widely condemned by the international community for allowing Pegasus, which the NYT once described as “the world’s most powerful cyberweapon”, to be sold to every African despot and authoritarian government with the means to pay for it, the Israeli government apparently drew the line at sharing the powerful hacking tool with the governments of Ukraine and Estonia, for fear they would use it against Russia.

  

  For those who aren’t familiar with Pegasus, the software was developed by secretive Israeli spyware company NSO Group, which found itself on the receiving end of international condemnation after it was revealed that the spyware had been used by the Saudi government to spy on Amazon chief Jeff Bezos (and murdered dissident Jamal Khashoggi). More recently, the Israeli government was accused of using the spyware to carry out warrantless surveillance of its own citizens.

  According to the NYT, Ukraine and Estonia had hoped to buy Pegasus in the hopes of using it to infiltrate Russian phones, but Israel’s ministry of defense refused to grant the licenses required for the sale.

  Ukraine had been pushing to obtain Pegasus for espionage purposes since as far back as 2014, while the Estonians started the process of trying to purchase it in 2018, going so far as to make a large down payment to NSO, which was eventually returned after the Russian government learned of Estonia’s plans and contacted the Israeli’s to put a stop to it.

  In the case of Ukraine, the requests for Pegasus go back several years. Since the Russian invasion of Crimea in 2014, the country has increasingly seen itself as a direct target of Russian aggression and espionage. Ukrainian officials have sought Israeli defense equipment to counter the Russian threat, but Israel has imposed a near-total embargo on selling weapons, including Pegasus, to Ukraine.

  In the Estonian case, negotiations to purchase Pegasus began in 2018, and Israel at first authorized Estonia to have the system, apparently unaware that Estonia planned to use the system to attack Russian phones. The Estonian government made a large down payment on the $30 million it had pledged for the system.

  The following year, however, a senior Russian defense official contacted Israel security agencies to notify them that Russia had learned of Estonia’s plans to use Pegasus against Russia. After a fierce debate among Israeli officials, Israel’s Ministry of Defense blocked Estonia from using the spyware on any Russian mobile numbers worldwide.

  During a recent speech to the Knesset, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky criticized Israel for refusing to provide Ukraine with the Israeli Iron Dome antimissile system and other defensive weapons, and for not joining the West in imposing strict economic sanctions on Russia.

  Israel has used Pegasus as a critical bargaining chip in its diplomatic relations with other nations; it has been reported that sharing the spyware tool was an important piece of the bargaining that led to the Abraham Accords, the landmark Israeli deal with several of its Middle Eastern neighbors brokered by President Trump and his administration.

  As a spyware tool, Pegasus is incredibly powerful. Once a device is targeted, the software can stealthily and remotely extract everything stored on the device, including photos, contacts, messages and video recordings, without the user having to click on a phishing link to give Pegasus remote access. It can also transform the mobile phone into a tracking and secret recording device, essentially transforming a phone into a tool to spy on its owner.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 22:40

• Russia Is Open To Selling Natural Gas For Bitcoin, Gold
  Russia Is Open To Selling Natural Gas For Bitcoin, Gold

  By Namcios of Bitcoin Magazine

  Russia is open to accepting bitcoin for its natural resources exports, the chairman of the country’s Congressional energy committee, Pavel Zavalny, said in a press conference on Thursday. 

  

  Zavalny explained that Russia is open to accepting different currencies for its exports, beginning with natural gas, depending on the buyer’s preferred method of payment. However, the chairman said terms will depend on the importing country’s foreign relations status with Russia.

  “When it comes to our ‘friendly’ countries, like China or Turkey, which don’t pressure us, then we have been offering them for a while to switch payments to national currencies, like rubles and yuan,” Zavalny said during the press conference.

  “With Turkey, it can be lira and rubles. So there can be a variety of currencies, and that’s a standard practice. If they want bitcoin, we will trade in bitcoin.”

  Zavalny’s statement comes on the heels of President Vladimir Putin’s comments on Wednesday demanding that ‘unfriendly’ countries pay for Russian gas in rubles. Putin’s message was clear, but it is unclear whether Russia can unilaterally change existing contracts agreed upon in euros.

  The State Duma’s energy committee chair echoed Putin’s decision while adding that the country should also accept gold.

  “When we exchange with Western countries…they should pay in hard money,” Zavalny said.

  “And hard money is gold, or they must pay in currencies which are convenient for us, and that is the national currency – ruble. That relates to our ‘unfriendly’ countries.”

  Russia being open to accepting bitcoin shift the tide as Putin last year had dismissed the possibility in an interview at the Russian Energy Week event in Moscow.

  “I believe that it has value,” Putin said at the time, referring to Bitcoin. “But I don’t believe it can be used in the oil trade.”

  The current size of the Bitcoin market and its liquidity do pose questions as to whether the peer-to-peer currency could be used widely by countries in international trade at this moment.

  However, by being open to the possibility and eventually conducting pilot trades with interested parties, Russia could set the stage for an upcoming trend where nations choose to transact in the stateless, global monetary system.

  The news helped push bitcoin and ether to the highest level since the start of the Russian invasion.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 22:20

• JGBs Slide, Yen Spikes As Parazlyed BOJ Fails To Intervene With Yields Hitting 6 Year High
  JGBs Slide, Yen Spikes As Parazlyed BOJ Fails To Intervene With Yields Hitting 6 Year High

  After sliding relentlessly for much of the past month on expectations that the BOJ will be the “odd” central bank out, refusing to join its developed peers in tightening financial conditions, and the USDJPY rising as high as 122.44 earlier (from 115 three weeks ago), the yen jumped on Friday morning in Japan, after the 10Y JGB crossed a critical resistance level without intervention from Kuroda.

  

  Entering the final trading day of the week, with 10Y JGB yields on the verge of rising above 0.23%, traders were bracing for another massive bond market intervention by the BOJ. As Bloomberg’s Wes Goodman put it, “there’s a good chance the Bank of Japan will buy bonds as soon as Friday to curb the advance in yields. JGB ten-year rates are climbing in tandem with yields globally, rising to 0.23%.”

  As shown in the chart below, when JGBs hit that level last month, the central bank responded with one of its an unlimited fixed-rate purchases, in effect putting a hard stop to further declines in JGBs.

  

  As a reminder, as part of its Yield Curve Control, the BOJ capped the maximum yield on the 10Y JGB at 0.25% although it would never let it rise quite as high. And while a move to curb yields may also weaken the yen, already at a six-year low, that shouldn’t deter the BOJ according to Goodman, who notes that “Governor Kuroda said last week that a weak currency should still be seen as positive for the economy, and he repeated his admonition that the BOJ won’t hesitate to add to easing if needed.”

  Or perhaps not… because with the 10Y rising as high as 0.24% on Friday morning, the BOJ remains oddly silent so far, which to some traders this suggests that even the BOJ may be willing to risk higher (and perhaps sharply higher) yields to stay in sync with its peers.

  Alternatively, had the BOJ intervened, it could have set off a selling cascade in the Yen which could push it into uncontrollable freefall.

  And indeed, with 10Y JGBs rising to a level not seen since 2016 moments ago Kuroda hit the tape, suggesting that the central bank is suddenly worried that the yen may in fact fall so far it would never come back:

  • *KURODA: DON’T THINK MARKETS HAVE LOST FAITH IN YEN
  • *KURODA: DESIRABLE FOR FOREX TO MOVE IN STABLE MANNER
  • *KURODA: RISING U.S. RATES SAID TO BE BEHIND RECENT WEAK YEN

  But what he said next was the punchline:

  • *KURODA: FAITH IN FISCAL SITUATION IS KEY FOR MONETARY POLICY
  • *KURODA: LOSING FISCAL FAITH CAN SPUR YIELDS, CUT EASING EFFECT
  • *KURODA: BOND BUYING IN YCC IS SOLELY FOR MONETARY POLICY

  And so Japan, that paragon of MMT crackpots everywhere, suddenly finds itself trapped in a lose-lose dilemma: intervene in the bond market and spark a furious, potentially destabilizing and uncontrolled plunge in the yen which would also lead to galloping (if not worse) inflation, which could collapse what little faith remains in the BOJ, or do nothing and contain the slump in the yen while risking far higher yields which in a country where the debt is orders of magnitude greater than GDP, could also spell fiscal and monetary doom.

  As a result, the market – having long gotten used to amicable interventions from the BOJ – will now surely test one of these two outcomes, and how the BOJ responds could have dramatic consequences for this original MMT test case. Should the BOJ’s reaction spark further erosion of faith in either Japan’s fiscal or monetary policies, the outcome for the world’s most indebted nation would be disastrous.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 22:04

• "Ripple Effect" – Chinese Port Congestion Soars To Five-Month High 
  “Ripple Effect” – Chinese Port Congestion Soars To Five-Month High 

  Top Chinese ports in Shenzhen and Hong Kong record some of the largest congestion in nearly half a year due to China’s zero-tolerance approach, locking down more than 50 million people and shuttering factories to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. 

  Bloomberg reports 174 vessels anchored or loaded off the country’s top ports, the largest number since Oct. 21, when a massive typhoon battered the area. 

  

  “Shenzhen is the second-busiest port next to Shanghai, so we will expect to see significant volume shift to the other ports within China,” said Ryan Closser, a director at FourKites, a supply-chain information provider.

  “A couple more weeks of shutdown may not have a huge disruption, but the longer the area is shut down, the more of a ripple effect it will have,” Closser said. 

  Even though workers have been sent back to factories, and some lockdowns have been lifted, the disruption alarmed A.P. Møller – Maersk A/S, the world’s largest container shipping company by capacity, last Friday, telling clients to expect new supply chain snarls and logistical delays. 

  “While manufacturing also takes place in other parts of the country, these delays will still affect output, though not drastically,” Maersk said in a memo to clients.

  Vessel observation data show increased congestion of container ships at Chinese ports. Meanwhile, congestion at Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach has subsided this year. 

  

  Bloomberg notes the growing threat of “possible delays to goods heading to the U.S. this summer.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 22:00

• Buchanan: Is Ukraine's Partition Zelenskyy's Fate?
  Buchanan: Is Ukraine’s Partition Zelenskyy’s Fate?

  Authored by Pat Buchanan,

  “It’s time to meet, time to talk … time to restore territorial integrity … for Ukraine,” said President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Saturday.

  Zelenskyy added that the need to negotiate was even greater for Moscow.

  “Otherwise, Russia’s losses will be so huge that several generations will not be enough to rebound.”

  According to the Pentagon, Russia has lost 7,000 soldiers; Kyiv puts the figure at 14,000 dead.

  Still, Russian President Vladimir Putin appears less pressured to meet and talk. What does this tell us?

  Zelenskyy does not believe further fighting will benefit Ukraine as much as it will cost his country. And he wants the war over.

  As for Putin, as Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said Sunday, “He’s not been able to achieve the goals that he wants to achieve as rapidly as he wants to achieve them.” Putin wants more time.

  The Russian president began the invasion of Ukraine with Crimea already annexed and the enclaves of Luhansk and Donetsk having already declared their independence of Kyiv.

  Since the invasion began, however, Putin’s forces have besieged but not taken Ukraine’s capital, Kyiv, or second largest city, Kharkiv.

  Yet, Russian troops are now in Mariupol on the Sea of Azov, having completed a land bridge from Russia through the Donbas to Crimea and, from there, halfway to Odessa, the last major Ukrainian port on the Black Sea.

  While the Ukrainian army and citizens have put up fiercer resistance than was anticipated in Moscow, Russia is not losing this war.

  

  Measured by territorial gains, Putin is winning

  He has not captured Kyiv or Kharkiv, but he has expanded the Russian-controlled territories of Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea that he had at the start of his invasion.

  While Russia’s costs and casualties have been far greater than was anticipated, Putin has added to the Ukrainian lands he held when the war began. And Mother Russia has not lost an inch of land in this war.

  “How does this thing end?” Gen. David Petraeus famously asked on the road to Baghdad.

  No political solution appears more likely than a new partition of Ukraine, with lands east of the Dnieper River and along the coasts of the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea being ceded to Moscow, and the west of Ukraine being declared a neutral nation like Austria or Finland in the Cold War.

  The problem with this probable outcome is that Zelenskyy has ruled out any territorial concessions or land transfers from Ukraine to Russia. And he seeks to “restore,” not to make permanent, the 2014 amputations of Crimea and the Donbas.

  The dilemma: Zelenskyy probably cannot survive ceding control of any Ukrainian land to Russia. And Putin probably cannot survive a failure in peace talks to expand the Ukrainian holdings with which he began the war.

  The “territorial integrity” of Ukraine is the crucial issue in ending this war.

  And it is precisely here where it appears impossible for both sides to come to terms.

  The one issue on which both parties will likely agree in any peace settlement is the issue that should have been agreed to — to prevent the war: a formal declaration by Kyiv that it will never join a NATO alliance created to contain Russia and, if necessary, defeat Russia in a war.

  A frustrated and enraged President Joe Biden has taken to calling Putin a “killer,” a “murderous dictator” and a “war criminal” who has launched an “immoral war” — comments the Kremlin calls “unforgivable”

  Such rhetoric would seem to rule out any role for U.S. diplomacy in negotiating the end to this war.

  Other nations — Israel, Turkey, France, Germany — have maintained regular relations and constant contact with Putin, who sits and broods atop the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.

  Consider the moral dilemma the U.S. has put itself in.

  Our president says Russia is led by “a war criminal,” conducting an “immoral” war in which deliberate atrocities are committed at hospitals, schools, kindergartens and art theaters.

  Yet, the U.S. and NATO will not provide weapons to Ukraine, including secondhand MiGs, that might cause Russia to retaliate against us or NATO or risk World War III or risk Russia’s use of tactical atomic weapons.

  Because, pillaged and persecuted though Ukraine may be, it is not a member of NATO.

  If Latvia, however, with 5% of Ukraine’s population, is encroached upon, we will engage Russia militarily, and to hell with the risk of World War III or Russia’s possible retaliation with atomic weapons.

  In war, the moral is to the material as three is to one, said Napoleon. Unfortunately, what George Bernard Shaw said cynically also appears to be true: In war, God is on the side of the big battalions.

  Zelenskyy probably cannot survive signing away the title to any Ukrainian land, be it Crimea or the Donbas. And Putin likely cannot survive not bringing home new territory from a Russian “victory.”

  Again, perhaps the one issue on which almost all now agree is that Ukraine renounce its right to join the NATO alliance.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 21:40

• IMF Warns Countries May Cut Dollar Reserves In Response To US Sanctions Against Russia
  IMF Warns Countries May Cut Dollar Reserves In Response To US Sanctions Against Russia

  Did the IMF just parrot one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s favorite criticisms of Western sanctions?

  

  During an interview with Foreign Policy, the IMF’s first deputy managing director, Gita Gopinath, warned that Western sanctions on Russia, and more specifically, the confiscation of dollar- and euro-denominated reserves held by the Russian Central Bank, could backfire by making other foreign central banks more reluctant to hold such a large amount of their own foreign reserves in dollars and euros.

  For decades now, the international dollar-based financial system has been underpinned by free market principles. Unfortunately, when western institutions effectively confiscate reserves belonging to an independent central bank, they cut against this notion, and prompt other nations to ponder the possibility – however remote – that they could be next.

  Ultimately, it’s likely that some countries will “reconsider” the wisdom of so heavily relying on Washington.

  “We are likely to see some countries reconsidering how much they hold of certain currencies in their reserves,” she told Foreign Policy.

  While Russia accuses the West of trying to engineer a default on Russia’s foreign-currency bonds by restricting its access to euros and dollars, Gopinath pointed out that the sanctions imposed over the past month have effectively cut Russia’s ties to the global financial system, and a default (however technical in nature) would likely lock Russia out of said system for years.

  “When you’ve defaulted, reentry into the market is not easy. And that can take a long time.”

  The IMF is already seeing an “increasing fragmentation” in global payments systems. On Thursday morning, it was reported that Russia and Iran are working on a global financial messaging system that could act as an alternative to SWIFT.

  Of course, the IMF isn’t the only institution to highlight this trend. Just the other day, Goldman Sachs released a note warning that the twilight of the US dollar’s global hegemony could be at hand – citing the possibility of Saudi Arabia accepting yuan for oil instead of dollars (leading to deep fissures in the edifice of the petrodollar) – as evidence.

  Since the annexation of Crimea in 2014, Russia’s central bank had steadily divested its reserves of most U.S. dollar assets. But the dollar, euro and sterling still account for more than 50% of its holdings, located in France, Germany, Japan, Britain, the United States, Canada and Australia.

  

  Russia isn’t alone in this: Increasingly, Latin American nations are diversifying their reserves away from the dollar, including larger percentages of alternatives like the Chinese yuan.

  

  And Russia isn’t alone in this. As Credit Suisse’s Zoltan Poszar recently pointed out, western sanctions could help spark a larger move away from holding reserves in the form of “inside” (aka fiat) money, and instead see a movement toward a new system where crypto, or perhaps a hybrid of gold and other commodities like oil, serve as the new reserve asset of choice. Of course, the Fed – which is pushing the adoption of a central bank digital currency to seize the last bit of financial autonomy Americans have left – will likely push back with force. We’re already seeing it today as the US and its G7 allies seek to halt purchases of gold by the Russian Central Bank.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 21:20

• Former FBI Agent Pleads Guilty To Tampering With Evidence
  Former FBI Agent Pleads Guilty To Tampering With Evidence

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

  A former FBI agent who was tapped to help investigate Missouri’s governor pleaded guilty on March 23 to tampering with evidence, deciding not to go to trial on seven counts.

  

  William Don Tisaby, 69, now a private investigator, was hired by St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kimberly Gardner to help probe Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens over an alleged invasion of privacy. Greitens resigned in 2018 after the investigation was opened.

  Tisaby was indicted on seven felonies, including perjury and evidence tampering, in 2019.

  Tisaby acknowledged in the plea deal that he said in a deposition that certain documents did not exist when, in fact, they did, Robert Russell, the special prosecutor in the case, told reporters outside the courthouse in St. Louis after the deal was reached.

  “He’s admitting to hiding or at least testifying that the notes that Ms. Gardner gave to him were not given to him by testifying that he did not take any notes, when in fact he did take notes on those notes Ms. Gardner gave him,” Russell said.

  Tisaby also took notes from an interview with a witness and sent them to Gardner but falsely testified that he never did.

  Gardner is set to face a disciplinary hearing soon for allegedly hiding details about the probe into Greitens from members of her team.

  Russell declined to put himself in Gardner’s shoes but said prosecutors “have an ethical obligation to correct and make sure the record is clear” regarding documents and that they should correct witnesses who offer false information.

  The deal means Tisaby, who was facing serious prison time, will not serve any time in jail. He will serve one year of probation and must pay court costs.

  

  “I think we’ve reached an appropriate resolution for Mr. Tisaby in this case based on what occurred,” Russell said, adding that it was important to make sure anybody attached to law enforcement is held accountable for being untruthful.

  Jermaine Wooten, a lawyer for the defendant, told reporters that he and his colleagues were prepared to go to trial but Tisaby wanted to put the case behind him because of his age and health.

  “I think it was just more of an issue of just negligence in this matter. It was a slew of documents that he had and he just went into that deposition not prepared. There was no malice in this man’s heart,” Wooten said, adding that no one instructed his client to hide the existence of the documents.

  But Russell said the defendant admitted to purposefully shielding evidence. ” I think he just didn’t want anybody to see what he had done,” Russell said.

  The investigation in question was looking into whether Greitens snapped a picture of a woman at his house in 2015. The alleged picture has never been found.

  Greitens, who is running for a U.S. Senate seat, said on Steve Bannon’s show that the guilty plea was “a great victory.”

  “The corrupt former FBI agent, William Tisaby, pled guilty,” he said. “What everyone recognizes now is what we said from the beginning, is that this was a criminal witch hunt against me.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 21:00

• Goldman's Hatzius: Can US Consumers Weather Commodity-Shock-Driven Recessionary Impulse?
  Goldman’s Hatzius: Can US Consumers Weather Commodity-Shock-Driven Recessionary Impulse?

  Goldman Sachs chief economist Jan Hatzius told clients Wednesday that the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the resulting commodity shock of soaring crude oil prices are “eerie parallels” to the geopolitical and economic turmoil three decades ago during the Gulf War. Hatzius makes the case consumers are in a much better position to weather an economic shock unlike in the past.

  Hatzius notes the latest spike in energy and agriculture prices, represents 1.9% of US consumer spending over the last year, adding that today’s commodity shock on consumers is similar to 2008 and 1990.

  

  Goldman predicts soaring commodity costs are eroding the real incomes of consumers. They forecast 2022 GDP above potential (+1.9% Q4/Q4 basis vs. potential of +1.75%, consensus of +2.7%, and FOMC median projection of +2.8%), adding the risk of recession is increasing (Morgan Stanley told clients last week to expect a downturn in 5-10 months).  

  “Higher commodity prices can also increase the risk of recession by constraining the ability of policymakers to respond to growth shocks,” Hatzius said. 

  On Monday, Fed Chair Powell said, “a brief burst of inflation associated with commodity price shocks” risks “extending the period of high inflation could push longer-term expectations uncomfortably higher.” 

  Hatzius asks: “Could the current commodity price shock tilt the economy into recession as it did in 1990 against a similar backdrop of heightened geopolitical risk and declining consumer confidence?” 

  He noted the size of the commodity shock shouldn’t be the focus but rather the health of the consumer. 

  Compared with the commodity shocks in the early stages of 1974, 1980, 1990, and 2008 recessions, consumers now have $2 trillion of excess savings accumulated during the virus pandemic, rising year-on-year trend in real incomes (but still negative bc of high inflation), and record-high household wealth-to-income ratio as significant buffers to combat price shocks for now. 

  

  Hatzius believes, “it would take a sustained oil price increase to $200 per barrel to produce an income shock similar in magnitude to those that precipitated the 1974 and 1979 recessions—and this would significantly increase the 2022 recession odds.”

  He said his commodity team’s upside target for Brent is around $165 per barrel, though he cannot rule out such an outcome ($200) if things worsen in Ukraine. 

  He pointed to “eerie parallels” of today’s commodity shock that could produce an economic downturn similar to 1990-91. 

  

  Hatzius concluded by saying recessions risks are rising over the next year between 20-35% range as an overheating labor market and fiscal tightening by the Fed could drag on growth. 

  The consumer might be stronger than most believe, well, at least in Goldman’s view. Maybe this is why we have yet to see gasoline demand destruction. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 20:40

• LA Spends Up To $837K Per Unit To House Just 5,600 Of Over 40,000 Homeless
  LA Spends Up To $837K Per Unit To House Just 5,600 Of Over 40,000 Homeless

  Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

  In 2016, the city of Los Angeles had 28,464 Homeless. It passed HHH authorizing $1.2 billion to tackle the problem. Let’s check in on the progress…

  

  Los Angeles Passed Proposition HHH in 2016. Cost per unit from LA City Audit.

  Inquiring minds are investigating Los Angeles City Controller’s Audit Report on the Progress of Proposition HHH a 2016 measure that authorized spending $1.2 billion to tackle homelessness in LA.

  Key Points

  • California had 28,464 Homeless in 2016.

  • LA then passed proposition HHH, authorizing $1.2 billion to address the problem.

  • In early 2020, pre-Covid, the city had 41,250 homeless. There are no current homeless stats and due to Covid are undoubtedly much higher.

  • The city is building units to address the problem. 1,200 units have been completed. 

  • 4,400 units are in construction. 

  LA Homelessness

  

  Homelessness chart from LA City audit pre-Covid, annotations by Mish. 

  Proposition HHH Cost Per Unit

  • Average completed cost is $520,879 per unit

  • Average cost of units underway is $596,486 per unit 

  • Approximately 14% of units in construction exceed $700,000 per unit.

  • One project is currently estimated to cost $837,000 per unit.

  • It took 3.4 years for the 1,200 completed units.

  • The estimated timeline is another 4.3 years for the additional 4,400 units.

  My guess is there are now 60,000 LA homeless (possibly a lowball number due to Covid). At the current average of $600,000 per unit (and rising), LA will need to spend another $36,000,000,000. 

  The controller says “Projects exceeding $600,000 per unit are no longer outliers.“

  Interim Housing

  What about interim housing? 

  Good question. Although six years have come and gone since HHH passed, the city is just now addressing delays.

  Ron Galperin says “The City should use remaining HHH funds—or any HHH funds that become available—to prioritize the development of facilities such as interim housing, clinics, storage, and showers to help better manage the immediate needs of Angelenos experiencing homelessness.”

  How Timely!

  Q: How much money is left anyway?

  A: Less than 5%, according to the audit, and that is a 2018 figure after the city suspended building HHH facilities and still struggles to complete them.

  Current vs Ongoing Costs

  • Housing the current estimated homeless would cost another $36 billion taxpayer dollars at the current rate. Unfortunately, that’s not the end of it. 

  • What about food, electricity, mental health treatments, and other services? 

  • What about building maintenance? 

  • What about building security at union wages? 

  Of the $1.2 billion authorized, we have the same questions, just on a smaller scale. 

  In another 4.3 years, LA will have a total of 5,600 units built for $1.2 billion while needing perhaps 60,000 units. Then what?

  When Does it Stop?

  The report says “Even after housing being built through Proposition HHH is completed, it is likely that tens of thousands of people will remain unsheltered.”

  Duh? Ya think?

  I assure you that whatever the the number of homeless is, be it 45,000 or 75,500 there is an endless demand for free services. 

  If the city were to give away 100,000 free units at a cost of $600,000 to $800,000 each, there would be 200,000 willing takers if not 2 million takers.

  What’s to stop San Diego or Austin, Texas from offering $200 and free bus transportation to LA for willing participants?

  Perhaps Austin should consider that right now.  The obvious snag is unlimited demand for a mere 5,600 “free” units. 

  Some will manage to get to LA from nearby areas even without the free transportation. 

  Progress? What Progress?

  There will never be progress in combatting homelessness by building $600,000 units to shelter the homeless.

  

  Inflationary Madness

  Paying $600,000 per unit to shelter homeless is inflationary madness. 

  So is the entirety of Build Back Better: Free college, student debt cancellation, more union jobs, free child care, combined with an attack on energy to allegedly save the world, while now promoting free gas money for dependents who don’t even drive. 

  On the table if Build Back Better happened to pass was a guaranteed “living wage” proposal. 

  One courageous Democrat, Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia saved the US from massive perpetual inflation of “free” stuff. 

  Meanwhile, Biden Doing Everything Possible to Drive Up the Price of Oil, Some of It’s Illegal. 

  Stop!

  *  *  *

  Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 20:20

• NATO Doubles Battlegroups In 'Eastern Flank' States: Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania & Slovakia
  NATO Doubles Battlegroups In ‘Eastern Flank’ States: Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania & Slovakia

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg announced that the military alliance will double the number of battlegroups it has deployed in Eastern Europe. Stoltenberg made the announcement just ahead of the major NATO summit attended by President Biden on Thursday.

  “The first step is the deployment of four new NATO battlegroups in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia, along with our existing forces in the Baltic countries and Poland,” Stoltenberg said. “This means that we will have eight multinational NATO battlegroups all along the eastern flank, from the Baltic to the Black Sea.”

  

  Stoltenberg didn’t initially detail how many troops would be in the new battlegroups. According to a NATO fact sheet from 2021, there are 4,615 NATO troops spread across the four battlegroups that are currently deployed across Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia.

  Stoltenberg also hinted that there will be other plans for NATO to bolster its forces in Eastern Europe announced at Thursday’s summit. “I expect leaders will agree to strengthen NATO’s posture in all domains, with major increases in the eastern part of the alliance on land, in the air and at sea,” he said.

  Here’s what NATO put out in its statement after Thursday’s emergency summit, which Joe Biden and other world leaders attended:

  In response to Russia’s actions, we have activated NATO’s defense plans, deployed elements of the NATO Response Force, and placed 40,000 troops on our eastern flank, along with significant air and naval assets, under direct NATO command supported by Allies’ national deployments. We are also establishing four additional multinational battlegroups in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia. We are taking all measures and decisions to ensure the security and defence of all Allies across all domains and with a 360-degree approach. 

  Over the past few months, the US has deployed tens of thousands of additional troops to Europe and is expected to send more, or at least make the deployments permanent. Sources told NBC News on Tuesday that Biden is expected to announce a plan to permanently maintain an increased number of troops in NATO countries near Ukraine.

  The US and NATO military buildup in Eastern Europe is done in the name of deterring Russia. But some of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s primary motivations for the invasion were Ukraine’s alignment with NATO and the Western military alliance’s presence on Russia’s borders. In the lead-up to the attack, Putin sought security guarantees that NATO wouldn’t expand further eastward, but the US didn’t take his concerns seriously.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 20:00

• Historic Treasury Front-End Selloff Approaching Peak As 2Y Notes Trade Below "Fails Charge"
  Historic Treasury Front-End Selloff Approaching Peak As 2Y Notes Trade Below “Fails Charge”

  It has been a harrowing month for rates traders, with 2-Year TSY yields blowing out by more than 17bps on two occasions in the past three weeks, representing two of the three biggest one-day selloffs since 2009 driven by the Fed’s historic hawkish pivot which now sees at least one rate hike on every FOMC meeting for the rest of 2022 and with banks such as Goldman and Morgan Stanley expecting two 50bps rate hikes in May and June.

  

  The unprecedented liquidation in the front-end has led to a massive pile up of shorts in bills and 2Y notes. As Curvature’s Scott Skyrm notes overnight, the market sell-off led to massive short positions across the short-end of the curve (as a reminder, when investors short the market they need to physically have possession of the securities to do so; if they don’t own the securities, they have to borrow them and for Treasuries they do so in the repo market, where the greater the negative repo rate on a given Treasury, the stronger the shorting pressure is). As shown in the chart below, two bills and 2 Year Note are trading at or below the Fail Charge (-2.75%); bills maturing on 6/23 averaged at -2.55% on Tuesday and -3.10% yesterday, while year bills (2/23/23) averaged at -3.20% two days ago and -0.95% on Wednesday, and even July 12 bills trading slightly Special averaging at -0.50% yesterday.

  Worse, 2 Year Notes were clearing over the past few days, but some failed yesterday, closing at -3.00% amid an unprecedented front-end shorting frenzy. Why would someone cover a short below the Fail Charge, Skyrm asks rhetorically and answers that “some firms have internal rules that require their Repo traders to cover, no matter what the rate is!”

  

  So as an epic pile up of shorts keep accumulating and pushing 2Y yields ever higher, so high that even Goldman now expects the 2s10s to invert as soon as next quarter when the 2Y hits 2.60%…

  

  … some are taking the other side, and in a note published overnight from Bloomberg’s Ven Ram, the Markets Live commentator writes that “we may be fast approaching its zenith for this year as bond traders are probably in the last lap of pricing the Federal Reserve’s intent to raise rates aggressively.”

  According to Ram’s calculations, two-year yields have surged about 145 basis points this quarter, roughly equivalent to about 205 basis points of Fed tightening based on historical correlations. And with the Fed’s dot plot pointing to about 10 hikes between this year and next, the two-year yield may reach a peak at 2.51% and settle around a 2.18%-2.26% range

  In an outlier scenario, it is conceivable that two-year yields go higher than the peak mentioned if the markets price in tightening on a scale seen in 1994. That cycle is “the best analogy” to what the Fed aims to do now, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis President James Bullard said this week. Back then, the monetary authority doubled its benchmark to 6% in just more than a year.

  In other words, that would mean the market factoring in even more hikes than what the Fed has penciled in, though that scenario would necessarily involve inflation prints remaining stubbornly high past the first half of the year, by which time the Fed would have already raised rates by 75 basis points to 100 basis points.

  Looking back, Ram notes that in November, when the two-year yield was around 0.42% (and when the dot plot hinted at just a handful of hikes in 2022), he suggested that front-end Treasuries represented an “accident waiting to happen”, and warned that the yield was in danger of breaching 1.75% based on the dot plot then. However, with the Fed having revised its median view of rates to factor in a much more aggressive path, the selloff has extended beyond that level.

  So fast forward to this week when Chair Jerome Powell sent bond yields spiraling when he remarked that the Fed was open to raising rates by 50 basis points in May should the data warrant such a response. He also outlined the Fed’s intent to start its balance sheet run-off sooner than in the previous cycle, which may sap sentiment more than usual, though that would pose bigger issues for longer-duration maturities.

  The selloff after his remarks has exacerbated fault lines in the market, with the Bloomberg Treasury Index having declined 5.93% through Tuesday, making it the worst quarter for U.S. bonds in data going back to 1973. At the same time, the Bloomberg Global Bond Aggregate Index is suffering its biggest drawdown on record.

  

  Historically, after such massive oversold liquidations, the subsequent move is a sharp reversal in flows as profit-taking begins; in this case profit-taking would be coupled with a record short squeeze. Meanwhile, with the war still raging in Europe Ram notes that there is still a possibility of systemic risk, an eruption of which may slow the Fed’s hand and send front-end yields much lower.

  As the Bloomberg analyst concludes, “all told, front-end Treasuries seem closer to the last leg of the selloff that has been rippling through the markets for a few months now.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 19:40

• Chinese Investigators Release First Clues About What Caused Crash Of China Eastern Airlines Flight
  Chinese Investigators Release First Clues About What Caused Crash Of China Eastern Airlines Flight

  Chinese authorities have just released some of the first definitive information about the circumstances surrounding the crash of China Eastern Airlines flight MU5735, which suddenly nosedived into the Guangxi Mountains on Monday, killing all 132 passengers and crew on board, and snapping China’s 12-year streak with no passenger airliner crashes. Unfortunately, their cryptic revelation raises more questions than it provides answers.

  According to Bloomberg, at least one piece of the ill-fated Boeing Co. 737-800 appears to have broken loose well before impact, possibly in mid-air, and potentially resulting in the devastating crash, which occurred before the plane’s pilots had time to send an emergency signal to air traffic control.

  Authorities didn’t say which piece exactly had broken off – only that it was found about 6 miles from the main wreckage area.

  Assuming that investigators confirm that the part did indeed come from the jet (of course, that would be some coincidence if it didn’t), this would indicate that the plane suffered some kind of midair breakup, which could in turn offer clues about what exactly precipitated Monday’s crash – or at the very least shed light on the flight’s final seconds.

  “The questions are: exactly what piece was it and when did it come off?” said Jeff Guzzetti, the former chief of accident investigations at the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration.

  As we have reported, the highly unusual arc of the plane’s dive, and the suddenness with which it occurred, has baffled airline safety experts.

  It’s impossible to know at this early stage in the investigation whether the piece came loose as a result of stresses during the high-speed plunge or broke off before the sudden descent.

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  The most likely scenario is that the piece sheared off as the plane plummeted from its cruising altitude of about 29,000 feet, which occurred in the span of about 1 minute and 35 seconds.

  “In my view, that’s the aircraft shedding parts as it’s coming down,” Guzzetti said.

  Rescue workers have found 183 pieces of wreckage, but heavy rainfall has hampered efforts to find the plane’s second black box, and its cockpit voice recorded was found to be heavily damaged, possibly rendering data recovery impossible. They have also found human remains at the site, and confirmed that there were in fact no survivors.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 19:20

• Malone: Are You Better Off Financially?
  Malone: Are You Better Off Financially?

  Authored by Robert W. Malone via Who is Robert Malone,

  I book a lot of air travel. In February we were away for 19 nights. In January, even more. We know what to expect to pay when we book a flight. But even I had a huge sticker shock when I booked a flight to Nashville for mid-April this week and the cost came close to $600 for each ticket. This is over triple what I normally pay, as it is a short “puddle jump” from Washington DC to Nashville – with plenty of flights going to and from.

  Of course it isn’t just airfare, it is literally everything has gone up – from gas to service to bread. As predicted in an earlier Substack, shortages and general economic hardship are likely on the way due to both the current economic situation of the last year (lockdowns, “stimulus”, inflation) together with the Russia/Ukraine disruptions. The predicted global food shortage is almost here.

  If one goes to the export numbers of Russia, it turns out (excluding rice), that they produce more grain than any other country in the world.

  Yesterday’s below the fold news was that White house is now signaling that Biden working on supply chain issues in conjunction with corporations. Yikes – he might have thought of that earlier (maybe he should have read my Substack)! It turns out that China has already secured a lot of the grain supply available globally. The worry is that Biden has done too little and too late to secure oil, grain and fertilizer supplies.

  Smash these dire observations with the latest polling data that shows that Americans are already hurting economically and things get scary tough. To assess how people felt about the economy, a March I&I/TIPP Poll asked the question:

  “Generally speaking, is your family better off today than it was one year ago, worse off than it was one year ago, or about the same as it was a year ago?”

  Fewer than one in five (20%) said they were “better off.” while more than twice that number — 42% — said they were “worse off.” Another 36% said they were “about the same.”

  

  What is interesting about this poll is the majority of Democratic respondents, who can clearly recognize that such a poll could reflect poorly on President Biden, answered that they were the worse off or the same than a year before. Only 29% of self-identified Democrats and 26% of liberals answered that they were better off.

  For the mid-terms, a quick glance at the independent responses show that only 17% believe that their family was better off than a year ago. Almost nine out of ten (89%) of Republican respondents felt that they were worse off or the same than a year before

  Taken as a whole, that means 78% of Americans have seen no progress or improvement at all in their financial and economic lives since Biden took over in early 2021.

  The I&I/TIPP poll also asked Americans,

  “How much does your household have in emergency savings — that is, money that is readily available in either a checking, savings or money-market account?”

  Respondents were given eight possible responses: “No emergency savings,” “One month’s expenses,” “Two months’ expenses,” “Three months’ expenses,” “Four months’ expenses,” “Five months’ expenses,” “Six months’ expenses or more,” and “Not sure.”

  The category “No emergency savings” garnered the biggest response at 34%. Both “One month’s” and “Two months’ ” had 11% each.

  That means 56% of all adult Americans have either no emergency savings or at most, barely enough to last two months. The loss of a job or an injury, for even for a couple of months would mean economic disaster for the majority of Americans.

  The opportunity to stop the Russian invasion before it started is long gone. The consequences are and will continue to cause us all to experience additional economic hardships. So buckle up, the worst has yet to come.

  Therefore, it is no surprise that a Reuters/Ipsos poll came out yesterday showing Biden’s approval rating has dropped to a new low of 40%. This is three percentage points lower than the week before.

  The national poll, conducted on March 21 and 22, found that 54% of Americans disapprove of his job performance. High inflation, food and supply shortages, the COVID-19 response, as well as how the President has handled the Ukrainian war, has convinced most Americans that Biden is doing a poor job.

  So my friends, get ready. Get prepared and be smart in your economic decisions. And watch for further examples of politicized public health policy decisions and messaging designed to distract from and bolster these dismal projections.

  *  *  *

  Subscribe to Who is Robert Malone

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 19:00

• Washington "Alarmed" As Beijing Nears Sweeping Security Pact With Solomon Islands
  Washington “Alarmed” As Beijing Nears Sweeping Security Pact With Solomon Islands

  Weeks after China’s foreign minister cautioned the US against trying to form a “Pacific NATO” – a veiled reference to the growing national security orientation of “the Quad” (a security and economic cooperation alliance involving the US, Australia, India and Japan) – Beijing has reportedly reached a deal with the Solomon Islands to station Chinese military and police personnel on the island, dramatically altering the balance of military power in the Pacific, and potentially re-orienting the small island nation toward Beijing, and away from Washington and Canberra.

  

  The FT broke the news, citing a draft agreement outlining the terms for China’s latest military outpost in the Pacific. At least two sources with “direct knowledge of the document” confirmed its details to the FT.

  Initial stirrings of what would become a broader security pact were first seen last year when China sent 10 police officers to the island nation to help quell unrest in the capital, Honiara. The Solomon Islands switched its diplomatic ties from Taiwan to Beijing in 2019, which reportedly contributed to “discontent” that led to riots in the capital, Reuters reported.

  One Australian security analyst slammed the deal as an example of “Belt and Road colonialism”.

  Rory Medcalf, head of the National Security College at the Australian National University, described the draft document as symptomatic of “Belt and Road colonialism, China’s Indo-Pacific empire”.

  Meanwhile, Reuters cited a senior Solomon Islands official who said that the deal covered “policing”, and that a wider security and military arrangement was in the works. The country’s cabinet must approve the deal, and any future deals, for them to be ratified.

  “We have a broad security treaty with Australia and policing cooperation. If there is anything with the PRC it will be just the same,” she said, referring to China.

  “Any other arrangement on broad security would be just the same as the Australian agreement,” she told Reuters in a telephone interview, giving the first public confirmation of the broader security talks.

  “It will have to go to Cabinet,” she said.

  The security deal was apparently signed late last week, according to another Solomon Islands official.

  Anthony Veke, minister for police in the Solomon Islands, said in a statement on Thursday that he had signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Wang Xiaohong, executive vice minister of China’s Ministry of Public Security, on policing cooperation in a virtual meeting on March 18.

