• NATO Takes Another Beating As EU Adopts Controversial Paper Which Undermines It
  NATO Takes Another Beating As EU Adopts Controversial Paper Which Undermines It

  Authored by Martin Jay via The Strategic Culture  Foundation,

  A sort-of EU army is in the making, or at least on paper in Brussels. It’s radical in that it would probably not involve Germany so therefore leaving France at the helm. But who’s going to pay for it?

  

  At the end of November, a draft proposal which sketched out a plan for an EU army entered the sphincter of the EU’s decision-making process, which, strangely didn’t cause much of a stir. Opaque and lacking concrete answers for major questions which have plagued the EU army idea for decades, the paper is both controversial and interesting.

  Former Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb believes that Brussels’ renewed enthusiasm for security is “timely, important and realistic. The U.S. is not going to back up European security forever.”

  If this is an accurate appraisal of the situation, then one could attribute the move as one born from Biden’s Afghanistan blunder which angered many EU leaders. And yet, Stub’s follow-up comment is alarming as it outlines that there is a worrying level of universal paranoia which goes beyond merely rogue states (which the EU failed to influence in any way, regardless such as Syria).

  He says that if Europe is to get serious about protecting itself “it needs to understand that the line between war and peace is blurred … soft power has been weaponized and become hard power. We see that with asylum-seekers being used as weapons. We see with information, trade, energy and vaccines being used as weapons.”

  And so the EU feels that its under fire on all levels, from all sides and needs a quick fix. The recent events which have unfolded on the Belarus-Polish border, combined with Russia’s troop build-up and Ukraine’s panicky beliefs that Putin will invade, the EU sees itself as useless, ineffective and doesn’t see its relations with NATO as solid enough that the defence organisation can be put to any good use to calm the tensions. Much worse for the EU is when individual, old Europe countries step forward and offer to send troops to the region while Brussels frets over the implications of Georgia or Moldovia joining NATO one day. It’s very much about “be careful what you wish for” but in the case of the EU, its latest plan is really more of a political ruse to send a message to both EU member states and to NATO that “something has to be done” in Ukraine and Belarus to tip the scales away from Putin and more towards the West.

  But it isn’t going to happen. NATO may well support Ukraine’s so-called sovereignty but it also provokes Putin towards a military option.

  What may well emerge from the EU paper is that France takes the lead role for an informal EU army, with a few member states joining, perhaps even the UK, which will used to police the edge of Europe’s borders but not for anything remotely looking like a confrontation with Russia. The numbers are just not there and there is too much anxiety from some EU member states who fret that NATO will be side lined if such an organisation ever got off the ground while others are more gung-ho but no one has the faintest idea how this plan would be funded. The paper suggests bigger budget which gives the reader the confirmation that whoever wrote it, is living in cloud cuckoo land and doesn’t have a realistic grasp of the political dynamics on a member state level. No one wants to pay more money into the EU pot as this “we don’t know how to fix it but let’s try more money” typical Brussels way of thinking has lost its credibility.

  Military spending on any level is hugely expensive. If the authors of such a paper haven’t worked out how to fund such a military outfit, let alone who would run it (not the EU itself), then we can assume that like a lot of papers which work their way through the debating chambers in the windowless corridors of the EU, there’s still a lot of work required to move beyond the ubiquitous agreement that everyone’s pissed off with Russia. But none of us have the first clue as to what to do about it. And even if the solution was a military one, how do you do that on a shoestring budget which just pays for the shiny business cards and the exclusive address in Brussels. If we look at the EU’s diplomatic corps – a farcical organisation which spends over a billion dollars a year funding over 120 “ambassadors” which fails stupendously to fly the EU flag around the world – then we have a clue as to what any such army might achieve. Expect much more chaff from the EU talk machine. But don’t hold your breath if you are expecting EU armbands on the arms of soldiers heading East. That’s just the stuff dreams are made of.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 12/07/2021 – 02:00

• Casedemic: The Hideous Scandal Of The Irredeemably Flawed PCR Test
  Casedemic: The Hideous Scandal Of The Irredeemably Flawed PCR Test

  Authored by Ian McNulty via The Brownstone Institute,

  Investigating the cause of a disease is like investigating the cause of a crime. Just as the detection of a suspect’s DNA at a crime scene doesn’t prove they committed the crime, so the detection of the DNA of a virus in a patient doesn’t prove it caused the disease.

  Consider the case of Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) for example. It can cause serious diseases like arthritis, multiple sclerosis and cancer. A Japanese study in 2003 found that 43% of patients suffering from Chronic Active Epstein-Barr Virus (CAEBV) died within 5 months to 12 years of infection.

  Yet EBV is one of the most common viruses in humans and has been detected in 95% of the adult population. Most of those infected are either asymptomatic or show symptoms of glandular fever, which can have similar symptoms to ‘long Covid.’

  If an advertising agency attempted to create demand for an EBV treatment with daily TV and radio ads representing positive EBV tests as ‘EBV Cases’ and deaths within 28 days as ‘EBV Deaths,’ they’d be prosecuted for fraud by false representation so quickly their feet wouldn’t touch the ground.

  

  How Viruses Are Detected

  Before the invention of PCR, the gold standard for detecting viruses was to grow them in a culture of living cells and count damaged cells using a microscope.

  The disadvantage of cell cultures is they need highly skilled technicians and can take weeks to complete. The advantage is they only count living viruses that multiply and damage cells. Dead virus fragments that do neither are automatically discounted.

  The invention of PCR in 1983 was a game changer. Instead of waiting for viruses to grow naturally, PCR rapidly multiplies tiny amounts of viral DNA exponentially in a series of heating and cooling cycles that can be automated and completed in less than an hour.

  PCR revolutionised molecular biology but its most notable application was in genetic fingerprinting, where its ability to magnify even the smallest traces of DNA became a major weapon in the fight against crime.

  But, like a powerful magnifying glass or zoom lens, if it’s powerful enough to find a needle in a haystack it’s powerful enough to make mountains out of molehills.

  Even the inventor of PCR, Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1993, vehemently opposed using PCR to diagnose diseases: “PCR is a process that’s used to make a whole lot of something out of something. It allows you to take a very miniscule amount of anything and make it measurable and then talk about it like it’s important.“

  PCR has certainly allowed public health authorities and the media around the world to talk about a new variant of Coronavirus like it’s important, but how important is it really?

  The Dose Makes The Poison

  Anything can be deadly in high enough doses, even oxygen and water. Since the time of Paracelsus in the 16th century, science has known there are no such things as poisons, only poisonous concentrations:

  “All things are poison, and nothing is without poison; the dosage alone makes the poison.” (Paracelsus, dritte defensio, 1538.)

  This basic principle is expressed in the adage “dosis sola facit venenum“ – the dose alone makes the poison – and is the basis for all Public Health Standards which specify Maximum Permissible Doses (MPDs) for all known health hazards, from chemicals and radiation to bacteria, viruses and even noise.

  Public Health Standards, Science and Law

  Toxicology and Law are both highly specialised subjects with their own highly specialised language. Depending on the jurisdiction, Maximum Permissible Doses (MPDs) are also known as Health Based Exposure Limits (HBELs), Maximum Exposure Levels (MELs) and Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs). But, no matter how complicated and confusing the language, the basic principles are simple.

  If the dose alone makes the poison then it’s the dose that’s the biggest concern, not the poison. And if Public Health Standards in a liberal democracy are regulated by the rule of law then the law needs to be simple enough for a jury of reasonably intelligent lay people to understand.

  Although the harm caused by any toxin increases with the dose, the level of harm depends not only on the toxin, but the susceptibility of the individual and the way the toxin is delivered. Maximum Permissible Doses have to strike a balance between the benefit of increasing safety and the cost of doing it. There are many Political, Economic and Social factors to consider besides the Technology (PEST).

  Take the case of noise for example. The smallest whisper may be irritating and harmful to some people, while the loudest music may be nourishing and healthy for others. If the Maximum Permissible Dose was set at a level to protect the most sensitive from any risk of harm, life would be impossible for everyone else.

  Maximum Permissible Doses have to balance the costs and benefits of restricting exposure to the level of No Observable Effect (NOEL) at one end of the scale, and the level that would kill 50% of the population at the other (LD50).

  Bacteria and viruses are different from other toxins, but the principle is the same. Because they multiply and increase their dose with time, maximum permissible doses need to be based on the minimum dose likely to start an infection known as the Minimum Infective Dose (MID).

  Take the case of listeria monocytogenes for example. It’s the bacteria that causes listeriosis, a serious disease that can result in meningitis, sepsis and encephalitis. The case fatality rate is around 20%, making it ten times more deadly than Covid-19.

  Yet listeria is widespread in the environment and can be detected in raw meat and vegetables as well as many ready-to-eat foods, including cooked meat and seafood, dairy products, pre-prepared sandwiches and salads. 

  The minimum dose in food likely to cause an outbreak of listeriosis is around 1,000 live bacteria per gram. Allowing a suitable margin of safety, EU and US food standards set the maximum permissible dose of listeria in ready-to-eat products at 10% of the minimum infective dose , or 100 live bacteria per gram.

  If Maximum Permissible Doses were based solely on the detection of a bacteria or virus rather than the dose, the food industry would cease to exist.

  Protection of the Vulnerable

  The general rule of thumb for setting maximum permissible doses used to be 10% of the MID for bacteria and viruses, and 10% of the LD50 for other toxins, but this has come under increasing criticism in recent years: first with radiation, then Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS), then smoke in general, then viruses.

  The idea that there is no safe dose of some toxins began to surface in the 1950s, when radioactive fallout from atom bomb tests and radiation from medical X-rays were linked with the the dramatic post-war rise in cancers and birth defects.

  Although this was rejected by the science at the time, it wasn’t entirely unfounded. There are many reasons why radiation may be different from other pollutants. Chemicals like carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen are recycled naturally by the environment, but there is no such thing as a Radiation Cycle. Radioactivity only disappears gradually with time, no matter how many times it’s recycled. Some radioactive substances remain dangerous for periods longer than human history.

  All life forms are powered by chemical processes, none by nuclear energy. The last natural nuclear reactor on earth burned out more than 1.5 billion years ago. The nearest one now is isolated from life on earth by 93 million miles of vacuum. 

  As evidence mounted to show there was no safe dose of radiation, maximum permissible doses were lowered drastically, but limited doses were still allowed. If public health standards were based purely on the detection of radiation rather than the dose, the Nuclear Industry would cease to exist.

  The susceptibility of any individual to any health risk depends on many factors. Most people can eat sesame seeds and survive bee stings without calling an ambulance, for others they can be fatal. In the US bees and wasps kill an average of more than 60 people each year, and food allergies cause an average of 30,000 hospitalisations and 150 deaths.

  If public health standards were based solely on the detection of a toxin rather than the dose, all bees would be exterminated and all food production closed down.

  Food allergies set the legal precedent. Where minuscule traces of something might be harmful for some people, the law demands that products carry a clear warning to allow the vulnerable to protect their own health. It doesn’t demand everyone else pay the price, no matter what the cost, by lowering maximum permissible doses to the point of no observable effect.

  Minimum Infectious Doses (MIDs) have already been established for many of the major respiratory and enteric viruses including strains of coronavirus. Even though SARS-CoV-2 is a new variant of coronavirus, the MID has already been estimated at around 100 particles. Whilst further work is needed, nevertheless it could serve as a working standard to measure Covid-19 infections against.

  Are PCR Numbers Scientific?

  As the philosopher of science, Karl Popper, observed: “non-reproducible single occurrences are of no significance to science.”

  To be reproducible, the results of one test should compare within a small margin of error with the results of other tests. To make this possible all measuring instruments are calibrated against international standards. If they aren’t, their measurements may appear to be significant, but they have no significance in science.

  PCR tests magnify the number of target DNA particles in a swab exponentially until they become visible. Like a powerful zoom lens, the greater the magnification needed to see something, the smaller it actually is.

  The magnification in PCR is measured by the number of cycles needed to make the DNA visible. Known as the Cycle Threshold (Ct) or Quantification Cycle (Cq) number, the higher the number of cycles the lower the amount of DNA in the sample.

  To convert Cq numbers into doses they have to be calibrated against the Cq numbers of standard doses. If they aren’t they can easily be blown out of proportion and appear more significant than they actually are.

  Take an advertisement for a car for example. With the right light, the right angle and the right magnification, a scale model can look like the real thing. We can only gauge the true size of things if we have something to measure them against.

  Just like a coin standing next to a toy car proves it’s not a real one, and a shoe next to a molehill shows it’s not a mountain, the Cq of a standard dose next to the Cq of a sample shows how big the dose really is.

  So it’s alarming to discover that there are no international standards for PCR tests and even more alarming to discover that results can vary up to a million fold, not just from country to country, but from test to test.

  Even though this is well-documented in the scientific literature it appears that the media, public health authorities and government regulators either haven’t noticed or don’t care:

  • “It should be noted that currently there is no standard measure of viral load in clinical samples.”

  • “An evaluation of eight clinically relevant viral targets in 23 different laboratories resulted in Cq ranges of more than 20, indicative of an apparently million-fold difference in viral load in the same sample.”

  • “The evident lack of certified standards or even validated controls to allow for a correlation between RT-qPCR data and clinical meaning requires urgent attention from national standards and metrology organisations, preferably as a world-wide coordinated effort.”

  • “Certainly the label “gold standard” is ill-advised, as not only are there numerous different assays, protocols, reagents, instruments and result analysis methods in use, but there are currently no certified quantification standards, RNA extraction and inhibition controls, or standardised reporting procedures.”

  Even the CDC itself admits PCR test results aren’t reproducible:

  • “Because the nucleic acid target (the pathogen of interest), platform and format differ, Ct values from different RT-PCR tests cannot be compared.”

  For this reason PCR tests are licenced under emergency regulations for the detection of the type or ‘quality’ of a virus, not for the dose or ‘quantity’ of it.

  • “As of August 5, 2021, all diagnostic RT-PCR tests that had received a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for SARS-CoV-2 testing were qualitative tests.”

  • “The Ct value is interpreted as positive or negative but cannot be used to determine how much virus is present in an individual patient specimen.”

  Just because we can detect the ‘genetic fingerprint’ of a virus doesn’t prove it’s the cause of a disease:

  • “Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms.”

  So, while there’s little doubt that using PCR to identify the genetic fingerprint of a Covid-19 virus is the gold standard in molecular science, there’s equally no doubt that using it as the gold standard to quantify Covid-19 ‘cases’ and ‘deaths’ is “ill-advised.”

  The idea that PCR may have been used to make a mountain out of a molehill by blowing a relatively ordinary disease outbreak out of all proportion is so shocking it’s literally unthinkable. But it wouldn’t be the first time it has happened.

  The Epidemic That Wasn’t

  In spring 2006 staff at the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in New Hampshire began showing symptoms of respiratory infection with high fever and nonstop coughing that left them gasping for breath and lasted for weeks.

  Using the latest PCR techniques, Dartmouth-Hitchcock’s laboratories found 142 cases of pertussis or whooping cough, which causes pneumonia in vulnerable adults and can be deadly for infants.

  Medical procedures were cancelled, hospital beds were taken out of commission. Nearly 1,000 health care workers were furloughed, 1,445 were treated with antibiotics and 4,524 were vaccinated against whooping cough.

  Eight months later, when the state health department had completed the standard culture tests, not one single case of whooping cough could be confirmed. It seems Dartmouth-Hitchcock had suffered an outbreak of ordinary respiratory diseases no more serious than the common cold!

  The following January the New York Times ran the story under the headline “Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t.” “Pseudo-epidemics happen all the time,” said Dr. Trish Perl, past president of the Society of Epidemiologists of America. “It’s a problem; we know it’s a problem. My guess is that what happened at Dartmouth is going to become more common.”

  “PCR tests are quick and extremely sensitive, but their very sensitivity makes false positives likely” reported the New York Times, “and when hundreds or thousands of people are tested, as occurred at Dartmouth, false positives can make it seem like there is an epidemic.”

  “To say the episode was disruptive was an understatement,” said Dr. Elizabeth Talbot, deputy epidemiologist for the New Hampshire Department of Health, “I had a feeling at the time that this gave us a shadow of a hint of what it might be like during a pandemic flu epidemic.”

  Dr. Cathy A. Petti, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Utah, said the story had one clear lesson. “The big message is that every lab is vulnerable to having false positives. No single test result is absolute and that is even more important with a test result based on PCR.”

  The Swine Flu Panic of 2009

  In the spring of 2009 a 5-year old boy living near an intensive pig farm in Mexico went down with an unknown disease that caused a high fever, sore throat and whole body ache. Several weeks later a lab in Canada tested a nasal swab from the boy and discovered a variant of the flu virus similar to the H1N1 Avian flu virus which they labelled H1N1/09, soon to be known as ‘Swine Flu.’

  On 28 April 2009 a biotech company in Colorado announced they had developed the MChip, a version of the FluChip, which enabled PCR tests to distinguish the Swine Flu H1N1/09 virus from other flu types.

  “Since the FluChip assay can be conducted within a single day,” said InDevR’s leading developer and CEO, Prof Kathy Rowlen, “it could be employed in State Public Health Laboratories to greatly enhance influenza surveillance and our ability to track the virus.”

  Up until this point the top of the World Health Organisation (WHO) Pandemic Preparedness homepage had carried the statement:

  “An influenza pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity, resulting in several simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.”

  Less than a week after the MChip announcement, the WHO removed the phrase “enormous numbers of deaths and illness,” to require only that “a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity” before a flu outbreak to be called a ‘pandemic.’

  No sooner had the laboratories started PCR testing with MChip than they were finding H1N1/09 everywhere. By the beginning of June almost three-quarters of all influenza cases tested positive for Swine Flu.

  Mainstream news reported the rise in cases on a daily basis, comparing it with the H1N1 Avian Flu pandemic in 1918 which killed more than 50 million people. What they neglected to mention is that, although they have similar names, Avian Flu H1N1 is very different and much more deadly than Swine Flu H1N1/09 .

  Even though there had been less than 500 deaths up to this point compared to more than 20,000 deaths in a severe flu epidemic people flocked to health centres demanding to be tested, producing even more positive ‘cases,’ 

  In mid-May senior representatives of all the major pharmaceutical companies met with WHO Director-General, Margaret Chan, and UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, to discuss delivery of swine flu vaccines. Many contracts had already been signed. Germany had a contract with GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) to buy 50 million doses at a cost of half a billion Euros which came into effect automatically the moment a pandemic was declared. The UK bought 132 million doses – two for every person in the country.

  On 11 June 2009 WHO Director-General Margaret Chan, announced:

  “On the basis of expert assessments of the evidence, the scientific criteria for an influenza pandemic have been met. The world is now at the start of the 2009 influenza pandemic.”

  On 16 July the Guardian reported that swine flu was spreading fast across much of the UK with 55,000 new cases the previous week in England alone. The UK’s Chief Medical Officer, Professor Sir Liam Donaldson, warned that in the worst case scenario 30% of the population could be infected and 65,000 killed.

  On 20 July a study in The Lancet co-authored by WHO and UK government adviser, Neil Ferguson, recommended closing schools and churches to slow the epidemic, limit stress on the NHS and “give more time for vaccine production.”

  On the same day WHO Director-General, Margaret Chan announced that “vaccine makers could produce 4.9 billion pandemic flu shots per year in the best-case scenario.” Four days later an official Obama administration spokesman warned that “as many as several hundred thousand could die if a vaccine campaign and other measures aren’t successful.”

  The warnings had the desired effect. That week UK consultation rates for influenza-like illnesses (ILIs) were at their highest since the last severe flu epidemic in 1999/2000, even though death rates were at a 15-year low.

  On 29 September 2009 the Pandemrix vaccine from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) was rushed through European Medicines Agency approval, swiftly followed by Baxter’s Celvapan the following week. On 19 November the WHO announced that 65 million doses of vaccine had been administered worldwide.

  As the year drew to a close it became increasingly obvious that swine flu was not all it was made out to be. The previous winter (2008/2009) the Office for National Statistics (ONS) had reported 36,700 excess deaths in England and Wales, the highest since the last severe flu outbreak of 1999/2000. Even though the winter of 2009 had been the coldest for 30 years, excess deaths were 30% lower than the previous winter. Whatever swine flu was, it wasn’t as deadly as other flu variants.

  On 26 January the following year, Wolfgang Wodarg, a German doctor and member of parliament, told the European Council in Strasbourg that the major global pharmaceutical corporations had organised a “campaign of panic” to sell vaccines, putting pressure on the WHO to declare what he called a “false pandemic” in “one of the greatest medicine scandals of the century.”

  “Millions of people worldwide were vaccinated for no good reason,” said Wodarg, boosting pharmaceutical company profits by more than $18 billion. Annual sales of Tamiflu alone had jumped 435 percent, to €2.2 billion.

  By April 2010, it was apparent that most of the vaccines were not needed. The US government had bought 229 million doses of which only 91 million doses were used. Of the surplus, some of it was stored in bulk, some of it was sent to developing countries and 71 million doses were destroyed.

  On 12 March 2010 SPIEGEL International published what it called “Reconstruction of a Mass Hysteria” that ended with a question:

  “These organizations have gambled away precious confidence. When the next pandemic arrives, who will believe their assessments?”

  But it didn’t take long to find an answer. In December the Independent published a story with the headline “Swine flu, the killer virus that actually saved lives.”

  The latest ONS report on excess winter deaths had shown that instead of the extra 65,000 swine flu deaths predicted by the UK’s Chief Medical Officer, Professor Sir Liam Donaldson, deaths in the winter of 2009 were actually 30% lower than the previous year.

  Instead of the low death rate proving that swine flu had been a fake pandemic, confidence in the organisations that had “gambled away precious confidence” was quickly restored by portraying swine flu as something that “actually saved lives” by driving out the common flu.

  PCR and Law

  Portraying something as something it isn’t is deception. Doing it for profit is fraud. Doing it by first gaining the trust of the victims is a confidence trick or a con. 

  In England, Wales and Northern Ireland fraud is covered by the Fraud Act 2006 and is divided into three classes – ‘fraud by false representation,’ ‘fraud by failing to disclose information’ and ‘fraud by abuse of position.’

  A representation is false if the person making it knows it may be untrue or misleading. If they do it for amusement, it’s a trick or a hoax. If they do it to make a gain, or expose others to a risk of loss, it’s ‘fraud by false representation.’

  If someone has a duty to disclose information and they don’t do it, it might be negligence or simple incompetence. If they do it to make a gain, or expose others to a risk of loss, it’s ‘fraud by failing to disclose information.’

  If they occupy a position where they are expected not to act against the interests of others, and do it to make a gain or expose others to a risk of loss, it’s ‘fraud by abuse of position.’

  In Dartmouth Hitchcock’s case there’s no doubt that using PCR to identify a common respiratory infection as whooping cough was ‘false representation,’ but it was an honest mistake, made with the best of intentions. If any gain was intended it was to protect others from risk of loss, not to expose them to it. There was no failure to disclose information and nobody abused their position.

  In the case of swine flu things aren’t so clear. By 2009 there were already plenty of warnings from Dartmouth Hitchcock and many other similar incidents that using PCR to detect the genetic fingerprint of a bacteria or virus may be misleading. Worse still, the potential of PCR to magnify things out of all proportion creates opportunities for all those who would gain by making mountains out of molehills and global pandemics out of relatively ordinary seasonal epidemics.

  The average journalist, lawyer, member of parliament or member of the public may be forgiven for not knowing about the dangers of PCR, but public health experts had no excuse.

  It may be argued that their job is to protect the public by erring on the side of caution. It may equally be argued that the massive amounts of money spent by global pharmaceutical corporations on marketing, public relations and lobbying creates enormous conflicts of interest, increasing the potential for suppression of information and abuse of position across all professions, from politics and journalism to education and public health.

  The defence is full disclosure of all information, particularly on the potential of PCR to identify the wrong culprit in an infection and blow it out of all proportion. The fact this was never done is suspicious.

  If there were any prosecutions for fraud they weren’t widely publicised, and if there were any questions raised or lessons to be learned about the role of PCR in creating the 2009 Swine Flu panic they were quickly forgotten.

  The First Rough Draft of History

  The first rough attempt to represent things in the outside world is journalism. But no representation can be 100% true. ‘Representation’ is literally a re-presentation of something that symbolises or ‘stands in for’ something else. Nothing can fully capture every aspect of a thing except the thing itself. So judging whether a representation is true or false depends on your point of view. It’s a matter of opinion, open to debate in other words.

  In a free and functioning democracy the first line of defence against false representation is a free and independent press. Where one news organisation may represent something as one thing, a competing organisation may represent it as something completely different. Competing representations are tried in the court of public opinion and evolve by a process of survival of the fittest.

  Whilst this may be true in theory, in practice it isn’t. Advertising proves people choose the most attractive representations, not the truest. News organisations are funded by financiers who put their own interests first, not the public’s. Whether the intention is to deliberately defraud the public or simply to sell newspapers by creating controversy, the potential for false representations is enormous.

  Trial By Media

  Despite the CDC’s own admission that PCR tests “may not indicate the presence of infectious virus,” its use to do exactly that in the case of Covid was accepted without question. Worse still, the measures taken against calling PCR into question have become progressively more draconian and underhanded since the very beginning.

  The mould was set with the announcement of the first UK death on Saturday 29 February 2020. Every newspaper in Britain carried the same front page story:

  “EMERGENCY laws to tackle coronavirus are being rushed in after the outbreak claimed its first British life yesterday,” screamed The Daily Mail.

  

  The first British victim contracted the virus on the Diamond Princess cruise ship in Japan, not Britain, but it didn’t matter. With less than 20 cases in the UK and one ‘British’ death in Japan, the media had already decided it justified rushing in emergency laws. How did they know how dangerous it was? How were they able to predict the future? Had they forgotten the lessons of the 2009 Swine Flu panic?

  After almost 2 weeks of newspaper, TV and radio fearmongering, Prime Minister Boris Johnson made it official at the Downing Street press conference on Thursday 12 March 2020 when he said:

  “We’ve all got to be clear. This is the worst public health crisis for a generation. Some people compare it to seasonal flu, alas that is not right. Owing to the lack of immunity this disease is more dangerous and it’s going to spread further.”

  None of that statement stood up to scrutiny, but none of the hand-picked journalists in the room had the right knowledge to ask the right questions.

  After 20 minutes blinding the press and public with science, Johnson opened the floor to questions. The first question, from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, set the mould by accepting the Prime Minister’s statement without question: 

  “This is, as you say, the worst public health crisis for a generation.”

  Any journalist who remembered the 2009 Swine Flu panic, might have asked how the PM knew, after just 10 deaths, that it was the worst public health crisis in a generation? He didn’t say it may be or could be but definitely ‘is.’

  Did he have a crystal ball? Or was he following the same Imperial College modelling that had predicted 136,000 deaths from mad cow disease in 2002, 200 million deaths from bird flu in 2005 and 65,000 deaths from swine flu in 2009, all of which had proved completely wrong?

  As the BBC’s chief political correspondent Kuenssberg wouldn’t be expected to know any more about science, medicine, or PCR than any other member of the general public. So why did the BBC send their chief political correspondent to a press conference on public health and not their chief science or health correspondent? And why did the PM choose her to ask the first question?

  But the BBC wasn’t alone. Six other correspondents from leading news outlets asked questions that day; all were chief political correspondents, none were science or health correspondents. So none of the journalists allowed to ask questions had the necessary knowledge to subject the PM and his Chief Scientific and Medical Officers to any degree of real scrutiny 

  With the rise in the number of coronavirus ‘cases’ and ‘deaths’ reported on a daily basis and the Prime Minister’s solemn warning that “many more families, are going to lose loved ones before their time” filling the headlines the following morning, questioning what the numbers actually meant became more and more impossible.

  If the press and the public had forgotten the 2009 Swine flu panic, and those who helped calm it down had dropped their guard, those whose intention was to make a gain had learned their lesson.

  

  Subject the Corona Crisis of 2020 to close scrutiny and it begins to look more like a carefully orchestrated advertising campaign for vaccine manufacturers than a genuine pandemic. But that scrutiny has been made impossible for all kinds of reasons.

  ‘Follow the money’ was once the epitome of investigative journalism, popularised in the movie of the Watergate scandal, ‘All The President’s Men’ which followed the money all the way to the top. Now following the money is called ‘Conspiracy Theory’ and is a sackable offence in journalism, if not yet in other professions.

  The idea that there may be real conspiracies to make false representations with the intention of making a gain or exposing others to a risk of loss has now been driven so far beyond the pale it’s literally unthinkable. 

  If PCR has been tried by media in the court of public opinion, the case for the prosecution was demonised and dismissed at the outset and prohibited by emergency legislation soon after.

  The Last Best Hope

  The last line of defence against false representation in both science and the media is the law. It’s no coincidence that Science and Law use similar methods and similar language. The foundations of the Scientific Method were laid by the Head of the Judiciary, the Lord Chancellor of England Sir Francis Bacon, in the Novum Organum, published exactly 400 years ago last year.

  Both are based on ‘laws,’ both rely on hard physical evidence or ‘facts,’ both explain the facts in terms of ‘theories,’ both test conflicting facts and theories in ‘trials’ and both reach verdicts through juries of peers. In science the peers are selected by the editorial boards of scientific publications. In law they’re selected by judges.

  In both law and science trials revolve around ‘empirical’ evidence or ‘facts’ – hard physical evidence that can be verified through the act of experiencing with our five senses of sight, sound, touch, smell and taste.

  But facts by themselves are not enough. They only ‘make sense’ when they are selected and organised into some kind of theory, narrative or story through which they can be interpreted and explained.

  But there’s more than one way to skin a cat, more than one way to interpret the facts and more than one side to every story. To reach a verdict on which one is true, theories have to be weighed against each other rationally to judge the ratios of how closely each interpretation fits the facts.

  Trial By Law

  The ability of PCR to detect the genetic fingerprint of a virus is proven beyond reasonable doubt, but its ability to give a true representation of either the cause, severity or prevalence of a disease hasn’t. To say the jury is still out would be an understatement. The jury has yet to be convened and the case yet to be heard.

  Testing coronavirus particles in a swab is no different to testing apples in a bag. A bag of billiard balls rinsed in apple juice would test positive for apple DNA. Finding apple DNA in a bag doesn’t prove it contains real apples. If the dose makes the poison then it’s the quantity we need to test for, not just its genetic fingerprint.

  Grocers test the amount of apples in bags by weighing them on scales calibrated against standard weights. If the scales are properly calibrated the bag should weigh the same on any other set of scales. If it doesn’t, local trading standards officers test the grocer’s scales against standard weights and measures.

  If the scales fail the test the grocer can be prohibited from trading. If it turns out the grocer deliberately left the scales uncalibrated to make a gain they can be prosecuted for ‘false representation’ under section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006.

  Testing the quantity of viral DNA in a swab, not the quantity of live viruses, is like counting billiard balls rinsed in apple juice as real apples. Worse still, in the absence of standards to calibrate PCR tests against results, tests can show a “million-fold difference in viral load in the same sample.”

  If a grocer’s scales showed a million-fold difference in the load of apples in the same bag they’d be closed down in an instant. If it can be shown that the grocer knew the weight displayed on the scales may have been untrue or misleading, and they did it to make a gain or expose customers to a loss, it would be an open-and-shut case, done and dusted in minutes.

  If the law applies to the measurement of the quantity of apples in bags, why not to the measurement of coronavirus in clinical swabs?

  By the CDC’s own admission, in its instructions for use of PCR tests:

  Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms.

  From that statement alone it’s clear that PCR tests may give a false representation that is untrue or misleading. If those using PCR tests to represent the number of Covid cases and deaths know it may be misleading and do it to ‘make a gain,’ either monetary or just to advance their own careers, it’s ‘fraud by false representation.’

  If they have a duty to disclose information and they don’t do it it’s ‘fraud by failing to disclose information.’ And if they occupy positions where they’re expected not to act against the interests of the public but do it anyway it’s ‘fraud by abuse of position.’

  If the law won’t prosecute those in authority for fraud, how else can they be discouraged from doing it?

  As Dr. Trish Perl said after the Dartmouth Hitchcock incident, “Pseudo-epidemics happen all the time. It’s a problem; we know it’s a problem. My guess is that what happened at Dartmouth is going to become more common.”The potential of PCR to cause problems will only get worse until its validity to diagnose the cause and measure the prevalence of a disease is tested in law. The last word on PCR belongs to its inventor, Kary Mullis: “The measurement for this is not exact at all. It’s not as good as our measurement for things like apples.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 23:40

• Looters Target California Pot Shops, Steal $5 Million Of Product
  Looters Target California Pot Shops, Steal $5 Million Of Product

  After a year of increasing retail thefts across the San Francisco Bay Area, thieves are becoming more brazen as they unleash ‘flash mob’ lootings at high-end retail stores. Criminal gangs have also begun to target marijuana businesses.

  According to the nonprofit group Supernova Women, criminal gangs targeted at least 15 licensed cannabis businesses in November, “vandalizing stores and offices, and stealing products worth millions of dollars.” 

  Cannabis companies impacted by the spate of robberies are requesting state and local government agencies for financial help. 

  “All types of licensed cannabis business were impacted: cultivation, manufacturing, distribution, and retail (delivery and storefronts). Cumulatively, these small and mostly Equity-licensed businesses are now faced with over $5 million in losses,” said Supernova Women.  

  One businesses owner told MJBizDaily that he “knows of 25 or so businesses that got hit” by smash and grab robberies last month. 

  “I know 25 or so businesses that got hit … and out of all those, the percentage I know that told me that they may not be able to reopen is about 50%,” said Tucky Blunt, the owner of Oakland cannabis shop Blunts and Moore. He said his shop was one of those robbed, adding that gangs believe marijuana businesses are sitting on boatloads of cash. 

  “People think we’re sitting on millions and millions of dollars,” Blunt said. “We don’t have that.

  Others say that the spat of robberies could spell financial trouble for impacted pot shops. 

  “Any loss, any blow, is a death blow potentially at this point,” said Nara Dahlbacka, a California consultant who works with several cannabis companies. “There are a lot of businesses that are on the edge right now.”

  The owner of a cannabis dispensary in Oakland, California says, “I was safer selling weed on the streets of Oakland than I am selling it legally” in the Democrat-run city.

  “That’s a problem.” pic.twitter.com/fl8MumW27N

  — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) December 6, 2021

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

  “A lot of these folks are not open and won’t be open for a while, because they can’t bounce back from these things,” said Amber Senter, the co-founder and chair of Oakland nonprofit Supernova Women. She said many of the targeted small pot shops don’t have a lot of extra capital, plus adding insurance coverage is nearly impossible. 

  

  To prevent criminals from believing all pot shops are cash-heavy companies, the passage of the federal SAFE Banking Act would allow a legitimate cannabis-related business to store their funds and use financial lifelines with banks. 

  Blunt said that if the SAFE Act were to become law, robberies would plunge “tenfold or cut it at least 30%.”

  As for now, the Bay Area’s downtown businesses district has transformed into a ghost town as retail shops of all kinds are fortifying their doors and windows with plywood to prevent an epidemic of flash mob robberies.

  The spate of robberies merely reflects how the criminal justice system doesn’t work under progressive rule. Their policies to lower penalties for shoplifting have royally backfired. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 23:20

• China's Growing Nuclear Program Worries The Air Force
  China’s Growing Nuclear Program Worries The Air Force

  Authored by Kris Osborn via NationalInterest.org,

  Here’s What You Need to Remember:  “The Chinese have plans to at least double their arsenal by the end of the decade. They are departing from what has been known as a minimalist theory,” Gen. Timothy Ray, Commander, Air Force Global Strike Command, told reporters at the 2021 Air Force Association Symposium.

  *  *  *

  China’s military seems like it is growing in every direction possible. 

  

  For example, Chinese shipbuilders are adding new aircraft carriers, amphibs and destroyers at an alarming pace. Chinese armored vehicle engineers are fast-adding new infantry carriers and mobile artillery platforms. Chinese weapons developers are adding large numbers of new drones and attack robots. But the largest and potentially most alarming element of all of this, according to many senior U.S. leaders, is the staggering pace at which China is adding nuclear weapons. 

  “A troubling revelation has been about the trajectory of the Chinese nuclear program. The Chinese have plans to at least double their arsenal by the end of the decade. They are departing from what has been known as a minimalist theory,”  Gen. Timothy Ray, Commander, Air Force Global Strike Command, told reporters at the 2021 Air Force Association Symposium. 

  Ray’s concern about the fast-growing Chinese nuclear arsenal aligns with and builds upon the Pentagon’s 2020 China Military Report, which states that the number of warheads arming Beijing’s intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) capable of threatening America will likely grow to 200 in the next five years. As an element of this expansion, China is increasing its inventory of long-range land-fired DF-26 Anti-Ship missiles able to fire both conventional and nuclear missiles.

  Ray cited a hope that China might be willing to consider joining various ongoing arms treaty discussions, but did not appear extremely optimistic about the possibility given China’s approach to nuclear weapons modernization. 

   “I think the need to have China in a conversation about arms control is important,” Ray says. 

  “Combined with a near-complete lack of transparency regarding their (China’s) strategic intent and the perceived need for a much larger, more diverse nuclear force, these developments pose a significant concern for the United States,” the 2020 Pentagon report explains.  

  The reality of the threat circumstance with China seemed to be one of several reasons why Ray stressed the importance of maintaining and adding to the U.S. nuclear triad, particularly in the Asian theater. 

  There continues to be successful U.S. and allied Bomber Task Force Patrols, including ongoing work with B-1s in India and integrated flights with nuclear-capable B-2s and B-52s. Ray said the Air Force is working vigorously to expand allied collaboration with Bomber Task Forces beyond its current scope. 

  “We have the highest bomber aircrew readiness in the history of the command,” he said. 

  Alongside an effort to emphasize the growing importance of allied operations in the Pacific, Ray stressed a need for the U.S. to maintain its strategic deterrence posture with a modernized nuclear triad. 

  “There are no allied bombers and no allied ICBMs. These two components are the cornerstone of the security structure of a free world,” Ray said. 

  What much of this contributes to, Ray explained, is the importance of continuing the current Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent program, a now underway effort to build a new arsenal of 400 U.S. ICBMs. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 23:00

• 'Potentially Hazardous" Eiffel Tower-Size Asteroid Passing Earth This Week 
  ‘Potentially Hazardous” Eiffel Tower-Size Asteroid Passing Earth This Week 

  On Dec. 11 (this Saturday), a “potentially hazardous” asteroid the size of the Eiffel Tower will enter Earth’s orbital path, according to NASA. 

  

  The 1,082-foot space rock, named 4660 Nereus, will come within 2.5 million miles from Earth on Saturday. NASA considers any space object a “near-Earth object” within 120 million miles. Any object that is within 4.65 million miles is considered to be “potentially hazardous.” Any deviation from Nereus’ projected path could put it on a collision course with Earth.

  

  The egg-shaped asteroid was first discovered in 1982. Nereus’ 1.82-year orbit around the sun brings it closer to Earth every decade. NASA and the Japanese space agency (JAXA) have considered “punching” it off course with a spacecraft but have abandoned the idea. 

  NASA recently launched a proactive planetary defense mission with the Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) spacecraft. Between Sept. 26 and Oct. 1, 2022, NASA will slam the DART into another asteroid called Dimorphos to see if it could alter the space rock’s course.

  If the DART test goes well next year, NASA could use the kinetic force of a spacecraft to deflect potentially hazardous near-Earth objects. It won’t be as exciting as the 1998 sci-fi thriller “Armageddon,” starring Bruce Willis, who landed a spacecraft on an asteroid headed to Earth and detonated a nuclear bomb, saving all of humanity. But it appears NASA will have tools in the not too distant future that could save humanity in the event of a potentially hazardous asteroid. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 22:40

• You Only Die Once As TINA Quietly Leaves The Building
  You Only Die Once As TINA Quietly Leaves The Building

  It was about a year ago when we first pointed out a remarkable divergence in this broken market: retail investors (as proxied by the 50 most popular retail-held stocks) were outperforming the smart money by a factor of 10 to 1 (and blowing out the S&P500 in the process).

  Is This The End For Hedge Funds: Retail Investors Outperform “Smart Money” Ten-To-One https://t.co/UsGDZKCnIx

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 13, 2020

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

  And while retail investors continued to dramatically outperform both the entire hedge fund universe (and to a lesser extent the broader market) for much of the following year, this unprecedented outperformance by stimmy-fueled apes almost came to a screeching halt last week when, as we noted, the universe of retail favorite stocks – mostly low liquidity, low float, high momentum small and mid-cap names as well as a couple of giga-caps such as Apple and Tesla – was on the verge of ending its remarkable streak of steamrolling the rest of the market:

  This is getting ugly: at this rate 20-year-old daytraders will soon barely outperform billionaire hedge fund PMs by more than 200% pic.twitter.com/WjcG4Kjh4w

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 2, 2021

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

  A few days later, it got even uglier, as the “retail basket” of non-profitable, mostly tech, high momentum names continued to slide following Friday’s rout, sending it to the lowest level since May, and back to levels first seen in Jan 2021. And while retail continue to outperform (modestly) the HFRX hedge fund universe, the 50 favorite retail stocks are now trailing the S&P500 by about 50% on a YTD basis.

  

  Picking up on the recent stretch of miserable retail performance, Bloomberg this morning writes that individual investors “are facing a moment of reckoning” adding that “the obsession with risk-on assets – short-handed by the term YOLO for you only live once – was a blessing for amateur traders during the meme-stock craze.” However, as we first showed last week, it has since turned “into a curse as the going got rough in every nook of the stock market last week.” And when looking at our chart of (last) week, today Bloomberg points out that Goldman’s basket of the 50 most-popular stocks among individual investors plunged 7.8% last week, trailing companies most-favored by mutual funds by 5.8 percentage points, the most ever.

  

  Virtually no momentum name was spared: retail investors incurred several big losses last week, from Plug Power Inc., which plunged 17%, Beyond Meat, which lost 16%, and Tesla which shed 6.2%.

  This is a problem because the retail crowd, which was among the first to scoop up shares during the 2020 pandemic rout, now appear to be leaving the YOLO mentality behind because, well, YODO.

  As confirmation, Bloomberg notes that last week, the daily average premium that small-lot traders – those buying or selling 10 options contracts or less – shelled out for protection jumped to about $786 million, surpassing a January peak for the highest level in recent history, according to a Susquehanna analysis of the latest Options Clearing Corp data.

  

  That premium spent on small-lot put buys is about twice as high as where it was two months ago.

  “While the small-lot call premiums continue to outpace those put premiums in absolute terms, we can see that they are trending in different directions,” said Chris Jacobson, a strategist at Susquehanna. That’s “suggesting that retail activity on the put side is in fact ramping up alongside the market weakness.”

  Of course, a different – and perhaps more correct – way of analyzing the data is that even retail investors are smart enough to hedge their positions during times of surging market vol… like right now. And if stocks tumble, retail investors will have puts to fall back on. As in, you know, hedging – something that hedge funds used to do once but then completely forgot how to do in centrally-planned markets.

  Still, with stocks remaining in deep negative gamma territory and market pain showing no end to its weakness, retail traders whose willingness to stand firm amid prior turmoils, are showing little appetite for risk. Evidence is piling up quickly: SPACs are taking a drubbing. Until today, bitcoin was hovering steps away from a 30% correction from its peak. Off-exchange volume has dropped to near the lowest level since last year’s rout. A gauge of newly minted initial public offerings, measured by the Renaissance IPO exchange-traded fund, lost 11% last week.

  A separate analysis from Goldman Sachs showed that last Wednesday some $2.2tn in option were traded in the US, with puts dominating amid a frenzy to hedge downside.

  

  “There must be an issue with either 1) meme stocks losing interest, 2) general profit taking into year end,” said Ben Emons, global macro strategist with Medley Global Advisors LLC.”

  To this all we can add say is that i) the data, when massaged enough, can show whatever one wants it to – after all, just last week we also showed that contrary to Bloomberg’s, and Susquehana’s analysis, retail investors were in fact buying the dip furiously and waving in everything that hedge funds had to sell. After all, according to Vanda Research, retail stock purchases rose to a new record on Tuesday of $2.2 billion, after reaching $2.1 billion during Friday’s rout.

  

  That said, until we get evidence to the contrary, it’s probably safe to say – as Bloomberg’s Cormac Mullen did – that for U.S. stock investors TINA has left the building. His thoughts below:

  It’s time to look for alternatives to America’s outperforming stock market, especially for global investors with a longer-term horizon.

  As any good Irishman will tell you when you ask for directions, you shouldn’t really be starting from here. Anyone seeking to put fresh money into U.S. stocks right now will see them already at a record relative to the rest of the world, with margins at an all-time high, trading at their most expensive since the dotcom bubble.

  But history shows the best returns for U.S. stock investors come when they buy at more sensible valuations and that they leave themselves open to losses when they pay up. Here’s a look at 10-year rolling returns for the S&P 500 superimposed with the starting P/E at the beginning of the investment period, which shows a strong inverse relationship since the 1960s.

  

  The relative valuation gap between American shares and global peers is also at a record, with the MSCI AC World ex-U.S. Index on less than 14 times forward earnings compared to the MSCI USA Index on 21 times.

  Forget TINA, that suggests there are plenty of opportunities in other markets for investors willing to take a chance: from bets on a rebound in China’s beleaguered shares (12 times earnings), to Japan’s economic reopening (14 times) to a contrarian wager on the U.K. (11 times). The French, Dutch, Austrian, Czech and Vietnamese benchmarks are already set to beat the S&P 500 this year — at least in data through Friday — along with over 20 others.

  None are without risk, but U.S. stocks face their own country-specific headwinds from the withdrawal of stimulus to the potential for a policy error to the threat of increased regulation of tech firms to mean-reverting margins. All without a decent valuation buffer.

  U.S. shares have been a fantastic investment, with a total return of almost 350% over the last decade compared with 100% for their international peers. But the risk/reward looks less favorable for the next 10 years, suggesting it’s time investors take a more serious look at alternatives.

  In conclusion, it is safe to say that all bets are off: after all, this morning Gartman called for a bear market sparking a furious market rebound and short squeeze (just as Goldman predicted would happen as the lows for the year are now in)… 

  Stocks Soar After Gartman Says “A Bear Market Is Required” And “Stocks Are Headed Lower” https://t.co/zegdDGTG0q

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 6, 2021

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

  … and should the extremely oversold rally continue tomorrow, wiping out the sour taste of the post Thanksgiving rout, then retail investors may be one surge higher away from taking the S&P to new all time highs.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 22:20

• China's RRR Cut Risks A Bond-Leverage Crackdown
  China’s RRR Cut Risks A Bond-Leverage Crackdown

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets reported and analyst

  RRR Cut Risks a Bond-Leverage Crackdown

  Beijing is moving toward putting a floor under the slumping economy. The PBOC cut the reserve requirement ratio for a second time this year, while Beijing signaled some policy fine-tuning in the housing sector. Neither move has changed the overall tone that China is doing the bare minimum to support the economy.

  

  Meanwhile, investors are taking advantage of cheap funding to build up leverage in the bond market, sending the overnight repo volume soaring. The risk is that the PBOC may step in to crack down on the leverage.

  Three days after Premier Li Keqiang flagged a cut in the RRR, the PBOC duly followed through. The central bank quickly came out to say that the RRR cut is a routine maneuver, in part to replace the maturing MLF loans that banks borrowed from the central bank. The PBOC said its stable monetary policy hasn’t changed, downplaying the notion this is the start of an easing cycle.

  The RRR cut in July did little to arrest the growth slowdown. After all, the economy is faltering not because there’s a lack of loan supply, but because the real-estate deleveraging has dampened the demand for credit. Hence, China’s growth outlook relies on whether the housing market can stabilize and whether investments in other industries can pick up the slack.

  There, Beijing also offered a glimpse of hope. The Politburo on Monday promised to provide more affordable housing next year. It indicated Beijing will take more of a supply-side approach, by increasing land and housing supply in the private sector, to address lofty housing prices, as opposed to cool housing demand, which is more economically damaging, Nomura’s economist Lu Ting noted. Still, Lu also pointed out that there has not been a 180-degree change in Beijing’s property curbs yet, suggesting the economic slowdown may continue in coming months.

  It’s worth pointing out that the previous RRR cut in July hasn’t lowered overall corporate borrowing costs much, as China Bull Research pointed out. In fact, the weighted average lending rate for corporates rose by 10 bps to 5.3% in the third quarter. In other words, the RRR cut didn’t fully pass through to the economy.

  Where did the money go? At least part of the liquidity has been channeled to the bond market, as investors borrowed short-term funds in the interbank market to buy government paper. The daily overnight repo turnover reached 4.7 trillion yuan ($737 billion) Monday, a level last seen in the early stage of the pandemic last year. (The 20-day average actually reached a record last month.)

  

  Banks’ interbank lending to non-bank financial institutions rose to elevated levels last quarter, another sign of financial speculation, according to China Bull Research.

  

  Beijing has been stressing that financial institutions should support the real economy, not speculate. In the past, the PBOC periodically drained liquidity to shake up leverage. The risk is that they do it again.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 22:18

• "They Don't Care…They Just Do" – Chinese Economist Explains President Xi's Crackdown
  “They Don’t Care…They Just Do” – Chinese Economist Explains President Xi’s Crackdown

  President Trump left office nearly a year ago, but much to Beijing’s chagrin, the relationship between China and the US has only continued to deteriorate. And now that the Americans are no longer willing to tolerate China’s transgressions in the hope that free markets would inevitably free the country from the CCP’s grasp, President Xi has decided not to hold back. Hong Kong is now firmly under CCP control, and many fear an invasion of Taiwan might be just around the corner.

  Xi’s string of heavy handed “reforms”, which China launched over the summer, have cracked down on industries as diverse as video games (minors are only allowed to play three hours a week) private tutoring (fears about educational inequality have angered the working class) and Beijing’s biggest tech firms, among others. Jack Ma, formerly the country’s richest man, has been brought to heel by the CCP after he stepped out of line during an obscure regional tech conference.

  Chinese markets and the growing geopolitical tensions in the wake of the COVID outbreak in Wuhan have attracted increasing interest in the US and abroad. So “60 Minutes” decided to interview a few different experts on China’s economy, some from the US, and some from China. 

  Keyu Jin, an economist, splits her time between the UK (where she teaches at the London School of Economist) and Beijing, where her father is president of one of China’s largest state-owned banks.

  

  According to Jin, China grew lawlessly over the last 40 years. But the next 40 years will be much more disciplined.

  President Xi envisions what he calls a “modern, socialist economy” for China – a much more “restricted” version of capitalism. According to Jin, President Xi is with the peasants, the middle class, and unlike his predecessors, he “doesn’t really care so much about what happens to elites.”

  Jin says he was sitting in the third row at the conference where Ma’s seemingly innocuous criticism about China’s tech regs “stifling innovation” led to the sacking of the Ant Global IPO (what would have been the biggest IPO in the world up to that date) and Ma disappearing from public view for months.

  Earlier this year, Chinese tech CEOs started stepping down and announcing massive donations.

  When confronted by Lesley Stahl about Beijing potentially killing the golden goose, Jin insisted that this was a “complete misinterpretation” of what’s going on. Lin insisted that China has been much more effective at lifting people out of poverty.

  To try and keep things fair and balanced, 60 Minutes also interviewed Matt Pottinger, a former Trump Administration National Security official whose focus is on China.

  According to Pottinger, if you are an American company operating in China, new rules imposed by the CCP require companies to hand over their encryption keys to the Chinese government. By law, the data now belong to the CCP.

  While Jin acknowledged that Americans might not be willing to tolerate the level of paternalistic behavior that’s imposed on society by the CCP, the approach has the support of the Chinese people. Take Beijing’s destruction of the private tutoring industry. Jin says it was an example of free market capitalism run amok by draining the resources of parents. So one weekend in July, the government essentially outlawed this entire $120 billion for-profit sector with the snap of its fingers.

  Jin concluded with this: “If [the CCP] is determined to do one thing, they just do it. They don’t care about the capital markets, implication of the financial sector. They don’t care about the employment implications.”

  That’s a level of control that American leaders will never come close to having.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 22:00

• Joe Biden's War Against Alaska Benefits Russia
  Joe Biden’s War Against Alaska Benefits Russia

  Authored by Duggan Flanakan via RealClearEnergy.org,

  Joe Biden’s war on fossil fuels has taken perhaps its heaviest toll on the 49th State. Oil and gas account for roughly half of Alaska’s economy and a quarter of its jobs. There would be lots more oil and gas jobs in Alaska but for Joe Biden, who unilaterally suspended all oil and gas leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge that President Trump had earlier approved. Now that action is being challenged in court.

  The ANWR suspensions came on the heels of the weak defense of ConocoPhillips’ Willow Master Development Plan. In October, the Biden Justice Department opted not to continue its defense of the project after the Alaska federal district court ruled against what would have been the largest oil and gas drilling project in the Alaskan Arctic.

  Adding insult to injury, just as he did by vacating sanctions that had blocked construction by Russia of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, President Joe opted to abandon the Arctic and the people of Alaska. In turn, he opened an even wider door for Russia to overtake the U.S. as an oil and gas producer. Lest anyone forget, the Nord Stream deal was announced weeks after Biden killed the Keystone Pipeline, also by Executive Order.

  

  Thanks to Biden policies, Russia has become America’s No. 2 foreign oil supplier. Russia has more than doubled its oil sales to the U.S. since Biden took office; Russian oil now doubles Alaskan oil’s contribution to U.S. consumption. While Alaska’s oil and gas production has fallen by 75 percent since 1988, seriously impacting state revenues, Biden has enabled Putin’s Russia to gain U.S. market share equal to Alaska’s entire current output.

  The Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) has sued President Biden, Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, and others in the Biden Administration, stating that their actions to obstruct and delay the development of valid oil and gas leases in the non-wilderness Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge are unlawful.

  In the 32-page filing, before the U.S. District Court for Alaska, the plaintiff explained that AIDEA had won the right to bid on leases to pursue drilling in ANWR when a federal judge denied any injunctive efforts to stop the oil and gas sale.

  Joe Biden disregarded this order on his first day of office by placing a “temporary” moratorium on ANWR development. He followed up in June by halting exploration and development on those leases, claiming that legal deficiencies in the oil and gas leasing program necessitated a new environmental review. In August, Haaland announced that Interior would still need more than a year to complete its “review.” Any bets on the outcome?

  AIDEA argued that these actions violated the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 that opened the door for the January 2021 lease sale. AIDEA had won seven 10-year leases in that sale to pursue development on tracts totaling about 370,000 acres in the 19-million-acre refuge.

  AIDEA contends that “defendants have defied a direct congressional mandate [emphasis added] to facilitate development of oil and gas resources on the coastal plain of Alaska. Rather than follow the law and the science, defendants have engaged in a politically driven, systematic campaign to prevent any Coastal Plain development.”