  “The signing of this MOU simply shows to the global community that we are here building meaningful cooperation, one that is based on teamwork and seriousness to develop Solomon Islands,” Veke said.

  Of course, geopolitics is a zero-sum game. Any advance in security in military cooperation between the PRC and the Solomon Islands will place it closer to Beijing’s sphere of influence, and further away from the West. Perhaps this is why Washington has reportedly been “alarmed” by the deal.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/24/2022 – 18:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Lorenz Duschamp s via The Epoch Times,

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Fortis Analysis via Human Terrain,

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  American corn.

  American energy.

  American labor.

  American subsidies.

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

  *  *  *

  Subscribe to Human Terrain

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Underreporting of Conflicts of Interests in Pharmaceutical Studies

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  — Jake Hanrahan (@Jake_Hanrahan) March 23, 2022

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

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

  — CTRLPew (@CtrlPew) March 24, 2022

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

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

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

  — Jake Hanrahan (@Jake_Hanrahan) March 23, 2022

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Daniel Nuccio via The Brownstone Institute,

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Once more, Boudreaux found himself teaching online.

  Navigating vaccine mandates and vaccine mandate backlash

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

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

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

  Both UChicago and GMU also weathered lawsuits over these decrees.

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Both universities also eventually came to issue booster mandates. 

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

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

  Both ultimately incited even greater resistance.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Universities follow the politics, not the science

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

  

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

  

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Atlas was a top health adviser to Trump.

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  Fox News didn’t respond to requests for comment.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times,

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

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  ‘The Lowest Point in My Life’

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

  A Farm for Freedom

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  ‘You Can’t Believe the View!’

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  ‘Hell on Earth’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

  Hand of Providence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  ‘Evil All Around Me’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

   

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) March 23, 2022

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Not everyone’s so sure.

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

  — Michael (@iAmSchuck) March 23, 2022

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

   

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

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

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  — Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) March 3, 2022

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

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

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

  pic.twitter.com/x9BOJHGwx5

  — Athanasios Psarofagis (@tpsarofagis) March 22, 2022

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Effectiveness

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  Evolution of Flu Vaccines

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  — Robert Kovacik (@RobertNBCLA) March 22, 2022

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

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

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

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

  This story sounds strangely familiar, doesn’t it?

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Digest powered by RSS Digest

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  — Liz Sly (@LizSly) March 21, 2022

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Kit Knightly,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Why should this concern you?

  

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

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

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

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

  To quote a Telegraph article from last Autumn:

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

  As I wrote in October last year:

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

  …and that was before.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

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

  – Director Steven Spielberg, Minority Report

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Nuclear Warheads Currently in Possession by Countries

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

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

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

  

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

  Timeline: Key Events in the Nuclear Arms Race

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

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

  August 6 & 9, 1945:

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

  August 29, 1949:

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

  October 3, 1952:

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

  February 13, 1960:

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

  October 16–29, 1962:

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

  October 16, 1964:

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

  July 1, 1968:

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

  May 18, 1974:

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

  September 30, 1986:

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

  October 9, 2006:

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  — Daniel Cohen (@DanielCohenTV) March 22, 2022

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

  

  NYC leads the way in lackluster employment gains.

  

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

  

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

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

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

  Submitted by The Machine Gun Nest (TMGN).,

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

  

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Marie Hawthorne via TheOrganicPrepper.com,

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

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

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

  

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

  We cannot forget the lessons of the past.

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

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

   Prolonged isolation

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

  Isolation has been spreading for years.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  The spread of free-floating anxiety

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

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

  Society soon turns to the punching bag

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  — wdsu (@wdsu) March 23, 2022

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

  Possible track of the twister. 

  

  Shocking footage shows the tornado moving through the metro area. 

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

  — Jay Gallé (@JayGalle) March 23, 2022

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

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

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

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

  Videos of the damage have been posted on Twitter. 

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

  — JD Carrere (@jdcarrere) March 23, 2022

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

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

  Insane pictures from the incident area. 

  

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

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

  — Tim Ballisty (@IrishEagle) March 23, 2022

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

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

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

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

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

  — Chaudhary Parvez (@ChaudharyParvez) March 23, 2022

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

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

  — Chaudhary Parvez (@ChaudharyParvez) March 23, 2022

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

  Power outages are already being reported.  

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

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

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

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

  *developing

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

• Bridgewater Reportedly Launching Crypto Fund
  Bridgewater Reportedly Launching Crypto Fund

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  

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

  Let’s take a look at an example.

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  

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

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

  Bloomberg reported that an oil executive mused:

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  ---

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

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

  ---

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

  He can be reached via this contact form.

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  If you have been waiting to get your booster shot…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  By Valerie Cerasuolo, Bloomberg Markets Live commentator and reporter

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  By Frank Fang of the Epoch Times

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  — Ted Goldberg (@TedrickG) March 21, 2022

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

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

  “Chevron Richmond is fully prepared to continue normal operations to safely and reliably provide the products that consumers need. We anticipate no issues in maintaining a reliable supply of products to the market. Chevron remains committed to safe operations for our workers and communities.”

  The heart of the problem is USW’s push to increase pay for workers by another 5%, on top of the national agreement to raise pay by 12%, purely based on the cost of living in the Bay Area is unbearable for blue-collar workers.

  “The cost of living in the Bay Area, as any blue-collar worker knows, has gotten to the point that makes it hard to live,” USW Local 5 First Vice President B.K. White, told local news ABC7. “Our workers have to live 45 minutes to an hour out. We are just asking for a little bit of relief.”

  He also said, “A cost of living increase for the Bay Area it’s not for us to get rich. Our medical, Kaiser, went up 23 percent this year and the company did not contribute another penny to it.”

  A prolonged strike could impact refining capacity as Californians pay some of the highest gasoline prices in the country. Here’s what Americans are paying on average at the pump for regular gas. 

  

  Ken Medlock, director of the Center for Energy Studies at Rice University’s Baker Institute, told AP the refinery is likely running a skeleton crew during the strike. He doesn’t believe the strike would lead Chevron to shutter capacity or the facility as a whole. 

  Let’s hope USW and the company can resolve their differences quickly, or the largest refinery in California could experience output disruptions. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 19:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Where The Crypto Hype Is Taking Over
  Where The Crypto Hype Is Taking Over

  The hype around cryptocurrencies is spreading around the world, with blockchain-based currencies like Bitcoin, Ethereum or Binance piquing the interest of more and more people – at least in some countries.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz notes, according to the Statista Global Consumer Survey, India, South Korea, the U.S. and Germany are countries where the number of crypto users and owners increased significantly between 2019 and 2021.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  In India, for example, the number of those “invested” in crypto more than doubled from 7 percent to 18 percent over that time span.

  In other countries, on the other hand, interest in cryptocurrencies more or less stagnated between the two years in question.

  Those countries included Brazil and Mexico. Modest gains could be seen in China and Spain.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 02:45

• Ukraine Can Hold Out As Long As West Keeps Supplying Weapons: Former UK Intelligence Chief
  Ukraine Can Hold Out As Long As West Keeps Supplying Weapons: Former UK Intelligence Chief

  By Alexander Zhang of The Epoch Times,

  Ukraine may be able to withstand the Russian invasion for “as long as we can supply them” with weaponry and “for as long as their morale holds up,” the former head of the UK’s Defence Intelligence has said.

  

  Air Marshal Philip Osborn said on March 20 that the Ukrainians have been “amazing” in their resistance so far. He told Sky News: “We need to bear in mind that they have been preparing for this. This, for most of the West started three weeks ago. For Ukraine, this started nearly a decade ago. They have had time to prepare and think. They have also got a strength of will and the application of good weaponry.

  “Frankly, I think they will hold out as long as we can supply them and for as long as their morale holds up, and those are two very easy things to say but really challenging to do.”

  

  He added, “Focusing on supporting a brave people to do what is right for them has to be one of those things that the West does to show strength and resolution.”

  In contrast to Ukraine’s resistance, Osborn said, Russia’s military campaign is “pretty demoralised, pretty stuck, and pretty stalled.”

  Russian forces are “demoralised because they were poorly prepared and proven to be inadequate,” and are now stalled because they have “lost momentum.”

  He added: “We are seeing them pull resources and manpower from across Russia, even from Syria, and that is not a good indication for a supposed superpower. They are stalled because they are running out of options. “Really what is left to them now is to double down on brute force to put pressure on the Ukrainian government.”

  According to the latest intelligence update from the UK’s Ministry of Defence (MoD), Russian forces made only “limited progress” in capturing a number of cities in Eastern Ukraine.

  “Instead, Russia has increased its indiscriminate shelling of urban areas resulting in widespread destruction and large numbers of civilian casualties,” it said.

  Olha Stefanishyna, Ukraine’s deputy prime minister for European and Euro-Atlantic integration, told Sky News that the situation in her country is becoming “more and more severe.”

  “Russia has committed nearly all possible war crimes which humanity has seen over the Second World War,” she said.

  She said Ukrainians are continuing to fight for their country but “it’s absolutely clear that only a Ukrainian army, and only a Ukrainian president, will not be able to withstand it alone.”

  She called on political leaders from around the world, including the United States, the European Union, and Asia, to establish an anti-war coalition.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/22/2022 – 02:00

• McMaken: We Must Now Learn The Lesson Of 1914, Not The Lesson Of 1938
  McMaken: We Must Now Learn The Lesson Of 1914, Not The Lesson Of 1938

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  With proponents of military intervention and war, it’s always 1938, and every attempt to substitute diplomacy for escalation and war is “appeasement.” 

  

  Last week, for example, Ukrainian legislator Lesia Vasylenko accused Western leaders of appeasement during Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, stating, “This is the same as 1938 when also the world and the United States in particular were averting their eyes from what was being done by Hitler and his Nazi Party.” The week before that, Estonian legislator Marko Mihkelson declared, “I hope I’m wrong but I smell ‘Munich’ here. “

  These, of course, are references to the notorious Munich conference of 1938, when UK prime minister Neville Chamberlain (and others) agreed to allow Adolf Hitler’s Germany to annex the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia as a means to avoid a general war in Europe. The “appeasement,” of course, failed to prevent war because Hitler’s regime actually planned to annex much more than that. 

  Ever since, the “lesson of Munich” for advocates of military intervention is that it’s always best to escalate international conflicts and meet all perceived aggressors with immediate military force rather than embrace compromise or nonintervention. 

  Americans have made similar references, with pundits from Larry Elder to Peter Singer peppering their musings on the Ukraine war with the Munich analogy. One need only enter “Munich” and “1938” into a Twitter search to receive an apparently endless number of tweets from newly minted American foreign policy experts about how anything less than World War III is Munich all over again. Historically, countless American politicians have used the analogy as well. Cold Warriors of the 1980s denounced Ronald Reagan’s efforts to limit nuclear weapons as Munich-style appeasement. Republicans routinely claimed Barack Obama’s Iran diplomacy was the same thing. 

  But it is not, in fact, the case that every act of diplomacy or compromise designed to avoid war is appeasement. Moreover, we can find countless examples in which nonintervention and a refusal to escalate a situation was—or would have been—the better choice. 

  In other words, it’s not always 1938. Rather than fixating on the “lesson of 1938” the better lesson to learn is often the “lesson of 1914” or perhaps even the lessons of 1853, 1956, or 1968. In all these cases, military escalation was—or would have been—the wrong response. Moreover, in the age of nuclear weapons—something that did not exist in 1938—the world is a different place, and confrontation with a nuclear power could potentially bring about the end of human civilization. Casually bandying about demands for a “no-fly zone”—which would mean war with Russia—is both irresponsible and the sort of rhetoric fit for a nonnuclear world that ceased to exist many decades ago. 

  The Foundations of the “Lesson of Munich”

  The supposed lesson of Munich is based on two basic pillars. The first is the assumption that any act of military aggression will lead to many more acts of military aggression if not forcefully countered. It is basically a variation on the domino theory: if one nation submits to conquest by an aggressive neighbor, other nations will soon be forced to submit as well. This assumes every allegedly aggressive state has the same motivations as Nazi Germany and can plausibly seek a large, region-wide chain of military conquests across numerous states. 

  The second pillar of the lesson of Munich is that since every aggressive military act is likely to lead to many more, the only realistic option is to meet aggression with escalation and a no-compromise response. 

  This is precisely why Western advocates of military adventurism repeatedly equate every foreign leader Western elites don’t like with Hitler. Or, as noted at The Conversation:

  This kind of parallelism is not new; it is used every time there is a new enemy the public opinion should focus on. In recent years, according to Western rhetoric, Adolf Hitler has already been apparently reincarnated several times—as Saddam Hussein, Mohammad Qaddafi, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and more besides.

  In 2022, Putin is the new Hitler, which necessarily means to some that any failure by the West to respond to the Russian invasion with a full-blown military escalation is a Munich-style appeasement. 

  The fact that the events of 1938 are so well known by so many has helped considerably in pushing the narrative that compromise or nonintervention is appeasement. For most Americans, it’s likely the only event in the history of diplomacy they actually know anything about. Never mind the fact that the lesson of Munich has often been proven quite inapplicable to the modern world. As noted by Robert Kelly at the hardly noninterventionist publication 1945: 

  This frightening image of falling dominoes is not actually historically common though, thankfully. It was in the 1930s, but it was not, for example, in the Cold War. Aggressors do not always read one victory in place to mean they can automatically push on other “dominoes.” Deterrence is structured by local and historical factors; some commitments are much more credible than others. So even though the US lost in Vietnam, North Korea or East Germany did not attack South Korea or West Germany, just as the US did not attack Cuba or Nicaragua after the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan.

  In Ukraine that means that Western reticence to fight directly against the Russians in Ukraine does not automatically mean that Putin will test NATO’s collective security commitment or that China will attack Taiwan.

  But none of this matters when the public believes what it’s told by politicians and the media about how every rogue state is the equivalent of Nazi Germany. There is no foreign policy lesson to learn except that of opposing each new “Hitler.”

  The Lesson of 1914 

  Yet there are competing lessons to be learned. Lessons can be found, say, in the lead-up to the Crimean War in 1853 or the July Crisis of 1914. (Ask the average American about either of these, and you will probably receive a blank stare.)

  In both of these cases, regimes claimed they were countering aggression by foreign states and protecting either “allies” or oppressed minorities in the lands being subjected to conquest. 

  The lead-up to the First World War provides an especially cautionary tale about rushing to intervene in the name of supporting allies. The Austrian regime issued an ultimatum to the Serbians, and the Russians—with the support of France, Europe’s biggest democracy—mobilized in support of traditional ally Serbia. The Germans then mobilized in support of Austria-Hungary. Later, the regimes in the United Kingdom and the United States employed propaganda about alleged German war crimes in Belgium to ensure their respective countries entered the war. British politicians also claimed they must intervene to assist Britain’s Entente allies in resisting aggression. Four years of preventable and utterly pointless bloodshed ensued. Thanks to calls to oppose aggression and defend allies, what should have been a regional war in the Balkans became a major Europe-wide war. Even worse, with the Treaty of Versailles and the inclusion of the absurd “War Guilt” clause against Germany, the war set the stage for the far more destructive Second World War. 

  Yet the war was a result of regimes doing—from their own perspectives—what the “lesson of Munich” dictates: rush to war, immediately escalate, and confront “enemies” with military force in the name of countering aggression.

  The lesson of 1914 is certainly instructive today. Escalation is extraordinarily unwise, especially if there is the potential of turning limited wars into megascale disasters. Moreover, in the case of the United States, the complexity of the war’s causes meant there was no justifiable reason at all for the United States to enter. There was no “good guy” in the war, and American participation only further extended the bloodshed. 

  Fortunately, in spite of its pretensions of being the global guarantor of freedom always and everywhere, the United States has, at least twice, behaved as if it had learned the lesson of 1914. The first time was in 1956, when Soviet tanks rolled into Hungary when the Hungarian regime—an ostensibly sovereign state—became too uppity to suit Moscow. So, Soviet military might moved in to ensure Hungary remained sufficiently under Moscow’s control. Thousands of Hungarians were killed. Did the North Atlantic Treaty Organization mobilize against this aggression? Did Dwight Eisenhower ready America’s bombers? No.

  Then, in Prague in 1968, Czechoslovakian resistance to Moscow led to an invasion of two hundred thousand foreign troops and twenty-five hundred tanks from the pro-Soviet regimes of the Warsaw Pact. Again, the United States took no action. 

  This, of course, was the right decision on the part of the US and NATO. Heeding the Lesson of Munich, on the other hand, would have meant direct confrontation between NATO and the Soviet Union—a de facto confrontation between the United States and the USSR. This would have greatly increased the likelihood of global nuclear war.

  Naturally, some anti-Soviet activists cried “Appeasement!” at the time. Fortunately, they were ignored. A curious difference between 1956 and now, however, is that at the time, most of the critics of American inaction were on the anti-Soviet Right. Today, it is mostly the Left where we find those howling about Munich and blithely pushing for a US-Russia war while downplaying the risk of a nuclear apocalypse. But those who are now demanding World War III are a cautionary example of what happens when we obsess over the lesson of 1938 and ignore the lesson of 1914. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 23:40

• WEF Issues Ominous Warning Over Coming Food Crisis, Recommends 'More Sustainable Diets'
  WEF Issues Ominous Warning Over Coming Food Crisis, Recommends ‘More Sustainable Diets’

  Did you see the ratio Bloomberg just earned for a tweet which recommends getting used to lentils instead of meat, switching to public transportation, and avoiding buying things in bulk?

  

  The piece, written by economist Teresa Ghilarducci, recommends that families earning under $300,000 per year consider switching to public transportation, embracing a veggie diet, and “rethink those costly pet medical needs.”

  The intellectual heavyweight oddly retweeted someone slamming her advice.

  

  Which is being parodied throughout social media…

  pic.twitter.com/jy1kY2R51Y

  — Sid Prabhu (@sidprabhu) March 20, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Unsurprisingly, Ghilarducci and the far-left “New School for Social Research” she works for is affiliated with the World Economic Forum (WEF) – which, in addition to bragging about having ‘infiltrated‘ various world governments – infamously suggested that people get used to eating bugs due to inevitable food shortages, and

  

  Yes, this WEF:

  

  Which brings us to the WEF’s latest – warning of an impending food crisis kicked off by the war in Ukraine.

  Key points:

  • More people around the world will go hungry as a result of the pandemic, high fuel prices and the conflict in Ukraine.
  • Russia and Ukraine are also major producers and suppliers of fertilizers and their raw materials.
  • Existing logistical issues with moving grain and food are likely to worsen.
  • Disruptions will put further pressure on this year’s harvest and lead to higher food prices.
  • Even before the pandemic, the FAO estimated that 690 million people or 9% of the world’s population, were facing food insecurity.

  In short, the Ukraine war is accelerating the existing problem of inflation and food shortages, so hold on to your hats and consider a ‘more sustainable diet’ because things are about to get much, much worse.

  We are currently witnessing the beginning of a global food crisis, driven by the knock-on effects of a pandemic and more recently the rise in fuel prices and the conflict in Ukraine. There were already clear logistical issues with moving grain and food around the globe, which will now be considerably worse as a result of the war. But a more subtle relationship sits with the link to the nutrients needed to drive high crop yields and quality worldwide.

  …

  In this context, calling for an immediate government intervention to the market is therefore the natural thing to do. Yet government budgets are severely stretched after COVID, leaving little room for direct monetary support and contribution. In view of the recent promises to remove all Russian oil and gas from our imports, there will be some tough decisions ahead for governments, farmers and consumers alike.

  In the medium term, it highlights the need to transform our food system, using more green energy. We should also be encouraging more sustainable diets, which contain fewer grain fed animal products; and regenerative agricultural practices, which improve soil health and the efficiency of nutrient use by the crop. -WEF

  So… eat the bugs and be happy?

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 23:20

• The Takeover Of America's Legal System
  The Takeover Of America’s Legal System

  Authored by Aaron Sibarium via Common Sense with Bari Weiss,

  If you are a Common Sense reader, you are by now highly aware of the phenomenon of institutional capture. From the start, we have covered the ongoing saga of how America’s most important institutions have been transformed by an illiberal ideology—and have come to betray their own missions.

  Medicine. Hollywood. Education. The reason we exist is because of the takeover of newspapers like The New York Times.

  Ok, so we’ve lost a lot. A whole lot. But at least we haven’t lost the law. That’s how we comforted ourselves. The law would be the bulwark against this nonsense. The rest we could work on building anew.

  But what if the country’s legal system was changing just like everything else?

  Today, Aaron Sibarium, a reporter who has consistently been ahead of the pack on this beat, offers a groundbreaking piece on how the legal system in America, as one prominent liberal scholar put it, is at risk of becoming “a totalitarian nightmare.”

  This is a long feature on a subject we think deserves your time. Save it, share it, or print it to read in a quiet moment And please support stories like this one by subscribing today.

  

  In 2017, the super lawyer David Boies was at a corporate retreat at the Ritz-Carlton in Key Biscayne, Florida, hosted by his law firm, Boies, Schiller and Flexner. Boies was a liberal legend: He had represented Al Gore in Bush v. Gore, and, in 2013, successfully defended gay marriage in California, in Hollingsworth v. Perry, paving the way for the landmark Supreme Court ruling two years later.  

  On the last day of the retreat, Boies gave a talk in the hotel ballroom to 100 or so attorneys, according to a lawyer who was present at the event. Afterwards, Boies’s colleagues were invited to ask questions.

  Most of the questions were yawners. Then, an associate in her late twenties stood up. She said there were lawyers at the firm who were “uncomfortable” with Boies representing disgraced movie maker Harvey Weinstein, and she wanted to know whether Boies would pay them severance so they could quit and focus on applying for jobs at other firms. Boies, who declined to comment for this article, said no.

  That lawyers could be tainted by representing unpopular clients was hardly news. But in times past, lawyers worried about the public—not other lawyers. Defending communists, terrorists, and cop killers had never been a crowd pleaser, but that’s what lawyers had to do sometimes: Defend people who were hated. 

  When congressional Republicans attacked attorneys for representing Guantanamo detainees, for example, the entire profession rallied around them. The American Civil Liberties Union noted that John Adams took pride in representing British soldiers accused of taking part in the Boston Massacre, calling it “one of the best pieces of service I ever rendered to my country.”

  But that’s not how the new associates saw Boies’s choice to represent Weinstein. They thought there were certain people you just did not represent—people so hateful and reprehensible that helping them made you complicit. The partners, the old-timers—pretty much everyone over 50—found this unbelievable. That wasn’t the law as they had known it. That wasn’t America.

  “The idea that guilty people shouldn’t get lawyers attacks the legal system at its root,” Andrew Koppelman, a prominent liberal scholar of constitutional law at Northwestern University, said. “People will ask: ‘How can you represent someone who’s guilty?’ The answer is that a society where accused people don’t get a defense as a matter of course is a society you don’t want to live in. It’s a totalitarian nightmare.”

  ---

  ‘Operating in a Panopticon’

  The adversarial legal system—in which both sides of a dispute are represented vigorously by attorneys with a vested interest in winning—is at the heart of the American constitutional order. Since time immemorial, law schools have tried to prepare their students to take part in that system.

  Not so much anymore. Now, the politicization and tribalism of campus life have crowded out old-fashioned expectations about justice and neutrality. The imperatives of race, gender and identity are more important to more and more law students than due process, the presumption of innocence, and all the norms and values at the foundation of what we think of as the rule of law.

  Critics of those values are nothing new, of course, and certainly they are not new at elite law schools. Critical race theory, as it came to be called in the 1980s, began as a critique of neutral principles of justice. The argument went like this: Since the United States was systemically racist—since racism was baked into the country’s political, legal, economic and cultural institutions—neutrality, the conviction that the system should not seek to benefit any one group, camouflaged and even compounded that racism. The only way to undo it was to abandon all pretense of neutrality and to be unneutral. It was to tip the scales in favor of those who never had a fair shake to start with.

  But critical race theory, until quite recently, only had so much purchase in legal academia. The ideas of its founders—figures like Derrick Bell, Alan David Freeman, and Kimberlé Crenshaw—tended to have less influence on the law than on college students, who by 2015 seemed significantly less liberal (“small L”) than they used to be. There was the Yale Halloween costume kerfuffle. The University of Missouri president being forced out. Students at Evergreen State patrolling campus with baseball bats, eyes peeled for thought criminals.

  At first, the conventional wisdom held that this was “just a few college kids”—a few spoiled snowflakes—who would “grow out of it” when they reached the real world and became serious people. That did not happen. Instead, the undergraduates clung to their ideas about justice and injustice. They became medical students and law students. Then 2020 happened. 

  All of sudden, critical race theory was more than mainstream in America’s law schools. It was mandatory. 

  Starting this Fall, Georgetown Law School will require all students to take a class “on the importance of questioning the law’s neutrality” and assessing its “differential effects on subordinated groups,” according to university documents obtained by Common Sense. UC Irvine School of Law, University of Southern California Gould School of Law, Yeshiva University’s Cardozo School of Law, and Boston College Law School have implemented similar requirements. Other law schools are considering them. 

  As of last month, the American Bar Association is requiring all accredited law schools to “provide education to law students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism,” both at the start of law school and “at least once again before graduation.” That’s in addition to a mandatory legal ethics class, which must now instruct students that they have a duty as lawyers to “eliminate racism.” (The American Bar Association, which accredits almost every law school in the United States, voted 348 to 17 to adopt the new standard.)

  Trial verdicts that do not jibe with the new politics are seen as signs of an inextricable hate—and an illegitimate legal order. At the Santa Clara University School of Law, administrators emailed students that the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse—the 17-year-old who killed two men and wounded another during a riot, in Kenosha, Wisconsin—was “further evidence of the persistent racial injustice and systemic racism within our criminal justice system.” At UC Irvine, the university’s chief diversity officer emailed students that the acquittal “conveys a chilling message: Neither Black lives nor those of their allies’ matter.” (He later apologized for having “appeared to call into question a lawful trial verdict.”) 

  Professors say it is harder to lecture about cases in which accused rapists are acquitted, or a police officer is found not guilty of abusing his authority. One criminal law professor at a top law school told me he’s even stopped teaching theories of punishment because of how negatively students react to retributivism—the view that punishment is justified because criminals deserve to suffer.

  “I got into this job because I liked to play devil’s advocate,” said the tenured professor, who identifies as a liberal. “I can’t do that anymore. I have a family.”

  Other law professors—several of whom asked me not to identify their institution, their area of expertise, or even their state of residence—were similarly terrified.

  Nadine Strossen, the first woman to head the American Civil Liberties Union and a professor at New York Law School, told me: “I massively self-censor. I assume that every single thing that is said, every facial gesture, is going to be recorded and potentially disseminated to the entire world. I feel as if I am operating in a panopticon.” 

  This has all come as a shock to many law professors, who had long assumed that law schools wouldn’t cave to the new orthodoxy.

  At a Heterodox Academy panel discussion in December 2020, Harvard Law School Professor Randall Kennedy said that, until recently, he’d thought that fears of law schools becoming illiberal—shutting down unpopular views or voices—had been overblown. “I’ve changed my mind,” said Kennedy, who, in 2013, published a book called “For Discrimination: Race, Affirmative Action, and the Law.” “I think that there really is a big problem.”

  The problem has come not just from students, but from administrators, who often foment the forces they capitulate to. Administrators now outnumber faculty at some universities—Yale employs 5,066 administrators and just 4,937 professors—and law schools haven’t been spared the bloat. Several law professors bemoaned the proliferation of diversity, equity, and inclusion offices, which, they said, tend to validate student grievances and encourage censorship. 

  The distinction between DEI and the rest of the administration is often wafer thin. At Yale Law School, the Office of Student Affairs told students in an email last week that they could “swing by” the office to grab a “Critical Race Theory T-Shirt!” The T-shirt repeated the phrase “reparations & prison abolition” five times, Bart Simpson-style, before delivering the kicker: “critical race theory & yale law school.”

  

  Law school deans have further entrenched this culture. In 2020, 176 of them petitioned the American Bar Association to require “education around bias, cultural competence, and anti-racism” at all accredited law schools, which led to the new ABA standards this February. 

  As the new ideology has been institutionalized, the costs of disobeying it have grown steeper, both for faculty and for students. ​​

  At the University of Illinois Chicago, for example, a law professor’s classes were cancelled and his career threatened for including a bleeped out “‘n____’” on an exam in a hypothetical scenario about employment discrimination. (He had used the same scenario for years without incident.)

  A Harvard Law professor told me that students face “social death” if they buck the consensus. Students at other law schools—including Yale, NYU, Boston College, Georgetown, and Northwestern—told me much the same thing. “You want to have friends, so you don’t want to say anything controversial,” one Georgetown Law student explained. 

  At Boston College Law School this semester, a constitutional law professor asked students: “Who does not think we should scrap the constitution?” According to a student in the class, not a single person raised their hand.

  Those students and organizations who do dissent often encounter a tsunami of hate. When members of Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law’s Federalist Society chapter invited the conservative writer Josh Hammer to campus in October 2021, the law school’s all-student listserv lit up with invective. 

  “I’d be completely unsurprised (and in fact, willing to bet) that Joshie Hammer fucks (or at least tries to fuck—he probably was rejected repeatedly) we the trannies in his free time,” one student emailed. “Or—more likely—he just wants (and needs) to get just fucked in the ass . . . Maybe our lovely, idiotic FedSoc board is experiencing a similar dilemma within their own psychosexual selves.”

  That was nothing compared to what happened at Yale Law School earlier this month, when the school’s chapter of the Federalist Society hosted a bipartisan panel on civil liberties. More than 100 law students disrupted the event, intimidating attendees and attempting to drown out the speakers. When the professor moderating the panel, Kate Stith, told the protesters to “grow up,” they hurled abuse at her and insisted their disturbance was “free speech.”

  The fracas caused so much chaos that the police were called. After it ended, the protesters pressured their peers to sign an open letter endorsing their actions and condemning the Federalist Society, which they claimed had “​​profoundly undermined our community’s values of equity and inclusivity.”

  “I’m sure you realize that not signing the letter is not a neutral stance,” one student told her class group chat. She was upset that the panel had included Kristen Waggoner of the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal nonprofit that’s won a slew of religious liberty cases at the Supreme Court.

  As similar messages clogged listservs and Discord forums, nearly two-thirds of Yale Law’s student body wound up signing the letter.

  Stith, the professor who was lambasted for telling students to “grow up,” doesn’t see the pile-on as an isolated incident. 

  “Law schools are in crisis,” she told me. “The truth doesn’t matter much. The game is to signal one’s virtue.”

  ---

  The Associates Want to ‘Burn the Place Down’

  We don’t need to speculate about how temper tantrums in New Haven will reshape American institutions. The ideas underlying these outbursts have already spread to boardrooms and government agencies. 

  Last year, NASDAQ demanded that companies listing shares on its exchanges meet racial and gender quotas. Uber and Postmates waived delivery fees from black-owned restaurants. Montana and Vermont gave non-white residents priority access to Covid-19 vaccines. 

  Some high-profile initiatives have been blocked—for example, the Biden administration’s attempt to prioritize minority-owned restaurants while doling out pandemic relief. But the legal guardrails that once ensured against this sort of tipping of the scales are coming undone.

  That was the lesson of Rebecca Slaughter, one of the five commissioners who run the Federal Trade Commission.

  In a Twitter thread in September 2020, Slaughter declared: “#Antitrust can and should be #antiracist.”

  Then she added: “There’s precedent for using antitrust to combat racism. E.g., South Africa considers #racialequity in #antitrust analysis to reduce high economic concentration & balance racially skewed business ownership.”

  Here was a prominent government official—educated at Yale Law School, formerly senior counsel for Senator Chuck Schumer—proposing that a federal agency jettison its mandate (protecting consumers, ensuring competition) in the service of a political goal (narrowing the racial wealth gap) that no one had debated or voted on. 

  In practice, several attorneys said, that meant a company with a majority-white board could be penalized for something that a company with a majority-black board might not be. The government might even block a merger if the resulting conglomerate would be insufficiently diverse—something that has actually happened in South Africa, the country Slaughter held up as a model. Jobs, plants, investments, market share: all of it was on the line.

  “That’s hugely corrosive,” said a corporate lawyer in Virginia, who, like most attorneys contacted for this article, would not go on the record for fear of losing his job. “You see it in all of the worst things we see in Donald Trump. ‘The law means what I say it means. The election was stolen because I lost.’ Once you depart from the idea that we’re all people under the law, it really matters who is in power. That starts to feel like the rule of man, not the rule of law.” 

  Two weeks after posting her thread, Slaughter appeared on CNBC. “I want to be working to promote equity, rather than reinforce inequity,” she said. She had come to the conclusion that “it isn’t possible to really be actually neutral, nor should we be neutral in the face of systemic racism and structural racism.” 

  Slaughter’s statement was not a one-off. It captured the zeitgeist not just of post-Floyd progressivism, but of an increasingly large chunk of the legal profession. The idea that lawyers can’t be neutral, that confronting injustice must supersede all else, has eroded the norm that legal representation—like the ability to obtain medical care or buy a train ticket—is something every American deserves.

  “Partners are being blindsided by associates who they think are liberals in their own image,” an attorney in Washington, D.C., told me. “But they’re not. The associates want to burn the place down.”

  Lawyers at top law firms in New York, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles said they fret constantly about saying the wrong thing—or taking on the wrong client.

  “It’s much worse than McCarthyism,” Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law, told me. “McCarthyism was a reflection of dying, old views. They were not the future. But the people today who are imposing litmus tests for who they represent—they are the future.”

  When Dershowitz was accused, in 2014, of sexual relations with an underage girl at Jeffrey Epstein’s various residences, he said he had trouble finding representation. (A federal judge eventually struck the allegations from the record.)

  Law firms have been known to avoid unpopular clients—Big Tobacco, for example—but the scope and frequency of these evasions have increased, dozens of lawyers interviewed for this story agreed. That’s partly because young lawyers, like the one who accosted David Boies, see representing someone as tantamount to endorsing them. 

  ​​“It used to be that most lawyers could work for Catholic hospital system even if they were pro-choice,” a recently retired lawyer told me. “But now people just say, ‘I oppose this client, so I can’t work for them.’” (The lawyer had planned to stay at his law firm—one of the largest in the US—for a long time. He told me he retired in 2020 after the firm’s culture became “simply unbearable,” with younger associates excoriating him for being “old and white, and part of the reason we have systemic racism in America.”)

  Law firms also worry about losing their corporate clients, which, like many American institutions, have grown more stridently ideological in recent years. “I knew of and heard of clients protesting cases we were taking,” the recently retired lawyer said. “If you were going to do a gun rights case, you would incur the wrath of other clients.”

  Since 2011, law firms have been pressured to drop or turn down a long list of clients: fossil fuel companies, foreign universities, a GOP-controlled House of Representatives, employers challenging Biden’s vaccine mandate, and, of course, Donald Trump.

  These pressures—both internal and external—have had a chilling effect. If defending anti-vaxxers can cost you business, law firms reason, imagine the blowback of defending a transphobe or a racist. 

  “It doesn’t even occur to people to take controversial cases,” one lawyer in Washington, D.C., said. Religious liberty cases, for example, are “totally off the table. I wouldn’t even think to bring it up.” 

  Another lawyer, who specializes in First Amendment litigation, described being forced to turn away a client with far-right views because the firm thought that any association with the client—even if the claims advanced were meritorious—would be bad for business.

  The problem, Strossen said, is that rights mean nothing without representation. “ANYONE who doesn’t have access to counsel in defending a right, as a practical matter, doesn’t have a meaningful opportunity to exercise that right,” the former ACLU chief told me in an email. “Hence, undermining representation for any unpopular speaker or idea endangers freedom for ANY speaker or idea, because the tides of popularity are constantly shifting.”

  Ken Starr, the former solicitor general who led the 1998 investigation of Bill Clinton, agreed. “At a time when fundamental freedoms are under assault around the globe, it is all the more imperative that American lawyers boldly stand up for the rule of law,” Starr said. “In our country, that includes—especially now—the representation of controversial causes and unpopular clients.”

  ---

  Undermining the Impartial Judiciary 

  Another cornerstone of the rule of law is an impartial judiciary. Some judges, however, have begun to see themselves not as impartial adjudicators, but as agents of social change—believing, like Slaughter, that they cannot be neutral in the midst of moral emergencies.

  During the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, for example, Massachusetts Superior Court judge Shannon Frison vowed on Facebook to “never be silent or complicit again, in any courtroom or any context.” “As the very keepers of justice,” she said, judges “not only stand with the protesters—we fall with them.” 

  The Washington State Supreme Court put out a statement recognizing “the role we have played in devaluing black lives,” and encouraged judges to strike down “even the most venerable precedent” if it is “incorrect and harmful.”

  Such statements are not mere virtue signaling. They reflect sincerely held beliefs with real-world consequences. 

  Case in point: the case of Montez Terriel Lee, Jr.

  On May 28, 2020, Lee, Jr., then 25 years old, broke into the MaX it PAWN Shop, in Minneapolis. It had been three days since George Floyd had been murdered by a white police officer, about ten blocks south, and the city had been engulfed by riots. As looters grabbed whatever they could find, Lee poured lighter fluid all over the pawn shop. Then, he set it on fire. Outside, Lee raised his arm and clenched his fist. In a video, he can be seen saying, “Fuck this place. We’re gonna burn this bitch down.”

  At the time, Lee was unaware that Oscar Stewart, Jr., a 30-year-old father of five, was trapped inside and that he would die of smoke inhalation and excessive burns. A little over two weeks later, police arrested Lee, who pleaded guilty to arson. 

  Usually, this sort of crime, according to federal sentencing guidelines, would have landed Lee in prison for up to 20 years. But the prosecutor, Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Calhoun-Lopez, only asked for 12 years. 

  In his pre-sentence filing, Calhoun-Lopez portrayed Lee not as a rioter but a protester. “Mr. Lee was terribly misguided, and his actions had tragic, unthinkable consequences. But he appears to have believed that he was, in Dr. King’s eloquent words, engaging in ‘the language of the unheard.’”

  The judge, Wilhelmina Wright, appeared to buy that argument. On January 14, she handed down a sentence of just 10 years—even fewer than the prosecution had asked for. 

  “Motivation is a relevant factor in sentencing, and it was appropriate for the prosecutor and judge to consider the fact that the defendant did not intend to kill anyone when he set fire to the store,” Rebecca Roiphe, a professor of legal ethics at New York Law School, said in an email. But, she added, “Rewarding someone for having the correct beliefs is almost as bad as punishing someone for having the wrong ones. More importantly, a criminal justice system that does the former likely does the latter as well.”

  Strossen was more pointed: “For anyone who might applaud the Minneapolis situation, I would ask: ‘How would you feel about a judge who has religious objections to abortion giving a lighter sentence to a pro-life crusaders who attacks clinic property or personnel?’”

  Judge Wright’s willingness to tip scales didn’t come out of nowhere. When she was a student at Harvard Law School, she’d taken a class with Derrick Bell, the founder of critical race theory, who asked students to submit written reflections on the assigned readings.  Bell published many of the reflections—including Wright’s—in a 1989 article for UCLA Law Review: “Racial Reflections: Dialogues in the Direction of Liberation.” 

  In one reflection, Wright said that “American liberalism”—especially the liberal “notion that property is neutral”—was “equally” as “damaging” as overt “racial supremacy.” Her chambers are eight miles away from the MaX it PAWN Shop, one of 1,500 businesses—many minority-owned—that were damaged or destroyed in the record-setting riots of 2020.

  ---

  ‘The Anti-Innocence Project’

  Minneapolis is a microcosm of a larger trend. As progressives have set about repurposing the law, they seem to have lost sight of the people they insist they’re saving: the poor, the vulnerable, the indigent—including many racial minorities.

  Consider the movement to abolish the right to eliminate members of a jury pool. 

  The so-called peremptory strike allows attorneys, in a trial case, to toss out potential jurors they deem biased. Peremptories, as criminal-defense attorneys see it, offer their least sympathetic clients—those against whom all the cards have been stacked—a glimmer of hope. 

  The problem, as progressives see it, is peremptory strikes have also been used to disproportionately exclude potential black jurors. Supreme Court Justice Steven Breyer was among the most prominent to call for an end to peremptories, arguing in a 2005 opinion that they magnify racial bias in the legal system. But it wasn’t until the last year or so that the cause gained momentum. 

  In August, the Arizona Supreme Court announced that the state would no longer allow peremptory challenges at civil and criminal trials. This came after a pair of Arizona judges launched a petition arguing that peremptories perpetuate “discrimination.” The New Jersey Supreme Court is considering a similar move.

  It hasn’t gone over well with defense attorneys.

  “This is the stupidest fucking thing in the world,” Ambrosio Rodriguez, a criminal-defense attorney in Los Angeles, said. “Is my voice clear just how pissed off I am about this thing?” Rodriguez noted that the peremptory is one of the few tools at his disposal to help “level the playing field.”

  “Suppose a woman married to a police officer says she can be fair,” Josh Kendrick, a criminal-defense attorney in Columbia, South Carolina, told me. “I won’t be able to strike her from the jury, even though we all know she can’t really be fair.”  

  Then there’s the erosion of the principle that one is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. “The Anti-Innocence Project,” one criminal-defense attorney in San Francisco joked.

  ​​Progressive lawyers have become more determined to turn a blind eye to certain defendants while cracking down with even greater than usual fervor on certain crimes. “The same people who are anti-incarceration for some defendants will support life plus cancer for others,” said Scott Greenfield, a criminal-defense attorney in New York. “Good people—which in practice means blacks and Hispanics, regardless of what they did—should be free. Bad people—which in practice means sex offenders and financial criminals—should go to jail.” 

  In 2019, for example, the American Bar Association nearly passed a motion urging state legislatures and courts to adopt a new definition of “consent” in cases of sexual misconduct that would flip the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused—despite fierce criticism of the standard from legal scholars, and despite some evidence that it has unfairly hurt black, male students on college campuses.

  The motion was expected to pass but failed at the last minute, after key attorneys withdrew their support. Even so, nearly 40 percent of ABA delegates voted for it. 

  This sort of progressive carceralism isn’t confined to sexual assault. After the Rittenhouse verdict, in November, some left-wing legal scholars zeroed in on the definition of “self-defense.” Changing that definition—insisting that whoever was the first to point his gun was the presumptive aggressor—would have made it harder for Rittenhouse to have been acquitted. It would also preempt future Rittenhouses. 

  Kendrick, the criminal defense attorney, was skeptical. “These reforms aren’t going to be weaponized against white males or the GOP,” he said. “They’re going to be weaponized against criminal defendants.”

  Criminal defendants like Stephen Spencer.

  In July 2017, Spencer, a black man, endured a series of racist taunts at a bar. When he went outside, a group of white men followed him and shouted: “We’re going to get you, n—–!” Taking them at their word, Spencer turned around, pulled out his gun, and fired, killing one of his pursuers. 

  A jury acquitted Spencer on all counts. But under a different definition of self-defense—one reverse engineered to put the Rittenhouses of the world in jail—the case could easily have gone another way.

  “There’s a real risk Stephen Spencer would be a convicted murderer instead of a free man, because he displayed a lawfully possessed firearm when he was menaced by a racist mob,” a prominent second-amendment lawyer told me.

  ---

  Brave New World

  The old-school liberals, those who have been around for three or four decades, say that none of this was supposed to happen.

  Several attorneys called FTC commissioner Rebecca Slaughter’s thread—and her almost off-the-cuff reference to South Africa—deeply unsettling. Of all places, they said, South Africa? Did she know what was going on there? (Slaughter and her assistant did not return calls and text messages.) 

  In July, there had been rioting, looting, Molotov cocktails, people pulled from their cars and families hacked to death in their homes. The demonstrations had been sparked by the arrest of former President Jacob Zuma, now serving a 15-month sentence for contempt of court. But the real causes had been percolating for decades: a faltering economy, corruption, and the deeply divisive policies of the ruling African National Congress, which Slaughter held up as a model of “#racialequity.”

  It started in 1998 with the Competition Act, an antitrust law that effectively required businesses to be partly black-owned. The act was an early example of “Black Economic Empowerment”—race-conscious policies aimed at lifting black South Africans out of poverty.

  It was a disaster. Soon, companies were being forced to cede large chunks of their equity to black shareholders, many of whom were well-connected to the ANC. Foreign investment dried up—the regulations imposed huge costs on businesses—and corruption and unemployment soared. 

  By 2009, Moeletsi Mbeki, a black South African political economist, was warning that South Africa’s race-conscious policies would “collapse” the country. By 2021, South Africa’s unemployment rate was 44%, the highest in the world. 

  All this had culminated in the riots that killed 300 people and destroyed scores of businesses. This was the country a U.S. antitrust official wanted to emulate. 

  At stake, said Noah Phillips, also an FTC commissioner, was not just trade or competition but the American justice system itself. How we govern ourselves. What we mean by democracy and the rule of law.

  “We should strive to meet the promise that is literally chiseled into the stone of the Department of Justice and courthouses across the country,” Phillips told me. “That is: the law should be applied equally. Deliberately attempting to apply the law in an unequal fashion, based on the preferences of those in power, is inimical to the rule of law.”

  On November 12, the FTC released a draft strategic plan for the next five years. One of its main objectives: use the agency’s power to “advance racial equity.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 23:00

• US Angered After Syria's Assad Makes Historic Visit To UAE
  US Angered After Syria’s Assad Makes Historic Visit To UAE

  Since it became clear that the Assad government emerged victorious after the decade-long proxy war to effect regime change in Damascus sponsored by the West and Gulf powers, there have been slow but consistent efforts by Arab countries to normalize relations with Syria once again. 

  On Friday, for the first time since the war began in 2011, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad visited an Arab state to meet with its leader. It was none other than US and Saudi ally UAE. After long being branded an international ‘pariah’ it was a shock for some to see Assad in photographs speaking warmly to Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan.

  

  The UAE sheikh “stressed that Syria is a fundamental pillar of Arab security, and that the UAE is keen to strengthen cooperation with it”, according to UAE state news. Assad also met with prime minister of the UAE, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum.

  The Associated Press called it “clear signal” of Assad’s coming reengagement with the Arab world as he “comes in from the cold” – with the likelihood of Syria eventually rejoining the Arab League.

  And The Wall Street Journal wrote, “The Emirates, Egypt and Jordan are trying to bring him back into the Arab diplomatic fold—a move that could unlock trade benefits for all sides and reduce Iran’s influence. U.A.E. Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed met with Mr. Assad in Damascus in November, making him the most senior Emirati official to visit Syria since the start of the civil war.”

  Perhaps to be expected, Washington was angered by UAE authorizing and welcoming the visit, slamming it as an “apparent attempt to legitimize” Assad.

  “We are profoundly disappointed and troubled by this apparent attempt to legitimize Bashar al-Assad, who remains responsible and accountable for the death and suffering of countless Syrians” said State Department spokesman Ned Price said of the visit.

  The UAE’s normalization effort isn’t new. But to roll out the red carpet for Assad on a symbolic anniversary for Syrians, and while his Russian ally is in the midst of waging war on Ukraine… well, that’s quite a message https://t.co/cniRtkcrET

  — Gregg Carlstrom (@glcarlstrom) March 19, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  He also warned countries wanting to deal with Syria about US-led sanctions, saying they must “weigh carefully the horrific atrocities visited by the regime on the Syrians over the last decade,” according to the statement. He said the US won’t lift sanctions or provide waivers for anyone doing business with Damascus “until there is irreversible progress toward a political solution, which we have not seen.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 22:40

• Jan. 6 Suicide Victim Was Told 'He Would Not Receive A Fair Trial In This Town'
  Jan. 6 Suicide Victim Was Told ‘He Would Not Receive A Fair Trial In This Town’

  Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The 14-month ordeal battling charges from his time at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, had put so much stress on Matthew L. Perna that he began throwing up blood.

  

  When the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) asked to delay his sentencing and announced that it would seek more prison time, it was a bridge too far. Perna took his own life on Feb. 25 in Sharon, Pennsylvania. He was 37.

  “Worry, anxiety, stress had worn him down,” Geri Perna, his aunt, said at a Capitol Hill news conference on March 17. “He suffered constant nightmares and began throwing up blood. He was no longer comfortable leaving his home.

  “One setback after another took its toll on him. And he just wanted it to be over. His attorney encouraged him to plead guilty by telling him that he would not receive a fair trial in this town.”

  Perna stood in driving rain near the steps of the Capitol, alongside three members of Congress, to decry the treatment of Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach defendants by the DOJ, much of society, and influencers on social media.

  ‘A Feeling of Shame’

  Collectively, they sounded the alarm that U.S. society is at a precipice, close to losing the freedoms that have been taken for granted for so long.

  “Matt walked through an open door into this Capitol building, a monument that has been called the People’s House,” Geri Perna said. “Standing here in front of this building does not give me a sense of pride, but instead [it] is replaced by a feeling of shame.”

  Matthew Perna had pleaded guilty to one felony count of obstruction of an official proceeding, the congressional certification of the presidential election results. He also pleaded guilty to three misdemeanor charges.

  He spent about 20 minutes inside the Capitol on Jan. 6. After his sentencing was initially scheduled for March 3, prosecutors announced that they sought to add penalty enhancers that would have meant 41 to 51 months in prison.

  “Although Matthew Perna may have taken his last breath on Feb. 25, his death began in January 2021 after he was arrested and a nightmare like no other began,” Geri Perna said. “It affected everyone in our family, but we stood by his side proudly.”

  Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) ripped the DOJ for the sentencing delay.

  “The Department of Justice wasn’t sure they had beat up on this guy enough,” Gohmert said.

  He lauded Matthew Perna for a life of service, including a mission trip to hurricane-ravaged Haiti.

  

  “This is not an insurrectionist that does these kinds of things. He didn’t break, touch, or steal anything,” Gohmert said. “He didn’t harm anyone. And yet the Biden Department of Justice sought to throw the book at him for what really was a mistake, that now … led to the end of his life, a life he used to serve others.”

  Gohmert asked where today’s DOJ prosecutors were in June 2016, when Democrats staged a sit-in on the House floor and prevented regular business from being conducted for more than 12 hours.

  “If the Biden administration cared so deeply about sending a message that you should never obstruct an official session of Congress, they had much that they could have gone after the Democrats who sat on the floor,” Gohmert said. “I knew at the time they were violating many House rules. I didn’t realize at the time they were committing federal felonies.

  

  “How long did they sit in jail? How long were they in pretrial confinement? Did they have a DOJ prosecutor that said, ‘Wait a minute, I want to make sure every one of these Democrats gets 41 months in prison,’ like he felt the gentleman named Matt Perna should have? No. No, they didn’t do any of that.”

  He accused the DOJ of trying to exact political revenge.

  “This is a very dangerous policy that this Department of Justice, this administration is pursuing in pursuing vengefulness,” Gohmert said. “Republics don’t last much longer when they get like this. They need to be careful that they’re not leading us into a dark chapter of our country.”

  The DOJ has refused to comment on the Perna case, although it did dismiss the charges after Perna’s death.

  Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) criticized the DOJ for not living up to legal obligations to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to defense attorneys.

  “At this time, the Department of Justice is still withholding hundreds of thousands of FBI records from defense attorneys,” Greene said. “They’re not allowing them to have the records to prepare their cases. Trials are starting and defendants still don’t have all of their discovery. They deserve this to be able to defend themselves.”

  ‘Two-Tiered Justice System’

  Greene opened her remarks by blasting federal judges in the District of Columbia Circuit for holding so many Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach pretrial defendants in jail without bond.

  “I’d like to start by saying shame on every single judge that is using their courtroom to persecute pretrial Jan. 6 defendants,” she said. “This should never happen in our country. We have a two-tiered justice system in America today. And it’s wrong.”

  Greene also shamed her congressional colleagues for not speaking out more about the issue.

  

  “There are very few Republicans, very few members of Congress that are willing to speak out and stand up for these people’s due process rights,” she said. “Do they even believe in America and a fair justice system? Shame on them! Shame on everyone that will not speak out against this outrage. It’s enough.”

  Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, said the Department of Justice “really wanted to make an example of Matthew Perna.”

  ‘Some of Them Have Been Tortured’

  Biggs said many of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach defendants who have been jailed for 14 months have experienced extended periods in solitary confinement.

  “Solitary confinement for more than two weeks in international law is considered torture,” he said. “These individuals, some of them have been tortured. That’s what’s going on here.”

  Biggs called out judges, “particularly the judges who’ve been biased because of political reasoning.”

  “Just stop it. This is America. You have to grant due process,” Biggs said. “The persecution that Matt Perna underwent by the mob on social media is too great for him to bear. We must correct it. We are a self-governing people. We can fix this, and we must fix this. This should never, ever be a situation again.”

  Geri Perna said the mistreatment that her nephew experienced will lead to more victims if something doesn’t change.

  “I agreed to come to this press conference today because I do not want Matthew Perna’s name forgotten,” she said. “There are hundreds of other people just like him, standing in his shoes. I do not know how much more they can take.

  “Still I promise you that if something is not done to stop this evil torture that is being inflicted upon these people who have not even been convicted of a crime, more are going to make the choice that Matthew Perna made.”

  Geri Perna said the silence from most of Congress is revealing.

  “Their silence speaks volumes. Shame on everyone who has a voice and could have intervened,” Perna said. “Maybe this tragedy would never have occurred. We are disappointed and angry. And we are seeking justice for Matthew Perna.

  “I stand here today only because my nephew is dead. No one cared about Matthew Perna’s sufferings at the hands of this Justice Department when he was alive. And now it is too late to help him. But anyone who knew Matt would say that he would want others to receive the help that he himself was denied.”

  Despite the hate mail directed at Matthew Perna’s father and other family members, Geri Perna said the family believes that Matthew is in Heaven.

  “He’s finally free. But the people responsible for this tragedy, they will stand before God someday for the part they played,” she said. “But there is an evil surrounding these same people, and I do not think that they are hoping to enter the gates of Heaven anyway.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 22:20

• Oil Price Spike Has Yet To Spark Gasoline Demand Destruction 
  Oil Price Spike Has Yet To Spark Gasoline Demand Destruction 

  Worries about demand destruction for gasoline appear overblown. Consumers are tolerating record-high prices at the pump as demand continues to rise. 

  US Energy Information Administration (EIA) data show gasoline prices are up a staggering 51% from a year ago, averaging around $4.32 a gallon on a national level.

  

  Record-high prices at the pump trigger fear that demand destruction is imminent, but that’s not what the data shows in the first half of March. 

  EIA noted gasoline consumption is up 6% over the year, to 8.9 million barrels per day for the week ending March 11. Demand was 2.3% higher than the two weeks prior. Over the last month, average weekly US gasoline consumption is up 8.6% versus the prior year, to 8.8 million barrels a day. 

  

  Skyrocketing fuel prices and significant inflationary pressure have yet to crimp demand as consumers appear to tolerate high prices as they must drive to work, drop off their kids at school, and run errands. Yes, millions of Americans are furious with the Biden administration about soaring costs but being irate and actually cutting back are two separate things. 

  “Higher oil and gasoline prices are certainly crimping consumer pocketbooks, but they are not yet causing a decline in demand,” research firm DataTrek said. 

  On Sunday, Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis for Gas Buddy, verified the trend and said weekly gasoline demand “surged to highest since last summer.” 

  Weekly US gasoline demand surges to highest since last summer… data incoming

  — Patrick De Haan ⛽️📊 (@GasBuddyGuy) March 20, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  DataTrek continued: “Given more workers commuting back to the office and incremental employment, we expect demand to continue to improve as the year continues. It always amazes us that the US uses the better part of 10 million barrels/day of gasoline…” 

  Consumers are reducing their discretionary spending to offset high gas prices. For instance, BofA’s research analyst Sara Senatore points out all restaurant spending through the week ending March 12 decelerated. The decline in restaurant spending coincides with the spike in fuel prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in late February. 

  

  Other indications consumers are paring back discretionary spending comes from consumer goods companies who said their ability to continue raising prices has likely hit the ceiling. Macy’s Inc. CEO Jeff Gennette recently told WSJ that price increases on mattresses and sofas were met with fierce consumer pushback. Clothing brand Bella Dahl hiked shirt prices by $20 and immediately saw sales crater. “There was a revolt,” said Steven Millman, Bella Dahls’ brand officer. “If we go any higher, we’ll do half the sales.”

  The good news is Americans’ average monthly wage share for fuel costs is by far the least among all OECD countries. This means the wage share can increase though discretionary spending will decrease. 

  

  Gas is a necessity, and even though consumers complain about soaring prices, they are belt-tightening and reducing spending elsewhere to offset their driving needs. Prices might have to rise much higher to reach the demand destruction threshold. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 22:00

• Stockman Slams Zelenskyy's Hyperbole: Pearl Harbor My Eye!
  Stockman Slams Zelenskyy’s Hyperbole: Pearl Harbor My Eye!

  Authored by David Stockman via AntiWar.com,

  We were already getting sick and tired of this Zelensky clown, but the sheer chutzpah of comparing Ukraine’s predicament with Pearl Harbor or 9/11 is just fricking outrageous. To paraphrase Senator Lloyd Bensten’s famous retort to Dan Quayle in the 1992 VP debate: We knew the United States of America and Ukraine isn’t any United States.

  To the contrary, it is a cesspool of corruption, mal-governance and rank stupidity on the foreign policy front. For crying out loud, its situation is comparable to the drug cartels taking over Mexico, demanding the return of the Gadsden Purchase and then seeking to join a Russian-led anti-American treaty organization.

  That is to say, Ukraine brought the Russian attack on itself by poking the bear in its eyes repeatedly since the 2014 coup. Yet now its leader has the gall to petition the US Congress to start WWII via standing-up a No Fly Zone in lieu of the obvious solution: Namely, Zelensky should resign and make way for a collaborationist government that will sue for peace on the following basis:

  • Recognize that Crimea is Russian territory and always has been since it was purchased by Catherine the Great in 1783;

  • Permit the separation of the Donbass Republics from Ukraine because the overwhelmingly Russian speaking populations there has been part of “New Russia” for more than 300 years and do not wish to be ruled by the anti-Russian fascists and oligarchs who control Kiev;

  • Amend the constitution of the rump state of Ukraine to prohibit its joining NATO or any similar western alliance, while reducing its military to a domestic law enforcement agency.

  Those terms may seem harsh, but it’s the only alternative to the complete destruction of Ukraine and an eventual Russian win anyway. The fact is, the NATO cavalry simply ain’t coming no matter how many standing ovations are stumped up by the armchair warriors of the US Congress.

  That’s because even the bully boys of Washington and Brussels aren’t ready to trigger WWIII over the broken remnants of a country that never had been a country historically until Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchev made it an administrative district of the Soviet Empire – the latter being a stain on mankind that thankfully disappeared into the dustbin of history 31 years ago.

  Yet without direct US/NATO engagement with the Russian military forces now occupying growing segments of Ukrainian territory the expedient of sending arms – even highly advanced lethal anti-air and anti-tank weapons – is futile. Russia now has total air superiority over Ukraine’s skies, meaning that incoming NATO weapons (and the so-called “foreign legion” fighters, too) will be destroyed long before they can make a difference.

  So for god’s sake Washington needs to stop standing on ceremony and leading the hapless Ukrainian government down the primrose path to national destruction. There is no way out of the current catastrophe except for Washington to:

  • concede that recruiting Ukraine to join NATO and potentially putting NATO missile bases within one minute’s cruise missile flight time from Moscow was an egregious mistake; and

  • that its demonization of Putin as a modern day Hitler on a quest to revive the Soviet Empire is just plain War Party hogwash and is no justification for its sweeping Sanctions War, most especially if Kiev capitulates to Moscow’s terms.

  The truth, in fact, is more nearly the opposite. That is, there really are not two distinct nations there, one invading the other. Russia and Ukraine have never been neighboring independent states like Germany and France or Spain and Portugal or Columbia and Peru. To the contrary, they have been an intermingled territory and peoples for the last 1300 years with borders, governing arrangements episodic external invasions all over the lot.

  The Ukrainian language itself is testimony to that history and geography. The dialects spoken in the Donbas (brown and yellow areas) are a mixture of Ukrainian and Russian; the old Galician territories of Western Ukraine centered in Lviv (red areas) are heavily influenced by Polish, Slovakian and Rumanian vocabularies.; and the blue areas of the North present dialects heavily influenced by Belarusian.

  What is also true is that these segmented populations have never been united under a common polity except by communist arms between 1922 and 1991; then between 1991 and 2014 by tenuous and continuously shifting electoral balances after the Ukrainian administrative entity was arbitrarily disgorged from the old Soviet Union; and finally after the February 2014 coup by dint of a Kiev government based on central and western Ukraine that essentially declared a civil war on Crimea (which seceded) and the eastern, Russian-speaking Donbas regions that have tried to do the same.

  So again, what’s wrong with partition? At the end of the day, Zelensky stood before Congress and had the gall to demand WWIII in behalf of an abortion of a nation that has virtually no chance of long-term survival in its present form. Yet the knuckleheads from both parties are in such war heat that they vociferously applauded the unctuous rantings of a clown who should have stuck to the comedy business.

  

  Still, for want of doubt about the madness of defending Ukraine by economic warfare now, and military confrontation with Russia if the warmongers get their way, just recall how the arbitrary borders depicted above got here. If this mongrel merits all out defense in behalf of the “rule of law,” then the rule of law be damned.

  Kiev Is the Ancestral Homeland of Russia

  In the first place, Putin is essentially correct when he says that Russia and much of the Ukrainian territory have been one through long stretches of history. Ironically, therefore, the Kiev today being laid to waste by the Russian army is actually the birthplace of Russia!

  As an excellent Washington post history recently explained,

  The “Rus” – the people whose name got tacked on to Russia – were originally Scandinavian traders and settlers who made their way from the Baltic Sea through the marshes and forests of Eastern Europe down toward the fertile riverlands of what’s now Ukraine. Other Viking adventurers journeyed to Constantinople, the great capital of the Byzantine Empire, to find their fortune – sometimes as hired muscle.

  The first major center of the “Rus” was at Kiev, established in the 9th century. In 988, Vladimir, a prince of the Kievan Rus, was baptized by a Byzantine priest in the old Greek colony of Khersonesos on the Crimean coast. His conversion marked the advent of Orthodox Christianity among the Rus and remains a moment of great nationalist symbolism for Russians. Putin invoked this older Vladimir in a speech when justifying his annexation of Crimea.

  

  However, successive Mongol invasions beginning in the 13th century subdued Kiev’s influence, and led the Russians to eventually migrate north. That led to the rise of other Rus settlements including Moscow, while the Turkic descendants of the Mongol Golden Horde formed their own Khanate along the northern rim of the Black Sea and Crimea.

  During the next several centuries the Ukrainian territory was a no man’s land, hosting successive invasions and occupations by external forces. The land that’s now Ukraine lay on the margins of competing empires, making it a region of permanent contest and shifting borders.

  At length, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which, at its peak encompassed a huge swath of Europe, dominated much of the land. But over the centuries Ukraine would also see the incursions of Hungarians, Ottomans, Swedes, bands of Cossacks and the armies of successive Russian czars.

  By the late 17th century after much of Europe had congealed into today’s borders, there was still no nation of Ukraine. Instead, as these meandering borders appeared and disappeared repeatedly, Russia and Poland (Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth) eventually split much of the territory of what’s now Ukraine along the Dnieper River, as shown in the map below. Approximately 355 years ago (1667), to be exact, the areas to the east of the Dnieper, which now include the Donbas, were acquired by Russia and incorporated into the Russian State.

  So, yes, the current day rebel provinces in the Donbas, which were giving partial autonomy from Kiev by the Minsk Agreements of 2015, have actually been “Russian” for more than three and one-half centuries and “Ukrainian” for about 31 years. Or as Secy Blinkey would say, because it’s borders.

  The Rise of New Russia

  Russia’s advance continued a century later during the 18th century rule of Catherine the Great, who proclaimed her domains along the Black Sea constituted “Novorossiya” or “new Russia.” Back then, the Russian court even harbored dreams of collapsing the Ottoman empire entirely, extending Moscow’s reach to Istanbul and even Jerusalem.

  The infamous architect of Catherine’s imperialism, Grigoriy Potemkin, thus told his sovereign:

  Believe me, you will acquire immortal fame such as no other sovereign of Russia ever had,” when offering the empress counsel in 1780 on plans to wrest Crimea away from Ottoman suzerainty. “This glory will open the way to still further and greater glory.”

  Meanwhile, the partitions of Poland in the late 18th century led to the city of Lviv– once a major regional hub and a center of Jewish culture in Eastern Europe – falling under the rule of the Austro-Hungarian empire. So even in the west there was still no state of Ukraine, but as the Washington post further noted,

  It was there in the mid-19th century where Ukrainian nationalism began to take hold, rooted in the traditions and dialects of the region’s peasants and the aspirations of intellectuals who had fled the stifling rule of Russia rule further to the east.

  

  The State the Commies Made

  The striking thing is that as of 1900, when much of Europe was fully formed albeit in part under the rubric of the Hapsburg’s empire, there was still no nation called Ukraine. In the east, Russia and today’s Ukrainian territories were one, while in the west the Galician territories were part of the Hapsburg Empire.

  Needless to say, World War I and the Bolshevik revolution in 1917 triggered more traumas and upheaval in the areas that now constitute Ukraine. The new Bolshevik government was desperate to end hostilities with Germany and its allies and signed a treaty in the town of Brest-Litovsk in 1918 . As the Washington Post further amplified, the treaty ceded,

  ….some of Russia’s domains to the Central powers and recognized the independence of others, including Ukraine.

  The terms of the treaty were nullified by Germany’s defeat later in the year, but the genie of Ukrainian nationalism was out of the bottle. Independence movements of various stripes sprung up in cities like Lviv, Kiev and Kharkiv, but were eventually all swept away amid the wider struggle for power in Russia.

  

  That struggle was mightily fueled at the misbegotten Versailles “peace” conference where the long dead nation of Poland was revived by Woodrow Wilson. The latter nearly single-handedly resurrected the nation of Poland, doing so with a keen eye not to the historic maps of Europe but to the polish vote in Cleveland, Detroit and Chicago.

  Soon thereafter a revived Poland reclaimed Lviv and a chunk of what’s now western Ukraine on the grounds that this was sacred Polish, not Ukrainian, territory.

  In any event, the region became a key battleground of the Russian Civil War, which pitted Bolshevik forces against an array of White Russian armies, led by loyalists to the old czarist regime as well as other political opportunists. After a lot of bloodshed – and other battles with Poland – the Bolsheviks emerged triumphant and officially declared the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic in 1922.

  At long last, therefore, the maps of the world now at least had something that roughly resembled modern Ukraine – even if it was wrested by Bolshevik rifles.

  The years that followed, however, would be even more traumatic. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, Ukraine suffered heavily under the rule of Soviet despot Josef Stalin. A vast segment of Ukraine’s rural population was displaced and dispossessed by Stalin’s aggressive collectivization policies. A man-made famine (the Holodomor) in 1932-3 led to the deaths of some three million people.

  To make up the numbers, Russian speakers from elsewhere immigrated to eastern Ukraine’s hollowed out towns and cities, leaving a demographic footprint that defines Ukraine’s divisive politics to this day.

  As shown in the map below, the tiny principality of Ukraine as of 1654 (dark blue area) had not been much to write home about until the Russians – Czars and Commissars, alike – bestirred themselves with nation-building. Russian nation-building, that is.

  The yellow areas being the winnings of Catherine the Great and other Russian Czars over 1654-1917, while the added territories seconded by Lenin’s Red Army are represented by the purple area of the map below. These were historic “new Russia” territories added to the Ukraine administrative entity for ease of Communist rule.

  Later came the rest of Ukraine proper via added gifts from Stalin’s Red Army (light blue area, 1939-1945) . These territories were stolen from the modern artificial state of Poland confected at Versailles. And the previously mentioned gift of Crimea (red area) was added by Khrushchev in 1954.

  In short, it needs be recalled that America’s borders were established by democratic politicians and have stood the test of 167 years of time during which they have been perfectly fixed. By contrast, today’s Ukraine depicted below is the handiwork of tyrants and commies, which changed by the decade.

  So the question recurs. Who in their right mind would select the historical mongrel depicted below to bring the world to the brink of nuclear war in order to establish the purported universal rule of law and sanctity of borders?

  

  Indeed, we’d say it’s only folks who have lost their minds to the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome). This entire imbroglio, in fact, is not about the nation of Russia, the rule of law, foreign policy or the genuine safety and liberty of the American homeland.

  To the contrary, it’s about a single member of the 7 billion-strong human race – the utterly demonized, vilified and reviled Vladimir Putin. The Biden mainstream of the Dem party is still not over the shock of November 2016, and apparently mean to do battle permanently with the ogre of Moscow whom they falsely hold accountable for their own self-inflicted defeat.

  As it happens, their endlessly repeated mantra that Putin’s expansionist intentions were revealed when he “seized” Crimea in 2014 tells you all you need to know. That claim is so hypocritical, threadbare and tendentious that only minds possessed with TDS would even dare to peddle it.

  That’s because it amounts to saying is that the dead hand of the Soviet presidium must be defended at all costs – as if the security of North Dakota depended upon it!

  As previously mentioned, however, the allegedly “occupied” territory of Crimea was actually purchased from the Ottomans by Catherine the Great in 1783, thereby satisfying the longstanding quest of the Russian czars for a warm-water port. Over the ages, Sevastopol then emerged as a great naval base at the strategic tip of the Crimean peninsula, where it became home port to the mighty Black Sea Fleet of the czars and then the Soviet commissars, too.

  For the next 171 years Crimea was an integral part of Russia (until 1954). And that’s a fact that you can look up in the Google/CIA archives!

  In fact, that span equals the 170 years that have elapsed since California was annexed by a similar thrust of “Manifest Destiny” on this continent, thereby providing, incidentally, the United States Navy with its own warm-water port in San Diego.

  While no foreign forces subsequently invaded the California coasts, it was most definitely not Ukrainian rifles, artillery and blood that famously annihilated The Charge of the Light Brigade at the Crimean city of Balaclava in 1854, either: The defending combatants were Russians fighting for their homeland against invading Turks, French and Brits.

  At the end of the day, security of its historical port in Crimea is and long has been Russia’s Red Line, and thereby none of Washington’s business.

  Unlike today’s feather-headed Washington pols, even the enfeebled Franklin Roosevelt at least knew that he was in Soviet “Russia” when he made port in the Crimean city of Yalta in February 1945.

  Maneuvering to cement his control of the Kremlin in the intrigue-ridden struggle for succession after Stalin’s death a few years later, Nikita Khrushchev allegedly spent 15 minutes reviewing his “gift” of Crimea to his subalterns in Kiev.

  As it happened, therefore, Crimea became part of the Ukraine only by writ of the former Soviet Union:

  On April 26, 1954 The decree of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet transferring the Crimea Oblast from the Russian SFSR to the Ukrainian SSR. Taking into account the integral character of the economy, the territorial proximity and the close economic and cultural ties between the Crimea Province and the Ukrainian SSR….

  So, yes, there is every reason for a Kiev government which finally sues for peace to return Crimea to Russia, which owned it all along; and in which Ukrainians accounts for less than 15% of the predominant Russian speaking population. For Washington to claim otherwise and encourage Zelensky to hold out is tantamount to a naked case of hegemonic arrogance.

  After all, during the long decades of the Cold War, the West did nothing to liberate the “captive nation” of Ukraine – with or without the Crimean appendage bestowed upon it in 1954. Nor did it draw any red lines in the mid-1990s when a financially desperate Ukraine rented back Sevastopol and the strategic redoubts of Crimea to an equally pauperized Russia.

  In short, in the era before we got our Pacific port in 1848 and even during the 170-year interval since then, America’s national security has depended not one whit on the status of Russian-speaking Crimea and the Donbas regions of eastern Ukraine. The fact that the local population of the former in March 2014 chose fealty to the Grand Thief in Moscow over the ruffians and rabble that have seized Kiev amounts to a giant, “So what?”

  Still, it was this final aggressive drive of Washington and NATO into the internal affairs of Russia’s historical neighbor and vassal, Ukraine, that largely accounts for the current dangerous confrontation. Likewise, it is virtually the entire source of the false claim that Russia has aggressive, expansionist designs on the former Warsaw Pact states in the Baltics, Poland and beyond.

  The latter is a nonsensical fabrication. In fact, it was the neocon meddlers from Washington who crushed Ukraine’s last semblance of democratic governance when they enabled ultra-nationalists and crypto-Nazis to gain government positions after the February 2014 coup, which threw-out Ukraine’s legitimately elected, Russia-leaning president.

  In this context, moreover, the history of the 1930s and 1940s must never be forgotten. As indicated above, Stalin decimated upwards of 15% of the Ukrainian population during the Holodomer (starvations) and then moved huge numbers of Russian-speakers into the Donbas to safeguard its chemical, steel and armaments industries from the defiant locals who were sent to Siberia.

  Thereafter, when Hitler’s Wehrmacht came charging through Ukraine on its way to the bloody battle of Stalingrad, it had no trouble recruiting hundreds of thousands of vengeance-seeking Ukrainian nationalists to its ranks to do its dirty work: That is, the brutal liquidation of Jews, Poles, Gypsies and other untermenschen.

  In fact, during the fall of 1941 began the mass killings of Jews that continued through 1944. An estimated 1.5 million Ukrainian Jews perished, and over 800,000 were displaced to the east; at Baby Yar in Kyiv nearly 34,000 were killed in just the first two days of massacre – and all of these depredations were assisted and often executed by local Ukrainian nationalists.

  Then, of course, the tide turned and the Red Army came marching back though the rubble of Ukraine on its way to Berlin. After their victory over the Germans at the Battle of Stalingrad in early 1943, the Soviets launched an equally brutal scorched earth counteroffensive westward, searching high and low for traitors and collaborators among the Ukrainian population who had allegedly aided the Wehrmacht.

  The Germans thus began their slow retreat from Ukraine in mid-1943, leaving wholesale destruction in their wake. In November the Soviets reentered Kyiv, where guerrilla activity intensified amid bloody revenge killings which claimed huge numbers of civilian victims. By the spring of 1944 the Red Army had penetrated into Galicia (western Ukraine), and by the end of October Ukraine was a bloody wasteland, once again under Red Army control.

  So it may be fairly asked: What Washington lame brains did not understand that triggering “regime change” in Kiev in February 2014 would reopen this entire blood-soaked history of sectarian and political strife?

  Moreover, once they had opened Pandora’s Box, why was it so hard to see that an outright partition of Ukraine with autonomy for the Donbas and Crimea, or even accession to the Russian state from which these communities had originated, would have been a perfectly reasonable resolution?

  Certainly that would have been far preferable to dragging all of Europe into the lunacy of the current military showdown and further embroiling the Ukrainian factions in a suicidal civil war.

  Needless to say, Zelensky gets none of this in the slightest – even though as a native and Russian speaking son of southeastern Ukraine, he actually grew up in a part of modern Ukraine that had been Russian for 370 years!

  That’s right. He’s just the perennial short guy feasting on his 15 minutes of fame. But enough is enough already. In a rational world this double-talking creep should have been sent packing this morning by the US Congress, but these war-obsessed nincompoops can’t see the handwriting on the wall.

  So once again, here it is. This is where the story ends – even as Washington wages Sanctions War on the entire global economy and thereby the American people as well.

  How Ukraine Will Be Partitioned After Kiev Capitulates

  

  In any event, a TV actor who has no script other than that handed to him by his Washington/NATO overseers is one thing. And at the end of the day, it small potatoes compared to the grotesque negligence and misdirection of Sleepy Joe’s own keepers.

  That is to say, Secy Blinkey and Snake Sullivan should be bent over the above map in earnest conversation with their Russian counterparts as to the fine points of the partition, and the meaning of “neutrality,” “de-nazification” and “demilitarization” of the green area of the map, which is to become the future “Ukraine,” if there is to be anything left at all.

  Needless to say, they are not even talking to the Russians. They are, in fact, so red in tooth and claw with the blood of economic warfare that they would drive the global economy to collapse rather than acknowledge that they – and they alone – brought this horrendous situation to the doorstep of the world.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 21:40

• Elon Musk Says Starlink Internet Access Is Ready In Ukraine
  Elon Musk Says Starlink Internet Access Is Ready In Ukraine

  It looks as though Elon Musk has officially activated Starlink internet service in Ukraine. Over the weekend, the Tesla CEO said that SpaceX had activated the service after officials in Kyiv lobbied for stations. 

  Musk heard the call, and Tweeted this weekend: “Starlink service is now active in Ukraine…more terminals en route.”

  Ukrainian Minister of Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov had lobbied for Musk’s help immediately after his country was invaded by Russia, a new report from Yahoo News says. 

  “While you try to colonize Mars — Russia try to occupy Ukraine! While your rockets successfully land from space — Russian rockets attack Ukrainian civil people! We ask you to provide Ukraine with Starlink stations,” he pleaded with Musk on Twitter. 

  

  Additionally he asked Musk “to address sane Russians to stand” against Russia’s invasion. The country has seen a “series of significant disruptions to internet service”, according to internet monitor NetBlocks.

  Curiously, an unlisted video appeared on the internet about a week and a half ago showing how to set up and use the Powerwall as a mobile power station. The video appeared after Tesla sent equipment to Ukraine to try and help ensure uninterrupted internet, Tesmanian wrote.

  The video shows how you can deploy a mobile power station in minutes without actually taking the equipment out of the box. To do this, you need to get the cables and connect them together in the appropriate order. The video also demonstrates how solar panels can be easily connected to the Powerwall, which will charge the battery, so you can get an independent power source even in the field.

  Starlink is hoping its more than 2,000 satellites will help not only Ukraine, but the rest of the planet, have access to internet. 

  Here’s a copy of the unlisted YouTube setup video. It has been viewed almost 14,000 times:

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 21:20

• Volatile Commodities Force Investors To Sell
  Volatile Commodities Force Investors To Sell

  By Tatiana Darie, Bloomberg Markets Live commentator and analyst

  Nickel’s blowout and oil’s roller-coaster this year show commodities have become more volatile across the asset class. That’s a problem because volatility begets volatility as investors are forced to rein in exposure or pay higher hedging costs.

  In the five years before Covid-19 struck markets, the Bloomberg Commodity Index saw daily moves larger than two-standard deviations on average about 14 times per year. Then, in the past year, we suddenly had 33.

  The index’s absolute daily average move has increased by 38% over the past year. Its standard deviation rose to 1.2% from 0.8% during March 2015-2020.

  Looking under the hood also reveals that 16 out of 23 components in the index had a similar dynamic: they’ve moved above or below two-standard deviations more often in the past year than pre-pandemic. Also, 17 out of 23 commodities have seen their absolute average daily move increase since 2021 versus the prior period.

  

  Big swings make it harder to trade and also make hedging more expensive. It forces money managers targeting a certain level of volatility across portfolios to cut exposure. Greater volatility also creates higher hedging costs via options pricing.

  That’s part of the reason why hedge funds have been selling in recent weeks, taking some steam out of the sector’s rally, according to Saxo Bank’s head of commodity strategy Ole Hansen. And that’s also why oil slumped last week.

  That, coupled with the fact that a quick jump in prices tends to hurt demand, could spell risks for the best performing major asset class this year and the most crowded long trade, per Bank of America’s latest global fund survey for the week ending March 10.

  

  A breakdown of the most volatile commodities shows natural gas, aluminum and soybean oil at the top, seeing nearly three, four and six times more two-sigma events over the past year versus the average of the pre-pandemic period. What used to be a two-standard deviation move for soybean oil, one of the most used in cooking, has become the norm, being exceeded in almost every fourth session since March 2021.

  Surprisingly, nickel, Brent and crude oil have been among the more stable commodities, seeing fewer outsized moves. Brent has actually seen its average absolute daily move slip to 1.58% over the past year from 1.60% seen pre-pandemic. At 1.71%, WTI’s is largely unchanged.

  Other resources that have seen large moves less frequently than in the past include: gasoline, lean hogs, sugar and live cattle.

  The study analyzed futures daily price movements to look at how many times a given commodity moved outside of its pre-pandemic two-standard deviation derived from March 9, 2015 to March 9, 2020. It then applied it to the past year starting March 9, 2021.

  As market observers like to say, commodities are their own worst enemies when they jump in price as quickly as they did in March. They’ve proved to be a great bet for investors this year so far, but only for those who’re able to handle the stomach-churning gyrations.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 21:00

• Microsoft "Investigating" Potential Breach Of Internal Systems By Group Known For Demanding Bizarre Ransom
  Microsoft “Investigating” Potential Breach Of Internal Systems By Group Known For Demanding Bizarre Ransom

  Microsoft is in the midst of investigating whether or not a “extortion-focused hacking group” has gained access to its internal systems, according to a Monday morning report from Vice. 

  The group in question, LAPSUS$, had formerly compromised companies like Ubisoft and Nvidia. In the case of Nvidia, the group made ransom demands of asking the company to “unlock aspects of its graphics cards to make them more suitable for mining cryptocurrency”. 

  So far, the group has not made any demands of Microsoft, the report says.

  But over the weekend the group put up images of what Vice says “appeared to be an internal Microsoft developer account to their Telegram channel”. The shot appeared to be from an Azure DevOps account and showed projects called “Bing_UX”, “Bing-Source” and “Cortana.”

  

  The terms  “mscomdev,” “microsoft,” and “msblox,” were also included in the screenshot. 

  The image was deleted shortly after it was posted, with an administrator of the channel writing: “Deleted for now will repost later.”