  AIDEA is seeking a declaratory judgment holding that the Biden ANWR moratorium violates the Administrative Procedures Act. The plea also asks for declaratory judgments that the Biden moratorium and Interior’s actions violate the 2017 Tax Act and constitute unlawful withholding and unreasonable delay of agency action – and are also arbitrary and capricious.

  AIDEA also seeks permanent injunctions against the federal defendants and an order compelling the government to proceed with leasing and development. They are going for the grand slam homer while down by three in the bottom of the ninth. America needs Alaska’s oil and gas. But Biden would rather buy it from Russia. And OPEC (whom he is begging!). And Venezuela. [Alas, China has none to spare.]

  Biden’s war on Alaska would be bad enough, but Russia is also engaged in polar geopolitics and has been investing heavily in the Arctic. According to Heritage Foundation scholars, Russia is spending nearly a billion dollars by 2026 to complete building a fiber optic cable (the Polar Express) spanning nearly 8,000 miles from the northern village of Teriberka to Vladivostok.

  The state-funded project was authorized under Russia’s 2018 Northern Sea Route Development Plan, which calls for significant increases in Arctic development by 2035. Putin’s Russia is also expanding Arctic oil and gas drilling, including a new project in the Laptev Sea. Russia has even stepped up its Arctic military presence, with new patrol vessels and new marine bases.

  The once-dubbed “evil empire” also aims to test its Poseidon nuclear-powered, nuclear-armed torpedo in the Arctic from newly refitted nuclear submarines. And Russia has over 40 ice-breaking ships, compared to America’s two, one of which is over 30 years old; neither can travel in U.S. waters above the Arctic Circle.

  Biden has, you may have noticed, brought expanded oil and gas and coal operations to countries around the world while depriving Americans of hundreds of thousands of direct jobs and leaving millions unwilling to work at all. The latest polls show him 2 points behind the much-maligned and twice-impeached Donald Trump.

  Biden’s anti-development policies play well with well-heeled environmental groups who oppose any use of fossil fuels in the West and by Africans (but not by Russians, Chinese, Indians, Iranians, or OPEC members). He has plowed on despite falling polls and rising prices for gasoline, home heating, groceries, and just about everything else.

  He knows he is not running again and has nothing to lose. He is effectively President for Life (at least his political life) only if he continues to please the far left. Expect no course corrections.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 21:40

• Hispanics Hate 'Latinx': Poll
  Hispanics Hate ‘Latinx’: Poll

  A new poll conducted by a Democratic firm has found that just 2% of Hispanics refer to themselves as “Latinx,” and 40% are offended by the term, according to Politico.

  

  The nationwide poll, conducted by Amandi International, “a top Democratic firm specializing in Latino outreach,” 68% of those polled referred to themselves as Hispanic, while 21% favor “Latino” or “Latina.”

  In short, yet another one of the left’s made-up words to stuff people into categories as ‘non-offensively’ as possible is hugely offensive. So much in fact that 30% of those polled said they would be less likely to support a politician or organization that uses ‘Latinx.’

  As Politico notes, this is bad news for Democrats at a time when Republicans appear to be wooing Latino voters.

  “The numbers suggest that using Latinx is a violation of the political Hippocratic Oath, which is to first do no electoral harm,” said Amandi, whose firm advised Obama’s successful nationwide Hispanic outreach program during both of his presidential campaigns. “Why are we using a word that is preferred by only 2 percent, but offends as many as 40 percent of those voters we want to win?”

  Amandi emphasized that he wasn’t blaming the erosion of Latino support for Democrats merely on the use of the word Latinx. Hispanic voters have started shifting right for myriad reasons, he said, chiefly because of more aggressive engagement from Republicans who have “weaponized culture war issues at the margins with Hispanic voters.”

  But as some on the left began embracing the term Latinx in politics, it started to expose a fault line in the party between moderate traditionalists and the more activist progressive base. Those embracing Latinx have explained that the word — and the trend of making Spanish words gender-inclusive by ending them in an X — is not a product of the U.S. left or white elites, but instead, can be traced back to Latin America and Latinos. It’s also an alternative to Hispanic, a term also criticized for its ties to Spain, which colonized much of Latin America. -Politico

  The term, to put it shortly, reeks of condescension.

  In June, President Biden was mocked for saying “It’s awful hard, as well, to get Latinx vaccinated as well. Why? They’re worried that they’ll be vaccinated and deported.”

  Breaking down why it’s so insulting is Virginia’s Attorney General-elect Jason Miyares (R), who is of Cuban descent and the state’s first Hispanic to hold the office.

  “By insisting on using the incorrect term Latinx, progressives are engaging in a type of cultural Marxism, a recast of societal norms,” he told Politico. “Latinos don’t use the term — only upper-educated white liberals who hardly interact with the Latino community. I believe that every time they use the term Latinx, they lose another Latino vote.”

  Read the rest of the report here.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 21:20

• On The Quasispecies Origins Of SARS-CoV-2's Enigmatic Furin-Cleavage Site
  On The Quasispecies Origins Of SARS-CoV-2’s Enigmatic Furin-Cleavage Site

  Via Harvard2TheBigHouse.Substack.com,

  A Grin Without a Cat

  Bottling-Up the Quasispecies Origins of SARS-CoV-2’s Enigmatic Furin-Cleavage Site. 

  From the co-author of the first peer-reviewed paper examining a laboratory origin for SARS-CoV-2, as well as its addendum, which formally linked the H1N1 Spanish Flu pandemic strain release of 1977 to gain-of-function research.

  

  Although it started as a point of obscure technical reference back in early 2020 as our ongoing pandemic was still in the early stages of spreading its now-ubiquitous wings, it’s now nearly two years later and debates are still raging about the origins and relevance of SARS-CoV-2’s notorious furin-cleavage site, or FCS. 

  This four-base amino-acid insert immediately drew the attention of the Sirotkin & Sirotkin father-and-son team as they were working on their paper covering the possible laboratory-engineered origins of the COVID-19 Pandemic, which was submitted back in April 2020, long before anyone else was discussing any of this with meaningful scientific detail:

  The genetic signatures in question includes two distinctive features possessed by SARS-CoV-2’s spike-protein: the unique sequence in the receptor binding domain (RBD), a region known to be critical for SARS-CoV-2’s utilization of human angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE2), which is the cell surface receptor used by both SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 for fusion with target cells and subsequent cell entry. The second feature is the presence of a polybasic furin cleavage site, which is also known as a multibasic cleavage site (MBS)—a four amino acid insertion with limited sequence flexibility—within the coronavirus’s novel spike-protein, that is not found in SARS-CoV or other lineage B coronaviruses. 

  This furin cleavage site, which is poly or multibasic by definition since its composed of multiple basic amino acids, is an important virulence feature observed to have been acquired by fusion proteins of avian influenza viruses and Newcastle Disease Virus either grown under experimental conditions or isolated from commercial animal farms—settings that mimic the conditions of serial laboratory passage. 

  In fact, no influenza virus with a furin cleavage site has ever been found [to originate] in nature, and it is a feature that has been thoroughly investigated in the literature since it appears to allow the influenza viruses that carry it to establish a systemic multiorgan infection using different cell types including nerve cells,  is correlated with high pathogenicity, and also plays a key role in overcoming the species barrier.  

  More generally, despite the fact that not all serially passed viruses have demonstrated an increase in pathogenicity, the fact remains that every highly pathogenic avian influenza virus, defined by having a furin cleavage site, has either been found on commercial poultry farms that create the pseudo-natural conditions necessary for serial passage, or created in laboratories with gain-of-function serial passage experiments.

  The first glaring sign that the virological community had something to hide was the fact that all of the studies covering the notorious 2012 gain-of-function experiments with ferrets and influenza referred to this four amino-acid FCS insert as multi-basic instead of poly-basic, like it was in all of the 2020 studies discussing this feature in the SARS-CoV-2 virus. 

  Granted scientific writing always has a load of jargon, but this really seemed intentional, to try a little syntactical shield to draw attention away from the serial passage gain-of-function experiments down with ferrets back in 2012 by hiding behind the fact that polybasic was somehow different from multibasic. 

  However there’s still something that seems to get in the way of tying SARS-CoV-2’s FCS directly to serial passage gain-of-function vaccine work, since there doesn’t appear to be any molecular room for SARS-CoV-2 to have gotten its FCS simply during serial passage as an insert, as it apparently occurs with influenza viruses during serial passage. Based on the genetics involved, there doesn’t appear to be any clear genomic pathway for SARS-CoV-2 to have gained it’s four amino-acid FCS insert as influenza strains presumably did back in 2012, allowing our novel coronavirus to molecularly spread its wings and achieve airborne transmission. With influenza the insertion matches up based on what we know about assumed genomic behavior, with our novel coronavirus that isn’t the case.

  So which is it, does the FCS lead us conclusively to a laboratory origin or not? 

  “You may have noticed, I’m not all there myself.”

  – The Cheshire Cat

  In 2012 during the serial passage experiments with ferrets and influenza viruses, two different teams carried out similar experiments with the H5N1 strain of influenza, which was and still is proliferating all across large commercial poultry farms, and back then was beginning to draw concern that it might gain the ability to jump all the way into human populations – isolated cases had emerged in farm workers in close contact with poultry all across the globe in the years leading up to these gain-of-function experiments, but there way no recorded human-to-human transmission yet. 

  It’s probably worth a brief moment to consider that every major industrial poultry farm on earth is stuffed to the wattles with potential viral hosts which are unable to self-segregate when they get sick like they are in wild populations, and so despite the fact that modern poultry farms have vaccination programs with 100% genomic coverage, 100% compliance, and 100% surveillance  – a perfect experimental situation with far more controllability that human societies – the emergence highly-pathogenic influenza strains that easily cull half the flock in a matter of days and sometimes result in 100% mortality are a constant threat. 

  Turns out you can’t vaccinate your way out of highly-transmissible RNA viruses in crowded commercial settings, but it also turns out that humans have a little issue trying to play God, and as so here we are. 

  So the H5N1 strain being used for serial passage experiments back in 2012 was a close cousin to the H1N1 1918 pandemic strain: Instead of spike-proteins like coronaviruses, the part of an influenza virus that is able to access host receptor-cells consists of a hemagglutinin protein right next to a neuraminidase protein, both of which come in different assortments, and so are referred to together as HxNy – with numbers from 1 to 18 possible to represent the different hemagglutinin proteins, and 1 to 11 indicating which neuraminidase protein is present.

  So as a unit, the HxNx surface-protein complex in influenza viruses fills an analogous role – penetrating and successfully infecting host cells – as the spike-protein does for coronaviruses, where SARS-CoV-2 has its FCS. 

  In the first experiment with H5N1, a Japanese team lead by Dr. Yoshiro Kawaoka wanted to try and measure how likely this strain was to move past only jumping from poultry to people and actually establish human-to-human transmission, by taking the gene for the H5 protein from H5N1, and splicing it onto a virus with the seven other genes – not including this H5 hemagglutinin gene – from the pandemic H1N1 strain, and then seeing what happened when the strains that emerged from this process got a chance to infect a bunch of lab ferrets sharing air in the same room but isolated in separate cages. 

  A Dutch team lead by Dr. Ron Fouchier conducted a similar study, in this one they also took this H5N1 influenza strain, but instead of making a chimeric Frankenvirus with genes from H1N1, alternatively but to a similar effect: they jacked it full of mutagens to accelerate the evolutionary process, and then also let it run amok through a whole bunch of lab ferrets in a similar set-up – watching to see which strains were eventually able to establish airborne transmission among the critters. 

  And in both cases it was only strains with our notorious FCS, albeit described without that exact term and instead using multibasic inserts and other language, which were able to reliably establish airborne transmission between laboratory ferrets, telling both teams of scientists it was this furin-cleavage site which was especially dangerous and might open the door to another human influenza pandemic if a virus with it was able to jump completely off of poultry farms and into human populations. 

  However there’s been a fundamental misunderstanding going on, one that rests at the very base of scientific exploration, that’s caused everyone talking about the FCS to argue that it’s an insert that appeared within the virus during these serial passages between ferrets, and was an evolutionary adaptation which allowed for airborne transmission to occur. 

  Because if you look carefully, that’s not what happened at all. 

  “How queer everything is to-day! And yesterday things went on just as usual, I wonder if I’ve been changed in the night? Let me think: was I the same when I got up this morning?”

  -The Cheshire Cat

  Fortuitously for us, the easiest way to correct the misconception around the FCS only emerging after airborne transmission between animal hosts, or being an insert that got added directly into the genome by evolution as a response to that pressure, is to examine SARS-CoV-2 and its behavior during serial passage as a quasispecies mutant swarm.

  The quasispecies swarm model approaches RNA viruses not as discrete genotypes transmitted on by discrete strains, but instead as quasispecies of mutant swarms of virions which carry distinct but complimentary sets of alleles – collections of genes thought to work together – which work in concert in real-time to establish and expand infections. One of the first empirical changes that comes once you consider an RNA virus as a quasispecies is that at any point in time an average of all the extant variants’ genomes serves as the smallest selective unit, as opposed to using individual virions or any single extant genome in a population, the classical approach. 

  This quasispecies viral swarming is an amorphous behavior that describes the search for fitness that occurs as each successive generation of the swarm produces another spectra of mutations, with the term “quasispecies” specifically describing “distributions of non-identical but related genomes subjected to a continuous process of genetic variation, competition, and selection, and which act as a unit of selection.”

  Each of these distributions can be considered clouds of allelic statistical possibilities, each of which represents the spectrum of mutations that can be expected to emerge within a set number of generations, so their ratios will be constantly changing over successive generations and in different environmental settings.

  This type of effect has just begun to be explored within the classical model, by quantifying the antigenic waves that shimmer across the surface of quasispecies mutant swarms as they shift between the host populations, and using these measurements to indirectly measure the quasispecies swarm itself without really getting the full picture of what’s really going on. 

  With quasispecies viruses replicating continually once a successful infection has set in and begun to smolder, the most-fit variant for a given tissue will predominate in that one tissue when a sample is taken only from it. However, although only one variant will appear in the smoky quasispecies mutant swarm infecting the tissue, the smoldering infection will be continually throwing off new variants which represent different points in the possible mutational spectrum – some of which will be better adapted to neighboring tissue, and others acting as accelerants for the predominate variant, intensifying its virulence.

  And just like one gas acting as an accelerant for another’s combustion can be modeled mathematically by looking at their relative binding tendencies to different elements and how they react at different concentrations, the mathematical inevitability of quasispecies mutant swarms fully exploring their mutational spectrum and finding variants to fuel their spread isn’t any different. It’s only the language that varies, as the literature currently describes the positive selection quasispecies mutant variants resulting in “hitchhiking” between mutations on variants in the same swarm, the exact same concept as different variants and their mutations acting as accelerates for each other during gaseous chemical combustion.

  Or in a more traditional sense, quasispecies mutant swarms likely depend on a sort of accidentally eusocial viral altruism to prosper. As one study revealed, although its usually possible to identify a majority consensus sequence from a sample of a host infected by COVID-19, the sample had a broad median variant count of 23, with nearly 250 different variants found in total just within one single host. 

  And considering that about half of the observed mutations thought to have a significant impact on gene expression and samples differing throughout the day even in the same organ system, as well as the fact that barely 2% of the minority variants were found to overlap at all between any two hosts – the inherently nebulous quasispecies mutant swarming nature of SARS-CoV-2 begins to coalesce even more.

  So as with any virus, but especially with coronaviruses, it’s important to keep in mind that hidden within their large genomes are entire suites of accessory genes which only appear functional while actually living inside their hosts, in vivo, and whose function won’t be observable within the virtual environment in lab Petri dishes, in vitro: “the coronavirus group-specific genes are not essential for growth in cell culture but function in virus-host interactions.”

  This means that some coronavirus genes get effectively muted when the virus isn’t being challenged by the immune system of an entire host body, which also helps explain why SARS-CoV-2 violates the “canyon hypothesis,” and has a region of its genome which appears never to have been challenged by a full host immune system like every other human coronavirus. 

  And so with the quasispecies model in mind, maybe it shouldn’t be such a surprise that our friendly neighborhood novel coronavirus has an FCS that isn’t exactly permanent, and can pull a little bit of a disappearing act – or at least what appears to us as outside scientific observers to be a disappearing act. Since it turns out SARS-C0V-2’s quasispecies swarm almost immediately loses its FCS when it’s passaged through Vero cells, which are derived from a line of African green monkey kidney cells that’s commonly used for cell culture, or in vitro, experiments.  

  These cells don’t present the same set of immune challenges as a full host, hardly a tiny fraction of them, and so it turns out SARS-CoV-2’s quasispecies swarm no longer needs the group-specific genes to cleave certain cell types conferred by an FCS when its in these friendly isolated cell-culture kidney cells – meaning it drops off, almost entirely in a single passage. 

  Almost, but not entirely. A phrase that defines trying to understand quasispecies mutant swarms overall. 

  But okay, the FCS can be almost entirely lost without all the immune challenges posed by a full host, but then how did it get there in the first place? The exact same way the H5N1 strains “gained” it during the 2012 experiments with ferrets and influenza: It was always there to begin with. 

  “When the day becomes the night and the sky becomes the sea, when the clock strikes heavy and there’s no time for tea; and in our darkest hour, before my final rhyme, she will come back home to Wonderland and turn back the hands of time.”

  – The Cheshire Cat

  In each of the 2012 serial passage experiments with influenza strains and ferrets, the FCS didn’t appear as a response to the challenge of airborne transmission between hosts, it existed in a very small frequency within each H5N1 swarm prior to each experiment, and then quickly reached majority status once the bottleneck of jumping from ferret-to-ferret in the air was presented. 

  It was observed by each team after successful airborne transmission between ferrets, however before this challenge was presented to the H5N1 swarms, they were both first heavily mutated by artificial outside means – directly splicing in genes from H1N1 in the case of Dr. Yoshiro Kawaoka and bathing the swarm in a mutagen in the cast of Dr. Ron Fouchier – artificial, inherently sloppy, and unpredictable processes a long way from surgically splicing precise nucleotides in-and-out, which led to the emergence of the FCS in small minority subpopulations of their swarms prior to their presentation to ferrets for passaging.

  This was the challenge that created the FCS during those experiments, the outside intervention of scientists intent on carrying out their gain-of-function experiments, not the challenge of jumping through the air between ferrets. Once it exists anywhere in the swarm, the FCS is going to remain at levels that are too small for typical detection until its special ability is called for: Airborne transmission between mammalian hosts. 

  Directly supporting this is the reemergence of SARS-CoV-2’s FCS within Calu-3 cells – cells grown from the surface of human lungs – after it falls off in Vero cells. The swarm doesn’t need an FCS to flourish inside monkey kidney cells, inside Vero cells, however once it gets placed into human airway cells – now the chance of airborne transmission is back on the table, and so the FCS quickly returns to dominance inside the swarm, reaching fixation in just a single passage. 

  SARS-CoV-2’s affinity for human kidneys – up to 25% of its patients can suffer an acute kidney injury – is likely linked to this past history being passaged through Vero kidney cells during its development as a live-attenuated vaccine (LAV) – a vaccine built from an entire virus that’s supposed to be weakened down to the point where it can never establish symptomatic infections, but still serves as enough of a mock-up to provide our immune systems with the ability to recognize and neutralize the actual live version of that virus. 

  LAVs were discovered by Louis Pasteur of preserving dairy-products fame, who accidentally discovered that samples of chicken cholera left out in the elements got weakened to the point where they effectively became vaccines: Exposing healthy chickens to samples of cholera that’d been weakened, or attenuated by the elements, protected the chickens from infection by the full-strength virus without creating any symptoms during inoculation by the weakened strain. And although this version of a LAV wasn’t known to revert, the modern LAV that protects against Polio, called OPV, can and does revert all the way back to full virulence and cause paralysis in its hosts. 

  And to design a LAV against Yellow Fever, the only type of vaccine that would confer protection since it creates the strongest type, the first step was building a highly-pathogenic chimera built from genes of several different strains of that virus. This was also the first step to develop OPV, which has recently begun the paradoxical phenomenon of reassembling itself within vaccinated populations and establishing full paralytic virulence. In 2019 there were 176 cases of poliomyelitis derived from the OPV strain reverting back to virulence worldwide, when only 33 had been seen the year prior. 

  This enigmatic process, of a LAV reverting or deattenuating back to virulence, is one of the worst nightmares for the virological and vaccinological communities – in part because in the case of OPV, the fully reverted strains are able to infect absolutely everyone, even if they’ve been fully vaccinated or previously infected. And its a possibility virologists and vaccine-designers are all well-aware of.  

  After all, as our Dr. Ron Fouchier of ferret and influenza serial passage gain-of-function fame noted rather presciently in July of 2019, a few months before the start of the Wuhan Military Games:

  “That’s what happened in the 70s, people were trying to do live-attenuated vaccines and do human challenge studies and that might be the way the H1 re-emerged in the 70s. Some people say it was a lab accident. I don’t believe that. I think it was actually human challenge studies and live-attenuated vaccines that reverted that are the likely candidates of the 1970 reemergence of H1. And we need to make sure that doesn’t happen again.”

  Because when a LAV reverts, the viral swarm that emerges in the case of OPV at least runs right through both natural and vaccine-induced immunity, and this is even with a virus like Polio where the OPV vaccine is considered 100% effective and permanent. 

  Turns out OPV vaccine was almost, but not entirely effective. 

  And so SARS-CoV-2 and the experimental H5N1 viral swarms both expressing their FCS when they need to achieve airborne transmission serves as a canonical example of  “the convergent evolution that dominates virus–host interactions, since viral proteins evolve convergently and often accumulate many of the same linear motifs that mediate many functionally diverse biophysical interactions in order to manipulate complex host processes.” They’re both products of serial passage gain-of-function experiments, and both display the ability to gain and lose their FCS depending on whether or not mammalian airborne transmission is on the table.

  When SARS-CoV-2 is taken out of kidney cells where an FCS won’t possibly be needed for airborne transmission, it seems to disappear back into the shadows as it only remains within a small minority sub-population of the swarm, but when it’s placed back in human airway cells – in just one passage it can appear to reach fixation, although in reality there will always be a small minority subpopulation without it.

  But of course in the case of SARS-CoV-2, this ability for the minority population with the FCS to almost immediately become the dominant strain wasn’t first observed in the laboratory, but unfortunately for humanity occurred in the field during the Wuhan Military Games, when this unexpected emergence of the FCS-dominant swarm allowed for airborne transmission and kicked off our pandemic as the virus spread through the air all across Wuhan.

  The fact SARS-CoV-2 had an FCS in the first place was suppressed from the start, because of its obvious ties to the gain-of-function serial passage work of 2012. And because of the nature of quasispecies swarms, which often create the illusion that only one discrete variant is extant in a population since each isolated organ system tends to predominately host the variant that’s best suited for it at the time, this novel coronavirus appeared to have a rather immutable and stable genome – since nasal swabs will only ever catch the one variant happens to be winning in your nose at a given time. 

  However the full quasispecies swarm will always be there, it’s just not going to appear unless you look for it with far more exacting tools than just a nasal swab. And just like OPV and its perpetually reverting quasispecies swarm, SARS-CoV-2 is going to continue to revert back towards its original highly-pathogenic form so long as any transmissions are ongoing at all, going through gatekeeping mutations as it makes unexpected evolutionary leaps back towards full virulence. 

  “Only a few find the way, some don’t recognize it when they do – some… don’t ever want to.”

  -The Cheshire Cat

  H1N1 is the highly-pathogenic state of human influenza, it is not an alien virus – it is completely and entirely adapted to our genome and has been with us for thousands of years. H1N1 doesn’t create a pandemic by simply by existing in a population, it is the strain that wins out and emerges once there’s enough crowding and transmission events to trick human influenza into thinking that its host population is about to die off completely, and so it goes into a highly-pathogenic state in an attempt to jump into a new host species, in its case from humans and into pigs.  

  Highly-pathogenic avian influenzas are identified by the existence of an FCS, something H1N1 doesn’t need for our cells because its perfectly adapted to human populations to begin with: 

  “In 1997, small fragments of viral RNA were obtained for sequence analysis from an autopsy sample of a victim of the 1918 influenza. The initial characterization of the virus confirmed the H1N1 subtype and demonstrated that the 1918 HA did not possess the cleavage site mutation seen in the lethal H5 and H7 viruses. This finding eliminated the HA cleavage site mutation as an appealing explanation for the virulent behavior of the 1918 virus.”

  And although there haven’t been any more published gain-of-function experiments with avian influenza due to the very-selectively-enforced moratorium against the practice, in the years since poultry farms have served as their own handy real-life Petri dishes. 

  Studies of the H7N9 avian influenza as its emerged off of poultry farms in a highly-pathogenic state and managed to infect workers have revealed that the process of jumping from birds into people doesn’t just happen out of nowhere in one magic moment. In fact, it takes five successive waves of infections before the H7N9 swarm begins to regularly jump from birds into farm-workers, the only people in close-enough contact to the avian swarm for all five of these waves to antigenically wash over them, building up a swarm within their prospective new humans hosts, and also slowly altering the nature of H7N9’s swarm within both host species. 

  And of course since there’s a highly-pathogenic avian influenza forming, the FCS is the distinguishing feature found in the fifth wave that indicates humans are now at risk. However it’s not only found in the fifth wave, and begins to show up in earlier waves along with other genomic features that fully reach majority fixation in the fifth wave – again showcasing how the quasispecies mutant swarm will invariably change its shape over time, and depending on the challenges its facing.

  So in the many months since the COVID-19 Pandemic began, it’s abundantly clear the people who started it and are profiting the most from it have instructed the media not to talk about “serial passage” at all, nor the past links to vaccine research and past viral outbreaks, including the 1977 H1N1 outbreak linked to military vaccine gain-of-function work as well as the 2009 H1N1 endemic, both likely from serially passaged LAVs that were able to make their way back to full strength much faster than the scientists who designed them anticipated. 

  And so the silence from absolutely everyone when it comes to the connections our ongoing pandemic might have with vaccine research and serial passage is mirrored by the media’s refusal to discuss the millions and millions of culled farm-minks as a link to the obvious intermediate animal host. Since mink point directly to lab ferrets, their very close cousins, which were used during the 2012 gain-of-function experiments that led to a moratorium against the practice, and were almost certainly used to attenuate the SARS-like LAV, that would emerge at the Wuhan Military Games as SARS-CoV-2 – ferrets are the go-to animal to use for airborne vaccine work. 

  Which is why this novel virus was able to create a second simultaneous pandemic across mink farms all across dozens of nations on multiple continents, because the virus was still incredibly well-acclimated to their physiology, since it so closely mimics the ferrets that the virus was serially passaged through as it was attenuated and weakened down into a LAV – appearing to the scientists building it to lose its FCS at some past point along the way, when in reality it was always there, hiding and waiting for when its unique ability might be needed to smile on humanity. 

  And it’s almost certainly the past reversions of H1N1 LAVs in 1977 and 2009 that seemed to eventually just melt away, which sociopaths like Richard Ebright and the rest of his sweaty socially-retarded buddies at JASON are using to assure everyone that SARS-CoV-2, another LAV that’s reverting, will just melt away in just a few more months – just like H1N1 seems to have done twice. Unfortunately, unlike their mythical buddy: Each and everyone one of these arrogant old hacks was drawn into the siren song of multi-billion dollar defense and pharmaceutical contracts long ago, and they’re going to remain pushing for a fascist and entirely ineffective vaccination program because they’re rotten, filthy, diseased whores, and that is exactly what they are being paid to do. 

  Our novel coronavirus is not a naturally spreading and evolving virus, and it has not become endogenous to human populations after thousands of years of coevolution – it is reverting back towards a highly-pathogenic SARS-like chimera that our immune systems will be entirely helpless against, and is going through the same unexpected epistatic gatekeeping mutations that OPV does on its way back to full virulence, which vaccines are also entirely helpless against. 

  In the case of SARS-CoV-2, this gatekeeping results in the sudden emergence of new strains that appear evolutionarily impossible – like Omicron.  And so long as transmission is ongoing, there is nothing that is going to stop this pandemic except more death, because transmission means more gatekeeping, and gatekeeping means continued steps closer to the original strongest version of this highly-pathogenic virus. 

  Being completely and entirely acclimated to the human genome is not at all the case with OPV, a LAV against the Polio virus that’s reverting all across the third world and bringing back Polio’s terrible paralytic poliomyelitis. So OPV serves as a much more accurate analogy for SARS-CoV-2 than the H1N1 LAVs.

  Our novel coronavirus is a LAV derived from the work being done at UNC, the only place on earth trying to make a LAV for SARS-like viruses, which are also obviously not going to be fully acclimated to the human genome like the human influenza virus, which seems to have been with us at least since the Trojan War thousands of years ago. 

  Until SARS-CoV-2 is understood as a LAV that’s deattenuating towards a highly-pathogenic chimeric coronavirus that’s going through gatekeeping mutations and has no intention whatsoever of following the assumptions drawn from observing natural evolution or even the paths of the H1N1 LAVs which melted back into their original endogenous human hosts – humanity is going to continue to be standing on its head as it attempts to battle this pandemic, and misunderstanding the basic fundamental nature of what its up against. 

  It’s something we seem to be particularly good at, since all the way back in 1977 when the first H1N1 LAV emerged to a mass global panic, a massive push was made to create and distribute vaccines against what was thought to be a potentially pandemic strain. But it turns out that one of the ways a LAV isn’t a natural virus, is that when you attempt to vaccinate against it, neurological side-effects appear to proliferate among the vaccinated population, as the virus blows through this attempt at protection. 

  Because unfortunately for all of us, this isn’t the first time we’ve all been down the horrific rabbit-hole of trying to rush out an incredibly profitable vaccine against an enigmatic mystery virus that’s really a military LAV that deattenuated faster than expected. A vaccine which only provides only weak and temporary protection – but also causes wide-spread side-effects because it turns out the pharmaceutical companies were lying about their vaccine studies, and knowingly risked the lives and livelihoods of tens of millions of Americans so they could make as much money as quickly as possible:

  “We are all victims in-waiting.”

  -The Cheshire Cat

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 21:00

• Japan PM Puts "Strike Option" On Table In 1st Since WW2 Amid China, Russia Provocations
  Japan PM Puts “Strike Option” On Table In 1st Since WW2 Amid China, Russia Provocations

  Japan’s prime minister Fumio Kishida has laid out bold new plans to drastically ramp up the country’s defense posture, including for the first time since its defeat in WWII acquiring strike capabilities against foreign enemy bases.

  He unveiled in a wide-ranging speech before the National Diet (or national legislature) that a fundamental shift in defense strategy will be implemented within the next 12 months, following in November a record high national defense budget of a total more than 6 trillion yen being formally approved (the equivalent of $53 billion). 

  “In order to safeguard the people’s lives and livelihoods, we will examine all the options, including the capability to attack enemy bases… and fundamentally strengthen our defense posture with a sense of speed,” PM Kishida said.

  

  Ironically Japan’s leaders have long carefully avoided even references to the word “military” to describe its national defense forces. That looks to change given growing concerns over China (including ongoing island and territorial water disputes), as well as Russia’s assertiveness over the Northern Territories/Kuril islands (and recent missile deployments there) – not to mention recent missile testing by North Korea. 

  International reports commonly estimate that Japan has built an arsenal of almost 1,000 warplanes, and even dozens of submarines and destroyers. Additionally, often its coast guard acts as a forward deployed force in fishing or island disputes with China. 

  This week Japan is showcasing its forces and ability to “stand up to China” in the region by launching a nine day long military exercise, described as follows:

  Dozens of tanks and soldiers fired explosives and machine guns in drills Monday on Japan’s northern island of Hokkaido, a main stronghold for a nation that is perhaps the world’s least-known military powerhouse.

  Just across the sea from rival Russia, Japan opened up its humbly named Self Defense Force’s firing exercises to the media in a display of public firepower that coincides with a recent escalation of Chinese and Russian military moves around Japanese territory.

  Russian and Chinese efforts to encircle Japan may prove counterproductive https://t.co/MtkwO0yn5R
  Joint #Russia–#Chinese air/navy patrols around #Japan’s archipelago are more frequent, a reaction to Tokyo’s growing military partnerships and combat drills with #NATO countries pic.twitter.com/qxfLdG9Xpy

  — Geopolitics (@PhilipCMead) December 6, 2021

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

  The timing of both the PM’s speech and launch of the new drills is interesting given the past months have seen Tokyo go from consciously staying out of the Taiwan independence debate and rhetoric, to more vocally joining Washington’s side – which has included hosting US warships and small-scale joint drills. This has of course been met with condemnation from Beijing.

  Further it must be recalled that in October a grouping of Chinese and Russian warships provocatively traversed narrow passageways near Japan, and ultimately took an encircling route around the large island-nation. And The Associated Press recounts that “In fiscal year 2020 through March, Japanese fighters scrambled more than 700 times — two-thirds against Chinese warplanes, with the remainder mostly against Russians — the Defense Ministry said.” Thus Kishida’s speech appeared to serve as a warning and bit of muscle-flexing in its own right, signaling that Tokyo is ready to respond to perceived aggression by expanding toward becoming a serious military presence in the region.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 20:40

• Facing The Chasm: The Future Of Bitcoin And The Metaverse
  Facing The Chasm: The Future Of Bitcoin And The Metaverse

  Authored by Sebastian Bunney via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  Bitcoin will play a pivotal role in the transfer of information from the physical realm to the digital…

  

  We tend to think of the world as the past, present and future, and as these distinguished moments in time. However, we intuitively know that this is not the case. Instead, we are always in a state of flux, this slow progressive evolution in order to suit humanity’s growing needs, knowledge and demands. However, with change comes adjustment, and what we are facing right now is an adjustment to the digital realm, the world of Bitcoin and our digital identity: a crossing of the chasm, a state of change away from the physical realm of traditional finance, legacy structures and the world as we know it. This article is meant to highlight some of these critical hurdles brought up by Raoul Pal and Robert Breedlove in an effort to get the collective consciousness thinking about how we can transition to this digital realm with minimal volatility and entropy.

  WHERE DO WE START?

  One thing Raoul and Breedlove bring up many times throughout the talk is the metaverse. Therefore, let’s first ensure we are on the same page when it comes to the metaverse. We often hear the metaverse is the future; however, what most deep down the rabbit hole may argue is that the metaverse has been blossoming into existence since the birth of the internet. However, we are only just starting to define it now. Let’s go deeper …

  Most of us tend to interpret the metaverse as this digital environment where we hang out in a virtual world- the world Mark Zuckerberg is pushing with his Facebook ads, i.e., Meta. But, I would argue that the metaverse is not this virtual world that it is made out to be, but rather a digital interface to one’s digital self. It is our digital identity where we interact with our online social community, manage our digital possessions and store our digital wealth, to name a few aspects which are currently easy to identify. With that being said, this osmosis into the metaverse is not a movement of people away from the physical world into the digital world, but rather a transfer of wealth and identity from the physical realm to the digital realm. Although many people already do and will continue to spend time in digital worlds in video games and social platforms, most of us will still very much be rooted in the physical world for the time being.

  Building on this idea, what will happen to physical assets? An asset’s value is subjective and is worth something usually because it provides value to us in some way or another. At the moment, our physical assets offer greater perceived value than our digital assets. This explains the discrepancy between the value of physical versus digital assets globally, e.g., real estate is worth over $300 trillion while the complete cryptocurrency market cap sits at $2.5 trillion (recently as high as $3 trillion). The question now is, how does this value shift over into the metaverse? This, I believe, is a demographic shift. As our population ages, those in earlier generations with limited exposure to the digital realm (i.e., digital identity, digital assets or digital possessions), will slowly bequeath their wealth to their offspring, which will find greater value as technology evolves in the metaverse. However, it should be noted that you will find utility and value in different areas and offerings within the metaverse depending on your age, values, interests, gender and location. Some people may choose to stay primarily in the physical world if the metaverse doesn’t seem to provide ample value to them. Others may dive in headfirst.

  Where are we now? We are currently in a state of limbo, one toe in the digital plane and the rest of the body out. Most of us have exposure to the metaverse when it comes to our digital identity, but only a handful of us find greater value in digital assets over physical assets, although this is quickly changing. However, as we see greater adoption, we will also encounter greater hurdles (technological, political, financial etc.). Taking this into account, this shift towards the metaverse isn’t something that will happen overnight. As previously mentioned, it is a generational demographic shift that has been underway since the invention of the internet. The transition from handwritten letters to email and social media was just the start. Now we should continue to see the transition of wealth, jobs, and identities to the digital plane.

  When can we safely say the metaverse is our reality? Just like inflation impacts everyone differently, as it is dependent on your consumption habits, what you classify as the metaverse is unique to you. There are many ways to measure your presence in the metaverse, i.e., by time, wealth, reputation, interests, job, hobbies or knowledge. With that in mind, some people may argue that we are already in the metaverse due to the amount of time we spend engrossed in technology. On the other hand, others may say we haven’t reached that inflection point just yet, or that the metaverse will become our reality when:

  • We spend more time connected to the digital realm than the physical realm

  • When digital wealth surpasses physical wealth

  • When we’re able to vote for our politicians in this digital world

  • When the majority of jobs are in the digital plane

  • When we can digitally upload one’s consciousness

  …and some will say the metaverse will never become our reality.

  My personal belief is that the metaverse is supplemental to our physical existence, and it is not one or the other. The metaverse eases our physical existence by dematerializing our limitations and constraints, such as distance, time, aging, wealth, connection, etc. However, there is and will continue to be an abundance of value in the physical world. But ultimately, this decision of whether we are or aren’t or what is versus what isn’t the metaverse is not for me to decide. I’ll pass that one onto you.

  Opinions aside, although the definition of what constitutes the metaverse may be subjective, what’s not so subjective is that we are and will continue to face hurdles as we see greater adoption.

  THE CHASM

  Every new technology has to “cross the chasm” to reach mainstream adoption (the chasm is detailed in the image above). During this crossing of the chasm, we see creative destruction take hold, where legacy systems collapse and new technology changes the way we interact with the world. All new technology has some form of disruption. It’s just that some technology is more disruptive than others.

  

  Source

  With the introduction of the digital camera, we witnessed the dismantling and disruption of the traditional film market. But from this, we saw the boon of photography and documentation. However, when it comes to cryptocurrencies, we have only just started to scratch the surface of what is possible. Here is an example of some of the sectors this new technology has the potential to disrupt:

  • The financial system (banking, remittances, micropayments, credit markets, to name a few)

  • Social media and digital interaction

  • The internet (our digital footprint)

  • Voting

  • Insurance

  From everything mentioned so far, it should be evident that we are in the middle of a major global state change, a transfer of identity, wealth, possessions and interactions from the physical realm into the digital realm. As Raoul and Robert eloquently explain, with this state of change in place, we have to overcome some major hurdles. We need to ensure we are heading in the right direction collectively. Therefore, we should ask ourselves, how do we get there safely, without a consolidation of power or the crippling of our economy? These are a few key questions we have to figure out before conquering the chasm of adoption. Let’s touch on a few key hurdles we have to face:

  TRANSACTION

  If an asset, such as bitcoin, is our primary currency and store of value and it is wildly outperforming the majority of other investment opportunities, then we will be disincentivized to transact and spend with it. Yes, there will be occasions here and there, but in general, the majority of the world we know will be starved of capital. This will push central banks to intervene and over-regulate in order to stop this capital flight from traditional assets to digital assets, but in doing so, it’ll only lock people into our failing system, delaying the inevitable and amplifying its negative effects down the line.

  Eventually, if we can predominately move across into the digital realm, this problem of capital flight will be solved. At this point, bitcoin will reach market saturation, similar to gold today, where it protects purchasing power but is no longer an asymmetric bet on technology and a failure of the current system. But in the interim, how do we take advantage of bitcoin’s positive properties while also promoting the exchange of bitcoin between one another?

  TAXATION

  In the short term, if we were to see a seismic shift of capital away from traditional assets and into digital assets, this starvation of capital from traditional assets would create sizable losses. Suppose traditional assets start facing major losses, while at the same time, there is a lack of transacting in digital assets, creating a reduction in realized gains; then we’d have a problem on our hands. We could see a significant decrease in capital gain revenue and an increase in capital losses, further eroding the tax base. This could push policymakers to implement overbearing regulation, resulting in measures such as taxation on unrealized gains. This would stifle the prosperity in the metaverse and limit the transition of individuals to the digital realm.

  In the long term, if we embrace a currency such as bitcoin as a legal tender:

  1. The government will no longer receive capital gains tax from any appreciation in the value of bitcoin. This would be in line with the fact that a country’s legal tender is not subject to taxation if/when it appreciates/depreciates.

  2. We live in an inherently deflationary world, whereby technological advancement allows us to get more for less. Over time this advancement increases productivity and efficiency, causing the cost of goods, services and assets to decline slowly. However, this is only possible under a currency with a fixed money supply (such as bitcoin). The lack of monetary expansion causing dilution would allow the currency to capture these technological gains. This may sound positive; however over time, most assets may decline in price, resulting in increased capital losses, reducing tax revenue.

  With that being said, one could argue that by adopting a currency such as bitcoin, the government will no longer be spending in a currency that loses purchasing power one day to the next. Therefore, all tax revenue will go further, making up for this reduction in tax revenue. If that is the case, then this may all come out in the wash. However, we should still be conscious of these potential taxation issues. With that in mind, how do we ensure that assets such as bitcoin are taxed appropriately, but as not to restrict their potential as a solution to our fragile system? And, how do we take into account an increase in capital losses?

  SUPPORT

  We are in the middle of one of the biggest revolutions in human history, and alongside this revolution, we face an assortment of immense deflationary forces such as:

  • Demographics (an aging population with limited purchasing power)

  • Our major debt burden consuming productive capital

  • Technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and robots consuming jobs

  • Competition in the workforce due to overcrowding of what jobs remain

  • Currency debasement, destroying our purchasing power

  • Monetary intervention suppressing interest rates and traditional asset returns

  • Capital flight into the digital realm putting strain on the traditional system

  As these forces become more pervasive, it becomes harder and harder for the lower- and middle-income segments of the population to survive. This is a big issue! The majority of the population is under immense pressure as they are being squeezed from all angles. How do we give them a voice, meet their needs and stop them from revolting?

  One potential option Raoul proposes is embracing central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), allowing easier implementation of fiscal stimulus such as universal basic income (UBI). By doing so, we could redirect the flow of the capital away from asset owners and into the hands of the most at-risk individuals. This will aid in bridging the gap between the physical and the digital realm for the lower- and middle-wealth percentiles, allowing them to support themselves as these deflationary pressures take hold.

  My worry with this view is that CBDCs have the potential to give governments globally immense power and control. If this power is used in the ways mentioned above, then I am all for it. However, if CBDCs are used with the interests of the few in mind, this will only further consolidate wealth and power and could potentially end this utopian decentralized vision of the metaverse. Therefore, is there a way to implement CBDCs but somehow define the boundaries for which they can be used, preventing misuse and the centralization of power?

  However, regardless of which route we chose to bridge the chasm, Raoul does bring up a good point: if we are able to transition over to a decentralized metaverse and democratize this incredible technological boon in productivity and innovation, then we may be able to implement a natural form of UBI, where we could monetize our own digital identity. Although this is currently not possible, as our online corporations’ current structure is to capitalize off of our data by monetizing our every move, a decentralized metaverse shifts this power and revenue generation into the hands of the user.

  DECENTRALIZATION

  As technology advances, we are and will continue to see robots and AI replacing our jobs. Additionally, as energy costs slowly trend to near zero, we should see the cost of living slowly decline. Adding in the fact that we are witnessing a giant demographic shift where people have fewer children due to the costly environment we live in, this should cause gross domestic product (GDP) per capita to skyrocket. This could mean we are about to face one of the most productive periods in human history.

  However, with costs slowly working their way to near zero and jobs being replaced by technology, resulting in more time on our hands, will this considerable increase in productivity bring about:

  1. A decentralized open-source world where we push for equality of opportunity and where technology is shared freely? If so, this could result in a renaissance period with a focus on culture, art, and science leading to immense prosperity, innovation, and growth;

  Or,

  2. A darker, more centralized productivity boon where the vast majority of the patents pertaining to this powerful technology that now governs our lives is under the control of a few key players? In this case, we would most likely see significant poverty and some of humanity’s more challenging times ahead due to the centralization of power and wealth.

  On top of all that, we are currently seeing major global exploitation of our digital identities. Not only are we seeing our online data being used in for-profit activities, but we are also seeing targeted media leading to psychological manipulation allowing these large monopolistic entities to sway the population.

  Unfortunately, with everything mentioned above, the free market isn’t going to solve these hurdles we face in the way we want. It is going to solve them with the total accumulation of wealth in the hands of the few. Therefore, what can we do to ensure this powerful technology of the future is in the hands of the people while also promoting the continuation of free markets?

  With all that being said, how we approach these tough questions will define our future. Will crossing the chasm result in a:

  a) Decentralized Metaverse? This would be a bright future where creative destruction is encouraged: Where there is a dispersion of power within a decentralized metaverse, brought about by rules and regulations that prevent the destruction and manipulation of the free markets, all while suppressing the overbearing powers of monopolies that asphyxiate competition. It should be noted that we may still have nation-state fiat currencies, but globally, we’d embrace an immutable decentralized asset as our world reserve currency. This would lower the cost of living and democratize technology and finance, reducing wealth inequality. But more importantly, it would restrict the centralization of power with a technology that complements our deflationary world.

  b) Centralized Metaverse? This would look similar to the current state of play, where a handful of large corporations have overwhelming control over our data and access to vast sums of capital, allowing them to lobby, protect their interests, and influence politics. In addition to the suppression of creative destruction, will we follow in China’s footsteps and see the rise of CBDCs and social credit scores? This would give the government unfettered access to all our personal data, laying the foundation for the destruction of free markets and suppression of capital flows into any technology that poses a threat to the government’s power.

  Or will we walk the middle ground just like we have done many times throughout history, experiencing a give-and-take between centralization and decentralization?

  CONCLUSION

  We tend to think that when new technologies, — such as Bitcoin and the metaverse — appear, we all jump on board, and everything is hunky-dory. However, the reality is, if certain events had not happened the way they did, we might not have many of the innovations and advancements we see today. These technologies don’t just appear. They are years in the making, a culmination of previous technological progress and human endeavours. They emerge from our experiences, needs and desires, and they are a byproduct of decisions we made ten, fifty, one hundred years ago. With this in mind, coming together as a collective, and understanding the unintended consequences of our choices will help guide us in making more efficient and productive decisions for the future.

  The future is bright … if we make it.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 20:20

• Aramco Chief Warns Of "Social Unrest" If Fossil Fuels Are Abandoned Too Quickly
  Aramco Chief Warns Of “Social Unrest” If Fossil Fuels Are Abandoned Too Quickly

  China has promised not to build more coal-fired power plants abroad, but it’s scrambling to build more plants at home in the latest indication that coal, the dirtiest of fossil fuels, will likely be with us for some time. And while ESG has become the hot factor trade du jour, analysts who know the energy space have warned that a rush to renewables could lead to energy hyperinflation, and that the UN’s goal of achieving global carbon neutrality by 2050 is more of a pipe dream that could have terrible consequences for humanity.

  Amin Nasser, the chief executive of Saudi Aramco, the world’s largest oil producer, has called on global leaders to continue investing in fossil fuels in the years ahead, or run the risk of spiraling inflation and social unrest that could force them to jettison emissions targets altogether, according to the FT.

  

  Amin Nasser

  Nasser was speaking at the World Petroleum Congress in Houston, Texas. He added that there’s an “assumption” that the world can transition to green energy with the flip of a switch, but that’s just not accurate.

  “I understand that publicly admitting that oil and gas will play an essential and significant role during the transition and beyond will be hard for some,” Nasser told delegates at the WPC, one of the biggest gatherings of oil and gas executives in the world.

  “But admitting this reality will be far easier than dealing with energy insecurity, rampant inflation and social unrest as the prices become intolerably high and seeing net zero commitments by countries start to unravel.”

  This isn’t the first hint at just how unrealistic climate change goals have become. Earlier this year, the IEA warned that all new gas and oil exploration projects would need to be abandoned immediately if the world were to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Exxon has considered following through on this to try and appease ESG-crazy investors.

  Nasser also warned that the world is facing an increasingly chaotic transition to green energy.

  “The world is facing an ever more chaotic energy transition centered on highly unrealistic scenarios and assumptions about the future of energy,” Nasser said.

  That oil prices feed through to inflation is hardly anything new.

  

  Already, higher oil and gas prices have forced President Biden to reckon with his climate goals. Despite Biden’s promises to lead the US on a transition away from oil, the president tried to blunt the rise in oil prices by unloading millions of barrels from the strategic petroleum reserve.

  But that of course is like slapping a band-aid on a bullet wound. The real problem is the years of neglect and under investment in the energy patch as market forces suppressed commodity prices. Nasser touched upon this as well, telling the FT that the majority of “key stakeholders” in the industry and politics agreed on the risks of under-investment, but were unwilling to say so openly. “They say so in private…[t]hey should say the same in public,” Nasser said.

  Put another way: virtue-signaling about climate change and green energy will fall out of favor as soon as most consumers feel it in their pockets.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 20:00

• Record Backlog And Inability To Produce, Pushes Class 8 Orders To Lowest November In 26 Years
  Record Backlog And Inability To Produce, Pushes Class 8 Orders To Lowest November In 26 Years

  By Alan Adler of FreightWaves,

  Class 8 truck orders in November were the lowest for that month in 26 years, reflecting a huge backlog of unbuilt trucks rather than a demand issue.

  

  The backlog of bookings in queue at major OEMs exceeded 14 months, according to ACT Research. That means that with few exceptions, an order for a Class 8 power unit placed this month would be delivered in February 2023.

  “Long backlog lead times resulting from ongoing supply constraints continue to pressure new order activity,” said Kenny Vieth, ACT president and senior analyst.

  “With backlogs stretching into late 2022 and still no clear visibility about the easing of the ‘everything’ shortage, modest November order results suggest the OEMs are continuing to take a more cautious approach to booking orders so as not to extend the cycle of customer expectations management.”

  ACT reported preliminary Class 8 orders of 9,800 in November. FTR Transportation Intelligence said its preliminary estimate was 9,500. Both analytics firms will report actual numbers for November around the middle of December.

  Production estimates falling

  FTR said orders were down 41% from October and 82% year over year. Supply chain uncertainty is the biggest reason for the lull. On a rolling 12-month basis, Class 8 orders total 393,000, more than the industry has capacity to build. ACT’s latest production estimate for 2021 is 260,000, a number that has been adjusted downward several times.+

  A shortage of semiconductors used in everything from power windows to safety systems has prompted truck makers to build and park new trucks for which they have orders but are unable to complete.  

  And the paucity of new trucks has driven prices of late model used trucks skyward, when they are even available. Canada-based auction house Ritchie Brothers reported that a 2020 Kenworth W990 sleeper cab sold for $166,110 in an auction in Alberta, Canada last week.

  “The low order numbers in November in no way are representative of total demand,” said Don Ake, FTR vice president of commercial vehicles. “The weak volumes are because OEMs are managing their backlogs very carefully.“

  In addition to inflated equipment prices, spot rates for freight are at record levels and contract rates are rising. When the manufacturing sector of the economy gets past the supply chain crisis, freight volumes will increase, Ake said.

  Payback for overbooking

  ACT’s October data, the last full month available, showed a Class 8 backlog of about 281,000 units. Based on the build rate during the month, the backlog-to-build ratio was 14.6 months because of supply challenges, Vieth said.

  Component deliveries, especially semiconductors, have been unreliable since March, Ake said. OEMs booked a huge number of orders a year ago, expecting to be able to build at full capacity throughout 2021, which has proved unachievable.

  “After overbooking almost every month in 2021, the OEMs are being extremely meticulous about scheduling commitments in 2022,” Ake said. “Once the OEMs are confident they can obtain the necessary production inputs, they will boost production and enter more orders.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 19:40

• Visualizing The Uneven Fallout Of The Inflation Surge
  Visualizing The Uneven Fallout Of The Inflation Surge

  With Christmas just three weeks away and the holiday shopping season in full force, now is the worst time of the year to be confronted with financial worries. And yet, as Statista’s Felix Richter details below, millions of Americans are facing financial hardship due to the recent surge in consumer prices.

  According to a survey conducted by Gallup in November, 10 percent of U.S. adults have been caused severe financial hardship by the latest surge in inflation, severe meaning that it might affect their ability to maintain their current standard of living. Another 42 percent face moderate hardship, meaning that price increases affect them but don’t threaten their standard of living.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Making inflation woes worse is the fact that they affect lower income groups disproportionately. While it’s relatively easy to shrug off price increases when it only reduces the amount of money left at the end of the month, it is much harder for people who struggled to make ends meet even before prices started surging.

  As the chart above shows, the perceived effect of recent price increases varies significantly by income group. While 71 percent of those living in households with an annual income of less than $40,000 experience some kind of financial hardship these day, just 29 percent of those earning $100,000 or more claim to do so.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 19:20

• Security Heightened At Major Store Chains After Series Of 'Flash Mob' Robberies
  Security Heightened At Major Store Chains After Series Of ‘Flash Mob’ Robberies

  Authored by Bryan Jung via The Epoch Times,

  Security is being boosted in retail outlets across the country this holiday shopping season, as stores and law enforcement face a pandemic of organized retail crime by smash and grab mobs.

  

  Major stores like Home Depot, CVS, Target, and Best Buy have been some of the worse afflicted by the “flash mob” raids, which have increased in scope and in size in recent weeks.

  Stores in California, Illinois, and Minnesota have been repeatedly attacked in the last few weeks, with the Bay Area being hit hard in particular.

  At the end of November, a well-coordinated gang, raided a San Francisco-area Nordstrom, stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of items.

  Bystanders watched helplessly as dozens of looters in cars drove up to the store and overwhelmed the staff, ransacking shelves and terrorizing customers before driving away, with police making only a handful of arrests.

  Only a few days later, a brazen mob of forty looters ransacked a Louis Vuitton and other stores in San Francisco’s Union Square.

  San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, charged nine people for allegedly participating in the Louis Vuitton incident, which cost retailers more than $1 million in losses.

  In the suburbs of Minneapolis, dozens of people stole goods from Best Buy stores over the Thanksgiving weekend.

  The size of the groups and the organized nature of the crimes have overwhelmed store staff and security personnel and have put a strain on local law enforcement.

  Critics are blaming the increase in serious property crimes on left-wing district attorneys and permissive policies by state governments that encourage such activities.

  In California, a 2014 law downgraded the theft of less than $950 worth of goods from a felony to a misdemeanor.

  “We’re trying to control it the best we can, but it’s growing every day,” said Ben Dugan, president of The Coalition of Law Enforcement and Retail, speaking to the WSJ.

  He said that retailers are expanding their security presence as a short-term response to the type of theft seen over the past few weeks.

  Law enforcement and retail executives suspect that these incidents are being conducted by organized criminal networks that recruit young people to steal items to be sold for profit online.

  It is thought that the gangs are exploiting the recent growth in e-commerce during the pandemic, which has led to more demand for underpriced goods online.