  Microsoft has commented that they are “aware of the claims” and are “investigating”. 

  The group said earlier this month that it was recruiting employees inside of companies like Microsoft. They also listed Apple and IBM as companies where they were looking for insiders to work with. 

  In the last 3 months alone, the group has “breached the Ministry of Health of Brazil, a slew of Brazilian and Portuguese companies, and then Nvidia and Samsung”, the report wrote. They also took credit for breaching Ubisoft earlier this month. 

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 20:40

• Peters: In The Decades To Come, Nuclear Weapons Will Be Thing Protecting Putin From 1.4 Billion Chinese On His Southern Border
  Peters: In The Decades To Come, Nuclear Weapons Will Be Thing Protecting Putin From 1.4 Billion Chinese On His Southern Border

  By Eric Peters of One River Asset Management

  “War is the continuation of politics by other means,” explained The Commander, quoting Carl von Clausewitz, the famous Prussian general and military theorist. “Von Clausewitz advocated that you continue to pound your enemy, you don’t stop a fight until you negotiate an end to it,” he added. “We tend to pause our military actions during negotiations, but Russia is doing as von Clausewitz advised. Putin is continuing to attack even as talks with Ukraine are taking place,” said The Commander. “All military leaders and strategists study von Clausewitz. And we all know our adversaries have internalized his work. Our weapons are more brutal today, but the theories are the same as when he wrote On War in the early 1800s.”

  

  “War is the realm of uncertainty; three quarters of the factors on which action in war is based are wrapped in a fog of greater or lesser uncertainty,” wrote Carl von Clausewitz in the early 1800s. “A sensitive and discriminating judgment is called for; a skilled intelligence to scent out the truth,” continued the Prussian general and military theorist. Like so many of our greatest thinkers, von Clausewitz trained his sights on the essence of what it means to be human. He narrowed that focus to how we behave in times of conflict, which is to say, much of the time. Even now, with a full-scale war underway in Ukraine, a lesser battle has begun over inflation, and a long-simmering conflict over the dollar’s prominence as the global reserve currency is heating up. The backdrop to these conflicts is the internal division we see throughout much of the West, and this is set against the world’s authoritarians who are tightening their grip, attempting to consolidate power. These issues are inextricably woven. All times are unique, and what makes this one unlike others is the degree to which we are all connected, our world shrinking. It both raises the costs of failure and presents new opportunities, possibilities. “No one starts a war – or rather, no one in his senses ought to do so – without first being clear in his mind what he intends to achieve by that war and how he intends to conduct it,” wrote Clausewitz. And we are left to imagine exactly what the protagonists in the conflicts now underway over Ukraine, inflation, and the dollar, intend to achieve and what they are willing to undertake to claim their objectives. “If the mind is to emerge unscathed from this relentless struggle with the unforeseen, two qualities are indispensable,” wrote Clausewitz. “First, an intellect that, even in the darkest hour, retains some glimmerings of the inner light which leads to truth; and second, the courage to follow this faint light wherever it may lead.”

  Military Minds: Carl von Clausewitz’s thoughts on war: – There are times when the utmost daring is the height of wisdom. – Theory must also take into account the human element; it must accord a place to courage, to boldness, even to rashness. – Everything in war is very simple, but the simplest thing is difficult. – There are very few men, and they are the exceptions, who are able to think and feel beyond the present moment. – If we read history with an open mind, we cannot fail to conclude that, among all the military virtues, the energetic conduct of war has always contributed most to glory and success.

  Military Minds II: – The backbone of surprise is fusing speed with secrecy. – If the leader is filled with high ambition and if he pursues his aims with audacity and strength of will, he will reach them in spite of all obstacles. – If we have made appropriate preparations, taking into account all possible misfortunes, so that we shall not be lost immediately if they occur, we must boldly advance into the shadows of uncertainty. – The Statesman who, knowing his instrument to be ready, and seeing War inevitable, hesitates to strike first is guilty of a crime against his country.

  Strength: “Powell developed a doctrine of projecting overwhelming force,” said The Commander, referring to Colin the General, not Jerome the Chairman, who fired last week’s tiny 25bp warning shot at a raging 7.9% inflation advance. “The idea is that there are people in the world who understand one thing, and that is power,” said The Commander. “Powell believed that the best way to avoid conflict was by making it clear to our adversaries that an act of aggression would be met with devastating force.” The Powell Doctrine led to the military buildup ahead of the 1990-91 Gulf War and emphasized ground forces together with widespread public support.

  Weakness: “Kind-hearted people might of course think there was some ingenious way to disarm or defeat an enemy without too much bloodshed and might imagine this is the true goal of the art of war,” wrote Carl von Clausewitz. “Pleasant as it sounds, it is a fallacy that must be exposed; war is such a dangerous business that the mistakes which come from kindness are the very worst,” continued the Prussian. “If our opponent is to be made to comply with our will, we must place him in a situation which is more oppressive to him than the sacrifice which we demand; but the disadvantages of this position must naturally not be of a transitory nature, at least in appearance, otherwise the enemy, instead of yielding, will hold out, in the prospect of a change for the better.”

  Action: “For political and social as well as for military reasons the preferred way of bringing about victory was the shortest, most direct way, and that meant using all possible force,” wrote Clausewitz. “The truth is that there are goons in this world, and they respect only one thing – strength – that’s it,” explained The Commander. “It is tempting to believe we’ve evolved past that kind of thinking, but it is wrong, we haven’t,” he said. “And this can at times create friction between politicians and military leaders, because politicians often seek to avoid conflict in the early stages, while military leaders understand that it is generally best to shut down conflict before it has even started, or at least in its earliest stages. Politicians and military commanders have the same goals, but different experiential perspectives.”

  Anecdote: “Clausewitz taught that we must dismantle our enemy’s center of gravity to achieve victory,” said The Commander. “Each nation has strengths and weaknesses, and it’s natural to capitalize on weakness,” he added. “But it is critical to pick apart the strengths that make up the center of gravity,” explained The Commander. “In the case of the US, our core strengths are superior communications, logistics, and our carrier fleet.” Added to this would undoubtedly be our control of the global reserve currency and payments systems. “So it should not be a surprise that China has invested heavily in offensive space capabilities to target our communications. And they are very focused on hypersonic weapon development to neutralize our carriers.”

  Efforts to unseat the dollar and create an alternative global payments system is also targeting our center of gravity. “In Putin’s case, his center of gravity in this conflict is his proximity. His supply lines are short, so it’s particularly devasting for him that his army failed so badly without anyone else’s help when it came to logistics,” said The Commander. “He miscalculated Ukrainian resistance, but worse still was the misjudgment of his own forces. And what you can now see is that his army is out of practice, and perhaps the worst thing is that it lacks agility,” he said. “In business and markets, I’m sure you understand the importance of agility. Well, in warfare, agility is vital to victory. And the US has the resources to train regularly. A modern army is incredibly complex and requires regular training, exercises.”

  The Russians don’t have these resources and haven’t fought a major war in too long. “Putin understands his many weaknesses. He has no real ability to project force on a global basis other than nuclear. So that is why he’s directed his limited resources to those capabilities.” In the decades to come, they will be the only thing protecting his vast territories and shrinking population from 1.4bln Chinese on his southern border. “And the risk now, learning from Clausewitz, is that the weakness of Putin’s conventional force leads him to abruptly jump to a nuclear conflict. He’s a cornered rat. I wouldn’t rule anything out.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 20:20

• Aviation Experts Baffled By Crash Of China Eastern Airlines Flight MU5735
  Aviation Experts Baffled By Crash Of China Eastern Airlines Flight MU5735

  Monday’s devastating crash of a Boeing 737 operated by China Eastern Airlines has gripped the US aviation industry (aka Boeing) in what’s shaping up to be another major scandal barely a year after the plane manufacturer had finally managed to move beyond the disastrous rollout of the 737 MAX 8, which left hundreds dead as a design flaw led to two crashes, one in Ethiopia and the other in Indonesia.

  Those crashes prompted global groundings and an extensive investigation which revealed that the FAA had essentially abdicated its oversight responsibility – while one internal Boeing email blasted the MAX 8 for being designed by “clowns who were overseen by monkeys”.

  

  As if the crash itself wasn’t embarrassing enough for the jet-maker, footage of the incident showing the plane essentially falling out of the sky has been seen by thousands, if not millions, of people, many of whom are already hoping for answers.

  Chinese airlines haven’t bought any new Boeing planes for years at this point, and Monday’s crash raises the possibility that Boeing could be barred from the world’s second-largest market for air travel.

  Local Chinese media reported shortly afterward that the crash had been caused by an electrical failure, but whether this is actually true remains unclear. At this point, little is known for certain about the circumstances surrounding the crash (and it will take investigators days, if not weeks, to examine the data from the plane’s “black box”, which must be recovered from the crash site in a mountainous region in Guangxi Province.

  

  But as the investigation begins, the only thing we know for certain is that China’s first passenger airline crash in a decade is extremely unusual as far as plane crashes go. Why? Because, as the video below shows, the plane essentially dropped out of the sky, with the nose of the plane declining at an extreme angle.

  According to experts quoted by Bloomberg, this gives the incident an extremely unusual profile.

  While there have been a handful of crashes in which an airliner plunged from cruising altitude, few, if any, fit the extreme profile of the Boeing Co. 737-800 as it pointed steeply toward the ground, according to veteran crash investigators and previous accident reports.

  “It’s an odd profile,” said John Cox, an aviation safety consultant and former 737 pilot. “It’s hard to get the airplane to do this.”

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Just look at the angle of the plane seen in footage of the crash, which has been circulating on social media.

  Dashcam footage of the China Eastern MU5735 crash. pic.twitter.com/H1MRgBWaAl

  — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) March 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Aviation experts were shocked by the angle of the descent, which was essentially straight down…

  

  …as the plane went from cruising altitude to dropping out of the sky in under two minutes, according to data from flight-tracking services.

  

  The National Transportation Safety Board has already appointed a senior air safety investigator to investigate the incident (although given the pandemic-related travel restrictions still in place in China, it’s unclear how long it will take for US investigators to arrive on scene).

  But as the investigation begins, aviation experts are already saying that the footage of the crash and the data cited above raises more questions, while offering few answers.

  #Chinacrash — It’s often pretty clear in the hours after an airliner crash what the outlines of the failures were. I don’t feel that way at all in this case. #ChinaEastern https://t.co/u9nxqEUJ73

  — Alan Levin (@AlanLevin1) March 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  And as the world waits to learn more, here’s what we know so far.

  • Flight MU5735 was flying at an altitude of about 29,000 feet roughly 100 miles from its destination, about the point at which the pilots would begin the process of descending, when it started plunging at a far greater rate than normal. Instead of gradually dropping by a few thousand feet per minute, the plane began falling at more than 30,000 feet per minute within seconds, according to tracking data logged by Flightradar24.

  • Flight-tracking data show that the plane dropped by 26,000 feet in the span of one minute, 35 seconds.

  • In an unusual twist, the plane’s dive appeared halt for about 10 seconds, and it climbed briefly, adding an unusual twist to the scenario, before resuming the plunge. “It’s very odd,” said Jeff Guzzetti, the former accident investigation chief for U.S. Federal Aviation Administration.

  • While there are some precedents in which passenger planes suddenly dropped from cruising altitude, most of these cases have important differences. For example, Air France Flight 447, which went down in the Atlantic Ocean on June 1, 2009, fell much slower and more erratically after speed sensors iced up and pilots became confused. All 228 people aboard that flight died.

  • Another similar crash occurred on Dec. 19, 1997, when a pilot with Silk Air 737-300 carrying 104 people dove into a river in Indonesia, killing everyone on board. That plane plunged at more than 38,000 feet per minute, according to Indonesian regulators, who concluded that the pilot likely crashed the plane deliberately.

  • Is that what happened in this case? Well, it’s unclear. The 737-800, like most other jetliners, is designed so that it won’t normally dive at steep angles. Forcing the plane to do so would likely require an extreme effort by a pilot, or a highly unusual malfunction.

  • It’s possible the pilot could have suffered a heart attack or some other medical emergency and slumped onto thte control column, lowering the nose.

  Earlier this evening, Boeing CEO David Calhoun sent a message to all employees:

  We are deeply saddened by the news of the accident involving a China Eastern Airlines 737-800 airplane. The thoughts of all of us at Boeing are with the passengers and crew members on Flight MU 5735, as well as their families and loved ones.

  We have been in close communication with our customer and regulatory authorities since the accident, and have offered the full support of our technical experts to the investigation led by the Civil Aviation Administration of China.

  I will keep you apprised of information about the accident as investigation protocols allow. In the meantime, trust that we will be doing everything we can to support our customer and the accident investigation during this difficult time, guided by our commitment to safety, transparency, and integrity at every step.

  Dave

  Answers will likely be forthcoming, although we suspect, given the crash occurred in China, may not be timely. But one thing is clear: something must have gone seriously wrong for the nose of the plane to have declined at such an extreme angle.

  “You need something to hold the nose down,” said Benjamin Berman, a a former NTSB investigator who has experience flying 737s.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 20:00

• One Week After Calling Them "Uninvestable", JPMorgan Says Chinese Stocks Are A Buy
  One Week After Calling Them “Uninvestable”, JPMorgan Says Chinese Stocks Are A Buy

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live commentator and analyst

  Depending on whom you listen to at JPMorgan Chase, some Chinese stocks are either “uninvestable” or a screaming buy. While it’s not unusual for different teams at the same bank to have opposite calls, this episode of “JPMorgan versus JPMorgan” shows how divided the markets have become when it comes to China. One thing is for sure: For the markets to recover, Beijing has to back up its words with actions to shore up the economy.

  Chinese stocks lost some momentum Monday after exhibiting the start of a V-shape recovery last week. The State Council pledged stronger monetary policy support for the economy, but also cautioned against flooding the market with liquidity. Top leaders’ vow to stabilize the market has stopped the panic, but investors are waiting for concrete steps to address key concerns, including potential delistings from U.S. exchanges, geopolitical risks and Covid outbreaks.

  The tug-of-war between fear and hope is on full display among JPMorgan’s strategists. JPMorgan analyst Alex Yao caused a splash last week with aggressive cuts to price targets for Chinese internet stocks, contributing to the panic selling last Monday. Saying global investors are undergoing a “regime shift” for pricing in China’s geopolitical risks, Yao recommended his clients avoid the whole sector because the market has become too unpredictable.

  The changes to his calls were almost epic. His price target for Alibaba, for instance, was slashed from $180 to $65. It’s the lowest among analysts surveyed by Bloomberg, and implies another 37% decline from the current level.

  

  Yet just days later, Marko Kolanovic, JPMorgan’s co-head of global research in New York and a widely followed quant guru, came out with a call to buy “beaten-up” stocks, including Chinese, EM, tech, biotech and small caps. “We think tail risks related to China will not materialize,” he wrote in a note published Monday.

  

  Meanwhile, adding to the confusion, his colleagues on the equity team maintain an “overweight” rating on China, saying they are “increasingly confident that a China macro policy pivot will produce strong GDP growth acceleration” and they see “meaningful equity risk premium priced in.”

  To be sure, Kolanovic didn’t specify Chinese internet stocks per se, and he’s been optimistic on China for a while. But given the heavy weighting of tech stocks, it’s hard to have a bullish view on China with a doomsday view on the sector.

  In any case, for Kolanovic to trump his colleague in Hong Kong, he needs Beijing to deliver what’s been promised.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 19:40

• April 2020 But In Reverse: One Bank Warns We Are About To Witness A Historic Short Squeeze Eruption In Oil
  April 2020 But In Reverse: One Bank Warns We Are About To Witness A Historic Short Squeeze Eruption In Oil

  We have repeatedly warned that Cushing balances would be tight in coming months due to limited crude oil production growth and strong refinery and export demand…

  WTI Soars Back Above $95 As “Tank Bottoms” Are Close At Cushing https://t.co/Dpev2jL1Vy

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  … and now, the Ukraine conflict clearly presents the risk of even greater tightness as report after report from various bullish Wall Street banks warn. Indeed, as BofA’s commodities team writes in a must read note titled “Cushing’s Cushion Wears Thin” published today (available to professional subs), WTI timespreads soared to decade highs ($11.70 for WTI 1-3 spread) recently and have since settled down at still elevated levels, discouraging oil storage. As a result, inventories at Cushing hub have drawn roughly 13 million bbl ytd, reaching 24mn bbl last week, the lowest seasonal level in the shale era. Now, storage levels are likely near operational minimum levels, or “tank bottoms.”

  

  According to BofA, given current backwardation levels, a good portion of these inventories are likely used for blending operations and as a backstop for pipeline flows. Thus, they may not be eligible for delivery against the WTI contract.

  Making matter worse, as inventories trend near operational minimum levels, nearly every price signal is discouraging oil flows to Cushing and will likely limit resupply. To wit: Midland WTI is fetching a $1.50/bbl premium over Cushing, limiting northbound flows to Cushing. Meanwhile, Bakken-WTI spreads of $5/bbl suggest that Bakken barrels may be more likely to bypass Cushing and flow directly to the USGC market. Recent strength in WCS (Cushing) vs WTI spreads, coupled with rich Bakken and Niobrara differentials should also discourage blending to WTI spec.

  

  Finally, WTI-Brent spreads hit multi-year lows of -$9.20/bbl recently and are currently trading near -$5/bbl, which should encourage higher, “potentially record” crude oil exports over the coming weeks.

  

  While refinery turnarounds should offer Cushing some short term relief…

  Refining turnarounds globally are expected to be light this spring, with outages averaging 4.3mn b/d during March and April, compared 6.8mn b/d on average for the same period during 2015-19. In the US, outages are expected to be even lighter (Exhibit 24), averaging about 500k b/d in March and April versus 1.3mn b/d during the same period in 2015-19 (Exhibit 25). However, refining outages north of Cushing (PADD 2, PADD 4, Alberta, and Saskatchewan), which should affect inbound flows to the hub, are expected to average 600k b/d in March and April versus about 475k b/d during the 2015- 19 (Exhibit 25). All else equal, these turnarounds suggests that more barrels will be making their way south, either to Cushing or to the USGC this month and next, which should help lift Cushing inventory levels over the near term.

  

  … balances will likely still be tight post maintenance.

  Historically, Cushing inventories have tracked WTI timespreads with a lag of about 2 months (Exhibit 26). While this relationship may appear linear during periods of normal inventory levels, timespreads should theoretically increase at a parabolic rate (more backwardation) as inventories fall towards tank bottoms and fall at a parabolic rate (more contango) as Cushing nears tank tops (Exhibit 27).

  

  All this means that “front month WTI at risk of a melt-up in 1H22″, similar to what was observed on April 20, 2020 when WTI traded down to negative $40/bbl as there was no place to store the deliverable contract amid the global economic shutdown, and when holders of the front contract were willing to pay others to take the obligation of delivery (which is what sent the price negative). Only in the opposite direction.

  As a reminder, unlike Brent, the WTI contract has a physical delivery mechanism, which forces convergence between the physical market and futures market every month. In April 2020, this convergence was on full display ahead of the May WTI contract expiry, as longs with no ability to take delivery were forced to liquidate their positions at negative prices. Now, BofA cautions, “the market setup has reversed.”

  In other words, with inventories at very low levels there is likely a reduced ability to make delivery against the WTI contract. As a result of limited US supply growth over 1H22 and limited incentives to send barrels to Cushing, inventories will likely scrape  along at low levels.

  Meanwhile, given the market is desperately short barrels in the near term –  and this ignores the record 1 billion barrels in oil futures that were sold and/or shorted in the past month…

  

  … BofA sees “increased risk of a short squeeze as WTI moves towards expiry each month” while also seeing risk that WTI strengthens relative to other North American grades to encourage more oil to flow to the hub.

  In short, in a mirror image of the historic events in April 2020, which saw oil prices freefall to negative prices for the first time ever due to forced liquidations, in the coming weeks we may see the opposite: a historic meltup as shorts scramble to obtain product but can’t find it at any price.

  The full report is available to pro subs in the usual place.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 19:20

• Stockman: Why Markets Always Beat Central Bankers And Presidents
  Stockman: Why Markets Always Beat Central Bankers And Presidents

  Authored by David Stockman via InternationalMan.com,

  Goodness me, even the Wall Street Journal is catching on. In a piece about the inflationary rebound theory of a former UK central banker named Charles Goodhart, it actually tees-up the possibility of high inflation for a decade or longer due to an adverse, epochal shift in the global labor supply.

  He argued that the low inflation since the 1990s wasn’t so much the result of astute central-bank policies, but rather the addition of hundreds of millions of inexpensive Chinese and Eastern European workers to the globalized economy, a demographic dividend that pushed down wages and the prices of products they exported to rich countries. Together with new female workers and the large baby-boomer generation, the labor force supplying advanced economies more than doubled between 1991 and 2018.

  He got that right. Now, however, the working-age population has started shrinking for the first time since World War II in developed economies, compounded by an ever more generous banquet of Welfare State free stuff that is shrinking the available labor pool even further. At the same time, China’s working force is expected to contract by a staggering 20% over the next three decades.

  Needless to say, as global labor becomes more scarce, developed world workers will finally have bargaining leverage to push up their own previously stagnant wages. In the US leisure and hospitality sector, for instance, where worker shortages are most acute, Y/Y wage gains have averaged 15% for the last three months running.

  And that’s not a “base effect”, either. On a two-year stacked basis, the gain from the February 2020 pre-Covid peak was 7.3% per annum. That’s nearly triple the average annual gain during much of the last decade.

  Y/Y Change In Hourly Earnings of Leisure And Hospitality Workers, 2012-2022

  

  But on the margin it is the draining of China’s rice paddies of subsistence labor that is fueling the now unfolding epochal change in the global labor cost curve and supply chains. As China’s workforce continues to shrink and fewer rural workers have moved to cities, its domestic labor costs have predictability risen.

  U.S. manufacturing wages, in fact, are now less than four times as much as those in China, compared with more than 26 times when China joined the WTO in 2001, according to recent research by investment firm KKR. And that’s just the warm-up: China’s workforce is expected to shrink by about 100 million over the next 15 years—an economic pile-driver that will cause the deflationary “China Price” of the past three decades to morph into the inflationary “China Price” in the years ahead.

  Moreover, this was all already well underway owing to the natural, baked-in demographics of the global labor market. But now that Washington has jumped the shark with its rabid Sanctions War against the global trading and payments system, the shift is likely to be sharply aggravated.

  That is to say, the 26:1 labor cost advantage China possessed in the early 21st century when the supply chain was globalizing at break-neck speed was even then off-set in part by all the non-labor factors that go into global sourcing of goods. These include transportation costs, insurance costs, extended inventory pipelines, quality control, product delivery and availability risks, periodic premium costs for expedited shipping and much more. Yet on balance the former well outweighed the latter, causing delivered product prices to systematically fall.

  As we have frequently pointed out, the proof of the pudding is in the PCE deflator for durable goods, which got massively off-shored into the low-cost nooks and crannies of the global supply chain during the “inflation sabbatical” of 1995-2019. As it happened, the index dropped by a staggering 40% during that period—a one-time deflationary plunge that has no precedent in economic history.

  PCE Deflator For Durable Goods, 1995-2022

  

  Now, however, the potential upside of all these non-labor supply chain costs and risks have increased dramatically. In a word, global supply chains are going to get reeled-in and shortened dramatically because in many instances the labor differential will no longer profitably offset these associated costs.

  Stated differently, the “lowflation” canard was always a statistical mirage, but under the double-whammy of rising global labor costs and soaring supply chain expense, there will now be no doubt. Substantial, persistent inflation in the cost of goods will become the order of the day, leaving the easy money central bankers of the world no choice except to finally shutdown their printing presses.

  Needless to say, this will leave the permabulls of Wall Street in a world of hurt and for years to come. That’s because the corollary of the now ending Inflation Sabbatical of 1995-2019 was the massive off-shoring of America’s productive economy, tracked by the relentlessly plunging deficit on goods and services.

  The recent release of the January 2022 trade balance leaves little to the imagination, recording a record deficit of $89.7 billion for that month alone. Moreover, this figure includes credit for the $19.2 billion surplus on services, meaning that the actual deficit in merchandise goods taken separately was nearly $109 billion. That’s an annualized run rate of $1.3 trillion!

  Of course, when global goods prices climb steadily higher under the aforementioned double-whammy of rising labor costs and de-globalization of supply chains this massive exposure to imports will whoosh through the US economy like green grass through the proverbial goose. As it does, our clueless Keynesian central bankers will be proverbial too, as is in deer in the headlights.

  That is to say, what we have is an economic boomerang. When the supply chain was going out to the cheapest corners of the global labor market, deflationary forces came flowing back. But the inverse is now happening: Supply chains are reeling back in toward the domestic cost structure, meaning that inflation will come ripping back, as well.

  US Trade Deficit On Goods And Services, 1990-2022

  

  Actually, however, the true picture is more dire than suggested by the chart above. That’s because the non-petroleum share of the trade deficit has ballooned even more egregiously during the last three decades than the overall figure.

  As shown by the red line in the chart below, the ex-petroleum trade deficit was just $8 billion per month in 1998 and now stands at nearly $90 billion per month owing to the fact that the fracking revolution has reduced the petroleum deficit (black line) to zero. This means that the inflationary whirlwind bearing down on the merchandise goods accounts will be all the more virulent.

  

  And while we are on the topic of energy trade and so-called energy independence, now might be as good a time as any to correct that shrill Fox News drumbeat that the Donald got America energy independent and then Sleepy Joe blew it in less than a year.

  The fact is, presidents don’t determine the output level or the trade balance for any sector of the US economy—the forces of supply, demand and investment/disinvestment incentives do. The peak level of domestic crude oil production reached in February 2020 of 13.1 million barrels per day, therefore, was a consequence of the global petroleum price and investment cycle, not the Donald’s arm-waving, including the attempted revival of the Keystone Pipeline.

  The latter was simply a cheaper way than rail to get Canadian tar sands to the refinery markets on the US gulf coast; it would have meant higher netbacks (prices received after transportation and other delivery costs) to Canadian oil sands producers, not more production or lower prices for American consumers.

  Likewise, the Donald’s more sensible public lands leasing policies were clearly superior to those of Obama, but given the long lead-time between lease awards on public lands and actual new production, the impact was irrelevant in the time frame under discussion.

  So what happened is what usually happens: The domestic petroleum production cycle had exactly nothing to do with four-year presidential terms. On that matter, the history is dispositive.

  For example, during the freeze-in-your-cardigan-sweater term of Jimmy Carter, domestic oil production rose from 8.1 million barrel per day in January 1977 to 8.6 million b/d in January 1981, a gain of 5%. By contrast, during the 12-years of Reagan/Bush, where policy clearly was to dismantle Jimmy Carter’s price controls and unleash domestic production, oil output dropped steadily to 6.9 million barrels per day by January 1993, thereby marking a 18% decline in annual production.

  Self-evidently what was at work was not the policy virtue or vice of the temporary Oval Office occupants during these periods, but the global petroleum cycle.

  Likewise, during the pro-production term of Bush the Younger, domestic production declined from 5.9 million barrel per day in January 2001 to 5.2 million barrels per day during January 2009. By contrast, the opposite happened during Obama’s eight years, notwithstanding that the administrator was crawling with anti-fossil fuel types and environmentalist wackadoos.

  Thus, by January 2017 domestic production averaged 8.9 million bbls/day, representing a gain of 70% from the level when ex-oilman Dubya left office. Again, however, this wasn’t presidential policy at work, but the global petroleum price, investment and production cycle.

  And one obvious feature of that is the lag-time between when world oil prices peaked at $150 per barrel in July 2008 and the mobilization of investment and production technology in the US shale patch that brought domestic production roaring back.

  Needless to say, that trend continued unabated during the Donald’s term, meaning that he was riding the inherited wave toward energy independence, not willing it into being through his Oval Office arm-waving and minor pro-production policy initiatives.

  Accordingly, domestic crude oil production peaked at a historic high of 13.1 million bbls/day in February 2020, and then was monkey-hammered like rarely before under the combined impact of the worldwide crash of demand owing to the Covid Lockdowns and the fact that in the spring of 2020, the world oil price actually crashed to below $20 per barrel.

  In the case of the US shale patch, that was an instantaneous death knell for new drilling. Yet owing to the deep and rapid decline rates of shale wells, lack of drilling translates into a plunge of production rates only a few quarters down the road.

  So what Sean Hannity and the other Fox screamers don’t tell you is that by September 2020, domestic production had plunged to 10.7 million bbls/day or by a stunning 18%. That is to say, the retreat from energy independence happened on the Donald’s watch, long before Sleepy Joe ambled into the Oval Office.

  In fact, by January 2021 production had remained plateaued at just above the September bottom at 10.9 million bbls/day. By January 2022, however, it had recovered to 11.5 million barrels per day, thereby digging out further from the hole dug at the end of the Donald’s term.

  US Crude Oil Production Ain’t Got Anything To Do With Presidential Terms

  

  Again, that had nothing to do with Biden’s canceling the Keystone Pipeline (again!) or leases in the Arctic Wildlife Range. To the contrary, it was just the global petroleum cycle doing its thing, again.

  Moreover, now that oil has again hit $130 per barrel and Washington’s madcap Sanctions War is likely to keep it there or higher, we can expect a new burst of drilling and production in the US shale patch. That prospect, in turn, has every probability of causing domestic crude production to top the Donald’s 13.1 million barrel per day record in the not too distant future.

  So perhaps Sean Hannity and the GOP energy independence howlers should be careful of what they wish for.

  *  *  *

  The Fed has already pumped enormous distortions into the economy and inflated an “everything bubble.” The next round of money printing is likely to bring the situation to a breaking point. If you want to navigate the complicated economic and political situation that is unfolding, then you need to see this newly released video from Doug Casey and his team. In it, Doug reveals what you need to know, and how these dangerous times could impact your wealth. Click here to watch it now.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 19:00

• Shanghai Reports Record Surge In COVID Cases
  Shanghai Reports Record Surge In COVID Cases

  Shanghai, China’s financial center, reported a record surge in daily COVID infections on Monday despite the CCP’s best efforts to contain the ongoing COVID outbreak, which is the worst outbreak in China since the virus first emerged in Wuhan more than two years ago.

  

  The country’s determined efforts to contain growing outbreaks despite the “mild symptoms” reported led to lockdowns that affected more than 50 million people at their peak; but the deleterious impact on China’s economy has led the CCP to ease some restrictions, particularly in the southern tech hub of Shenzhen.

  Shanghai reported 24 new domestically-transmitted cases with confirmed symptoms on Monday and another 734 local asymptomatic infections, which Wu Jinglei, director of Shanghai Health Commission, attributed to rounds of mass screening in the city last week, according to the SCMP.

  “Shanghai is standing the test of a severe epidemic,” Wu said, referring to the mass testing carried out from last Wednesday to Sunday.

  Across mainland China, 1,947 new locally transmitted cases and a further 2,384 asymptomatic infections were reported on Monday, continuing the run of high infection rates. China has reported more than 37,000 local infections this month. Up until February, the number was slightly more than 100K cases.

  Liang Wannian, head of the expert panel leading China’s COVID response, defended China’s tough approach to outbreaks

  “Ideally, we would achieve zero COVID patients in society but the specificity of the coronavirus that causes Covid-19 means we can’t achieve that for the moment,” Liang told state broadcaster China Central Television.

  “The dynamic zero-Covid approach means we need to swiftly identify the outbreaks and cut the transmission chain to go towards the direction of zero COVID, or the transmission will be continuous and connected, causing a large-scale rebounding of cases.”

  More than 95% of COVID patients in the outbreaks this month showed only mild symptoms or none at all and less than 0.1 percentage point of the 29,127 cases confirmed over the past month were in a severe or critical condition. This includes the elderly, patients with comorbidities and the unvaccinated, according to Jiao Yahui, an official with the National Health Commission.

  Meanwhile, the northern province of Jilin, which accounts for most of the cases reported over the past month, confirmed another 2,091 infections, with and without symptoms, on Monday.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 18:40

• US Unexpectedly Sanctions China Officials Hours After Demanding Beijing Condemn Russia
  US Unexpectedly Sanctions China Officials Hours After Demanding Beijing Condemn Russia

  Apparently not content with diplomatic war on one front with Russia, the Biden administration appears ready to escalate with China following on the heels of last week’s persistent accusations that Beijing was mulling cooperation with Moscow on weapons resupplies for its Ukraine operation, as well as assistance on Western sanctions evasion.

  Monday afternoon Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced more visa restrictions on Chinese officials related to prior charges that state authorities are overseeing the ethnic cleansing of Uighurs. It’s certainly interesting timing in terms of pulling out the the human rights card, given that throughout last week the admin’s China criticisms seemed exclusively focused on its “fence-sitting” over Ukraine.

  Perpetrators of human rights abuses must continue to face consequences. The United States has taken action to impose visa restrictions on PRC officials for attempting to intimidate, harass, and repress dissidents and human rights defenders inside and outside of China.

  — Secretary Antony Blinken (@SecBlinken) March 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Blinken called on China to “end its ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, repressive policies in Tibet, crackdown on fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong, and human rights violations,” as cited in Bloomberg.

  “The United States rejects efforts by (Chinese) officials to harass, intimidate, surveil, and abduct members of ethnic and religious minority groups, including those who seek safety abroad, and U.S. citizens, who speak out on behalf of these vulnerable populations,” Blinken said. “We are committed to defending human rights around the world and will continue to use all diplomatic and economic measures to promote accountability.”

  It’s unclear as yet which and how many Chinese state officials will be impacted by the new visa restriction measures, which will effectively ban them from travel into the United States, and it’s an expansion of prior Trump restrictions.

  Earlier, the White House issued a statement saying – like UK prime minister Boris Johnson’s words over the weekend – that Beijing must condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and stop downplaying it.

  WHITE HOUSE SAYS U.S. WANTS TO HEAR CHINA CONDEMN RUSSIA’S ACTIONS ON THE GROUND IN UKRAINE

  Childish

  — The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) March 21, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Meanwhile, here’s commentary from Rabobank on the implications of how China figures into the Ukraine crisis…

  * * *

  But next up must surely be many in markets. On Friday, I argued if the Biden-Xi call went well, markets would take it as positive; if it went badly, markets would take it as a huge negative; and yet what we were told happened on the call might not be the whole story. Markets saw the bullet points released by the Chinese side *before the call was even over*, which had key words like “peace” and the need for good US-China relations,…. and fell for it hook, line, and stinker even though the US readout was short and brusque.

  That’s a very bad call call. It’s as bad as Eurasia Group’s Ian Bremmer calling for President Biden to visit Kyiv, when if a bomb hits him it’s WW3; or one on Twitter from an Asian hedge fund player (although in truth I find it hard to tell if they are a parody account or not) which says: “Seems initial reaction to Xi – Biden call was positive, as expected, but let’s see how Western media ‘interprets’ it. US and China= BFFs?” And, when someone pushes back, the response being: “…not everyone’s view counts equally. The view of those participating in the capital markets matters disproportionately more, this is why the US runs the world.” Which is ironically what this is all about, while still being completely wrong.

  Geopolitical analysts, including ones who cover markets too, note that underneath the algo-triggering headlines the reality was that Beijing:

  1. Blamed the US for the crisis by expanding NATO, rather than Russia expanding Russia;

  2. Stated the US would have to resolve it using a Chinese idiom;

  3. That this includes addressing Russian security needs too, and linking this all back to Taiwan;

  4. Saying China would help if the US backs off on trade war, tech war, AUKUS, the Quad, etc.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Europe Can Survive Throughout Summer Without Russian Gas
  Europe Can Survive Throughout Summer Without Russian Gas

  Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

  • WoodMackenzie: European gas storage levels will likely be within the five-year range by the end of this winter.

  • If Russian flows continue, the European Union (EU) and the UK will end this winter’s heating season with 27 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas in storage.

  • Increasing imports from Norway, Algeria and LNG may help to compensate lower gas flows from Russia.

  If Russian gas flows to Europe were interrupted now, Europe would have enough gas to last it through the end of this winter and the following summer without having to curtail demand, energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie said on Friday.

  

  European gas storage levels will likely be within the five-year range by the end of this winter, thanks to mild weather, more arrivals of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and sustained imports from Norway, according to WoodMac.

  If Russian flows continue, the European Union (EU) and the UK will end this winter’s heating season with 27 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas in storage, which is a level within the five-year range.

  Although energy exports are not part of the sanctions against Russia currently, there is a risk that Moscow could stop flows as a countermeasure to intensifying sanctions over the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

  “If Russian flows stop in the middle of March, gas in store would be sufficient for the rest of this winter and summer, without demand curtailment,” said Kateryna Filippenko, principal analyst on Wood Mackenzie’s Europe gas and LNG team.

  While this winter and the summer could be easier for Europe without Russian gas, some demand curtailments in the 2022-2023 winter will be inevitable, according to WoodMac’s Filippenko.

  Higher natural gas imports from Norway and Algeria, more LNG, slowing the phase-out of coal, and delaying maintenance shutdowns on nuclear power plants could also free up some gas for the power generation sector, perhaps as much as 13 bcm until the end of October 2022, according to Wood Mackenzie.

  The EU is overhauling its energy strategy following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the European Commission unveiled last week a plan to make Europe independent from Russian fossil fuels well before 2030, starting with gas. The EU will seek to diversify gas supplies, speed up the roll-out of renewable gases, and replace gas in heating and power generation—all this can reduce EU demand for Russian gas by two-thirds before the end of the year, the Commission says. In addition, the Commission will propose that by October 1, gas storage in the EU has to be filled up to at least 90%. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/21/2022 – 02:00

• Latest Edition Of Psychiatry's "Bible" Labels "Excessive Grief" A Mental Disorder
  Latest Edition Of Psychiatry’s “Bible” Labels “Excessive Grief” A Mental Disorder

  The latest edition of the DSM, psychiatry’s “bible” of mental disorders, features an entirely new one: excessive grieving for a deceased loved one.

  

  The NYT reported over the weekend that the inclusion of the new “disorder” marks an end to a prolonged debate within the field of mental health, prompting researchers and clinicians to view intense grief as a target for medical “treatment”, aka the prescribing of psychiatric medication, which would likely lead to a financial windfall for pharmaceutical companies. The disorder’s inclusion in the DSM-5, the latest edition of the manual, means insurers can be billed for the medication.

  The new diagnosis, prolonged grief disorder, was designed to apply to a narrow slice of the population who are incapacitated, pining and ruminating a year after a loss, and unable to return to previous activities.

  Its inclusion in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders means that clinicians can now bill insurance companies for treating people for the condition.

  Psychiatrists have been pushing for recognition of this “grief disorder” since the 1990s. And some of the experimental treatments under consideration involve drugs that have previously mostly been used for the treatment of alcoholism and opioid use disorder.

  It will most likely open a stream of funding for research into treatments — naltrexone, a drug used to help treat addiction, is currently in clinical trials as a form of grief therapy — and set off a competition for approval of medicines by the Food and Drug Administration.

  Since the 1990s, a number of researchers have argued that intense forms of grief should be classified as a mental illness, saying that society tends to accept the suffering of bereaved people as natural and that it fails to steer them toward treatment that could help.

  Some examples of individuals suffering from grief disorder include widows or widowers who never overcome the loss of a spouse, and parents who struggle to overcome the loss of a child.

  A diagnosis, they hope, will allow clinicians to aid a part of the population that has, throughout history, withdrawn into isolation after terrible losses.

  “They were the widows who wore black for the rest of their lives, who withdrew from social contacts and lived the rest of their lives in memory of the husband or wife who they had lost,” said Dr. Paul S. Appelbaum, who is chair of the steering committee overseeing revisions to the fifth edition of the D.S.M.

  “They were the parents who never got over it, and that was how we talked about them,” he said. “Colloquially, we would say they never got over the loss of that child.”

  Unsurprisingly, many psychiatrists oppose the inclusion of this “grief disorder” in the DSM-5, arguing that it will inevitably lead to many “false positives”, since distinguishing between normal and abnormal levels of grief will be difficult.

  Throughout that time, critics of the idea have argued vigorously against categorizing grief as a mental disorder, saying that the designation risks pathologizing a fundamental aspect of the human experience.

  They warn that there will be false positives – grieving people told by doctors that they have mental illnesses when they are actually emerging, slowly but naturally, from their losses.

  So once again, the field of psychiatry is putting the interests of drug makers and insurance companies over those of patients, many of whom will now be prescribed drugs to treat “grief”, a  normal – and for all people, inevitable – facet of life.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 22:20

• From Record Selling To Panic Buying: A Week For The Hedge Fund History Books
  From Record Selling To Panic Buying: A Week For The Hedge Fund History Books

  If one had to describe last week’s turmoil in the hedge fund world it would be just two words: “sheer chaos”, because we have finally reached a point where smart investors have given up trying to predict what comes next and instead are merely trying to react (as fast as possible) to the newsflow.