  The National Retail Federation estimates that organized retail crime, which is a crime distinct from shoplifting, has cost retailers an average of $700,000 per $1 billion in sales.

  National and local retailers are currently lobbying for new federal and state legislation that would make the online reselling of stolen goods more difficult.

  Many of these stolen goods are being resold online anonymously through Amazon.com, Facebook Marketplace, and on other platforms.

  Spokespersons from Meta Platforms, Inc., which hosts Facebook Marketplace and from Amazon, have told the WSJ that they are assisting the crackdown on the sale of stolen merchandise sold on their websites.

  They said that they are working closely with local law enforcement and affected retailers, and are encouraging their customers to report suspiciously listed items.

  A coalition of district attorneys in the Bay Area are working together to combat organized retail theft to break up the criminal networks that make it profitable.

  The California Highway Patrol announced that they are working with retailers and local California law enforcement to round up the smash and grab suspects.

  States like Florida and Illinois, are also setting up special retail crime task forces to better coordinate efforts in fighting the crime wave.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 19:00

• Kamala Harris A 'Soul-Destroying Bully' Who Lacks Self-Confidence According To Former Staff
  Kamala Harris A ‘Soul-Destroying Bully’ Who Lacks Self-Confidence According To Former Staff

  While President Biden is surrounded by DC veterans who peddle him around and and fill his teleprompter with presidential sounding scripts, Vice President Kamala Harris is quite the dysfunctional bitch according to former staffers, who describe her management style as “soul-destroying” and incompetent.

  

  In a new report from the Washington Post just days after the departure of spokesperson and longtime aide Symone ‘poor white people‘ Sanders, the former staffers make clear that the woman who’s just one heartbeat away from the presidency is a nightmare boss who doesn’t read briefings, is ‘degrading’ towards employees, who who has “struggled to make progress on her vice-presidential portfolio or measure up to the potential that has many pegging her as the future of the Democratic party.”

  For both critics and supporters, the question is not simply where Harris falls on the line between demanding and demeaning. Many worry that her inability to keep and retain staff will hobble her future ambitions. -WaPo

  “One of the things we’ve said in our little text groups among each other is what is the common denominator through all this and it’s her,” said former Democratic strategist Gil Duran, who quit after five months of working for Harris in 2013.

  The Post interviewed 18 people connected to Harris, including current and former staffers and West Wing officials.

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

  Now, Harris is looking for a new communications director and press secretary, and may have nobody to turn to.

  “Who are the next talented people you’re going to bring in and burn through and then have (them) pretend they’re retiring for positive reasons,” Duran told the Post.

  Meanwhile, the damage control has been hilarious.

  Blink twice if Kamala is in the room with you https://t.co/ZpB1p4yd17

  — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) December 6, 2021

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsWhite House spox Jen Psaki spun the wave of staff departures as routine, saying on Thursday: “In my experience, and if you look at past precedent, it’s natural for staffers who have thrown their heart and soul into a job to be ready to move on to a new challenge after a few years,” adding “And that is applicable to many of these individuals. It’s also an opportunity, as it is in any White House, to bring in new faces, new voices and new perspectives.”

  Sure Jen.

  In July, Harris staffers began leaking, telling Politico that Harris’ office was a toxic, ‘abusive’ environment where “people are thrown under the bus from the very top.” That report followed a Feb. 2019 exposé in which over fifty current and former staffers decried her dysfunctional campaign for president. According to the staffers, “People are thrown under the bus from the very top, there are short fuses and it’s an abusive environment.”

  “It’s not a healthy environment and people often feel mistreated. It’s not a place where people feel supported but a place where people feel treated like shit.”

  pic.twitter.com/wpk52U3Q1h

  — Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) June 30, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 18:55

• Survey Finds More Than Half Of Bitcoin Investors Got In During 2021
  Survey Finds More Than Half Of Bitcoin Investors Got In During 2021

  As Bitcoin headed for its 434th ‘death’ this weekend amid a sudden downswing (which has since been bid back up), a survey by Grayscale confirms that investors are embracing Bitcoin and worry less than they did in previous years about the systemic risks, chief among which are cyberattacks, volatility, and regulation.

  

  All respondents were between the ages of 25 and 64, and had primary or shared responsibility for household financial decision-making. All respondents were involved in some form of personal investing, with at least $10,000 in household investable assets (excluding workplace retirement plans or real estate), and at least $50,000 in household income.

  The Grayscale survey finds that the slice of Americans who own Bitcoin has increased to 26% in 2021 from 23% in 2020.

  

  Another sign that investors are increasingly treating Bitcoin as a store-of-value asset is the fact that many are choosing not to sell their position. More than half (55%) of investors polled invested in Bitcoin for the first time over the past 12 month period. Among this cohort, most investors continue to hold their Bitcoin today, underpinning the theory that Bitcoin is viewed as a long-term investment.

  

  This confirms what we detailed over the weekend, that dip buyers were retail and whales while the sellers are medium accounts – mostly likely shorters, who are trying to spook the market; and further, this means that most people are not incentivized to sell here as they are not dramatically underwater (unless levered of course).

  “It is becoming increasingly difficult for investors to ignore Bitcoin as its price continues to rise.”

  In fact, Bitcoin is currently trading almost exactly at its average price for 2021…

  

  Moreover, Grayscale notes that their survey shows more than half (55%) of investors perceive Bitcoin as a long-term play that fits into their overall investment strategy.

  

  It’s not just Bitcoin though as Grayscale note that more than half of investors were aware of Dogecoin and Ethereum. Almost three-quarters (74%) of investors have heard of Dogecoin, surpassing the level of awareness around Ethereum (56%). Litecoin, Cardano, and Tether are also on investors’ radar, with the awareness level hovering above 25% for each of them.

  And most investors who own Bitcoin also own at least one other cryptocurrency:

  

  Importantly, investors are well aware of the high risk that crypto carries… (so perhaps ‘we, the people’ can look after ourselves without the nanny state in DC ‘helping’ us)…

  

  Finally, we note that despite all the ‘doomsaying’ by the Mungers, Yellens, and Warrens of the world, more than 30% of investors want Bitcoin offered at more financial institutions.

  Perhaps, protecting your personal sovereign identity is more important to many Americans than following the pre-approved narrative, and sliding into a ‘Black Mirror’-esque future dominated by CBDCs.

  Despite a number of the so-called elites (whose lifestyles rely on the status quo) continuing to voice skepticism about Bitcoin and the digital currency asset class, the Grayscale survey shows that investors have demonstrated not only a willingness but a desire to make room for Bitcoin in their portfolios. In addition, Bitcoin acceptance has become a cross-generational phenomenon, with baby boomers increasingly interested in gaining exposure to Bitcoin investment products.

  Read the full survey here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 12/06/2021 – 18:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Decline Of American Empire: A Kübler-Ross Cycle Analysis
  The Decline Of American Empire: A Kübler-Ross Cycle Analysis

  Authored by Andrew Roberts via Quillette.com,

  How will the United States react domestically should she be dislodged from her role of global top-dog power by China? As well as the obvious economic and strategic ramifications of an end to American imperium, there will be profound emotional and psychological effects on a society that has taken its hegemony for granted for more than three-quarters of a century.

  

  The via dolorosa presently stretched before the United States will likely encompass the replacement of the dollar as the global currency of last resort, the recognition that the South China Seas are no longer navigable by the US Navy, the understanding that Africa has been effectively colonized by China, and the possible swallowing of Ukraine by Russia and Taiwan by China. If the United States maintains its present course, Americans should prepare themselves for a century of humiliating retreats. So, how are these developments likely to play out in an already deeply divided polity and society?

  An analogy can be drawn with the British Empire, and the prolonged grieving process experienced by Britons in the three-and-a-half decades after India became independent in 1947. Within a generation and a half, the largest empire in the history of Mankind was reduced to struggling with Argentina over the Falkland Islands. Empires tend to rise and fall faster in modern than in ancient history, so what can Britain’s loss of Empire teach us about the possible decline and fall of America’s?

  A useful means of understanding how Britons slowly accommodated themselves to their postwar loss of power and prestige is provided by the Kübler-Ross Grief Cycle—the five-stage process by which individuals deal with tragedy, bereavement, and a dawning knowledge of imminent demise. The British people’s journey through those five stages of grief has profound implications for America, assuming she continues down her chosen path of impotence and retreat.

  The first stage of the Kübler-Ross Cycle is Denial, which was the initial response of the British government after the loss of the jewel in Britain’s imperial crown. Notwithstanding the ideological anti-imperialism of Clement Attlee’s Labour government, it insisted that India would remain part of the British Commonwealth (as it was still then designated) and attached to the Western anti-Communist bloc. Indeed, the whole concept of the Commonwealth—founded in December 1931 but not taken seriously until 1947—can be seen as a sop to a people in denial about the loss of Empire.

  America is already in the Denial stage of appreciating the loss of power overseas. President Biden’s speeches and press conferences at the time of the coalition’s over-hasty and humiliating scuttle from Afghanistan betray a psychology symptomatic of the first stage of the Kübler-Ross cycle. “Last night in Kabul,” Biden announced in the White House State Dining Room on August 31st, “the United States ended 20 years of war in Afghanistan—the longest war in American history. We completed one of the biggest airlifts in history, with more than 120,000 people evacuated to safety. … No nation has ever done anything like it in all of history. Only the United States had the capacity and the will and the ability to do it, and we did it today.”

  In fact, plenty of nations have the capacity, will, and ability to lose wars, but the United States had not done it since Vietnam. And as Biden’s speeches and actions have subsequently shown, his administration is in denial about the message that defeat at the hands of the Taliban sends to vacillating allies and jubilant antagonists alike.

  Britain was shaken out of her Denial stage by the Suez Crisis of 1956, which arrived less than a decade after the loss of India.

  The second stage of the Kübler-Ross Cycle is Anger, and the fury that greeted Anthony Eden over his invasion of—and subsequent withdrawal from—the Canal Zone was symptomatic of a deeper anger about Britain’s dwindling position on the world stage. The role of the United States in forcing Britain’s humiliating retreat after a successful military operation further underlined the new world order, and sent a large number of Conservatives such as Enoch Powell into the barren cul-de-sac of lifelong anti-Americanism. The anger in British politics was also evident in the activities of the League of Empire Loyalists, which disrupted political meetings in the early 1960s. Its members were furious that after Suez and the independence of Sudan, the Conservatives no longer considered itself the party of Empire.

  The capacity for anger in modern American politics hardly needs emphasising since the appalling scenes at the Capitol on January 6th, 2021. The mid-term elections in November 2022 may see at least some outpouring of anger over American loss of hegemony. It will be the first time that large sections of the American electorate have gone to the polls since the Afghan catastrophe. Anger with the Democrats will likely result in their loss of the House of Representatives and the relegation of Biden to lame-duckery.

  Britain entered the third stage of the Kübler-Ross Cycle—Negotiation—in the 1960s when she made the rational choice to cleave to the United States; in Harold Macmillan’s revealing phrase, to try to become Greece to America’s Rome. His relationship with President Kennedy and support during the Cuban Missile Crisis were the foundations of a new post-Churchill Special Relationship. This was a logical response to the Suez debacle, and it could not even be weakened by Harold Wilson’s and Edward Heath’s refusal to be drawn into Vietnam.

  It remains to be seen what the United States will do in her Negotiation stage. Certainly, she starts at a disadvantage because President Biden is not as good a diplomatic negotiator as President Xi of China or Russian President Putin, both of whom seem to outmanoeuvre him repeatedly. It is therefore doubtful that the United States can negotiate with her opponents and rivals successfully in an effort to defend a rules-based world order once she is eclipsed as the world’s pre-eminent superpower.

  When Britain entered the Depression stage of Kübler-Ross in the 1970s, she did so with a total bipartisan commitment to national decline. She experienced depression in both its metaphysical and material senses. Economically and in prestige, she risked slipping into the third rank of world powers thanks to socialism and the pathos-laden Heathite Conservative response to it. In that doleful decade, Britain experienced the OPEC oil price trebling; IRA violence and internment in Northern Ireland; a miners’ strike that led to power cuts and a three-day week, stagflation, price and income caps; and trade union militancy that threatened the primacy of Parliament. The worst (because longest-lasting) of that decade’s developments came when Britain turned her back on the Commonwealth and joined the EEC in 1973. Only a country in the grip of severe depression, self-doubt, and historical amnesia could have done such a thing.

  When the United States recognizes that it no longer matters in the world as it once did, that key allies are distancing themselves and flirting with China, that the global organizations erected by Bretton Woods and Dumbarton Oaks no longer guarantee her primacy, and that there is little she can do about it, then depression will hit America. It will leave her confused, morose, and liable to turn in on herself politically. It will be an ugly time.

  In the 1980s, Britain embraced the fifth and final stage of the Cycle—Acceptance. This was almost entirely down to one person, Margaret Thatcher. The Falklands War seemed to arrest the lamentable drift and surrender since Suez, and the spectacular victory in the Cold War, in part due to her close alliance with Ronald Reagan, finally provided closure after the loss of Empire. Although she could never again be top-dog power, Britain’s replacement by her close ally was palatable because the Special Relationship had been shown to work well for both countries and also for the wider world in ridding the world of Soviet Communism.

  For modern America, however, acceptance of decline cannot have any sense of closure because the successor-state is totalitarian. Every precept of National Socialist China is entirely antithetical to American values. Britain’s successor-state shared her language, common law, liberal principles, free market, and outlook. The United States can take no such comfort when peering into her post-imperial future. So, America’s final Acceptance stage is fraught with far greater dangers than the other four put together. The Free World really will have met its “time when the locusts feed.”

  Is all this inevitable? Not if the United States can grasp the leadership of the West once more instead of wallowing in self-destructive and profoundly decadent obsessions with its own faults, real and imagined. The United States ought to heed the words of Winston Churchill during the Munich Debate of October 5th, 1938.

  The people, he said, should be told that “we have sustained a defeat without a war, the consequences of which will travel far with us along our road; they should know that we have passed an awful milestone in our history … And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.”

  President Biden has already made it clear that he does not understand those words or appreciate their present importance. For now, Americans remain preoccupied with navel-gazing about Critical Race Theory and endlessly revisiting slavery 158 years after its abolition. Hopefully sometime before China takes Taiwan, Putin takes Ukraine, and Iran develops the Bomb, the United States will reject Acceptance of her eclipse and embrace her own supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 23:30

• "We Got Too Slow" – Burger King To Axe Menu Items To Speed Up Drive-Thru Times
  “We Got Too Slow” – Burger King To Axe Menu Items To Speed Up Drive-Thru Times

  On Wednesday, Jose Cil, CEO of Restaurant Brands International, which owns Burger King, told attendees at Morgan Stanley’s Global Consumer and Retail Conference that it will cut menu items to speed up drive-thru times. 

  Cil said the company noticed drive-thru times “declined significantly” since the pandemic began. In response to streamlining the drive-thru experience, he said certain menu items would be eliminated. 

  “We’re working on eliminating SKUs that – we’re simplifying processes that have become a bit too complicated in terms of sandwich builds, and doing a better job in terms of the menu design to make it easier for the customer, at the drive-thru in particular, to make quicker decisions,” he said.

  Cil did not mention what menu items would be eliminated but said his goal is to speed up drive-thru times. 

  “Given the volume increases in drive-thru, it’s a really easy win in terms of driving additional volume in our business,” Cil said. “We got too slow, and we need to address that.”

  So which menu item(s) gets axed?

  

  He noted the fast-food chain would be adding technology to stores, such as digital menu boards, to make drive-thrus more efficient. There was no mention if automation and artificial intelligence would be added to the kitchen to alleviate labor shortages. 

  We suspect that whatever menu items gets axed by corporate, angry customers will take to social media about the changes.

  There’s also reason to believe that if Burger King is concerned about drive-thru times and possibly even consistency — they will eventually automate kitchens in the latter part of this decade, or sooner. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 23:00

• Didi, Alibaba, Evergrande Crush Traders: What To Watch In China
  Didi, Alibaba, Evergrande Crush Traders: What To Watch In China

  By Sofia Horta e Costa, Bloomberg analyst and reporter

  For traders, all the bad China news is hitting at once — just as concern over U.S. tapering deflates the most speculative investments globally.

  Beijing’s demand that Didi delist its U.S. shares helped trigger the biggest plunge in the Nasdaq Golden Dragon China Index since 2008 on Friday. Alibaba, whose mysterious slump last week was already drawing attention, sank to its lowest level since 2017. The same day, Evergrande said it plans to “actively engage” with offshore creditors on a restructuring plan, suggesting it can no longer keep up with debt payments. That’s as stress returns to China’s dollar junk bond market, with yields above 22%. Evergrande bonds trade near 20 cents on the dollar.

  The developments highlight the risks in betting that Chinese assets have already priced in negative news. HSBC, Nomura and UBS all turned positive on the nation’s stocks in October, citing reasons including cheap valuations and receding fear of regulation from Beijing. T. Rowe Price Group and Allianz Global Investors were among money managers taking advantage of the recent turmoil to add Chinese developer bonds.

  

  A lack of transparency is adding to nervousness. Didi’s delisting notice comprised just 127 words. There were no details of how and when a move to Hong Kong would work. Evergrande’s statement was barely longer, and made no mention of whether the embattled developer would meet upcoming debts, including two interest payments due Monday. The Economic Daily said Premier Li Keqiang’s comments about a potential reserve ratio cut doesn’t indicate China will ease monetary policy.

  There’s no shortage of symbolism. Alibaba, the largest-ever Chinese listing in the U.S. and the country’s most valuable company less than 14 months ago, has lost about $555 billion in value since its 2020 record. Its ADRs trade at record low valuations. (The company just replaced its CFO.) Didi, which was China’s second-largest U.S. listing — is being yanked at the request of the government. That comes as regulators in both countries put pressure on Chinese firms listed in the U.S.

  December is shaping up to be a testing time, just as traders around the world look to book profits after a frenzied year. Along with the plunge in Chinese equities and concern over what’s next for Evergrande, another developer Kaisa is on course for default this week unless it can reach a last-minute agreement with creditors to delay payment. The firm has $11.6 billion in outstanding dollar debt, making it the nation’s third-largest issuer of such notes among property firms.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 22:37

• China To Cut RRR "Within A Week" As Evergrande Braces For Imminent Default
  China To Cut RRR “Within A Week” As Evergrande Braces For Imminent Default

  Last Friday, just as markets were set to crater, during a meeting with IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva, China’s Premier Li hinted at a potential RRR cut in the near term to support the real economy. Li’s comment comes amid sluggish activity growth – the economy struggled with downward pressures from property slowdown, the lingering drag from “dual controls” policy and power shortage, and multiple waves of local outbreaks of Covid-19.

  Specifically, Premier Li commented that “China would maintain prudent macro policy, enhance policy effectiveness and pertinency, keep liquidity at reasonable and adequate levels, cut RRR when appropriate to increase support to the real economy and in particular SMEs”.

  In its take of Li’s remarks, Goldman’s Chinese economists said that they think PM Li’s comment implies “a targeted RRR cut is very likely in the near term,” and they go on to note that “based on previous experiences, after Premier Li’s comment, PBOC usually announces the actual cut within a week.” That said, the net liquidity impact may depend on whether the central bank rolls MLF in full on December 15th when RMB 950bn loans will mature. It also means that the cut will likely take place before the 15th.

  Goldman also noted that despite PBOC Sun’s implicit comment on no RRR cut in mid October, the recent slump in economic growth and increased stresses in the labor market likely still concerned policymakers and in particular the State Council. Property indicators such as land sales continued to deteriorate, and despite PBOC’s guidance on accelerating credit extensions, TSF data has surprised to the downside in the recent months (on the other hand, China’s credit impulse can’t drop any further and is poised for a sharp bounce if only on base effects). The strict restrictive measures against Covid-19 also dragged down consumption activities and export growth might have also moderated in November.

  Of course, the imminent RRR cut will hardly be a surprise as it comes one week after we reported that “Beijing Capitulates: Urges Local Govts To Unleash Debt Flood As Cities Begin Backstopping Property Developers“; as we discussed than, there have been a series of policy easing measures in recent weeks – especially in the property market – and high frequency indicators suggest incremental improvement in construction activities.

  

  To be sure, the upcoming Politburo meeting and Central Economic Work Conference may shed more light on the policy outlook next year. Policymakers may send incremental easing signals while stating a stable overall macro policy next year.

  One such signal came early on Monday, when China’s Securities Daily confirmed that Beijing may cut the RRR ratio, citing Li Chao, chief economist at Zheshang Securities, who said bank would use the liquidity released from the cut to repay the 950BN yuan in medium-term policy loans coming due on Dec 15,

  The reaction in the market was quick and in at the start of trading, the yield on China’s 10-year government bonds slumped the most since July, on expectations the central bank will soon reduce the the reserve-requirement ratio for lenders: China’s 10-year yield was down 5bps to 2.85%, while 5-year tenor falls 6bps to 2.68%.

  

  In other news, shares of China’s insolvent property giant Evergrande Group tumbled 12% to an 11-year low on Monday after the firm said late on Friday what was patently obvious to anyone, i.e., that there was no guarantee it would have enough funds to meet debt repayments, prompting Chinese authorities to summon its chairman.

  In a filing late on Friday, Evergrande, the world’s most indebted developer, also said it had received a demand from creditors to pay about $260 million. That prompted the government of Guangdong province, where the company is based, to summon Evergrande Chairman Hui Ka Yan, and it later said in a statement it would send a working group to the developer at Evergrande’s request to oversee risk management, strengthen internal controls and maintain normal operations.

  As Bloomberg put it, “Evergrande’s statement offers its most explicit acknowledgment yet that its $300 billion of overseas and local liabilities have become unsustainable.”

  Evergraned’s stock fell more than 12% to HK$1.98, its lowest since May 2010. The shares fell as a 30-day grace period on a coupon payment of $82.5 million due on Nov. 6 comes to an end on Monday.

  

  Evergrande, whose default is just a matter of time, is grappling with more than $300 billion in liabilities amid a Chinese property sector that is all but dead. The upcoming collapse would send shockwaves through the country’s property sector and beyond.

  That’s why, repeating what it did two months ago when the Evergrande turmoil first emerged, China’s central bank said in a series of apparently coordinated statements late in the evening, that any risks to the broader property sector could be contained. Which is precisely what Bernanke said about subprime.

  Short-term risks caused by a single real estate firm will not undermine market fundraising in the medium and long term, the People’s Bank of China said, adding that housing sales, land purchases and financing “have already returned to normal in China”.

  Perhaps sensing that Evergrande’s doom is nigh and that markets will need to see central bank support to avoid widespread panic, China’s securities regulator stated it would support the reasonable financing needs of developers which coupled with a report over the weekend which said that November developer loans increased for a second month, sent the beaten down sector surging.

  In Hong Kong Sunac China Holdings rose as much as 7.1%, Shimao Group was up 7.3%, Country Garden Holdings jumped 6.4%, Vanke was up 5.2%, China Overseas Land +3.3%, China Resources Land +3.9%, Seazen +4.1%, Greentown China +2.9%, Kaisa Group +3.2%, Guangzhou R&F +2.9%, Zhongliang Holdings Group adds 5.1%, and so on.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 22:23

• House Lawmakers Ask Airlines: After $50 Billion In Relief, Why Are There Mass Disruptions And Delays
  House Lawmakers Ask Airlines: After $50 Billion In Relief, Why Are There Mass Disruptions And Delays

  We’ve already heard the nonsense excuses that airlines offered up as to the flight disruptions that took place earlier this year. Now, House lawmakers want to hear more.

  Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Representative Peter DeFazio of Oregon, and the committee’s top Republican, Sam Graves of Missouri wrote to the industry trade group “Airlines For America” last week asking whether or not airlines had enough staff to handle the holiday season, Bloomberg reported this week.

  The Senate Commerce Committee has also asked executives of major airlines to come to a December 8 hearing and answer the same questions. 

  DeFazio and Graves’ letter said: “As you know, travelers don’t care why their flight is delayed. They care just that it’s delayed.”

  The trade group has yet to respond, but United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby publicly praised the government’s PPP program and said it had been “helpful to employees”.

  

  Congress had included airlines in a $50  billion package to help cover payrolls and limit job losses early on in the pandemic. But despite the government help, airlines like American and Southwest have still suffered “mass cancellations” over the last few months. 

  The letter continued: “We suspect that the voluntary separations coupled with a faster than anticipated growth in travel volumes may have rendered airlines less resilient when recovering from cascading disruptions and delays due to weather and other variables, like those we saw earlier this fall.” 

  Passenger traffic is still below 2019 levels, the report says. During the Thanksgiving holiday, only 87% of the traffic from a pre-pandemic 2019 traveled.  

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 22:00

• Bitcoin: Welcome To The Big Leagues
  Bitcoin: Welcome To The Big Leagues

  Submitted by bithedge

  If there was still anyone left shouting that Bitcoin is an uncorrelated asset they were put to rest in recent days. And what was once confined to obscure corners of the internet has obviously left them a long time ago, but it truly feels like this was the week that cranked things to 100…

  

  In moments of major stress Bitcoin has followed risk assets for years – hardly much of a ‘digital gold’ but crisis is crisis, and recall during the March 2020 puke that even the precious metal was dumped indiscriminately alongside bonds and everything else as confused traders and algos were either forced or scared into dumping it all for cash. There is a saying that in real volatility “all correlations go to 1.”

  What is more concerning is the strengthening connection between Bitcoin (and thus Ethereum, and thus altcoins) and greater financial assets when equities are 3% off all time highs. This speaks to either 1) a greater integration of Bitcoin into the wider risk-on/risk-off framework that both traders and computers are programmed to buy or sell out of depending on mostly whether or not rate hike expectations are up that day, 2) a market that is under increasing stress despite being just off all time highs and up 23% YTD, or 3) both…

  

  Of course nothing is really as simple as just risk-on or risk-off, and Bitcoin, on top of being long beta / long momentum, is a great beneficiary of inflation both realized and expected. 

  That’s certainly one of the reasons why it’s up 160% over the past year (at this point anyone with an internet connection knows that no doubt about it – this is the highest inflation the U.S. has seen in 50 years). Even Powell ditched ‘transitory’…

  AND a third factor in Bitcoin’s favor may be establishment distrust, which is obviously higher following two years of Americans being told their lives are now vastly different because the bat coronavirus that first emerged blocks away from an NIH-funded lab that studied bat coronaviruses actually was just an unfortunate development in a cave somewhere. BofA has dubbed it an “anarchy hedge” – record wealth inequality and soaring inflation seem to set the stage for taking out some insurance.

  So since the three things that drive bond yields higher are conveniently risk-on, higher inflation expectations, and higher credit risk, it’s no surprise that Bitcoin trades even tighter alongside the 10 year: 

  

  Which begs the question of why not just go short the 10 year in size and avoid the regulatory and custody risks that come with holding crypto? If this trend holds for another year, that’ll be a question many are hoping you don’t ask. But for the average person buying Bitcoin is easier than short selling bonds – and in a market where passive > active flows and retail is a prominent force that may be all it takes for the coin to remain in fashion. 

  Recent developments are undoubtedly a thorn in the side of the once-isolated crypto trading community, filled with many who after spending years mastering their specific market are now essentially in competition with firms backed by billions in capex and decades of experience. Because unless it’s also a coincidence that Tesla and Bitcoin have hit their high or low for the month on the same day 8 out of the last 15 months, it really appears that Bitcoin trades only as a composite of long ‘the next big thing’ FOMO and short U.S debt. There’s nothing wrong with that – the trade has done well. But it’s a slap in the face to the uncorrelated/digital gold/reserve asset narrative. And it’s a major blow to those who were looking for an ‘alternative’ investment. Increasing correlation with bonds and equities is the biggest threat to Bitcoin right now. 

  It’s possible and maybe even likely that this is temporary – but whatever needs to happen for Bitcoin to again decouple from greater markets hasn’t happened yet. In light of the past two weeks, can anybody seriously say right now that they think Bitcoin will end the year higher than where it is currently if the S&P 500 doesn’t?

  But to be fair, long term hodlers really don’t have anything to worry about since if the world post-GFC is any guide, the current pullback in equities will bottom out soon and if it doesn’t – the Fed will just announce a pause in their tapering plans and at that point everyone should go even more all in because rest assured it will give way to new all time highs for the Nasdaq, home prices, inequality, and the newest member of the liquidity-firehose winners club, Bitcoin. 

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 21:30

• "They Were In Uniform With Multiple Weapons": San Francisco Restaurant Defends Booting Cops
  “They Were In Uniform With Multiple Weapons”: San Francisco Restaurant Defends Booting Cops

  San Francisco cops have more to deal with than a DA who keeps releasing violent criminals back into the community…

  On Friday, three on-duty officers were seated at Hilda and Jesse, a local restaurant, before the staff denied them service and asked them to leave after they became “uncomfortable with the presence of their multiple weapons,” according to a post on the eatery’s Instagram account.

  

  The officers left without incident.

  “At Hilda and Jesse, the restaurant is a safe space. The presence of the officers weapons in the restaurant made us feel uncomfortable. We respect the San Francisco Police Department and are grateful for the work they do. We welcome them into the restaurant when they are off duty, out of the uniform, and without their weapons,” reads the Instagram post published on Saturday.

  In an interview with ABC7 news, co-owner Rachel Sillcocks said “It is about the fact that we do not allow weapons in our restaurant. We were uncomfortable, and we asked them to leave. It has nothing to do that they were officers. It has everything to do that they were carrying guns.”

  “We understand how much the police support and protect the community,” she continued, adding “We want to again reiterate the fact that this is about guns being in our space, and we don’t allow it.”

  “𝗪𝗲 𝗱𝗼 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗴𝘂𝗻𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁.”

  I just spoke exclusively to one owner of Hilda & Jesse.

  Rachel Sillcocks told me “it doesn’t matter what you do, whether you’re a security guard of a policeman”— they don’t want any weapons #SanFrancisco pic.twitter.com/yGog0Dym4M

  — Dion Lim (@DionLimTV) December 5, 2021

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsIn another statement, Sillcocks wrote “We’re sorry that the decision upset you. We understand your perspective and we hope you’ll consider ours.”

  BREAKING: Restaurant in SF refuses service to two SFPD officers yesterday 12/3, stating their presence made staff (and perhaps guests) uncomfortable. Hilda and Jesse on Union St. Here’s their response: 👇 pic.twitter.com/7ujmJ2Ks0O

  — Richie Greenberg (@richieSF2016) December 5, 2021

  SFPD Chief Bill Scott has called the incident “personally disappointing,” and the SF Police Officers Association said the restaurant acted without “any tact or class,” according to Fox News.

  “The San Francisco Police Department stands for safety with respect, even when it means respecting wishes that our officers and I find discouraging and personally disappointing,” tweeted Scott on Saturday. “I believe the vast majority of San Franciscans welcome their police officers, who deserve to know that they are appreciated for the difficult job we ask them to do – in their uniforms – to keep our neighborhoods and businesses safe.”

  “Three foot beat officers looking to eat where they patrol are treated without any tact or class by this establishment. Fortunately, there are plenty of restaurants that don’t discriminate and will welcome our officers working to try and keep all San Franciscans safe,” the San Francisco Police Officers Association said in a statement. 

  So if armed criminals hold up Hilda and Jesse, we assume they’ll understand that the police aren’t able to intervene. 

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 21:00

• Morgan Stanley Lists The Four Investment Debates It Will Focus On In 2022
  Morgan Stanley Lists The Four Investment Debates It Will Focus On In 2022

  By Michelle Weaver, equity strategist at Morgan Stanley

  A core element of the research process is asking the right question at the right time.

  Each year Simon Bound, our Global Director of Research, hosts senior analysts from around the world to discuss the most important questions facing their industries and the debates that will shape returns in the years ahead. Looking back on our gathering this past week, here are four investment debates our teams will be particularly focused on in 2022.

  1. How can technology disrupt health care on both the consumer and business side? 

  The patient services experience is complex, convoluted, and fragmented – an area ripe for disruption. Some tech companies have tried to consumerize health care (for example, Apple with the Apple Watch). However, most big tech companies haven’t ventured into the more regulated and specialized areas. Which consumer-facing segments will be easiest for tech companies to enter?

  Technology innovations also have the potential to transform diagnosis and drug development. Can artificial intelligence improve the selection of participants in drug trials and help get drugs to market more quickly? Who will be the key tech players disrupting health care? Big tech has the money to invest but is also under pressure to deliver growth to shareholders. Will smaller players be the ones driving transformative change or will the government implement policies to spur innovation in this field? For investors, it is also important to focus on areas where companies can make big strides over the next decade versus moonshot ideas.

  2. Will technology drive a wave of sustained productivity growth? 

  Covid lockdowns induced rapid and fairly widespread adoption of labor-saving technology. However, we have yet to see if the productivity gains that resulted are a one-time shift higher in productivity, or a permanent gain to productivity growth. The technology diffusion is widespread and can be seen in retailers, banks, health care, industrial companies, and others. Companies are already seeing SG&A efficiency improvements and have proof of the benefits of their investment in and adoption of technology. How will new technologies like artificial intelligence, machine learning, and the internet of things change the outlook for aggregate productivity growth over the coming decade?

  3. Is it harder to build a mega brand today, and does direct-to-consumer (DTC) actually work? 

  Technology is fragmenting audiences, which makes brand-building harder but the prize bigger. In response, companies have ramped up ad spending, which is growing rapidly as a percentage of GDP. Brand-building is less challenging in some markets than others. Sportswear and footwear are two areas where new players have an easier time gaining a foothold. It’s much harder to build a brand in the luxury world, since heritage and provenance loom as two very high barriers to entry. We’ve seen a global transition across verticals into DTC selling. Acquiring customers is very expensive, but brands have to share less of their profits with multi-brand retailers. Still, is there a ceiling above which you can’t grow your brand digitally any further? If brand-building is becoming tougher, should investors pay up for big brands?

  4. How do low interest rates impact cryptocurrency? 

  High capital availability is having two substantial impacts on cryptocurrency – it is allowing new entrants to the cryptocurrency world (and FinTech generally) to operate for extended periods of time without reaching profitability and it is pulling labor and skills out of the incumbents. Bitcoin came from the aftermath of the global financial crisis and was a response to the Fed’s quantitative easing policies and poor sentiment around traditional banking. Some retail customers are choosing cryptocurrency as they want to transact in a decentralized system without banks. However, if capital no longer remains cheap, can preferences for cryptocurrency-based transactions persist if they remain higher cost, higher risk, and less convenient than existing payment systems? With ~$3 trillion of value now assigned to cryptocurrency globally, this question looms large.

  Enjoy your Sunday.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 20:30

• Shots Fired: CNN's Brian Stelter Unleashes Potato-Gun On Chris Cuomo
  Shots Fired: CNN’s Brian Stelter Unleashes Potato-Gun On Chris Cuomo

  Not even one day after CNN fired Chris Cuomo for shielding his scandal-plagued brother and ‘additional information’ which came to light, former colleague Brian Stelter threw Fredo under the bus.

  

  “Chris Cuomo, one of the most popular anchors at CNN, one of the best-known names in television news, violated journalistic ethics and norms not once or twice, but many times and that’s ultimately what is the result of today’s news, Jim,” Stelter told Jim Acosta. “What we didn’t know until tonight, Jim, is that an outside law firm came in and went through the thousands of pages of text messages and sworn testimony that was released back on Monday. So there was clearly something in those documents that was found to be a serious breach of standards and practices.”

  The “Reliable Sources” host dinged Cuomo for “acting like an unpaid staffer” for his brother based on the documents released by the AG despite how “it was known months ago” that the anchor was helping the governor.

  Stelter told Acosta he has “no answers” as to the “additional information” CNN had learned as part of its investigation and when it would ever be made public. –Fox News

  “I think this may be a situation where it was death by a thousand cuts, where there were just so many headaches time and time again involving Chris Cuomo that even though many viewers loved ‘Cuomo Prime Time,’ looked forward to his show, he was causing so many headaches for the network and for CNN staffers that ultimately this decision was reached,” Stelter continued. “I do think, you know, this is a moment where journalistic ethics are at play. I know there were many CNN staffers very unhappy with the situation, very frustrated by Chris Cuomo. At the same time, Jim, I was hearing from some fans of Chris, some viewers who said we understood he was looking out for his family.”

  Watch:

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 20:00

• Omicron: We Warned You The COVID Farce Would Never End
  Omicron: We Warned You The COVID Farce Would Never End

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  Remember when Anthony Fauci and other government paid medical “professionals” said that American’s needed to mask up and stay home for two weeks to “flatten the curve” on the covid pandemic? Remember when they came back two weeks later and said they needed another couple of weeks? Remember how they backed off of the lockdowns a little and then came right back with demands for more? Remember in 2019 when people weren’t cowering in their homes and behind masks over a virus with an average IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) of only 0.27%? Remember that?

  

  At the very beginning of the pandemic response I and many others in the alternative media warned that the mandates and lockdowns were never going to end; they are meant to go on forever. I predicted this based on statements made by the very globalists and institutions scripting covid response policy for national governments. In my article ‘Waves Of Mutilation: Medical Tyranny And The Cashless Society’ published in April of 2020, I outlined comments by globalist Gideon Lichfield from MIT built on white papers published by the Imperial College of London. In the article titled ‘We’re Not Going Back To Normal’ he describes the future of the world under covid medical tyranny:

  “To stop coronavirus we will need to radically change almost everything we do: how we work, exercise, socialize, shop, manage our health, educate our kids, take care of family members.

  We all want things to go back to normal quickly. But what most of us have probably not yet realized—yet will soon—is that things won’t go back to normal after a few weeks, or even a few months. Some things never will.”

  He continues:

  “As long as someone in the world has the virus, breakouts can and will keep recurring without stringent controls to contain them. In a report yesterday researchers at Imperial College London proposed a way of doing this: impose more extreme social distancing measures every time admissions to intensive care units (ICUs) start to spike, and relax them each time admissions fall…”

  Lichfield argues:

  “Ultimately, however, I predict that we’ll restore the ability to socialize safely by developing more sophisticated ways to identify who is a disease risk and who isn’t, and discriminating—legally—against those who are.

  …one can imagine a world in which, to get on a flight, perhaps you’ll have to be signed up to a service that tracks your movements via your phone. The airline wouldn’t be able to see where you’d gone, but it would get an alert if you’d been close to known infected people or disease hot spots. There’d be similar requirements at the entrance to large venues, government buildings, or public transport hubs. There would be temperature scanners everywhere, and your workplace might demand you wear a monitor that tracks your temperature or other vital signs. Where nightclubs ask for proof of age, in future they might ask for proof of immunity—an identity card or some kind of digital verification via your phone, showing you’ve already recovered from or been vaccinated against the latest virus strains.”

  Two years later (instead of two weeks), the covid farce continues. By farce I mean that the virus is not a health threat to the vast majority of the public, but governments and the media continue to fear monger over it’s existence while trying to force people to accept experimental vaccines with no long term testing to prove they are safe. In almost any country where people have been mostly disarmed or any country with minimal chance of a riot, the covid totalitarians are racing to grab every ounce of power they can before the population realizes what is happening.

  I could go on and on outlining the mountain of scientific facts and evidence that completely debunk the panic over covid, but I have already done this in several articles. I could talk about the fact that 99.7% or more of people are in no danger from covid death and only a tiny percentage of those hospitalized by covid have longer term health side effects. I could mention the fact that countries with high vaccination rates like Israel or Ireland also have the highest infection rates and numerous deaths of fully vaccinated people. I could also mention that natural immunity has been proven in studies in majority vaxxed countries to be superior in every way to vaccination. The authoritarians do not want to hear it.

  In New Zealand and Australia, once supposed bastions of western democracy and freedom, citizens are now locked down on the whims of bureaucrats at the first sign of a positive PCR test. I have been saying for months that if you want to see the future that the establishment intends for Americans, just take a look at countries like Australia where they are actually building covid prison camps operated by the military. People have even been arrested trying to escape these compounds. No, this is not conspiracy theory, this is fact.

  In these camps you are under the complete control of the government. Much like any prison, they feed you when they want to feed you, they restrict your movements, they isolate you from friends and family, etc. Your time in the camps can even be “extended” by the administrators without oversight if they determine you have “misbehaved.” That’s right, it’s not about how infectious you are, it’s not about science, it’s about how submissive you are.

  And really, that is all that the covid pandemic response has ever been about.

  Look at a nation like Austria, which has 65% vaccination and ever increasing infection rates. They decided that unvaxxed people are to blame, so they ordered anyone without proof of vaccination to submit to lockdowns. After that, their infections and deaths spiked even more. So, instead of admitting the obvious and logical conclusion (that the vaccines don’t work, or at the very least, that lockdowns don’t work), they ordered a lockdown for EVERYONE. Why? To hide the fact that the unvaxxed are not the problem.

  To be clear, the initial spike that prompted the lockdowns in Austria amounted to around 300 deaths, the vast majority of them among the elderly. In Austria, nursing home patients make up around 36% of all covid deaths. To be clear, they are eliminating the freedoms of 9 million people and strangling their economy over a spike of 300 deaths. People die every day in large numbers from a host of transmissible diseases. This is a fact of life, it is not something to be used as a political and social weapon.

  To take things a step further, Austria is also now threatening a compulsory vaccination bill that allows fines and prison for the unvaxxed. Vaccination status will be determined by the government and booster shots could be required at any time. Just because you are fully vaccinated now does not mean you will be considered fully vaccinated tomorrow. It will never end.

  The data shows that vaccination does little to nothing to slow actual infection rates or deaths; there were more covid deaths in 2021 than in 2020 despite the proliferation of the vaccines this year. That is to say, vaccinations were introduced this year and yet there were more covid deaths than last year. Isn’t that strange?

  The mainstream media claims this is now a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.” I guess they should tell that to the many thousands of fully vaccinated people infected and hundreds dying in states like Massachusetts where they actually track breakthrough cases.

  Of course, the media still sings the praises of the vaccines despite these little hiccups.

  If the vaccines actually worked, then there would be no need for compulsory vaccinations. The people who are vaxxed would be protected and the people who are unvaxxed assume the individual risks. The covid cult doesn’t seem to grasp the logic here – Either the vaccines are effective and there is no need to make them mandatory, or they are not effective, which means making them mandatory is pointless.

  But again, logic and science are not the point – Control is the point. It’s an endless rationale for infinite control. It will never end.

  The reality is that the covid agenda has not been all that effective if we look at the big picture. If the goal is 100% vaccination and perpetual vax passport controls using regular boosters as a dominance mechanism for the long term (medical tyranny), then so far the plan has failed. Some countries have fallen into the long covid winter, but many others have not. Nearly every conservative state in the US is in full defiance of the mandates and federal courts have blocked Joe Biden’s attempts to circumvent the constitution. If red states in America hold out, this gives hope to others. So, what’s left for the establishment power mongers to do?

  That’s easy…they just do more of the same.

  Enter the Omicron variant of covid, something we “conspiracy theorists” have been warning about for the past two years. This is the beauty of the pandemic narrative when it comes to building a global authoritarian regime; viruses are always changing and new viruses can even be engineered if needed. Therefore, there is always a new threat to frighten the public and always a new reason to lock them up in their homes or demand they give up more of their freedoms. It is an endless vampiric cycle that slowly drains the liberty from a population.

  Set aside the fact that the doctors that discovered Omicron in South Africa have labeled it a mild variation of covid and not a significant threat to the public. This makes perfect sense. In the vast majority of pandemic scenarios viruses tend to evolve into slightly more infectious but much less deadly versions of the original. But that’s not stopping the media and government scientists from screeching bloody murder about Omicron and even suggesting that this time covid “might” evolve to become more deadly rather than less.

  This must be done. They have nothing left and if they lose out on covid they lose out on one of the best opportunities they have ever had for centralized control of nearly every individual on Earth.

  The fear over covid is waning. Hundreds of millions of people are not willing to give up their freedoms over a hyped and farcical pandemic with a 0.27% IFR. Many people who are vaccinated are fighting the mandates alongside the unvaxxed. Most of us aren’t obese. Most of us aren’t 80 years old and in a nursing home. Most of us don’t have preexisting conditions. These are all factors that make up the majority of covid deaths. Many of us already had covid and easily survived it, which means we have natural immunity that is 13-27 times more effective at stopping future infections than the vaccines. Without more hype and more variants the party for the globalists stops, and they don’t like that idea at all.

  If the public is allowed to pull their heads out of the haze of propaganda for a moment and regain their bearings, they might realize they have been made the target of a massive terror campaign. They might get angry. They might demand investigations. They might even demand that some globalist heads roll. So, get ready for Omicron to remain in the headlines for months to come, and then the next mutation and the next mutation and the mutation after that. The globalists and political opportunists will keep going with the theater until they get what they want, or until they are removed from the equation entirely. It will never end, unless they end.

  *  *  *

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 19:30

• Plumber Finds $600,000 In Cash And Checks Stashed In Wall At Joel Osteen's Texas Mega-Church
  Plumber Finds $600,000 In Cash And Checks Stashed In Wall At Joel Osteen’s Texas Mega-Church

  The Lord works in mysterious ways.

  Tell that to the plumber who found “hundreds of envelopes of cash and checks hidden in a wall” at Joel Osteen’s Texas church while performing routine repair work.

  Police think the stash has something to do with a 2014 theft that took place at the church, CNN reported.

  Houston Police were called to the church on November 10 to investigate the findings. The police told CNN: “Church members stated that during a renovation project, a large amount of money — including cash, checks and money orders — was found inside a wall.”

  The police also said the envelopes were connected to a March 9, 2014 theft that took place at the church, where about $600,000 was stolen from a church safe. The money came in from contributions on March 8 and March 9 of that year and included $200,000 in cash and $400,000 in checks.

  

  The money was left in the custody of the church since it was found on its premises, the report said. Lakewood Church commented: “Recently, while repair work was being done at Lakewood Church, an undisclosed amount of cash and checks were found. Lakewood immediately notified the Houston Police Department and is assisting them with their investigation.”

  The plumber called into local radio station 100.3 and shared the story with them, saying: “There was a loose toilet in the wall and we removed the tile … Went to go remove the toilet and I moved some insulation away and about 500 envelopes fell out of the wall, and I was like, ‘Oh wow.'”

  Radio host George Lindsey told CNN: “I wish we had video of our faces because we were all just like, ‘holy cow.’ He could have stashed some of this money in his pocket and walked out and never said anything to anybody, but [he] was an honest, stand-up kind of guy.”

  Meanwhile, the statute of limitations on a $25,000 reward being offered for information about the theft has expired. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 19:00

• Hedge Fund CIO: No One On Earth Has Any Idea How Monetary Policy Can Alleviate Supply Chain Constraints
  Hedge Fund CIO: No One On Earth Has Any Idea How Monetary Policy Can Alleviate Supply Chain Constraints

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

  “It’s a good time to retire that word,” said Powell, seated comfortably next to Yellen. Senator Toomey had asked how long inflation must run above target before the Fed decides, maybe it’s not so “transitory.”

  The Senate Banking Committee’s Ranking Member appeared as surprised as virtually every Wall Street economist that two consecutive years of 15% deficits, financed by Jay’s magic money machine, lifted inflation in ways that have begun to appear persistent.

  “I think what we missed about inflation,” Powell admirably conceded, “was we didn’t predict the supply-side problems, and those are highly unusual and very difficult, very non-linear, and it’s really hard to predict those things, but that’s really what we missed, and that’s why all of the professional forecasters had much lower inflation projections.”

  No doubt our Fed Chairman is right.

  There’s not an economic model in the solar system that could have forecast today’s extraordinary inflation without first predicting the “highly unusual, very difficult and very non-linear” supply constraints plaguing the global economy.

  But that is all now understood. What is not known is how monetary policy can or should be used to alleviate these supply constraints.

  For nearly half a century, the Fed reaction function was nearly linear. When the system deviated unacceptably far from stability, equilibrium, the Fed added new monetary tools. Forward guidance. Average inflation targeting. Whatever it took.

  And it is possible that once the invisible hand restores global supply chains, markets and economies will return to their familiar states. But having just retired the notion of transitory, the entire system appears to be moving towards a non-linear mode. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 18:30

• Fauci Downplays Severity Of Omicron Strain
  Fauci Downplays Severity Of Omicron Strain

  One week after the US media and its “scientists” rolled out a full-blown panic parade over the Omicron variant, setting the stage for a new round of lockdowns as a result of a strain which nobody knew much about, yet which was conveniently viewed as a greenlight for trillions more in stimmies, the narrative is gradually turning.

  First a note out of South African’s Medical Research Council discussing the recent development in the Tshwane District, which is the global epicenter of the Omicron Outbreak, and the Gauteng Province Fourth Wave, with the weekly number of cases rising exponentially over several weeks…

  

  … confirms what we pointed out last weekend, namely that while much more tranmissible, the Omicron strain is also far more mild and its rapid propagation across the globe could, in fact, be a blessing in disguise as a far less dangerous, “flu-like” variant promptly becomes the dominant one. This, as a reminder, is also a point subsequently made by JPM’s Marko Kolanovic. Here is the conclusion from the SA MRC note:

  the first impression on examination of the 166 patients admitted since the Omicron variant made an appearance, together with the snapshot of the clinical profile of 42 patients currently in the COVID wards at the SBAH/TDH complex, is that the majority of hospital admissions are for diagnoses unrelated to COVID-19. The SARS-CoV-2 positivity is an incidental finding in these patients and is largely driven by hospital policy requiring testing of all patients requiring admission to the hospital.

  The exponential increase in the positivity rate in these patients is a reflection of the rapidly increased case rate for Tshwane but does not appear to be associated with a concomitant increase in the rate of admissions for severe COVID (pneumonia) based on the high proportion of patients not requiring supplemental oxygen.

  The relatively low number of COVID-19 pneumonia hospitalizations in the general, high care and ICU wards constitutes a very different picture compared to the beginning of previous waves…

  For those interested in a more detailed breakdown of the latest South African data, we recommend reading

  Okay folks, time for a South Africa update, focused this time on severity of disease.

  First up, the report from hospitals in Tshwane (the district furthest along in Omicron wave) is essential reading, as is thread from @miamalan https://t.co/5GNwrNJHsk
  https://t.co/2U0wkjNFgy

  — John Burn-Murdoch (@jburnmurdoch) December 4, 2021

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

  In any event, with almost two weeks since the first appearance of the Omicron variant and with a distinct lack of any evidence that the new strain is more dangerous, or results in a greater number of more acute hospitalizations than the Delta or other variants, the narrative by the “scientific establishment” – which has burned through most if not all of its credibility in the past year by constantly ‘moving the goal posts’ to serve various political agendas – appears to be changing once again, and earlier today none other than the chief health propaganda shaman of the Biden admin, Anthony Fauci, indicated that “the U.S. was encouraged by reports from South African officals that the rapid spread of omicron hadn’t yet resulted in a spike in hospitalizations in that country, an indication that the strain could be less virulent.”

  “Though it’s too early to really make any definitive statements about it thus far, it does not look like there’s a great degree of severity to it,” Fauci said on Sunday in a CNN interview. He added that more review is needed to confirm that Omicron causes less illness than other variants, such as Delta, “but thus far, the signals are a bit encouraging.”

  Dr. Anthony Fauci cautions about making early judgment about Omicron, but says:

  “Thus far, though it’s too early to really make any definitive statements about it, it does not look like there’s a great degree of severity to it.” pic.twitter.com/eHGMmv5PO1

  — The Recount (@therecount) December 5, 2021

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

  Of course, making a blanket “all clear” determination would have made a mockery of all the fearmongering that was unleashed just last week, and so Fauci cautioned that it was too soon to make any “definitive statements” about the variant and encouraged Americans to get vaccinations and booster shots, adding that “you got to hold judgment until we get more experience.”

  Fauci’s comments came as the Biden administration reported that Omicron had spread to 16 US states. The new variant’s many mutations suggest that it might not be effectively treated with some Covid-19 therapeutics and that it could evade the immunity provided by current vaccines, CDC director Dr Rochelle Walensky said on Sunday in an ABC News interview.

  Despite the concerns over jab efficacy, Fauci said getting more Americans to take vaccine booster shots will be “really critical in addressing whether or not we’re going to be able to handle this.” As with Delta, boosters will elevate immunity levels to help prevent infections, or at least reduce the severity of illnesses caused by the variant, he said as it becomes apparent that the narrative is now shifting to using Omicron as a talking point for widespread use of booster shots.

  “The vaccines that we are distributing now in the United States and throughout the world are directed against the original, ancestral or Wuhan strain,” Fauci told Jake Tapper, who unlike his pal Chris Cuomo, has yet to be fired.

  He added that “we feel certain that there will be some degree, and maybe a considerable degree, of protection against the Omicron variant if, in fact, it starts to take hold in a dominant way in this country.”

  Meanwhile, the Biden admin is suffering from blowback for the very same “xenophobic” policies it recently adopted and which it previously criticized Trump for implementing, after banning visitors from South Africa and seven other African nations on November 26.

  Tapper noted that the US hadn’t banned travel from the dozens of other nations where Omicron cases have been confirmed and that UN chief Antonio Guterres referred to restrictions targeting southern African countries as “travel apartheid.” Fauci replied that too little was known about Omicron at the time the ban was imposed.

  “That ban was done at a time when we were really in the dark — we had no idea what was going on… When the ban was put on, it was put to give us time to figure out just what is going on,” Fauci said adding that the decision is being re-evaluated as more data become available so the ban may be lifted in a “reasonable period of time. I mean, we all feel very badly about the hardship that might have put upon not only South Africa, but the other African countries.”

  Biden’s ban prompted criticism from international officials, with United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres last week likening the restrictions to “travel apartheid.” World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus called on countries to maintain “rational, proportional risk-reduction measures.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 18:00

• Court On A Hot Tin Roof: Airing Out "The Stench" From The Oral Argument Over Abortion
  Court On A Hot Tin Roof: Airing Out “The Stench” From The Oral Argument Over Abortion

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Below is a version of my column in The Hill on the statement of Justice Sonya Sotomayor on the “stench” of politics in the oral argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a challenge to the Mississippi abortion law.

  The statement seemed directed at Sotomayor’s three new colleagues and the effort to use the new court composition to seek the reduction or overturning of Roe v. Wade.

  

  Here is the column:

  In Wednesday’s Supreme Court oral argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Justice Sonya Sotomayor got a whiff of something she did not like. She said many abortion opponents, including the sponsors of the Mississippi abortion law at issue, hoped her three new colleagues would allow for the reversal or reduction of Roe v. Wade. With Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett listening, she asked, “Will this institution survive the stench” created from such political machinations — and then answered: “I don’t see how it is possible.”

  Of course, when justices begin to declare their disgust at the very thought of overturning precedent, there is another detectable scent in the courtroom.

  Indeed, it felt like a scene from Tennessee Williams’ play, “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.” The only thing missing was the play’s central character, “Big Daddy” Pollitt, asking: “What’s that smell in this room? … Didn’t you notice a powerful and obnoxious odor of mendacity in this room? There ain’t nothin’ more powerful than the odor of mendacity.”