  As Goldman’s Prime Brokerage explains, “the desk has witnessed the increasingly high level of difficulty in terms of navigating this market (10 out of 10 difficulty?). Indeed, the most recent GS PB flows data suggests that “investors are now chasing trends – buying on rallies, selling on selloffs – instead of anticipating what comes next, as that has become virtually impossible.”

  Witness the latest out of GS PB over recent sessions

  • Prime Flow for Mar 11-14thth (SPX -2.03%) — Largest $ net selling since early January
  • Prime Flow for Mar 15th (SPX +2.14%) — Largest $ net buying in 3 weeks
  • Prime Flow for Mar 16th (SPX +2.24%) — Largest $ net buying since late January
  • Prime Flow for Mar 17th (SPX +1.23%) — Overall book slightly net bought (1-Yr Zscore +0.2)

  The numbers in terms of actual hedge fund activity are even more remarkable:

  • Net selling from Friday (3/11) and Monday (3/14) combined was the 3rd largest over any 2-day period in the past decade (behind late Dec ’18 and early Jan ’22).
  • Fundamental LS -6.0% (alpha -2.0%) vs MSCI TR -3.7%. Fundamental LS managers experienced negative alpha performance in 9 of the 11 trading days MTD.
  • Fundamental LS Gross leverage has fallen -7.6 pts MTD – the 3rd largest decrease over any 10-day period behind Mar ’20 and Dec ‘18.

  

  • Fundamental LS Net leverage has fallen -7.5 pts MTD – the largest decrease over any 10-day period on record (since Jan ’16).

  

  It is this phenomenon of extreme swings that has underscored a “short gamma” market (however, as we noted on Friday, dealers are now slightly long gamma so the volatility may finally quiet down)…

  

  …. which results in one thing: buyers higher, and sellers lower.

  The same can now be said for the systematic crowd as well – with the moves over the past 48hrs, Goldman estimates that CTAs are decent buyers of global equities over the next week and next month…

  

  … a shift we haven’t seen in some time.

  The relentless, trendless rollercoaster in stocks, explains why yet again, hedge funds are painfully underperforming their benchmarks, with Equity L/S managers down -10% YTD on an asset-weighted basis and down around -6% on a simple average basis.

  

  The problem is that with hedge fund positioning the lowest in two years both gross and net… 

  

  … any continued ramp higher will lead to another panicked, frenzied chase higher. Of course, if instead we see a reversal of last week’s furious stampede, brace for the selling as hedge funds – already shellshocked – resume their liquidating ways.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 21:37

• The Great Depression II
  The Great Depression II

  Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

  Whenever a movie has been a huge hit, the film industry tries to follow it up by doing a sequel. The sequel is almost invariably far more costly, as there’s the anticipation by those who create it that it will be an even bigger blockbuster than the original.

  

  The Great Depression of the 1930’s is seen by most people to be the be-all and end-all of economic catastrophes and there’s good reason for that.

  Although the economic cycle has always existed, the period leading up to October 1929 was unusual, as those in the financial sector had become unusually creative.

  Brokers encouraged people to buy into the stock market as heavily as they could afford to. When that business began to level off, they encouraged people to buy on margin. The idea was that the buyer would only put up a fraction of the money for the purchase and the broker would “guarantee” full payment to the seller. As a condition to the agreement, the buyer would have to relinquish to the broker the right to sell his stock at any point that he wished, should he feel the need to do so to get himself off the hook in the event of a significant economic change.

  Both the buyer and the broker were buying stocks with money that neither one had. But the broker entered into the gamble so that he could charge commissions, which he would be paid immediately. The buyer entered into the gamble, as he had been promised by the broker that stocks were “going to the moon” and that he’d become rich.

  Banks got into the game, as well. At one time, banks took money on deposit, then lent that money out at interest. They would always retain a percentage of the deposited money within the bank to assure that they could meet whatever the normal demand for withdrawals might be. But, eventually, bankers figured out that, if they were prepared to gamble, they could lend out far more money – many times the amount that they had received on deposit. As long as very few loans turned bad, they would eventually get the money back, with interest.

  And so, in the 1920’s, they loaned money to people so that they could buy into the stock market more heavily. From that point forward, an investor who was tapped out and couldn’t afford to buy more stock, then bought on margin. When he was no longer able to even afford to buy on margin, he borrowed money from the bank to buy on margin.

  That meant that only a tiny percentage of the “money” that passed hands actually existed. The great majority of investment funds only existed on paper.

  Of course, the very existence of this absurd anomaly depended upon a market that was thriving and moving steadily upward. If for any reason, there were a sudden loss of confidence in the banks, large numbers of depositors would demand to withdraw their deposits and there would be bank failures, as the banks had been playing with money that did not exist.

  Likewise, if that loss of confidence were to take place with regard to the stock market, large numbers of stockholders would try to sell at the same time and the market would collapse, as the brokers had been playing with money that did not exist.

  In the 1920’s, fortunes were being made by those who ran banks and brokerage houses – at a rate that greatly exceeded anything that had ever existed.

  Unfortunately, they’d created the greatest financial bubble in history and, when it popped, as all bubbles do, it popped in a very big way.

  Thousands of banks were wiped out. Thousands of brokerage houses were wiped out. And millions of investors were wiped out.

  Not surprising that laws were then passed to assure that such a disaster could never occur again. Of particular importance was the Glass Steagall Act.

  Then, in 1999, Glass Steagall was repealed. This was done under the advice of Fed chairman Alan Greenspan, and was accepted readily by then-president Bill Clinton, as he was assured that the repeal would mean a dramatic increase in investment, which would assure a shining legacy for him as he left office.

  My own first reaction to the repeal was that, over the ensuing years, we’d see irrational investment in the real estate market, made possible through bank loans. This would lead to a crash in real estate, followed by a crash in the stock market. I believed that this debacle would be papered over by governments, eventually leading to a further crash, and that the latter crash would be of epic proportions.

  But, why should this be? Why should the second crash be so much greater?

  Well, the magnitude of a crash tends to be equal to the magnitude of the economic abnormality that preceded it. The crash of 1929 was greater than previous crashes, because bankers and brokers had found new ways to inflate the bubble beyond anything that had existed before.

  Likewise, they’ve become even more creative this time around and have inflated the bubble far beyond what existed in 1929. The level of debt far exceeds anything the world has ever seen.

  The 2008 crash was, in effect, a mini-crash. No correction ever took place. Instead, it was papered over by massive increased debt, assuring that, when the inevitable big crash did occur, the severity would be far beyond any other crash in history.

  The sequel to the 1929 crash will be much like movie sequels. With movies, the producers invest more money into the sequel than they spent on the original movie, in the belief that, if they just throw enough money at it, it will somehow be better and make them even more money than the original.

  Likewise in economic events, the assumption is that, if a great deal of money had been made in the buildup to the last major collapse, surely, by creating even more debt this time around, the profit to be made will be far greater than before.

  And this has proven to be true. Financial institutions have entered into an era of profit that has historically been without equal. The original was a monster and the sequel will prove to be an even bigger monster.

  Of course, there’s a difference between movies and economic events. With movies, the producers cash in when the moviegoers pay their admissions fee. With economic crises, the producers make their fortunes in the lead-up to the crash. The crash itself simply passes the bill for the disaster to the moviegoers.

  The question that’s always asked prior to any crash is, “When will it happen?” Unfortunately, although crises can be analyzed and predicted beforehand, the date is more uncertain. The decisive factor is the loss of confidence by the general public. When they collectively get weak knees about the economic future – when they withdraw their deposits from banks and sell their shares in the market, the bubble will suddenly pop.

  And so, the actual screening of this particular epic could be a year from now, or it could be next week. So, it might be premature to buy your box of popcorn now, but, when crashes come, they come suddenly and without warning.

  Since it’s not possible to predict an exact date, those who don’t wish to be casualties of the collapse may wish to prepare for it – to get free of debt, to liquidate assets that will be devalued in a crisis, to turn the proceeds into real money (precious metals) and to relocate to a place that’s likely to be less impacted by the monetary and social crisis that will ensue.

  *  *  *

  How will you protect yourself in the event of an economic crisis? New York Times best-selling author Doug Casey and his team just released a guide that will show you exactly how. Click here to download the PDF now.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 21:10

• "Criminal Tourists" Target Wealthy American Neighborhoods 
  “Criminal Tourists” Target Wealthy American Neighborhoods 

  A starling new development reveals South American criminal tourists are on home invasion sprees targeting wealthy neighborhoods across the US, according to Daily Mail. 

  South American thieves exploit the US’ immigration system for travel as they target multi-million dollar homes in liberal-controlled areas with relaxed criminal justice laws. 

  Police from around the country report some of these criminal tourists are from Colombia and elsewhere in South America. They have ransacked mansions in California, New York, Virginia, Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.

  

  Law enforcement experts say these professional burglars exploit a 2014 visa waiver program intended to promote tourism. Called the Electronic System for Travel Authorization, it’s an automated system that determines the eligibility of visitors to travel without obtaining a visa. 

  Earlier this year, the FBI busted one of these gangs in Virginia who stole an estimated $2 million worth of goods from mansions owned by Asian and Middle Eastern families. Officials said those homes were targeted because they had lots of high-value jewelry and cash. 

  The thieves chose Virginia because of the state’s lax bail laws and could skip bail and exit the country with the loot. The thieves were also connected to burglaries in Carolinas, Georgia, Texas, and a brazen $1.2 million jewelry heist in Southern California. 

  Police in Nassau County, New York, arrested criminal tourists from Chile who broke into multi-million dollars homes and stole jewelry and cash. 

  In the San Francisco suburb of Hillsborough, where a home’s average price is $5.4 million, a group of criminal tourists from Chile and Colombia looted homes in multiple neighborhoods. One of the incidents was caught on cameras as the thieves emptied a house.

  Professional thieves from abroad have found a ‘sweet spot’ in exploiting a travel program on top of relaxed criminal justice laws that have made targeting wealthy Americans very enticing without limited repercussions because they can easily flee the States if caught. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 20:50

• Some Bad Ideas Just Won't Die
  Some Bad Ideas Just Won’t Die

  Authored by Michael Maharrey via SchiffGold.com,

  This may be the dumbest thing you read today. Not my words, but this CNN article I’m about to tell you about.

  Americans are struggling under the weight of inflation. The official CPI for February came in at 7.9%. Measured honestly, CPI is above 15%. So, what’s the best way to help consumers deal with rising prices?

  

  More stimulus!

  That’s the idea floated by Mark Wolfe in his CNN op-ed.

  The fastest and most effective way to protect vulnerable citizens from the impacts of global economic instability is to provide a direct payment through the IRS, similar to the three stimulus checks that were sent to families during the height of the pandemic.”

  I told you it was dumb.

  By the way, this guy is an “energy economist.”

  Now, I’m sure a lot of Americans would get on board with another round of stimulus checks. They enjoyed all three rounds of stimulus during the pandemic.

  But you know what they’re not enjoying?

  Paying for those stimulus checks.

  Because that’s exactly what they’re doing today through these soaring prices.

  So, Wolfe wants to address the inflation problem by literally creating more inflation.

  Dumb.

  Now, he would probably tell you that the rising prices we’re seeing today are the result of the pandemic, or supply chain issues, or maybe even Russia. These are certainly factors in the rising prices of some goods. But at the core, the general rise in prices is the result of the Federal Reserve printing trillions of dollars out of thin air and the US government handing out that money in the form of stimulus checks.

  When you have more dollars chasing the same amount of goods and services, prices generally rise. This is economics 101. (Except apparently at whatever school Wolfe went to.) The government lockdowns during the pandemic exacerbated the problem by constricting supply. So, while supply shrank, demand actually increased because everybody had more dollars in their pockets even though they weren’t going to work. In effect, we had more dollars chasing fewer goods and services. Prices went up. This is entirely predictable — unless you are an energy economist.

  Now, you’ll hear a lot of pundits telling you that inflation is the result of increased demand. That’s not entirely wrong.  But what created the demand? Stimmy checks! In fact, it was by design. Stimulus is meant to stimulate demand. That’s the whole point.

  My point is that yesterday’s stimulus checks were a major factor in today’s inflation problem.

  Now, our intrepid energy economist wants the government to hand out more money that it doesn’t have to help Americans cope with the cost of handing out money that it didn’t have over the last couple of years.

  Of course, that will necessitate more borrowing, meaning the US government will have to sell more bonds.

  And who is going to buy those Treasuries?

  Over the last two years, the Fed has been one of the biggest buyers. It prints money to buy these bonds. And that — by definition — is inflation.

  Do you see? Wolfe’s “solution” is really the root of the problem.

  The Fed has launched a war on inflation that is supposed to include shrinking its balance sheet. But how does the Fed shrink its balance sheet when the US government needs it to keep buying bonds to create the artificial demand necessary to continue funding its massive deficits?

  Here’s a truth you should always remember – whatever the government puts in your left pocket, it took from your right pocket. You ultimately pay for every government action. You might pay through direct taxation. Or your kids might pay if the Treasury borrows the money. Or, you’ll pay through the inflation tax. Regardless, you’re going to pay.

  Americans are paying for coronavirus stimulus today. If Wolfe has his way, you’ll pay for inflation relief with more inflation in the years to come.

  It’s dumb.

  But so much that is dumb is politically viable, so I wouldn’t be surprised if this notion gains steam.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 20:20

• Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Hospitalized With Infection
  Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Hospitalized With Infection

  With the confirmation battle for Justice Stephen Breyer’s nominated successor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, about to begin, longtime conservative Justice Clarence Thomas has reportedly been hospitalized with an infection, according to media reports.

  

  Thomas, the most senior associate justice on the nation’s highest court, is being treated with intravenous antibiotics, according to a spokesperson for the court. His symptoms are easing and he’s expected to recover, they said.

  Officials said Thomas was admitted to Sibley Memorial Hospital in Washington DC on Friday evening after experiencing flu-like symptoms. Court officials said they expect Thomas to be released in a day or two.

  According to USA Today, SCOTUS was set to hear oral arguments on Monday, but the court indicated that Thomas wouldn’t take part (remotely or in person). Instead, he would rather “participate in the consideration and discussion” through court records and audio of the arguments.

  Thomas was nominated by President George H.W. Bush to serve on the Supreme Court in 1991. His nomination led to a contentious confirmation battle after Anita Hill accused him of sexual misconduct while he was her supervisor at the Department of Education and on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 19:35

• The "Wealth Effect" Is Failing As A Key Fed Policy Driver
  The “Wealth Effect” Is Failing As A Key Fed Policy Driver

  Authored by Bruce Wilds via Advancing Time blog,

  In a world where optimism and hope have dominated the investment landscape for over a decade, we should be prepared for reality to raise its ugly head. This time is not different and debt does matter. As pointed out by many economists over the years, low-interest rates and easy money, do not always result in a strong vibrant economy. Japan’s failure to recover from its bubble bursting decades ago remains proof of this.

  

  Much of the rationale behind QE has been that it creates what the Fed calls a “Wealth Effect.” For years this has been a key driver of central bank policy. This view is firmly embedded in the macroeconometric models used by the Fed. The notion, widely adopted by central bankers, is that by inflating asset prices to make the wealthy (the asset holders) even wealthier, these people will spend more of what they see as free money from asset price inflation. The premise is that this additional spending will create additional demand for goods and services thus providing jobs for the masses. 

  Sadly, several times over the years the wealth effect formula has slid off the tracks and most likely will again. Consumption does not create wealth, it creates debt. The example that stands out in the minds of most people is from back in 2008. By loaning money against homes with little scrutiny as to the borrower’s ability to repay them the Fed created a financial bubble with broad implications. It could be argued that since 2008, Fed policy has never really addressed that mess but attempted to paper over it by printing money and expanding debt through quantitative easing.

  

  Wealth Effect Policies Have Failed To Generate Enough Growth

  Looking back at how pursuing policies that breed the Wealth Effect can slide off track or lose their effectiveness, we see it always centers on the risk they create. At some point, the combination of easy-to-borrow money at low-interest rates tends to morph into a high-risk environment of increased speculation and leverage. In short, savers and investors seeking a return on their savings are forced out of traditional accounts because such investments get ravaged by inflation.

  

  Many Consumers Bought Into This

  The 2008 financial crisis resulted in the worst economic disasters in modern times and caused the biggest recession since the great depression of 1930. It is also referred to as the global financial crisis (GFC). Over the last several years, the Fed has been getting a great deal of well-deserved bad press for driving inequality and fracturing society. Since 2008 it has become apparent the Fed has created an unfair system that is broken, unfair, and corrupt. This has affected different generations in rather specific ways.

  It is again becoming very apparent the wealth effect policies are failing. Not only have they failed to create a healthy economy but they have brought the financial system to the brink of collapse. Following the GFC the Federal Reserve and the Bush administration spent hundreds of billions of dollars to add liquidity to the financial markets. They worked hard to avoid a complete collapse. They almost didn’t succeed. Today we are spending not billions, but trillions of dollars to keep the same corrupt policy moving forward. 

  History shows investors should treat the wealth effect with caution because it is susceptible to reversals. Since the GFC, attempt after attempt has been put forth to change the tide, but still, we have watched the middle class shrink. The elephant in the room when it comes to growing the economy is how “the broken window theory” is spun and interpreted. The gist of this theory is that if a window is broken, the subsequent repair expenditure will have no net benefits for the economy. Still, it is not uncommon to see destruction touted as a good thing because it promotes spending. In truth, the idea destruction is good discounts several facts. 

  One has to do with where the money is coming from but whether it is from an insurance company or someplace else, it still means the money is diverted from being used on another purchase. Repairing a broken window is maintenance spending which doesn’t improve growth because it doesn’t improve productivity. This expenditure would have occurred anyway. The only thing a broken window does is  cause maintenance spending to occur earlier and lower the useful life of the window. Maintenance spending may keep the economy going it doesn’t provide a boost. Instead, it is better to invest the money in something which creates wealth by increasing productivity.

  Many people and even economists have real misconceptions as to how the economy works. Where money flows and who it enriches is a key component of economics. The failure to consider this is a blind spot many people have. Years of being told everything revolves around spending has diminished the important role savings plays in the scheme of a balanced economy. Fans of Keynesian economics that encourage government spending to stabilize the economy during a downturn tend to discount the importance that where and how money is spent matters a great deal. 

  

  Wealth Effect Policy Has A Poor Record

  In the end, this all comes back to the fact current policies are presenting us with diminishing returns while increasing risk. Sadly, financial corruption has played a huge role in getting us here. Never before in our history have Presidents, Fed Chairs, and politicians in general been able to exploit their power and gained massive wealth following their time as so-called public servants. A big part of our current problems is the elite top-down efforts to control our society has created a permanent government. Today an army of government workers, most un-elected have been empowered to nibble away at our rights.  

  Bubbling up to the surface is the recognition the Fed has to shoulder a huge responsibility in pushing inequality higher. Powell has even gone so far as to claim there was little demand for loans below $1 million. Sadly, the same policies that dump huge money into larger businesses because it is an easier and faster way to bolster the economy give these concerns a huge advantage over their smaller competitors.

  The long-term ramifications of destroying smaller businesses will hurt America in the long run. It eliminates competition, reduces opportunity, and over time fuels inflation. This drives my angst directed at companies such as Amazon and big tech. The policy of making people feel better so they spend more than they can afford is part of voodoo economics.  So is sending jobs abroad and increasing our consumption of imported goods which has resulted in a massive trade deficit. Good economic policy encourages personal responsibility and is rooted in saving not spending. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 19:30

• Turkey Says Ukraine, Russia "Close To An Agreement" As Moscow Delivers Ultimatum To Surrender Mariupol
  Turkey Says Ukraine, Russia “Close To An Agreement” As Moscow Delivers Ultimatum To Surrender Mariupol

  Another day, another glimmer of hope there we may soon see a ceasefire in the Ukraine war: on Sunday, Turkey said that Russia and Ukraine had made progress on their negotiations (ostensibly the same negotiations which, if they fail, could lead to World War 3 according to Zelensky) to halt the invasion and that the two warring sides were close to an agreement.

  “It’s not easy to negotiate while the war is ongoing, or to agree when civilians are dying. But I want to say that there is momentum,” Turkey Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said from the southern Turkish province of Antalya, AFP reported. “We see that the parties are close to an agreement.”

  Cavusoglu this week visited Russia and Ukraine as Turkey, which has strong bonds with the two sides, has tried to position itself as a mediator. The foreign minister, who hosted his peers from Russia and Ukraine this week,  said Turkey was in contact with the negotiating teams from the two countries but he refused to divulge the details of the talks as “we play an honest mediator and facilitator role.”

  In an interview with daily Turkish newspaper Hurriyet, presidential spokesman Ibrahim Kalin said the sides were negotiating six points: Ukraine’s neutrality; disarmament and security guarantees; the so-called “de-Nazification”; removal of obstacles on the use of the Russian language in Ukraine; the status of the breakaway Donbas region; and the status of Crimea, annexed by Russia in 2014.

  Turkey’s pro-government Hurriyet newspaper reported that the two countries were edging towards agreement on Kyiv declaring neutrality and abandoning its drive for Nato membership, “demilitarizing” Ukraine in exchange for collective security guarantees, what Russia calls “denazification” and lifting restrictions on the use of Russian in Ukraine.

  Two people familiar with the discussions said it was likely a compromise would involve token concessions from Kyiv on what Russia calls “denazification”. But Linda Thomas-Greenfield, US ambassador to the UN, accused Moscow of failing to fully participate in the talks. “The negotiations seem to be one-sided,” she said. “The Russians have not leaned into any possibility for a negotiated and diplomatic solution.”

  Hopes that an agreement is close were dashed, however, after the Russian military delivered an ultimatum for the surrender of Mariupol, the besieged city in southern Ukraine and the scene of some of the heaviest fighting since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine more than three weeks ago, according to the National Defense Control Center of the Russian Federation as cited by Tass.

  Colonel-General Mikhail Mizintsev said all armed units of Ukraine must leave Mariupol from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. local time on Monday, according to Tass, after which any fighters remaining would “face a military tribunal.” It said humanitarian convoys would deliver food, medicine and other essentials to the city.  The Russian statement demanded a written response from Ukraine’s government by 4 a.m. Kyiv time.

  The eastern port city has been devastated by relentless shelling, with whole neighborhoods reduced to piles of smouldering rubble. Electricity, gas and water have been cut off and trapped residents are without food.

  Ukraine’s armed forces said the situation in Mariupol which located in mostly Russia controlled territory around Donetsk, was “difficult: there is famine in the city, street fights, people are trying to leave”. Local authorities in Mariupol said “civilians are still under the rubble” after the school bombing.

  

  Russia’s advance in Mariupol came after Kyiv said it had been cut off from the strategically important Sea of Azov, a conduit to the Black Sea. Capturing Mariupol would give the Russians control of a swath of Ukraine’s southern coast.

  Kyiv also accused Moscow of using its new hypersonic missiles against civilian areas elsewhere in Ukraine, in the first confirmation that the Kremlin had deployed the weapons in the conflict. Moscow said it used the Kinzhal, which it claims can travel at 10 times the speed of sound, twice in the past three days: to destroy a fuel depot in southern Ukraine and to target a munitions storage facility in the country’s west.

  Russia said Andrei Paliy, deputy commander of its Black Sea fleet, had died during the battle for Mariupol. Paliy’s death makes him the seventh high-ranking Russian officer Ukraine claims to have killed during the war.

  Kyiv and its western allies fear Russian president Vladimir Putin could be buying time in peace talks to replenish Moscow’s forces and launch a broader offensive.

  Meanwhile, as the FT notes, Mariupol’s status is a sticking point in the ongoing Turkey-mediated peace talks because it is part of the Ukrainian-held territory claimed by Moscow-backed separatists, according to two people briefed on the peace efforts.

  Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky said the talks were worth pursuing even if they had a “1 per cent chance of success” and warned a failure of negotiations would risk “a third world war.” “We have demonstrated the dignity of our people and our army . . . But unfortunately our dignity is not going to preserve lives. So I think we have to use any format, any chance, in order to have the possibility of negotiating,” he told CNN. Zelensky said western leaders had told him Ukraine would not be allowed to join Nato or the EU although “publicly, the doors will remain open”. 

  US president Joe Biden will visit Europe this week to attend Thursday’s Nato summit in Brussels, but will not travel to Ukraine, the White House said on Sunday.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 19:00

• Escobar: The 'Rules-Based International Order' Is Unraveling Much Faster Than Expected
  Escobar: The ‘Rules-Based International Order’ Is Unraveling Much Faster Than Expected

  Authored by Pepe Escobar,

  The “rules-based international order” – as in “our way or the highway” – is unraveling much faster than anyone could have predicted.

  

  The Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) and China are starting to design a new monetary and financial system bypassing the U.S. dollar, supervised by Sergei Glazyev and intended to compete with the Bretton Woods system.

  Saudi Arabia – perpetrator of bombing, famine and genocide in Yemen, weaponized by U.S., UK and EU – is advancing the coming of the petroyuan.

  India – third largest importer of oil in the world – is about to sign a mega-contract to buy oil from Russia with a huge discount and using a ruble-rupee mechanism.

  Riyadh’s oil exports amount to roughly $170 billion a year. China buys 17% of it, compared to 21% for Japan, 15% for the U.S., 12% for India and roughly 10% for the EU. The U.S. and its vassals – Japan, South Korea, EU – will remain within the petrodollar sphere. India, just like China, may not.

  Sanction blowback is on the offense. Even a market/casino capitalism darling such as uber-nerd Credit Suisse strategist Zoltan Pozsar, formerly with the NY Fed, IMF and Treasury Dept., has been forced to admit, in an analytical note:

  “If you think that the West can develop sanctions that will maximize the pain for Russia by minimizing the risks of financial stability and price stability for the West, then you can also trust unicorns.”

  Unicorns are a trademark of the massive NATOstan psyops apparatus, lavishly illustrated by the staged, completely fake “summit” in Kiev between Comedian Ze and the Prime Ministers of Poland, Slovenia and the Czech Republic, thoroughly debunked by John Helmer and Polish sources.

  Pozsar, a realist, hinted in fact at the ritual burial of the financial chapter of the “rules-based international order” in place since the early Cold War years: “After the end of this war [in Ukraine], ‘money’ will ‎never be ‎the same.” Especially when the Hegemon demonstrates its “rules” by encroaching on other people’s money.

  And that configures the central tenet of 21st century martial geopolitics as monetary/ideological. The world, especially the Global South, will have to decide whether “money” is represented by the virtual, turbo-charged casino privileged by the Americans or by real, tangible assets such as energy sources. A bipolar financial world – U.S. dollar vs. yuan – is at hand.

  There’s no surefire evidence – yet. But the Kremlin may have certainly gamed that by using Russia’s foreign reserves as bait, likely to be frozen by sanctions, the end result could be the smashing of the petrodollar. After all the overwhelming majority of the Global South by now has fully understood that the backed-by-nothing U.S. dollar as “money” – according to Poznar – is absolutely untrustworthy.

  If that’s the case, talk about a Putin ippon from hell.

  It’s gold robbery time

  As I outlined the emergence of the new paradigm, from the new monetary system to be designed by a cooperation between the EAEU and China to the advent of the petroyuan, a serious informed discussion  erupted about a crucial part of the puzzle: the fate of the Russian gold reserves.

  Doubts swirled around the Russian Central Bank’s arguably suicidal policy of keeping assets in foreign securities or in banks vulnerable to Western sanctions.

  Of course there’s always the possibility Moscow calculated that nations holding Russian reserves – such as Germany and France – have assets in Russia that can be easily nationalized. And that the total debt of the state plus Russian companies even exceeds the amount of frozen reserves.

  But what about the gold?

  As of February 1, three weeks before the start of Operation Z, the Russian Central Bank held $630.2 billion in reserves. Almost half –

  $311.2 billion – were placed in foreign securities, and a quarter – $151.9 billion – on deposits with foreign commercial and Central Banks. Not exactly a brilliant strategy. As of June last year, strategic partner China held 13.8% of Russia’s reserves, in gold and foreign currency.

  As for the physical gold, $132.2 billion – 21% of total reserves – remains in vaults in Moscow (two-thirds) and St. Petersburg (one-third).

  So no Russian gold has been frozen? Well, it’s complicated.

  The key problem is that more than 75% of Russian Central Bank reserves are in foreign currency. Half of these are securities, like government bonds: they never leave the nation that issued them. Roughly 25% of the reserves are linked to foreign banks, mostly private, as well as the BIS and the IMF.

  Once again it’s essential to remember Sergei Glazyev in his groundbreaking essay Sanctions and Sovereignty: 

  “It is necessary to complete the de-dollarization of our foreign exchange reserves, replacing the dollar, euro and pound with gold. In the current conditions of the expected explosive growth in the price of gold, its mass export abroad is akin to treason and it is high time for the regulator to stop it.”

  This is a powerful indictment of the Russian Central Bank – which was borrowing against gold and exporting it. For all practical purposes, the Central Bank could be accused of perpetrating an inside job. And subsequently they were caught flat-footed by the devastating American sanctions.

  As a Moscow analyst puts it, the Central Bank “had delivered some volumes of gold to London in 2020-2021. This decision was motivated by a high price of gold at that time (near $2000 per ounce) and could hardly be initiated by Putin. If so, this decision can be qualified as very stupid, or even part of a diversionist tactic (…) Most of the gold delivered to London was not stored but sold and transferred into foreign currency reserves (in euro or pounds) which were frozen later.”

  No wonder a lot of people in Russia are livid. A quick flashback is in order. In June last year, Putin signed a law canceling requirements for the repatriation of foreign exchange earnings from gold exports. Five months later, Russia’s gold miners were exporting like crazy. A month later, the Duma wanted to know  why the Central Bank had stopped buying gold. No wonder Russia media erupted with accusations of “an unprecedented [gold] robbery”.

  Now it’s way more dramatic: RIA Novosti described the American-dictated freeze as – what else – a “robbery” and duly predicted global economic chaos.  As for the Central Bank, it’s back on the gold buying business.

  None of the above though explains some “missing” gold that de facto is not under the possession of the Russian Central Bank. And that’s where a somewhat shady character such as Herman Gref comes in.

  Let’s check this out with State Duma deputy Mikhail Delyagin, who had a few things to say about the gold-exported-to-London bonanza:

  “This process has been going on for the past year. Exported, according to some estimates, 600 tons. [Head of Russian Central Bank] Nabiullina said – whoever wants to sell gold to get cash, or if you mine gold and trade it, keep in mind that the state, in my person, will not buy gold from you at a market price. We will take it at a big discount. If you want to get honest money for it, please export it. The world center of gold trading is London. Accordingly, everyone began to export and sell gold there. Including Mr. [Herman] Gref. The head of the formally state-owned Sberbank sold a huge part of his gold reserves.”

  Look here for fascinating details about Sberbank’s Gref shenanigans.

  Watch for the gold-backed ruble

  It may be a case of too little too late, but at least the Kremlin has now established a committee – with authority over the Central Bank nerds – to handle the serious stuff.

  It boggles the mind that the Russian Central Bank does not answer to the Russian constitution as well as to the judicial system, but in fact is subordinated to the IMF. A case can be made that this cartel-designed financial system – implying zero sovereignty – simply cannot be tackled head on by any nation on the planet, and Putin has been trying to undermine it step by step. That includes, of course, keeping Elvira Nabiullina on the job even as she duly follows the Washington consensus to the letter.

  And that brings us back to the ultra high stakes possibility that the Kremlin may have wanted from the start to go no holds barred, forcing the Atlanticists to reveal their true hand, and exposing their system in a “The King is Naked” spectacular for a worldwide audience.

  And that’s where the EAEU/China new monetary/financial system comes in, under Glazyev supervision. We can certainly envision Russia, China and vast swathes of Eurasia progressively divorcing from casino capitalism; the ruble reconverted to a gold-backed currency; and Russia focused on self-sufficiency, productive domestic investment and trade connectivity with most of the Global South.

  Way beyond its confiscated foreign reserves and tons of gold sold in London, what matters is that Russia remains the ultimate natural resource powerhouse. Shortages? A little austerity for a little while will take care of it: nothing as dramatic as the national impoverishment under the neoliberal 1990s. And extra boost would come from exporting natural resources at premium discount prices to other BRICS and most of Eurasia and the Global South.

  The collective West has just fabricated a new, tawdry East-West divide. Russia is turning it upside down, to its own profit: after all the multipolar world is rising in the East.

  The Empire of Lies won’t back down, because it does not have a Plan B. Plan A is to “cancel” Russia across the – Western – spectrum. So what? Russophobia, racism, 24/7 psyops, propaganda overdrive, cancel culture online mobs, that don’t mean a thing.

  Facts matter: the Bear has enough nuclear/hypersonic hardware to shatter NATO in a few minutes before breakfast and teach a lesson to the collective West before pre-dinner cocktails. There will come a time when some exceptionalist with a decent IQ will finally understand the meaning of “indivisibility of security”.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 18:30

• Shenzhen Scrambles To Ease Lockdown As Port Congestion Persists
  Shenzhen Scrambles To Ease Lockdown As Port Congestion Persists

  The CCP continued to ease lockdown restrictions on Shenzhen over the weekend as the municipal government claimed that the spread of COVID in the city is “overall controllable.”

  Shenzhen’s municipal government said it would resume normal operations and production, according to a notice posted to its WeChat account on Friday.

  

  As factories reopen, citywide bus and subway services will also resume, according to the notice, which said the reopening would be effective starting March 21 through March 27.

  The city’s COVID situation is still grim, but it’s overall controllable, according to the notice. The move follows a partial lift of restrictions for five districts of Shenzhen on Friday, as President Xi Jinping said.

  The reopening comes as China seeks to minimize the economic and social disruption to the economy from its COVID zero policy.

  But the city’s reopening hasn’t been quick enough to prevent a backlog at Shenzhen’s critical ports. Cargo ships are accumulating at one of the busiest ports in the country after another COVID outbreak shut down factories and warehouses, raising the prospect of a new round of bottlenecks that could push up freight rates and slow deliveries.

  There are more than 35 ships waiting to dock in Shenzhen and another 30 farther north in Qingdao, according to shipping brokers. The Port of Shenzhen, which serves a major manufacturing and export hub, includes the Yantian terminal, which handles about 25% of all US-bound Chinese exports. Manufacturing plants and warehouses in the city were ordered to close this past week, while another container load is falling fast as fewer trucks are arriving.

  “I’ve got a load of bicycles, but stuck 16 kilometers on the highway coming into the port for almost two days,” said Wei Wu, a truck driver moving boxes for a European container and logistics operator. “Very little moves in Shenzhen. You need to test repeatedly, and I don’t know if the ship will be allowed to come in.”

  The lockdown in Shenzhen was partially lifted Friday after President Xi Jinping told a Politburo meeting that while sticking to its COVID-zero policy, the government should “minimize the impact” of the pandemic on the country’s economy.

  According to WSJ, the Danish boxship company AP Moller-Maersk said that although terminals in Shenzhen are operational, the shipping giant had come up with contingency plans that could divert ships if the COVID restrictions there remain.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 18:00

• Grains Cheatsheet, Part 3: The Corn And Soybean Spread
  Grains Cheatsheet, Part 3: The Corn And Soybean Spread

  The final, part 3 out of 3 in a weekly miniseries, by Macro Ops Substack, Part 1 can be found here; Part 2 can be found here.

  The Corn and Soybean Spread

  Corn and Soybeans compete for the same acreages area. Ultimately farmers must decide how much of their space they are going commit to plant Corn, and therefore how much Soybean they will put into the ground.

  The ratio is Soybeans over Corn, and it tracks how much money a farmer receives for their Soybean crop relative to their Corn crop.

  It’s usually around 2/1. Whenever it’s over 3/1, it means that it pays more to grow Soybeans over Corn. For every ton of Soybeans a producer sells he will have to sell at least 3 tons of Corn to get the same amount of income.

  It’s important to realize that corn yields are bigger than soybean yields. That means that an acreage of Corn gives more bushels than an acreage of Soybeans. Since farmland is a limited resource that can’t be quickly scaled up or down, it’s important to pay attention to this indicator.

  It gives you an insight on how the producers could decide to plant for the year.

  Weather Is THE Real Risk Factor, it doesn’t have to materialize… the rumor is enough.

  For Macro Ops narratives are important. And it’s no different for grain markets. The concept of Weather Premium is an important one to understand in order to trade grains. Whenever the crops are on the ground, they are really sensitive to bad weather conditions. Volatility tends to go up.

  If you add a rumor about bad weather that COULD have a negative impact on yields, prices will go up. This higher price is known as Weather Risk Premium. The reason being is that now there are concerns that supply won’t be enough for everybody.

  Some key players absolutely need corn for their operations. They are price acceptant which means that no matter the price they have to purchase the corn.

  This type of player is willing to buy at a higher price just to secure its operative needs (think of Kellogg’s for example). 

  This type of behavior is what brings prices up.

  Now, if we fast-forward to harvest time, and the Weather wasn’t as bad as previously thought. (The genetically modified seeds are pretty resilient by the way.) Then prices should go lower as the weather premium is no longer baked in anymore. 

  The point to take home here is bad weather didn’t become a reality, nevertheless the rumor was enough to make some key players take action, and this ended up influencing prices. So, pay attention to Weather Narratives and try to identify when you are in a Weather Risk Premium Market.

  Weather has an asymmetric effect.

  The real reason why markets are willing to pay a Premium for weather risk is because weather has an asymmetric effect on yields and therefore on the supply.  Bad weather has the potential to literally destroy a year’s crop potential (that’s why insurance for farmers exists). 

  There are many ways horrible weather conditions could mess up crops. If it’s too dry or too wet while the grains are in the ground it has a negative effect on yields. Too much rain when it’s planting season means a slower planting pace. There’s a critical window of opportunity for planting corn and soybeans. If they are not planted in the right moment yields will suffer.

  On the other hand, during harvest season if there is too much rain it also slows the pace and could lead to quality issues. Grains must have a standard dryness otherwise they are considered lower quality.

  A storm could mess up piers and ships and create distribution worries. In South America where infrastructure isn’t so great, heavy rains imply bad muddy roads which makes some farms impossible to reach.

  Good weather on the other hand, doesn’t have the same effect… it just helps yields to some degree, but only if everything else was done properly, and that’s pretty much it.

  If you are trading Soybeans, China’s New Year Holidays matter.

  Check your calendar around February. China’s holiday celebration lasts a week. That means that all physical operations for Soybeans stops during this time of the year, If there aren’t any other relevant news on the market like a weather story, prices tend to go down as a result of the lesser demand while the East is asleep.

  By the same logic, when the festivities are over they tend to come back with a buying frenzy so it’s good to be aware of this behavior.

  It’s easy to pinpoint this trend in China’s Soybean Imports report. February tends to be the smallest month of all. 

  Commitment of Trader Reports though a lagging indicator is an important one.

  The COT is a really useful indicator to understand the structure of the market you’re in. It divides all market players into 3 key classifications, Commercials, Managed Money and Speculators. Commercials will be guys like ADM, Cargill, or Kellogg’s. They use the futures market not to speculate but to hedge out the risk that commodities prices have on their physical operations.

  Managed Money will be hedge funds with big amounts of money. They are the so called “Smart Money.” Speculators are all the small players like you and me.

  If you take each group’s long contracts minus their short contracts you will be able to pinpoint whether they are Net long or Net short.

  Commercials tend to be net short almost all the time.

  Managed Money can be both net short or net long. If they switch positions from a very net short position, like 150.000 contracts, to net long 50.000 contracts this should tell you that the “smart money” is now bullish on that commodity and betting on higher prices.

  Referencing how long or how short the funds and the commercials are relative to their previous positions gives tremendous insight on the market.

  Speculators have a tendency to be on the wrong side of the trade consistently, OUCH! (Don’t be one of them).

  Unlike other bigger markets. Fund money is big enough to move prices on the grains futures market. It’s important to track their actions. A good way to keep an eye on their activities is to take their net position and divide that by the open interest.

  The Open Interest

  Open Interest is an indicator that confuses a lot of stock traders since it’s exclusive to derivative markets. 

  Here’s a simple example: 

  If you go long 5 contracts of Corn, you have raised the volume indicator by 5 contracts. If by the end of the day you decided to take profits and close 2 contracts, you will have to sell two corn futures.

  The volume will end up being 7 contracts for the day. 

  But since you closed out two contracts you are only left with 3 contracts overnight. The open interest indicator will show 3 contracts. 

  Open Interest tracks how many futures are still open at the end of the day. Every time you short or go long on a futures contract you will add one point to Open Interest. You will “create” one contract. When you offset the position by making a closing trade, you will eliminate the contract thus reducing the OI.

  The higher the OI the more contracts are created. Therefore more people are trading that particular futures contract. 

  If OI starts to trend lower it usually means traders are starting to roll their exposure over to the next month’s contract. Liquidity will dry up in the expiring contract and flow into the new contract.   

  The Forward Curve: Contango and Backwardation

  The forward curve is simply the chart representation of all the tradable futures contracts in any point in time. Futures contracts are available in most months. The forward curve will plot all the prices on Y axis, thus giving you a picture on how the market is pricing the contracts from today until many months into the future.

  

  In this example prices went up from yesterday. The spread between different contracts remains the same, because otherwise there’ll be arbitrage opportunities.

  When the front month is the cheapest one, and contracts further out in time are higher in price, you are in a Contango Market.

  When the front month is the most expensive one, and contracts further out in time are lower in price, you are in a Backwardation market.

  Calendar Spreads and the Grain Elevators Business

  A calendar spread is a trading strategy which consists of profiting from a movement in price on the same underlying asset with two different expiry dates. 

  When we were discussing the Corn to Soybeans ratio, we were trying to get into a farmer’s head and play the game just like he would.

  Whenever you are talking about calendar spreads we are entering in the domains of the Grain Elevators. Their business focuses on this.

  They receive the grain from the farmers when it is abundant and cheap, store it, and then sell it when it’s scarce and expensive. They didn’t add value, they just keep it in the same conditions they received it. The idea is only to profit later on when prices are higher.

  When you are trading calendar spreads you are working in a similar fashion. All you are saying is that the prices of Corn in May should go higher relative to the Corn in September or vice-versa. 

  Forward Curve and the Storage Theory

  It always intrigued me how the market could figure out how to price Corn futures so many months in advance, especially when nobody knows how future events will unveil. To understand why the Corn market is usually in Contango we are going to need two additional concepts: Storage costs and Arbitrage.

  Let’s say today’s Corn is priced at 350 cents per bushel and the futures with delivery 3 months from now are trading at 400 cents. If someone is able to buy the corn today at $3.50 and store it with a cost of 5 cents per month, he will end up with a price of 3.50+0.15= 3.65 per bushel three months into the future. 

  So what this opportunist needs to do is to buy the Corn at today’s prices, sell the 3 month futures contract for 4.00 and wait three months. At the end of it, he will end up with a profit 0.35 (4.00 – 3.65= 0.35) per bushel.

  The point here is that there wasn’t any risk, no matter what happens to prices he’ll end up with a profit. That’s an Arbitrage trade.

  If the contango curve is too steep it means that prices are too high between one contract and the next forward. Many people will be able to do a similar arbitrage trade like the one we just described. This brings down the prices on the further out futures until the arbitrage disappears.

  I like to think about the forward curve in this way. If the Sep Contract is trading at 350 and the December Contract is trading at 355, then it probably costs 5 cents to store that corn from September to December. Otherwise there will be an Arbitrage Opportunity. It’s important to get a feeling of how steep the forward curve should be. If it gets too high maybe there’s an opportunity! 

  Backwardation Case

  When prices are in Backwardation it’s not possible to do the same arbitrage trade we just described.

  When prices are at backwardation it usually implies that there are supply concerns and people need their grain NOW. 

  But if the prices of the closest futures get too high, people just will stop buying altogether. They will postpone their purchase plan and try to take advantages of cheaper prices in the future. 

  This two cases should give you an idea on how the market is able to maintain a reasonable Forward Curve. Of course new information could mess up with these relationships, and that is where opportunities arrive!

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 17:30

• Wall Street's 'King Of Block Trades' Targeted In DoJ Investigation
  Wall Street’s ‘King Of Block Trades’ Targeted In DoJ Investigation

  A few weeks have passed since the investing public received an update on the SEC block trading probe that had captured Wall Street’s attention before the market ructions that briefly sent the Nasdaq into a bear market earlier this month emerged. As we learned earlier this year, the probe had ensnared Morgan Stanley and a handful of buy-side clients, most (if not all) of whom had some kind of connection to ex-Morgan Stanley executive Pawan Passi, who ran the bank’s equity syndication desk for years.

  

  So far, Morgan Stanley has appeared to be the nexus of the investigation, as DoJ and SEC investigators examine whether the bank illegally tipped off clients about impending block trades (a practice that was once described by Bloomberg as “a grey area”).

  But on Friday, Bloomberg revealed that another firm has been inextricably wrapped up in the probe: CaaS Capital Management, a New York-based hedge fund with more than $4 billion AUM led by Frank Fu, a longtime Wall Street operator. To hear Bloomberg tell it, CaaS has made its money mainly off the types of block trades that the SEC/DoJ are trying to criminalize. Fu and his firm have become so closely associated with this trading strategy, that Bloomberg informally dubbed him Wall Street’s “king of block trading”.

  What’s more, business has been good. According to Bloomberg, the firm achieved a return higher than 70% during its first year.

  His CaaS Capital Management would focus on block trading, one of the last bastions of old Wall Street, where big slugs of stock are sold through person-to-person negotiation, even cajoling, rather than electronic venues. Many practitioners are bro-y – the type who played college football. For Friday happy hours, Fu’s colleagues unzip their CaaS puffer vests and break out chess boards in a conference room.

  Yet Fu, 39, soon managed to establish close ties with investment banks including Morgan Stanley, the juggernaut of the equities world. His pitch: CaaS would “partner” with them, positioning itself for preferential treatment. Prospective investors say CaaS has boasted to them of quickly becoming one of the biggest U.S. funds dedicated to block trading, getting a first look at deals and gaining entry to virtually every IPO in the country. In the firm’s first full year Fu posted a jaw-dropping 76% return.

  Fu has enjoyed a charmed career, starting off trading options at Susquehanna, before pivoting to an entirely different style of trading: block trades that required a high-contact approach involving the humans on either side of the trade. His personal relationship with Passi quickly established him as one of the first individuals to “get the call”.

  In his early career, Fu focused on types of trading that depend more on math than networking. Born in Shanghai, he came to the U.S. to study at Cornell University in the early 2000s, earning a bachelor’s degree in operations research and industrial engineering and a master’s in financial engineering in 2006, after which he landed at Susquehanna International Group, where he spent two years trading options.

  Fu parlayed his reputation and growing influence to launch his own firm, with the backing of Wall Street giants like BlackRock.

  Fu set up his own shop with early backing from BlackRock Inc. and New Holland Capital. He told investors he planned to position himself as an aide to banks, which after the 2008 financial crisis weren’t able to pile on big blocks of stock like they used to. In more recent months, CaaS has told prospective investors it had ties to about 30 banks.

  “Due to the breadth and strength of these relationships, CaaS has earned a reputation in the market as the firm that receives an early, if not first, call,” the firm wrote in a recent marketing presentation.

  Fu wasn’t flashy with his growing wealth. One associate described him as one of the cheapest dinner meetings on Wall Street, typically ordering just an entree and a Diet Coke. He bought investment properties in Weehawken, New Jersey, and surrounding areas and started a foundation with his wife, which has donated to Cornell and Horace Mann, a private school in the Bronx.

  He quickly became one of the best-known buyers of blocks of shares, which he used computer modeling to analyze to ensure his firm bought shares at a reasonable price. Regulatory filings show that CaaS was there to hoover up blocks of shares dumped by prime brokers on Archegos’s behalf. Typically, CaaS holds positions anywhere from a few days, to a few months.

  But some of Fu’s counterparties have noticed what they described as ‘irregularities’ in his trading style.

  Not every bank took up Fu’s offer. One banker, speaking on the condition that he and his employer not be named, said his firm twice sold Fu a block of shares from its own book, but each time noticed a drop in the public price before the transaction was finished, reducing the bank’s proceeds. Suspicious that the drops might not be coincidental, the banker made a personal decision a few years ago to stop trusting Fu with new business.

  Now, Fu and Morgan Stanley’s Passi are reportedly two among a group of more than a dozen Wall Street executives who have found themselves in investigators’ crosshairs. As one lawyer who spoke with BBG acknowledged, the line between what’s legal and illegal is nebulous, at best.

  “The definition of material nonpublic information is pretty broad,” and can be murky, said Dan Viola, a partner overseeing law firm Sadis & Goldberg’s regulatory and compliance practice. “Funds shorting after such calls are taking an aggressive stance. Regulators appear to be concerned about a banker giving confidential information to preferred customers at the expense of the person who is selling the big block.”

  The big question now: can prosecutors actually convince a jury that Fu, Passi and others intentionally violated laws governing the dissemination of material non-public information?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 17:00

• What Is The Strike Price Of The Powell Put?
  What Is The Strike Price Of The Powell Put?

  Authored by MN Gordon via EconomicPrism.com,

  The Federal Reserve, through a multi-decade series of shady practices, finds itself in a very disagreeable place.  Policies of extreme market intervention have positioned the economy and financial markets for an epic bust.

  

  Price inflation.  Unemployment.  Interest rates.  Stock market valuations.

  These metrics are presently situated in such a way that the “Powell put” will be impossible to successfully execute for the foreseeable future.

  Price inflation is at a 40 year high.  The unemployment rate is 3.8 percent, which is near its low.  The 10-Year Treasury note is yielding 2.15 percent.  While this key interest rate is certainly trending higher, it’s still near a historical low.

  And for all the wild price swings and gnashing of teeth over the last two months, the S&P 500 has hardly slipped.  In fact, as of market close on Thursday March 17 of 4,411, the S&P 500 is down only 7.83 percent from its all-time record close of 4,786 reached on January 3.  It still has another 12.17 percent to fall before reaching official bear market territory.

  Moreover, the ratio of total market capitalization over GDP is currently 185 percent.  This is considered significantly overvalued.

  By our estimation the S&P 500 has much, much further to fall in 2022.  And given current price inflation, unemployment, and interest rates, the Powell put won’t likely be executed with the clockwork certainty that investors have grown accustom to over the last 35 years.

  We posit that a 50 percent decline in the S&P 500 and an unemployment rate over 10 percent would be needed before the Fed can bailout Wall Street again.  That, and massively higher interest rates will first be required to contain raging consumer price inflation.

  Quite frankly, 25 basis point rate hikes to the federal funds rate won’t cut it.  We’ll explain why in just a moment.  But first, some context is in order…

  Extreme Intervention

  When Alan Greenspan first executed the “Greenspan put” following the 1987 Black Monday crash, financial markets were well positioned for this centrally coordinated intervention.  Interest rates, after peaking out in 1981, were still high.  The yield on the 10-Year Treasury note was about 9 percent.  There was plenty of room for borrowing costs to fall.

  The unstated mechanics of the Greenspan put are extraordinarily simple.  When the stock market drops by about 20 percent, the Fed intervenes by lowering the federal funds rate.  This typically results in a real negative yield, and an abundance of cheap credit.

  This tactic has a twofold effect of seen and observable market distortions.  First, the burst of liquidity puts an elevated floor under how far the stock market falls.  Thus, the put option effect.  Second, the interest rate cuts inflate bond prices, as bond prices move inverse to interest rates.

  As of the late 1980s, thanks to the Greenspan put, the Fed has been running an implicit program of countercyclical stock market monetary stimulus.  Ben Bernanke then ratcheted up the Fed’s extreme market intervention via quantitative easing (QE) in the aftermath of the 2008-09 financial crisis.  That’s when things really got nuts.

  QE, remember, involves creating credit out of thin air and then loaning it to the Treasury.  The Treasury then injects the fake money into the economy through government spending programs.  QE can also involve bailing out the big banks by swapping the Fed’s fake money for toxic securities.

  In short, U.S. financial markets have been rigged for at least three decades.  The unintended consequences have infected every sector of the economy.  And now, with the resulting effect of both massive asset price inflation and massive consumer price inflation, the next time the stock market cracks, it will be impossible to exercise the Powell put without also further inflating consumer prices.

  The implications for buy and hold investors are bleak…

  What is the Strike Price of the Powell Put?

  The official CPI is currently 7.9 percent.  When calculated using methodologies from the 1980s, the rate of inflation is double.

  This week the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) hiked the federal funds rate by 25 basis points.  The FOMC also promised to hike the federal funds rate six more times this year.

  Some in the financial press reported this as “hawkish,” which is an absolute joke.  But who knows?  Maybe the Fed will get serious and hike by 50 basis points next time.

  Regardless, it’s too little too late.  Inflation is on the loose and the Powell put is seriously compromised.

  According to the BofA Global Fund Manager Survey, the Fed put for the S&P 500 is now at 3,636.  But what do they know?

  As far as we can tell, participants in the FMS suffer from a serious lack of imagination.  In fact, just a little abstract thinking tells another story.

  For example, what if there’s a bear market yet consumer price inflation spikes to 10 percent (officially)?  How could the Fed bailout Wall Street when consumer prices are inflating by double digits?

  What if the economy contracts yet inflation rises…and the stagflation misery index – the unemployment rate plus the CPI – goes through the roof?

  What then would be the strike price of the Powell put?

  Scenarios like these have become increasingly likely.

  Over the last two years, somewhere on the order of $6 trillion in fake money has been vomited into the U.S. economy.  This is the primary reason for raging consumer price inflation.  Despite what President Biden says, it’s not Vladimir Putin’s fault.

  Here’s the point, the Fed will have to contain inflation before it puts a floor under the stock market and acts to further stimulate the economy.  It can’t do both at the same time.

  Any path that involves juicing the stock market or stimulating the economy before inflation is snuffed out would ensure that inflation continues to rage higher.

  So how far will the S&P 500 fall – and unemployment and interest rates have to rise – before Powell can fire off the monetary bazookas?

  Would 2,500 cut it?  What about 2,000…or lower?

  In reality, Powell or his successor will fire them off long before then…and the misery index will eat us alive.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 16:30

• Morgan Stanley: We Could Be In A Downturn 5-10 Months From Now
  Morgan Stanley: We Could Be In A Downturn 5-10 Months From Now

  by Michael Wilson, chief US equity strategist at Morgan Stanley

  A year ago, we published a joint note with our economics and cross-asset strategy teams arguing that this cycle would run hotter but shorter than the prior three. Our view was based on the speed and strength of the economic and earnings rebound following the 2020 recession, the return of inflation after a multi-decade absence, and an earlier-than-expected pivot to more hawkish Fed policy. On Friday, we published an update that shows developments over the past year support this call – US GDP and earnings have surged past prior cycle peaks and are now decelerating sharply, inflation is running at a 40-year high, and the Fed has executed the sharpest pivot in policy we’ve ever witnessed.

  Meanwhile, just 22 months after the end of the last recession, our cross-asset team’s US cycle model is already approaching prior peaks. This indicator aggregates key data to help signal where we are in the economic cycle and where headwinds/tailwinds exist for different asset classes, styles, etc. The latest rebound has been unusually fast. The model is currently in the ‘expansion’ phase (data above trend and rising – i.e., mid-to-late cycle). At this pace, the indicator could peak in 2-4 months and move to ‘downturn’ 5-10 months from today.

  

  With regard to US equities, earnings, sales, and margins have all surged past prior cycle highs. In fact, earnings recovered to the prior cycle peak in just 16 months, the fastest rebound going back 40 years. The early-to-mid-cycle benefits of positive operating leverage have come and gone, and US corporates now face decelerating sales growth coupled with higher costs. As such, our leading earnings model is pointing to a deceleration in EPS growth toward zero over the coming months, and higher-frequency data on earnings revision breadth are trending lower – driven by cyclicals and economically sensitive sectors – a set-up that looks increasingly ‘late’ cycle.

  

  Another key input to the shorter-cycle view was our analysis of the 1940s as a good historical parallel. Specifically, excess household savings unleashed on an economy constrained by supply set the stage for breakout inflation both then and now. Developments since we published our report in March last year continue to support this historical analogue – inflation has surged, forcing the Fed to move off the zero bound aggressively in a credible effort to restore price stability. Assuming the comparison holds, the next move would be a slowdown and ultimately a much shorter cycle. While the end – i.e., recession – does not appear to be imminent, the slowdown in earnings we’ve been expecting looks incrementally worse than it did when we first published our ‘fire and ice’ narrative last fall.

  Further analysis of the post-World War II evolution of the cycle (1947-48) reveals another interesting similarity to the current post-Covid phase – unintended inventory build from over-ordering to meet an excessive but unsustainable pull-forward of demand. Regular readers of our research should be familiar with this as a dynamic we have written about. In short, we think the risk of an inventory glut is growing this year, particularly in areas of the economy that experienced well above-trend demand like Consumer Discretionary and Technology goods.

  Now, with the Fed raising rates this past week and communicating a very hawkish tightening path over the next year, our rates strategists are looking for an inversion of the yield curve in 2Q. Curve inversion does not guarantee a recession, and our economists don’t expect one. However, it does support our view for sharply decelerating earnings growth and is one more piece of evidence that says it’s late cycle.

  In terms of our US strategy recommendations, we continue to lean defensive and focus on companies with operational efficiency and high cash flow generation. This leads us to names with more durable earnings profiles that are also attractively priced. Pharma, Insurance, Real Estate, Utilities, Food/Beverage/Tobacco, and Telecom all screen relatively well – i.e., defensive cohorts. Growth stocks may benefit as the curve flattens, but such a move should be faded before 1Q earnings season begins and more companies come to the confessional. This same analysis also supports our underweight in Consumer Discretionary goods, with Retailing and Consumer Durables & Apparel screening poorly. Cyclical Technology stocks also look vulnerable to the payback in demand that has yet to fully play out.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 16:00

• Will The New York Times Apologize To Sen. Cotton?
  Will The New York Times Apologize To Sen. Cotton?

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Every recovery program starts with the mantra that the first step in dealing with a problem is to admit that you have a problem.

  That cathartic moment seems to have escaped the editors of the New York Times in denouncing a cancel culture that they helped spread in the media. Many of us were both bemused and bothered by the editorial in the New York Times opposing cancel culture. The Times has not been some dedicated antagonist of this culture but rather one of its most unabashed ambassadors. 

  Indeed, one of the most outrageous acts of cancellation by the media was the treatment of Sen. Tom Cotton over his 2020 Times editorial.

  

  Given its history, the most striking aspect of the Times editorial was the utter lack of self-awareness.  The editors wrote:

  “In the course of their fight for tolerance, many progressives have become intolerant of those who disagree with them or express other opinions, and take on a kind of self-righteousness and censoriousness that the right long displayed and the left long abhorred.”

  As with the recent admission of the Times that the Hunter Biden laptop and emails are authentic, there was no effort to address its own leading role in spreading viewpoint intolerance and censorship.

  The treatment of the Cotton column shocked many of us.

  It was one of the lowest points in the history of modern American journalism. During the week of June 6, 2020, the Times forced out an opinion editor and apologized for publishing Cotton’s column calling for the use of the troops to restore order in Washington after days of rioting around the White House.

  While Congress would “call in the troops” six months later to quell the rioting at the Capitol on January 6th, New York Times reporters and columnists denounced the column as historically inaccurate and politically inciteful. The column was in fact historically accurate, even if you disagreed with the underlying proposal (as I did).

  Reporters insisted that Cotton was endangering them by suggesting the use of troops and insisted that the newspaper should not feature people who advocate political violence. Writers Taylor Lorenz, Caity Weaver, Sheera Frankel, Jacey Fortin, and others also said that such columns put black reporters in danger and condemned publishing Cotton’s viewpoint.

  Critics never explained what was historically false (or outside the range of permissible interpretation) in the column.

  In a breathtaking surrender, the newspaper apologized and not only promised an investigation into how such an opposing view could find itself on its pages but promised to reduce the number of editorials in the future:

  “We’ve examined the piece and the process leading up to its publication. This review made clear that a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an Op-Ed that did not meet our standards. As a result, we’re planning to examine both short term and long term changes, to include expanding our fact-checking operation and reduction the number of op-eds we publish.”

  One of the writers who condemned the decision to publish Cotton was New York Times Magazine reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones.  Hannah-Jones applauded the decision of the Times to apologize for publishing such an opposing viewpoint and denounced those who engage in what she called “even-handedness, both sideism” journalism. (Notably, Hannah-Jones herself later tweeted out a bizarre anti-police conspiracy theory that injuries and destruction caused by fireworks was not the fault of protesters but actually part of a weird police conspiracy. There was no hue and cry over accuracy).

  Opinion editor James Bennet reportedly made an apology to the staff.  That however was not enough. He was later compelled to resign for publishing a column that advocates an option used previously in history with rioting.

  What was particularly galling was the open hypocrisy of the editors as they continued to publish authors with violent viewpoints and anti-free speech agendas.

  For example, the newspaper had no problem in publishing “Beijing’s enforcer” in Hong Kong as Regina Ip mocked freedom protesters who were being beaten and arrested by the government.

  Likewise, the New York Times published a column by University of Rhode Island professor  Erik Loomis, who defended the murder of a conservative protester and said that he saw “nothing wrong” with such acts of violence.  (Loomis has also been ridiculed for denouncing statistics, science, and technology as inherently racist).

  In truth, there is a reason to publish all of these authors as part of a diverse set of viewpoints in a newspaper. The problem is that the Times only moved against one: Sen. Cotton.

  When confronted by the very mob described in the recent editorial, the Times let them in and rushed to join them in cleansing its pages and editorial staff.

  Everyone loves a redemptive sinner and I would be the first to applaud the New York Times in rescinding its earlier position on the Cotton editorial.  However, absent that recognition, the Times is just another member of the mob haunted by its own lack of courage.

  If the Times has decided to truly oppose the anti-free speech movement, it can start with an apology to Senator Tom Cotton.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 15:30

• Oil Tycoons Have Seen Their Net Worth Explode Higher Since Russia Invaded Ukraine
  Oil Tycoons Have Seen Their Net Worth Explode Higher Since Russia Invaded Ukraine

  Sometimes, the irony is just wonderful.

  The very same ultra-rich oil tycoons that the left absolutely loves to hate (because not only are they rich, but rich from oil) are benefitting the most from the left insane economic policies that have helped to drive up the price of the commodity.

  According to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, oil and gas industrialists now share a collective net worth of $239 billion, which is up 10% higher since Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24. The rise in wealth is directly tied to the spike in energy prices over the last few months.

  Since Russia invaded Ukraine, Brent prices have risen as much as 32% and finished last week at about $106, Bloomberg wrote. While the price spikes have sent other industries into chaos, it has translated to pure profit for those in the business of producing or transporting fossil fuels. 

  Continental Resources Inc. co-founder Harold Hamm, for example, moved up 28 places on the BBI to 93rd and now has a fortune of over $18 billion dollars. Richard Kinder, of Kinder Morgan, has seen his net worth move to $8.5 billion. 

  

  Even before the invasion of Ukraine, oil prices in the U.S. were being pushed higher by post-Covid demand. And it was mostly private companies, not public, who seized the opportunity of higher prices the most, the report says. 

  Andrew Dittmar, a director at energy-analytics and software firm Enverus, told Bloomberg: “On the private side, those pressures from shareholders aren’t nearly as acute. It makes good economic sense for private firms to invest in growing production.”

  The founder and sole owner of Lafayette, Louisiana-based Hilcorp Energy, Jeffery Hildebrand, now sports a net worth of more than $12 billion as a result. Autry Stephens, founder of Endeavor Energy Resources, has seen his net worth move higher to $5.2 billion. 

  Michael Smith, who owns about 63% of Freeport LNG, saw his wealth rise to $6.2 billion after the company sold 25% of itself to a Japanese company that valued Freeport at $9.7 billion.

  Talon Custer, a Bloomberg Intelligence analyst, concluded: “Michael Smith’s bet on the U.S. gas industry has paid off. And they have options to grow.”

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 15:00

• "Disinformation": China Says They're Not Providing Weapons To Russia, Instead Hopes To 'De-Escalate Crisis'
  “Disinformation”: China Says They’re Not Providing Weapons To Russia, Instead Hopes To ‘De-Escalate Crisis’

  China’s top Ambassador has vowed Beijing “will do everything” to de-escalate the war in Ukraine, and insisted that his country’s relationship with Russia is “not part of the problem,” according to Bloomberg.

  

  In a Sunday appearance on CBS‘s “Face the Nation,” Ambassador Qin Gang said “There’s disinformation about China providing military assistance to Russia,” adding that China isn’t currently sending “weapons and ammunitions to any party.”

  MARGARET BRENNAN: So President Biden asked Beijing not to provide any kind of support to Russia. Is it your intent to go ahead and give a lifeline to Vladimir Putin?

  AMB. GANG: On Friday, President Xi Jinping and the president, Biden, had a video call. It was candid, deep and constructive. President Xi Jinping gave China’s position very clear, that is China stands for peace, opposes war. China is a peace-loving country. We hate to see the situation over Ukraine come to today’s, you know, like this and we call for immediate ceasefire and we are promoting peace talks and we are sending humanitarian assistance to–

  MARGARET BRENNAN: –Will you send money and weapons to Russia, though?

  AMB. GANG: Well, There’s a disinformation about China providing military assistance to Russia. We reject that– 

  MARGARET BRENNAN: –You won’t do so, Beijing will not?

  AMB. GANG: What China is doing is send foods, medicine, sleeping bags and the baby formula– 

  MARGARET BRENNAN: –That’s– 

  AMB. GANG: –not weapons and ammunition to any party and we are against a war, as I said, you know, we will do everything to dis-escalate the crisis.

  Watch:

  The interview comes as China attempts to balance its relationships with the US and Russia – with Qin claiming that its “common interests” with Russia are “not a liability.”

  “China is part of the solution, it’s not part of the problem,” he added, citing Chinese President Xi Jinping’s phone call with Putin shortly after the Russian invasion in which the Chinese leader urged Putin to negotiate with Ukraine.

  When asked if China would condemn Russia, Qin said: “Don’t be naive, condemnation doesn’t solve the problem. I would be surprised if Russia will back down by condemnation.”

  Why can’t you condemn this as an invasion?” @margbrennan asks China’s Ambassador to the U.S., Qin Gang of Russia’s Ukraine invasion.

  “Don’t be naive. Condemnation doesn’t solve the problem,” he says. pic.twitter.com/Oe47GsJSTC

  — Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) March 20, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Nothing like a hostile interview in the US press to promote healthy US-China relations, right?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 14:30

• Life In The 1970s
  Life In The 1970s

  Submitted by Nicholas Colas, founder of DataTrek Research

  The economic history of the 1970s and early 1980s is getting a lot of attention these days as an analog to today’s period of soaring inflation (see our post from October “Is Stagflation Here: Comparing The 2020s With The 1970s“). For his latest Story Time note, DataTrek’s Nick Colas offers up 3 personal anecdotes to fill in some of the gaps on that fateful decade: food inflation was a huge issue, especially in the early 1970s. Second, unemployment was actually higher in the early 1980s than during the Financial Crisis. Third, Fed policy ran very differently from today, targeting money supply growth with dramatic swings in Fed Funds rates.

  Some more details from Colas on Life in the 1970s:

  #1: Going to the supermarket.

  Once I turned 10 (which was in 1974), one of my household chores was to run errands to the local grocery store. My family lived in New York City, and the market was a short walk from our apartment. My mom gave me a list of things to buy, some cash, and sent me on my way.

  On one such trip – I think it would have been 1975 – I got to the cash register with my items and a $10 bill. The cashier rang them up. The total was $11 and something.

  “What do you want to put back?” the cashier asked. I had no idea. I had never come up short before. In the end she chose the lowest ticket items that would bring the bill down to below $10.

  I walked home in shock. My family was not wealthy, but we had always had enough money to buy food and get change back from the transaction. What had just happened? Was it my fault?

  That was my introduction to inflation. When I got home my parents thought I had been mugged, because I was so upset. They explained prices were going up a lot lately, and that’s just the way things were.

  The chart below shows US CPI food inflation from 1970 to the present, and it shows just how different the world has been since then. The cost of food has risen most years since the early 1980s, but only in a band of 0 to 5 percent. Now, however, food inflation is 7.9%. That may not be back to the 1970s/early 1980s, but it is outside of the historical band since then.

  

  Takeaway: when people say, “if you didn’t experience 1970s inflation, you don’t know how bad it can be”, food inflation is a big part of what they mean. Wages went up in the 1970s (+6-9 percent annually), just as they are now (+6-7 percent). But wages did not keep up with food prices then, and they are not doing so now. It is frightening, as a child or adult, to wonder if food prices will rise so quickly that you will only be able to afford the basics or even less. “What do you want to put back?” is an awful question to hear.

  * * *

  #2: “Your father is going to be a consultant, working for himself. He got fired.”

  While the 1970s/early 1980s are now best known for inflation, they were also a period of very high unemployment and job insecurity. My own family went through that in the late 70s, when my father lost his job. He picked up work as he could, and we were OK eventually.

  This chart shows just how bad US unemployment was in the 70s – early 80s. It never fell below 5.7% and was 8 – 11 percent during the 3 recessions of the period. At its worst in late 1982, unemployment got to 10.8 percent, higher even than the Great Recession.

  

  Takeaway: with US unemployment now at just 3.8 percent, we are a long way from the 70s-early 80s experience. I do wonder how this will affect the Federal Reserve’s efforts to reduce inflation without causing a recession. At yesterday’s press conference, Chair Powell made it clear that his goal is to reduce the current labor market imbalance between openings (companies’ desire to hire) and unemployed workers (available labor supply). Cooling the economy through rate hikes should do that, but he and the Fed will have to strike a fine balance. The central lesson of then-Fed Chair Paul Volcker’s early 1980s rate hikes is that recession is the fastest way to reduce high inflation.

  * * *

  #3: “Watch the money supply”.

  I first became interested in capital markets listening to the news in the morning before going to school. The local NYC station featured a fellow named Larry Wachtel at 7:55am every weekday morning. He was a market strategist before that was a popular job title, and he made the markets intelligible and even interesting to my teen aged ears.

  Larry would focus on the US money supply data to get an edge on market action. This was because in October 1979 Paul Volcker had made it a central focus of his fight against inflation. Back then, Fed policy was much more opaque. No post-meeting communiques, no press conferences, and no Fed-head interviews. Volcker needed to give investors a simple roadmap to explain the Fed’s goals. He chose the supply of money. Slow its growth, and lower inflation should follow.

  This translated into both very high, but also very volatile, Fed Funds rates as the chart below shows. Volcker’s Fed, free of the communication requirements of today’s institution, moved Fed Funds aggressively and frequently to manage the supply of money by changing its cost as needed. It was shock therapy for the US economy, and it eventually worked.

  

  Takeaway: where Paul Volcker’s Fed managed to a number (money supply) that it could directly influence by changing interest rates, Jay Powell’s Fed has chosen to strictly adhere to the “dual mandate” of measured inflation and unemployment. In 2020 – 2021, Chair Powell was fond of saying that the Fed has a great playbook for reducing inflation. Paul Volcker wrote that playbook, and it is expressed in the above chart. How much today’s Fed will follow it remains an open question. For clients interested in this topic, I recommend the link below. It summarizes Volcker’s inflation-fighting strategies and their costs on the US economy.

  Sources: Paul Volcker and the US Money Supply: https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/anti-inflation-measures

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/20/2022 – 13:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Chris Hedges: Waltzing To Armageddon
  Chris Hedges: Waltzing To Armageddon

  Authored by Chris Hedges via ConsortiumNews.com,

  The Dr. Strangeloves, like zombies rising from the mass graves they created around the globe, are once again stoking new campaigns of industrial mass slaughter.

  

  The Cold War, from 1945 to 1989, was a wild Bacchanalia for arms manufacturers, the Pentagon, the C.I.A., the diplomats who played one country off another on the world’s chess board, and the global corporations able to loot and pillage by equating predatory capitalism with freedom. In the name of national security, the Cold Warriors, many of them self-identified liberals, demonized labor, independent media, human rights organizations, and those who opposed the permanent war economy and the militarization of American society as soft on communism. 

  That is why they have resurrected it.

  The decision to spurn the possibility of peaceful coexistence with Russia at the end of the Cold War is one of the most egregious crimes of the late 20th century. The danger of provoking Russia was universally understood with the collapse of the Soviet Union, including by political elites as diverse as Henry Kissinger and George F. Kennan, who called the expansion of NATO into Central Europe “the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era.” 

  This provocation, a violation of a promise not to expand NATO beyond the borders of a unified Germany, has seen Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, Croatia, Montenegro and North Macedonia inducted into the Western military alliance.

  This betrayal was compounded by a decision to station NATO troops, including thousands of U.S. troops, in Eastern Europe, another violation of an agreement made by Washington with Moscow. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, perhaps a cynical goal of the Western alliance, has now solidified an expanding and resurgent NATO and a rampant, uncontrollable militarism. The masters of war may be ecstatic, but the potential consequences, including a global conflagration, are terrifying. 

  Peace has been sacrificed for U.S. global hegemony. It has been sacrificed for the billions in profits made by the arms industry. Peace could have seen state resources invested in people rather than systems of control. It could have allowed us to address the climate emergency. But we cry peace, peace, and there is no peace. Nations frantically rearm, threatening nuclear war. They prepare for the worst, ensuring that the worst will happen. 

  

  “The Butcher’s Cut,” illustration by Mr. Fish.

  So, what if the Amazon is reaching its final tipping point where trees will soon begin to die off en masse? So what if land ice and ice shelves are melting from below at a much faster rate than predicted? So what if temperatures soar, monster hurricanes, floods, droughts, and wildfires devastate the earth? In the face of the gravest existential crisis to beset the human species, and most other species, the ruling elites stoke a conflict that is driving up the price of oil and turbocharging the fossil fuel extraction industry. It is collective madness.

  The march towards protracted conflict with Russia and China will backfire. The desperate effort to counter the steady loss of economic dominance by the U.S. will not be offset by military dominance. If Russia and China can create an alternative global financial system, one that does not use the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency, it will signal the collapse of the American empire. The dollar will plummet in value. Treasury bonds, used to fund America’s massive debt, will become largely worthless. The financial sanctions used to cripple Russia will be, I expect, the mechanism that slays Americans, if not immolation in thermonuclear war.

  Washington plans to turn Ukraine into Chechnya or the old Afghanistan, when the Carter administration, under the influence of the Svengali-like National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, equipped and armed the radical jihadists that would morph into the Taliban and al Qaeda in the fight against the Soviets. It will not be good for Russia. It will not be good for the United States. It will not be good for Ukraine, as making Russia bleed will require rivers of Ukrainian blood.

  Pandora’s Box of Evils

  The decision to destroy the Russian economy, to turn the Ukrainian war into a quagmire for Russia and topple the regime of Vladimir Putin will open a Pandora’s box of evils. Massive social engineering — look at Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya or Vietnam — has its own centrifugal force. It destroys those who play God.

  The Ukrainian war has silenced the last vestiges of the Left. Nearly everyone has giddily signed on for the great crusade against the latest embodiment of evil, Vladimir Putin, who, like all our enemies, has become the new Hitler.

  The United States will give $13.6 billion in military and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine, with the Biden administration authorizing an additional $200 million in military assistance. The 5,000-strong EU rapid deployment force, the recruitment of all Eastern Europe, including Ukraine, into NATO, the reconfiguration of former Soviet bloc militaries to NATO weapons and technology have all been fast tracked.

  Germany, for the first time since World War II, is massively rearming. It has lifted its ban on exporting weapons. Its new military budget is twice the amount of the old budget, with promises to raise the budget to more than 2 percent of GDP, which would move its military from the seventh largest in the world to the third, behind China and the United States.

  

  German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, left, visits NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, on right, Dec. 11, 2021. (NATO)

  NATO battlegroups are being doubled in size in the Baltic states to more than 6,000 troops. Battlegroups will be sent to Romania and Slovakia. Washington will double the number of U.S. troops stationed in Poland to 9,000. Sweden and Finland are considering dropping their neutral status to integrate with NATO.

  This is a recipe for global war. History, as well as all the conflicts I covered as a war correspondent, have demonstrated that when military posturing begins, it often takes little to set the funeral pyre alight. One mistake. One overreach. One military gamble too many. One too many provocations. One act of desperation. 

  Russia’s threat to attack weapons convoys to Ukraine from the West; its air strike on a military base in western Ukraine, 12 miles from the Polish border, which is a staging area for foreign mercenaries; the statement by Polish President Andrzej Duda that the use of weapons of mass destruction, such as chemical weapons, by Russia against Ukraine, would be a “game-changer” that could force NATO to rethink its decision to refrain from direct military intervention — all are ominous developments pushing the alliance closer to open warfare with Russia.

  

  Polish President Andrzej Duda, left, and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at the Lask air base in Poland on March 1. (NATO)

  Once military forces are deployed, even if they are supposedly in a defensive posture, the bear trap is set. It takes very little to trigger the spring. The vast military bureaucracy, bound to alliances and international commitments, along with detailed plans and timetables, when it starts to roll forward, becomes unstoppable. It is propelled not by logic but by action and reaction, as Europe learned in two world wars.

  Staggering Hypocrisy

  The moral hypocrisy of the United States is staggering. The crimes Russia is carrying out in Ukraine are more than matched by the crimes committed by Washington in the Middle East over the last two decades, including the act of preemptive war, which under post-Nuremberg laws is a criminal act of aggression. Only rarely is this hypocrisy exposed as when U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield told the body: 

  “We’ve seen videos of Russian forces moving exceptionally lethal weaponry into Ukraine, which has no place on the battlefield. That includes cluster munitions and vacuum bombs which are banned under the Geneva Convention.”

  Hours later, the official transcript of her remark was amended to tack on the words “if they are directed against civilians.” This is because the U.S., which like Russia never ratified the Convention on Cluster Munitions treaty, regularly uses cluster munitions. It used them in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and Iraq. It has provided them to Saudi Arabia for use in Yemen. Russia has yet to come close to the tally of civilian deaths from cluster munitions delivered by the U.S. military.

  The Dr. Strangeloves, like zombies rising from the mass graves they created around the globe, are once again stoking new campaigns of industrial mass slaughter. No diplomacy. No attempt to address the legitimate grievances of our adversaries. No check on rampant militarism. No capacity to see the world from another perspective. No ability to comprehend reality outside the confines of the binary rubric of good and evil. No understanding of the debacles they orchestrated for decades. No capacity for pity or remorse.

  

  March 24, 1986: President Ronald Reagan, right,  meeting with Elliott Abrams, center, about a trip to Central America. John Whitehead on left. (Reagan White House, Wikimedia Commons)

  Elliott Abrams worked in the Reagan administration when I was reporting from Central America. He covered up atrocities and massacres committed by the military regimes in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and by the U.S.-backed Contra forces fighting the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. He viciously attacked reporters and human rights groups as communists or fifth columnists, calling us “un-American” and “unpatriotic.” He was convicted for lying to Congress about his role in the Iran-Contra affair. During the administration of George W. Bush, he lobbied for the invasion of Iraq and tried to orchestrate a U.S. coup in Venezuela to overthrow Hugo Chávez.

  

  Jan. 25, 2019: Elliott Abrams, left, with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, addressing the media on Venezuela. (State Department)

  “There will be no substitute for military strength, and we do not have enough,” writes Abrams for the Council on Foreign Relations, where he is a senior fellow:

  “It should be crystal clear now that a larger percentage of GDP will need to be spent on defense. We will need more conventional strength in ships and planes. We will need to match the Chinese in advanced military technology, but at the other end of the spectrum, we may need many more tanks if we have to station thousands in Europe, as we did during the Cold War. (The total number of American tanks permanently stationed in Europe today is zero.) Persistent efforts to diminish even further the size of our nuclear arsenal or prevent its modernization were always bad ideas, but now, as China and Russia are modernizing their nuclear weaponry and appear to have no interest in negotiating new limits, such restraints should be completely abandoned. Our nuclear arsenal will need to be modernized and expanded so that we will never face the kinds of threats Putin is now making from a position of real nuclear inferiority.” 

  Putin played into the hands of the war industry. He gave the warmongers what they wanted. He fulfilled their wildest fantasies. There will be no impediments now on the march to Armageddon. Military budgets will soar. The oil will gush from the ground. The climate crisis will accelerate.

  China and Russia will form the new axis of evil. The poor will be abandoned. The roads across the earth will be clogged with desperate refugees. All dissent will be treason. The young will be sacrificed for the tired tropes of glory, honor and country. The vulnerable will suffer and die.

  The only true patriots will be generals, war profiteers, opportunists, courtiers in the media and demagogues braying for more and more blood. The merchants of death rule like Olympian gods.  And we, cowed by fear, intoxicated by war, swept up in the collective hysteria, clamor for our own annihilation.

  *  *  *

  Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for 15 years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning News, The Christian Science Monitor and NPR. He is the host of the Emmy Award-nominated RT America show “On Contact.” 

  This column is from Scheerpost, for which Chris Hedges writes a regular column. Click here to sign up for email alerts.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 23:30

• Where The World Regulates Cryptocurrency
  Where The World Regulates Cryptocurrency

  Some countries declare Bitcoin to be official legal tender while others announce outright bans on cryptocurrency. The world map below, created by Statista’s Katharina Buchholz – based on data collected by the Law Library of the U.S. Congress – shows where countries have been trying to stop the cryptocurrency hype and where crypto has been given more or less free reign.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  One example of a country embracing cryptocurrency is El Salvador, where Bitcoin was declared an official currency in September of 2021 by populist president Nayib Bukele. The country also taxes and otherwise regulates cryptocurrency. El Salvador is in a special position because it does not have its own currency and instead relies on the U.S. dollar, like some other countries in the region.