  

  Justices Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer insisted that overturning Roe in whole or in part would bring ruin upon the court by abandoning the principle of stare decisis, or the respect for precedent. Yet neither showed the same unflagging adherence to precedent when they sought to overturn conservative doctrines.

  Notably, Sotomayor pointed out another allegedly “political” decision in the court’s recognition of an individual right to bear arms; she and Breyer both indicated a willingness to overturn the ruling in that case, District of Columbia v. Heller. After that decision, both continued to dissent and arguing that “the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self-defense.” Indeed, they may reaffirm that position this term.

  Sotomayor’s nose for judicial politics was also less sensitive when she recently called upon students to campaign against abortion laws — a major departure from the court’s apolitical traditions. After telling the students that “You know, I can’t change Texas’ law but you can and everyone else who may or may not like it can go out there and be lobbying forces in changing laws that you don’t like.” She added: “I am pointing out to that when I shouldn’t because they tell me I shouldn’t.” That was more than a whiff of politics, but the same legal commentators applauding her “stench” comment were entirely silent in condemning her direct call for political action on abortion. There also were no objections to the stench of politics when the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg publicly opposed a presidential candidate.

  They are not the only figures showing such selective outrage. During the confirmation hearing for Justice Kavanaugh, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) demanded that Kavanaugh promise to respect stare decisis on cases like Roe, but then called for overturning cases like Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Democratic groups often decry the conservative majority as “partisan” while demanding the packing of the court to guarantee an immediate liberal majority.

  On Wednesday, Kavanaugh and other justices balked at claims that Roe is somehow untouchable due to the passage of 50 years. The 1896 ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson was overturned in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, roughly 58 years after it was written; the court ruled that its Plessy decision was egregiously wrong — one in a long list of reversals celebrated today. This includes Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned prior precedent allowing the criminalization of homosexual relations.

  There is a major difference, though, between the oral arguments in Brown and those in Dobbs. In Brown, the court had extensive discussion of the constitutional foundation for the “separate but equal” doctrine; in the oral argument on Dobbs, there was comparably little substantive defense of the analysis in Roe or its successor case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey.  Indeed, the thrust of much of the pro-choice argument was that, even if Roe was incorrectly decided, it takes more than being wrong to overturn such an “established” precedent.

  When it was released, Roe was widely ridiculed as being extraconstitutional and excessive. That includes some who are now calling to pack of the Court criticized Roe. For example,  Harvard Professor Laurence Tribe objected  that “behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which it rests is nowhere to be found.”

  Even Justice Ginsburg once criticized it, declaring: “Roe, I believe, would have been more acceptable as a judicial decision if it had not gone beyond a ruling on the extreme statute before the court. … Heavy-handed judicial intervention was difficult to justify and appears to have provoked, not resolved, conflict.”

  In the Dobbs hearing, Roe was the opinion that many wanted to preserve but few seemed willing to defend. Part of the problem is that Roe died long ago. In Casey, the Supreme Court gutted Roe and adopted a new standard barring state actions that impose “an undue burden” on abortions. So it is hard to tell what precedent is being defended as “established” beyond a de facto right to abortion. Moreover, Casey was a mere plurality, and the court has often split 5-4 on later abortion cases.

  While defending abortion as a “liberty interest,” efforts to explore the actual basis for Roe were largely brushed aside. Even when justices tried to push pro-choice advocates to defend the key “viability” standard, counsel defended it as a “principled” or “workable” line but did not actually say how it was constitutionally compelled. That seems odd, since this case is about whether Mississippi can impose a 15-week limit. (The United States is one of only seven among the world’s 198 countries that allow abortions after 20 weeks.)

  It appeared particularly frustrating to Chief Justice John Roberts, who finally stated: “Viability, it seems to me, doesn’t have anything to do with choice. If it really is an issue about choice, why is 15 weeks not enough time?” He never received an answer, and the pro-choice counsel effectively declined to offer a meaningful alternative test when it was repeatedly requested by the justices.

  Likewise, rather than defending the analysis underlying Roe, most legal commentators prefer to attack justices as ideologues for questioning such “established precedent.” Even Sotomayor portrayed the arguments against abortion as little more than a “religious view,” a statement that is wildly off-base and ignores the many secular critics of Roe as a legal case or of abortion as a medical practice. Others picked up on that theme, and one law professor demanded that Barrett recuse herself because of her own religious beliefs. It was a continuation of the disgraceful attacks on Barrett’s faith during her confirmation hearing by senators like Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).

  That is the problem with both politics and mendacity: They are a stench that one tends to smell only in others — and tends to be more pungent when one is in dissent.

  There is no problem with changing one’s rationale for reproductive rights, or even changing one’s views on constitutional interpretations; that is part of honest intellectual development. However, the mere fact that a case is constitutional precedent — or even “super precedent,” according to some — is no substitute for constitutional principle.

  Breyer and Sotomayor are known for often profound, detailed opinions. I expect both will ably defend reproductive rights in Dobbs, even if they do not defend the actual analysis in Roe. But Roe should stand or fall on constitutional merits — not on feigned outrage over changing constitutional precedent.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 17:30

• Trump Social Media Venture Raises $1BN At Valuation Near $4BN
  Trump Social Media Venture Raises $1BN At Valuation Near $4BN

  Many traders were stunned to learn on Wednesday that Trump’s social media venture was seeking to raise as much as $1 billion in a PIPE financing, with Reuters reporting that Trump was personally calling some investors to ask them to make a commitment of more than $100 million as it now appears that “allocating capital to a Trump SPAC” is the new “donating to the Clinton foundation”. The reason for the surprise is that while the original SPAC deal from September valued Trump Media at $875 million (including debt) just two months later the company is now seeking to raise up to an additional $1 billion at a valuation of close to $4 billion, to reflect DWAC’s rally after the stock soared in its first few days of trading as some speculated it could emerge as a twitter competitor.

  And yet, the deal did get done and on Saturday, Trump’s social media venture said it inked agreements to raise about $1 billion from a group of unidentified investors as it prepares to float in the U.S. stock market. Digital World Acquisition Corp, the blank-check acquisition firm that will take Trump Media & Technology Group Corp public by listing it in New York, said it will provide up to $293 million to the partnership with Trump’s media venture, taking the total proceeds to about $1.25 billion.

  The $1 billion will be raised through a private investment in public equity (PIPE) transaction from “a diverse group of institutional investors,” Trump Media and Digital World said in a statement. They did not respond to requests to name the investors.

  Trump Media and Digital World said the per-share conversion price of the convertible preferred stock PIPE transaction represents a 20% discount to Digital World’s volume-weighted average closing price for the five trading days to Dec. 1, when Reuters broke news of the capital raise. If that price averages below $56 in the 10 days after the merger with Digital World has been completed, the discount will grow to 40% with a floor of $10, the companies added. Digital World shares ended trading on Friday $44.97.

  The rapid capital raise at a stratospheric valuation “underscored the former U.S. president’s ability to attract strong financial backing thanks to his personal and political brand.” As reported previously, Trump is working to launch a social media app called TRUTH Social that is now several weeks away.

  While Reuters is quick to note that “many Wall Street firms such as mutual funds and private equity firms snubbed the opportunity to invest in the PIPE” clearly many did invest and judging by the ravenous demand for Trump’s social engagement, their investment could pay off handsomely. Among those investors who participated were hedge funds, family offices and high net-worth individuals.

  “As our balance sheet expands, Trump Media & Technology Group will be in a stronger position to fight back against the tyranny of Big Tech,” Trump said in a statement on Saturday.

  That said, the deal still faces regulatory risk after Elizabeth Warren asked the SEC last month to investigsate the planned merger for potential violations of securities laws around disclosure.

  And while we wait to see what the actual Trump media product will look like, Investors attending the confidential investor road shows were shown a demo from the planned social media app, which looked like a Twitter feed, Reuters reported.

  If Trump’s media venture is successful it may breathe new life into the SPAC bubble which had burst in mid-2021 after a surge of deals early in the year and in late 2020. As Reuters notes, “special purpose acquisition companies such as Digital World had lost much of their luster with retail investors before the Trump media deal came along. Many of these investors were left with big losses after the companies that merged with SPACs failed to deliver on their ambitious financial projections.”

  TRUTH Social is scheduled for a full rollout in the first quarter of 2022. It is the first of three stages in the Trump Media plan, followed by a subscription video-on-demand service called TMTG+ that will feature entertainment, news and podcasts, according to the news release.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 17:00

• Greenwald: To Deny "Lab Leak" COVID Theory, NYT & WaPo Use Dubious, Conflicted Sources
  Greenwald: To Deny “Lab Leak” COVID Theory, NYT & WaPo Use Dubious, Conflicted Sources

  Authored by Glenn Greenwald via Substack,

  A bizarre and abrupt reversal by scientists regarding COVID’s origins, along with clear conflicts of interest, create serious doubts about their integrity. Yet major news outlets keep relying on them…

  

  Peter Daszak, President of EcoHeath Alliance, speaking in 2017 (Wikipedia)

  That COVID-19 infected humanity due to a zoonotic leap from a “wet market” in Wuhan — rather than a leak from a lab in the same Chinese city — was declared unquestionable truth at the start of the pandemic. For a full year, anyone dissenting from this narrative was deemed so irresponsible that they were banned from large social media platforms, accused of spreading “disinformation.” No debate about COVID’s origins was permitted. It had been settled by The Science™. Every rational person who believed in science, by definition, immediately accepted at the start of the pandemic that COVID made a natural leap from bats or pangolins; that it may have escaped from a lab in Wuhan which just so happens to gather, study and manipulate novel coronaviruses in bats was officially declared a deranged conspiracy theory.

  The reason this consensus was so quickly consecrated was that a group of more than two dozen scientists published a letter in the prestigious science journal Lancet in February, 2020 — while very little was known about SARS-CoV-2 — didactically declaring “that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.” The possibility that COVID leaked from the Wuhan lab was dismissed as a “conspiracy theory,” the by-product of “rumours and misinformation” which, they strongly implied, was an unfair and possibly racist attack on “the science and health professionals of China.”

  

  For months, that letter shaped the permissible range of debate regarding the origins of COVID. Or, more accurately, it ensured that there was no debate permitted. The Science™ concluded that COVID was a zoonotic virus that naturally leaped from non-human animal to human, and any questioning of this decree was deemed an attack on The Science™.

  That Lancet letter has fallen into disrepute due to the key role in its publication played by one of its signatories, Peter Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance. To say that Daszak had a gigantic but undisclosed conflict of interest in disseminating this narrative about the natural origins of COVID is to understate the case. Daszak had received millions of dollars in grants from the National Institute of Health (NIH) to conduct research into coronaviruses in bats, and EcoHealth awarded part of that grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the lab which would be the leading suspect, by far, for any COVID lab leak.

  Daszak’s enormous self-interest in leading the world to believe that a lab leak was impossible is obvious. It would be a likely career-ending blow to his reputation if the Wuhan laboratory to which EcoHealth had provided funding for coronavirus bat research was responsible for the escape of a virus that has killed millions of people around the world and caused enduring suffering among countless others due to lockdowns and economic shutdowns.

  In July of this year, The Lancet published a new letter from the same group which signed that seminal letter in February of last year. The July 2021 letter included two fundamentally new additions. First, the language about COVID’s origins was radically softened from the smug certainty of the February letter that closed debate to humble uncertainty given the lack of proof. While continuing to affirm a belief that COVID was naturally occurring (“our working view” is “that SARS-CoV-2 most likely originated in nature and not in a laboratory”), they moved far away from the definitive posture of that original letter, acknowledging that “opinions are neither data nor conclusions” and urging further investigation on what they called “the critical question we must address now”: namely, “how did SARS-CoV-2 reach the human population?” In other words, after telling the world in February that any questioning of the zoonotic origin was a malicious “conspiracy theory,” they now acknowledge it is “the critical question we must now address.”

  The other major change was that this July Lancet letter included what the February letter shamefully omitted: namely, the key fact that Daszak’s “remuneration is paid solely in the form of a salary from EcoHealth Alliance,” and that EcoHealth had received funding from NIH to study coronaviruses in bats, and used some of that funding to support research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. This disclosed conflict of interest about Daszak was included in the new July, 2021 letter as well as a separate “addendum” called “competing interests and the origins of SARS-CoV-2.” No explanation was provided about why these “competing interests” on the part of Daszak were not disclosed in that crucial, debate-closing February letter in the The Lancet.

  

  

  The U.S. Government began aggressively distancing itself from EcoHealth this year. In an October 20, 2021 letter to Congress, the NIH argued that while the coronavirus strains studied by the Wuhan lab through EcoHealth’s grant “are not and could not have become SARS-CoV-2,” it argued that EcoHealth violated the terms of the grant by failing to notify NIH of “unusual results” from its research that could make the viruses it was studying more dangerous. They also accused EcoHealth of failing to promptly report the ongoing results of their experiments.

  All of this led to an unraveling of the Official Consensus. In May of this year — fifteen months after The Lancet pronounced the debate closed — Facebook reversed its policy of banning anyone who suggested that the virus may have come from the Wuhan lab. The reversal came, said the Silicon Valley giant, “in light of ongoing investigations into the origin”. This about-face came after The Wall Street Journal reported days earlier that U.S. intelligence sources claim that “three researchers from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick enough in November 2019 that they sought hospital care.”

  Weeks later, President Biden “ordered intelligence officials to ‘redouble’ efforts to investigate the origins of Covid-19, including the theory that it came from a laboratory in China.” The president’s statement noted that “the US intelligence community was split on whether it came from a lab accident or emerged from human contact with an infected animal.” Suddenly, mainstream outlets such as The New York Times began publishing claims that, just months earlier, were officially declared “disinformation” and resulted in removal from social media platforms: “some scientists have argued that it’s possible SARS-CoV-2 was the result of genetic engineering experiments or simply escaped from a lab in an accident,” said the Paper of Record in October. The Official Consensus had undergone a 180-degree turn in the course of just over a year. “Lab leak” went from insane conspiracy theory that must be censored to serious possibility that must be investigated.

  As a result of all this, Daszak’s reputation and credibility are crippled, and rightfully so. The once-revered scientist was profiled two weeks ago in Science under the headline “PROPHET IN PURGATORY.” It noted that while his “journey from oracle to pariah has appalled many colleagues,” many scientists — often loath to openly attack each other’s ethics — insist that his wounds are both justified and self-inflicted. Even those who believe the vilification of Daszak has been excessive nonetheless acknowledge that EcoHealth was far from honest about questions central to understanding this worldwide pandemic:

  But some scientists, even those dismayed by the attacks, say Daszak is in part a victim of his own making. They argue he failed to reveal important information that later surfaced through embarrassing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and leaks, and some accuse him of making false statements. “Daszak has been far from forthcoming about EcoHealth’s research, much of which is highly relevant to the pandemic origin discussion,” says Filippa Lentzos, a social scientist at King’s College London who specializes in biosecurity. “It is the pattern of continuing obfuscation and deceit that I find alarming.”

  Edward Holmes, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Sydney who’s solidly in the natural origins camp—he calls the debate a “tempest in an espresso cup”—says Daszak has been “unfairly vilified.” But EcoHealth “is guilty of shockingly poor communication and a naïvete that it would not come under scrutiny,” Holmes says.

  That Science profile, similar to the one from The New York Times acknowledging that the “lab leak” is a real possibility, noted that documents unearthed by FOIA litigation from The Intercept call into serious doubt the months of denials by Daszak and EcoHealth, as well as from Dr. Fauci, that funding provided by NIH to the Wuhan lab through EcoHealth was used for “gain of function” research — meaning research designed to manipulate pathogens to make them more contagious and/or dangerous to humans:

  In September, a FOIA request to NIH from The Intercept—which required a lawsuit to obtain documents—also yielded details about controversial experiments done at WIV by [WIV virologist Shi Zhengli] during her collaboration with EcoHealth. Her lab has more than 2000 samples of bodily fluids from bats that have tested positive for coronaviruses. To assess the risk of those viruses to humans, Shi’s team took sequences coding for their viral surface protein and stitched them into a bat coronavirus called WIV1, one of only three she has succeeded in growing in lab cultures. Daszak and Shi described these chimeric viruses in a 2017 paper. None of them has a close relationship to SARS-CoV-2. But some lab-leak proponents believe Shi, possibly with Daszak’s knowledge, hid other chimeric virus experiments that led to SARS-CoV-2.

  The same batch of documents also showed that in “humanized” mice, some of the chimeric viruses grew better and were more lethal than WIV1. An NIH official, in response to an inquiry from a member of Congress, claimed EcoHealth had “failed to report” the worrisome results immediately, as the grant required. Daszak sent NIH a detailed letter strongly rebutting that accusation.

  The documents also included a grant report that described an additional experiment, in which Shi added bat coronavirus surface proteins to the coronavirus that causes Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), a highly lethal human pathogen. Ferocious debates erupted about whether this work and the WIV1 studies constituted gain of function (GOF), the type of experiment that can make disease agents more transmissible or pathogenic and that requires extra layers of review. Richard Ebright, a biochemist at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, who has long lobbied against GOF research, tweeted that both “unequivocally” met the definition of [gain-of-function].

  Despite the collapse of Daszak’s reputation and credibility — due both to his undisclosed conflicts of interest and repeated deceit and even lying — The New York Times continues to cite him as one of its primary sources on the question of COVID’s origins…

  …

  To read the rest, click here and subscribe…

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 16:30

• China Poised To Establish 1st Ever Naval Base In Atlantic, Alarming US Officials
  China Poised To Establish 1st Ever Naval Base In Atlantic, Alarming US Officials

  US intelligence believes that China is set to establish its first ever permanent naval installation on the Atlantic Ocean. On Sunday The Wall Street Journal revealed key findings of a series of classified intelligence reports that point to China’s military prepping a presence at a deep water port in Equatorial Guinea, on Africa’s east coast.

  American officials who spoke to the WSJ indicated that the reports “raise the prospect that Chinese warships would be able to rearm and refit opposite the East Coast of the U.S.—a threat that is setting off alarm bells at the White House and Pentagon.”

  

  Last April, the commander of US Africa Command, Gen. Stephen Townsend, first raised the possibility of this “most significant threat” of a PLA military Atlantic presence during Senate testimony – describing that Beijing is eyeing “a militarily useful naval facility on the Atlantic coast of Africa.”

  “By militarily useful I mean something more than a place that they can make port calls and get gas and groceries,” he said at the time. “I’m talking about a port where they can rearm with munitions and repair naval vessels.”

  But for all the “alarm” in Washington and the defense establishment, it bears pointing out that Equatorial Guinea is 7,000 miles away from the United States mainland. Additionally the US maintains at least 750 bases across some 80 countries worldwide, including 29 or more known bases stretching from one side of Africa to the other. 

  China’s first overseas military base was set up in Djibouti in 2017, on the Horn of Africa, and is less than 10 miles from Camp Lemonnier, known as the largest US base in Africa. US officials have long been concerned that along with a Chinese military footprint, Beijing hopes to coerce host countries into signing onto major Chinese investment and infrastructural deals, advancing China’s geopolitical interests in the line with Xi’s Belt and Road Initiative. 

  The China Belt and Road Initiative is changing the economic landscape across Africa. This Earth Intelligence Spotlight by Maxar Technologies reveals #insightsfromspace on #china #africa #financeandeconomy. Please check it out and…https://t.co/Y2t0R73dak https://t.co/g532vZHSRf

  — Tony Frazier (@tfraz06) June 21, 2019

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

  One US-funded think tank analyst pointed out the following pattern that accompanies Chinese military expansion to foreign countries: 

  “China doesn’t just build a military base like the U.S.,” said Paul Nantulya, research associate at the Pentagon-funded Africa Center for Strategic Studies. “The Chinese model is very, very different. It combines civilian as well as security elements.”

  Chinese state-owned companies have built 100 commercial ports around Africa in the past two decades, according to Chinese government data.

  In Equatorial Guinea especially, the US concern is that Beijing can more easily make deeper and lucrative economic inroads as the family-run government of longtime strongman President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo (having ruled the tiny country with an iron fist since 1979) is widely perceived as corrupt. 

  

  Already China has multiple major construction companies there, and it should be remembered that the West African oil-producing country has been a member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) since 2017.

  China also trains and arms the country’s national police force. Equatorial Guinea has also in recent years singed Belt & Road memorandums pledging adherence to the initiative.

  

  The WSJ report features satellite imagery and statements of US officials strongly suggesting the Chinese have an eye on Bata in particular, the country’s largest mainland city, on the coast. The report describes that this location “already has a Chinese-built deep-water commercial port on the Gulf of Guinea, and excellent highways link the city to Gabon and the interior of Central Africa.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 16:00

• US Coal Is Making A Transitory Comeback
  US Coal Is Making A Transitory Comeback

  Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

  • U.S. coal miners, who have already benefited from rising demand from utilities this year, are in for at least another year of strong sales and cash flows

  • Much higher natural gas prices are making more power generators switch to coal

  • Annual U.S. coal-fired electricity generation is set to rise this year for the first time since 2014

  While the U.S. Administration is pushing its green energy agenda and wants to decarbonize the power grid by 2035, coal is making a comeback this year as high natural gas prices incentivize more coal use in electricity generation.

  

  This could be coal’s last hurrah, as the fossil fuel is still set for a continuous decline over the medium and long term, analysts say, amid the global push toward clean energy and the ESG trend that restricts investment and access to finance in the coal industry.  

  Still, U.S. coal miners, who have already benefited from rising demand from utilities this year, are in for at least another year of strong sales and cash flows as the much higher natural gas prices this year compared to 2020 are making more power generators switch to coal.

  Annual U.S. coal-fired electricity generation is set to rise this year for the first time since 2014, and the share of coal in America’s power generation mix is set to rise to 23 percent in 2021 from 20 percent in 2020 as electricity demand rebounds and the delivered natural gas price for electricity generators more than doubles, according to EIA estimates.

  Coal Demand Is Rising Amid High Natural Gas Prices

  Rising demand for coal and muted supply response have depleted U.S. coal stocks to their lowest levels since the early 1970s. As utilities scrambled to secure supply ahead of the winter, coal prices in the United States were estimated to have hit last month the highest level since 2009.

  The rise of coal this year also highlights a key challenge ahead for the green energy transition: a shift to cleaner energy will not happen overnight and keeping the lights on in America still needs a lot of coal and natural gas, regardless of the U.S. Administration’s long-term policies.  

  The U.S. still gets over 60 percent of its electricity generation from fossil fuels, 40 percent of which was natural gas and 20 percent coal in 2020.

  This year, the EIA estimates the share of gas dropping to an average of 36 percent from 39 percent last year, but coal’s share rising by 3 percentage points to 23 percent. The share of renewables, including hydropower, is expected to remain basically flat on the year at 20 percent, EIA’s latest Short-Term Energy Outlook showed.

  U.S. Coal Stocks Lowest Since the 1970s

  “U.S. coal production growth has not kept pace with rising domestic demand for steam coal in the electric power sector and export growth, leading to a draw down in coal inventories held by the electric power sector,” the EIA said in the STEO in November.

  Coal inventories at utilities stood in August 2021 at lowest levels since the early 1970s, according to EIA data in its latest Monthly Energy Review.

  Stocks are now some two-thirds of the five-year average for this time of year, The Wall Street Journal points out.   

  In view of the lowest coal stocks in decades, PJM Interconnection, which coordinates wholesale electricity in all or parts of 13 states and the District of Columbia and serves a fifth of U.S. residents, said in October that until April 1, 2022, it could ask coal-fired plants to conserve stocks and curb operations if their respective remaining resources fall below 10 days worth of supply.

  “This would only be implemented to address concerns with local or regional reliability,” PJM said.   

  “Christmas Has Come Early” For U.S. Coal Miners

  Rising coal demand and the highest coal prices in more than a decade are boosting the profitability of the large U.S. coal miners, which sell their production in advance and are now looking to lock in higher prices for the next two years in negotiations with utilities.  

  “I’m reminded of that line, which goes who says Christmas, can’t come a little early. We are now three quarters through having our best year financial and operational performance since we went public,” Randy Atkins, CEO at Ramaco Resources, said on the Q3 earnings call last month.

  The U.S. coal industry is almost sold out for 2022 as high natural gas prices have incentivized more coal-fired generation this year.

  The outlook of many U.S. coal miners for 2022 and 2023 is positive, although long-term uncertainty over the role of coal is only rising. 

  “The reality is, there’s just been very limited investment in new coal production really everywhere domestically and as well as internationally. And as a result, there is a bit of a scramble right now as generators look to find additional volumes with gas prices, as higher as they are at around $5,” Deck Slone, Senior Vice President, Strategy at Arch, said at the end of October.

  “Business conditions in the Powder River Basin are temporarily strong on a variety of factors including high natural gas pricing in regions that consume PRB coal that encourages gas-to-coal switching by power generators and various logistical issues present across the region that limits the coal industry’s ability to produce and deliver coal,” Moody’s said in early November when it revised the rating outlook on Arch Resources to positive from stable.

  Coal Still On Track For Long-Term Decline

  Despite the generally bullish outlook for U.S. coal through 2023, the industry is still set for a decline in the long term due to the push for more renewable energy generation and the ESG investment community shunning fossil fuels, especially coal.   

  “Moody’s believes that investor concerns about the coal industry’s ESG profile are still intensifying and, notwithstanding current strength in coal pricing and better debt trading levels, coal producers will be increasingly challenged by access to capital issues in the early-to-mid 2020s,” the rating agency noted.

  “Looking forward, the Biden administration’s domestic energy policy agenda, combined with ESG obsessions in Europe and the United States, will most likely continue to restrict growth in fossil fuel production. Absent any significant global demand destruction, we expect fossil fuel prices will remain at elevated levels through next year and into 2023,” Alliance Resource’s CEO Joe Craft said on the Q3 call.  

  This year’s rise in coal power generation in the U.S. is unlikely to continue, with generation from coal plants next year expected down by 5 percent from 2021 due to continuing retirements of coal capacity and slightly lower natural gas prices, the EIA says.  

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 15:30

• COVID Outbreak On US Cruise Ship Despite Fully Vaxxed Passengers
  COVID Outbreak On US Cruise Ship Despite Fully Vaxxed Passengers

  Despite every cruise line requiring passengers and crew to be fully vaccinated before boarding, a cruise ship returning from a sail across the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea with thousands of passengers onboard detected an outbreak of COVID-19, according to AP News. 

  Norwegian Breakaway, owned by Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd, departed from the Port of New Orleans on Nov. 28 and sailed to Belize, Honduras, and Mexico, with more than 3,000 people on board. 

  Ahead of returning to its homeport in New Orleans, the cruise line detected ten COVID infections among its guest and crew. Those who were infected were fully vaccinated and were forced into quarantine. 

  Governor John Bel Edwards, the City of New Orleans, and the Port of New Orleans were notified about the incident and contacted the CDC. The infected passengers and crew will either travel directly to their homes or self-isolate at an undisclosed location. 

  Video shows the cruise ship with at least 10 confirmed COVID cases— the Norwegian Breakaway — in New Orleans Sunday morning.

  Read more here: https://t.co/ZDXusG6cdA pic.twitter.com/UPL19wXSi6

  — WWL-TV (@WWLTV) December 5, 2021

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

  According to the vessel-tracking website CruiseMapper, Norwegian Breakaway docked in New Orleans early Sunday morning. All passengers and crew will be subjected to a COVID test before exiting the ship. 

  

  Despite a 100% vaccination rate on the vessel, there was still an outbreak of COVID, suggesting that vaccine effectiveness is severely waning. 

  A recent study of the three primary COVID vaccines showed a ‘dramatic‘ drop in efficacy over six months. So as cruise ship operators begin hitting the high seas with only fully vaxxed passengers and crews that have waning defenses against the virus, one would suspect additional outbreaks on ships as new infections surge across the US. 

  Even in Europe, where vaccine passport schemes and high vaccination rates are highly enforced, countries are experiencing a surge in infections. 

  So what are cruise ship operators going to do now? Only allow passengers and crew who are not just fully vaccinated but have their booster shots? 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 12/05/2021 – 15:15

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Now Or Never: The Great 'Transition' Must Be Imposed
  Now Or Never: The Great ‘Transition’ Must Be Imposed

  Authored by Alastair Crooke via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  A new wave of restrictions, more lockdowns, and – eventually – trillions of dollars in new stimmie cheques may be in prospect…

  

  Were you following the news this last week? Vaccine mandates are everywhere: one country, after another, is doubling-down, to try to force, or legally compel, full population vaccination. The mandates are coming because of the massive uptick in Covid – most of all in the places where the experimental mRNA gene therapies were deployed en masse. And (no coincidence), this ‘marker’ has come just as U.S. Covid deaths in 2021 have surpassed those of 2020. This has happened, despite the fact that last year, no Americans were vaccinated (and this year 59% are vaccinated). Clearly no panacea, this mRNA ‘surge’.

  Of course, the Pharma-Establishment know that the vaccines are no panacea. There are ‘higher interests’ at play here. It is driven rather by fear that the window for implementing its series of ‘transitions’ in the U.S. and Europe is closing. Biden still struggles to move his ‘Go-Big’ social spending plan and green agenda transition through Congress by the midterm election in a year’s time. And the inflation spike may well sink Biden’s Build Back Better agenda (BBB) altogether.

  Time is short. The midterm elections are but 12 months away, after which the legislative window shuts. The Green ‘transition’ is stuck too (by concerns that moving too fast to renewables is putting power grids at risk and elevating heating costs unduly), and the Pharma establishment will be aware that a new B.1.1.529 variant has made a big jump in evolution with 32 mutations to its spike protein. This makes it “clearly very different” from previous variants, which may drive further waves of infection evading ‘vaccine defences’.

  Translation: a new wave of restrictions, more lockdowns, and – eventually – trillions of dollars in new stimmie cheques may be in prospect. And what of inflation then, we might ask.

  It’s a race for the U.S. and Europe, where the pandemic is back in full force across Europe, to push through their re-set agendas, before variants seize up matters with hospitals crowded with the vaccinated and non-vaccinated; with riots in the streets, and mask mandates at Christmas markets (that’s if they open at all). A big reversal was foreshadowed by this week’s news: vaccine mandates and lockdowns, even in highly vaccinated areas, are returning. And people don’t like it.

  The window for the Re-Set may be fast closing. One observer, noting all the frenetic Élite activity, has asked ‘have we finally reached peak Davos?’. Is the turn to authoritarianism in Europe a sign of desperation as fears grow that the various ‘transitions’ planned under the ‘re-set’ umbrella (financial, climate, vaccine and managerial expert technocracy) may never be implemented?

  Cut short rather, as spending plans are hobbled by accelerating inflation; as the climate transition fails to find traction amongst poorer states (and at home, too); as technocracy is increasingly discredited by adverse pandemic outcomes; and Modern Monetary Theory hits a wall, because – well, inflation again.

  Are you paying attention yet? The great ‘transition’ is conceived as a hugely expensive shift towards renewables, and to a new digitalised, roboticised corporatism. It requires Big (inflationary) funding to be voted through, and a huge parallel (inflationary) expenditure on social support to be approved by Congress as well. The social provision is required to mollify all those who subsequently will find themselves without jobs, because of the climate ‘transition’ and the shift to a digitalised corporate sphere. But – unexpectedly for some ‘experts’ – inflation has struck – the highest statistics in 30 years.

  There are powerful oligarchic interests behind the Re-Set. They do not want to see it go down, nor see the West eclipsed by its ‘competitors’. So it seems that rather than back off, they will go full throttle and try to impose compliance on their electorates: tolerate no dissidence.

  A 1978 essay “The Power of the Powerless” by then dissident and future Czech President Vaclav Havel begins mockingly that, “A SPECTRE is haunting Eastern Europe: the spectre of what in the West is called ‘dissent’”. “This spectre has not appeared out of thin air. It is a natural and inevitable consequence of the present historical phase of the system it is haunting.” Well, today, as Michael Every of Rabobank notes, “the West has polarisation, mass protests, riots, talk of obligatory vaccinations in Europe, and Yanis Varoufakis arguing capitalism is already dead; and that a techno-feudalism looms”. Now, prompting even greater urgency, are the looming U.S. midterms. Trump’s return (even if confined just to Congress), would cut the legs from under BBB, and ice-up Brussels too.

  It was however, precisely this tech revolution, to which Varoufakis calls attention, that both re-defined the Democrat constituency, and turned tech oligarchs into billionaires. Through algorithmically creating a magnetism of like-minded content, cascaded out to its customers, it has both smothered intellectual curiosity, and created the ‘un-informed party’, which is the today’s Managerial Class – the party of the credentialed meritocracy; the party, above all, smugly seeing themselves as the coming era’s ‘winners’ – unwilling to risk a look behind the curtain; to put their ‘safe space’ to the test.

  Perversely, this cadre of professionally-corralled academics, analysts, and central bankers, all insist that they completely believe in their memes: That their techno-approach is both effective, and of benefit to humanity – oblivious to the dissenting views, swirling around them, down in the interstices of the internet.

  The main function then of such memes today, whether issued by the Pharma Vaccine ‘Command’; the MMT ‘transition’ Command; the energy ‘transition’ Command; or the global managerial technocracy ‘transition’, is to draw a ‘Maginot line’ – a defensive ideological boundary, a “Great Narrative” as it were – between ‘the truth’ as defined by the ruling classes, and with that of any other ‘truth’ that contradicts their narrative. That is to say, it is about compliance.

  It was well understood that all these transitions would overturn long-standing human ways of life, that are ancient and deeply rooted and trigger dissidence – which is why new forms of social ‘discipline’ would be required. (Incidentally, the EU leadership already refer to their their official mandates as ‘Commands’). Such disciplines are now being trialled in Europe – with the vaccine mandates (even though scientists are telling them that vaccines cannot be the silver bullet for which they yearn). As one high ‘lodge’ member, favouring a form of global governance notes, to make people accept such reforms, you must frighten them.

  Yes, the collective of ‘transitions’ must have their ‘Big, overarching Narrative’ – however hollow, it rings (i.e. the struggle to defend democracy against authoritarianism). But it is the nature of today’s cultural-meme war that ultimately its content becomes little more than a rhetorical shell, lacking all sincerity at its core.

  It serves principally, as decoration to a ‘higher order’ project: The preservation of global ‘rules of the road’, framed to reflect U.S. and allied interests, as the base from which the clutch of ‘transitions’ can be raised up into a globally managed order which preserves the Élite’s influence and command of major assets.

  This politics of crafted, credentialised meme-politics is here to stay, and now is ‘everywhere’. It has long crossed the partisan divide. The wider point here – is that the mechanics of meme-mobilisation is being projected, not just in the western ‘home’ (at a micro-level), but abroad, into American ‘foreign policy’ too (i.e. at the macro-level).

  And, just as in the domestic arena, where the notion of politics by suasion is lost (with vaccine mandates enforced by water-cannon, and riot police), so too, the notion of foreign policy managed through argument, or diplomacy, has been lost too.

  Western foreign policy becomes less about geo-strategy, but rather is primordially focussed on the three ‘big iconic issues’ – China, Russia and Iran – that can be given an emotional ‘charge’ in order to profitably mobilise certain identified ‘constituencies’ in the U.S. domestic cultural war. All the various U.S. political strands play this game.

  The aim is to ‘nudge’ domestic American psyches (and those of their allies) into mobilisation on some issue (such as more protectionism for business against Chinese competition), or alternatively, imagined darkly, in order to de-legitimise an opposition, or to justify failures. These mobilisations are geared to gaining relative domestic partisan advantage, rather than having strategic purpose.

  When this credentialled meme-war took hold in the U.S., millions of people were already living a reality in which facts no longer mattered at all; where things that never happened officially, happened. And other things that obviously happened never happened: not officially, that is. Or, were “far-right extremist conspiracy theories,” “fake news,” or “disinformation,” or whatever, despite the fact that people knew that they weren’t.

  Russia and China therefore face a reality in which European and U.S. élites are heading in the opposite direction to epistemological purity and well-founded argument. That is to suggest, the new ‘normal’ is about generating a lot of contradictory realities, not just contradictory ideologies, but actual mutually-exclusive ‘realities’, which could not possibly simultaneously exist … and which are intended to bemuse adversaries – and nudge them off-balance.

  This is a highly risky game, for it forces a resistance stance on those targeted states – whether they seek it, or not. It underlines that politics is no more about considered strategy: It is about being willing for the U.S. to lose strategically (even militarily), in order to win politically. Which is to say gaining an ephemeral win of having prompted an favourable unconscious psychic response amongst American voters.

  Russia, China, Iran are but ‘images’ prized mainly for their potential for being loaded with ‘nudge’ emotional-charge in this western cultural war, (of which these states are no part). The result is that these states become antagonists to the American presumption to define a global ‘rules of the road’ to which all must adhere.

  These countries understand exactly the point of these value and rights-loaded ‘rules’. It is to force compliance on these states to acquiesce to the ‘transitions, or, to suffer isolation, boycott and sanction – in a similar way to the choices being forced on those in the West not wishing to vaccinate (i.e. no jab; no job).

  This approach reflects an attempt by Team Biden to have it ‘both ways’ with these three ‘Iconic States’: To welcome compliance on ‘transition issues’, but to be adversarial over any dissidence to mounting a rules framework that can raise the ‘transitions’ from the national, to the supra-national plane.

  But do the U.S. practitioners of meme-politics, absorb and comprehend that the stance by Russia-China – in riposte – is not some same-ilk counter-mobilisation done to ‘make a point’? That their vision does stand at variance with ‘the rules’? Do they see that their ‘red lines’ may indeed be ‘red lines’ literally? Is the West now so meme-addicted, it cannot any longer recognise real national interests?

  This is key: When the West speaks, it is forever looking over its shoulder, at the domestic, and wider psychic impact when it is ‘making a point’ (such as practicing attacks by nuclear-capable bombers as close to Russia’s borders as they dare). And that when Russia and China say, ‘This is our Red Line’, it is no meme – they really mean it.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 23:30

• Putin Denounces Ukraine's Use Of Turkish Drones In Erdogan Call
  Putin Denounces Ukraine’s Use Of Turkish Drones In Erdogan Call

  In a Friday phone call Russian President Vladimir Putin told his Turkish counterpart Tayyip Erdogan that Ukraine is using Turkish-made drones against pro-Russia separatists in the war-torn Donbass region. Putin put the Turkish leader on notice over the “destabilizing” activity of the continued drone transfers from Turkey to Ukraine.

  Putin further denounced the Turkish drone usage as “destructive” and “provocative” behavior on the part of Ukrainian authorities, citing specifically that Turkish-made Bayraktar drones have increasingly turned up in the conflict. Putin is reportedly also angry that the Turkey-to-Ukraine drone and weapons pipeline is still open and going strong, according to new reports.

  

  A spokesperson for Erdogan later confirmed that the drone issue was raised, but gave no further details. A follow-up statement from Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu, however, rejected the notion that Turkey can be held responsible for the Ukrainian military’s deployment of Turkish-made drones.

  Further at issue is that recent drone sales from Turkey have been found to be much bigger than previously disclosed, outraging the Kremlin:

  Turkey has sold Ukraine significantly more of the armed drones that drew a rebuke from Russia than previously disclosed, with further deals in the pipeline, Bloomberg reported. 

  Baykar, an arms manufacturer based in Istanbul, has sold dozens of drones to Ukraine since 2019, together with control stations and missiles, according to several officials and an executive at a Turkish defense company with close government ties. Orders for at least two dozen more drones are under way, the people said, asking not to be named due to the sensitivity of the subject. 

  As Reuters reviews, Turkish drones have recently become featured in a flair-up of fighting:

  In October, Russia accused Ukraine of destabilizing the situation after government forces used a Bayraktar TB2 drone to strike a position controlled by Russian-backed separatists.

  Ukraine used the Bayraktar drone “for one tidy shot” at a gun system, and since then enemy soldiers are afraid of doing duty at such systems as they understand “how this could end,” Ukraine’s defense minister Oleksii Reznikov said on Friday.

  We noted in late October that Russia began intensely investigating recent reports of Turkish attack drones being deployed for the first time in Ukraine’s eight-year civil war. The Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) under the command of the Kiev government claimed that the drones were used at that time in combat against ethnic Russian rebels.

  #Ukraine tests Turkey-made Bayraktar TB2 attack drones in the Sea Breeze-2021 military exercises. The drones are armed with MAM-C guided munitions. pic.twitter.com/fYcRz9gdNJ

  — Ali Özkök (@Ozkok_A) June 30, 2021

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

  And the now confirmed Turkish drone deployments mark a dramatic escalation in the smoldering war, as it marks the involvement of NATO member Turkey in the conflict. Up to now, the United States and other NATO states have been supplying lethal weaponry through Kiev to prosecute its war against the breakaway self-declared republics of Donetsk and Luhansk.

  Over the past year as reports started to surface, Moscow began suggesting it could sever all military level relations and cooperation with Turkey. Turkey, for example, relies on Russia for technical support for the S-400 anti-air missile defense systems supplied a couple years ago. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 23:00

• US Companies Are "Hostages" To China
  US Companies Are “Hostages” To China

  Authored by Emel Akan via The Epoch Times,

  Foreign firms doing business in China should be aware of the costs of transacting with a totalitarian regime that controls everything in society and can easily bend any company to its will.

  

  Heads of U.S. corporations don’t dare to criticize the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) even in private settings. They know Big Brother is always watching them.

  JPMorgan boss Jamie Dimon’s quick apology over a joke he made recently about the country’s communist regime provides a good example of how business leaders fear retribution from Beijing.

  Clyde Prestowitz, author and strategist on Asia and globalization, explains the true cost of doing business in China in his latest book “The World Turned Upside Down: America, China, and the Struggle for Global Leadership.” He was a presidential advisor and a leader of the first American trade mission to China in 1982.

  The U.S. companies that are highly coupled with China face all kinds of risks, from intellectual property theft to commercial cyber espionage. But the biggest, most fundamental risk is “the loss of free speech,” Prestowitz says in his book.

  Dimon is not alone as there are many examples of free-world CEOs and presidents making apologies or backtracking when they anger the Chinese regime.

  During Hong Kong protests in 2019, for example, Apple pulled from its app store a map application widely used by pro-democracy protestors that showed the location of police patrols and tear gas deployments, citing security reasons. The move was made after Chinese state media piled pressure calling for the app’s removal. Google also sparked controversy when it removed a Hong Kong protest role-playing game from its app store.

  These are by no means the only apparently self-censorship incidents by U.S tech companies. Apple, for example, removed nearly 55,000 active apps from its app store in China since 2017, according to a New York Times report. They include apps made by minorities oppressed by the regime, including Uyghurs and Tibetans.

  Over the years, the list of entities that have caved to Beijing’s censorship demands has grown long. The Gap, Disney, Delta Airlines, Medtronic, Marriott, the NBA, and many others have all bowed to the Chinese regime over issues ranging from Taiwan to Uyghurs to Hong Kong.

  Such actions by U.S. firms, though, have drawn criticism from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, who accuse companies of sacrificing American values for the allure of profits in the world’s second-largest economy.

  For the CEO of Apple Tim Cook and other U.S. corporate executives navigating the Chinese market, they effectively become “hostages” to the whims of the Chinese regime.

  “They may be perceived as the heads of American companies, but they fear Beijing far more than they fear Washington,” Prestowitz writes in his book.

  Since there’s no rule of law in China, they become “captive,” he adds. In Washington, they have lawyers and lobbyists that give them the power to influence or sue the U.S. government. In Beijing, however, they can’t sue the Chinese regime because they know they would lose—the courts in China are controlled by the Communist Party—and would face retaliation from the regime for even trying.

  Beijing is aware of this leverage and hence can freely use companies as a tool. As I wrote in a previous column, the Chinese Embassy in Washington is pressuring U.S. companies and trade groups that have business interests in China to lobby against a comprehensive China bill that aims to enhance U.S. competitiveness and hold Beijing accountable for its human rights abuses.

  According to Prestowitz, entities that are under pressure could be giants like Walmart, Apple, General Electric, and FedEx as well as organizations like the U.S.-China Business Council.

  None of this should come as a surprise. As The Epoch Times readers will know, China exerts significant influence in the United States. It spent more than $67 million on lobbyists last year, a sixfold increase since 2016, according to OpenSecrets.

  And this is only the tip of the iceberg, as it only covers the overt influence operations that need to be disclosed under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

  The FARA, passed in 1938, requires a person who represents a foreign interest to register as a foreign agent. The law, however, falls short in addressing less overt political influence operations conducted through proxies, including corporations, trade associations, and think tanks. Many China hawks in Washington are urging Congress to close this loophole in foreign influence.

  “It’s really something that must be addressed,” Prestowitz tells me.

  If heads of corporations have substantial business operations in China, “they should not be allowed to make political donations in the United States,” he said.

  “When they testify before Congress, they should be compelled to declare that they are testifying as the leaders of Chinese businesses. They should be made to tell the public and the Congress that they in fact, are subject to pressure and influence by the Chinese Communist Party.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 22:30

• Goldman Senior Executives Are Searching For Ways To Quietly Boost Their Own Pay
  Goldman Senior Executives Are Searching For Ways To Quietly Boost Their Own Pay

  What’s good for the gander is good for the geese, right?

  It seems that way at Goldman Sachs. No sooner do we write about how Goldman Sachs is looking to implement additional paid leave for its rank-and-file employees in order to keep morale up than it was revealed that the company’s bosses are also looking at ways of improving their own yacht collection quality of life. 

  In fact, CEO David Solomon and the top brass at the bank are reportedly “searching for ways to juice their own eight-digit pay packages,” Bloomberg reported this week. 

  Solomon’s total stake in the company, including unvested stock, is worth about $180 million already the report says. He made $27.5 million his first full year as CEO and the same the next year, in 2020. Solomon also was given a $50 million bonus plan to be split with another employee in October of this year. That off-cycle bonus came as a result of Goldman’s skyrocketing stock price, which is up about 80% since Solomon took over as CEO. 

  Pat Scanlan, a spokesman for the bank, told Bloomberg: “We have offered co-investment opportunities for our senior executives that align interests with investors. That the board of directors would explore additional opportunities is hardly surprising.”

  One way that Solomon is pushing to boost pay is to expand the allocation of founders’ shares in SPAC deals that the bank partakes in. These requests have reportedly “irritated members of the SPAC team”, as it pins them against Solomon for a share of the projects that they have worked on.

  Teams at the bank are reportedly “scrambling to figure out how to structure and disclose the SPAC investment for the NEOs while avoiding the appearance of boosting pay.”

  

  The optics of bonuses when you’re already making tens of millions of dollars per year need to be carefully dealt with. While banks want to raise pay commensurate with other banks in order to retain talent, they have to walk a thin line with public perception. Bloomberg says that the key is to “give the board as much elbow room as possible to grant him more, without making it look like an outsized raise”.

  For example, when Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman surprised the market in 2020 by lowering his pay by about 7% due to the pandemic, it caused Goldman to delay its own decision on executive compensation for months.

  Top brass at Goldman has also reportedly looked at different ways to increase their share of profits from internal investment vehicles, including whether or not private funds operated by the firm’s merchant bank could pay larger bonuses for senior managers. 

  Recall, days ago we wrote how Goldman was also seeking to offer new incentives to its “burnt out” employees. 

  The investment bank is going to now be offering “paid leave for pregnancy loss” and is “expanding the amount of time employees can take for bereavement leave,” the report says.

  Goldman will also be offering unpaid sabbatical for its long time employees and removing a one year waiting period before matching employee 401(k) contributions.

  Goldman’s head of human resources, Bentley de Beyer, told the WSJ: “We wanted to offer a compelling value proposition to current and prospective employees, and wanted to make sure we’re leading, not just competing.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 22:00

• Shellenberger: The Real Threat To Banks Isn't From Climate Change, It's From Bankers
  Shellenberger: The Real Threat To Banks Isn’t From Climate Change, It’s From Bankers

  Authored by Michael Shellenberger via substack,

  Over the last two years, some of the world’s most powerful and influential bankers and investors have argued that climate change poses a grave threat to financial markets and that nations must switch urgently from using fossil fuels to using renewables.

  In 2019, the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco warned that climate change could cause banks to stop lending, towns to lose tax revenue, and home values to decline. Last year, 36 pension fund managers representing $1 trillion in assets said climate change “poses a systemic threat to financial markets and the real economy.”

  And upon taking office, President Joe Biden warned government agencies that climate change disasters threatened retirement funds, home prices, and the very stability of the financial system.

  But a major new staff report from the New York Federal Reserve Bank throws cold water on the over-heated rhetoric coming from activist investors, bankers, and politicians. “How Bad Are Weather Disasters for Banks?” asks the title of the report by three economists. “Not very,” they answer in the first sentence of the abstract.

  The reason is because “weather disasters over the last quarter century had insignificant or small effects on U.S. banks’ performance.” The study looked at FEMA-level disasters between 1995 and 2018, at county-level property damage estimates, and the impact on banking revenue.

  The New York Fed’s authors only looked at how banks have dealt with disasters in the past, and what they wrote isn’t likely to be the final word on the matter. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and most other scientific bodies predict that many weather events, including hurricanes and floods, which cause the greatest financial damage, are likely to become more extreme in the future, due to climate change.

  And in February, The New York Times quoted one of six United States Federal Reserve governors saying, “Financial institutions that do not put in place frameworks to measure, monitor and manage climate-related risks could face outsized losses on climate-sensitive assets caused by environmental shifts.”

  

  But the Fed economists looked separately at the most extreme 10 percent of all disasters and found that banks impacted not only didn’t suffer, “their income increases significantly with exposure,” and that the improved financial performance of banks hit by disasters wasn’t explained by increased federal disaster (FEMA) aid.

  In other words, disasters are actually good for banks, since they increase demand for loans. The larger a bank’s exposure to natural disasters, the larger its profits.

  Happily, the profits made by banks are trivial compared to rising societal resilience to disasters, which can be seen by the fact that the share of GDP spent on natural disasters has actually declined over the last 30 years.

  While scientists expect hurricanes to become five percent more extreme they also expect them to become 25 percent less frequent, and now, new data show global carbon emissions actually declined over the last decade, and thus there is no longer any serious risk of a significant rise in global temperatures.

  Banking Against Growth

  The real risk to banks and the global economy comes from climate policy, not climate change, particularly efforts to make energy more expensive and less reliable through the greater use of renewables, new taxes, and new regulations.

  “For policymakers,” warned the three economists writing for the New York Fed, “our findings suggest that potential transition risks from climate change warrant more attention than physical disaster risks.”

  While they may seem like outliers, they are far from alone in expressing their concern. The second half of the quote by the Fed governor about climate change, which was hyped by The New York Times, warned that banks “could face outsized losses” from the “transition to a low-carbon economy.” (My emphasis.)

  And, now concern is growing among members of Congress about the dangers of over-relying on weather-dependent energy, with some members citing the New York Fed’s report after The Wall Street Journal editorialized about it last week .

  Proof of the threat to the economy from climate policy is the worst global energy crisis in 50 years. Shareholder activists played a significant role in creating it, according to analysts at Goldman Sachs, Bloomberg, and The Financial Times, by reducing investment in oil and gas production, and causing nations to over-invest in unreliable solar and wind energies, which has driven up energy prices, and contributed significantly to inflation.

  And yet a crucial Biden Administration nominee for bank regulation has openly said she would like to bankrupt firms that produce oil and gas, the two fuels whose scarcity is causing the global energy crisis. Progressive academic, Saule Omarova, nominated by Biden, said recently that “we want [oil and gas firms] to go bankrupt” and that “the way we basically get rid of these carbon financiers is we starve them of their source of capital.

  

  Biden nominee Saule Omarova said she wants to bankrupt energy companies

  Omarova is not an outlier. The Biden Administration’s Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) is advocating 30 new climate regulations that should be imposed on banking. Many analysts believe the US Securities and Exchange Commission will require new regulations. The goal is to radically alter how America’s banks lend money, the energy sector, and the economy as a whole.

  And former Bank of England chief, Mark Carney, co-chair of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, has organized $130 trillion in investment and said recently that his investors should expect to make higher, not lower, returns than the market. How? In the exact same way Omarova predicted: by bankrupting some companies, and financing other ones, through government regulations and subsidies.

  

  Former Bank of England head Mark Carney

  Carney created the Glasgow Financial Alliance, or GFANZ, with Michael Bloomberg, and they did so under the official seal of the United Nations. “Carney said the alliance will put global finance on a trajectory that ultimately leaves high-carbon assets facing a much bleaker future,” wrote a reporter with Bloomberg. “He also said investors in such products will see the value of their holdings sink.”

  What’s going on, exactly? How is it that some of the world’s most powerful bankers, and the politicians they finance, came to support policies that threaten the stability of electrical grids, energy supplies, and thus the global economy itself?

  The Unseen Order

  Three of the largest donors to climate change causes are billionaire financial titans Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, and Tom Steyer, all of whom have significant investments in both renewables and fossil fuels.

  

  Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg, and George Soros

  Soros is worth $8 billion and recently made large investments in natural gas firms (EQT) and electric vehicles (Fisker), Bloomberg has a net worth of around $70 billion and has large investments in natural gas and renewables, and much of Steyer’s wealth derives from investments in all three main fossil fuels—coal, oil, and natural gas — as well as renewables.

  All three men finance climate activists and politicians, including President Biden, who then seek policies — from $500 billion for renewables and electric vehicles over the next decade to federal control over state energy systems to banking regulations to bankrupt oil and gas companies — which would benefit each of them personally.

  Bloomberg gave over $100 million to Sierra Club to lobby to shut down coal plants after he had taken a large stake in its replacement, natural gas, and operates one of the largest news media companies in the world, which publishes articles and sends emails nearly every day reporting that climate change threatens the economy, and that solar panels and wind turbines are the only cost-effective solution.

  Soros donates heavily to Center for American Progress, whose founder, John Podesta, was chief of staff to Bill Clinton, campaign chairman for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, and who currently runs policy at the Biden White House. So too does Steyer, who funds the climate activist organization founded by New Yorker author Bill McKibben, 350.org, which reported revenues of nearly $20 million in 2018.

  The most influential environmental organization among Democrats and the Biden Administration is the Natural Resources Defense Council, NRDC, which advocated for federal control of state energy markets, the $500 billion for electric cars and renewables, and international carbon markets that would be controlled by the bankers and financiers who also donate to it.

  In the 1990s, NRDC helped energy trading company Enron to distribute hundreds of thousands of dollars to environmental groups. “On environmental stewardship, our experience is that you can trust Enron,” said NRDC’s Ralph Cavanagh in 1997, even though Enron executives at the time were defrauding investors of billions of dollars in an epic criminal conspiracy, which in 2001 bankrupted the company.

  From 2009 to 2011, NRDC advocated for and helped write complex cap-and-trade climate legislation that would have created and allowed some of their donors to take advantage of a carbon-trading market worth upwards of $1 trillion.

  NRDC created and invested $66 million of its own money in a BlackRock stock fund that invested heavily in natural gas companies, and in 2014 disclosed that it had millions invested in renewable funds.