  Other countries which are applying laws to regulate digital currencies probably wouldn’t go as far as El Salvador. Rather, these places – which are most typically developed countries – have been investing in projects to launch their own central bank digital currencies. This is arguably a very different approach to using blockchain technology than that of original cryptocurrencies, which are explicitly independent of any state control, but can be very volatile as a result. Among those exploring the concept are the U.S., European countries, Russia and Australia. India and Thailand, both of which are also broadly regulating cryptocurrency, already have more concrete plans to issue their own digital currencies.

  Ukraine was also among the countries which have been regulating cryptocurrency, but the nation went one step further on Wednesday when legislating a framework for the cryptocurrency industry in the country. The nation made the move after it received donations in crypto following its invasion by Russia. Rules like having to register or acquire a license for a crypto exchange also exist in the EU, the UK, Canada, the U.S., Mexico, Chile, Japan and Korea, among others.

  China was the first major economy to start issuing its national currency on the blockchain in early 2021. The country has taken a more extreme approach to regulating cryptocurrency by issuing an absolute ban on it. According to the Law Library of Congress, nine countries had so far taken this measure, while many more were implicitly banning the use of cryptocurrency through their other laws. This practice was most common in Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 23:00

• 2020 Election Nullification, Audit Bills Dead Or Dying In State Legislatures
  2020 Election Nullification, Audit Bills Dead Or Dying In State Legislatures

  Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Nine of 10 bills filed in six states seeking to audit 2020 election results—including three that would have nullified Joe Biden’s victory—have fallen by the wayside as legislative sessions wind down.

  

  Seven bills seeking 2020 general elec­tion audits were filed in four states, Flor­ida, New Hamp­shire, South Caro­lina, and Tennessee. Only a New Hampshire measure proposing a review of one county’s 2020 results remains on the docket.

  Lawmakers in New Hampshire, Arizona, and Wisconsin filed 2022 legislation demanding the nullification of 2020’s election results with an audit to determine the winner. Only the embattled Wisconsin effort has a heartbeat.

  New Hampshire’s House Bill 1484, sponsored by Rep. Tim Baxter (R-Seabrook) advanced, got a hearing before the House Election Law Committee but, on March 12, the panel issued an “inexpedient to legislate” verdict, essentially killing it for the session.

  Under HB 1484, New Hampshire would hire an independent third party to conduct a full statewide forensic audit of ballots cast in the 2020 election, with the multimillion-dollar cost covered by private donations.

  Failed Resolution

  While HB 1484 is dead, another bill seeking only to audit election results in Merrimack County has secured one committee approval and remains viable.

  Arizona Rep. Mark Finchem’s (R-Oro Valley) House Concurrent Resolution 2033 seeking to nullify the state’s 2020 election was buried at introduction when House Speaker Rusty Bowers (R-Mesa) assigned it for approval to all 12 House committees. It has not been heard by one.

  The resolution calls on Congress to “set aside the results of the Maricopa, Pima, and Yuma County elections as irredeemably compromised and reclaim the 2020 Presidential Electors due to the irredeemably flawed nature of these elections that prevent the declaration of a clear winner of said presidential electors.”

  He said, “They can’t see to bring themselves to consider the evidence that has been laid before them.”

  Finchem said Bowers told him he was essentially killing the resolution because “he hadn’t seen the evidence and hadn’t seen the supporting jurisprudence. Well, I found the evidence and now that’s not good enough.”

  Last year, Finchem survived two election recalls in part for his outspoken support for a failed resolution seeking to block the state’s 11 electoral college votes for Biden and instead accept “the alternate 11 electoral votes” for Trump.

  “It is a case where if you don’t like the message, even if the message is right, you kill the messenger,” he said, calling for a ”show up or shut up public debate” with those who oppose a 2020 election audit.

  “We have a great place, the Hyatt Regency downtown [Phoenix]. They have a ballroom that will accommodate 800 people,” Finchem said. “On the stage, pros and cons making their case. The problem is there are no cons who want to come, none have the spinal fortitude to show up, The pros will show. All I have to do is pick up the phone and tell them when to be there. This is who the cons are—they’re afraid they will be found out.”

  As lawmakers, he said, it is their “solemn responsibility” to “safeguard the Constitution” and the sanctity of citizens’ votes. But not everybody agrees, he said.

  No Basis in Law

  “The people who fill the institutions, they love the status quo because this protects their power,” Finchem said, adding as far as he knows, Arizona is one of only “two states that recognize the Constitution and the pertinent judicial prudence and have received evidence—formally received evidence,” that the 2020 election should be nullified.

  That other state is Wisconsin where, on March 1, the Legislature’s Office of the Special Counsel published a 136-page report that calls for decertifying the 2020 election; providing a method for private citizens to challenge the state’s voter rolls; giving the power to certify elections to a “politically accountable body” rather than the governor and the elections commission; creating a way for presidential candidates to “assemble alternative slates of electors” and allowing post-certification challenges to election results.

  Despite the report, Joint Resolution 120, filed by Rep. Timothy Ramthun (R-Campbellsport) which calls for “reclaiming the electoral ballots for President and Vice President that were certified under fraudulent intent and purpose” has not advanced since it was filed Jan. 25 and referred to the House Rules Committee.

  Ramthun maintains if the Wisconsin Legislature decertifies the 2020 results and rescinds the state’s 10 electoral votes it could begin a process that ends with Biden ousted from office. Critics, even some supporters, say the proposal has no basis in state or federal law.

  Stand Earns Punishment

  Inaction on last year’s Legislative Audit Bureau (LAB) election analysis and demands for decertification have fostered division among Wisconsin Republicans with every member of Assembly GOP leadership issuing a joint statement accusing Ramthun and a staffer of spreading misinformation among lawmakers while continuing to demand House Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) do more to overturn the 2020 election result.

  As punishment, Ramthun was denied legislative aides until Feb. 20 when legislative aide Erin Yeager was assigned to his office “20 hours a week to take care of 66,000 constituents.”

  Ramthun in February announced he would challenge “establishment” Republicans Kevin Nicholson and Rebecca Kleefisch for the party’s nod in the GOP August primary to take on incumbent Democrat Tony Evers in November’s gubernatorial race.

  There is “unfinished business” in examining issues related to the 2020 presidential election and not investigating it further is “an assault on our Constitution and it’s a national security issue,” he said in announcing his candidacy.

  Decertifying the 2020 election will be a key component of his campaign, Ramthun promised.

  “I want everything to be revisited and reviewed fully and forensic because if we’re not going to get closure in 2020 and justice, we’re going to need to continue to pursue that in every election until we get it right,” he said. “I won’t stop until we have justice so I’ll keep poking. I’m all in.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 22:30

• China Warns West's "Outrageous" Sanctions Are Forcing Nuclear-Armed Russia "Into A Corner"
  China Warns West’s “Outrageous” Sanctions Are Forcing Nuclear-Armed Russia “Into A Corner”

  On Saturday a high-ranking Chinese government official lashed out at the West’s sanctions regimen against Russia in the wake of the Ukraine invasion, blasting the far-reaching punitive measures which have also served to severely isolate Moscow as increasingly “outrageous”. 

  “The sanctions against Russia are getting more and more outrageous,” Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng told a security forum in Beijing, according to Reuters.

  

  Strongly suggesting the sanctions would only serve to harm common Russian citizens, he described that the West depriving the people of their overseas assets were ultimately “for no reason”. 

  “History has proven time and again that sanctions cannot solve problems. Sanctions will only harm ordinary people, impact the economic and financial system… and worsen the global economy.”

  He further hinted that US and EU sanctions would in the end only escalate the situation, as Reuters continues, he…

  acknowledged Moscow’s point of view on NATO, saying the alliance should not further expand eastwards, forcing a nuclear power like Russia “into a corner”.

  The unusually blunt Chinese reaction (given Beijing has appeared somewhat reluctant to weigh in too forcefully behind either side thus far, other than calling out NATO expansion) to the ratcheting Ukraine crisis comes the same day that Ukrainian President Zelensky’s office publicly urged Beijing to come out and condemn “Russian barbarism” in a public statement. 

  In a Twitter statement presidential aide Mikhailo Podolyak asserted “China can be the global security system’s important element if it makes a right decision to support the civilized countries’ coalition and condemn Russian barbarism.”

  🇨🇳 can be the global security system’s important element if it makes a right decision to support the civilized countries’ coalition & condemn 🇷🇺 barbarism. It is a chance to sit at the table as equals. The West must explain to Beijing how $1.6 trillion differs from $150 billion

  — Михайло Подоляк (@Podolyak_M) March 19, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  It seems the implication behind the Chinese vice foreign minister’s fresh remarks might also be that if Russia is feeling pushed into a corner …so is Beijing – given that the past week has seen the Biden administration bring China’s growing cooperation with Russian into its crosshairs, with Biden warning his counterpart Xi Jinping in a Friday call that serious “consequences” follow if Beijing is found to be supplying Moscow with military equipment to aid its operations in Ukraine. 

  As on Chinese state TV pundit has put it…

  Can you help me fight your friend so that I can concentrate on fighting you later?

  — CGTN LIU Xin 刘欣 (@LiuXininBeijing) March 19, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Jake Sullivan has also this week warned against any possible Chinese help given to Russia for sanctions evasion. China has notably failed thus far to even use the words “invasion”, instead opting for vaguer words like “crisis” – even as the assault on Ukraine enters its fourth week.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 22:00

• 19th Anniversary Of Iraq Invasion: US Says Troops Will Be There For More Years To Come
  19th Anniversary Of Iraq Invasion: US Says Troops Will Be There For More Years To Come

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  On the eve of the 19th anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq, the head of Central Command told Military Times that the US troop presence in the country will likely continue for years to come.

  The US invasion of Iraq started with airstrikes on March 19, 2003, and ground troops entered the country the following day. The initial “shock and awe” phase of the invasion lasted about six weeks and killed tens of thousands. According to the Iraq Body Count, about 7,400 Iraqi civilians were killed in this period.

  

  All US troops withdrew from Iraq in 2011 but returned to the country in 2014 to fight ISIS, a group that wouldn’t exist if not for the invasion and US intervention in Syria. Today, the US currently has about 2,500 troops in Iraq. At the end of 2021, the US formally changed its presence in Iraq from a combat role to an advisory one, but no troops were withdrawn.

  “As we look into the future, any force level adjustment in Iraq is going to be made as a result of consultations with the government of Iraq,” CENTCOM chief Gen. Frank McKenzie said. “And we just finished a strategic dialogue a few months ago — we believe that will continue.”

  While the US troops are in Iraq training the current government to fight ISIS, there are many factions in the country opposed to the US presence, including Iraq’s Shia militias. Most of the militias fall under the umbrella of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), a group that was formed in 2014 to fight ISIS.

  In January 2020, the US killed PMF leader Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis alongside Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani with a drone strike in Baghdad. The assassinations enraged many in Iraq, and the country’s parliament voted to expel the US forces, but they stayed, and rocket attacks on US bases increased.

  Formally ending the combat mission was an attempt to placate those opposed to the US presence. But at the beginning of 2022, when it became apparent the US wasn’t leaving, attacks on bases housing US troops spiked again, highlighting the danger of the continued presence.

  The Economist has finally found a war it doesn’t like. pic.twitter.com/Lmh3sQAycS

  — Alan MacLeod (@AlanRMacLeod) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  One reason the US doesn’t want to leave Iraq is that its bases in the country support the US occupation of eastern Syria. The US currently has about 900 troops in Syria where it backs the Kurdish-led SDF. On paper, the US presence is about fighting ISIS, but it is also part of Washington’s broader campaign against Damascus.

  The US maintains crippling sanctions on Syria that aim to prevent the country from rebuilding. The US also occupies the area where most of the country’s oil fields are, keeping the vital resource out of the hands of Damascus. Last year, Biden administration officials said that they had no plans to end the troop presence in Syria.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 21:30

• Where Governments Have The Tightest Grip On The Internet
  Where Governments Have The Tightest Grip On The Internet

  Perhaps not entirely surprising to many, according to the 2021 Freedom House Freedom on the Net index, China was the country with the most controlled internet out of 70 nations assessed, scoring only 10 out of 100 possible index points.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, some of the other least free countries on the internet are restrictive regimes like Iran, Myanmar and Cuba.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Vietnam in rank 5 has also been taking cues from its close ally China, which asserts internet control via the so-called Great Firewall, a collection of gateways that controls all internet traffic going in and out of the country, enabling the Chinese government to filter it. Iran and North Korea also employ this method.

  The idea has become popular among Southeast Asian nations, with Cambodia and Thailand recently mulling the introduction of this draconian measure of internet control.

  Tight internet controls are also common in the Middle East and North Africa, with the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Bahrain raking highly.

  Russia came in a shared 11th place out of the 70 countries in the ranking. The report states that the blocking of content and platforms, disinformation campaigns, cyber attacks and persecution of users as well as a tightening of some cyber laws were happening in the country.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 21:00

• Five Critical Factors Why Prices Will Stay High For Years
  Five Critical Factors Why Prices Will Stay High For Years

  Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

  At approximately 9am local time on February 21, 1972, a Boeing 707 airplane dubbed Spirit of ‘76 landed in Shanghai’s Hongqiao airport.

  The airplane’s main door opened, and out walked US President Richard Nixon.

  The trip shocked the world. There had been no formal communication or diplomatic ties between the US and China for 25 years. And Nixon’s voyage not only normalized relations between the two countries, but it kickstarted decades of worldwide economic growth.

  Back then, the US was the richest and most powerful economy in the world. But as a consequence of that prosperity, the US was also a very expensive place to produce.

  US companies were on the lookout for inexpensive, foreign manufacturing hubs where they could cheaply produce their products and sell them back to the US market.

  China became that cheap manufacturing hub.

  Eventually China was producing just about everything from T-shirts to antibiotics. And because the cost of production was so low in China, consumers around the world benefited.

  Combined with cheap oil, a functioning global supply chain, and relative peace and stability, cheap Chinese production helped keep prices low and constrain inflation for decades.

  But these trends are rapidly coming to an end.

  For starters, China is now an economic superpower; many of its largest cities, in fact, have a per-capita GDP that exceeds the United States and Western Europe.

  Want to ensure you and your loved ones can survive and thrive, no matter what happens next? Download our FREE Ultimate Plan B Guide now to discover fully actionable strategies you can start putting in place right now…

  Wages have increased dramatically in China over the years because of this increase in prosperity, which means that it’s no longer cheap to manufacture most lower-end products there.

  A lot of manufacturing has already shifted to cheaper places like Vietnam, Bangladesh, etc. But even those countries are quickly becoming more expensive places to produce. And they don’t have nearly enough capacity to keep up with global manufacturing demand.

  Some large companies are starting to bring their manufacturing back home. This is becoming more popular now as global stability wanes.

  Plus businesses learned during the COVID-19 lockdowns, and the resulting global supply chain dysfunction, that manufacturing at home is more reliable.

  That may be true. But manufacturing in a ‘rich’ country is also a LOT more expensive.

  So, regardless of whether a business chooses to manufacture at home or abroad, they’re almost guaranteed to suffer higher production costs. And that means consumers will be paying more.

  This trend is a massive reversal from decades of cheap foreign production that kept prices low. But it only scratches the surface of why inflation will likely persist for years to come.

  (British economist Charles Goodhart, a former central bank official, describes this phenomenon in his new book The Great Demographic Reversal. It’s definitely worth reading to understand this trend.)

  

  Historic shifts in the labor market will also be a major contributor to inflation.

  For example, there have never been more retirees in the history of the world than there are right now. And their numbers are growing.

  According to Federal Reserve data, an additional 1.5 million people in the United States retired early during the first year of the pandemic. There will likely be more to come.

  Plus US Labor Department statistics show that millions of other individuals, including young people, abandoned the idea of working altogether because of the pandemic.

  Traditionally there’s a steady balance between the number of jobs in the economy, and the number of workers in the labor force. Sometimes there are shocks, like during the Great Recession in 2008, when millions of jobs vanished, practically overnight.

  Now the converse has taken place: millions of workers have vanished, practically overnight.

  The end result is that there are 11.3 million unfilled jobs in the United States– a record high– because so many people simply quit the labor force.

  Of course, another key labor trend is that younger workers aren’t interested in most traditional jobs.

  Countless teenagers aspire to be Instagram starlets, or to live-steam themselves playing video games for a living. They have little interest in construction, transportation, or manufacturing jobs.

  So, in summary, we have former ‘low cost’ manufacturing hubs becoming a lot more expensive. Plus a constrained work force back home that limits production and pushes costs higher.

  This is all highly inflationary.

  And there’s absolutely nothing the government or central bank can do about it. Gen Z 20-somethings aren’t going to suddenly decide to start working traditional jobs just because the Federal Reserve raises interest rates by 0.25%.

  Most likely the politicians will make it much worse– which is another key factor in future inflation.

  Nancy Pelosi stated on Friday that inflation was solely Vladimir Putin’s fault and insisted that their multi-trillion dollar deficit spending is “reducing the national debt” and “not adding to inflation.”

  The President, meanwhile, has blamed inflation on “greed”, while the Federal Reserve insists that higher prices are a result of supply chain dysfunction.

  Not one of these institutions– Congress, the White House, or the Fed– seems capable of looking at their own actions.

  The Fed refuses to consider that inflation is due to their dizzying expansion of the US money supply– the largest since 1943.

  Congress refuses to consider that inflation is due to their insane deficit spending– the largest ever in US history.

  And the White House refuses to consider that inflation is due to its fetish for anti-competitive regulations and constant attacks on capitalism.

  So, when the three key institutions charged with keeping inflation in check refuse to understand why there’s a problem, it’s hard to imagine they’re going to fix it.

  There are plenty of other lingering inflation factors as well; geopolitical conflict is obviously inflationary. COVID-19 continues to be very inflationary. Environmental fanaticism is inflationary.

  And just like the challenge of increased manufacturing costs, and labor market demographic trends, these issues cannot be magically fixed by politicians or central bankers.

  In essence, policymakers are completely powerless to do anything about inflation.

  There’s an irrational hope that inflation will quickly reverse, and prices will return to 2019 levels– just as soon as Putin leaves Ukraine… and the global supply chain dysfunction works itself out.

  But this is wishful thinking.

  First, both of those resolutions could take a very long time.

  But more importantly, the trends I outlined are much larger and could keep prices elevated for years to come.

  So, if your “Plan A” is depending on the government for prosperity and price stability, it’s time to take a hard look at your Plan B.

  *  *  *

  Alternative residency or citizenship generally forms the backbone of any robust Plan B. But there are WAY more things to consider. That’s why we created our 31-page Ultimate Plan B report to help you get to grips with this topic, and you can download the full, unabridged report here – 100% FREE.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 20:30

• Flashback: World Superpowers Pledged To Avoid Nuclear War Less Than 90 Days Ago
  Flashback: World Superpowers Pledged To Avoid Nuclear War Less Than 90 Days Ago

  As Russia began amassing troops near the Ukrainian border, five of the world’s nuclear powers pledged not to use nukes in the event of a global war.

  

  “We believe strongly that the further spread of such weapons must be prevented,” reads a ‘rare’ joint statement by China, France, Russia, the UK and US, seemingly out of left field.

  “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” the statement continues – echoing a 1985 joint statement from former US President Ronald Reagan and former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev following a summit in Geneva amid the cold war.

  

  “Nuclear weapons — for as long as they continue to exist — should serve defensive purposes, deter aggression, and prevent war.”

  The curiously-timed statement by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (P5) commits that nations will “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control,” according to DW.

  The joint pledge was issued ahead of what was to be the latest review of the Treaty of the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

  The tenth review session which was scheduled to take place at UN headquarters in New York this month, was postponed to later this year.

  China’s Xinhau media agency quoted Foreign Minister Ma Zhauxu as saying that the joint agreement “will help increase mutual trust and replace competition among major powers with coordination and cooperation.”

  Russia’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement: “We hope that in the current difficult conditions of international security, the approval of such a political statement will help reduce the level of international tensions.” -DW

  The Non-Proliferation Treaty was created in the 1970s to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and related technology, with the ultimate goal of complete nuclear disarmament – while allowing for the peaceful use of nuclear power.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 20:00

• Snowden Discusses Bitcoin's Lack Of Privacy
  Snowden Discusses Bitcoin’s Lack Of Privacy

  Authored by Shawn Amick via Bitcoin Magazine,

  • “Bitcoin is not an anonymous ledger,” said Edward Snowden.

  • “You get chain analysis people and whatnot who are doing fairly devious things with it,” he added, discussing companies focused on on-chain analysis.

  • Speaking on the privacy of Bitcoin, Snowden stated that “it’s really just private to the public, but it’s public to the prominent, shall we say.”

  Edward Snowden, whistle-blower and president of the Freedom of the Press Foundation – a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to protecting journalists – recently took an interview to discuss Bitcoin, other cryptocurrencies, privacy, and nation-state influence.

  “Bitcoin is not an anonymous ledger, it is a truly public ledger, and those things are always out there,” Snowden explained as he recounted his experience with Wikileaks, in which there was a seemingly insurmountable amount of pressure from the U.S government to shut the organization and his story down.

  Bitcoin allowed “time and distance,” as Snowden said, which ultimately allowed him to communicate with and meet the necessary journalists that would eventually lead to his escape to Russia, as well as the release of his leak.

  

  Time and distance is an important distinction that is separate from the idea of safety. Possessing safety would assume Bitcoin was capable of hiding identity and traceability perpetually, however, Snowden knew this was not the case, nor was he taking extensive steps to be anonymous, as he explains in the interview.

  The mark against anonymity is not necessarily a critique, but rather a statement of fact when proper steps toward anonymity are not taken. Companies have an entire business model built on tracking Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency transactions, through which Bitcoin Magazine has reported stories on the traceability of transactions for donation causes.

  Snowden explored chain analysis companies saying, “You get chain analysis people and whatnot who are doing fairly devious things with it,” including objectives like “trying to get a financial edge out of the on-chain analysis.”

  Snowden addressed the idea of privacy as it relates to one’s capacity to discern or obtain information when compared to public capability of discerning or obtaining that exact same information.

  “When you think about Bitcoin having a public ledger, well, once a dollar enters the banking system, there is a private ledger that is available to the people who are performing financial surveillance,” he explains.

  “So it’s really just private to the public, but it’s public to the prominent, shall we say.”

  When asked why cryptocurrency and financial privacy are important for whistle-blowers, Snowden responded that “there’s this question we all have to ask ourselves: What is the role of the government in a free and open society?”

  Snowden went on to explain that it is important to examine the roles nation-states actually play in our lives, as it relates to the philosophical question of what role they should be playing. Snowden then brings to bear the consideration that an open and free society, or one that wishes to be so, must also do everything in its power to achieve its idyllic state.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 19:30

• NOAA Warns US Megadrought Will Persist; May Impact Food Supply Chains 
  NOAA Warns US Megadrought Will Persist; May Impact Food Supply Chains 

  Abnormally dry to exceptional drought conditions are expected to persist across 60% of the continental U.S. as spring in the Northern Hemisphere begins. Forecasters expect little to no rain for certain parts of the western U.S. through June.

  From April to June, above-average temperatures are expected from Southwest to the East Coast and north through the Midwest, according to a new outlook published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 

  NOAA’s map shows a greater than 50% chance of drought persistence for nearly 60% of the continental U.S. 

  

  “Severe to exceptional drought has persisted in some areas of the West since the summer of 2020, and drought has expanded to the southern Plains and Lower Mississippi Valley,” said Jon Gottschalck, chief, Operational Prediction Branch, NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center.

   “With nearly 60% of the continental U.S. experiencing minor to exceptional drought conditions, this is the largest drought coverage we’ve seen in the U.S. since 2013,” Gottschalck said. 

  The outlook also noted more than 50% of the U.S. will experience above-average temperatures this spring, with the greatest chances in the Southern Rockies and Southern Plains. 

  According to the U.S. Drought Monitor, at least 90% of nine western states are plagued with dry conditions, including all of California, Nevada, and Utah, and 99% of New Mexico. 

  

  NOAA’s latest forecast doesn’t bode well for the western U.S. farm industry as it could very well suggest the multiyear mega-drought (one of the worst in 1,200 years) could begin to impact the U.S. food supply and comes at a very inopportune time as the Russian invasion of Ukraine has choked the world of natural resources. 

  The U.S. and world are careening towards a food crisis. Perhaps it’s time to plant a garden and become independent as national and global food supply chains may begin to breakdown. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 19:00

• The Evolution Of Credit & The Growing Fiat Money Crisis
  The Evolution Of Credit & The Growing Fiat Money Crisis

  Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

  After fifty-one years from the end of the Bretton Woods Agreement, the system of fiat currencies appears to be moving towards a crisis point for the US dollar as the international currency. The battle over global energy, commodity, and grain supplies is the continuation of an intensifying financial war between the dollar and the renminbi and rouble.

  It is becoming clear that the scale of an emerging industrial revolution in Asia is in stark contrast with Western decline, a population ratio of 87 to 13. The dollar’s role as the sole reserve currency is not suited for this reality.

  Commentators speculate that the current system’s failings require a global reset. They think in terms of it being organised by governments, when the governments’ global currency system is failing. Beholden to Keynesian macroeconomics, the common understanding of money and credit is lacking as well.

  This article puts money, currency, and credit, and their relationships in context. It points out that the credit in an economy is far greater than officially recorded by money supply figures and it explains how relatively small amounts of gold coin can stabilise an entire credit system.

  It is the only lasting solution to the growing fiat money crisis, and it is within the power of at least some central banks to implement gold coin standards by mobilising their reserves.

  

  Evolution or revolution?

  There are big changes afoot in the world’s financial and currency system. Fiat currencies have been completely detached from gold for fifty-one years from the ending of the Bretton Woods Agreement and since then they have been loosely tied to the King Rat of currencies, the dollar. Measured by money, which is and always has been only gold, King Rat has lost over 98% of its relative purchasing power in that time. From the Nixon Shock, when the Bretton Woods agreement was suspended temporarily, US Government debt has increased from $413 bn to about $30 trillion — that’s a multiple of 73 times. And given the US Government’s mandated and other commitments, it shows no signs of stabilising.

  This extraordinary debasement has so far been relatively orderly because the rest of the world has accepted the dollar’s hegemonic status. Triffin’s dilemma has allowed the US to run economically destructive policies without undermining the currency catastrophically. Naturally, that has led to the US Government’s complacent belief that not only will the dollar endure, but it can continue to be used for America’s own strategic benefits. But the emergence of rival superpowers in Asia has begun to challenge this status, and the consequence has been a financial cold war, a geopolitical jostling for position, particularly between the dollar and China’s renminbi, which has increased its influence in global financial affairs since the Lehman crisis in 2008.

  Wars are only understood by the public when they are physical in form. The financial and credit machinations between currency-issuing power blocs passes it by. But as with all wars, there ends up a winner and a loser. And since the global commodity powerhouse that is Russia got involved in recent weeks, America has continued its policy of using its currency status to penalise the Russians as if it was punishing a minor state for questioning its hegemonic status. The consequence is the financial cold war has become very hot and is now a commodity battle as well.

  Bringing commodities into the conflict is ripe with unintended consequences. Depending how the Russians respond to US-led sanctions, which they have yet to do, matters could escalate. In the West we have comforted ourselves with the belief that the Russian economy is on its uppers and Putin will have to either quickly yield to sanctions pressures, or face ejection by his own people in a coup. But that is a one-sided view. Even if it has a grain of truth, it ignores the consequences of Putin’s military failures on the ground in Ukraine so far, and his likely desperation to hit back with the one non-nuclear weapon at his disposal: Russia’s commodity exports.

  He may take the view that the West is damaging itself and little or no further action is required. And surely, the fact that China has stockpiled most of the world’s grain resources gives Russia added power as a marginal supplier. Putin can afford to not restrict food and fertiliser exports, blaming on American policy the starvation that will almost certainly be suffered by all non-combatant nations. He could cripple the West’s technology industries by banning or restricting exports of rare metals which are of little concern to headline writers in the popular press. He might exploit the one big loophole left in the sanctions regime by supplying China with whatever raw materials and energy it needs at discounted prices. And China could compound the problem for the West by restricting its exports of strategic commodities claiming they are needed for its own manufacturing requirements.

  While everyone focuses on what is seen, it is what is not seen that is ignored. Commodities are the visible manifestation of a trade war, while payments for them are not. Yet it is the flow of credit on the payment side where the battle for hegemonic status is fought. The Americans and their epigones in Europe have tried to shut down payments for Russian trade through the supposedly independent SWIFT system. And even the Bank for International Settlements, which by dealing with both Nazi Germany and the Allies retained its neutrality in the Second World War, is siding with the West today.

  But step back for a moment to look at how broadly based the West’s position is in a global context, because that will be a factor in whether the dollar’s hegemony will survive this conflict. We see America, the EU, Japan, the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand on one side. In population terms that’s roughly 335, 447, 120, 65, 38, 26 and 5 million people respectively, totalling 1,036 million, only 13% of the world population. This point was made meaningfully by the Saudis who now want to talk with Putin rather than Biden. As long ago as 2014, this writer was informed by a director of a major Swiss refinery that Arab customers were sending LBMA 400-ounce bars for recasting into Chinese four-nine one kilo bars. The real money saw this coming at least eight years ago.

  Even if the US’s external policies do not end up undermining the dollar’s global status, it is becoming clear that the King Rat of currencies is under an existential threat. And the Fed, which is responsible for domestic monetary policies, in conjunction with the Biden administration is undermining it from the inside as well by trying to manage a failing US economy by accelerating its debasement.

  A betting man would therefore be unlikely to put money on a favourable dollar outcome. Whether the dollar suffers a crisis or merely an accelerated decline, just as Nixon changed the world’s monetary order in 1971 it will change again. That the current situation is unsatisfactory is widely recognised by multiple commentators, even in America, calling for a financial and currency reset. And it is assumpted that the US Government and its central bank should come up with a plan.

  There are two major problems with the notion that somehow the deck chair attendant can save the ship from sinking by rearranging the sun loungers.

  • The first error is insisting that money is the preserve of only the state and is not to be decided by those who use it. It was the underlying fallacy of Georg Knapp’s State Theory of Money published in 1905. That ended with Germany printing money to arm itself in the hope that it would win: it didn’t and Germany ended up destroying its papiermark.

  • The second error is that almost no one understands money itself, as evidenced by the whole financial establishment, from the governments down to junior fund managers, thinking that their currencies are money. Commentators calling for a reset are themselves in the dark.

  Events will deal with the fallacies behind the State Theory of Money and whether it will turn out to be an evolution or revolution. But at least we can have a stab at explaining what money is for a modern audience, so that the requirements and conditions of a new currency system to succeed can be better understood.

  What is money for?

  The pre-Keynesian classical economic explanation of money’s role was set out in Say’s Law, otherwise known as the law of markets. Jean-Baptiste Say was a French economist, who in his Treatise on Political Economy published in 1803 wrote that,

  “A product is no sooner created than it, from that instant, affords a market for other products to the full extent of its own value.”

  And

  “Each of us can only purchase the productions of others with his own productions — and so the value we can buy is equal to the value we can produce. The more men can produce the more they will purchase.”

  Money or credit is the post-barter link between production and consumption facilitating the exchange between the two. What to produce and what is needed in exchange is a matter for those involved in individual transactions. And the medium of exchange used is a decision for each of the parties. They will tend to use a medium which is convenient and widely accepted by others.

  Say’s Law was incorrectly redefined and trashed by Keynes to “…that the aggregate demand price of output as a whole is equal to the aggregate supply price for all volumes of output is equivalent to the proposition that there is no obstacle to full employment.” This has subsequently been shortened to “supply creates its own demand”. Keynes’s elision of the truth was leading to (or was it to justify?) his erroneous invention of mathematical macroeconomics. It is simply untrue.

  All Say was pointing out is we divide our labour as the most efficient means of production for driving improvements in the human condition. That cannot be argued with, even by blinkered Keynesians. Money, or more correctly credit has two roles in this division of labour. The first is as the medium for investment in production, because things must be made before they can be sold and there are expenses in the form of presale payments that must be made. And the second is to act as the commonly accepted intermediary between the sale of products to their buyers. Instead of opining that supply creates its own demand, if we say instead that people make things so they can buy the products and services they don’t make for themselves, it is so obviously true that Keynes and his self-serving theories don’t have a leg to stand on. And importantly, full employment has nothing to do with it.

  The money involved is always credit. Even the act of lending gold coins to an entrepreneur to make something is credit because it is to be repaid. If gold coins are the payment medium between production and consumption, they are the temporary storage of production before it is spent. In this very narrow sense, they represent the credit of production which will be spent. The principal quality of gold, which when it is at rest is undeniably money, is that it has no counterparty risk and is to be parted with last.

  The point is that money in circulation is a subsection of wider credit and is the very narrowest of definitions of circulating media. But even under a gold standard, it is hardly ever used in transactions and rarely circulates. This is partly due to a Gresham’s Law effect, where it is only exchanged for inferior forms of credit as a last resort, and partly because it is less convenient than transferring banknotes or making book entries across bank ledgers. By far the most common forms of circulating media are credit in the form of banknotes issued by a central bank, and transferable credit owed by banks to depositors.

  But in our estimate of a practical replacement of the current fiat currency-based system, we must also acknowledge that credit is far broader than that recorded as circulating by means of the banking system. We are increasingly aware of the term, “shadow banks” most of which are pass-through channels of credit rather than credit creators. But doubtless, there is expanded credit in circulation originating from shadow banks, the equivalent of officially recorded bank credit, which is not captured in the money supply statistics. But there are also wider forms of credit in any economy.

  Defining credit

  To further our understanding of credit, we must define the fundamental concept of credit:

  Credit is anything which is of no direct use, but which is taken in exchange for something else, in the belief or confidence that we have the right to exchange it away again.

  It is the right to a future payment, not necessarily in money or currency. It is not the transfer of something, but it is a right to a future payment. Consequently, the most common form of credit is an agreement between two parties which has nothing to do with bank credit per se.

  Bank credit is merely the most obvious and recorded subset of the entire quantity of credit in an economy. And the whole world of derivatives, futures, forwards, and options, are also credit for an action in time, additional to bank credit. Global M3 money supply is said to be $40 trillion equivalent, about 3% of investments, derivatives, and cryptocurrencies, all of which are forms of credit: rights and promises to future payments in credit or currency. And this is in addition to private credit agreements between individuals and other individuals, and between businesses and individuals, which are extremely common.

  The commonly stated position among sound money advocates of the Austrian school is that bank credit should be replaced by custodial deposit-taking banks and separate arrangers of finance. But given the broad definition of credit in the real world, eliminating bank credit appears untenable when individuals are free to offer multiple amounts of credit and the vast bulk of credit creation is outside the banking system.

  Consider the case of a bookie accepting wagers for a horse race. Ahead of the event, he takes on obligations many times the capital in his business, in return for which he is paid in banknotes or drawings on bank credit by his betting customers. When the race is over, he keeps the losers’ stakes and is liable for payments to holders of the winning bets. He has debts to the winners which are only extinguished when the winners collect. While there are differences in procedures and of the risks involved, in principal there is little difference between a bookie’s business and that of a commercial bank; they are both dealers in credit. Arguably, the bookie has the sounder business model.

  The restriction imposed on an individual providing credit to others is his potential liability if it is called upon. The unfairness in the current system is not that bank credit is permitted, but that is permitted with limited liability. Surely, the solution is to ensure that all providers of credit are responsible for the risks involved. Licenced banks and their shareholders should face unlimited liability. It is even conceivable that listed capital in an overleveraged bank might trade at negative values if shareholders face a risk of unlimited calls on their wealth. That should promote responsibility in bank lending. It will not eliminate the cycle of bank credit expansion and contraction, but it will certainly lessen its disruptive impact.

  Variations in the purchasing power of a medium of exchange

  A proper consideration of credit, the all-embracing term for mediums of exchange to include future promises, shows that government statistics for money supply are a diminishingly small part of overall credit in an economy. We must take this fact into account when considering changes in the official quantity of money on the purchasing power of units of the medium of exchange (that is credit in the form of circulating banknotes and commercial bank credit — M1, M2, M3 etc.).

  A downturn in economic activity must be considered in the broader sense. If, for example, I say to my neighbour that if he arranges it, I will cover half the cost of fencing the boundary between our properties, I have offered him credit upon which he can proceed to contract a fencing supplier and installer. However, if in the interim my circumstances have changed and I cannot deliver on my promise, the credit agreement with my neighbour is withdrawn and the fence might not be installed.

  A father might promise his son an allowance while he attends university. That is a credit agreement with periodic drawdowns lasting the course. Later, the father might promise help in buying a property for his son to live in. These are promises, whose values are particular and precarious. And they will be valid only so long as they can be afforded. If there is a general change in economic conditions for the worse, it is almost certainly driven more by the withdrawal of unrecorded credit agreements between individuals and small businesses such as corner shops, and not directly due to bank credit contraction.

  An appreciation of these facts and of changes in human behaviour which cannot be recorded statistically explains much about the lack of correlation between measures of credit (i.e., broad money supply) and prices. The equation of exchange (MV=PQ) does not even capture a decent fraction of the relationship between the quantity of credit in an economy and prices. Our understanding of the wider credit scene goes some way to resolving a mystery that has bedevilled monetary economists ever since David Ricardo first proposed the relationship over two centuries ago. In theory, an increase in the quantity of measurable credit (that is currency in the banking system) leads to a proportionate increase in prices. Even allowing for statistical legerdemain, that is patently not true, as Figure 1 illustrates.

  

  Figure 1 shows that over the last sixty years, the broadest measure of US dollar money supply has increased by nearly seventy times, while prices have increased about nine. The equation of exchange explains it by persuading us that each unit of currency circulates less so that the increase in the money quantity somehow leads to less of an effect on prices. This interpretation is consistent with Keynes’s denial of Say’s Law. The Law tells us that we all make profits and/or earn salaries, which in the time-space of a year means we can only spend and save once. That is an unvarying velocity of unity. Instead, the mathematical economists have introduced a variable, V, which simply balances an equation which should not exist.

  That is not to say that credit expansion does not affect the purchasing power of a currency. Logic corroborates it. But an understanding of the true extent of credit in an economy confirms that the sum of currency and recorded bank credit is just a small part of the story – only one eighth as indicated by the divergence between M3 and consumer prices — all else being equal.

  It brings us to the other driving force in the credit/price relationship, which is the public acceptability of the currency. Ludwig von Mises, the Austrian economist, who lived through the Austrian inflation in the post-WW1 years and whose advice the Austrian government was reluctant to accept, observed that variations in public confidence in the currency can have a profound effect on its purchasing power. Famously, Mises described a crack-up boom as evidence that the public had finally abandoned all faith in the government’s currency and disposed of all of it in return for goods, needed or not.

  It leads to the sensible conclusion that irrespective of changes in the circulating quantity, the purchasing power is fully dependent on the public’s faith in the currency. Destroy that, and the currency becomes valueless as a medium of exchange. If confidence is maintained, it follows that the price effects of a currency debasement may be minimised.

  This brings us to gold coin. If the state backs its currency with sufficient gold which the public is free to obtain on demand from the issuer of the currency, then the currency takes on the characteristics of gold as money. We should not need to justify this established and ancient role for gold, or silver for that matter, to the current generations of Keynesians brainwashed into thinking it’s just old hat. Though they rarely admit it, central bankers fully committed to their fiat currencies still retain gold reserves in the knowledge that they are no one’s liability; that is to say, true money while their currencies are simply credit.

  Given what we now know about the extent of credit beyond the banking system and the role of public confidence in the currency when it is a credible gold substitute, we can see why a moderate expansion of the currency need not undermine its purchasing power proportionately. While the cycle of bank credit expansion and contraction leads to the boom-and-bust conditions described by Von Mises and Hayek in their Austrian business cycle theory, the effects on prices under a gold standard do not appear to have been enough to destabilise a currency’s purchasing power. Figure 2 illustrates the point.

  

  Admittedly there are several factors at work. While the increase in the quantity of currency in circulation was generally restricted by the gold coin standard, the bank credit cycle of expansion and contraction led to periodic bank failures. Then as now, the quantity of bank credit relative to bank notes was eight or ten times, and so long as the note-issuing bank remained at arm’s length from the tribulations of commercial bank credit the overall price effects were contained.

  Britain abandoned the gold standard in 1914, and just as the abandonment of the silver standard in the 1790s led to an increase in the general price level, a dramatic increase occurred during the First World War. This was due to deficit spending by the state driving up material costs at a time when imported factors of supply were limited by the destruction of merchant shipping.