  Former NRDC head, Gina McCarthey, now heads up Biden’s climate policy team, and Biden’s top economic advisor, Brian Deese, last worked at BlackRock, and almost certainly will return at the end of the Biden Administration.

  Money buys influence. In 2019, McKibben called Steyer a “climate champ” when Steyer announced he was running for president, adding that Steyer’s “just-released climate policy is damned good!” And in 2020, McKibben wrote an article called, “How Banks Could Bail Us Out of the Climate Crisis,” for The New Yorker, which repeated the claim that extreme weather created by climate change threatens financial interests, and that the way to prevent it is to divert public and private money away from reliable energy sources toward weather-dependent ones.

  Forms filed to the Internal Revenue Service by Steyer’s philanthropic organization, the TomKat Charitable Trust, show that it gave McKibben’s climate activist group, 350.org, $250,000 in 2012, 2014, and 2015, and may have given money to 350.org in 2013, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020, as well, because 350.org thanked either Steyer’s philanthropy, TomKat Foundation, or his organization, NextGen America, in each of its annual reports since 2013.

  At the same time, McKibben’s motivations are plainly spiritual. He claims that various natural disasters are caused by humans, that climate change literally threatens life on Earth, and is thus “greatest challenge humans have ever faced,” a statement so unhinged from reality, considering declining deaths from disasters, declining carbon emissions, and the total absence of any science for such a claim, that it must be considered religious.

  McKibben first book about climate change, The End of Nature, explicitly expressed his spiritual views, arguing that, through capitalist industrialization, humankind had lost its connection to nature. “We can no longer imagine that we are part of something larger than ourselves,” he wrote in The End of Nature. “That is what this all boils down to.” Indeed, for William James, the belief in “an unseen order” that we must adjust ourselves to, in order to avoid future punishment, is a defining feature of religion.

  Climate change is punishment for our sins against nature — that’s the basic narrative pushed by journalists, climate activists, and their banker sponsors, for 30 years. It has a supernatural element: the belief that natural disasters are getting worse, killing millions, and threatening the economy, when in reality they are getting better, killing fewer, and costing less. And it offers redemption: to avoid punishment we must align our behavior with the unseen order, namely, a new economy controlled by the U.N., bankers, and climate activists. Unfortunately, as is increasingly obvious, the unseen order is parasitical and destructive.

  When Nuclear Leads, the Bankers Will Follow

  The unseen order of bankers, climate activists, and the news media is so powerful that it is difficult to imagine how it could ever be challenged.

  The financial might of the climate lobby covers the wealth not only of billionaires Soros, Steyer, and Bloomberg, but also $130 trillion in investment funds, including many of the world’s largest pension funds, such as the one belonging to California public employees. The climate lobby’s political power is equally awesome, covering the entirety of the Democratic Party and a significant portion of the Republican Party, and most center-Left parties in Europe.

  

  Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emanuel Macron, and U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm

  And all of that is sustained by cultural power, which has led many elites to view climate change as the world’s number one issue, has convinced half of all humans that climate change will make our species extinct, and has served as the apocalyptic foundation for Woke religion.

  But serious cracks in the foundation are growing. The global energy crisis has revealed for many around the world the limits of unreliable renewables, with European governments having to subsidize energy to avoid public backlash, President Biden and other heads of state opening up emergency petroleum reserves, and all nations begging OPEC to produce more energy.

  The blackouts and rising unreliability of electricity in California, along with the work of the pro-nuclear movement over the last 6 years, has resulted in a growing number of Democrats supporting nuclear energy. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm last week publicly urged California Governor Gavin Newsom not to close California’s Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, the signature nuclear plant Environmental Progress has been trying to save since 2016. Democratic support in particular for nuclear is growing.

  

  And alternative media including Substack, podcasts, and social media platforms are increasingly providing a counterweight to the mainstream news media, exposing a huge number of issues that the media got wrong in recent years, and amplifying alternative voices.

  Nowhere is the change occurring faster than in Europe, where energy shortages are affecting heating, cooking, and electricity supplies in ways that undermine the legitimacy of the banker-led climate efforts. In Britain, private energy companies have gone bankrupt, forcing the government to bail them out. For-profit energy companies, like banks, ultimately depend on taxpayers, who are also voters.

  Outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who led her nation’s exit from nuclear energy, acknowledged that Germany had been defeated in its anti-nuclear energy advocacy at the European Union level, and that nuclear would finally be recognized as low-carbon.

  And French president Emanuel Macron, under pressure from the political right as voters look to elections next year, gave a passionate speech in favor of nuclear energy last month, announcing $35 billion for new reactors.

  As the world returns to nuclear, policymakers, media elites, and climate advocates will be increasingly confronted with the question of why consumers and taxpayers will benefit from a global carbon trading scheme and more weather-dependent renewables, particularly at a time of declining global emissions from the continuing transition from coal to natural gas, reduced deforestation, and increased reforestation.

  Simply building more nuclear power plants means there is no climate change justification for weather-dependent renewables, which actually require greater use of natural gas, in order to deal with the high amount of unreliability.

  Nuclear power goes with slow and patient capital. The obvious funders of a nuclear expansion in the West would be the pension funds, which need the secure return on investment that major construction and infrastructure projects provide, and which unreliable renewables, as the energy crisis shows, do not.

  And though the news media is currently ignoring the New York Fed’s report, reporters will not be able to continue spreading misinformation about climate change indefinitely. Increasingly, they, and thus policymakers and the public, will be forced to confront facts inconvenient to their narrative, including that humans are adapting remarkably well to climate change, that renewables make energy unreliable and expensive, and that only nuclear can achieve sustainability goals of reduced emissions, material throughput, and land use.

  As people ask, “How Bad Are Weather Disasters?”, not just for banks, but for all of us, the answer will increasingly come back, “Not very.”

  *  *  *

  Michael Shellenberger is a Time Magazine “Hero of the Environment,”Green Book Award winner, and the founder and president of Environmental Progress. He is author of just launched book San Fransicko (Harper Collins) and the best-selling book, Apocalypse Never (Harper Collins June 30, 2020). Subscribe To Michael’s substack here

  Donate to Environmental Progress

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 21:30

• Biden Infrastructure Bill Includes Passive Monitoring Vehicle "Kill Switch" Mandates For Automakers
  Biden Infrastructure Bill Includes Passive Monitoring Vehicle “Kill Switch” Mandates For Automakers

  As if the Biden administration wasn’t doing enough to infringe on your civil liberties with lockdowns and vaccine mandates, media reports over the last several days are suggesting that Biden’s new infrastructure bill will also include a mandate for auto manufacturers to install “kill switches” into vehicles.

  Former Rep. Bob Barr, writing for The Daily Caller, calls the measure “disturbingly short on details”, but for the fact that the proposed device must “passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired.”

  Which, of course, is code for some kind of device that is constantly on and monitoring your vehicle – and will likely have the power to shut down your vehicle anytime it wants. 

  “This is a privacy disaster in the making, and the fact that the provision made it through the Congress reveals — yet again — how little its members care about the privacy of their constituents,” The Daily Caller writes. 

  

  It appears that in President Biden’s future, not only will you not be in charge of your own personal health decisions, but you also won’t be in charge of whether or not you can fire up your car, which you bought with your hard-earned money, to drive it somewhere, when you deem fit. 

  That decision will now “rest in the hands of an algorithm”, the report says. Similar monitoring and control devices have faced constitutional opposition, the report notes, “notably with the 5th Amendment’s right to not self-incriminate, and the 6th Amendment’s right to face one’s accuser.”

  Barr concludes: “Unless this regulatory mandate is not quickly removed or defanged by way of an appropriations rider preventing its implementation, the freedom of the open road that individual car ownership brought to the American Dream, will be but another vague memory of an era no longer to be enjoyed by future generations.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 21:00

• Obituary For Russiagate
  Obituary For Russiagate

  Authored by Patrick Lawrence via Consortium News,

  Russiagate, that fraudulent fable wherein Russian President Vladimir Putin personally subverted American democracy, Russian intelligence pilfered the Democratic Party’s email, and Donald Trump acted at the Kremlin’s behest, is at last dead.

  No, nothing sudden. It has been a slow, painful death of the sort this destructive beast richly deserved. But its demise is now definitive — in the courts and on paper. We await the better historians to see this properly into the record.

  Three key operatives in the construction of the Russiagate edifice are indicted for lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about aspects of the Russiagate tale. The Steele dossier, the document on which much of the case against former President Trump rested, is now exposed as a Nixonesque “dirty trick” authorized and paid for by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Some mainstream newspapers — certainly not all — are busy in their archives, editing out the worst of the falsehoods they reported in 2016 and 2017 as unassailable fact. This is a wholesale collapse now.

  

  There are, as one would expect, those who seem determined to hold out no matter what the factual evidence. These go well beyond MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, whose record I will let speak for itself.

  I am thinking of people such as David Corn, the Mother Jones correspondent in Washington, and David Frum, a staff writer at The Atlantic. Both invested big time into the Russiagate junk, and both published books filled with the ridiculous, evidence-free piffle of which it was made.

  Corn, Frum and numerous others like them are now industriously throwing good money after bad to go by recent publications. Here is Corn’s latest, and here Frum’s. One finds the same tired combination of presumption, useless innuendo, and spoon-fed, evidence-deficient falsities derived from the intelligence agencies that were key to fomenting the Russiagate hoax. Yes, Messrs. Corn and Frum, it was a hoax.

  To these diehards, people such as your columnist, given to rational, disinterested consideration of what is known and what is conjured from thin air, are “denialists.” Strange it is that those denying established facts and truths call those who accept these facts and truths by this name.

  But this is a measure of the extent Russiagate has plunged us into Alice–in–Wonderland depths where what is up is down, what is dark is light, what is true is to be buried, what is false is to be held high — where blindness is preferred to sight.

  This leads us to the essential question we now face, or one of them. What are the consequences of the Russiagate scam? If it rested on lies start-to-finish, this is not to say it did not exact its price. It did. The price is high, and we are fated to pay it for some time to come.

  The Damage Done

  An inquiry of this kind must begin with the damage Russiagate has done to the prevalent American consciousness. The last five years have delivered Americans into a culture of unreason of the kind they have been prone to indulging periodically throughout their history. It is made in equal parts of a native insecurity and anxiety, of paranoia and of irrationality.

  This is at once a pitiable and dangerous state. All is reduced to the Manichean distinctions characteristic of the old Westerns (not to mention most of the good guys vs. bad guys Dreck that comes out of Hollywood these days). No subtlety of thought survives in the culture of unreason. Public space is populated with poseurs, cutouts, and imposters. Public discourse, with some exceptions, is much of the time not worth bothering with.

  

  To understand this condition, we must recognize it as the work of a diabolic alliance comprised of the Democratic Party’s corrupt leadership, the FBI and other law-enforcement agencies, the national security apparatus and its many appendages, and the media. It is no longer in the slightest objectionable to speak or write of a Deep State that controls this country.

  The elite minority this alliance represents derives its power from its claim to speak for the majority — an absolutely classic case of the “soft despotism” Alexis de Tocqueville warned Americans of 190 years ago. Liberal authoritarianism is another name for what has consolidated itself in the years since Democrats, in mid–2016, first raised the phony specter of Russia “hacking” into its mail systems.

  In effect, Russiagate has tipped the American polity upside down. It is the illiberal liberals among us, righteous as the old Puritan ministers of New England, who now prosecute a regime of censorship and suppression of dissent that is at least as severe and anti-democratic as what conservatives had going during the Cold War (and in my view worse).

  It is they who seek to cow ordinary Americans into the new, weird idolatry of authority, no matter that those to whom the nation is urged to bow are proven liars, law-breakers and propagandists.

  Culture of Unreason

  There is, of course, the more dangerous world Russiagate has done so much to create. In the culture of unreason, the Deep State has a discouraging record of success in gaining wide public support for any aggressive campaign against any nation or people it wishes to act against. In this dimension, Russiagate has destroyed the Democrats as a party willing to stand against the imperial project in its late phase.

  A war with China over the Taiwan question is now spoken of as a logical possibility. Washington is now raising the temperature on the Ukraine–Russia border, just as it did when it cultivated the 2014 coup in Kiev, and this is put across as a Democratic administration’s sound policy. Rampant Russophobia is a direct consequence of the Russiagate ruse, Sinophobia its uglier sibling — uglier for its racist subtext.

  We have active subversion operations in Nicaragua, Venezuela, Cuba and Peru, all progressive states in the true meaning of this term, and Democrats of all stripes — including “progressives” with the necessary quotation marks — cheer on every one of them. We cannot view this as distinct from the elevation of institutions dedicated to campaigns of covert subterfuge — chiefly but not only the CIA. — to wholly inappropriate positions of respect.

  The damage Russiagate has done to the press … let me rephrase this.  The damage the press has inflicted upon itself in the cause of Russiagate is so extensive it is hard to calculate with any precision. We watch now as their credibility collapses in real time. Those running the mainstream newspapers and networks seem to understand this, as they rush to protect what remains of their reputations with rearguard actions to obscure their grossly irresponsible conduct.

  NYT & WashPost showered themselves with Pulitzers for their monomaniacal obsession with Russiagate. Even after Mueller admitted he could find no evidence to establish the conspiracy and indicted *nobody* for it, they persisted. We’ll see what they do now:https://t.co/CLYp0rgZM6

  — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) November 5, 2021

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

  The long list of those who caved to the Russiagate orthodoxy includes some stunning names. Among publications that should have known better we find Mother Jones, The Nation, The Intercept, and Democracy Now! Was it conformity, pressure from donors or Democratic Party ventriloquists, or some combination of ideology, ignorance and inexperience that caused them to flip?

  The Atlantic, The New Yorker, the major dailies, the networks — they have all sustained one or another degree of discredit, left either to craven rewrites in their archives, denial in the Corn–Frum mode, or silence. None will do: They will never regain lost ground without first acknowledging what they have done, and this appears out of the question.

  Resort of Omission

  The feature of the corporate-owned press — and the “progressive,” press, as just suggested — that strikes me most now is its resort of omission. Think about it: Lengthy hearings on Capitol Hill, in which leading Democratic Party Russiagaters admit under oath they never had any of the evidence they long claimed, go unreported. The collapse of the Steele dossier goes unreported in The New York Times and other major dailies.

  It is but a short step to all else that is newsworthy but left out — the collapse of the case against Julian Assange (against whom the Russiagate frenzy was wielded), the collapse of the chemical weapons case in Syria, all the above-noted covert subversions. It is wholesale dereliction of duty now, and it was Russiagate that licensed this betrayal.

  Mainstream media are now approaching that point when they leave out more of the world we live in than they report. This is a losing proposition in the medium term — a desperate, last-ditch strategy to defend a “narrative” that simply no longer holds. I put the acceleration of this trend down to the poisoned information environment Russiagate did so much to engender.

  There is a positive dimension to the media’s fate since Russiagate, and regular readers of this column may already guess where I am headed. The disaster Russiagate has proven for the corporate-owned press, the networks, and the “left” — with-quotation-marks — press has landed independent media such as Consortium News with large, new responsibilities, and they have by-and-large risen to the occasion. Their role in keeping the truth of the Russiagate fraud on the table cannot be overstated.

  We witness, in effect, an historically significant transformation in how Americans get their news and analysis. This, a gradual process, is an excellent thing. In time, independent media stand to play as important a role in repairing the across-the-board damage of Russiagate as legacy media played in hatching and deepening it.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 20:30

• 'Never Seen Anything Like It': Los Angeles Residents Stunned As Violent Crimes Creep Into Wealthier Communities
  ‘Never Seen Anything Like It’: Los Angeles Residents Stunned As Violent Crimes Creep Into Wealthier Communities

  After two years of rising crime in Los Angeles, residents of upscale neighborhoods are finally starting to freak out after a spate of ‘flash mob‘ lootings at high-end retail stores have been accompanied with a disturbing increase in violent crimes committed in the suburbs, according to the LA Times.

  

   

  Crews of burglars publicly smashing their way into Los Angeles’ most exclusive stores. Robbers following their victims, including a star of “The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” and a BET host, to their residences. And this week, the fatal shooting of 81-year-old Jacqueline Avant, an admired philanthropist and wife of music legend Clarence Avant, in her Beverly Hills home.

  …these incidents have sparked a national conversation and led to local concern about both the crimes themselves and where the outrage over the violence will lead.

  “The fact that this has happened, her being shot and killed in her own home, after giving, sharing, and caring for 81 years has shaken the laws of the Universe,” said Oprah Winfrey, expressing grief over Avant’s killing via Twitter. “The world is upside down.”

  The Times notes that while overall crime rates within Los Angeles remain far below the notoriously violent 1990s, much of it has been concentrated in poor communities – so it receives virtually no attention. Now that crime has “crept up in wealthier enclaves and thrust its way to the center of public discourse” across the city.

  Turning point?

  In 2020, polls showed that California voters largely supported criminal justice reform, as well as rolling back tough sentencing laws to reduce prison populations without nary a thought to how it might affect the crime rate. Now, those concerned about crime and blame liberal policies for its rise are growing more vocal.

  For others, it’s been a serious wake-up call.

  “I have never seen anything like it,” said Dominick DeLuca, owner of the Brooklyn Projects skateboard shop on Melrose Avenue where burglaries and robberies have seen a sharp enough spike in recent months that he’s now carrying a gun to work. “In the last two years, I have been broken into three times.”

  On Thursday, Mayor Eric Garcetti and LAPD Chief Michael Moore advocated for locking offenders up, and questioned several pandemic-related policies that put nonviolent arrestees back on the street without bail.

  Moore said arrests had been made in several high-profile “smash-and-grab” burglaries but lamented that the suspects had all been released pending trial. Garcetti said warehousing criminals in jails without rehabilitating them is not a solution, but neither is ceding the streets to repeat offenders.

  Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. George Gascón, whose progressive policies around prosecution and sentencing many blame for the uptick in crime, was notably absent at the press conference but said through his office that he is working closely with law enforcement partners to hold perpetrators accountable for such brazen crimes. -LA Times

  According to LAPD data through Nov. 27, property crime is up 2.6% YoY, but is down 6t.6% from 2019, while robberies are up 3.9% YoY and down 13.6% from 2019. Burglaries are down 8.4% from last year and 7.7% from 2019. Car thefts, meanwhile, are up nearly 53% vs. 2019.

  The difference? Rich people are now getting hit, so officials are officially concerned.

  What’s more, violent crime is way up – with homicides jumping 46.7% and shootings up 51.4% vs. 2019. As of the end of last month, there were 359 homicides year-to-date, compared with 355 in all of 2020. That said 2008 was LA’s deadliest year with 384 homicides.

  Read the rest of the report here.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 20:00

• Sound Money Is A Prerequisite To Peace, Prosperity, And Freedom
  Sound Money Is A Prerequisite To Peace, Prosperity, And Freedom

  Authored by Patrick Barron via The Mises Institute,

  There are many good recommendations promoted by Austrian school economists for improving the economy. Although we enjoy successes periodically, most–such as deregulating trucking and airline pricing–involve eliminating previous government interventions. These successes are to be celebrated, of course. But no one can deny that government intervention into the economy has continued, despite these occasional success stories.

  

  The reason Big Government has continued to grow is that it controls money production. Not only does government grow in terms of spending, regulations, and interventions everywhere (both internally and overseas), but it threatens our very freedoms. In other words, government’s control of money is diametrically opposed to peace, prosperity, and freedom and eventually will destroy our republican democracy. For this reason, returning to sound money–i.e., money that is created by the private market, is part and parcel of the market, and is controlled by no one–should be goal number one for every lover of peace, prosperity, and freedom. Nothing less than the survival of our western-style way of life is at stake.

  Here are a few examples of how unsound money progresses and masks its destructive power.

  • One, unsound money allows government to confiscate resources at will. For example, in 2020 America’s bloated military spent as much as the next eleven nations of the world combined. Of course, military spending went up in 2021 and will continue to increase in 2022. America’s annual budget deficit is projected to be somewhere between $1.84 trillion and $3.4 trillion, depending upon whether you ask the Biden administration or the Congressional Budget Office. All of this money is created out of thin air. Americans’ taxes will not increase enough to cover even a fraction of the Biden estimate, and there is no appetite in the bond market for more American debt. Therefore, the Fed will monetize the new debt onto its balance sheet. The resulting increase in base money will cause the prices of most goods and services to rise. This impoverishment of the American people through the hidden tax of inflation is possible only because money is completely fiat; i.e., produced out of nothing except the government’s printing press and computer terminals.

  • Two, unsound money masks the destructive power of government market interventions. An example is former President Trump’s tariffs on Chinese goods. According to a friend of mine, the data is irrefutable that the tariffs worked. Well, as Mark Twain said, there’s lies, damned lies, and statistics. What really is irrefutable is the economic law of opportunity cost; i.e., that choosing one thing means the giving up of another. Another is individual preference. The very fact that people must not be allowed to purchase Chinese goods means that they valued those goods to a higher extent than American goods. The reason does not have to be financial. There’s always service, availability, quality, etc. So preventing Americans from buying Chinese goods means less satisfaction for Americans. This is just one example. Another is keeping zombie companies in business through artificially lower interest rates means that capital is misallocated to less productive uses. There’s a whole panoply of labor laws that artificially raises the cost of American labor, reduces American productivity, and lowers business income. Some workers are priced out of the market through minimum wage and mandatory benefit packages. Business has less capital to invest for expansion. New business starts are discouraged. There’s something there for everyone! The destruction is masked by monetarily inflated GDP numbers, artificially suppressed Consumer Price Index (CPI) statistics, increased unemployment payments, and other government programs and manipulated data.

  • Three, and most importantly, Americans’ freedom is threatened. Government can print enough money to buy unlimited enforcers of its rules. More IRS agents. More agents for enforcing arbitrary rules of the Occupational, Safety, and Health Administration (OSHA). More agents for enforcing new environmental regulations and laws arbitrarily established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). More Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) agents. Perhaps even agents to confiscate guns.

  Conclusion

  Returning to limited government, creating a more free market order, having a less intrusive government, etc. requires sound money. Sound money is not a guarantee of a free society, but a free society is impossible without sound money.

  I conclude with these quotes from The Quotable Mises. The last quote is especially pertinent to the point of this brief essay. (Emphases are mine.)

  • The gold standard alone makes the determination of money’s purchasing power independent of the ambitions and machinations of governments, of dictators, of political parties, and of pressure groups. The gold standard alone is what the nineteenth-century freedom-loving leaders (who championed representative government, civil liberties, and prosperity for all) called “sound money.”

  • All those intent upon sabotaging the evolution toward welfare, peace, freedom, and democracy loathed the gold standard, and not only on account of its economic significance. In their eyes the gold standard was the labarum, the symbol, of all those doctrines and policies they wanted to destroy.

  • The classical or orthodox gold standard alone is a truly effective check on the power of the government to inflate the currency. Without such a check all other constitutional safeguards can be rendered vain.

  I do not want to close on a pessimistic note. Therefore, I offer this final quote from Ludwig von Mises, ever the optimist and ever the gentleman: “Every nation, whether rich or poor, powerful or feeble, can at any hour once again adopt the gold standard.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 19:30

• Dark Winter Looms For Pennsylvanians As Power Bills Set To Soar 
  Dark Winter Looms For Pennsylvanians As Power Bills Set To Soar 

  Power prices in some parts of Pennsylvania are set to jump as much as 50% beginning this month, according to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC).

  “Most Pennsylvania regulated electric utilities are adjusting the price they charge for the generation portion of customers’ bills on December 1 for non-shopping customers, also known as the ‘Price to Compare’ (PTC). The PTC averages 40% to 60% of the customer’s total utility bill. However, this percent varies by the utility and by the level of individual customer usage,” PUC said in a press release.

  

  PUC lists power increases for residential customers. The most significant increase comes from Pike County Light & Power, which serves nearly 5,000 customers, is expected to raise power prices by 50%. The second highest is PPL Corporation, serving about 1.4 million customers in central and eastern parts of the state, which is expected to raise power prices by 26%. 

  • Citizens’ Electric, up from 6.9777 cents to 7.9476 cents per kWh (13.9%);

  • Duquesne Light, up from 7.41 cents to 7.98 cents per kWh (7.7%);

  • Met-Ed, up from 7.114 cents to 7.414 cents per kWh (4.2%);

  • PECO, up from 6.597 cents to 7.021 cents per kWh (6.4%);

  • Penelec, down from 6.761 cents to 6.507 cents per kWh (3.8%);

  • Penn Power, down from 7.657 cents to 7.593 cents per kWh (less than 1%);

  • PPL, up from 7.544 cents to 9.502 cents per kWh (26%);

  • Pike County Light & Power, up from 6.5234 cents to 9.796 cents per kWh (50.2%);

  • Wellsboro Electric, up from 7.2596 cents to 7.5051 cents per kWh (3.4%); and

  • West Penn Power, up from 5.447 cents to 5.698 cents per kWh (4.6%);

  A PUC spokesperson told Fox News that rising energy prices are due to “market forces.” 

  Many Pennsylvanians will be in for a sticker shock this winter as the Northern Hemisphere winter approaches. Customers are already stretched thin with soaring food, fuel, and shelter inflation. It’s a good thing Fed Chairman Jerome Powell told Congress on Tuesday that he would “retire” the “transitory” narrative to explain the inflationary environment that continues to crush the working poor. 

  We noted last week that Americans, already preparing for one of the darkest cold seasons in years, have been panic buying cords of firewood and stoves as they seek alternative methods to heat their homes to mitigate soaring power prices. 

  Persistent inflation this winter will continue to increase discontent for President Biden and could be favorable for Republicans ahead of midterm next year. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 19:00

• Co-Opted By Wall Street: Bitcoin's Biggest Risk?
  Co-Opted By Wall Street: Bitcoin’s Biggest Risk?

  Authored by Rob Price via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  As bitcoin gains mainstream acceptance from centralized financial institutions, will Wall Street come to ruin what is most powerful about the asset?

  

  Bitcoin’s potential is immense — an independent global reserve asset, the foundation of a more ethical financial system, uncorrupted by centralized financial overlords.

  But what is the risk that bitcoin could become co-opted and corrupted by those centralized financial overlords? What if bitcoin loses its independence? What if bitcoin merely becomes another speculative Wall Street plaything?

  TLDR: Wall Street’s growing importance is unavoidable as bitcoin goes mainstream, but correlations will not rise indefinitely and bitcoin’s independence remains in the hands of everyday users like me and you.

  HOW BITCOIN’S TECHNICAL SECURITY ADVANCED IN 2021

  The great bitcoin mining migration of 2021 further decentralized bitcoin mining, which enhanced its security and reduced the possibility of a technical attack on the network itself. Furthermore, bitcoin showed in 2017 that it is resistant to change. A group of miners and merchants alienated themselves from the community because they ignored the community and pushed for an increase to the blocksize.

  So, Bitcoin is technically secure and unlikely to change its underlying principles. The network is decentralized and principles enshrined. Users have vehemently defended those principles. However, technical risks are not the only risks to bitcoin.

  WHAT IF BITCOIN BECOMES BITCOINTM, A WALL STREET PLAYTHING?

  Ben Hunt outlined some of these softer, more philosophical fears around Bitcoin in his very thought-provoking article “In Praise Of Bitcoin,” in which he wrote about the prospect of BitcoinTM emerging:

  “What is Bitcoin!TM in abstracted form? It’s a securitization or representation of Bitcoin ownership that promises the price appreciation of Bitcoin without the hassle of Bitcoin ownership. It’s a casino chip that represents the price of Bitcoin. Michael Saylor, for example, is only too happy to sell you a MicroStrategy casino chip. Or maybe you’d prefer to play on the Canadian crypto ETF felt? Or try your luck at the wheel of a Morgan Stanley private fund?”

  This is a much more insidious risk than a technical attack or government regulation, in my opinion, and it warrants reflection.

  S&P 500 CORRELATION VS. BITCOIN RISING AGAIN: SHOULD WE BE WORRIED?

  I recently noticed that the one-year rolling correlation between bitcoin and the S&P 500 reached its highest levels on record, according to a chart accessed via Glassnode. This shows that there is a growing relationship between Wall Street and bitcoin, which could be a signal that our worst fears are coming to fruition. Should we be worried?

  

  Source: Glassnode and Sound Money

  CENTRAL BANK POLICY DOMINATES ALL ASSET CLASSES

  From a technical perspective, different asset classes can be driven by the same factors, even if the assets are fundamentally different in nature. For example, inflation can drive gold and equities higher simultaneously but it can also generate divergent outcomes under different circumstances.

  It is no surprise that bitcoin and equity markets are both being driven higher by excessively loose monetary policy, which debases the value of fiat currencies. Many other asset classes are caught in the same theme, including property and bonds.

  A rising trend in correlations does not imply that the trend will remain intact indefinitely.

  But it could…

  WHAT COULD CAUSE A RISING CORRELATION TO BECOME A PERMANENT FEATURE?

  If Wall Street creates numerous financial products and trade in these products starts to dominate relative to actual users of the technology, the rising correlation between the S&P 500 and bitcoin could become a permanent feature. What if regulators force users to comply with numerous KYC and AML measures, reducing its censorship-resistant qualities and rendering it less independent?

  A couple of responses to each scenario:

  1) INSTITUTIONALIZATION IS INEVITABLE BUT THAT DOES NOT IMPLY WALL STREET MUST DOMINATE

  Take a look at the holders of bitcoin today: More than 35% of coins have not moved in at least two years, according to data from Glassnode, which is a strong indication of long-term investment behavior. Some percentage of these holders could be institutional investors. But the fact that they are not trading the asset implies that, for one, they do not view the asset as a speculative plaything and secondly, that they choose to expose themselves to the vagaries and eccentricities of this alternative monetary network for the long haul, i.e., they are investing on bitcoin’s terms, not Wall Street’s.

  

  Source: Glassnode and Sound Money

  Bitcoin has no central bank to enter the market during periods of turmoil. The buyers of last resort are everyday bitcoiners who believe in the project and store their long-term wealth in the asset. It’s these bitcoiners who create the price floors during price crashes.

  On-chain research via Glassnode shows that the number of addresses with balances less than 1 bitcoin continues to rise in 2021, giving an indication that smaller holders remain a very important dynamic in the market. By contrast, the growth in the number of addresses with balances great than 100 bitcoin has been negative throughout 2021, also per data accessed on Glassnode.

  

  Source: Glassnode and Sound Money

  Conclusion: Yes, Wall Street is becoming important for bitcoin, but that does not imply Wall Street dominates bitcoin.

  2) PRIVACY IS CRITICAL AND AVAILABLE TO THOSE WHO NEED IT

  I would like to remind readers that privacy is a human right and is required by all to live fulfilling human lives. You would not want someone peering into your bedroom every morning! Not only is the right to privacy enshrined in the constitution of numerous countries but also in Article 12 of the UN’s “Declaration Of Human Rights” (UDHR), from 1948.

  The desire for privacy does not imply tax evasion or criminal activity. Numerous people require privacy to live due to targeted, government-mandated, financial exclusion. There are more obvious examples in autocratic governments like China, Venezuela and Afghanistan, but there are also more nuanced examples in the countries regarded as the “free world.”

  Increasingly stringent financial, travel, property and speech restrictions imposed in 2020 and 2021 implies that the number of people who may be forced into privacy will increase.

  Thankfully, numerous users across cryptocurrency markets remain focused on privacy, using techniques to protect their human rights, including privacy-focused altcoins and mixing services to protect fungibility .

  Conclusion: While greater government oversight of cryptocurrency is inevitable, greater privacy is also available to those who are willing to put in the effort to get it. Moreover, developers continue to work on technical upgrades which enhance privacy, like Taproot in bitcoin.

  CONCLUSIONS

  I am worried about bitcoin being co-opted by traditional financial markets and a rising correlation between bitcoin and the S&P 500 accentuates my fear.

  Practically speaking, a rising correlation between bitcoin and the S&P500 indicates less diversification potential for traditional investors investing into bitcoin. I do not think it will dramatically alter people’s allocation decisions (0.4 is still a pretty low correlation), but it could because the optimal risk-adjusted portfolio could advocate for a slightly lower allocation based on mean-variance optimizations.

  However, a rising correlation should not be extrapolated higher indefinitely into the future. The reasons for the correlation, its persistence and its breakdown should be assessed.

  Ultimately, it is unsurprising that extreme central bank policies are driving all financial markets in 2021. If central banks were to remove their stimulus, even if only temporarily, it would have a negative impact on risk assets, including equity, like the S&P 500 and bitcoin.

  Investors should never get complacent about this tighter monetary policy risk despite the incredibly low probability that central banks will be able to implement prudent policies with higher real interest rates for any length of time.

  Despite all my worries about large players dominating bitcoin and government oversight negating the censorship resistant characteristics of bitcoin, grassroots bitcoiners continue to grow and access to privacy-preserving techniques is increasing.

  I continue to encourage all holders of bitcoin to use the technology. You may hold the asset as an investment and may not want to touch it for many years to come — that’s great! But get a little bit of bitcoin in a wallet, send it to your friend and realize the value of decentralized, borderless value transfer and storage so that we continue to advocate for this independent system maintained by individuals, not institutions.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 18:30

• Nevada Becomes First State To Impose Surcharge On Unvaccinated Workers
  Nevada Becomes First State To Impose Surcharge On Unvaccinated Workers

  by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times

  Nevada on Thursday became the first U.S. state to impose a surcharge on workers who have not gotten a COVID-19 vaccine, though the penalty doesn’t take effect until the middle of next year.

  

  All but two members of the state’s Public Employees’ Benefit Program Board (PEBP) voted during a meeting to approve a surcharge of $55 a month on unvaccinated workers.

  The approved proposal also stipulates a surcharge of $175 a month for workers’ spouses, partners, and dependents 18 and older. That could be adjusted down the road.

  The surcharges will go into effect on July 1, 2022.

  They’ll help offset the costs of COVID-19 testing, Laura Rich, executive officer of the board, said.

  Testing costs through September were estimated at $3.3 million.

  The board did not analyze the cost of COVID-19 hospitalizations for the proposal because that would have made the surcharge for spouses and dependents “significantly higher,” Rich said. State rules bar making the surcharge on workers any higher.

  Nevada’s Department of Labor last month released guidance saying the surcharges were legal, and Rich compared them to surcharges on smokers imposed by plans in the past.

  Exemptions are available for religious or medical reasons, as required by law.

  Public commenters during the meeting, and those submitting written statements, spoke out against the proposal before the vote.

  “I believe that the proposed surcharge is inappropriate and excessive,” Ellen Crecelius, one member of the public, said in a statement. She noted that many people enjoy natural immunity, or the protection one gets after having recovered from COVID-19.

  Shanna Cobb-Adams said she already pays $255.06 a month. The new surcharges would increase that by 90 percent. She expressed concern about her 18-year-old son getting a vaccine when studies show that young males are at elevated risk of developing heart inflammation after getting a vaccine, while COVID-19 poses little risk to healthy youth without serious underlying health conditions.

  Another commenter noted that Gov. Steve Sisolak, a Democrat, is the one forcing workers to get tested weekly if they don’t get a vaccine. “The unvaccinated should not have to foot the bill for the agency’s unjust decisions,” she wrote. “The fact is vaccinated and unvaccinated employees both can contract and spread the virus equally, yet the state has decided to only put the hardships on the unvaccinated unfairly.”

  Some members also voiced opposition to the proposal, and two voted against it.

  Several state residents did support the measure, including one who said that “anti-vaxxers should pay for their choice since their freedom is not free.”

  Sisolak’s policy director, DuAne Young, said that the pandemic “has been shouldered on the burden of everyone.”

  “And now this particular burden—the testing—should be shouldered on the burden of those who refuse to (be vaccinated),” Young added.

  Some companies have imposed surcharges but no states had before Thursday.

  Discussions with entities that had imposed penalties pointed to benefits like increasing the percent of workers who are vaccinated and offsetting rising costs, Rich said. If the board did not approve the surcharges, every workers’ premium, regardless of vaccination status, would need to be hiked, she said.

  Revenue from the surcharges is expected to be about $18 million a year. Testing costs are pegged at ranging from $12 million to $24 million.

  Prior to the vote, representatives for the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees and the Nevada Faculty Alliance said the unions were not taking a position on the proposal.

  Terri Laird, representing the Retired Public Employees of Nevada, said the organization also was neutral on the surcharges.

  But, she told members, the added costs would “burden many employees.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 18:15

• Steve Cohen's Point 72 Venture Fund Is Backing A 24 Hour Equities Exchange
  Steve Cohen’s Point 72 Venture Fund Is Backing A 24 Hour Equities Exchange

  Steven Cohen’s Point72 Ventures is getting behind the idea of 24 hour a day stock trading.

  The venture arm of Point72 is leading a $14.25 million funding round for a company called “24 Exchange”, which was founded in 2018 and has already launched FX and crypto trading platforms, according to the WSJ.

  It is now seeking approval from the SEC to become an around the clock exchange. 

  The company believes that traders who are used to trading currencies and Bitcoin, which trades all the time, want the same experience for equity markets. 

  The obvious downside to such a venture, in addition to needing regulatory approval, would be poor liquidity during off hours. But Point 72 seems to think that “24-hour equities trading has a large potential market, including nonprofessionals trading from home and overseas investors with an appetite for U.S. stocks,” the WSJ reported.

  

  Point72 Ventures partner Pete Casella commented: “When you look at the growth of equities trading over the last couple of years, a lot of that has been the increased role of retail. These are people with day jobs, so they want to trade at night and on weekends.”

  The company plans on completing its applications to the SEC by the end of December, Dmitri Galinov, founder and chief executive of 24 Exchange, said. 

  This means it’ll likely be “well into” 2022 before the SEC renders a decision. 

  24 Exchange has U.S. offices in Stamford, CT and Miami, and is incorporated in Bermuda. 

  Point 72 ventures has also invested in fintech startups like Acorns and Say Technologies. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 18:00

• CNN Fires Chris Cuomo Following Recent Suspension
  CNN Fires Chris Cuomo Following Recent Suspension

  CNN star anchor Chris Cuomo was fired on Saturday, just days after the network suspended him amid an internal investigation into his efforts to help his brother, former Governor Andrew Cuomo, fight a sexual harassment scandal.

  

  “Chris Cuomo was suspended earlier this week pending further evaluation of new information that came to light about his involvement with his brother’s defense,” read a Saturday statement from CNN. “We retained a respected law firm to conduct the review, and have terminated him, effective immediately. While in the process of that review, additional information has come to light. Despite the termination, we will investigate as appropriate.”

  As the New York Times reports, the announcement is a ‘stunning downfall’ for the network’s top-rated anchor who had – up until last month – enjoyed the support of CNN president Jeff Zucker. He notably faced no discipline for strategizing with his brother’s political aides – ‘a breach of basic journalistic norms.’

  Brian Stelter of CNN‘s “Reliable Sources” predicted Cuomo would be back in January. Whoops.

  Brian Stelter, CNN’s chief media correspondent, said he believes it is possible that Chris Cuomo will be back on air in January.https://t.co/NQhLpmz2CP

  — Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) December 1, 2021

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsChris Cuomo’s undoing came after the NY Attorney General released a batch of testimony and text messages on Nov. 29 which revealed Cuomo had played a far more intimate and direct role in his brother’s damage control.

  pic.twitter.com/YfH8teYx36

  — Lonewolfy 🐺 (@Lonewolfy777) December 4, 2021

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

  In May, CNN anchor Jake Tapper spoke out publicly against the Cuomo brothers – saying that his colleague had “put us in a bad spot,” adding “I cannot imagine a world in which anybody in journalism thinks that that was appropriate.”

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 17:33

• ​​​​​​​Wall Street Firms Tell Employees To "Dress Down" As Violent Crime Rages 
  ​​​​​​​Wall Street Firms Tell Employees To “Dress Down” As Violent Crime Rages 

  As New York City political elites brag about their “urban utopia,” reality shows it’s nothing like that. Rather a dystopia as defunding the police and other progressive policies have resulted in a surge of violent crime. The city saw its most significant year-over-year increase in shootings and homicides in more than half a century between 2019 and 2020. Violent crime continues to plague the city today, as top Wall Street firms tell their employees to “dress down” to avoid being targeted. 

  

  Outgoing Mayor Bill de Blasio’s progressive policies doomed the city as successor, Mayor-elect Eric Adams, a former police officer and Brooklyn Borough President, is expected to deal with soaring violent crime. 

  At the Bank of America Tower in Midtown Manhattan, senior executives have told employees to “dress down” to avoid being targeted by thieves, according to NYPost, who quoted one bank employee who spoke with On The Money. Execs told employees to avoid wearing the bank’s insignia on clothing as they commute to work. 

  Employees have been extra cautious about potential attacks after someone recently spotted a man wielding a knife near the office building. Bank of America is not the only financial firm in Midtown and Lower Manhattan to advise employees about surging crime and how they need to take precautions to avoid becoming a victim. 

  Citibank has offered employees private shuttles to avoid public transportation as violent crime becomes a significant problem. The city reported a 15% increase in felony assaults in November, compared with the same period last year.

  

  Another Wall Street source told On The Money the fear of being targeted on the commute home has “been a topic of conversation on the floor frequently over the last few months.”

  “Some people I work with have been accosted … I’d say it’s becoming frequent, if not common,” the source said. “There’s probably a dozen incidents that I saw, or have been involved in,” the person said — mostly verbal, but some physical, the person said.

  According to Kastle Systems today, whose electronic access systems secure office buildings in the metro area, only 28% of NYC employees are back in the office compared with 35% last month. The decline is due to the spread of the new COVID-19 variant. 

  

  Rising violent crime in the metro area could be the golden opportunity for some employees who’ve returned to the office but want to return to remote working status. Their excuse is that commuting to work is a life-or-death situation. 

  It’s not just Wall Street bankers frightened about being targeted. College students are on alert after a Columbia University student was stabbed to death on Thursday. 

  Columbia University Student Dies in Stabbing Near Campus

  New York is back…. 1970s New York

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 3, 2021

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

  NYC is becoming a liberal hellhole where violent crime will only worsen under progressive policies. For bankers who want to dress down, try incorporating the ‘homeless’ clothing line sold by elite clothing brands (Gucci makes $900 pair of sneakers that look like someone pulled them out of a garbage can). 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 17:00

• When Fiat Currency Stops Being Money
  When Fiat Currency Stops Being Money

  Authored by Daniel Lacalle via The Mises Institute,

  Most emerging and developed market currencies have devalued significantly relative to the United States dollar in 2021 despite the Federal Reserve’s aggressive monetary policy. Furthermore, emerging economies that have benefitted from rising commodity prices have also seen their currencies weaken despite strong exports. As such, inflation in developing economies is much higher than the already elevated figures posted in the United States and the eurozone.

  

  The main reason behind this is a global currency debasement problem that is making citizens poorer.

  Most central banks globally are implementing the same expansionary policies of the European Central Bank and the Federal Reserve System but the results are disproportionately hurting the poor as inflation rises, particularly in essential goods and services, while fiscal and monetary imbalances are increasing.

  Many emerging economies have implemented a very dangerous policy of boosting twin deficits—fiscal and trade deficits—under the misguided idea that it will accelerate growth. Now growth and recovery estimates are coming down but monetary imbalances remain.

  Therefore, most currencies are falling relative to the US dollar. The policies implemented by global central banks are as aggressive or even more so than those of the Federal Reserve but without the global demand that the US dollar enjoys. If global nations with sovereign currencies continue to play this dangerous game, local and international demand for their currency will evaporate and dependence on the US dollar will rise. More importantly, if the Federal Reserve continues to put its global reserve status to the test, all fiat currencies may suffer a loss of confidence and a move to other alternatives.

  If the private sector does not accept this currency as a unit of measure, a generalized means of payment, and a store of value backed by reserves and demand from the mentioned private sector, the currency becomes worthless and ceases to be money. Ultimately, it becomes useless paper.

  Examples of state currencies that are neither a store of value nor a generally accepted means of payment are many. From the sucre in Ecuador, which disappeared, to the Argentine peso or the Venezuela bolivar, the examples in history are innumerable.

  In Cuba inflation is now estimated at 6,900 percent due to the lack of demand for a worthless currency with no real demand or reserves to back it.

  Once this sort of thing happens, the state does not create money, it simply issues a means of payment—the currency—using the credibility of private sector demand to issue its promissory note. Like a debt issuer who loses repayment credibility, the value of this promise fades if the currency does not have private backing.

  More importantly, the value of the currency and its use is not decided by the government. It is decided by the last private sector agent who accepts the promise of payment because they assume that it will maintain its value and its acceptance as a medium of payment.

  As such, when a government creates many more of these increasingly worthless promissory notes, far outstripping the real local and international demand, the effect is the same as a massive default. The government is simply impoverishing the citizens, who are forced to use the currency, and destroying the credibility of the value of the government’s promissory notes.

  When a state creates a currency without real reserve backing or demand, it destroys money.

  When the government issues currency—promises of payment—that are neither a store of value nor a generally accepted means of payment nor a unit of measure, it not only does not create money, it destroys it by sinking the purchasing power of the poor captive citizens, who are forced to accept its notes and little pieces of paper (government officials, pensioners, etc.).

  This is what we are seeing in many nations all over the world, a massive salary and savings slash created by government intervention on the monetary balance to its own benefit. Governments benefit from inflation because they pay their debt in a currency of diminishing value and they impose a cut to the price they pay for wages and the services of the sectors that provide service to the issuer of currency. Even in developed nations with relatively stable currencies, inflation is a big benefit for governments that collect higher revenues from the money-based taxes (wage, profit, and sales taxes) … and a big negative for savers and real wages.

  Some say that workers may benefit because wages will rise in tandem with inflation. This is simply incorrect. Wages, at best, may rise with the consumer price index, which is a very weak measure of inflation and is a basket created by government bodies to lower real inflation in an average of combined goods and services. However, even if you consider the consumer price index, the vast majority of workers do not even see a rise in wages that compensates for the index rise. That is why median real wages are falling in the United States.

  Those who say that the state can always “create money and spend it”—and only has to create the money it needs to finance the public sector because it will be accepted by the rest of the economic agents—should be obliged to receive their salaries in Argentine pesos and enjoy the experience.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 16:30

• U.S. Ship Logjam Worsens As Biden's Attempt To Save Christmas Fails
  U.S. Ship Logjam Worsens As Biden’s Attempt To Save Christmas Fails

  President Biden told Americans that the supply chain is in “very strong shape” ahead of Christmas. Speaking from the White House Wednesday, Biden said his administration has partnered with the private sector to “ensure the store shelves are stocked.” But new shipping data shows snarled supply chains are worsening, and it could take months to untangle them. 

  New shipping data from the busiest U.S. port complex, Los Angeles and Long Beach, California, shows 96 container ships idled offshore, waiting to unload cargo.

  FreightWaves’ Greg Miller described a new queuing system for vessels as pure optics, which reduces the number of ships offshore of Los Angeles/Long Beach. He said ships are being placed in holding patterns further out into the ocean where they’re out of sight and out of mind — to prevent attention-grabbing aerial imagery of container ship logjams.

  The new queuing system has divided vessels into a couple of categories: 40 ships anchored within 40 miles of the ports and 56 outside that perimeter. With the line continuing to get longer at the U.S.’ largest containerized ports, the Biden miracle to save Christmas appears to be failing.  

  What’s also worsening are wait times. It now takes 21 days, or three weeks, for a vessel to enter the twin ports, that’s up from seven in August. 

  

  Biden’s effort to reduce dwell times is not working, even after he announced a new directive for the twin ports in mid-October to operate on a 24/7 basis. We noted at the time, in a piece titled “Here’s The Truth Behind Biden’s 24/7 Port Operations Pledge,” that the move would not save Christmas. 

  There’s even more confirmation that disputes the president’s claim supply chains are easing. FreightWaves’ Clarissa Hawes said, “we are drowning on the landside by long lines and staffing issues at the terminals.” She said a flawed appointment system and other efficiency issues for drayage truckers continue to plague the twin ports. 

  Biden’s attempt to save Christmas appears to be failing. There’s still time to call in the National Guard. At least now the administration can blame the new Omicron COVID-19 variant on why some store shelves are still bare. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 16:00

• Leveraged Bitcoin Traders Flushed Out In Epic Overnight Crash
  Leveraged Bitcoin Traders Flushed Out In Epic Overnight Crash

  The price of Bitcoin was rangebound on early Friday around the $56k handle. The world’s largest cryptocurrency then spiked when the kneejerk read of the November payrolls came in as very disappointing, seen as postponing the Fed’s plans to accelerate the taper but then began to decline during the US cash session to about $54k-$53k handle by late afternoon as the narrative flipflopped and near unanimous consensus emerged around a Fed announcement that Powell would announce a much faster taper on Dec 15 leading to rate lift off by June.

  Then at midnight into the early hours of Saturday morning, during the traditionally illiquid Asian session when things normally go splat in the night for cryptos as one or more super levered Asian momentum chasers blow up, Bitcoin suffered a massive liquidation and crashed down to the $42k level, tumbling into a bear market. Price has recovered some, now trading around $47k. 

  

  We noted that the action was that of a margined whale getting liquidated…

  Someone just got margined to liquidstion https://t.co/TVYDfmwXZu

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 4, 2021

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

  … an assessment Vijay Ayyar, head of Asia Pacific with crypto exchange Luno in Singapore agreed with, telling Bloomberg the action overnight was leveraged buyers of Bitcoin being flushed out. 

  “Markets have also been jittery with all the uncertainty around omicron, with cases now appearing in many countries,” Ayyar said. “It’s hard to say what that means for economies and markets and hence the uncertainty.”

  And sure enough, according to Coinglass, over 410K crypto accounts were liquidated in the past 24 hours totaling $2.6 billion with the largest liquidation being $27 million.

  

  

  So far, Bitcoin has found support just below the 200dma. 

  

  The plunge is just another sign of risk aversion sweeping across global markets as equities sink and fate havens soar. Spiking inflation is forcing central banks to tighten monetary policy, reducing liquidity for risk assets. However, as we first pointed out yesterday, we are now at the point where the market is starting to price in the first future rate cut – sometime in 2023-2024 – resulting from the Fed’s overtightening cycle.

  

  The omicron variant of COVID-19 has also compounded risk aversion as it derails the global economic reopening. 

  Today’s global cryptocurrency market cap is $2.28 Trillion, down 17.5% in the last 24 hours. Total cryptocurrency trading volume in the last day is at $236 billion. Bitcoin’s market cap of all crypto is 38.68%. 

  

  That said, El Salvador President Nayib Bukele is using the dip to buy even more Bitcoin. 

  Missed the f***ing bottom by 7 minutes 😂

  — Nayib Bukele 🇸🇻 (@nayibbukele) December 4, 2021

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

  You must buy 50 more coins to match.

  It’s just a couple million dollars more…

  Come on! https://t.co/GPTvjXM9ru

  — Nayib Bukele 🇸🇻 (@nayibbukele) December 4, 2021

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

  And as the storm of schadenfreude readies to strike, declaring ‘bitcoin is dead’, remember, this is the 434th time that call has been made…

  

  Source: 99Bitcoin.com

  Finally, we note that while Ethereum (and every coin) has been crushed, it has outperformed Bitcoin in this carnage and has pushed up to its strongest relative to the larger market cap coin since 

  

  “It seems that investors are taking ETH as a hedge here,” said Crypto Birb, an independent market analyst in a tweet Saturday, pointing to a four-hour ETH/BTC price chart (as shown below) that showed the pair retracing sharply after testing its 200-period moving average (the orange wave) as support.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 15:47

• Kremlin Says Biden-Putin Talks Will Take Place Tuesday
  Kremlin Says Biden-Putin Talks Will Take Place Tuesday

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The Kremlin said Friday that it has a tentative date for virtual talks between President Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin that will take place in the coming days and is waiting on confirmation from the US. It followed on Saturday by indicating Tuesday evening for the virtual summit.

  “We are working on a possible contact between Putin and Biden in the videoconference format. This contact is to take place within days. We have a concrete date and time for this videoconference. But it is better to wait until all its parameters are agreed with the US side and then we will be able to announce it officially,” Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov told reporters, according to the Russian news agency TASS.

  

  Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Stockholm on Thursday to discuss Ukraine tensions. The diplomats made little progress, but Blinken said they agreed on new Biden-Putin talks in the “near future.”

  Ushakov said the talks would build on the Biden-Putin summit that took place in Geneva back in June. The leaders are expected to discuss several issues, including Ukraine and NATO’s presence near Russia’s borders.

  Putin will seek guarantees from Biden and NATO that the military alliance would not move further eastward or deploy weapons that threaten Russia near the country’s borders, including Ukraine. Ushakov pointed out that the US had given assurances NATO wouldn’t expand towards Russia at the end of the Cold War.

  The Kremlin has said virtual format talks between the two heads of state will take place Tuesday evening…

  Here we go: Russian President Vladimir Putin will hold talks with his US counterpart Joe Biden on Tuesday evening, the Kremlin has announced. The two men will speak using a secure video link, discussing Ukraine and other outstanding issues.https://t.co/gx1EtlGzdH

  — Bryan MacDonald (@27khv) December 4, 2021

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

  “It is a very old issue. Both the Soviet Union and Russia were given verbal assurances that NATO’s military structures would not advance eastward. However, it turned out that those verbal assurances were worthless,” he said.

  Since the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, NATO has grown from 16 member states to 30. The military alliance has also waged wars of aggression across the Middle East, North Africa, and the Balkans.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 12/04/2021 – 15:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Victor Davis Hanson: Third-Worldizing America
  Victor Davis Hanson: Third-Worldizing America

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson, op-ed via Townhall.com,

  In a recent online exchange, YouTuber Casey Neistat posted his fury after his car was broken into and the contents stolen. Los Angeles, he railed, was turning into a “3rd-world s-hole of a city.”

  The multimillionaire actor Seth Rogen chastised Neistat for his anger.

  

  Rogen claimed that a car’s contents were minor things to lose.

  He added that while living in West Hollywood he had his own car broken into 15 times, but thought little of it.

  Online bloggers ridiculed Rogen. No wonder – the actor lives in multimillion-dollar homes in the Los Angeles area, guarded by sophisticated security systems and fencing.

  Yet both Neistat and Rogen accurately defined Third Worldization: the utter breakdown of the law and the ability of the rich within such a feudal society to find ways to avoid the violent chaos.

  After traveling the last 45 years in the Middle East, southern Europe, Mexico, and Asia Minor, I observed some common characteristics of a so-called Third-World society. And all of them might feel increasingly familiar to contemporary Americans.

  Whether in Cairo or Naples, theft was commonplace. Yet property crimes were almost never seriously prosecuted.

  In a medieval-type society of two rather than three classes, the rich in walled estates rarely worry that much about thievery. Crime is written off as an intramural problem of the poor, especially when the middle class is in decline or nonexistent.

  Violent crime is now soaring in America. But two things are different about America’s new criminality.

  • One is the virtual impunity of it. Thieves now brazenly swarm a store, ransack, steal, and flee with the merchandise without worry of arrest.

  •  

  • Second, the Left often justifies crime as a sort of righteous payback against a supposedly exploitative system. So, the architect of the so-called 1619 Project, Nikole Hannah-Jones, preened of the riotous destruction of property during the summer of 2020: “Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence.”

  Third Worldization reflects the asymmetry of law enforcement. Ideology and money, not the law, adjudicate who gets arrested and tried, and who does not.

  There were 120 days of continuous looting, arson, and lethal violence during the summer of 2020. Rioters burned courthouses, police precincts, and an iconic church.

  And there was also a frightening riot on January 6, when a mob entered Washington D.C.’s Capitol and damaged federal property. Of those arrested during the violence, many have been held in solitary confinement or under harsh jail conditions. That one-day riot is currently the subject of a congressional investigation.

  Some of those arrested are still – 10 months later – awaiting trial. The convicted are facing long prison sentences.

  In contrast, some 14,000 were arrested in the longer and more violent rioting of 2020. Most were released without bail.

  The majority had their charges dropped. Very few are still being held awaiting capital charges.

  A common denominator to recent controversies at the Justice Department, CIA, FBI, and Pentagon is that all these agencies under dubious pretexts have investigated American citizens with little or no justification – after demonizing their targets as “treasonous,” “domestic terrorists,” “white supremacists,” or “racists.”

  In the Third World, basic services like power, fuel, transportation, and water are characteristically unreliable: in other words, much like a frequent California brownout.

  I’ve been on five flights in my life where it was announced there was not enough fuel to continue to the scheduled destination. The plane was required either to turn around or land somewhere on the way. One such aborted flight took off from Cairo, another from southern Mexico. The other three were this spring and summer inside the United States.

  One of the most memorable scenes that I remember of Ankara, Old Cairo, or Algiers of the early 1970s were legions of beggars and the impoverished sleeping on sidewalks.

  But such impoverishment pales in comparison to the encampments of present-day Fresno, Los Angeles, Sacramento, or San Francisco. Tens of thousands live on sidewalks and in open view use them to defecate, urinate, inject drugs, and dispose of refuse.

  In the old Third World, extreme wealth and poverty existed in close proximity. It was common to see peasants on horse-drawn wagons a few miles from coastal villas. But there is now far more contiguous wealth and poverty in Silicon Valley. In Redwood City and East Palo Alto, multiple families cram into tiny bungalows and garages, often a few blocks from tony Atherton.

  On the main streets outside of Stanford University and the Google campus, the helot classes sleep in decrepit trailers and buses parked on the streets.

  Neistat was right in identifying a pandemic of crime in Los Angeles as Third Worldization.

  But so was Rogen, though unknowingly so.

  The actor played the predictable role of the smug, indifferent Third World rich who master ignoring – and navigating around – the misery of others in their midst.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 23:40

• Tesla Has Officially Moved Its Headquarters To Austin
  Tesla Has Officially Moved Its Headquarters To Austin

  Tesla’s already announced plan to move its corporate headquarters out of California and into Texas is now complete. 

  The change went into effect on Wednesday of this week, according to Inside EVs, and the company filed a corresponding disclosure with the SEC listing its new address.

  “On December 1, 2021, Tesla, Inc. relocated its corporate headquarters to Gigafactory Texas at 13101 Harold Green Road, Austin, Texas 78725,” the filing says. 

  This address is “right next to Tesla’s Gigafactory Texas facility,” where the company owns 2,000 acres. A recent drone flyover revealed the area only has “some temporary trailers and construction offices” for the time being, the report said.

  The location is about 5 minutes from the airport and 15 minutes from downtown, according to the NY Post.

  

  Recall, Musk first announced the move in the beginning of October during the company’s annual shareholder meeting in the Austin area. At the time, Musk stressed that Tesla would continue to expand in both California and Nevada, saying “we will continue to expand our activities in California. This is not a matter of Tesla leaving California. Our intention is to increase output from Freemont and giga-Nevada by 50%.”’

  “It’s tough for people to afford houses and a lot of people have to come in from far away,” Musk said at the time.

  He continued: “We’re taking it as far as possible but there’s a limit to how big you can scale it in the Bay Area.”

  Musk had previously taken exception with California’s handing of Covid, stating on Twitter at one point this year: “Frankly this is the final straw. Tesla will now move its HQ and future programs to Texas/Nevada immediately. If we even retain Fremont manufacturing activity at all, it will be dependent on how Tesla is treated in the future.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 23:20

• The Case For Compulsory Vaccinations Is Dead… Omicron Just Killed It
  The Case For Compulsory Vaccinations Is Dead… Omicron Just Killed It

  Authored by Kit Knightly via off-Guardian.org,

  Yesterday, Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, held a press conference where she talked at length about her “concerns” over the EU’s low vaccination rate, and how best to “fix” it.

  When asked about making vaccines mandatory, she said:

  It is understandable and appropriate to lead this discussion now – how we can encourage and potentially think about mandatory vaccination within the European Union. This needs discussion, this needs a common approach, but I think it’s a discussion that has to be led.”

  Adding:

  Two or three years ago, I would have never thought to witness what we see right now, that we have this horrible pandemic, we have the life-saving vaccines but they are not being used adequately everywhere. And thus this is an enormous health cost,”

  Of course, the idea that the EU nations are going to “debate” mandatory vaccinations is a joke, they are more likely to enforce them no matter what.

  

  But any real, rational debate was over as soon as the EU and the vaccine manufacturers both admitted that the vaccines do not work.

  By any pre-2021 definition, the Covid “vaccines” are not actually vaccines. From the beginning, it has been widely admitted that they don’t stop you getting the disease, and they don’t stop you spreading it.

  Every day we hear about some famous person or other testing positive “despite being vaccinated”.

  The EU has already hinted that their vaccination passes (which, ironically enough, they appear to have been planning for “two or three years” despite von der Leyen claiming they never saw the pandemic coming), will expire in nine months.

  Why will they expire?

  Because the “protection” allegedly conferred by the vaccine wears off.

  How fast does it wear off?

  They have no idea.

  The alleged emergence of the Omicron variant makes the situation even worse, from the establishment point of view. Indeed, it could be argued the first real casualty of the Omicron outbreak was narrative cohesion.

  Experts are already warning that the Omicron variant may be resistant to the vaccines, and the CEO of Moderna added his voice to this chorus yesterday, saying:

  I think it’s going to be a material drop [in vaccine effectiveness]. I just don’t know how much because we need to wait for the data. But all the scientists I’ve talked to…are like ‘this is not going to be good’.”

  Even if these warnings prove incorrect, and the mainstream suddenly backtracks and starts reporting that the vaccines work “better than expected” to combat Omicron, that’s irrelevant.

  They have just admitted that the “vaccines” could stop working the moment there is a new mutation. And viruses mutate a lot.

  So, they know the vaccine’s don’t work very well, they know they will wear off, and they know any new mutations could stop them working completely.

  The only thing they don’t know is what the long term side effects of the vaccines are, a fact admitted by Pfizer themselves in their supply contracts:

  the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known

  Now, here’s the all-purpose disclaimer: This is not admitting that Covid19 is dangerous, the pandemic real or in any other way endorsing the narrative. Rather, and this is important, it’s pointing out that even on their own terms the establishment’s plan for compulsory vaccination does not make any sense at all.

  The current narrative is that:

  • The vaccines do not confer immunity or prevent transmission.
  • What beneficial effect they do have wears off, they don’t know when.
  • They probably don’t protect against new variants or mutations.
  • The vaccines have unknown longterm side effects.

  These are not fringe ideas or baseless theories, they are the self-contradictory supposed “facts” of the schizophrenic covid story.

  Going entirely by the mainstream’s own words, and completely on their own terms, any possible case for mandatory vaccinations is dead.

  The “Omicron variant” killed it, even if it never killed anything else.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 23:00

• Alumni Are Now Withholding Donations Over Too Much Censorship On Campus
  Alumni Are Now Withholding Donations Over Too Much Censorship On Campus

  The censorship on college campuses is getting to such a fever pitch that alumni are now withholding donations in an attempt to get colleges to “enforce free speech”.

  For example, the Wall Street Journal reports that when Cornell reached out to alumnus Carl Neuss for a seven-figure check, he responded by saying he was “worried about what he saw as liberal indoctrination on campus and declining tolerance toward competing viewpoints.”

  So, it turns out it isn’t the snowflakes that head out into the real world and make the millions, we guess?

  When the school put Neuss in touch with their “moderate” political staff, the staff complained that they were “humiliated” by the diversity training that the school mandates.

  “If you say the wrong words, you could lose your position or be shunned,” Neuss told the WSJ.

  Joel Malina, Cornell’s vice president for university relations, told the paper that “robust debate and a discussion of all views remain hallmarks of the Cornell experience both in and out of the classroom.”

  Instead of donating, Neuss then helped start the Cornell Free Speech Alliance – described by the WSJ as “one of about 20 such dissident alumni organizations that have taken root on college campuses over the last couple of years.”

  Neuss isn’t the only alumnus concerned. And Cornell isn’t the only campus where this is playing out.

  

  John Craig, who is head of a group at Davidson College in North Carolina called Davidsonians for Freedom of Thought and Discourse, commented: “This is a battle for our culture and, in many ways, for Western civilization.”

  Some of these organizations have “watch lists” for liberal professors who groups believe advocate their own ideologies in place of encouraging debate. 

  An organization called the Generals Redoubt started by alumni at Washington and Lee University in Virginia sent out 10,000 emails asking alumnus to “suspend contributions to the university until this situation is rectified.”

  Washington and Lee President Will Dudley responded: “We’re living in an environment where people on both sides, right and left, are engaged in a culture war and they want to use universities. I don’t find that beneficial to our mission and I’m not interested in being a participant in it.”

  Claudia Leon, a junior at Cornell University from San Juan, Puerto Rico, defended the campus, stating that bigots should “think twice” before speaking. She argued: “Just because you can’t go around calling someone an [ethnic slur] anymore, doesn’t mean your free-speech rights are being stifled.”

  Even about 80% of students have said they “self-censor” at times due to rules on campuses, according to a survey this year by RealClearEducation, College Pulse and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. The same survey found that 66% of students think it is “acceptable to shout down a speaker to prevent him or her from speaking on campus”.

  23% of students polled even said it was acceptable to use violence to stop a campus speech. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 22:40

• What A Homeschooling Surge Means For Our Future
  What A Homeschooling Surge Means For Our Future

  Authored by Alice Salles via The Libertarian Institute & Mises.org,

  Parents across America were caught unprepared for the mass closure of government schools in 2020. Soon after, however, many decided they and their children had had enough of the status quo. Now at a crossroads, will they choose reform or repudiation?

  The wave of ill-advised school shutdowns last year compelled tens of thousands of parents to rethink their children’s education. When the classroom was virtually forced into their homes via Zoom, parents realized just how abysmal the curricula and tutelage were. Statistics on families fleeing to homeschooling must be worrying the education establishment.

  

  From 2012 to 2019, the homeschooling rate hovered around 3.3 percent of K–12 US students. That figure rose to 5.4 percent in spring 2020. By the following fall, that figure had more than doubled to 11.1 percent.

  Among black families, the increase was particularly noteworthy considering only 3.3 percent of black children were homeschooled in spring 2020 versus 16.1 percent in the fall.

  While legacy media focused on cases of parents keeping their kids home out of fear of covid, longtime critics of the public school system argued that the pandemic actually helped to expose parents to the abuses and shortcomings that have long plagued public education.

  Some chose homeschooling, but many other parents took to school board meetings, facing the beast head-on and ripping apart the deceptive social engineering with the public comment microphone. All the glory, glitz, and glam has so far gone to the latter group.

  They grew a decentralized movement with immediate political consequences not only in Virginia’s gubernatorial election but also in school board races across the country earlier this month.

  Axios, the popular DC-based news outlet run by former Politico journalists, recently reported on the growth of the 1776 Project, a new political action committee focused on reforming public school systems at the local level. “My PAC is campaigning on behalf of everyday moms and dads who want to have better access to their children’s education,” the PAC’s founder Ryan Girdusky told Axios.

  The 1776 Project won three-fourths of its fifty-eight races across seven states, proving the populist Right’s focus on the culture wars to be smart politicking. Now Republicans in Congress are pushing a “parents bill of rights” ahead of their 2022 primary elections. Included are so-called rights to know what’s taught at school, the right to be heard, and the right to transparent school budgets and spending.

  The effects of COVID-19 on public schools: Enrollment fell by 3% in Autumn 2020 as families shifted to options such as homeschooling and private schools. Sharpest declines were in lower grades, especially kindergarten. https://t.co/rRNqVLlWkZ pic.twitter.com/ozauGgBj4t

  — aedmans (@aedmans) November 26, 2021

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

  “This list of rights will make clear to parents what their rights are and clear to schools what their duties to parents are,” their flier states. The reform position focuses on schools’ duty to parents and ipso facto their children. But what of the duties parents owe to their children?

  What if, instead of pointing their collective finger at the school boards, parents looked in the mirror? What if they asked themselves how or why they feel entitled to have a place to drop their kids off for thirteen years of government brainwashing?

  Any taxpayer has a perfect reason to object to school mask mandates or the teaching of racist and queer ideologies. Parents must start thinking more deeply about the situation, though.

  Certainly for some, running for school board positions is their best shot at helping to provide their children and their neighbors’ children with better education. The problem is that in too many places, there’s an absolute crisis in education that can’t wait any longer for reform, no matter how severe.

  Every family and community ultimately applies the Catholic principle of subsidiarity, the notion that the best way to organize society is for each action or decision to be taken at the smallest scale necessary, in assessing what must be done about things such as education.

  By simply refusing to accept what federal or state authorities peddled throughout 2020, parents rightfully accepted more responsibility, clearly demonstrating that when things get personal, people will do what it takes to take back control.

  Whatever step in that direction is taken, the child is better off. In his great essay “Education: Free and Compulsory,” Murray Rothbard argued that public school and compulsory schooling laws tend to victimize the child: “The effect of the State’s compulsory schooling laws is not only to repress the growth of specialized partly individualized private schools for the needs of various types of children. It also prevents the education of the child by the people who, in many respects, are best qualified—his parents.”

  Unfortunately, far too few parents think of themselves as qualified, much less the best qualified educators of their children. They are easily led to believe simple reforms will “fix the system” they grew up dependent upon as children themselves.

  “We always hear, Oh it’s broken. It’s not broken. It’s doing exactly what it was designed to do,” Katie Phipps Hague told Mises Institute supporters at the latest summit in Florida last month.

  Hague shared her experience homeschooling her seven kids and encouraged other parents to give it a try, essentially asking, What have you got to lose?

  I know this sounds like I’m a crazy person, but if you pulled your children out of school… for a whole year, then include them in everything that you do in all of your trips and all of your conversations, put them around the intelligent, capable people that you all have in your circles and let them become comfortable around those people, you’d probably do better for them than maybe anything else you could ever do.

  It’s wonderful that the populist movement on the right is targeting the educational bureaucracy, one of the great roots of societal decay. There is a lot of potential for good in populism, but not if it sets its sights on mere reforms. A much brighter future lies in a libertarian populism where parents free themselves from these decrepit statist systems altogether and grow alternative institutions.

  Parents must be responsible for their children’s education precisely so that children learn to be autonomous. Autonomous people don’t support tyrannical policies, so the sooner parents embrace their own power, the sooner their children will be able to unleash their own.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 22:20

• Watch: Disturbing Confrontation Inside Australia's 'Gold Standard' COVID Internment Camp
  Watch: Disturbing Confrontation Inside Australia’s ‘Gold Standard’ COVID Internment Camp

  Days ago we presented the latest Orwellian headline out of Australia… “Aussie Police Arrest Teen ‘Fugitives’ Who Escaped From COVID Internment Camp”. Since then more incredibly disturbing video from inside the Northern Australian Covid internment camp, Howard Springs facility, has emerged. A frightening confrontation between a imprisoned “quarantined” woman and camp authorities was caught on hidden camera.

  One host on the popular cultural commentary and news analysis site UnHeard recently introduced a segment taking a look at the fresh footage from inside the notorious Covid internment camp : “Australia. Until recently, that country was most famous for its sunshine and relaxed attitude. Well since the Covid pandemic hit we’ve all got to know another side of Australia…”

  Paradise in Australia. pic.twitter.com/BXNrwFzRy5

  — Evelyn Rae (@_evelynrae) December 3, 2021

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

  “With some of the longest and most stringent lockdowns and travel restrictions in the world, it’s become a case study of what happens when a government will do anything to keep Covid numbers low,” host Freddie Sayers’ narration continues. 

  “Their latest policy is to build special camps, Covid internment camps – to which infected and suspected infected people are moved. The biggest of these camps is called Howard Springs.”

  “It houses up to 2,000 inmates, surrounded by tall fences and carefully policed against attempts to escape. It’s been described as the ‘gold standard’ of such camps and is being replicated across Australia.”

  The woman being interrogated and threatened with a 5000 AU$ fine in the above video can been seen in a follow-up interview below, conducted after she was released from detention…

  As is shown in the video in question, camp officials confronted the quarantined woman, later identified as Hayley Hodgson, and began pointing out yellow lines that she could not cross. 

  She never tested positive for COVID after being tested three times. “Never had Covid. I was in close contact with someone – never got it, and I was treated literally like a criminal,” she later described. After her 14-day stint at the camp, she lost her job, returning to her home unemployed, she later confirmed. 

  Up until recently, Australia – with its sprawling coastline and beautiful beaches, outdoor and adventure life, and nearly year-round sunshine – was considered by most to be a large “paradise” vacation spot in the South Pacific… but now it’s marked as the place of “Covid quarantine hell”. 

  * * *

  Meanwhile, in neighboring New Zealand, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has unironically given citizens permission to use the bathroom inside other people’s homes when visiting…

  Exciting news from New Zealand, where PM Jacinda Ardern has given her people permission to use the bathroom inside their friends’ homes.pic.twitter.com/YhbzuJiBRL

  — Michael P Senger (@MichaelPSenger) November 29, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 22:00

• Evil Is The Root Of All (Fiat) Money
  Evil Is The Root Of All (Fiat) Money

  Authored by Egon von Greyerz via GoldSwitzerland.com,

  “So you think that money is the root of all evil. Have you ever asked what is the root of all money?”

  -Ayn Rand

  Money used to be a stable medium of exchange and a store of value but that was in the days when there were sound monetary principles, mostly backed by gold or silver.

  Since 1913 and especially 1971 there is no discipline and no morals when it comes to the issuing of money as unlimited amounts of fake fiat money is printed at will.

  In today’s fiat money world, there is only one answer to Rand’s question “What is the root of all money?”, namely:

  “Evil is the root of all fiat money.”

  – Egon von Greyerz

  On the IMF (International Monetary Fund) website there is an article stating that “Money is something that holds its value” – Hmmm…..

  The meeting of bankers and politicians on Jekyll Island in November 1910 laid the foundations for the Federal Reserve Bank. Three years later in 1913 the Fed was founded.

  From that moment on, private bankers were running the US monetary system including the printing of money. But the British pound, backed by gold until 1931, was the global currency of choice until then.

  

  CURRENCY SYSTEMS ARE EPHEMERAL

  The Bretton Woods Agreement in 1944 established a new currency system based on the dollar. From that time, all major currencies were pegged to the US dollar and the dollar itself was pegged to gold at $35 per ounce. The dollar thus became the world’s reserve currency bolstered by big gold reserves. These were accumulated gradually from the early 1900s to the late 1940s. The US received payment in gold during WWII from its sales of arms and other supplies.

  As the chart below shows, the gold holdings grew from virtually nothing in the early 1900s to 22,000 metric tonnes by 1947. Over the following 25 years, 14,000 tonnes were sold and the US gold reserves are now alleged to be 8,000 tonnes.

  The 14,000 tonnes sold would today be worth a handsome $840 billion which certainly would have been useful in propping up the ailing finances of the US treasury.

  

  Most of the US gold was sold at a measly $35 per oz which tells that the US made an opportunity loss of $794 billion. And the people in charge of the Treasury and the Fed are supposed to be money experts. This tells us again that they don’t understand gold and they don’t understand history. They clearly don’t understand money either. Still they are only hired hands and temporary custodians of US gold and the US finances and never have to directly suffer the consequences of their actions.

  As Ayn Rand said:

  “You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.”

  In the current era of the golden calf and instant gratification, no leader, politician, central banker or commercial banker ever has to suffer the consequences of his own actions. Profits are always privatised and losses, without fail, socialised.

  Whatever deficits or debts a President or Prime Minister causes, the consequences when he retires are fees in the millions for just selling his name. And the bankers continue to collect their bonuses and options whatever losses they incur.

  So most of these individuals don’t ever have to bear the consequences of their actions. Instead normal people bear the consequences through taxes and decreasing benefits like pensions, healthcare and a much lower standard of living.

  US – 90 YEARS OF DEFICITS

  Since 1930, the US government has had budget deficits every year, except a couple of years in the 1950s and 1960s. The Clinton surpluses were fake due to false accounting.

  So for 90 years, the most powerful economic power in the world has been living on borrowed money and borrowed time.

  The consequences are blatant and for most people to see, if they care to look. But their government won’t tell them and the media is too ignorant to understand it.

  Probably not even 1% of Americans understand that their leaders and bankers are destroying their money on a daily basis.

  How many Americans would understand that since 1971 their US dollar has lost 98% of its purchasing power? Virtually nobody realises that the dollar only buys 2% of what it bought in 1971.

  And what did President Nixon tell his American compatriots in 1971 when he took away the gold backing of the dollar:

  “THE EFFECT OF TODAY’S ACTION will be to stabilise the dollar.”

  A DOLLAR FALL OF 98% SO FAR – ANOTHER 100% TO GO

  Hmmmmmm! The chart below shows how the dollar was stabilised. A 98% fall of the dollar doesn’t look very stable to me. Instead it looks chaotic and catastrophic!

  

  US DEFICITS ARE GROWING EXPONENTIALLY

  Back in 2016 when Trump was elected I forecast that the US debt would be $28 trillion at the beginning of the next presidential period in early 2021.  Few forecasters predicted an $8 trillion increase for the period after Obama. But I am no genius. The trick was easy. Just look at history. Since Reagan became president in 1981, US debt has on average doubled every 8 years. A simple extrapolation meant $28 trillion debt at the halfway stage and $40 trillion in 2025. But as the table shows below, I have now revised my forecast and am projecting $50 trillion by 2025.

  

  The US government is currently spending $7 trillion annually but the tax revenue is ONLY $4 trillion. So there is a neat annual deficit of a mere $3 trillion or 43% of the US budget.

  How can anyone believe that the US can repay a debt of currently $29 trillion and rising to $50 trillion with an annual deficit of $3 trillion – a deficit which is rising exponentially. The simple answer is that they never will repay it. Instead it will increase uncontrollably.

  As I said at the beginning of the article – Evil is the root of all fiat money as a 50 fold increase in the US debt since 1981 can only be achieved through corrupt means.

  And don’t believe that the Fed will really taper the $120 billion a month that they are printing. They have declared a $15 billion tampering programme but that is a FAKE TAPER as my colleague Matt Piepenburg wrote about.

  As expected they are cooking the books, giving with one hand and taking back with the other one – Plus ça change….. (the more it changes, the more it stays the same). 

  COVID – YET ANOTHER VARIANT WITH OMICRON

  So now the world has yet another Covid variant. It seems as every time Covid recedes another variant is invented appears. European countries are starting to lock down again. In the UK there were initially only 2 cases of the Omicron variant. Still, based on those 2 cases Switzerland implemented a 10 day quarantine for UK visitors and more countries are likely to follow.

  At this point, nobody knows the severity of the Omicron variant but still countries are locking down. It is believed that Omicron has around 32 mutations and that current vaccines might not be effective. So now Big Pharma will come up with a new vaccine to be taken in addition to boosters and normal annual flu vaccines. It is a wonderful position  for Big Pharma to be both expert advisor and beneficiary of Covid. The billions and trillions will keep rolling in.

  CONSEQUENCES

  We are not medical experts (there seems to be few impartial ones around) but we do understand the economic CONSEQUENCES.

  In September 2019, major central banks gave the signal that they “would do what it takes” to keep the financial system afloat.

  Covid which officially arrived early in 2020 was of course the most perfect excuse for starting yet another massive programme of unlimited money printing. Some people even believe that it was started deliberately but that could hardly be possible??

  Whatever the severity of new Covid variants, it is crystal clear that the world will suffer economically, financially as well as socially.

  In other words, all these additional problems are landing on a world which is morally and financially bankrupt. All the king’s soldiers and all the king’s printed money will not put this Humpty Dumpty world together again.

  A PERFECT RECIPE FOR DISASTER

  Let’s look at the ingredients:

  • Global debt of $300 trillion growing exponentially – it was $100t in 2000

  • Rapidly increasing deficits in most major and developing economies

  • $1.5t+ derivatives which will be worthless when counterparties fail

  • An Epic Everything bubble in all asset classes – Stocks, Bonds, Property

  • An asset bubble which will implode since it is based on fake money

  • Social and Moral decadence

  • No statesmen as leader in any Western country – so no chance of rescue

  • A flu of relatively modest proportions which will lock down the world for a 3rd year

  • A financial system which is on the verge of collapse

  • Inflation which will lead to hyperinflation

  • Fiat Money of ZERO value which is created hand over fist

  • A currency system which will lose 100% from here as history tells us

  The above factors are the inevitable consequences of a financial and currency system that was doomed to fail when it was first devised by a few bankers on Jekyll Island in 1910.

  As I said at the beginning of the article – Evil is the root of all fiat money!

  Greed is a cardinal sin and the bankers and politicians at Jekyll Island were definitely clear of the consequences of their actions. With more than 100 years of reaping the benefits and creating extraordinary fortunes for a few, they needn’t worry.

  But the rest of the world, that just has debt and no savings, is in for an extended period of misery.

  It is clearly very appropriate that the decision to take control of the money took place on Jekyll Island. If we look up the meaning of Jekyll we find:

  “A person with very different sides to their personality – one good and the other EVIL”!

  Clearly the appearance that the Fed would like to project to the world is the goodness of being the guardian and saviour of the financial system. The purpose agreed at Jekyll Island was the EVIL purpose to take control of the monetary system for the benefit of the private bankers who would own and control the Fed.

  MANY OF THE BEST THINGS IN LIFE ARE FREE

  I don’t like being a Cassandra predicting doom and gloom that few will believe.

  But these are the consequences that history teaches us time and time again. But sadly everyone thinks it is different today.

  Since every currency system in history has collapsed, it is quite a certain bet that this one will too.

  For the few who have savings, wealth preservation in physical gold and silver is essential as insurance against yet another failed currency and financial system.

  And for everybody it is important to remember that the most important things in life are family and friends. Helping others in difficult times is critical.

  Remember also that many wonderful things in life are free, conversations, books, music and nature.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 21:40

• Americans Panic-Buy RVs As Shipments Exceed 600,000 Units This Year And Next
  Americans Panic-Buy RVs As Shipments Exceed 600,000 Units This Year And Next

  Months after we discussed the “unprecedented demand” for recreational vehicles (RV), which we said was on pace for a blowout 2021 and expected to continue into 2022. A new RV Industry Association (RVIA) report has confirmed our suspicions: Americans continue to panic buy motorhomes. 

  RVIA’s latest quarterly report projects RV wholesale shipments will exceed 600,000 units in both 2021 and 2022, which is record-breaking demand as the virus pandemic has fundamentally changed how Americans vacation. 

  

  “RV manufacturers and suppliers have accomplished something never before seen with the incredible number of RV produced in 2021 and forecasted to be built in 2022,” said RVIA President & CEO Craig Kirby.

  “More RVs will be headed to dealer lots in 2022 than ever before, allowing even more consumers to experience the freedom and control of traveling the country in their ideal RV,” Kirby said. 

  RV shipments are expected to range between 593,600 and 610,800 units with an estimated year-end total of 602,200 units, a 40% increase over the 430,412 units shipped in 2020. RVIA said growth is expected to continue through 2022, with shipments ranging between 599,760 and 627,700 units.

  “The RV industry is looking at double-digit growth rates into mid-2022, due in part to low inventories, the strong financial standing of consumers, and the desire of consumers to get outdoors and experience an active outdoor lifestyle,” said Jeff Rutherford, RVIA Chair and President & CEO of Airxcel

  “Thanks to the RV manufacturers and suppliers, more consumers than ever before will be able to take advantage of all of the benefits of owning an RV,” Rutherford said. 

  This is the latest sign Americans, more than ever, are rediscovering national parks and rural communities in their RVs rather than vacationing in big cities and at resorts. The RV boom might continue past 2022 as demand by millennials has been steadily increasing. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 21:20

• Why Web3 Will Change Everything (In Plain English)
  Why Web3 Will Change Everything (In Plain English)

  Authored by Deep Pulusani via ‘Moment of Deep’ substack,

  This post was inspired by the following tweet and most popular reply:

  

  

  Some notes before we start: the term web3 today is sometimes used synonymously to mean cryptocurrency, blockchain tech, virtual reality/augmented reality & the metaverse. I find that people already have a more intuitive understanding of how VR/AR may change the future. Therefore, I’ll only be writing about how crypto & blockchain tech in the context of web3 will transform the future, since it’s a bit more challenging to understand and abstract in its concepts.

  Often this subject is explained with technical specifications or more commonly with political terms, ideas about liberty, decentralization, censorship, and power. These are all important; but what ultimately determines if web3 powered by crypto is the future lies in the economic and productive value it brings, the increases in quality of life it can achieve. These are the aspects I hope to make clear.

  

  Where we’ve come from and where we are

  All of the iterations of the web are digital revolutions, i.e. not only do more of our analog (physical) lives move to the digital realm, but new digitally native (digital-first) experiences are invented as well.

  Web1 (1990s): a revolution in information availability.

  Information and content from the real world is put online. Information is no longer a local phenomena nor a physical one, but is available for anyone with an internet connection to access. Early web protocols also allow for file transfers, emails, and web pages.

  Examples: personal web pages, Encyclopedia Britannica & Encarta online, FTP, MapQuest

  Web2 (2000-): a revolution in creation, experience, and connection.

  The static becomes dynamic, and a convergence of hardware and software technologies enable us to experience rich interfaces and interactions on the web. Our lives start to become increasingly digital – compare what percent of your daily attention is focused online in 1999, then 2009, and then 2019. The ecosystem and interface of web2 is now rich enough where people can spend the majority of their lives online – from their careers, relationships, hobbies, investments, etc. – we now spend much of our lives in digital space. We also consume most of our content digitally, create much of our output digitally, and connect most frequently with others through messaging apps and social networks.

  Examples: YouTube, Google Docs, Twitter, Instagram, WhatsApp, Robinhood, smart home & smart health devices

  Web3 (2015-): a revolution in coordination, ownership, and value transfer.

  I’ll break down each of these web3 revolutions in the ‘Web3 Paradigm Shifts’ section further below. It’s important to note first, however, that much of what will happen in web3 has its roots in web2. What’s often lost in all the web3 talk is that the web2 era is not over and will continue to produce enormous value and new companies. Let’s see how web3 powered by crypto is the next logical step to some of the revolutions of web2.

  Web3 Extensions of Web2.

  New and more powerful networks.

  In web1 times, your networks might’ve included your local community, your job, your family, and friends you grow up with. Maybe you were part of a mailing list or a forum if you were savvy online. In web2, networks proliferated rapidly, and continue to explode. You might have networks on FB, telegram groups, IG niches, corners of Twitter, or varied family/friend WhatsApp groups.

  This network creation continues in web3 with the introduction of the value network. Examples include Ethereum, Solana, Polkadot, countless others – each currency representing its own individual network of users. In addition, you have the tokens built on top of these programmable currencies, tokens that any individual or business can issue. The result is a proliferation of value networks that are themselves nested into a larger, more powerful network that it can communicate with and transfer between. This is an extremely powerful new invention because a value network can be added to all of our existing networks in web2 – to our existing social networks, messaging networks, and content networks – or to brand new networks entirely. Essentially any network can be monetized, tokenized, or incentivized, creating supercharged versions of our already rich variety of networks.

  Explosion of creative activity, niches, and formats.

  Even if we just include web2 companies launched in the past few years alone – TikTok, Substack, Clubhouse, etc. – there’s so many creative and productive niches for individuals to occupy. Couple that with increasingly easier ways to distribute content among a proliferation of platforms (aka networks), it’s no wonder there has been an explosion of creative activity and individual power over the past 20 years. In the web1 world, we still mainly had movie stars and bestselling authors. In web2, we have stars and activists in every genre, category, and format you could ask for. What progresses in web3 is the further expansion of platforms, niches, and content types. Most notably, you will see more purely digital creation and digital reward (e.g. create an opera in a virtual world that’s monetized by a virtual currency that’s easily tradeable into other virtual currencies or goods). Furthermore, the platforms that creators and producers use will be less intrusive, less expensive, and more malleable than the monolithic platforms of today.

  Ease of global collaboration

  Cloud storage & editing, powerful front-end frameworks, and ever-increasing browser strength have made it possible to collaborate effectively with anyone, anywhere, and in practically any field. Figma and Airtable are just two examples of recent web2 companies that have accelerated the ease of collaboration with individuals halfway around the world. The pandemic has further accelerated this phenomena. With web3, we now have organizations that can be independently formed with no underlying platform dependence. These organizations, dubbed DAOs, can be both incentivized to work towards a common goal and govern themselves through tokenization. Anonymous, pseudonymous, or fully public individuals can have their work measured and verified through a publicly available blockchain.

  Disintermediation and distribution.

  Web3 will continue the trend of removing distance between producer and consumer. There is a continual disintermediation happening on the web. During web1, to release a successful music album you had to go artist → label → distributer → retailer → consumer. At each step there is profit loss and gatekeepers deciding whether you can continue onward to distribute. In web2 you got to go either 1-step closer (artist → label → platform → consumer) or 2-steps closer for those fully independent ( artist → platform → consumer). Web3 continues this disintermediation, as the platform merely becomes the underlying network or protocol the connection is made over (artist → consumer via protocol or network). There’s no longer gatekeepers or an expensive take-rate. There can still be curators to guide consumers (the difference being that a curator can make money independently of the artist’s margin). The end goal is that all service providers or product creators have the option to be connected directly with service seekers and product consumers.

  Disintermediation is only possible because of the increasing ability to self-distribute. In the past, middle men at each step were essential to ensure wide distribution. Web2 gave us powerful tools of self-distribution through platforms like Amazon, Shopify, Google Ads, Social Media, SoundCloud, etc. In web3, we can maintain all the tools of web2, but now we introduce tokenized systems. By creating tokens that somehow represent your business or art in your chosen way, early fans and early users become incentivized to spread your art by holding those tokens. Those fans will now distribute that art for you through their own individual networks and tools.

  Web3 Paradigm Shifts

  Users become owners.

  Employee stock options made many tech employees rich with the advent of web-first tech companies. However, for companies that rely on network effects – which is all social media, all sharing economy e.g. Uber, all marketplaces e.g. Amazon, all cloud tools, all games – the early users are equally as important. Without the early users, later users don’t join in, and a company never gains traction. Today, however, early users are not compensated for this essential contribution. In web3, through both fungible and non-fungible tokens, users & early evangelizers will win when a company wins too.

  In common press about web3, what’s often talked about is that we’ll now be compensated for our data. This is true – unlike our data being owned by the platforms (Twitter, FB, etc.) it will travel with us and be owned by us. However, the more valuable and scarce asset that users give over to apps is their attention, and this will be the far greater reward to users. Power users and heavy users of games, cloud tools, and content platforms, will eventually either be incentivized by the app or move on to companies that do incentivize their valuable attention.

  Any agreement becomes possible.

  At each era of the web, we can code increasingly powerful experiences (i.e. code becomes more abstracted from the binary 0s and 1s that the computer actually runs). When web2 rolled around, internet connections were fast enough and devices strong enough to have rich streaming & content experiences. In web3, the game-changing abstraction is smart contracts. Smart contracts essentially allow any agreement between individuals, groups, protocols, or mix of the bunch. Relying on the legal system to enforce billions of agreements small and large on the web is neither desirable nor realistic. A smart contract’s ability to allow for agreements between two untrusted individuals without burdening the legal system creates a major shift in a human’s ability to coordinate behavior and form agreements between groups. In web3, code enforces the agreements and the blockchain infrastructure protects against manipulation of this code. Smart contracts are natively digital, meaning they can be combined and stacked with other contracts to create powerful systems and infrastructures. The implications of this are not yet fully realized, but one hint to the power of smart contracts is the emergence of decentralized finance, which has disrupted a giant sector in a very short period of time. Smart contracts can now be embedded in all the software and hardware we use – any object can be embedded with operating rules, sharing terms, & financial agreements between parties. Combine this with the ability to interface with any other contract on the network, and the creative, collaborative, and productive uses of these contracts become limitless.

  Everything can be a financial instrument.

  People often ask why not just use fiat currency through PayPal or Stripe – what’s the functional point of an open-source digitally native currency like Ethereum? The answer is that you can program it, build on top of it, and integrate it with anything digital – whether a smart hardware device or a software application. Even everyday items like your chat groups, gifs, or your writing journal can be made into a financial instrument. That universe becomes bigger when imagine digitally native assets and services that have not even been invented yet. Any individual can perform this integration, not just institutions. Usually when people think of financial instruments, we think of ownership, of buying and selling. But these aren’t the only functions of financialization – we can integrate all financial functions including borrowing, lending, insurance, and merging. With financial functionality, also comes executive functionality, like governance and direction. Now imagine these functions available to any asset or network, both digital and physical.

  A new identity emerges.

  Tokens don’t necessarily have to represent money or value – we can use tokens to verify productive work done, or personal and career milestones reached. Because web3 transactions are stored on a publicly available network, our web3 wallet can not only represent transactions we’ve made and tokens we own, but organizations we’re apart of, events we’ve attended, people we know, content we’ve created, and work we’ve done. We can carry this history around to any app connected to the network that we grant access to. Those concerned with privacy never have to expose their physical identity, as wallets are simply avatars which maintain the right to hide or expose the physical identity behind it. Instead of our creative and productive output being spread out and siloed over various companies – LinkedIn, Twitter, IG – our web3 wallet can be carried with us wherever we go. Apps, games, and experiences can then interact with the specific identity the user brings to create tailored and one-of-a-kind experiences for the user’s history. Collaborators and employers can verify your expertise, your skill, your network, and things you’ve created or worked on through your wallet, without requiring a resume or contacting references.

  Postscript: Why did I write this?

  There’s something odd about writing articles that predict the future. If the writer is correct, the future is going to happen anyway, so what’s the point of writing an article about it now? What’s the point of another article hyping up a future that is certain?

  Because web3 is so widely misunderstood, the future is uncertain. The economic and productive value that web3 can bring is deeply threatened by governments and regulators around the world.  This is somewhat expected from authoritarian governments that will naturally crack down on web3 because of what it entails – shared equity and decision making, mass participation and organization – as retaining centralized power is essential to their literal survival. This has already become apparent in China. What’s essential is that major democracies, especially the world’s wealthiest USA and the world’s biggest India, foster the web3 experiment. It’s essential that we let things develop before overzealously legislating in the name of protection. Unfriendly governments could have firewalled the web1 internet and set progress back a decade because it was now easier for criminals to communicate and spread criminal information.  Undoing legislation and regulatory burdens is much harder than waiting to pass them in the first place. Web3 built on crypto has the possibility to be the major boon for wealth inequality (see paradigm shifts listed above), an issue all sides of the political spectrum claim to want to solve. Democratic governments: let’s let web3 grow, develop, and make mistakes. We’re still so early.

  *  *  *

  Follow me on twitter @momentofdeep for more content like this.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 21:00

• California To Cut Water To Cities And Farmland Amid Persisting Drought
  California To Cut Water To Cities And Farmland Amid Persisting Drought

  A severe drought has ravaged every county in California for seven months, forcing state officials to restrict water delivery next year to millions of Californians and hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland, according to Bloomberg.

  Above-average temperatures and the lack of precipitation began in early February 2020, and by the summer, conditions worsened following heatwave after heatwave. Some of the state’s largest reservoirs registered near or at record low levels, which prompted some to believe state officials were preparing to announce the first-ever federally declared water shortage. Dry conditions also sparked one of the worst fire seasons on record as more than 8,000 fires charred 3 million acres. 

  The California Department of Water Resources is now prioritizing water delivery as the drought will persist well into 2022. Water delivery for 27 million Californians and three-quarters of a million acres of farmland will be affected. 

  “Despite a wet start to the water year, conditions have dried out since that first storm and we are still planning for a below-average water year,” Karla Nemeth, director of the department, said in a statement. “

  “That means we need to prepare now for a dry winter and severe drought conditions to continue through 2022,” Nemeth said.

  According to the U.S. Drought Monitor, much of the Golden State is in severe drought with large pockets of extreme and exceptional drought. 

  

  This year, the devastation unleashed on the state could compound into a megadrought next year if the winter remains dry. Much of the state’s water is derived from rain and snow in higher elevations north. Two-thirds of water demand comes from the southern part of the state. The inability for some farms not to receive water next year could be devastating and transform farmland into fallow land. We already noted some farmers reported receiving no water last summer. 

  As conditions worsen, California could be starring at “the second Dust Bowl.” If the winter remains dry, the probability goes up that state regulators will announce the first-ever federally declared water shortage. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 20:40

• Goldman: Are We Starting To See What The "New Normal" Looks Like?
  Goldman: Are We Starting To See What The “New Normal” Looks Like?

  By Goldman strategist Chris Hussey

  New Normal?

  US stocks traded sharply lower Friday, and on pace for another decline this week, as investors reacted to a new virus variant, strong business sentiment surveys, and Friday’s decidedly mixed labor report — and contemplated how to position into a now-volatile year-end.

  …is this what it looks like?

  As we leg further into the last month of 2021 and the post-pandemic era, this week may be raising the question: are we starting to see what the ‘new normal’ looks like?

  It’s not unreasonable to look at the Omicron variant as an anomaly that ‘surprises’ markets and represents a left tail risk. But after enduring the original COVID-19 outbreak followed by waves from the Beta and Delta variants, investors may be determining that COVID waves are becoming a regular thing — seasonal like the flu the perhaps.

  

  For now, we don’t yet know how much of an impact the Omicron virus will have, but what we might be learning is that the virus is still having an impact, even if that impact is not as great as it first was back in early 2020.

  And beyond the virus, this week may also have delivered a clearer view of what else may become ‘normal’ in the post-pandemic era: from inflation, to labor, shopping, sentiment and volatility. A few things to consider:

  • high inflation. Leading into this week, our economists revised our forecast for Fed Fund rate hikes to 3 in 2022, from 2, as inflation is remaining remarkably sticky. Fed Chair Powell’s testimony before Congress earlier this week only reinforced our view that the FOMC is concerned about high inflation. And high commodity prices are unlikely to provide a relief valve for inflation pressures as Jeff Currie discusses in the latest Commodity Watch. We now see a 28%+ total return for commodities over the next 12 months.
  • tight labor. Friday’s payrolls report revealed that fewer non-farm payroll jobs were added in November (210k vs 546k a month earlier) but also that fewer people are unemployed than expected (the unemployment rate fell to 4.2%). So while its tempting to look at the 210k new job adds as a disappointing indicator of US growth, the 4.2% unemployment rate may tell us more about the economy — everyone who wants a job, has one. Also interesting in Friday’s report, despite the ultra-low unemployment rate, wage growth moderated to +0.3% mom from +0.4% a month ago. But will wage pressures continue to ease in a world where so few are looking for a job but ‘Help Wanted’ signs seem to appear on every store you walk by? One other note on payrolls: from December 2011 through February 2020 (8 years+ of pre-pandemic data), monthly non-farm payroll additions averaged 200k (meet the new payrolls, the same as the old payrolls).
  • Black Friday now takes place on Black Monday. The post-Thanksgiving holiday shopping stats have been somewhat uninspiring, another reason, perhaps, to doubt the growth pace of the US economy. But Eric Sheridan and Kate McShane point out that people are still shopping, they just are starting their holiday shopping a lot earlier than they used to. Perhaps people are starting to shop on October 19th rather than November 29th. And our weekly retailer activity tracker continues to show strong shopping activity throughout November.
  • Business sentiment is very strong. On Friday, the ISM Services index was reported to have reached a new all-time high at 69.1. And the ISM Manufacturing Index rose to 61.1 in the latest survey — near its highest level in the last 10 years (only this past March’s spike to 64.7 exceeds November). Supply chain bottlenecks partly reflect the strong demand for industrial products and the inflationary impulse that such bottlenecks support. But the strong business sentiment may also reflect how Corporate America is adjusting to the ‘new normal’ of the post-pandemic era — and likes what it sees.

  Stock market volatility is high. In the past week, the VIX has spiked back up to 32, highlighting the uncertainty that is permeating around stocks now.

  

  As we wrote in Thursday’s Midday, “price discovery,” the spike in volatility appears to simply reflect the increased difficulty in determining the price of risk assets in a world of rising inflation, virus waves, and normalizing growth. And as we step into the ‘new normal’, perhaps such uncertainty is likely to persist such that volatility remains elevated for longer than we have seen in past cycles. One other note on the VIX: in the 3+ years prior to the pandemic from December 2016 through late-February 2020, the VIX had a median weekly level of 13. Since the VIX picked up on the pandemic risk in late-February 2020, the VIX has registered a median of 22.

  One last item for the ‘new normal’ file: rates. While the stock market is going through another bout of elevated uncertainty and a spike in the VIX, yields on 10-year Treasuries have retreated back to 1.36%, well above the lows we saw at the heart of the pandemic in 2020, but at the very bottom of the range we experienced in the post-Great Financial Crisis era. Praveen Korapaty forecasts that yields will rise to 2.00% by year-end 2022 but it is interesting to see that as the economy ‘normalizes’, yields on 10-year Treasuries are not pushing higher — even as inflation does. Inflation markets this week began to price in less inflation in the future — contributing to the lower 10-year yield. But regardless of the technical factors that may be holding rates down, an ultra-low 10-year Treasury yield has provided a good backdrop for stock price appreciation in the past – especially the Tech-laden, ‘long duration’ US stock market.

  Interesting fact: beyond the Tech-laden, ‘long-duration’ S&P 500, index returns this year have been quite a bit less impressive. The Russell 2000 Small Cap stock index, for example, is now up less than 10% for the year.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 20:31

• Citizens Continue To Exit High-Tax US States
  Citizens Continue To Exit High-Tax US States

  Authored by Andrew Wilford via RealClearMarkets.com,

  If you’re still wondering why raising the cap on the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction was important enough to Democrats to sacrifice their stated principles and resort to brazen gimmicks in order to fit it into the reconciliation bill, look no further than the latest release of the IRS’s tax migration data, covering tax years 2018-2019.

  The data shows that certain states continue to alienate their own tax bases with punitively high taxes and uncompetitive business tax environments. High-tax states are losing taxpayers at an alarming rate, while states that tax their residents less aggressively are benefiting from their fellow states’ loss.

  

  The five states that lost the most taxpayers are not exactly known for fiscal restraint.

  New York, California, Illinois, New Jersey, and Massachusetts lost, on net, 219,937 taxpayers and over $28 billion in adjusted gross income (AGI). On average, these states have a state-local effective tax rate of 11.8 percent.

  The five states that gained the most taxpayers, on the other hand, are all low-tax states — in fact, three of the five have no state income tax.

  Florida, Texas, Arizona, North Carolina, and Washington state gained, on net, 194,340 taxpayers and $28.9 billion in AGI, all while averaging a state-local effective tax rate of just 8.96 percent. Unsurprisingly, Florida is the big winner here, adding $17.5 billion in AGI to its tax base alone.

  But this phenomenon of taxpayers fleeing states that treat them like boundless sources of tax revenue is nothing new, and high-tax states aren’t learning their lessons anytime soon. Since the tax years covered by this data, New Jersey and New York have passed major income tax increases, while the other three states that lost the most taxpayers are seriously considering doing the same.

  And even with never-ending tax increases, many of these states are in dire fiscal straits. Illinois, New Jersey, and Massachusetts stand out for their poor fiscal outlook due to debt and unfunded pension liabilities.

  If you’re thinking that these states should consider cutting back on spending rather than blissfully continuing down this death spiral, you wouldn’t fit in well among their policymakers. Instead, they’re counting on a reinstituted SALT deduction to pass the tax burden they place on their residents onto taxpayers elsewhere.

  Of the 10 counties that saw the largest benefit from the SALT deduction before it was capped, nine are in the five states that suffered the greatest net loss of taxpayers (the other is in Connecticut, which lost the 11th most taxpayers on net). These 10 counties lost, on net, over 35,000 taxpayers and $10.4 billion in AGI between 2018 and 2019, after the SALT deduction was capped.

  It’s easy to see, then, why high-tax states view the capping of the SALT deduction as an existential threat. Without the ability to write off their high state and local taxes on their federal tax returns, residents there face the full brunt of the tax burden imposed by the state.

  However, that’s far more of an indictment of the tax policies of high-tax states than it is a reason to reinstate the full SALT deduction. Tax liabilities reduced by the SALT deduction necessarily result in either higher taxes for other taxpayers or greater accumulation of debt. Either way, average taxpayers elsewhere pay.

  Instead of counting on the federal government to bail them out, states with uncompetitive tax structures should look inwards. When residents don’t feel like the taxes they pay are fair or reasonable, they leave for a state with more reasonable tax burdens. If high-tax states want to keep their residents, they need to recognize that fact.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 20:00

• Some US Colleges Start Requiring Vaccine Boosters For Students, Staff
  Some US Colleges Start Requiring Vaccine Boosters For Students, Staff

  Authored by Li Hai via The Epoch Times,

  Following booster shots recommendations made by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), some colleges are now requiring boosters for students and staff wanting to return to campus.

  

  On Monday, the CDC doubled down on its recommendation on boosters, saying all adults should get a booster shot.

  “Today, CDC is strengthening its recommendation on booster doses for individuals who are 18 years and older,” CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said in a statement.

  “Everyone ages 18 and older should get a booster shot either when they are six months after their initial Pfizer or Moderna series or two months after their initial J&J vaccine,” Walensky said, adding that the emergence of the Omicron variant further emphasizes the importance of vaccination and boosters.

  

  Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the CDC’s director, testifies to a Senate panel in Washington on Nov. 4, 2021. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

  On Tuesday, the first case of the Omicron variant in America was confirmed in California.

  On Wednesday, University of Massachusetts Amherst Chancellor Kumble Subbaswamy announced that the university requires all students to receive a COVID-19 vaccine booster shot.

  “The vaccine booster, combined with the advance testing explained below, and ongoing wastewater testing, adaptive testing, convenient voluntary testing options, and our indoor mask requirement represent a comprehensive approach to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and ensure a safe and successful spring for our community,” Subbaswamy said in an email to students.

  The university will continue indoor masking requirements, but this will be reviewed later, the email stated.

  Some universities initiated a booster requirement earlier, doing so when the CDC expanded its recommendation of booster shots to include all adults—18 years and older on Nov. 19. Previously, CDC only recommended boosters to 65 years and older or those younger but with underlying medical conditions.

  On Nov. 23, Wesleyan University—a 3,200-student university located in Connecticut—announced that the university is requiring all students, staff, and faculty to get the booster shots by Jan. 14.

  “Vaccine booster shots are now available, and they offer an important additional layer of protection,” the university’s president Michael Roth said in a statement.

  The St. Joseph’s College of Maine announced as early as Oct. 4 that the school would require boosters. The Catholic college said the requirement would be implemented “on a rolling basis—as boosters become available, and as the list of recommended recipients expands.”

  As of Wednesday, the school has a 99 percent vaccination rate and a 56 percent booster rate. The school said that the indoor mask requirement would be lifted when an 85 percent booster rate is reached.

  More colleges are still considering whether to require boosters. Some colleges choose to “strongly” recommend it instead of requiring it for now.

  The University of Rochester said in an updated guidance Monday that it is not requiring students, faculty, and staff to receive a booster, but “it is strongly encouraged.”

  Duke University and Harvard University also “strongly” encourage everyone eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine booster.

  

  A nurse fills up syringes for patients as they receive their COVID-19 booster vaccination during a Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination clinic in Southfield, Mich., on Sept. 29, 2021. (Emily Elconin/Reuters)

  Some experts don’t think there’s a need for young people to get a boost, especially young males.

  Jeremy Faust, a physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, sent a letter to CDC’s director in October, saying based on his analysis, for males ages 18-29, it seems that third doses of Pfizer are likely to cause more hospitalizations (due to myocarditis) than they will prevent (from COVID-19 breakthrough cases) in the coming 6 months.

  But CDC expanded eligibility for boosters to include people 18 years and older on Nov. 19 and further on Nov. 29.

  Gerri Taylor, the co-chair of the American College Health Association’s COVID-19 task force, said if CDC updates its definition of fully vaccinated to include booster shots, then “colleges might be more apt to require it.” Inside Higher Ed reported.

  The association has recommended that colleges require COVID-19 vaccination but hasn’t recommended requiring boosters yet.

  During Wednesday’s White House press briefing, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told reporters that currently, the definition of fully vaccinated doesn’t include a booster, but it could change.

  “We don’t know right now whether it should change, but it might,” Fauci added.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 19:40

• US Spy Planes Conducted Record Number Of Missions Near China, Beijing Think-Tank Says
  US Spy Planes Conducted Record Number Of Missions Near China, Beijing Think-Tank Says

  Reconnaissance aircraft operated by the USAF carried out a record number of flights over the South China Sea in November, according to data compiled by a Beijing-based think tank.

  The South China Sea Strategic Situation Probing Initiative (SCSPI) said U.S. spy planes carried out 94 sorties last month, a 25% increase from the February record of 75 flights. The think tank reported 80% of the flights were conducted by P-8A anti-submarine patrol aircraft, and the rest were MQ-4C surveillance drones and 8C air-to-ground surveillance aircraft.

  

  SCSPI’s data shows the most move active day was on Nov. 04, when the U.S. deployed ten spy planes across the region. The same day, the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier strike group sailed through the South China Sea. 

  

  A Navy P-8A anti-submarine patrol aircraft flew over the Taiwan Strait on Nov. 29, an area where Beijing continues to unleash wave after wave of warplanes into Taiwan’s defense identification zone. The spy plane “was only about 15.91 nautical miles [29.46km] from the baseline of the Chinese mainland’s territorial waters,” the SCSPI report said, adding that the aircraft may have had their transponder turned off. 

  Last year, Beijing blasted the U.S. for concealing spy planes’ identities as commercial passenger planes. They said it’s common for USAF spy planes to impersonate the transponder code of civilian aircraft from other countries — calling it dangerous. 

  At the time, SCSPI said, “this undoubtedly added up to great risk and uncertainty to international flight safety, which could lead to misjudgment (by ground air defense systems) and probably bring danger to civilian aircraft especially those being impersonated.”