  The end of the war restored the supply/demand balance and saw a reduction in military spending. Prices fell and then stabilised. A gold bullion standard at the pre-war rate of exchange was re-established in 1925, only to be abandoned in 1931. The Second World War and subsequent lack of any anchor to the currency led to an inexorable rise in prices before America abandoned the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1971. And since then, the sterling price of gold has risen even further from £14.58 when the Agreement ceased to £1,470 today. Measured in true money the currency has lost over 99% of its purchasing power over the last fifty-one years.

  Both logic and the empirical evidence point to the same conclusion: price stability can only be achieved under a working gold coin standard, whereby ordinary people can, should they so wish, exchange banknotes for coin on demand. Despite making up most of the circulating medium, fluctuations in bank credit then have less of an effect on prices, for the reasons stated above.

  Can cryptocurrencies replace gold?

  The reason gold is relatively stable in purchasing power terms is that through history, above ground stocks have expanded at similar rates to population growth. A very gradual increase in gold’s purchasing power comes from manufacturing, technological, and competitive production factors. In other words, the price stability clearly demonstrated in Figure 2 above between 1820—1914 is evolutionary.

  Whether cryptocurrencies or central bank digital currencies might have a stabilising role for prices in future is highly contentious. We can readily dismiss yet another version of state-issued currencies as being a worse form of credit than failing fiat currencies. The aim behind them is communistic, to enable the state to allocate credit resources wherever and to whomsoever its political class may desire. It is with the intention of reducing the vagaries of human action on the state’s intended outcome. Just as every replacement currency for failing fiat in the past has failed, if CBDCs are introduced they will fail as well. It is unnecessary to comment further.

  Cryptocurrencies, particularly bitcoin, are seen by a small minority of enthusiasts as the money of the future, being outside the state’s printing presses. But as observed above, in reality, sound money is augmented by fluctuating quantities of credit in far larger quantities. So long as sound money provides price stability, circulating credit inherits those characteristics.

  Bitcoin, the leading claimant to being future money, lacks both world-wide acceptance and the flexibility required for long-term stability and therefore economic calculation. Imagine an entrepreneur planning to invest in production, a project which from the drawing-board to final sales takes several years. His nineteenth century forebears had a reasonable idea of final prices, so could calculate costs, sales values, and therefore the interest cost of the capital deployed over the whole project to leave him with a profit. No such certainty exists with bitcoin because final prices cannot be assumed. Furthermore, central banks do not have bitcoin as part of their reserves, and by embarking on plans for their own CBDCs have signalled that they will not have anything to do with it. But in most cases central banks or their government treasury ministries possess gold bullion, which as a last resort they can deploy to stabilise a failing currency.

  While there will undoubtedly be future benefits from their underlying technologies, it is impossible to see how cryptocurrencies can have a practical role in backing wider credit.

  Conclusion

  The evolution of fiat dollars which dates from the abandonment of the Bretton Woods Agreement is coming to an inevitable conclusion: fiat currencies come and go and only gold goes on forever. Whoever wins the financial battle now raging with increasing intensity over commodity prices, the US dollar as the King Rat of fiat currencies is losing its assumed superiority over the renminbi, and possibly the rouble if the Russians can stabilise it. The old-world population backing the dollar is heavily outnumbered by the newly industrialising Eurasia as well as its commodity and raw material suppliers in Africa and South America.

  Not mentioned in this article is the Federal Reserve Board’s commitment to sacrifice the dollar to support financial values — that ground has been well covered in earlier Goldmoney articles. But it is a repetition of John Law’s policies in 1720 France, now underway to stop the global financial bubble from imploding. And just as the Mississippi Company continued after 1720 when the French livre collapsed entirely that year, we see the same dynamics in play for the entire fiat currency system today.

  John Law’s policies of credit stimulation for the French economy were remarkably like those of modern Keynesians. This time, the expansion of money supply on a global basis has been on an unprecedented scale, encouraged by the subdued effect on prices measured by government-compiled consumer price indices. Undoubtedly, much of the lack of price inflation is down to statistical method, but from Figure 1 we have seen that over the last sixty years the quantity of currency and credit captured by US dollar M3 has grown about seven and a half times more rapidly than prices. We have concluded that this disparity is partly due to not all credit in the economy being captured in the monetary statistics.

  Understanding the relationship between money which is only physical gold coin, currency which is bank notes and credit which includes bank credit, shadow bank credit, derivatives, and personal guarantees, is vital to understanding what is required to replace the fiat-currency system. It also explains why a relatively small base of exchangeable gold coin in relation to the overall credit in an economy is sufficient to guarantee price stability.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 18:30

• Interest In NFTs Has Plummeted
  Interest In NFTs Has Plummeted

  While many of us have been forced to at least try to understand what an NFT is over the last year or so, the latest figures from Google Trends suggest that this research has not led to a sustained interest in the topic.

  For those that haven’t as yet attempted to get to grips with the phenomenon, here’s Wikipedia to the rescue:

  “A non-fungible token (NFT) is a non-interchangeable unit of data stored on a blockchain, a form of digital ledger, that can be sold and traded. Types of NFT data units may be associated with digital files such as photos, videos, and audio.”

  Still not clear? Then have fun delving down this particular rabbit hole.

  Though, as Visual Capitalist’s Martin Armstrong notes, if the trend shown by Google’s search data continues, that might turn out to be a monumental waste of your time.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  One place where the demise of the NFT is by no means being predicted however, is at LimeWire.

  The popular file-sharing platform from the early 2000’s (largely facilitating illegal download of films and music) announced this week that it will be returning as a “mainstream-ready, digital collectibles marketplace for art and entertainment, initially focusing on music.”

  The service is expected to go live in May.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 18:00

• Teachers' Union Teams Up With Steven Brill's NewsGuard To Flag "Misinformation" For Children
  Teachers’ Union Teams Up With Steven Brill’s NewsGuard To Flag “Misinformation” For Children

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Under the leadership of Randi Weingarten, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) has long been criticized by conservatives for its support of far left policies and support for Democratic candidates. Nevertheless, as a union, it is entitled to be political and most unions favor the Democrats due to their pro-union policies.

  However, the concern over the AFT’s agenda become far greater when it announced that it would team up with NewsGuard to start to flag news sources deemed “misinformation.”

  NewsGuard is co-founded by Steve Brill who has been accused of bias against Republicans and conservatives. Conservative sites have previously tagged NewGuard as “heavily skewed” in favor of the left. The “misinformation” label has been used extensively by liberal media to kill stories like the Hunter Biden laptop stories as unreliable.

  Indeed, Brill is under fire for being one of the voices falsely claiming that the Hunter Biden laptop was likely false Russian disinformation. His company will now put “traffic lights” on information for children on what sources they rely upon.

  

  The ratings of NewsGuard have long been criticized by conservative sites as favoring liberal sites like The Nation (with a 93 percent rating) over more conservative sites like Fox News (at 66 percent).

  The timing of the announcement could not be worse after the New York Times finally recognized that the Hunter Biden laptop story was legitimate and the controversial emails authentic.

  For two years, some of us have been hammered as spreading “Russian disinformation” and false allegations in raising concerns over the raw influence peddling by the Biden family. Steven Brill was one of those voices flagging the story as likely “disinformation.”

  Brill assured viewers on CNBC that this was likely all untrue:

  “My personal opinion is there’s a high likelihood this story is a hoax, maybe even a hoax perpetrated by the Russians again.”

  The media campaign to bury or block the story worked. The Biden family had long been accused of special dealing and influence peddling. The emails were potentially devastating with references to millions from foreign sources, including shady Chinese, Russian, and Ukrainian interests while Joe Biden was Vice President. The media actively participated in shielding the Bidens from the scandal.

  In fairness to Brill, he opposed efforts to block the story and did not support moves like Twitter to bar references to the story before the election. (After Biden was elected, Twitter admitted it was a mistake by Democrats then demanded more censorship). I agree with him entirely that the solution is to allow readers to decide by comparing news sources.

  However, the interview had an interesting element. Brill’s objections to Twitter and FaceBook killing the story was that they are not qualified to make that decision on what, in his words, is likely a Russian “hoax.”

  That is what NewsGuard does in flagging unreliable sources. He is clearly referring to himself as one of those qualified to make that decision. Yet, he was entirely wrong. At the time, many of us were noting that Biden did not deny that this was his laptop, that it was seized by the FBI in an ongoing criminal investigation, and some recipients of the emails had confirmed their authenticity.  Nevertheless, Brill still thought it was all a hoax.

  Weingarten has declared using Brill’s NewsGuard will be a “game changer” in preventing students from being “misled” by news sources. It may well be. It would allow the AFT and school districts to teach students to distrust certain news sources like Fox News, which is given a lower rating by NewsGuard. (For full disclosure, I appear on Fox as a legal analyst).

  Conservative and independent sites continue to bedevil many on the left. The laptop story shows how advocacy journalism is now the norm in many newsrooms. Viewers and readers were told by most media figures, including Brill, that the story was likely Russian propaganda and untrue.

  The unsupported hoax claim (which contradicted readily available authenticating evidence at the time) raises the specter of a type of de facto state media. The problem is that such an echo chamber is only fully successful if there is no alternative source of information. Yet, Fox and New York Post continued to cover the story as did some of us as columnists.

  The most extreme effort was a letter from Democratic members to pressure companies like AT&T to reconsider whether viewers should be allowed to watch Fox News and other networks. It does not matter that Fox News is the most popular news cable station and even has a greater percentage of Democratic viewers than CNN. The members insisted that “not all TV news sources are the same” and called on these companies to protect viewers from “dissemination” of false viewpoints.

  Other members have sought to create algorithmic interventions to steer people away from certain stories or books, including the current NUDGE Act being proposed by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.).

  The AFT is now seeking a much earlier intervention with children by getting Brill’s NewsGuard to rate reliable and unreliable sources of news. Weingarten has declared that, with Brill’s help, children and families will no longer be “drowning in an ocean of online dishonesty.”

  It is unlikely to be reassuring for many that the children instead will be swimming in a pool carefully maintained by the AFT and NewsGuard.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 17:30

• Bill Gross Warns Fed Rate Hikes Will "Crack" US Economy And Housing Market
  Bill Gross Warns Fed Rate Hikes Will “Crack” US Economy And Housing Market

  Bill Gross, the PIMCO founder and longtime “Bond King” of Wall Street, has likely grown accustomed to critical portrayals in the press, following his widely publicized dispute with a Laguna Beach neighbor (Gross published his own account of the aftermath which is definitely worth a read for the entertainment value alone), and after the recent publication of a book called “The Bond King” – which prompted him to pen his own memoirs to counteract what he feared would be a negative portrayal. Now comfortably ensconced in retirement, the PIMCO founder has taken a break from managing his own portfolio (which has recently included winning options bets against GME and AMC) to share his concerns about the Fed’s rate-hike plans with the FT‘s top business editor.

  

  Gross fears that if the Fed follows throuogh with its plans to hike rates by 25 basis points at each successive meeting this year, it will “crack” the US economy and the housing market, sending the US careening into a recession.

  As we shared on Wednesday, the Fed’s median projection as expressed in the latest “dot plot” shows 7 rate hikes in 2022, which would leave the Fed funds rate, the central bank’s benchmark interest rate, at a peak of 2.75%.

  Raising the benchmark rate to this terminal level would cause the US economy to “crack”, Gross said, causing a recession and “breaking” the housing market (which has been caught in a torrid buying frenzy).

  “I suspect you can’t get above 2.5 to 3 per cent before you crack the economy again,” he said. “We’ve just gotten used to lower and lower rates and anything much higher will break the housing market.”

  Gross’s commentary isn’t that far-fetched, considering that the Fed expects it will need to cut rates later in 2024 to accommodate the slowing economy.

  

  before the central bank later starts cutting rates to accommodate an economic slowdown later in 2024.

  Of course, Gross’s commentary stands in stark contrast to that of St. Louis Fed President James Bullard, who has called for the Fed to hike rates by 50bp per meeting to reach the 2.75 percentage point terminal rate before the end of 2023. Otherwise, the central bank would risk “losing credibility”.

  Gross’s commentary is interesting considering that he has railed against low interest rates for years.

  “It destroys the savings function,” he said. “Meme stocks and NFTs [non fungible tokens], all of this nonsense in my mind has developed from the inability to earn a decent return in your 401k” retirement plan.

  After initially taking losses, Gross said that his bets against GME and AMC have yielded some profits.

  In the past 18 months, he has been putting his personal money where his mouth is, by using options to bet against GameStop and AMC, the most prominent meme stocks to have seen their share prices driven up by retail enthusiasts. Although he initially took enough losses that he stopped sleeping and closed some of his positions, he says he has been vindicated by rapid tumbles in both company’s shares. “Maybe I’m an old fart…but in total, I’m up maybe $15mn to $20mn.”

  Gross has also profited from investments in partnerships that in turn have invested in natural gas pipelines.

  Gross has also profited handsomely from a decision to buy partnerships that invest in natural gas pipelines. He freely admits his interest was piqued by their tax structure — dividends are reinvested and not taxed until the holding is sold. Now the position is benefiting from sharply higher energy prices owing to the emergence from the pandemic and the war in Ukraine.

  The scrutiny he has faced in the press has led Gross to reflect on his insecurities and the combative temperament that led to his ouster from PIMCO.

  The process has forced him to recognise his own shortcomings and insecurities. In his last days at Pimco, when he famously feuded with other top executives, “I was too sensitive and that was disruptive,” he said. “It’s probably the best thing that I left. At 72, you do start to lose it, and at 77 you lose it even more.”

  He also said he misses the PIMCO investment committee, which met daily.

  “I missed the Pimco investment committee” which met daily, he said. “This was a company of bond kings and queens. I had some responsibility for hiring and keeping them at the firm. But these people are good.”

  The interview seems to mark the start of a new, more reflective period for Gross. Being nearly 80, Gross joked that living in what he calls “the death zone” has led him to live more “in the moment”.

  Although he remains estranged from the child he had with his second wife, Gross has remarried and he is close to his two older children. “When you get to your late 70s and early 80s, it’s like the death zone,” he said. “You just wait for the prostate cancer. But it also allows you to be more happy in the moment.”

  Although he is now retired (following what was by all accounts a disastrous stint at fund manager Janus) Gross said he still wakes up early (around 0500PT) to spend 5 hours a day at his Bloomberg terminal (he was gifted a lifetime subscription by Michael Bloomberg himself).

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 17:00

• Soaring LNG Demand Creates Traffic Jam At Gulf Of Mexico Ports
  Soaring LNG Demand Creates Traffic Jam At Gulf Of Mexico Ports

  Authored by Charles Kennedy via OilPrice.com,

  • Gulf Coast liquefaction facilities are operating near capacity thanks to strong demand.

  • Europe is rushing to replenish its exhausted gas reserves.

  • Eikon: 27 LNG tankers were either on their way to Gulf Coast export terminals or already there.

  

  Close to a record number of liquefied natural gas tankers are crowding Gulf Coast export terminals as U.S. exports of the superchilled fuels run at record rates.

  Reuters reported that Gulf Coast liquefaction facilities are operating near capacity thanks to strong demand, especially from Europe, which is currently trying to replenish its exhausted gas reserves.

  Citing data from Refinitiv Eikon, Reuters wrote that some 27 LNG tankers were either on their way to Gulf Coast export terminals or already there. As a result, liquefied natural gas exports could reach 6.47 million tons this month, according to Kpler, beating the previous monthly record of 6.3 million tons set in January.

  Europe has morphed into the biggest market for U.S. liquefied natural gas over the past three months, as concern about the geopolitical tensions around Ukraine prompted the EU to seek alternatives to Russian gas in case Moscow turned off the taps, even though Moscow has repeatedly said that it has no such plans.

  As a result of the surge in demand for U.S. LNG, the country overtook Qatar to become the world’s largest exporter of the commodity. U.S. LNG is one of the European Union’s preferred alternatives to Russian pipeline gas, whose consumption the union is trying to cut by two-thirds within a year.

  Last week, the chief executive of the largest U.S. natural gas producer, EQT, said the United States could easily replace Russian gas, which last year accounted for 45 percent of total EU gas imports.

  “We’ve got the ability to do more, the desire to do more,” EQT’s Toby Rice told the BBC, estimating that the United States had enough gas to quadruple current output by 2030.

  However, environmentalists have been quick to protest the increase in LNG exports, with a coalition of more than a hundred organizations calling on banks to stop financing LNG export terminal projects. Environmentalist protests, according to a Reuters report, have led to the shelving of an interagency review on ways to boost LNG exports to Europe.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 16:30

• Another Lost Decade Ahead? 60/40 'Balanced' Books Suffer Worst Streak Since 2008
  Another Lost Decade Ahead? 60/40 ‘Balanced’ Books Suffer Worst Streak Since 2008

  Since the “Powell Pivot” was unleashed on global markets, precious metals have strongly outperformed so-called safe-haven portfolios…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  …and in fact, as Bloomberg reports, the classic 60/40 portfolio – a strategy named for the share allocated to equities and high-grade debt, respectively – is down more than 10% this year, leaving it on pace for the worst drubbing since the financial crisis of 2008.

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  In fact, for the first time on record, Bonds (TLT) and Stocks (SPY) are both down over 10% in Q1 together…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  And on a 50-50 Bonds/Stocks basis, Q1 looks set to be the worst quarter on record…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Why? Why the sudden shift for a portfolio mix that is – by name – defined as ‘balancing’ risk, rather than aggregating it.

  The answer is both simple and terrifying for the world’s central planners (and commission-takers) – Stagflation is back.

  Unlike the last major crisis of faith in 60/40 books in 2008, though, the current environment is not driven by just a growth scare. Assets are being hammered by the double whammy of the risk that a stagnant economic expansion and fears of out-of-control ‘non-transitory’ inflation (a combination that could cause poor returns, or even losses, to extend for some time to come).

  With rising stagflation risks, Goldman warns that investors face lower real returns and higher risks from 60/40 portfolios. There is pressure for higher equity allocations given the prospect of poor returns and less diversification potential from bonds. But while higher equity allocations increase the potential for attractive real returns in the long run, they increase the risk of large and fast drawdowns in the near term.

  “You cannot count on the sort of investment returns seen over history for a period of time,” said Chris Brightman, chief investment officer at Research Affiliates.

  “Bond yields, dividend and earnings yields are at a low starting point and it means future returns will be low when compared to history.”

  During the the so-called “lost decade” of the 2000s, the “60/40 portfolio generated a meager 2.3% annual return and investors would have lost value on an inflation-adjusted basis,” Goldman Sachs Asset Management’s Nick Cunningham, the vice president of strategic advisory solutions, wrote in October.

  “The very good returns of the past decade mean that is important for investors to establish more realistic return expectations,” said Izabella Goldenberg, U.S. head of portfolio strategy at Goldman Sachs Asset Management. She said that may involve seeking returns in global equities and “in principle being diversified for the long term.”

  Andrew Patterson, senior economist at Vanguard Group Inc., said markets are verging on a period of low gains for the 60/40 portfolio.

  He estimated that annual returns over the next 10 years will be “south of 5% and our estimates have been grinding down in recent years, mainly driven by equities.”

  Equity and bond prices falling together may be a feature of the inflation shock. In past eras of supply-driven inflation, government bonds failed to offset equity losses, as prices in both markets moved together, said Jean Boivin, head of the BlackRock Investment Institute.

  “Investors will have to live with higher inflation and that will challenge the role of government bonds in a portfolio,” he said.

  “Central banks will find it harder to contain inflation and also harder to ease if economic growth slows materially.”

  Markets have further repriced risk of stagflation, boosted by the commodities rally due to the Russia/Ukraine crisis – US 10-year breakeven inflation has reached the highest level since the 1990s, while real yields remain near all-time lows, resulting in a similar gap to that in the 1970s.

  

  This points to little optimism on long-term real growth and material concerns on inflation risk.

  

  For those looking for alternatives, Goldman suggests a combination of allocations to commodities, real estate, infrastructure, more international diversification as well as value, high dividend yield stocks and convertibles could help to reduce the risk of another 60/40 ‘lost decade’. Private markets might offer more opportunities to gain exposure to these themes.

  During the 1970s stagflation there were material benefits from broader diversification…

  

  PIMCO recently recommended shifting a portion of 60/40 portfolios into in commodities to hedge against elevated inflation.

  “When inflation increases, asset values generally fall,” and “even a small allocation to commodities may materially improve the inflation protection of a traditional 60/40 stock/bond portfolio,” it said.

  We already saw that Gold has outperformed dramatically as the stagflation fears rise.

  And finally, Goldman has a lower conviction suggestion for those struggling with ‘balanced’ bond-stock portfolios… add some Bitcoin…

  Our analysis suggests that just a small allocation to Bitcoin in a standard US 60/40 portfolio would have enhanced risk-adjusted returns materially since 2014 (while Bitcoin prices are available from mid-2010, we use prices since 2014 as Bitcoin was not easily accessible to investors before then), even as balanced portfolios performed strongly on their own. The strong risk-adjusted performance of Bitcoin was due to strong returns rather than to low risk.

  

  But Goldman warns that Bitcoin’s history is too short to cover several business cycles or a period of high inflationary pressures, so it is unclear how Bitcoin would behave during a period of stagflation. Additionally, Bictoin’s high relative volatility can quickly come to dominate the diversified book’s performance.

  Given its limited and known supply, the price of Bitcoin should primarily depend on investor demand and its perceived value. But investor demand so far seems to be linked to the asset itself rather than macro factors; adoption by retail investors – and recently some institutions – has boosted prices while regulatory and tax concerns, as well as positioning, have driven sharp setbacks. Without more clarity on these idiosyncratic drivers, assessing Bitcoin’s future risk/reward and role in balanced portfolios remains difficult.

  Since the GFC, many of these alternative strategies have had mixed success due to low and anchored inflation, but Goldman believes that in the Post-Pandemic Cycle they are likely to enhance risk-adjusted returns for a balanced portfolio.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 16:00

• Putin: Destined To Hang Or Drown?
  Putin: Destined To Hang Or Drown?

  Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

  As we end this third week of World War III it’s becoming clear that the West’s end-game strategy is now regime change in Russia. As the money and weapons pour into Ukraine the Ukrainian Flag further morphs into the 21st century’s version of ‘Old Shoe,’ all around the Twittersphere.

  

  Zelenskyy’s even been invited to the Oscar’s for pity’s sake.

  If you were ever in doubt about this, just watch Senator Lindsey Graham (Neocon – SC) triple-down on assassinating a world leader.

  Speaking at a press conference, Graham said “I hope he will be taken out, one way or the other,” adding “I don’t care how they take him out. I don’t care if we send him to The Hague and try him. I just want him to go.”

  “It’s time for him to go,” Graham further said of Putin, echoing Joe Biden’s blurted remarks that “He’s a war criminal.”

  “I wish somebody had taken Hitler out in the ’30s. So yes, Vladimir Putin is not a legitimate leader. He is a war criminal.” Graham declared.

  Graham further proclaimed that Russia is “going to have zero future” under Putin, adding “I think the world is better off without Putin – the sooner the better, and I don’t care how we do it.”

  This is called Saying the Quiet Parts Out Loud.

  Even Paul Craig Roberts is trying to figure out why Putin isn’t treating his enemies more ruthlessly. We awake Americans have a real sense of the depravity that our leaders carry and at times I think we get carried away with our own insights here.

  As I said would happen, Russia’s go-slow war has played 100% into their enemies’ hands. Russia needed a quick victory to forestall a devastating psyops campaign against her and to intimidate further NATO expansion. What the Kremlin achieved by  believing that the West would respect  humanitarian intentions is infamy.  Instead of discouraging provocations of Russia that will eventually lead to nuclear war, the Kremlin’s liberal goody-goodly war policy, which the West sees as  irresolution, has encouraged more provocations 

  Dr. Roberts’ thesis is one I’ve heard from multiple people, including from my friend Dexter White on two recent podcasts we did (here and here). Putin’s slow rolling the Ukraine operation has further emboldened Neocon crazies whose whole being is focused on interpreting every action by their enemies as a weakness to exploit.

  This analysis further solidifies my conclusion that they are left-brain possessed, betraying all the attributes of someone psychologically unbalanced to the point of madness. They become paranoid psychotics seeing everything in terms of their enemy.

  It’s the most popular refrain of desperate globalists, “Putin did it.”

  It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. What matters is keeping people in that suggestible state. It’s easy to do since they, themselves, are there too.

  Lindsey Graham likes to play tough guy. So does Biden. Neither of these men have ever been in a real fight with their bodies on the line in their life. They’ve never really been in a life-threatening situation. For them their fear is far worse, it’s reputational which means fear of exposure.

  They hide behind cameras, their positions, and their egos.

  They live in fear of being shamed.

  It’s easy to dismiss Graham as a buffoon, because he is. But he’s also a very important cog in the machine. So, when he speaks it’s important. Don’t be flip about these statements, they absolutely mean something.

  If you look around D.C. you see the same psychological projection of inner rot every time one of these war mongers gets in front of a camera to manufacture consent. They are also fearful of the shame of exposure which drives them to madness like Lindsey displays now on a nearly daily basis.

  This push for regime change in Russia, however, begs a very important question: “Why have they gone this far? Why do they think they can get regime change when Putin has 70+% support?”

  Is it because they really are scared of the emerging facts on the ground, that Russia is grinding out, inevitably and inexorably, a victory in Ukraine on Russian terms that isn’t a reflection of bad military strategy and/or poor intelligence and logistics?

  Or is it something deeper.

  Something Darker

  Alistair Crooke and I talked about this in our latest podcast. Russia’s collective psyche is a reflection of Putin’s. You’ll see that their anger and frustration is now real and complete. The West hates Russia and Russians with a burning passion that is irrational.

  The fear of loss of potency has made war-mongers out of way too many folks because they refuse to blame themselves for this mess:

  • That they allowed Biden to take the White House

  • That they believed all the crude propaganda about Trump and Putin

  • That they still wear their masks, now with Ukrainian Flags on them, to show their wisdom over those who are now clearly traitors.

  • That their paychecks are getting smaller by the day.

  When you see a push poll by Pew that states more than one-third of Americans are willing to risk nuclear war to stop Putin in Ukraine, you know something has gone way off the rails, and it ain’t the Russians.

  It’s not fear that makes the Russian people and Putin angry, it’s disappointment at having their hand of friendship consistently slapped away so thoroughly in the post-Soviet era.

  What goodwill that existed in the West towards Russia in the 1990’s, seeing them as victims of a terrible evil to be pitied, has morphed into disgust for following a man into war for threatening their comfortable existence behind their iPhones.

  When Putin speaks now he is visibly, viscerally angry. He’s been systematically, for years, cutting Russia off from the influences of the ill-liberalism of the West.

  Putin knows he’s been pushed into this by people who are powerful but psychologically small. And the Russian people have been deeply disrespected to the point of war. That’s why his poll numbers rise while Bidens’ barely budge.

  That all leads to regime change as the end-game because it may be the only option, which implies continued escalation to the point of something unthinkable.

  And it makes perfect sense that’s what they are planning, not just regime change, but a wider war (see the buildup of NATO troops) to grind Russia into a paste and atomize it, Russian culture and the Russian people.

  

  That said, Davos has very little human intelligence on the ground to actually make that happen. All the sanctions and expelling diplomats helped Russia’s and Putin’s security.

  The U.S. Embassy in Moscow has less than 50 people in it.

  While that is a sad state of affairs and means there is little to no hope of diplomacy, it also means there isn’t any infrastructure to do what Lindsey is so desperately saying… Someone take him out, anyone!

  That’s a sign of creating the new narrative while simultaneously betraying helplessness, in my view.

  Now, unfortunately that leads me into an ever darker place. They don’t just want regime change and some kind of negotiated settlement for Ukraine. That’s actually way off the table now.

  They see the writing on the wall for their financial system which has failed. The only option they see now is making open preparations for WWIII thinking they still have the materiel and the manpower to enforce their Great Reset, which was always leading to war.

  Lindsey Graham’s job is to build up the propaganda war to justify NATO’s entrance into Ukraine in the next few weeks.

  The program now is WWIII, possibly with nukes and the abject humiliation of Russia and its eventual destruction.

  And ours.

  I begged off ‘working’ yesterday because of this realization. I was drained to the point of exhaustion and planned on sleeping my depression off. I re-watched part I of Oliver Stone’s The Putin Interviews from 2016.

  I recommend everyone watch these films, they are an enlightenment.

  If you want to know your enemy, you should study him. Demonizing him may win you friends at the water cooler, but it will cost you your soul. About 20 minutes in, during their first conversation, Stone brings up the multiple assassination attempts on Putin.

  If you watch nothing else, watch this segment (click here) to get a better understanding of Russia and Putin. The punchline is simple:

  “Do you know what they say among the Russian people? Those who are destined to hang, do not drown.”

  – VLADIMIR PUTIN

  Putin is well aware, hyper-aware of his situation. A person in his position who has been fighting this way for more than 20 years, a project he has dedicated the 2nd half of his life to, is not so stupid as to be the willing dupe of Davos nor is he blind to the capabilities or the ruthlessness of his enemies.

  This is why I hold to the positions about Putin that I do. He may fail here. War is hell and nothing ever goes according to the plan on the white board.

  But, if you are going to be led into war who would your bet on? People like Lindsey Graham could never stand in front of a camera and say what Putin said to Stone. Why?

  Because there is no there there. He’s just a shadow projector with a hand puppet up its ass.

  But if you turn the camera away from Graham and Biden and look at Putin, he’s speaking to the world now. That’s what his latest speech was about.

  It wasn’t aimed at his enemies.

  He’s done talking to them. They aren’t listening.

  That speech was aimed at everyone else including Americans and Europeans, “This is what they think of you. This is what they are willing to do to demand your obedience,” They will steal your money, take your children, burn your life to the ground.

  And it isn’t like he doesn’t have a very sound point, folks.

  If anyone was calling for regime change now, it’s Putin.

  It may have zero effect or play here in the West. In fact, I predict it will have almost zero effect. But it will resonate around the world in those places now very scared of the conflict that Biden and Davos are forcing on everyone.

  Under those circumstances clarity comes quickly. Big decisions happen fast.

  I think a global memetic collapse is in process as I type this. We can’t see it here in the West because we aren’t allowed to. But in parliaments and politburos around the that part that Davos just sees as ‘the help,’ it’s happening. The headlines are coming in almost too fast for anyone to keep up with.

  This is what happens when fearful men become cornered. Davos is cornered. The drowning man will do everything to keep from drowning, including drowning his rescuer.

  The hanged man has already accepted his fate. He is free.

  What happens next is not in his hands, it’s in ours.

  *  *  *

  Join my Patreon if you don’t want to drown

  BTC: 3GSkAe8PhENyMWQb7orjtnJK9VX8mMf7Zf
  BCH: qq9pvwq26d8fjfk0f6k5mmnn09vzkmeh3sffxd6ryt
  DCR: DsV2x4kJ4gWCPSpHmS4czbLz2fJNqms78oE
  LTC: MWWdCHbMmn1yuyMSZX55ENJnQo8DXCFg5k
  DASH: XjWQKXJuxYzaNV6WMC4zhuQ43uBw8mN4Va
  WAVES: 3PF58yzAghxPJad5rM44ZpH5fUZJug4kBSa
  ETH: 0x1dd2e6cddb02e3839700b33e9dd45859344c9edc
  DGB: SXygreEdaAWESbgW6mG15dgfH6qVUE5FSE

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 15:30

• Clip Of Biden Boasting He Proposed NATO's 78-Day Airstrikes On Belgrade Goes Viral In China
  Clip Of Biden Boasting He Proposed NATO’s 78-Day Airstrikes On Belgrade Goes Viral In China

  Both Russian and Chinese media and state officials have in the last days been widely circulating a resurfaced video from 1999 wherein then senator Joe Biden bragged about being the first US official to propose bombing Belgrade and destroying the city’s infrastructure.

  State media in Russia wrote this week while featuring the footage: “The head of Roscosmos, Dmitry Rogozin, reposted the footage on his social media account, reminding the current US President of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia that is estimated to have killed about 2,500 people, including 89 children.” Russian officials used the clip to blast Biden over his latest description of Vladimir Putin as a “war criminal” and “thug” due to the invasion of Ukraine. It’s also getting wide circulation on Chinese social media.

  “I was the one who suggested the bombing of Belgrade. I was who suggested to send American pilots and blow up all the bridges over the Danube”..
  Joe Biden, 1999 pic.twitter.com/NrkvmTqN33

  — Geo_monitor (@colonelhomsi) March 16, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  “I suggested bombing of Belgrade. I suggested that American pilots go there and destroy all bridges on the Drina,” Biden had said at the time.

  The 78 days of air strikes lasted from 24 March 1999 to 10 June 1999. The bombs kept falling even on Serbia’s Easter – called Pascha – which is the holiest day of the Orthodox Christian year.

  “I was suggesting very specific action,” Biden said while seeming to praise his own ‘muscular’ proposals which helped lead to the NATO war against the Serbs.

  China’s mission to the EU also called out prior US action over what was Yugoslavia, condemning the outrageous May NATO bombing of the Chinese embassy – which killed and injured multiple Chinese nationals and journalists.

  China to NATO: “[W]e will never forget who had bombed our embassy in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. We need no lecture on justice from the abuser of international law…”

  Wow.https://t.co/bMYHiEAPDo pic.twitter.com/FxK5e9GA1j

  — Nina 🐙 Byzantina (@NinaByzantina) March 18, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  According to a summary of the incident in The National Review, “Despite the seemingly extensive target vetting, on May 7 the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was struck by five Joint Directed Attack Munition satellite-guided bombs, delivered by U.S. Air Force B-2 Spirit bombers. Three Chinese journalists—Shao Yunhuan of Xinhua, and Xu Xinghu and his wife Zhu Ying of the Guangming Daily—were killed in the attack. Twenty other Chinese nationals were injured, five seriously.”

  On Thursday China’s foreign ministry said in a statement “we will never forget” – and related it to Washington’s outrage over ongoing Russian military action in Ukraine:

  The Chinese diplomatic mission in the European Union said on Thursday that Chinese people could fully relate to the suffering of other countries because “we will never forget who bombed our embassy in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia”.

  “We need no lecture on justice from the abuser of international law,” it said. “As a Cold War remnant and the world’s largest military alliance, Nato continues to expand its geographical scope and range of operations. What kind of role has it played in world peace and stability? Nato needs to have good reflection.”

  

  While the US downplayed it as an “accidental targeting” incident, evidence later emerged that it was likely done deliberately amid accusations that Yugoslav army communications were being transmitted from the embassy.

  Biden had actually gone on to boast about his role in the NATO attack on Belgrade in multiple different venues…

  In the above archived clip, for example, he said in a fiery speech, “I will continue with every fiber in my being to keep America involved with troops that can shoot and kill….”

  “I believe it is absolutely essential for American troops to be on the ground with loaded rifles and drawn bayonets.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 15:00

• Rickards: The Last Straw
  Rickards: The Last Straw

  Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

  The U.S. and its allies in the EU and others around the world have imposed the harshest economic sanctions on Russia that have ever been used. In the past, even nations directly at war with each other would continue to pay the debts they owed each other.

  Since this war is in Ukraine, let’s look at another war that took place in present Ukraine from 1854–56, during the Crimean War.

  Britain (and France) was at war with Russia. Yet throughout the war, the Russian government kept paying interest to British holders of its debt. The British government also kept paying its debts to the Russian government.

  One British minister said that civilized nations should pay their debts, even to an enemy during wartime.

  But that was then and this is now. The U.S. and its European allies outside of Ukraine aren’t even directly at war with Russia (not yet anyway), but they’ve still imposed the most punitive economic sanctions in history.

  To a great extent, the Russian economy has been cut out of the global economy.

  The Effects Will Last for Decades

  Russia has been kicked out of the SWIFT global financial telecommunications system. A long list of Russian banks, oligarchs and major companies have been listed among those who cannot transact with Western parties. These include Gazprom (the major Russian natural gas company), among others.

  Biden has also prohibited exports of semiconductors, high-tech equipment and other technology to Russia. When you add it all up, we should expect a decline on the order of 25% in Russian GDP in the first half of 2022. That’s massive.

  Even when the kinetic war is over, probably in a month or so, the economic war will continue and the effects on the global economy (not just Russia) will last for decades. Still, Russia is not a punching bag that takes hits without hitting back.

  They’ll fight the sanctions both with retaliatory measures of their own and with inventive workarounds designed to defeat the sanctions.

  For example, Russia will be teaming up with China to roll out the Chinese credit card system (UnionPay) for Russian consumers. This comes after Visa and Mastercard ended all business with Russia. Their efforts won’t end there.

  Good Luck Sanctioning Russian Gold

  Russia is working with banks in China and India to reestablish hard currency payment channels.

  There’s now proposed legislation in the U.S. Senate to freeze gold reserves held by the Central Bank of Russia.

  Well, here’s the problem: The gold is physical, about 2,300 metric tonnes worth about $150 billion, and is stored inside Russia. It can’t actually be frozen or seized at all.

  The legislation would impose secondary boycott sanctions on any party that assists Russia in transporting or transacting in gold. But this presumed sanction would be easy to evade.

  For example, if Russia puts 100 metric tonnes of gold on a plane and flies it to Beijing in exchange for manufactured goods, they’re not exactly going to issue a press release about it. That’s the kind of transaction that will go undetected by U.S. intelligence.

  Gold is an element, atomic number 79, and is easily melted down and re-refined into new gold bars with Chinese markings that are untraceable. The Central Bank of Russia can buy more gold from Russian miners for rubles to make up for the shipment.

  Again, that gold is untraceable (Russia and China both have numerous gold refineries). If this is the best the U.S. can do then Putin is not only on his way to winning the shooting war, but he may win the financial war as well.

  Unintended Consequences

  Russia has also implemented capital controls that will shift the pain of sanctions from Russian borrowers to Western lenders who will now suffer defaults on the Russian bonds they own. And Russia has announced that it will cut off exports of important chemicals, metals and processed gasses to any nation that has sanctioned Russia.

  These exports are indispensable to manufacturing processes including semiconductors, automobiles and agriculture. In the end, most of the economic pain will fall on Western manufacturing and farming.

  This is where the law of unintended consequences comes into play. Over 65% of the processed neon gas used to power lasers that make semiconductors comes from Ukraine. Between 35% and 50% of strategic metals, such as titanium and aluminum, used in aircraft manufacture by Boeing and Airbus come from Russia. Much of the grain that feeds the Middle East and Africa comes either from Ukraine or Russia.

  Russia also exports metals used in battery production for EVs including lithium, cobalt and nickel. The list goes on topped by oil, natural gas and coal, where Russia is the leading supplier to Europe.

  If Russia follows through, we could be looking at a shutdown of major industries around the world from semiconductors (essential for automobiles, appliances, electronics, etc.) to heavy equipment and transportation.

  The Biden administration will find out the hard way that in a globalized, densely connected world, what happens in Russia doesn’t stay in Russia. Russia may be the first victim of U.S. sanctions. But the entire world will pay the final price.

  So will the dollar…

  My Vision Is Coming to Pass

  In 2009, I facilitated and participated in the first-ever financial war game hosted by the Pentagon. This war game was conducted at the top-secret Warfare Analysis Laboratory of the United States (code name: WALRUS) located in the Applied Physics Laboratory, about halfway between Washington, D.C., and Baltimore.

  I wrote about this in 2011 in Chapters 1 and 2 of my book Currency Wars. The scenario I presented at the time was that Russia and China would accumulate large gold reserves, pool their gold and launch a new digital currency backed by gold in place of the U.S. dollar.

  Russia and China would then insist that any purchases of Russian energy or Chinese manufactured goods be paid for in the new currency. It would be a clear-cut effort to get out from under U.S. dollar hegemony and to protect themselves from U.S. dollar-based economic sanctions.

  Of course, that’s exactly what’s playing out today.

  The Last Straw for Russia and the World

  It took the U.S. dollar 33 years (1914–1944) to achieve its status as the leading global reserve currency. The dollar lost its gold link in 1971 but remained the leading reserve currency due in part to the petrodollar deal that was worked out by Nixon and Kissinger in 1974.

  The world was flooded with dollars through a combination of Fed money printing and U.S. trade deficits.

  The difficulties began in the 1990s and early 2000s when the U.S. used financial sanctions to punish enemies such as Iran, North Korea, Venezuela and, to a limited extent, Russia. The U.S. kept going back to sanctions over and over.

  Now that the U.S. has frozen the reserves of the Central Bank of Russia, this is the last straw for Russia and the world.

  

  After all, if dollar reserves are no longer a safe haven, then who needs dollar reserves? The world will demand something more dependable that can’t be frozen on U.S. whims.

  The U.S. is destroying the value of the dollar by abusing sanctions. In the future, the dollar will not be that important. It won’t happen overnight, but the unprecedented sanctions against Russia will only accelerate the process.

  Investors can prepare for the coming collapse of the dollar by increasing their allocations to physical gold. That’s the one form of money you cannot freeze or seize.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/19/2022 – 14:30