  Bloomberg spoke with a spokesperson for the U.S. 7th Fleet who said, “U.S. Navy ships and aircraft routinely operate within the international waters of the South China Sea, and are committed to supporting its network of alliances and partners and upholding a free and open Indo- Pacific.” 

  On Friday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian urged the U.S. to stop “severely infringing on China’s territorial security.” He said, “this is aimed at creating tensions and will drive the risk of regional conflict.”

  The last thing the U.S. and China need is a major foreign policy crisis. President Biden and President Xi Jinping don’t want conflict ahead of the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing and ahead of next year’s 20th Party Congress in China and the U.S. midterm elections.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 19:20

• Elizabeth Warren Is So Very Wrong About Inflation
  Elizabeth Warren Is So Very Wrong About Inflation

  Authored by William Anderson via The Mises Institute,

  Almost anyone who follows social media is familiar with the latest tweets by Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has pronounced her verdict on higher food and gasoline prices: they are nothing less than the result of corporate greed. In fact, according to Warren, there is no inflation, only corporations arbitrarily raising prices in their relentless pursuit of … profits.

  

  In a November 21 interview with MSNBC’s Joy Reid, Warren declared (later placed on Twitter):

  Prices have gone up. Why? Because giant oil companies like Chevon and ExxonMobil enjoy doubling their profits. This isn’t about inflation. This is about price gouging for these guys and we need to call them out.

  Three days later, she outdid herself, declaring:

  Wondering why your Thanksgiving groceries cost more this year? It’s because greedy corporations are charging Americans extra just to keep their stock prices high. This is outrageous.

  To those familiar with Warren and her previous economic pronouncements, none of this is surprising. A decade ago, she declared that entrepreneurial successes are due to the government, not any decisions that entrepreneurs might have made, and her record in the US Senate speaks volumes to her economic illiteracy. That she should claim that all businesses have to do to increase profits is to raise prices is proof to her intellectual bankruptcy.

  Despite the title, however, this article is not about Elizabeth Warren’s economic viewpoints.

  However, in her declaration that no doubt plays well with progressives, she makes a specific claim: firms that wish to increase their profits and stock values simply need to raise the prices of whatever they sell.

  Warren’s claim raises an obvious question: If higher prices always lead to greater profits, why would any business owner pass up the chance for greater profitability? In fact, if high profits are tied directly to higher prices, then one would expect a cottage industry to spring up of class action law firms suing corporations for lowering their prices, since any firm is free to increase its profits at will. Doing anything less is dereliction of duty to shareholders.

  Not that I regularly follow Warren’s Twitter decrees, but I doubt seriously that she ever has praised any businesses when they lower their prices (oil companies often lower prices, not to mention technology firms). Since lower prices do not fit into Warren’s progressive narratives, it is doubtful that she even notices when that happens, and if we are to take her latest statements seriously, then we would have to believe that such an event could not happen because no profit-maximizing firm ever would impose losses upon itself when they are fully aware of a profitable alternative strategy.

  There are a number of fallacies in Warren’s antimarket missives, and I shall examine them from the Austrian viewpoint, specifically using Murray Rothbard’s Man, Economy, and State as the standard. I first look at her view of profits themselves.

  Like many American progressives, Warren seems to interpret business profits as an extraction of wealth from the community at large. Rothbard wrote about what he called the “altruists” as condemning profits:

  It is also peculiar that critics generally concentrate their fire on profits (“the profit motive”), and not on other market incomes such as wages. It is difficult to see any sense whatever in moral distinctions between these incomes.

  Indeed, progressives like Warren see markets in a starkly different way than do Austrians such as Rothbard. To Warren, markets are violent, predatory entities with no more moral standing than the Roman arenas. Rothbard, not surprisingly, differs:

  [C]ritics overlook the fact that the operation of the free market is vastly different from governmental action. When a government acts, individual critics are powerless to change the result. They can do so only if they can finally convince the rulers that their decision should be changed; this may take a long time or be totally impossible. On the free market, however, there is no final decision imposed by force; everyone is free to shape his own decisions and thereby significantly change the results of “the market.” In short, whoever feels that the market has been too cruel to certain entrepreneurs or to any other income receivers is perfectly free to set up an aid fund for him for depriving his fellowman of needed benefits. For the consistent altruist must face the fact that monetary income on the market reflects services to others, whereas psychic income is a purely personal, or “selfish,” gain.

  Entrepreneurial profits, Rothbard notes, do not come about because of nefarious behavior on part of the producers, but rather the good judgment successful entrepreneurs make regarding the present price of key factors of production and the predicted value of final products these factors help create. Writes Rothbard:

  What gave rise to this realized profit, this ex post profit fulfilling the producer’s ex ante expectations? The fact that the factors of production in this process were underpriced and undercapitalized—underpriced in so far as their unit services were bought, undercapitalized in so far as the factors were bought as wholes.

  One can imagine Warren and other progressives replying: “Maybe that is true in a theoretically competitive market, but oil companies and big food companies are not entrepreneurs, but rather are monopolies that regularly manipulate the market to their advantage. Their markets are not competitive, so they are free to set whatever prices they want and name their own profits.”

  While accusations of “market manipulation” by rapacious monopolies are common among progressives, identifying such actions of “manipulation” is difficult. The standard accusation is that these companies manage to keep supplies off the market, thus forcing up the prices of goods. The problem, of course, is identifying specific instances and also properly identifying scenarios in which such “manipulation” actually is possible.

  Take fuel prices, for example. If oil and gas companies were to hold back supplies in order to gain temporary price increases, they quickly would have to release those confiscated supplies back into the market (forcing down prices), as there are no secret storage areas that these companies possess that would enable them to set aside the massive quantities of fuel needed to accomplish what Warren and other progressives accuse oil and gas firms of doing.

  The only way fuel companies can make the kinds of windfall profits that Warren claims they are making is for them to experience either unanticipated surges in demand that overwhelm current supplies or for there to be external events that threaten future supplies and quickly increase the value of those present supplies. As I recently pointed out, the Joe Biden administration is attempting to cripple the oil and gas industries in the future in pursuit of its ill-advised green agenda, and one of the obvious effects of throwing down regulatory roadblocks and dangling criminal charges against fuel company executives for allegedly warming the earth is to ensure that future fuel supplies will be diminished. The upshot of such actions will be to force up the current prices of fuels. As I wrote in that article:

  While some have called this “regulatory overreach,” there is nothing surprising or shocking about this. The Biden administration response to anything it can tie to “climate change” is going to be heavy-handed and expansive, especially since regulators now believe they have been near-divinely appointed to bring better weather to planet Earth.

  The Biden administration’s actions have the effect of forcing up present prices because buyers know that the government’s attempts to cripple these industries will mean severely diminished supplies in the future. Such actions cause the value of current inventories to increase, which in the short term will boost industry profits. Since Warren openly supports the Green New Deal and other such measures, she is partly to blame for higher fuel prices even if she refused to admit she is part of the problem.

  To further emphasize this point, I use Rothbard’s examples to compare the government’s attempts to reduce production of oil and gas with the actions of coffee firms in Latin America to burn part of the year’s harvest to enjoy higher present prices. He writes:

  But is not monopolizing action a restriction of production, and is not this restriction a demonstrably antisocial act? Let us first take what would seem to be the worst possible case of such action: the actual destruction of part of a product by a cartel. This is done to take advantage of an inelastic demand curve and to raise the price to gain a greater monetary income for the whole group. We can visualize, for example, the case of a coffee cartel burning great quantities of coffee.

  In the first place, such actions will surely occur very seldom. Actual destruction of its product is clearly a highly wasteful act, even for the cartel; it is obvious that the factors of production which the growers had expended in producing the coffee have been spent in vain. Clearly, the production of the total quantity of coffee itself has proved to be an error, and the burning of coffee is only the aftermath and reflection of the error. Yet, because of the uncertainty of the future, errors are often made. Man could labor and invest for years in the production of a good which, it may turn out, consumers hardly want at all. If, for example, consumers’ tastes had changed so that coffee would not be demanded by anyone, regardless of price, it would again have to be destroyed, with or without a cartel.

  In the case of fuels, the oil and gas companies are not destroying present supplies or even hiding them in imaginary vaults. Instead, we have a government that does what it can to ensure that future supplies of these fuels will be less available and that firms are on notice that this particular president believes those companies should not even exist. And yet Warren and her colleagues are shocked, SHOCKED, that government-directed reduction of oil and gas supplies means higher present prices for consumers.

  Furthermore, contra Warren, we should expect fuel and commodity prices to rise substantially during periods of deliberate government monetary debasement (better known as inflation), as commodities historically have had wider price swings during periods of inflation and deflation and are very sensitive to changes in the value of the dollar. The markets for commodities like oil and crops are some of the most competitive markets to be found anywhere.

  Unfortunately, those that are most responsible for this current upswing in fuel and food prices are the same ones pointing blame elsewhere. Jacob Hornberger in his blog has noted that the Biden administration is taking a page from the Jimmy Carter administration more than forty years ago, which blamed higher prices on private enterprise. Hornberger writes:

  According to an article in the Washington Post, Biden is “considering whether to escalate an attack on parts of corporate America over rising prices…. The administration would amplify criticisms of large firms in heavily concentrated industries for passing higher prices on to consumers as they benefit from high profits”

  According to the article, “The White House took a step in this direction earlier this week, with Biden urging the Federal Trade Commission to escalate its investigation of anti-competitive behavior in the oil and gas industry, which the president alleged was leading to higher prices for drivers at the pump.”

  Readers like me who were adults during that time might remember that many in Congress and the media were calling for full nationalization of the oil industry, and that progressives of that era claimed (as they do now) that oil markets were not subject to ordinary laws of economics. That we have seen these things disproven over the past four decades means little to political, media, and academic elites who spew the same economic nonsense as they did in the 1970s.

  The explanations given by Austrians at that time, such as Murray Rothbard, still hold true today. We are seeing the natural results of massive monetary manipulation that dwarfs anything the Federal Reserve System and its government allies saw in the late 1970s and a new generation of progressives such as Elizabeth Warren are dusting off the old playbook and, with the help of elites of the mainstream media and academe, are spreading the old economic nonsense all the while destroying the fundamentals of a market economy. One likens them to the Bourbons of early nineteenth-century France after they were restored to power after the turmoil of the French Revolution and the Napoleon years. The French statesman Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand wrote of them, “Ils n’ont rien appris, ni rien oublié.” They have learnt nothing, and forgotten nothing.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 19:00

• Dalio: "Dangerously High Risk" Of Civil War In America
  Dalio: “Dangerously High Risk” Of Civil War In America

  While he may be willfully blind (or worse?) to China’s human rights abuses (stoking a sharp rebuke from the likes of Mitt Romney), when it comes to domestic matters Billionaire Ray Dalio thinks there’s a “dangerously high risk” of civil war in the United States within the next decade due to an “exceptional amount of polarization” in the country.

  

  In his new book, “Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order: Why Nations Succeed and Fail,” Dalio points to the six stages of an internal order/disorder cycle – and estimates that there’s a 30% chance of civil war.

  “For example, when close elections are adjudicated and the losers respect the decisions, it is clear that the order is respected. When power is fought over and grabbed, that clearly signals the significant risk of a revolutionary change with all its attendant disorder,” he writes, adding that “a vast number of people – including high-ranking officials, have openly doubted the validity of recent elections, and have expressed a willingness to fight for their beliefs.”

  Dalio also points to various studies showing that Americans are currently in an emotionally charged divide between political parties, according to RT. In one recent survey noted by Dalio, 15% of Republicans and 20% of Democrats thought the country would be better if the opposing political party “just died.”

  

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 18:40

• World Health Organization Says "No Evidence" Booster Jabs Would Offer "Greater Protection" To The Healthy
  World Health Organization Says “No Evidence” Booster Jabs Would Offer “Greater Protection” To The Healthy

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

  The World Health Organization has questioned the UK government’s decision to roll out hundreds of millions of booster jabs to its population, asserting there is “no evidence” they would offer “greater protection” to the healthy.

  

  UK Health Secretary Sajid Javid’s says the country has secured an additional 114 million vaccine doses for 2022 and 2023 to “buy time” and that everyone over the age of 18 will be offered one by the end of January.

  Dr. Mike Ryan, head of the WHO’s emergencies program, questioned the logic behind this decision.

  “Right now, there is no evidence that I’m aware of that would suggest that boosting the entire population would necessarily provide any greater protection for otherwise healthy individuals against hospitalization and death,” he said.

  Ryan also noted that the UK was in a “luxurious position” of being able to offer booster shots to its entire population given that many poorer countries don’t even have even vaccines to give all their people one dose.

  UK medical authorities have also seized upon the Omicron variant to insist that more children receive vaccines.

  This is odd given that the variant has become noted for only causing “mild” symptoms in younger populations.

  Experts argue that dismissing Omicron as “mild” is dangerous because South Africa has a very young population (average age 27) and we don’t know how it will impact older people.

  They then say the solution is to vaccinate more younger people.

  Makes total sense.

  *  *  *

  Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

  In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 18:35

• Leapfrogging Legacy Banking To A Bitcoin Standard
  Leapfrogging Legacy Banking To A Bitcoin Standard

  Authored by Mitch Klee via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  How looking at the history of technological adoption can give us insights into where Bitcoin could be embraced the fastest…

  

  INTRO

  Throughout time, technology has proven to change our lives by leveraging efficiencies in energy. New ways in how we hunt have saved time and energy for innovation and to live more intentionally. Currently, Bitcoin presents an immense opportunity to change the lives of those who are burdened by old forms of manipulated money and preserve their time and energy. It is the first self-sovereign, programmable money that is proving to destroy expectations of every “expert” imaginable. At the intersection of money and technology, Bitcoin’s network effect is spreading like a mind virus to all corners of the globe. This is not a coincidence but the manifestation of a zero to one moment; a radical new technology that will change nearly everything it touches.

  This article explores the idea that some regions and nations have a higher susceptibility to adoption in new monetary networks. Specifically, I will outline how the unbanked populations of emerging countries can leapfrog legacy systems, straight into a new monetary standard. But first, let’s lay the groundwork for understanding how this can happen with some concepts.

  DEMOCRATIZATION OF TECHNOLOGY

  To understand leapfrogging, let’s first look into something that naturally happens when humans produce technology: the democratization of technology. As we make technology, the cost reduces, while the ease of production increases. Our tools get better, people’s skills improve, securing the material for production gets easier, logistics improve, and everything is less costly as humans continue increasing the output/yield over time. Simply put, cost goes down, while production goes up.

  

  Figure 1.

  A great example is the printing press. Before this innovation, each book had to be typed out or written one by one and distributed almost by osmosis. This means books were more expensive and were only in the hands of the few. After the printing press, people were able to automate a portion of the process by creating blueprints of the books. This cut down labor costs, and there was a huge explosion in printed material. This may have put people out of work; but it also introduced better dissemination of information to a wider group of people and new opportunities to produce more books for less cost and effort.

  Another example is photography. Historically, taking photos on film took hours to produce in a dark room. The film had to be brought to a local expert and it would take several days to get back the finished product. Smartphones and photoshop technology made this essentially free. It was then possible to download an app or use the built-in app on smartphones, take pictures, and immediately process them. Democratization of technology has been happening across every single aspect of human society since the beginning of time. Humans create tools to make it easier and cheaper to survive. Each tool becomes better, we then expand and evolve with less energy improving the quality of life.

  Fast-forward to the internet age. Emerging countries are just now tapping into the power of the internet. Although there are many factors underlying the reasons for expansion, one thing that is known is that technology builds on itself, making each successive technology easier to produce. Not only is there growth, but there is exponential growth. Certain times throughout history, technology has made such a large leap forward that it allows extremely poor countries to skip the legacy technology and quickly adopt the new one. This is called leapfrogging.

  LEAPFROGGING EXPLAINED

  Leapfrogging is when the cost to produce one technology is too great for a population, so when a new, drastically cheaper technology is created it’s quickly adopted and the old tech is skipped. This is the coexistence and benefit of separate populations within society. Let’s look at the mobile phone revolution as a way to explain leapfrogging. Some societies did not have the wealth or infrastructure to adopt landlines and phone communication when it was brand new, but when the mobile phone was introduced, this gave mostly everyone around the world the ability to opt-in.

  

  Figure 2. Landlines in the U.S., 1900–2019.

  Figure 2 shows the number of landlines in the U.S. population from the 1900s to 2019. Throughout the entirety of the 20th century, the landline was being adopted in the U.S. Consequently it only took a decade to dethrone this old technology. The decline started when the benefit of cell phones outweighed the cost compared to landlines. This is where democratization hit the tipping point and we saw a huge jump from one technology to the next. Now it’s extremely cheap to use technology that is 100 times or even 1,000 times more advanced than the previous. Mobile phones usurped landlines because they were more affordable, easier to use and more mobile. Figure 2 shows how quickly a society can adopt a technology that has significantly more benefits than the previous, even in an advanced society.

  A similar thing is happening with television and the internet. Netflix came out and disrupted how people consume media on the television. As more platforms emerged, and people realized they could pay a fraction of the cost for a Netflix subscription rather than $100 for cable and a bunch of commercials, the switch was easy. Legacy systems were bogged down by all of the brick-and-mortar stores and overhead costs. They could not compete and pivot quickly enough, so they lost their seat at the table.

  

  Figure 3. Number of telephone subscriptions in the U.S. versus worldwide.

  When comparing fixed telephone subscriptions to other countries, the U.S. was way ahead of most. Many factors were contributing to this. Wealth played a huge part, but much of it was the production and first movers’ advantage. The U.S. was the first country to set up telephone lines from Boston to Somerville Massachusetts and expanded from there. Other countries did not have this opportunity, so they were laggards in the technology simply by default. It also made it easy to have a grid to run on top of, being a technologically advanced country with a power grid. Because it was so resource-heavy to set up this grid, this took over 30 years to build up the infrastructure.

  

  Figure 4. Landline subscriptions compared to GDP per capita, 2019.

  One of the main reasons why it was so hard to increase telephone subscriptions in other countries is because of the initial cost. You can’t just tap into a telephone line, there needs to be a large grid, infrastructure and companies/governments willing to build out this grid. Figure 4 shows that there is a rough line at a GDP per capita of $5,000 to get off zero and start communicating via landline. As the GDP per capita grows in a country, it is more likely they adopt fixed landlines. This is a huge barrier to entry as they try and compete to be a part of the 21st century. With telephones, it brings an easier flow of information across long distances quickly. These are important technologies that helped first-world countries advance quicker than their counterparts. This technology could mean the difference between surviving and thriving in the modern era.

  

  Figure 5. Mobile phone subscriptions versus GDP per capita, 2019.

  Things get much different when you start looking at mobile phones in Figure 5. To have a mobile phone is drastically cheaper than having a landline, all costs considered. Before, you needed the infrastructure and everything that came with installing a landline phone. But with mobile phones, even at a GDP per capita of less than $1,000, you get ~50% penetration of adoption within the population. All of the countries that were left out of communication with landlines, now have leapfrogged the old technology, right into a new standard of mobile phones.

  People benefit, businesses benefit and countries benefit immensely from these technologies. With mobile communication, people have higher leverage over their energy output. Businesses and life in general are more efficient, in turn creating a higher GDP for the country. It is a feedback loop that is good for all of humanity. When one group of people creates new technology, everyone benefits at one point or another.

  FROM LANDLINES TO MOBILE PHONES TO INTERNET-CONNECTED SMARTPHONES

  Not only are poorer countries leapfrogging into mobile phone communication, but they are, in turn, jumping right into the internet age. On top of that, (Android) smartphone costs are dropping significantly every year, with the average cost down by 50% from 2008 to 2016. With the growing ability to connect with the rest of the world comes more opportunities to learn and grow with the rest of the world. An incredible amount of information is available on the internet, and the benefit of being on the network is immeasurable.

  

  Figure 6. Mobile versus landline subscriptions, worldwide, 1960–2019.

  When comparing the numbers of mobile phone users to the numbers of landlines, you get a huge disparity in the pace at which they were adopted. Fixed landlines were around for almost 50 years before they started to see some real competition. Thinking back to our Figure 5, this makes sense, because the cost to build infrastructure is drastically higher than that of mobile phones. The opportunity a landline brought to civilization was immense, but the cost-effective mobility of cell phones transcends previous communication technology by a longshot.

  As of September 2021, the world’s population was ~7.89 billion people. Of that, there are 10.5 billion cell phones with network connections. That is 2.52 billion more activated phones than there are people. This becomes thought-provoking when adoption data starts to reveal where mobile phones are headed next.

  As people adopt mobile phones, smartphones are becoming cheaper and more abundant. The cost of production for smartphones is less and less each year, and soon there will be little reason to have a cell phone without internet connection because the cost difference will be so minuscule. Smartphone abundance is allowing people around the world to tap into the internet and it is estimated that “by 2025, 72% of all internet users will solely use smartphones to access the web.”

  

  Figure 7. Share of the population using the internet, 1990–2019.

  Currently, the world is in a transitionary period of communication. Not all of the world has access to the internet, only 65%, with an increasingly rapid pace of adoption. Because it is so inexpensive to get a mobile phone, and the benefits are immense, the world is being onboarded at an incredible rate.

  To answer the question “What is Leapfrogging?” we can look directly at mobile phones. But it’s not just one leapfrog, it’s more of a continuous onboarding to the digital revolution for the entire human population. Things are getting cheaper, and technology is moving exponentially forward, toward a more connected future. Soon, everyone will have access to the internet and will bring about new and exciting opportunities for the world to grow. With the high rate of adoption in communication technology, mobile phones swept across low-GDP countries allowing information to spread. Smartphones are a small hop away from mobile phones. With smartphones comes all sorts of opportunities not to mention the connection to the world’s internet. In developing countries, the internet is starting to hit its hockey stick moment. Adoption continues to grow and as smartphones get cheaper, more people in the world have access to the internet, connecting them to their local and global economies and new innovations will come about in unforeseen ways.

  This begs the question, what monetary network will they use to transact in the digital age? It’s taken years to get the legacy banking system up to speed. We’ve bootstrapped and “Frankensteined” many different ways to connect the internet to a centuries-old banking infrastructure, but these newly onboarded countries have the opportunity to skip that altogether. With no legacy banking infrastructure rooted within the nation, this leaves the door wide open for a new legacy.

  LEAPFROGGING ONTO A BITCOIN STANDARD

  It seems the stage is set for a paradigm shift. A perfect storm is brewing in populations that lack bank accounts and access to store their wealth. Coupling this with connection to the internet, and 21st-century e-commerce and monetary system, it is impossible for countries not to adopt it. Because bitcoin is a global asset with no intermediaries, its infrastructure is inherently global. Any improvements to the network, the entire world will benefit automatically without having to update the old tech. Unlike landlines, there is no infrastructure to build, and the barrier to entry is almost zero. You just opt in with a bit of hardware and an internet connection.

  As of 2017, according to the World Bank, there are 1.7 billion adults in the world without a basic transacting account. Most of these countries with higher rates of unbanked are poor, have high rates of inflation and lower currency stability, not to mention a disconnected state government ripe with problems. This is extremely common when looking at currencies in other low-GDP countries. So, what are some of the biggest factors in which people would want or need to adopt Bitcoin? If we can answer this question, then maybe we can quantify and pinpoint which countries have the biggest opportunity and most to gain from adopting a Bitcoin standard.

  

  Figure 8. World’s most unbanked countries (Source).

  Figure 8 shows the top-10 most unbanked countries as of February 2021. The Oxford dictionary defines “unbanked” as “not having access to the services of a bank or similar financial organization.” Much like building the infrastructure for landlines, it’s expensive to build banks and serve the local economy. Not to mention, many of the people living in these countries don’t have the amount of money that would warrant the cost of owning a bank account. Some even share bank accounts with members of their families to save on costs. There is a huge opportunity to solve the problem of banking in low-GDP countries, but many of the digital banking companies around the world are constrained by regulation and geographical jurisdiction. It may be hard to grasp the importance of a bank account having never lived without one, but without a bank, citizens cannot secure funds safely. Without secure funds, the future is uncertain. This is where Bitcoin can solve some of the problems in these less developed and emerging countries. There are three specific ways in which these problems could be solved.

  1. Bank the Unbanked

  Bitcoin gives everyone the ability to be their own bank with something as little as a cell phone. All that’s needed is to be connected to the network and accept funds. The smartphone does all of this. It allows people to download a bitcoin wallet, connect to the internet and start transacting. There are many ways in which one can use this wallet. Coincidentally, the countries above who have low banking numbers within their population, also have mobile phones and high internet penetration. This is an open door from a technological standpoint, allowing people to opt into Bitcoin and secure their funds digitally.

  In addition to using the Bitcoin network to transact on your phone, you can also use it as a cold storage solution. Cold storage is similar to a savings account. This savings account or cold storage is disconnected from the internet, making it harder for people to steal your funds. With the old technology of banks, you would have to pay for this solution, but with Bitcoin, it’s free, just download the software and/or buy a hardware wallet. There are some cold storage solutions where you can pay for a hardware device, but creating a phone wallet and securing your keys, gives the people an entry point and on-ramp to storing their wealth in a digital bank.

  2. Securely Store Value Over Time

  The second opportunity is the store of value function. Many of the countries that have unbanked populations and poverty issues are a result of a currency problem. In my previous article, “Bitcoin As A Pressure Release Valve,” I wrote that certain countries have hyperinflated currencies with no option but to turn to the black market. Most of the time, these countries use the U.S. dollar to transact since it holds its value better relative to their currency. Strictly from a monetary standpoint, bitcoin is scarce. It is the most scarce form of money there is. There will only ever be 21 million bitcoin in existence and when the value rises, the production does not increase. This is called elasticity or the lack of elasticity in bitcoin’s case. Unlike fiat money, no government, central bank or agency can print more. And unlike gold, silver or any other commodity, when the demand rises, the amount that is mined stays the same. The first completely inelastic asset in existence is a result of preprogrammed architecture, with consensus in the network that’s default is to not change the protocol.

  People that live in countries where the money is known to be manipulated, understand Bitcoin almost immediately. When the idea of something that can’t be manipulated is presented, the concept of scarcity and 21 million is understood. With the reality of incorruptible money, the current regime in power can’t stuff their pockets without alienating the population through force. These people understand this idea because they have experienced it firsthand. When food prices rise faster than people can spend a weekly budget on groceries, it is immediately apparent the importance of a completely scarce, un-manipulatable asset.

  In developed countries with low levels of unbanked, people have ways of storing their wealth. They have a 401k and IRA, and most people own property. This is a way of storing value over time. It may not be completely efficient, but it is sufficient enough to escape some level of inflation. The alternative would be to keep your dollars in a savings account, and the real yield of that is negative and not a smart way to store money. These countries put money in financial devices, because it is the smart thing to do and it preserves time and energy. Unbanked countries have no way of storing long-term value. It is degraded and evaporated through manipulation and high levels of money printing. Emerging countries cannot store time and value into financial instruments. There is no Apple stock or S&P 500 to put money into. They are stuck with low levels of wealth that are stolen away on an ever-moving treadmill. There is no way of truly saving value or energy spent over time.

  For the first time, Bitcoin gives the world, particularly those in emerging countries, the ability to hold their value in a closed system that cannot be inflated. Much like the opportunity the mobile phone brought to change communication, bitcoin is the first “store of value” that is available for low-GDP countries to buy and hold. It allows them to securely transfer their wealth over time, without fear of inflation or confiscation. Add on top of that, if they need to transfer wealth out of the country and flee an oppressive regime, bitcoin is the first asset that gives the ability to do so. Large amounts of gold cannot be taken on a plane or property and homes cannot be transferred to another country. Bitcoin gives people the freedom to do what they want with their earned value, without fear of a centralized power removing it. Bitcoin preserves the fundamental human right of property.

  3. Connection to the Digital Economy

  The third problem Bitcoin solves is connecting and transacting digitally. Being a digitally native asset, bitcoin smooths the rails of commerce allowing low-GDP countries to join the 21st century of commerce. This is huge, and what cell phones did for communication, digital commerce will do the same. It immensely increases our ability to transact and exchange value. Bitcoin allows anyone, anywhere, to join a digital transacting network and exchange value natively over the internet, whether in person or without knowing them at all.

  Digital economies move at the speed of light, while old-school economies move at the speed of osmosis. This brings more time and efficiency for people on both ends of the transaction. Businesses spend less time on transactions, widen their addressable market, and start putting more time and effort into other things that can improve their work. It is the difference between transacting daily in cash and using a preprogrammed point of sales system. It is simply better.

  Not only does Bitcoin make things easier and frees up more time, but it is programmable money. Like the internet, Bitcoin can be built in layers. Each layer brings a new way to use it that widens the possibilities and use cases. What the internet did for communication, Bitcoin will do for money.

  Combining all three of these factors, you get a massive magnetic pull toward adoption of the new technology. It is hard to slow the movement of technological adoption and impossible to stop. Like throwing a match on a tinder-filled hillside, years of opportunity build up in countries that lack technology where innovation and adoption prepare to explode at the right moment.

  QUANTIFYING BITCOIN ADOPTION IN LOW-GDP COUNTRIES

  

  Figure 9. LocalBitcoins and Paxful Vietnamese dong (VND) combined volume in Vietnam (Source).

  Looking at every one of the top-10 countries from Figure 8, they all have meaningful adoption in Bitcoin and it is growing every week. Not only is Vietnam number two on the unbanked list, but it is also number one on the “Chainalysis 2021 Global Adoption Ranking.” In fact, looking at Figure 10 of adoption through LocalBitcoins and Paxful, USD volume shows that every one of the countries in the top-10 list of unbanked have meaningful adoption.

  

  Figure 10. LocalBitcoins and Paxful Vietnamese dong (VND) combined volume.

  What does this tell us about Bitcoin adoption in unbanked countries? It tells us that it’s working. Continuing to see these trends improve will be good for Bitcoin adoption and not to mention the countries in which they are adopting it. All the ingredients are there. Most are unbanked with high internet access and an unreliable currency that isn’t natively digital. All you need is time for the adoption to take hold.

  There are also some concerns that come up when thinking about Bitcoin adoption. Like, “How can they adopt bitcoin when it is so volatile?” Well, there are a few solutions to this problem. The first is that when a population has no choice, something as volatile as bitcoin could mean the difference between losing 30% or losing 90% over the span of one year. Keep in mind that bitcoin is already solving three of the major problems listed above, we are just remedying the problem of volatility.

  First, look at just bitcoin and its use cases today. For some countries, their currency is just as volatile if not more volatile than bitcoin. Not only that, but it is volatile to the downside, continuing to lose value as the government steals and prints away spent time and energy. If bitcoin were to be used, sure it might be volatile, but this volatility is either short lived, or it’s to the upside.

  Now look at bitcoin while using it for everyday transactions through Strike, as a more technical solution. This solution is currently available now in El Salvador as a test case and is starting to roll out to more and more countries. People use the Bitcoin and Lightning rails every single day but transact in USD, choosing to either save in bitcoin or not. This solution gives the best of both worlds. One, a population has the ability to transact short term in a currency that isn’t volatile, like other emerging countries. Two, this gives access to the payment rails of Bitcoin and the ability to save in the most scarce asset in existence. Looking back historically, bitcoin has grown at a 200% compound annual growth rate and this has the opportunity to conserve and grow wealth immensely. For someone in a developing world, this is life changing.

  As this trend of adoption in underbanked countries continues, new and exciting ways where Bitcoin is used will emerge. For the first time in history, countries have the ability to store wealth in something that cannot be stolen. It gives the opportunity to transact freely without the permission of the state or government, and it allows people to break free from imposed serfdom. Bitcoin is here and it is only getting bigger. There is a change in the tides of time, and Bitcoin is a once-in-a-millennia technology that is pulling the shores.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 18:20

• Russia's Lavrov Warns Blinken Of Return To Military Confrontation "Nightmare"
  Russia’s Lavrov Warns Blinken Of Return To Military Confrontation “Nightmare”

  On Friday top Ukraine officials continued sounding the alarm over what they believe is a large-scale mustering of Russian troops aimed at prepping an invasion of eastern Ukraine. 

  “Our intelligence analyses all scenarios, including the worst,” Ukraine’s defense minister, Oleksii Reznikov, told parliament on Friday. “It notes that the likelihood of a large-scale escalation from Russia exists. The most likely time to reach readiness for an escalation will be the end of January.” He said more than 94,000 Russian soldiers have massed across the border. 

  

  The charge comes two days after Moscow turned the accusation around, saying that it’s actually Kiev that has now stationed half the entire national army in Donbass. The Kremlin called Ukraine’s rhetoric and actions “excessively inflamed and dangerous”, and suggested the flurry of ratcheting allegations this week are designed to provoke Russia.

  US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Thursday said in Stockholm that Western allies have expressed “tremendous solidarity” to take action in the event of a Russian offensive in Ukraine.

  Given this atmosphere of escalating accusations and fears of direct confrontation, the Russian foreign ministry is urging immediate deconfliction. Likely there will be engagement between the Pentagon and Russian defense officials. Over a week ago, on Nov.23, the heads of the Russian and United States militaries held a rare phone call in efforts to deescalate the soaring tensions in eastern Europe.

  In his latest comments Friday, Russian FM Sergey Lavrov asserted that NATO is refusing calls to de-escalate the crisis: 

  “NATO refuses to consider our proposals on de-escalation of tensions and prevention of dangerous incidents,” Lavrov said, accusing the US-led bloc of rejecting constructive discussion.

  “On the contrary, the alliance’s military infrastructure is moving closer to Russia’s borders… The nightmarish scenario of military confrontation is returning.”

  Blinken and Lavrov separated by about 25 feet and a large flower arrangement. pic.twitter.com/RypogEMcAC

  — Nick Wadhams (@nwadhams) December 2, 2021

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

  He actually met with Blinken on the sidelines of conference of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), held in Sweden:

  At a European security conference in Sweden, Mr Lavrov floated the idea of a new European security pact to try to stop Nato from expanding further east.

  US Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned of “serious consequences” if Russia sought conflict with Ukraine.

  Moscow has repeatedly denied that it’s preparing any kind of military offensive against Ukraine. It’s leader have said that troop movements within its own sovereign borders shouldn’t be cause for any other country’s concern. 

  Meanwhile, Russia remains on edge while again finding itself in the international spotlight of the West’s accusations: “As tensions rise, Russia said on Thursday it had arrested three suspected Ukrainian security service agents,” BBC reported of the latest incident. “One of the three was accused of planning a terrorist attack, while the other two had been seeking to gather intelligence, Russia’s Federal Security Service said.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Escobar: The NATOstan Clown Show
  Escobar: The NATOstan Clown Show

  Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Saker blog,

  American hysteria over the “imminent” Russian invasion of Ukraine has exploded every geopolitical Stupid-o-Meter in sight – and that’s quite an accomplishment.

  What a mess. Sections of the U.S. Deep State are in open revolt against the combo that remote controls Crash Test Dummy, who impersonates POTUS. The neocon-neoliberal axis is itching for a war – but has no idea how to sell it to an immensely fractured public opinion.

  

  UKUS, which de facto controls the Five Eyes spy scam, excels only in propaganda.

  So in the end it’s up to the CIA/MI6 intel axis and their vast network of media chihuahuas to accelerate Fear and Loathing ad infinitum.

  Russophobic U.S. Think Tankland would very much cherish a Russian “invasion”, out of the blue, and could not give a damn about the inevitable trouncing of Ukraine. The problem is the White House – and the Pentagon – must “intervene”, forcefully; otherwise that will represent a catastrophic loss of “credibility” for the Empire.

  So what do these people want? They want to provoke Moscow by all means available to exercise “Russian aggression”, resulting in a lightning fast war that will be a highway to hell for Ukraine, but with zero casualties for NATO and the Pentagon.

  Then the Empire of Chaos will blame Russia; unleash a tsunami of fresh sanctions, especially financial; and try to shut off all economic links between Russia and NATOstan.

  Reality dictates that none of the above is going to happen.

  All exponents of Russian leadership, starting with President Putin, have already made it clear, over and over again, what happens if the Ukro-dementials start a blitzkrieg over Donbass: Ukraine will be mercilessly smashed – and that applies not only to the ethno-fascist gang in Kiev. Ukraine will cease to exist as a state.

  Defense Minister Shoigu, for his part, has staged all manner of not exactly soft persuasion, featuring Tu-22M3 bombers or Tu-160 White Swan bombers.

  The inestimable Andrei Martyanov has conclusively explained, over and over again, that “NATO doesn’t have forces not only to ‘counter-act’ anything Russia does but even if it wanted to it still has no means to fight a war with Russia.”

  Martyanov notes, “there is nothing in the U.S. arsenal now and in the foreseeable future which can intercept Mach=9-10+, let alone M=20-27, targets. That’s the issue. Same analytical method applies to a situation in 404. The only thing U.S. (NATO) can hope for is to somehow provoke Russia into the invasion of this shithole of a country and then get all SIGINT it can once Russia’s C4ISR gets into full combat mode.”

  Translation: anything the Empire of Chaos and its NATO subsidiary try in Donbass, directly or indirectly, the humiliation will make the Afghanistan “withdrawal” look like a House of Gucci dinner party.

  No one should expect clueless NATO puppets – starting with secretary-general Stoltenberg – to understand the military stakes. After all, these are the same puppets who have been building up a situation which might ultimately leave Moscow with a single, stark choice: be ready to fight a full scale hot war in Europe – which could become nuclear in a flash. And ready they are.

  It’s all about Minsk

  In a parallel reality, “meddling in 404” – a delightful Martyanov reference to a hellhole that is little more than a computer error – is a totally different story. That perfectly fits American juvenilia ethos.

  At least some of the adults in selected rooms are talking. The CIA’s Burns went to Moscow to try to extract some assurance that in the event NATO Special Forces were caught in the cauldrons – Debaltsevo 2015-style – that the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, with Russian help, will concoct, they would be allowed to escape.

  His interlocutor, Patrushev, told Burns – diplomatically – to get lost.

  Chief of the General Staff, Gen Valery Gerasimov, had a phone call with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen Mark Milley, ostensibly to ensure, in Pentagonese, “risk-reduction and operational de-confliction”. No substantial details were leaked.

  It remains to be seen how this “de-confliction” will happen in practice when Defense Minister Shoigu revealed U.S. nuclear-capable bombers have been practicing, in their sorties across Eastern Europe, “their ability to use nuclear weapons against Russia”. Shoigu discussed that in detail with Chinese Defense Minister Wei Fenghe: after all the Americans will certainly pull the same stunt against China.

  The root cause of all this drama is stark: Kiev simply refuses to respect the February 2015 Minsk Agreement.

  In a nutshell, the deal stipulated that Kiev should grant autonomy to Donbass via a constitutional amendment, referred to as “special status”; issue a general amnesty; and start a dialogue with the people’s republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.

  Over the years, Kiev fulfilled exactly zero commitments – while the proverbial NATOstan media machine incessantly pounded global opinion with fake news, spinning that Russia was violating Minsk. Russia is not even mentioned in the agreement.

  Moscow in fact always respected the Minsk Agreement – which translates as regarding Donbass as an integral, autonomous part of Ukraine. Moscow has zero interest in promoting regime change in Kiev.

  This charade has come to a point that – diplomatically – is quite unprecedented: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov lost his Taoist patience.

  Lavrov was forced, under the circumstances, to publish 28 pages of correspondence between Moscow on one hand, and Berlin and Paris on the other, evolving around the preparation of a high-level meeting on Ukraine.

  Moscow was in fact calling for one of the central points of the agreement to be implemented: a direct dialogue between Kiev and Donbass. Berlin and Paris said this was unacceptable. So yes: both, for all practical purposes, destroyed the Minsk Agreement. Public opinion across NATOstan has no idea whatsoever this actually happened.

  Lavrov did not mince his words: “I am sure that you understand the necessity of this unconventional step, because it is a matter of conveying to the world community the truth about who is fulfilling, and how, the obligations under international law that have been agreed at the highest level.”

  So it’s no wonder that the leadership in Moscow concluded it’s an absolute waste of time to talk to Berlin and Paris about Ukraine: they lied, cheated – and then blamed Russia. This “decision” at the EU level faithfully mirrors NATO’s campaign of stoking the flames of imminent “Russian aggression” against Ukraine.

  Armchair warriors, unite!

  Across NATOstan, the trademark stupidity of U.S. Think Tankland rules unabated, congregating countless acolytes spewing out the talking points of choice: “relentless Russian subversion”, “thug” Putin “intimidation” of Ukraine, Russians as “predators”, and everything now coupled with “power-hungry China’s war on Western values.”

  Some Brit hack, in a twisted way, actually managed to sum up the overall impotence – and insignificance – by painting Europe as a victim, “a beleaguered democratic island in an anarchic world, which a rising tide of authoritarianism, impunity and international rule-breaking threatens to inundate”.

  The answer by NATOstan Defense Ministers is to come up with a Strategic Compass – essentially an anti-Russia-China scam – complete with “rapid deployment forces”. Led by who, General Macron?

  As it stands, poor NATOstan is uncontrollably sobbing, accusing those Russian hooligans – scary monsters, to quote David Bowie – of staging an anti-satellite missile test and thus “scorning European safety concerns”.

  Something must have got lost in translation. So here’s what happened: Russia conclusively demonstrated it’s capable of obliterating each and every one of NATO’s satellites and blind “all their missiles, planes and ships, not to mention ground forces” in case they decide to materialize their warmongering ideas.

  Obviously those deaf, dumb and blind NATOstan armchair warrior clowns – fresh from their Afghan “performance” – won’t get the message. But NATOstan anyway was never accused of being partial to reality.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 12/03/2021 – 00:00

• Singapore Power Prices Spike 1,290% As Energy Crisis Emerges 
  Singapore Power Prices Spike 1,290% As Energy Crisis Emerges 

  The global energy crisis continues to worsen with its latest victim Singapore. Power prices in the Southeast Asian country saw a dramatic surge in wholesale power prices. 

  According to Bloomberg, provisional Uniform Singapore Energy Price jumped S$4,499 ($3,293) per megawatt-hour, the highest on record or about a 1,290% jump in the last few days. Just on Tuesday, prices were S$323.61 ($236.60). 

  

  The dramatic price increase in wholesale power reflects the persistent global energy crisis. It doesn’t help when 95% of the country’s electricity is generated by burning natgas. All of the natgas is imported from neighboring countries.

  With the Northern Hemisphere winter just weeks away, Singapore’s electricity prices are likely to remain elevated as natgas demand continues to strengthen across Europe and the rest of Asia, due in part to La Nina conditions producing unseasonably colder trends.

  There’s word that limited gas supply from Indonesia has already resulted in turbine trips, or emergency shutdown of power generation turbines, at some Singapore power plants. 

  Julius Wiratno, deputy for operations at Indonesia oil and gas regulator SKK Migas, told Bloomberg that gas flows from Indonesia to Singapore are at “minimum demand levels” as supply is limited.

  “Almost all of the independent retailers were forced out of the market, leaving a significant number of consumers previously on fixed price tariffs at the mercy of the spot market,” Whistler said.

  Singapore has resorted to bringing back combined-cycle gas turbine capacity in the event of more turbine trips to mitigate a collapse of its power grid. 

  A spike in power prices might not have a tremendous impact on households, considering a majority of them are under fixed-rate contracts. Still, it could unleash pain for companies that tend to be on variable contracts. 

  Considering Singapore’s power grid is mostly powered by natgas, we suspect this is not the last we’ll hear about soaring power prices as winter fast approaches. We first noted the energy crisis was going globale back in September. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 23:40

• How Migrant Surge At The Border Fuels Massive American OD's From Tiny Grains of This Killer Drug
  How Migrant Surge At The Border Fuels Massive American OD’s From Tiny Grains of This Killer Drug

  By Vince Bielski, published originally in RealClearInvestigations.com

  On a September afternoon, Allyssia Solorio wondered why her energetic young brother hadn’t emerged from his bedroom in their Sacramento, Calif., home. When she opened his door, she saw 23-year-old Mikael leaning back on his bed with his legs dangling over the side. She rushed to her brother and shook him, but to no avail. He was dead. A counterfeit pharmaceutical pill laced with illicit fentanyl had killed him.

  Mikael Tirado was one of an estimated 93,331 overdose fatalities in the United States last year – an all-time high. Nearly five times the murder rate, the deadly overdose toll was primarily caused by fentanyl, a highly lethal synthetic opioid. It’s manufactured mostly by Mexican cartels with ingredients imported from China, and then smuggled over the southwestern U.S. border. Fentanyl has been arriving in larger quantities each year since at least 2016.

  The cartels are taking advantage of law enforcement weaknesses and policy failures to smuggle record amounts of the lethal drug into the United States, according to interviews with half a dozen current and former drug and immigration agents. While a lack of screening technology to find contraband at ports of entry and an inept U.S-Mexico campaign to cripple the cartels are longstanding issues, there’s also a new one: the flood of migrants across the border that the Biden administration has done little to stop.

  Former law enforcement officials say the cartels are orchestrating the surge, overwhelming the capacity of agents to pursue drug smugglers. They can freely enter Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California carrying fentanyl while agents are diverted to the time-consuming duty of apprehending and processing migrants.

  Frustrated border agents and their union have been calling on Congress to send reinforcements. But help is not on the way. The administration’s upcoming budget request doesn’t include funding for more Customs and Border Protection agents.

  In September, tensions boiled over after President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris lashed out at agents on horseback in response to videos showing them blocking Haitians crossing the border. Harris compared the incident to the mistreatment of slaves, an inflammatory accusation that the union strongly denied, saying no migrants were hit or hurt.

  The administration is pivoting away from law enforcement and embracing a public health approach to the fentanyl crisis. It has proposed spending $11.2 billion – a huge increase over last year – to expand substance abuse prevention, treatment and recovery services. Fewer addicts would mean fewer deaths from fentanyl.

  But curbing opioid addiction is very challenging. The vast majority of substance abusers avoid treatment, according to researchers, and only about one-third of those receiving long-term medical care fully recover. These success stories, however, will be offset if the supply of fentanyl continues to boom and fuel more addiction.

  “Drug treatment is very important, but you can’t treat someone in the morgue who just died from fentanyl poisoning. It’s too late,” says Derek Maltz, the former director of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s special operations division, which primarily targets cartels.

  “We have to vigorously attack the production labs in Mexico and increase border security on our side.”

  Cartels have turned to fentanyl because the super-potent powder is cheap to produce, making it more profitable than heroin, says Eric Triana, an assistant special agent in charge at the DEA division in New York. Two of Mexico’s most powerful crime groups – the Sinaloa and Jalisco New Generation cartels – manufacture the synthetic drug in rustic clandestine labs. In the U.S., the powder is mixed with heroin to stretch supplies.

  To boost sales, cartels have more recently increased production of counterfeit pharmaceuticals. They are made with fentanyl but labeled to look exactly like legitimate medications such as Percocet, Vicodin and Xanax.

  

  The fake pills, which are promoted and sold on social media platforms as real pharmaceuticals, are priced to sell at a discounted rate of about $20 each. They have brought the dangers of fentanyl to mainstream America, with victims belonging to every age, class and racial group. Nationwide, DEA agents seized an unprecedented 9.5 million fake pills — some portion of that total in every U.S. state in the first nine months of 2021, or more than the last two years combined. That prompted the agency to issue a rare public safety alert in September.

  Fentanyl’s potency – at 50 times the strength of heroin – is what makes it so deadly. Two milligrams, which can fit on the tip of a pencil, can kill. But cartels don’t take precautions to make sure the pills aren’t lethal. DEA analysis found that 40% of the seized pills had a potentially deadly dose.

  “I saw the devastation that heroin brought to Baltimore as a young police officer,” Triana says. “But fentanyl is a more potent deadly threat. It’s frightening.”

  Crime groups have gained complete control of the Mexican side of the 1,950-mile border, directing the flow of both migrants and drugs. The Gulf Cartel runs the region around Brownsville, Texas, and moving west to California, the Cartel of the Northeast, Juarez Cartel and the Sinaloa Cartel have staked out turf, says Victor Avila, a former supervisory special agent with Immigration and Customs Enforcement who specialized in human and narcotics trafficking.

  Diversion Game at the Border

  They operate openly as if they were the Mexican military. Jalisco New Generation Cartel, which has recently expanded operations, even slaps a “CJNG” logo in big letters on its military-style trucks and uniforms as part of a show of force.

  

  The surge of migrants that began in 2019 and accelerated after Biden took office has been a boon to these violent enterprises. The migrants are coming from Eastern Europe and Africa as well as Central and South America, lured partly by the administration’s policy that allows unaccompanied children and families to stay in the states while they apply for asylum, according to border agents who have interviewed them. In addition to paying cartels between about $2,000 and $9,000 each to cross, migrants are also used as decoys in drug smuggling operations.

  Equipped with encrypted communications and satellite technologies, crime organizations are precisely orchestrating the timing and location of the border crossings of large migrant groups as part of a diversion tactic, several officers say. Dozens of agents are forced to leave their posts guarding many miles of the border and at checkpoints on roads to assist with apprehensions of the groups.

  The cartels work with spotters in the Halcon network to identify these wide security gaps along the border and send drug smugglers on foot through them undetected.

  A Call for More Agents

  “The illegal alien flows are so big that the Border Patrol has to leave hundreds of miles of border unprotected,” says Avila. “This absolutely means more fentanyl has been entering the country in the last few years.”

  The smugglers make their way across tough terrain to one of hundreds of stash houses located near roads in the border region. The drugs are then placed in cars and driven through often unguarded checkpoints and across the country.

  Rather than pursue these smugglers, many Border Patrol agents are handling the crush of migrants entering the U.S. They apprehended more than 1.7 million this fiscal year, or six times the 2017 number. (That doesn’t include the hundreds of thousands who got away, according to Border Patrol estimates.) Agents deport most of the single adults. But they have to assist in transporting, processing, housing and feeding the unaccompanied children and families who are placed in border patrol facilities for weeks before they are released into the U.S. to pursue asylum claims.

  In the busiest border areas, such as Texas’ Rio Grande Valley and Del Rio, as many as 30% of agents are pulled from the frontlines to deal with the migrant overflow, says Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council. Texas is trying to fill the security void by deploying hundreds of state troopers and the National Guard in Operation Lonestar, a $1.8 billion effort. They have seized 127 pounds of fentanyl this year through early September.

  The Trump administration was able to tamp down the number of migrants crossing the border by forcing them to remain in Mexico while they applied for asylum. Biden ended that program, calling it inhumane, and the administration is now fighting a court order to reinstate it.

  Judd says as long as Biden’s asylum policy is in place, the Border Patrol, which has about 14,000 field agents covering both coasts and both land borders, needs thousands more to help secure the Southwest flank. Pleas to congressional leaders for help, made by Judd’s union and former Border Patrol chiefs, have gone unheeded.  

  “If you are not going to change the policy, then give me more manpower to stop the drugs,” Judd says. “But Democrats control Congress, and while some of them are fairly good on border security, it isn’t a priority for a majority of them.”

  So far this year, CBP has redeployed 400 agents from the northern and coastal areas to the southern border – not nearly enough to fill the gaps, Judd says.

  In a statement to RealClearInvestigations, a CBP spokesperson said the agency continues to evaluate the need for more agents and pointed to drug busts as evidence of strong enforcement. Border and customs agents seized 10,000 pounds of fentanyl this fiscal year, according to agency data. That’s five times the catch in 2018. But agents say more seizures actually indicates that more of the deadly drug is entering the country since they have only been capturing an estimated 10% to 15% of the total.

  Most of the fentanyl is pouring over the Southwest border at the U.S. ports of entry, particularly in California, a favorite route for smugglers. The challenge for customs agents at the controlled inspection ports in four states is very different than the cat-and-mouse pursuits of the Border Patrol: How to find illegal contraband in vehicles without slowing trade with Mexico worth hundreds of billions of dollars each year.

  The San Ysidro port in California between San Diego and Tijuana is the busiest land border crossing in the Western Hemisphere. The 70,000 vehicle passengers headed north every day through the port have to wait in long lines of traffic for an hour, on average. Nearby, the thousands of commercial trucks that go through the Otay Mesa port daily have even longer waits.

  

  Customs agents are in a fix. They are under pressure to efficiently clear trucks from Mexico carrying fruits, vegetables, electronics and other goods for entry into the U.S. But that priority to avoid costly commercial delays is in constant conflict with the need to stop and search the vehicles for illicit goods.

  More often than not, smugglers get waved through without a search. “Transnational criminal organizations take advantage of the chaos and clutter at the ports of entry that are dealing with so much legitimate trade and travel,” says Victor Manjarrez, a former Border Patrol supervisor and now a security expert at the University of Texas at El Paso.

  Cartels have the confidence to go big at the border. In August, a Mexican tractor-trailer driver attempted to cross at Otay Mesa with 2.8 tons of methamphetamine and fentanyl hidden among plastic household goods. Agents scanned the cargo using an X-ray-like machine and saw what they described as “anomalies” inside the trailer. Then a canine team sniffed out narcotics worth $13 million. It was the largest ever meth bust along the border.

  Customs agents would arrest more smugglers if they were equipped with basic scanning technology used in the huge Otay Mesa seizure. It helps them quickly make better decisions about which vehicles to inspect manually, a process that can take hours. CBP says it has been deploying more large-scale scanners at ports of entry in the last two years.

  Remarkably, only 15% of trucks were scanned at Southwest ports of entry in 2019, according to a CBP report. And less than half of them received any formal inspection because customs agents have to move too rapidly through the snarl of waiting traffic, says Manjarrez.

  Many of the 328 U.S. ports also need to be expanded and modernized to reduce wait times to allow for more inspections. The Biden administration is asking Congress for $660 million for upgrades, or enough to improve only a handful of the old ports. Otay Mesa’s $144 million expansion plan alone would absorb almost a quarter of this new funding. “It’s really only a down payment for what is needed,” Manjarrez says.

  ‘Hugs, Not Bullets’ in Mexico

  More agents and technology would “absolutely make a bigger dent” in the flow of fentanyl over the border, Manjarrez says, but not stop it. Agents say Mexico also has to begin targeting the hundreds of cartel production labs to further cut the supply.

  “Destroying the labs has to be a top priority because, without them, the cartels can’t continue to kill our kids,” says Maltz, the former DEA organized crime specialist.

  But President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador ended Mexico’s military campaign against cartel leaders two years ago. Soldiers captured and killed many kingpins, but the crackdown also unleashed a reign of violence that Lopez Obrador pledged to blunt.

  The populist president is pushing his “hugs, not bullets” agenda to reduce poverty in the hope that it will eventually curb the appeal of drug smuggling. Meanwhile, the cartels, facing little government resistance, have continued to expand their hold on territory and corrupt lawmakers, according to Vanda Felbab-Brown, a scholar focusing on nonstate armed actors at the Brookings Institution.

  The clout of the cartels was made clear in 2020 when U.S. agents arrested a former Mexican defense secretary for taking bribes to protect the ultraviolent H-2 Cartel. Outraged officials pressured the U.S. to return Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda to Mexico where prosecutors promptly exonerated him.

  The more lasting damage to drug enforcement came when Mexico passed a law in response to Cienfuegos’ arrest. Maltz says it froze DEA’s operations in Mexico by requiring agents to pass sensitive intelligence through a central foreign affairs office that they believe is corrupt.  

  “The cartels control Mexico. All of it,” says Avila, the former ICE agent who survived gunshot wounds in an ambush with a cartel. “They are running a parallel government.”

  The U.S. Plays Nice

  With the U.S. drug enforcement imperiled, Felbab-Brown has called on the Biden administration to “get tough” with Mexico. In January she urged the administration to use financial support as leverage to compel Mexico to target mid-level cartel operatives and their corrupt government protectors to avoid the bloodshed that comes with taking down bosses.

  But the State Department is taking a conciliatory position, essentially backing Lopez Obrador’s economic development strategy in an agreement between the two countries announced in early October.

  

  At a joint press conference, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the countries had relied too much on security forces to try to weaken the cartels. Over the past decade the U.S. has spent $3 billion to arm and train the Mexican military and police as part of the Merida Initiative. During that time, drug trafficking into the U.S. increased. A new agreement will replace Merida, making job creation in poor communities and drug treatment and prevention top priorities, Blinken said.

  The countries did agree to pursue the cartels, particularly by curtailing the illegal supply of U.S. arms into Mexico and money laundering activities. But the prosecution of cartel members isn’t the priority. Mexico Foreign Secretary Marcelo Ebrard said the success of the agreement won’t be measured by how many drug lords go to jail.  

  The administration’s strategy has plenty of backers in the criminal justice and public health professions. “I’m sympathetic to the argument that Mexico is on the border with the largest consumer of fentanyl and cocaine in the world,” says Bryce Pardo, a drug policy specialist at Rand Corp. “We could do more to reduce our insatiable appetite for drugs.”

  In the meantime, more fentanyl smuggled into the U.S. means more deaths. Triana, the DEA special agent, estimates that the number of overdose fatalities this year will either be on par with or exceed 2020’s.

  Allyssia Solorio, the sister of the Sacramento man who died from fentanyl, has become an activist to raise awareness of the dangers of the illicit drug. The former postal worker says law enforcement must play a larger role.

  “President Biden can do a lot more to shut down the smuggling of fentanyl over the Mexican border,” she says.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 23:20

• New York Crime Figures Return To "The Bad Old Days Of The 1980s"
  New York Crime Figures Return To “The Bad Old Days Of The 1980s”

  A few days ago, we reported that Philadelphia, the City of Brotherly Love, had reported its 500th murder of the year in a case of domestic violence.

  But Philadelphia isn’t the only major American city grappling with a surge in violence. NYC, Philadelphia’s coastal neighbor, has also seen a surge in violent crime in the nearly two years since the start of the pandemic, as we have repeatedly reported.

  Outgoing Mayor Bill de Blasio seems more than happy to let his successor, Mayor-elect Eric Adams, a former police officer and Brooklyn Borough President, deal with the city’s new crime problem. But as overall crime has continued to rise after last year’s surge (while murders have declined only slightly from last year’s extremely elevated rate), a gruesome stabbing in Brooklyn has captured the city’s attention.

  40-year-old Ernest Diaz was found dead late last week outside the lobby of an apartment building on 99th Street in the neighborhood of Bay Ridge. Surveillance footage was enough for police investigating the killing to arrest 56-year-old Vitor Bauza, who was charged Saturday with murder and criminal possession of a weapon.

  Diaz reportedly lived with Bauza, who initially fled the scene, before turning himself in to the police the following day.

  Brooklyn Supreme Court Judge Edgar Walker ordered Bauza to be held without bail until his next court appearance on December 3. Speaking outside of a Brooklyn courthouse on Sunday, Bauza’s lawyer Arthur Aidala confirmed that his client had known Diaz ‘for a very, very long time,’ and called the gruesome murder ‘an aberration’ and ‘so out of character for him.

  CCTV video of the attack was posted online by the Daily Mail:

  Prab Singh, 31, who runs a liquor store nearby, told the New York Daily News that Diaz exited the apartment building naked and covered in blood after being stabbed in the foyer.

  “I looked outside and the guy was just sitting at the front door covered in blood, just red all over,” Singh said. “One of our clients called the police and ran to help him and bring him back inside, but was unsuccessful when she tried to move him.” ‘came out from the apartment building naked.’

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 23:00

• Iran Hails "Fruitful" Vienna Nuclear Talks; Israel Asks Biden To Urgently Suspend Dialogue
  Iran Hails “Fruitful” Vienna Nuclear Talks; Israel Asks Biden To Urgently Suspend Dialogue

  Four days into restarted nuclear deal talks in Vienna, and Iran’s top negotiator, Ali Baqeri-Kani, has issued a rare positive statement Thursday saying that discussions have so far been “fruitful”. Despite complaints alleging that outside entities – Israel in particular – are attempting to “poison” the possibility of reaching a restored Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Baqeri-Kani said the Islamic Republic is determined to see a deal materialize. 

  The top Iranian diplomat said he had “fruitful discussions with Grossi aimed at continuation of technical cooperation between Iran and IAEA” – in reference to the head of the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, Rafael Mariano Grossi. However, he emphasized “now the ball is in the court of the Americans. The Americans must remove the sanctions.”

  

  The Iranian side has still stuck firmly to its up-front demand of immediate US sanctions relief, pointing out that it was the US that unilaterally broke the deal under Trump starting in 2018. Baqeri-Kani was cited in state media and international reports further as confirming “the resolute intention of Iran to actively and positively engage in the talks in Vienna.”

  But Biden administration officials are still expressing deep skepticism, after the recently installed Ebrahim Raisi government was accused of stalling talks which had been off for months since mid-summer, with the charge being it was in order to buy more time to covertly ramp up nuclear development and uranium enrichment.

  Israeli leaders especially have charged Tehran with using the Vienna process as a “cover” to make advances toward nuclear weapons – something which Iran has vehemently rejected. On Thursday Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett told Secretary of State Tony Blinken in a phone call that the Iranian nuclear talks should be immediately halted. 

  While Israel has long been on record as opposing any restored JCPOA deal, this is the first time it’s openly and directly urged the White House to not even enter talks:

  “Iran is engaged in nuclear blackmail as a negotiation tactic — this must lead to an immediate suspension of the talks in Vienna and to harsh retaliation steps by the world powers,” Bennett told Blinken, according to a statement from his office.

  #Israel‘s prime minister told @SecBlinken today, “#Iran is carrying out nuclear blackmail as a negotiating tactic, and this should be answered by the immediate halt to negotiations and the implementation of tough steps by the world powers.”https://t.co/tgDgEJcNlY

  — Jason Brodsky (@JasonMBrodsky) December 2, 2021

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

  Perhaps because of this renewed Israeli pressure, Blinken has been cautious in his assessments: “I have to tell you,” he began from the sidelines of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), “recent moves, recent rhetoric, don’t give us a lot of cause for optimism.”

  He added in the fresh statements: “But even though the hour is getting very late, it is not too late for Iran to reverse course”, referencing that Iran remains in breach of uranium enrichment caps and other steps it took after the US pulled out and ramped up the sanctions pressure.

  “In the very near future, the next day or so, we will be in a position to judge whether Iran actually intends now to engage in good faith,” Blinken added.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 22:40

• Goldman Offering "Burnt Out" Employees New Benefits, Including Sabbatical And Paid Bereavement Leave
  Goldman Offering “Burnt Out” Employees New Benefits, Including Sabbatical And Paid Bereavement Leave

  The latest chapter in the “do anything to make our bankers happy so they don’t quit and/or make another public slide deck” saga comes from the halls of Goldman Sachs.

  The bank is reportedly implementing new worker benefits in order to combat employee burnout, according to a new report from the Wall Street Journal.

  It’s part of a continued push to retain employees at a time when the nation is facing a historic labor shortage and power has shifted to the workers in many industries.

  The investment bank is going to now be offering “paid leave for pregnancy loss” and is “expanding the amount of time employees can take for bereavement leave,” the report says.

  Goldman will also be offering unpaid sabbatical for its long time employees and removing a one year waiting period before matching employee 401(k) contributions.

  Goldman’s head of human resources, Bentley de Beyer, told the WSJ: “We wanted to offer a compelling value proposition to current and prospective employees, and wanted to make sure we’re leading, not just competing.”

  Peter Cappelli, director of the Center for Human Resources at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, commented: “Taking a sabbatical is not the kind of thing that super-engaged executives do.” But, he says, it might help give employees “peace of mind” to have, even if they don’t use it. 

  But while some banks are still coddling their employees, others are starting to pump the brakes. Recall, just days ago we wrote that Morgan Stanley executives were pushing their junior bankers to get back into the office. 

  

  Chris O’Dea, a Morgan Stanley managing director, said on a conference call to employees last week: “If you’re 21 to 35, you are nuts not to be in the office all the time.”

  Executives at the bank are pushing for their younger employees to ditch Zoom in favor of suiting up like the old days and getting into the office, the NY Post reported this week. 

  Gorman said earlier this year he would be “disappointed” if staff wasn’t back at their desks by Labor Day. He also threatened a pay cut for those who didn’t come back to the office.

  This year, we have been writing extensively about the effort Wall Street banks have gone to in order to try and retain talent. Earlier this year, we noted that Evercore was now paying its junior bankers up to $120,000 per year. Second year analysts at Evercore will make $130,000 and third year analysts will make $140,000. 

  Guggenheim has also raised its first year analyst pay to $110,000. First-year analysts across the global corporate and investment banking, markets, and research at Bank of America will now receive $100,000 per year, up from $95,000. Second year analysts will make $105,000 per year and third year analysts will make $110,000. 

  Months ago we also noted that Jefferies announced it was going to be raising pay for its first year analysts in the U.S. to $110,000. The bump in pay is a raise of $25,000 from their previous starting salary of $85,000 per year. Second year analysts will make $125,000, up from $95,000 and third year analysts, called associates, will move up to $150,000 per year from $125,000. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 22:20

• SEC Chair Gensler: Bitcoin Competes With The US Banking System
  SEC Chair Gensler: Bitcoin Competes With The US Banking System

  Authored by ‘NAMCIOS’ via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  • Bitcoin is an “off-the-grid” alternative to the traditional financial system, SEC Chairman Gary Gensler said.

  • Gensler joined former SEC chairman Jay Clayton on Wednesday to talk about Bitcoin, cryptocurrency, and ETFs.

  • Issuers should “come within the investor protection remit” to launch a spot BTC ETF in the U.S., Gensler said.

  

  Bitcoin is a competitor to the U.S. banking system and its worldwide consensus, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Gary Gensler said on Wednesday.

  “We layered over our digital money system about 40 years ago with money laundering and various sanctions and regimes around the globe; we layered that over a digital currency system called our banking system,” Gensler said.

  “In 2008, Satoshi Nakamoto wrote this paper in part as a reaction, an off-the-grid type of approach. It’s not surprising that there’s some competition that you and I don’t support but that’s trying to undermine that worldwide consensus.”

  Gensler’s remarks came during the DACOM Summit 2021, a compliance and market integrity event live-streamed on Wednesday. The SEC chairman joined Jay Clayton, who was in Gensler’s shoes as the commission’s head a few years past, for a conversation around Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies, digital assets, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), and decentralized finance.

  BITCOIN, THE DOLLAR, AND DIGITAL ASSETS

  Throughout the conversation, the SEC chairman kept drawing a dividing line between Bitcoin and digital assets. While Gensler did not vouch for one or the other, he acknowledged their differences, highlighting the securities-like nature of many projects.

  “These have largely been about raising money for entrepreneurs, and as such, meet the time-tested definition of an investment contract and thus falls under the securities laws,” Gensler said, referring to the many tokens being created and traded worldwide outside of his regulatory scope.

  Gensler has said time and again how he views the cryptocurrency sector as a “Wild West.” He urged the “gatekeepers” of the many cryptocurrency projects in existence to “find a path to register and get within the investor protection remit.” Such projects, “whether it’s a trading platform or token,” he added, are “not going to evolve well outside of the tenets of public policy.”

  When talking about digital assets, Gensler commented how, in his opinion, such developments already exist and don’t demand decentralization to function. The SEC chairman also drew a parallel between the U.S. dollar and the concept of digital currency, downplaying their differences.

  “The U.S. dollar, the euro and the yen, and most of the public companies, are digital,” he asserted.

  “You buy and sell stocks that are digital, you buy and sell treasuries that are digital; there is no physical treasury debt any longer. I tend to call these digital assets.”

  However, Gensler didn’t outright remove the right of other digital assets to exist. Ultimately, he said, investors should decide what’s worthy of investing their money in. Still, he demands clear and straightforward information on each project’s objectives with their offerings.

  “At the core of our bargain in the securities markets is: investors get to decide what risks they want to take. But the people raising the money, the issuers, should share full and fair disclosure,” he said, adding that while the value proposition is “for the market to decide,” it must be “within public policy frameworks.”

  Gensler highlighted the importance of “full and fair disclosure” in the perspective of “investor protection and fraud prevention.” If these digital assets fail to come under the regulatory umbrella of the SEC, he added, there could be financial instabilities in the future.

  “We’re gonna have a ‘spill in Aisle 3’ and…it might be a financial instability event, or come from stablecoins, or by the investing public getting hurt by fraudsters or good-faith actors promoting and raising money,” the commission’s chairman said. “And the investing public didn’t, in hindsight, get enough information.”

  “The innovations around DeFi could be real, but they won’t persist if they stay outside of the public policy frameworks,” he added.

  On stablecoins, Gensler equated them to “poker chips at the casinos,” highlighting how the majority of the movement in that sector has been done inside trading platforms.

  “They were initially brought forward to make the trading platforms more efficient, but it also allowed people around the globe to avert money laundering and tax compliance in jurisdictions,” he said.

  The SEC chairman also shared that his commission is collaborating with sibling agencies such as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) in figuring out how different tokens should be treated by U.S. markets and its regulatory body.

  “We’re working together to sort through that,” Gensler said.

  “But right now the public is not protected as it could be and as I believe it ought to be in this space. Technologies don’t long persist outside of public policy norms; people get hurt, trust is diminished. It’s far better to bring it inside the policy frameworks, and that’s what we’re going to try to do at the SEC.”

  WHEN WILL THE SEC APPROVE A SPOT BITCOIN ETF?

  When asked about bitcoin ETFs and the double standards being applied by the SEC to such products, Gensler declined to comment, saying he couldn’t discuss matters the commission is currently evaluating. But he did shed some light on what issuers need to do to have a spot bitcoin ETF approved in the U.S., although he said they already know what the SEC’s demands are.

  “These platforms need to come in, get registered, come within the investor protection remit, ensure for the appropriate anti-manipulation and transparency, and deal with the custody issues,” Gensler said.

  On November 29, asset manager Grayscale Investments sent a letter to the SEC outlining discrepancies in the agency’s rejection of spot ETFs and acceptance of derivatives-based offerings.

  “The Commission has no basis for the position that investing in the derivatives market for an asset is acceptable for investors while investing in the asset itself is not,” the letter said.

  The SEC had denied VanEck’s spot bitcoin ETF proposal earlier that month, and a few more deadlines are coming up on its schedule. The commission has nearly ten filings lined up on its desk, awaiting approval.

  

  Spot bitcoin ETF applications on the SEC’s desk. Source: Arcane Research.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 22:00

• November Payrolls Preview: Strong Enough To Justify The Accelerated Taper?
  November Payrolls Preview: Strong Enough To Justify The Accelerated Taper?

  With Powell’s Fed having telegraphed it will accelerate the taper at this month’s meeting so it can start presumably start hiking as soon as June of 2022, the November payrolls report may be moot although traders will be looking for barbell signs: will it be strong enough to validate an accelerated taper, or could it come so far below expectations that the Fed will be forced to delay its taper-boosting plans.

  Looking at the expectations, Newsquawk reminds us that analysts look for 550k nonfarm payrolls to be added to the US economy in November, similar to October’s 531k; the jobless rate is seen falling by one-tenth of a percent to 4.5%. While as noted above the Fed appears almost certain to announce a quickening in the pace of QE tapering, analysts will be carefully watching measures of labor market slack to gauge the progress towards the Fed’s ‘three tests’ for rate hikes: i) Participation was unchanged in October, ii) employment-population ticked up by 0.1ppts, while iii) the U6 measure of underemployment fell 0.2ppts.

  With the inflation tests met, the labor market data will form a key part of the Fed’s arguments for rate hikes, and any significant  improvement in these metrics may see markets further price in tighter rates next year. Meanwhile, labor market gauges have generally been constructive in November: the rate of initial jobless claims going into the November survey period improved relative to the October window; ADP’s gauge of payrolls was in line with expectations, though the pace eased vs October; business surveys saw employment sub-indices improve and are alluding to a very tight labor market, while today’s Challenger job cuts fell to the lowest since 1993.

  Here is a summary of expectations:

  • Nonfarm payrolls are expected to print 550k in November vs 531k in October (private payrolls expected at 530k vs 604k prior,
  • manufacturing payrolls expected at 45k vs prior 60k);
  • the 3-month average nonfarm payrolls trend rate eased to 442k in October (vs 629k in September),
  • the 6-month average rose to 666k (from 622k) and the 12-month average eased to 481k (from 494k).
  • The unemployment rate is seen declining by 0.1ppts in November to 4.5%;
  • Labor market participation was unchanged at 61.6% in October (vs 63.6% in February 2020),
  • U6 underemployment declined by 0.2ppts to 8.3% (vs 7.0% in February 2020), and the employment-population ratio rose 0.1ppts to 58.8% (vs pre-pandemic 61.1%).
  • Average hourly earnings are seen rising 0.4% M/M, with the annual measure expected to rise by 0.1ppts to 4.0% Y/Y,
  • Average workweek hours are likely to be unchanged at 34.7hrs.

  POLICY FOCUS: Fed Chair Powell this week delivered hawkish testimony to lawmakers, where he stated that the economy had continued to strengthen, the labor market had continued to improve, and he sees inflation moving down significantly over the next year. He added that it was appropriate to consider wrapping up the tapering of asset purchases a few months sooner, which participants will discuss at the December FOMC. Powell telegraphing the debate in advance may have taken some of the sting out of incoming economic data — the rationale being that the Fed is set to accelerate the taper barring any significant deterioration in labor market and inflation data before the December 15th confab — but Powell still suggested that there was a three-part test for raising rates (economy at maximum employment, inflation at 2%, inflation on track to moderately exceed 2% for some time);

  Fed officials have attempted to break the link between tapering and eventual rate hikes, but forward-looking markets will be assessing incoming data within the context of the three tests, and will price expectations of the Fed rate hike trajectory accordingly. The inflation test has been met, but Powell said there was still ground to cover to reach maximum employment, though he has previously said that could be achieved by the middle of next year; this week’s labor market data, therefore, remains a key part of the eventual rate hike debate.

  SLACK: Taking an aggregate of the headline since March 2020, there are still some 4.44mln nonfarm payrolls to be recouped to get back to pre-pandemic levels. Goldman Sachs explains that it has been childcare constraints and elevated fiscal transfers which have likely weighed on participation, but these factors should have only a small effect going forward, but it may still take some time for some people to feel comfortable in returning to work, leaving some potential for longer-lasting drags. “We continue to expect that the labor force participation rate will increase in the nearterm, but we have nudged down our participation rate forecast to 1ppt below trend at end-2021 (61.9%) and 0.5ppts below trend at end-2022 (62.1%),” the bank says, “but because jobs are abundant and residual weakness in participation in mid-2022 will likely be due to changes in fiscal policy, wealth, and worker preferences, we expect that the FOMC will judge any participation shortfall that remains at that point to be structural or voluntary and will update their maximum employment goal accordingly.”

  JOBLESS CLAIMS: In the week that traditionally coincides with the BLS survey window for the jobs report, initial jobless claims were little changed at 270k from the prior week’s 269k; but since the October jobs report survey window, claims have eased from 351k. Continuing claims, meanwhile, printed 2.049mln in the survey week, down from 2.11mln in the prior week, and lower than the 2.81mln in the October survey period. Pantheon Macroeconomics said that the trend in initial jobless claims remains firmly downward, but the read may not be clear in the holiday season: “Unfortunately the numbers will be volatile over the holidays, as usual, and the next clean read on the data will be in mid-January,” and by then, “we think claims will be close to the lows seen in the pre-COVID cycle, about 210K.”

  ADP: The ADP’s national employment gauge saw 534k job additions to the US economy in November, more or less in line with the 525k forecast; the prior was revised down trivially by 1k to 570k. ADP’s economists noted that the labor market recovery continued to “power through” its challenges last month. “Job gains have eclipsed 15 million since the recovery began, though 5 million jobs short of pre-pandemic levels,” ADP said, “service providers, which are more vulnerable to the pandemic, have dominated job gains this year.” On the pandemic, ADP’s economists said it was too early to tell if the Omicron variant could potentially slow the jobs recovery in coming months.

  BUSINESS SURVEYS: Within the ISM manufacturing report, the employment index rose by 1.3 points to 53.3, remaining in expansion for a third month, with the report noting some indications that the ability to hire is improving, though this is being partially offset by the challenges of turnover and backfilling. “Survey panellists’ companies are still struggling to meet labour-management plans, but there were modest signs of progress,” ISM said, “an increasing share of comments noted improvements regarding employment,” where “an overwhelming majority of panellists indicate their companies are hiring or attempting to hire.” 51% of those surveyed were expressing difficulties in filling positions, with the situation becoming more acute in the month. Meanwhile, the services ISM is released after this month’s jobs data, but using the IHS Markit flash November PMIs as a proxy, similar themes have been seen. IHS Markit said that pressure on capacity persisted amid labour shortages, with backlogs of work rising at the second-fastest pace on record. “Firms sought to expand their workforce numbers, but employment growth was held back by challenges finding suitablecandidates.”

  JOB CUTS: Challenger’s November report said that announced job cuts had dropped to 14,875 from the 22,822 in October, the lowest monthly total since May 1993. Year-to-date, employers have announced plans to cut 302,918 jobs from their payrolls, the lowest January-November total on record, and vs 2,227,725 vs the same period in 2020. Challenger said that “with the Omicron variant emerging and the unknowns that come with its spread, coupled with the ongoing difficulty hiring and retaining workers, it’s no surprise job cuts are at record lows,” adding that “employers are spread thin, planning best- and worst-case scenarios in terms of COVID, while also contending with staff shortages and high demand.”

  Speaking of Goldman, the bank is more optimistic than consensus and estimates nonfarm payrolls rose 575k in November, above the 531k gain in October and higher than the bank’s initial forecast of +550k (which is in line with consensus). The bank expects no change in government payrolls, and thus private payrolls will also rise +575k in November (vs. consensus +525k).  According to the bank, the summer expiration of federal unemployment insurance benefits in some states boosted job-finding rates there, and the programs expired in the remaining states on September 5th. Over 4.6mn people have dropped off the unemployment benefit rolls since early September, and we assume 300-400k found new jobs during the November payroll month.

  Goldman also believes upward revisions to prior-month nonfarm payrolls are fairly likely in tomorrow’s report. The chart below reveals a trend of increasingly large upward revisions over the course of the year, with prior-month job growth revised up on net in each of the last six reports (including +235k with last month’s release). There are two potential explanations, both of which could potentially lead to upward revisions in tomorrow’s report as well.

  • First, some reopening establishments may respond to the BLS survey with a lag (e.g. 1-2 months after reopening). This would result in positive revisions to the not-seasonally-adjusted data that occurred in May, July, August, and September (dark blue bars below).
  • Second, the seasonal factors may be overfitting to the advance releases, mistakenly attributing some of the strong job creation to an evolution of seasonality (light blue lines below).

  

  ARGUING FOR A STRONGER REPORT:

  • End of federal enhanced unemployment benefits. The expiration of federal benefits in some states boosted job-finding rates over the summer, and all remaining such programs expired on September 5. The 239k pickup in job growth in October relative to September is consistent with a boost from improved labor supply, and with 4.6 mn individuals no longer receiving benefits versus in early September, this tailwind is expected to continue in tomorrow’s report and beyond.
  • Public health. The Delta wave coincided with a late-summer slowdown in job growth, with leisure and hospitality employment growth slowing sharply in September and October (see Exhibit 1). With covid infection rates falling since September, restaurant seatings on OpenTable have rebounded,and economists expect strong gains in leisure and hospitality and in other services.

  

  • Job availability. The Conference Board labor differential—the difference between nthe percent of respondents saying jobs are plentiful and those saying jobs are hard to get—increased to a record-high of 46.9. JOLTS job openings decreased by 191kin September to 10.4mn but remained significantly higher than the pre-pandemic record.
  • Jobless claims. Initial jobless claims fell during the November payroll month, averaging 257k per week vs. 320k in October. Continuing claims in regular state programs decreased 283k from survey week to survey week.
  • Education seasonality. Education payrolls weighed on the previous two reports, declining 170k cumulatively in September and October (public and private). This reflects some janitors and support staff declining to return for the fall school year. While schools will eventually fill these open positions, the start-of-year catalyst for a large rise in education jobs has passed, and we are assuming only second derivative improvement in tomorrow’s report, such as a flat reading or a modest gain (mom sa).
  • Employer surveys. The employment components of business surveys generally increased in November. Goldman’s services survey employment tracker increased 0.5pt to 55.1 and its manufacturing survey employment tracker increased 0.7pt to 59.6. The Goldman Sachs Analyst Index (GSAI) increased 4.3pt to 77.2 in November, and the employment component rose 1.6pt to a record-high of 75.6.
  • Job cuts. Announced layoffs reported by Challenger, Gray & Christmas declined by 10% month-over-month in November after increasing by 18% in October (SA by GS),and remain near their three-decade low.

  ARGUING FOR A WEAKER REPORT:

  • Supply constraints in retail. Labor supply constraints may have weighed on pre-holiday hiring in the retail industry, for which the BLS seasonal factors anticipate net hiring of around 350k. If so, retail payroll could fall on a seasonally adjusted basis.
  • Vaccine mandates. The vaccine mandates announced by the Biden administration nin September apply to roughly 25mn unvaccinated workers, and may have weighed on November job growth in healthcare and government. While the federal deadline for compliance is generally not until early January and faces an uncertain future in the court system, early adoption in some states may have reduced job growth at the margin in tomorrow’s report.

  NEUTRAL FACTORS

  • Big Data. High-frequency data on the labor market were mixed. Three of the four measures available this month indicate another sizeable gain. However, the Homebase data that directionally flagged the September payroll missindicates an outright decline

  

  • ADP. Private sector employment in the ADP report increased by 534k in November, in line with consensus expectations for a 525k gain and consistent with strong growth in the ADP panel.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 21:40

• Another Shutdown Averted After Senate Passes CR
  Another Shutdown Averted After Senate Passes CR

  Update (2130ET): The Senate on Thursday night passed the Continuing Resolution (CR) passed earlier in the day by the House, thus averting another government shutdown which would have taken effect Friday at midnight.

  The measure passed by a vote of 69-28, ending a brief yet tense period of negotiations until February 18 – at which time lawmakers must either kick the can down the road with yet another CR, or pass a dozen long-stalled appropriations bills to fund the government through September, the end of the 2022 fiscal year.

  🎉 Shutdown officially thwarted 🎉

  Senate passes the CR, 69-28.

  Happy stopgap to all those who celebrate.

  — Caitlin Emma (@caitlinzemma) December 3, 2021

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

  *  *  *

  House Democrats have reached a spending deal to fund the government through Feb. 18 in yet another can-kick that avoids a shutdown on Friday at midnight.

  

  House Appropriations Committee Chair Rosa DeLaurio (D-CT) announced the deal early Thursday, saying that an agreement had been reached on a continuing resolution (CR) which would maintain funding at the most recent level until a larger bipartisan agreement is eventually reached.

  According to DeLaurio, the legislation “includes virtually no changes to existing funding or policy” – which will instead be included in a spending omnibus in the months ahead, according to The Hill. “However, Democrats prevailed in including $7 billion for Afghanistan evacuees. The end date is February 18. While I wish it were earlier, this agreement allows the appropriations process to move forward toward a final funding agreement which addresses the needs of the American people,” she added.

  Given the Friday night deadline, House Democrats plan to put it to a vote later Thursday, with a Senate vote soon to follow.

  🚨🚨CR DEAL REACHED: feb 18 end date. This is in line what rs have been pushing for. $$ for refugees from Afghanistan., a Dem win.

  Have to imagine a house vote today. pic.twitter.com/t6bFcXfpiJ

  — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) December 2, 2021

  As Bloomberg notes, the stopgap measure ‘puts agencies on autopilot, freezing in place program funding levels and forbidding new contracts, with few exceptions, one of which being $7 billion in funding to aid Afghan evacuees.’

  Meeting the fast-approaching end-of-week deadline will require cooperation by Senate Republicans, who have the power to drag out the process. 

  One potential impediment is a threat by a group of conservative Republicans to tie up the vote on a temporary government funding measure over their objections to federal Covid-19 vaccine and testing mandates. 

  Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and his Republican counterpart, Mitch McConnell, gave repeated assurances throughout the day Wednesday that negotiations were making progress and a deal was near.

  “I think we’re going to be OK,” McConnell told reporters. -Bloomberg

  Some Republicans, however – including Marjorie Taylor Greene – have called on the GOP to shut down the government in order to prevent the implementation of a federal vaccine requirement. Unfortunately for MTG, she doesn’t have the votes.

  The new stopgap bill is required because Congress was unsuccessful at passing any of the 12 annual appropriations bills required to keep the lights on.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 21:29

• It's Make-Or-Break Moment For Property Junk Bonds
  It’s Make-Or-Break Moment For Property Junk Bonds

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets live commentator and analyst

  Thursday’s news of another missed bond payment by a Chinese developer reminded investors of the struggle homebuilders face, even as the worst of the regulatory tightening is behind. Debt issued by property developers, most of them junk-rated, may soon start to diverge — with the strong credits swimming and the weaker ones sinking. In fact, an S&P Global study shows half the B-rated private developers won’t survive a stress test in the worst-case scenario.

  China’s government advisers are proposing a 2022 growth target that’s lower than the 2021 one of “above 6%,” Reuters reported, adding that the new objective could be as low as 5% to 5.5%. While comments from senior leaders call for stabilizing house prices, they fall short of rolling back curbs. All point to a tight lid that will remain on housing markets and any relaxation or easing will be in a gradual, piecemeal manner.

  Moody’s cut China’s property sales forecast on Thursday and reiterated a negative outlook for the nation’s housing sector, blaming “strict regulatory controls” that will “constrain … onshore and offshore funding access” and lead to “defaults, declining sales and rising investor aversion.” Contracted property sales are expected to fall 5%-10% in 2022 versus a prior projection range of flat to a 5% drop.

  

  Against such a policy backdrop, developers’ fortunes could soon start to diverge. Some Chinese developers are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel, rushing to raise funds in the onshore bond market after private-sector homebuilders issued the least amount of yuan notes in five years. Investors including T. Rowe Price Group Inc., Allianz Global Investors and Goldman Sachs Asset Management are starting to tap opportunities selectively.

  Meanwhile, those with poor finances continue to suffer. The latest victim is Shenzhen-based Kaisa Group Holdings Ltd., which has yet to pay interest due Wednesday on a dollar bond, two note holders said. The firm had to make a $17.5m coupon payment on $300m note due 2026, Bloomberg data shows. There’s a 30-day grace period before a default can be declared.

  S&P’s research showed that half of the B-rated developers cannot meet their debt obligation within a year.

  The default rate for Chinese junk bonds is expected to fall from 13.6% this year, but will remain high at 9.7% in 2022 due to property sector troubles, JPMorgan wrote in a client note. JPMorgan favors BB-rated high-yield bonds, betting that the developers will survive and yields in mid-teens are juicy enough. For B-rated notes, the bank sees markets mostly pricing in “selected defaults” and others should eventually recover once the fear subsides.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 21:20

• While Short-Term Rates Flatline, Long-Term Ocean Freight Rates Are Soaring
  While Short-Term Rates Flatline, Long-Term Ocean Freight Rates Are Soaring

  Shippers looking to lock-in long term contracts for ocean freight are in for some serious sticker shock this month, according to shipping data consultancy Xeneta.

  While some adherents to the now discredited “transitory” inflation camp point to the recent flatlining in short-term containership rates – or even decline in the case of core transpacific trades…

  

  … long-term contract rates are still going up. According to Xeneta’s statistics compiled by the Maritime Executive website, global average long-term contracted ocean freight rates went up by 16% in November alone, for a cumulative rise of 121% year-on-year. This follows after a record-setting increase of 28% in July, when all of the major shipping corridors saw significant long-term rate hikes.

  “The continued perfect storm of high demand, maxed-out capacity, port congestion, changing consumer habits, and general supply chain disruption is fueling a rates explosion that, quite frankly, we’ve never seen the like of,” said Patrik Berglund, the CEO of Xeneta. “What’s more, it’s difficult to see a change of course ahead, with the fundamentals stacked very much in favor of the carrier community. In short, they’ve never had it so good, while many shippers, unfortunately, are well and truly on the ropes.”

  The long-term rate hikes are most pronounced for routes to and from the United States. Xeneta calculated the increase for long-term import rates for the U.S. market at 39% for November, up 122 percent year-on-year. U.S. export rates also rose 9% for the month.

  The soaring rates are driving tremendous profitability at the top container lines, many of which have doubled (or even tripled) their revenue year-on-year. Analysts with Blue Alpha Capital estimate that container lines took in a cumulative $48 billion in profit in the third quarter alone, and more than $100 billion over the first nine months of the year. This is more than the combined earnings of the last five years for the entire industry. According to third-ranked carrier CMA CGM, the fourth quarter may be even more profitable, and the first half of 2022 is looking strong as well.

  “2021 will be a year to remember for carriers and one to forget, if that’s possible, for the shipper community,” said Berglund. “What lies ahead is unclear, but we can see there’s action planned to try and ease congestion at major US ports . . . while newbuilds, potential new players and the growing trend of shippers chartering their own vessels might [have an effect].”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 21:00

• Centers For Medicare And Medicaid Services Suspends Vaccine Mandate Enforcement
  Centers For Medicare And Medicaid Services Suspends Vaccine Mandate Enforcement

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

  The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) suspended enforcement of its vaccine mandate for healthcare workers after two court orders earlier this week.

  A memo issued by the agency, posted by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt on Twitter Thursday, said that CMS “remains confident” it will prevail in court but is “suspending activities related to the implementation and enforcement of this rule pending future development in the litigation.”

  

  “While these preliminary injunctions are in effect,” it continues to say, “CMS surveyors must not survey providers for compliance with the requirements” with the rule.

  The memo is referring to federal government officials conducting checks of whether Medicare- or Medicaid-funded facilities are complying with the Biden administration’s mandate that healthcare staff gets fully vaccinated for COVID-19 by Jan. 4.

  The CMS rule allows for religious and medical exemptions to the vaccine.

  Schmitt, a Republican who is running for Missouri’s U.S. Senate seat, hailed CMS’s memo as a victory in a Twitter post.

  This week, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri and the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana issued preliminary injunctions against the CMS vaccine rule, which was unveiled on Nov. 4 alongside federal rules that mandate either testing or vaccines for employers with 100 or more workers.

  “Between the two of them, these injunctions cover all states” as well as Washington, D.C. and U.S. territories, the memo said.

  CMS has appealed the two federal court decisions.

  The rule for private businesses, which is being enforced by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, was dealt a blow last month when a U.S. Fifth Court of Appeals issued an injunction that blocked its enforcement.

  The same court affirmed its previous decision several days later, which is currently being challenged by the Biden administration.

  On Nov. 29, the Biden administration’s Office of Management and Budget federal told agencies in a memo that they can wait to terminate or suspend their employees who won’t get vaccinated until the holidays are over.

  OMB Deputy Director for Management Jason Miller and Office of Personnel Management Director Kiran Ahuja wrote that “no subsequent enforcement actions, beyond that education and counseling” is mandated for federal workers “who have not yet complied with the vaccination requirement until the new calendar year begins in January.”

  Later, White House Jen Psaki downplayed the memo and said that “nothing has changed” regarding enforcement, claiming it is “inaccurate” to say that the White House has “delayed anything, or changed” enforcement of the rule. In September, Biden announced he would require all federal employees to receive the shot.

  The Epoch Times has contacted CMS for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 20:40

• Russia Deploys Anti-Ship Missiles Near Japan On Disputed Kuril Islands
  Russia Deploys Anti-Ship Missiles Near Japan On Disputed Kuril Islands

  Russia has just seriously escalated the ongoing historic dispute with Japan over the Kuril islands, which Tokyo calls the Northern Territories. The status of ownership of the islands, which Russia de facto currently controls and has small bases on, is still unresolved since the end of WWII as a treaty regarding their status is still being negotiated.

  On Thursday the Russian Defense Ministry announced the military stationed has stationed its Bastion coastal missile defense system on a remote part of the island chain near Japan, identified as the island of Matua. These are considered “shore-based anti-ship missile systems” – seen as also potentially threatening to Japan’s Western allies, given for example US warships have recently traversed nearby waters.

  

  This marks the third Bastian defense system deployed to the islands, amid a major push to beef up Russia’s military infrastructure there.

  The Bastion has a reported range of up to 450 kilometers, and while deemed “defensive” in nature, there’s little doubt Tokyo will take it as an unnecessary and threatening posture regarding the islands’ ownership. 

  Russia has defended the missile deployments so near Japan, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying in fresh statements, “Russia is free to place on its territory those objects that it considers (necessary), and in those areas of our country in which it considers appropriate. This is our sovereign right, this is the right of any state, it is unlikely that it can be challenged by anyone.” Peskov added: “And we retain the political will to continue a comprehensive dialogue with our Japanese partners in order to find ways to resolve this fundamental problem.”

  Russia (at that time as the Soviet Union) has exercise de facto control over the Kurils since it seized them in the final days of World War II. The United States recognizes Japan’s sovereignty over the islands, however.

  

   Russia’s near-future plans for continuing to build-up defense on the islands were described in The Moscow Times as follows: 

  The Pacific Fleet has erected a special “autonomous military town” on the uninhabited volcanic island to provide operational maintenance for the Bastion, which has a range of up to 450 kilometers. 

  According to Interfax, the Russian military has previously announced plans to build an airfield for light military transport aircraft and a base point for Russian Navy ships on Matua. 

  Japan’s Foreign Ministry has in the recent past frequently protested Russia’s military build-up just to its north stressing in prior statements: “We are constantly gathering information about the Russian military’s actions in the Northern Territories.” This has served to stall any final negotiated settlement, with no final resolution in sight.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 20:20

• Watch: Joe Rogan Eviscerates Media For Reporting Waukesha Massacre As An "Accident"
  Watch: Joe Rogan Eviscerates Media For Reporting Waukesha Massacre As An “Accident”

  Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

  Joe Rogan once again tore the legacy media apart on his podcast, this time over its coverage of the Waukesha attack after several outlets referred to the murderous rampage as an accident.

  

  “The guy in Wisconsin had tried to run over his f****** girlfriend and he was out on only $1000 bail. He tried to kill someone with his car, he was out on $1000 bail, and then he runs over 50 people in a car,” Rogan explained.

  “Here’s the f***** up part: the way they’re covering that story in the news. It’s not the ‘man who killed those people,’ it was an accident that was caused by an SUV,” Rogan said, referring to NBC, CNN, CBS and others calling the attack a ‘crash’ and an ‘accident’.

  Rogan continued, “A f****** SUV caused an accident? what are you saying? Did the car go haywire? Did the auto-driving feature go nuts? No this evil man with real problems… a psychologically f***** up human being drove into a crowd of strangers.”

  

  Watch:

  The Washington Post reported that the attack was ’caused by a SUV’:

  According to the Washington Post, the Christmas parade attack was actually “caused by a SUV.”https://t.co/VQxIfv1bhw

  — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) November 25, 2021

  The New York Times reported the “SUV” incident on page 22:

  One wonders if a white supremacist (whether deliberately or not) had ploughed into a BLM parade that the New York Times would put the report on page 22. pic.twitter.com/R9k2Sb3I68

  — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) November 22, 2021

  The media also lied and suggested that suspect Darrell Brooks was fleeing another crime scene and just happened on the Christmas parade.

  *  *  *

  Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

  In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here. Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 20:00

• FAA & Army Probe Dangerously Low NFL Game Flyover: "Could've Been A Disaster"
  FAA & Army Probe Dangerously Low NFL Game Flyover: “Could’ve Been A Disaster”

  The US Army has opened a rare investigation of a military flyover of an NFL game. Several helicopters from the 101st Airborne Division’s Combat Aviation Brigade, based at Fort Campbell, Tennessee, conducted what’s being described as a dangerously low flyover of Nashville’s Nissan Stadium on Nov.14 for the Tennessee Titans game that night. Over 69,000 people were in attendance.

  The low pass included a pair of AH-64 Apache helicopters, a UH-60 Blackhawk, and a CH-47F Chinook which were conducting a “Salute to Service” tribute for active duty service members and veterans. While this sort of thing has become routine for NFL games in recent years, it immediately sparked an inquiry from the FAA given the federal agency’s requirement that military flyovers must happen at least 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle.

  Epic flyover at Tennessee Titans game above Nissan Stadium. AH-64 Apache, UH-60 Blackhawk, CH-47F Chinook. 😎 pic.twitter.com/14LNVCNaYG

  — Thenewarea51 (@thenewarea51) November 23, 2021

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

  In the Nov.14 example the military helicopters seemed literally eye-level with fans in the upper decks. Further, one local CBS affiliate cited a fan to say the aircraft actually “came close to knocking down an American Flag and a camera.”

  Based on the initial FAA probe, the 101st Airborne Division “has directed [a] preliminary inquiry into this event,” according to Army spokesman Lt. Col. Terence Kelley.

  The incident has sparked controversy, with a number of current military pilots coming forward to defend the low-pass of the packed stadium as perfectly safe and nothing to worry about. However one former FAA official slammed the maneuver as irresponsible – which could have led to “disaster”…

  But Larry Williams, a retired aviation safety inspector with the FAA, told NewsChannel 5 that the incident could “have been a disaster.”

  “General reaction, yeah, it was unsafe,” Williams told the news outlet. “It was very dangerous.”

  From inside the @101stAASLTDIV military flyover #SaluteToService 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/aErsRxfR17

  — Tennessee Titans (@Titans) November 16, 2021

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

  And some fans had also expressed concern, with one posting to social media – and cited in local reports as saying, “Altitude was concerning as I stood and watched from the top row of the stadium. I was above these guys. I had a mini heart attack.”

  Some observers said the helicopters dipped in to the stadium, and not just flew over it…

  A 101st Airborne Division flyover of Nissan Stadium in Nashville, Tennessee, last month is being probed by the FAA. But military helicopter drivers have shrugged, saying they train extensively to operate at low altitudes, Task & Purpose reports. https://t.co/hbEEwSzDW5

  — The War Horse (@thewarhorsenews) December 1, 2021

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

  Channel 5 News suggested the choppers may have flown under a hard to spot cable, though this is in dispute.

  When NewsChannel 5 Investigates slowed down the video, the helicopters pass right beneath what appears to be a cable of some sort stretched across the stadium.

  “They went under that cable,” Williams said. “It appeared just a few feet from there. So if they had just gotten off from altitude a few feet, it would have been a disaster.”

  From another angle, the cable is clearly visible.

  But from the cockpit camera, it’s not as easy to see.

  “I wonder whether they saw the cable before they got there,” Williams said.

  NewsChannel 5 Investigates asked, “What is the potential with that cable across the stadium?”

  “Well,” Williams answered, “if you hit the cable, especially with a helicopter, more than likely it would crash.”

  Video from near ground level showing what appears to be the cable in question:

  And more: 

  According to Nashville’s News Channel 5, videos of the event are “raising concerns (that) some…appeared to show the choppers passing just beneath some sort of cable. The Titans said it was actually cables used to hold the field goal nets.”

  However, the Nashville station also says that their own videos show “those cables are connected to the bottom of the top deck, which means the Army helicopters would have flown above them.”

  An update to that report, however, quoted a Titan spokesperson who said the position of the cable in question was an “optical illusion”, and that it represented no danger to the inbound helicopters or people seated below.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 19:40

• Iran Says Israel Is Spreading Lies To "Poison" Nuclear Deal Talks
  Iran Says Israel Is Spreading Lies To “Poison” Nuclear Deal Talks

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  As negotiations to revive the Iran nuclear deal concluded their third day in Vienna, on Wednesday Iran said Israel is stoking tensions and spreading lies to “poison” the talks.

  “Israeli regime whose existence relies on tension is at it again, trumpeting lies to poison Vienna talks,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh wrote on Twitter. “All parties in the room now face a test of their independence & political will to carry out the job — irrespective of the fake news designed to destroy prospects for success.”

  

  For decades now, Israel has been falsely claiming Iran is developing nuclear weapons, but the warnings never come true. On Monday, when the negotiations first resumed, Israeli media reported that Israel warned the US Iran is preparing to enrich uranium at the 90 percent level needed for weapons-grade, and the reports offered no evidence to back up the claim.

  Since the JCPOA talks have resumed, Israeli officials have made their opposition to the process known and claim Iran is only trying to buy time to make a bomb. On Tuesday, Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid called for more sanctions on Iran and a “credible military threat” to deter Tehran.

  But sanctions from the US and covert attacks from Israel have only led to Iran making the nuclear advancements that Israel is complaining about.

  The JCPOA limits Iran’s uranium enrichment to 3.67 percent and makes its nuclear program subject to the most stringent inspections in the world. If Israel really cared about Iran’s nuclear advancements, it would favor a JCPOA revival instead of doing everything to sabotage the agreement.

  #Iran accused #Israel of “trumpeting lies to poison” the Vienna talks on reviving Tehran’s 2015 nuclear agreement

  “Israeli regime whose existence relies on tension is at it again, trumpeting lies to poison Vienna talks”Iran FM spokesman posted on Twitter https://t.co/EDW86yRbPA

  — Randa HABIB (@RandaHabib) December 1, 2021

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

  Even without the JCPOA, Iran still vows not to develop a nuclear bomb and is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Israel refuses to sign due to its secret nuclear weapons program.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 19:20

• Democrats Blocking Senate Bill That Bans Imports Made With Uyghur Slave Labor
  Democrats Blocking Senate Bill That Bans Imports Made With Uyghur Slave Labor

  GOP China hawks are lashing out at Senate Democrats for their latest “concessions to the Chinese Communist Party” – which also threatens to halt Congressional approval for the $740 billion National Defense Authorization Act.

  Sen. Marco Rubio wants to see a “controversial” amendment added, which his office is saying Dems are blocking based on false pretenses based on procedural issues, that would ban any imports from China that are suspected of being produced with Uyghur slave labor. However supporters say it shouldn’t be a source of controversy at all given several human rights groups support it, and it should be consistent with the Biden administration’s general human rights stance on China. “Today we have American corporations using slaves in China,” Sen. Rubio told Fox News on Thursday, highlighting the fundamental issue.

  

  The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act targets “Goods manufactured or produced in Xinjiang” which “shall not be entitled to entry into the United States unless Customs and Border Protection (1) determines that the goods were not manufactured by convict labor, forced labor, or indentured labor under penal sanctions; and (2) reports such a determination to Congress and to the public,” according to the bill summary.

  The action springs from widespread reports over the past couple years that the Chinese state has placed some one million ethnic Uyghur Muslims in a network of Communist ‘reeducation’ and forced labor camps. Beijing officials have admitted to the existence of such facilities, but while US leaders have condemned the “slave camps” – China’s government has presented them as merely tantamount to job training and assistance programs, or a halfway house of sorts. 

  According to details of a last minute blockage of the human rights amendment, the Free Beacon writes, “But Democrats excluded the amendment from a vote late Wednesday night, after members of the party privately objected to it, sources told the Free Beacon. Earlier in the evening, Democrats tried to use a procedural mechanism that would have allowed a vote on the act but stripped it from the final appropriations bill, according to a hotline memo from Senate leadership.

  Ironically, the move appears connected to the Biden admin trying to preserve it’s futile “climate agenda”, which in the end will sacrifice the United States’ human rights stance in China: 

  The pushback from Senate Democrats comes amid efforts by senior Biden administration officials to quietly kill the bill over concerns it will hinder the White House’s climate agenda and limit solar panel imports from China. Presidential climate envoy John Kerry, among others, has been lobbying House members against the bill, the Free Beacon reported last month.

  Senator Rubio on @FoxNews: Today we have American corporations using slaves in China pic.twitter.com/ce5L75FdoS

  — Senator Rubio Press (@SenRubioPress) December 2, 2021

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

  However, each side is now blaming the other amid conflicting accounts of precisely why it’s being blocked, with Democrat leaders downplaying their actions as merely based on technicalities, blaming improper Republican procedural methods and rule-breaking.

  Importantly, as the report underscores of the Uyghur dominant Xinjiang province, “The region is also the world’s largest producer of solar panel components, an industry that human rights groups say is rife with Uyghur slave labor.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 19:00

• Futures Slide After Five "Mild" Cases Of Omicron Variant Detected In New York
  Futures Slide After Five “Mild” Cases Of Omicron Variant Detected In New York

  It’s an outcome that could be seen from a mile away – and we made sure everyone following us would see it this morning, when we said to “expect a cluster of NYC cases in the next 24 hours” after it was reported that the 2nd identified US case in Minneapolis had attended the Anime NYC 2021 convention at the Javits Center from Nov. 19-21…

  Expect a cluster of NYC cases in the next 24 hours.

  “The person spoke with MDH case investigators and reported traveling to New York City and attended the Anime NYC 2021 convention at the Javits Center from Nov. 19-21”

  We will know just how benign Omicron is within 72 hours

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 2, 2021

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

  … but apparently the news that more cases are emerging in NYC has come as a total shock to the algos programmed by 19 year old math PhD’s.

  Moments ago, during a press conference by New York Gov. Kathy Hochul with NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio, the two announced that at least five cases of the COVID-19 omicron variant were reported in New York, just hours after the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) announced a case in a resident with a recent travel history to New York City.

  #BREAKING: In a joint press conference with @NYCMayor Bill de Blasio, @GovKathyHochul announced that a total of 5 known cases of the #OmicronVarient of the coronavirus have been confirmed in the state of New York. pic.twitter.com/L5gtpFB3nN

  — Moshe Schwartz (@YWNReporter) December 2, 2021

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

  The five confirmed cases in the state of New York include:

  1. 67-year-old woman in Suffolk County – some vaccination history present, unknown how many doses she received
  2. Queens based case – unknown gender – unknown if vaccinated
  3. Queens based case – unknown gender – unknown if vaccinated
  4. Brooklyn based case – unknown gender – unknown if vaccinated
  5. Just received word of a 5th suspected case – no further info

  What is far more important – because by now everyone knows that the omicron variant is highly transmissible – is that all of the cases are said to be “mild” and everyone recovered at home. In other words, while we collect more and more data point, every incremental observation validates the optimistic take that omicron may spread faster but is indeed, as the South African doctor who first identified it, “extremely mild.”

  Gov Hochul confirmed as much, saying that “while [Omicron] may be highly transmissible we want people to know that the early cases that arise are not life threatening, they seem to be minor cases”

  Of course, all the nuances was wasted on the headline scanning algos, and futures which had levitated after the close to trade near session highs in today’s torrid short covering session, dropped on the news, and were down about 15 points…

  

  … or about 3 spoos for every new case. We can’t wait for the algos to learn that there are over 8 million New Yorkers (actually probably less than that now that so many are fleeing de Blasio’ socialist paradise).

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 18:48

• Today's Inflation Trivia: Carbon Offsets
  Today’s Inflation Trivia: Carbon Offsets

  Submitted by Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

  What “commodity” is up 350% since May and up 22% since November 1? The Global Emissions Offset Futures:

  

  So the one inflation literally no one is talking about, is the cost of buying carbon offsets?

  What we need to understand is how many of the offsets are new (someone created an offset) which would be good, or how much is people who already had offsets just selling them?

  Clearly winners and losers in this market, but fascinating.

  This topic came up because I’m told, at least in Europe, despite high gasoline prices, refiners are seeing less profitability, in part, because the rise in carbon offsets has outpaced all else.

  Probably not a bad thing, if it is getting us to the goal of carbon neutral (which somehow I think depends on whether this is new offsets created, or shifting of existing offsets, that previously weren’t monetized), but I suspect it is inflationary, especially since of all the inflation complaints I hear and read about, this one isn’t mentioned.

  Anyways, I found this one really curious and have to admit it had been off my radar screen until recently.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 18:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Large UK Supermarket Chains Refuse To Police "Divisive" Face-Mask Mandates
  Large UK Supermarket Chains Refuse To Police “Divisive” Face-Mask Mandates

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

  Two large supermarket chains in the UK have refused to make their staff police mandatory face mask rules, with one boss asserting that the issue is too “divisive.”

  

  New face mask rules were imposed in England from today, meaning people who use public transport, enter shops and innumerable other venues have to wear a compulsory face covering.

  England dropped mandatory face mask rules back in July, but they remained in place in neighboring countries like Scotland, where official data shows infection rates remained the same or higher.

  According to Oxford Professor Jim Naismith, re-imposing face mask rules is “unlikely to have much of an impact” on the spread of the Omicron variant.

  Wary of how contentious the issue has become, Iceland and Co-op, two large supermarket chains in the UK, have publicly said they will tell staff not to enforce such rules.

  Richard Walker, managing director of Iceland, said the company would instead be concentrating its efforts on the “long-term recovering of the high street.”

  “We fully support the reintroduction of compulsory face masks in shops, however, we won’t be asking our store colleagues to police it,” said Walker.

  Co-op’s Paul Gerrard went further, telling GMB, “”What we won’t do is we won’t refuse to serve people who aren’t wearing a mask and we won’t refuse entry to the shop to people who aren’t wearing a mask.”

  “I won’t be asking my store colleagues to police those who refuse to adhere to the rules because I know that, bizarrely, this is a divisive issue, and I think my store colleagues have got enough to deal with in the run-up to Christmas,” he added.

  The British Retail Consortium said that it was the responsibility of the police to enforce the rules, adding: “Customers are asked to respect the rules and be considerate to their fellow shoppers and to hard-working shop staff.”

  *  *  *

  Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

  In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 12/02/2021 – 02:00

• The Usual Suspects Are Trying To Foment A Crisis With Russia
  The Usual Suspects Are Trying To Foment A Crisis With Russia

  Authored by Ted Galen Carpenter via Antiwar.com,

  Once again, the United States and some of its security clients in Eastern Europe are doing their utmost to create a crisis atmosphere with respect to Russia. A key player in that effort is the government of Ukraine. As Ukrainian officials did in April 2021, they are again highlighting allegedly suspicious Russian troop movements near the border between the two countries in late October and early November. Ukrainian leaders contend that such maneuvers might well be the prelude to a military offensive.

  

  Kiev’s propaganda offensive escalated dramatically on November 20 when Brig. General Kyrylo Budanov, Ukraine’s director of defense intelligence, asserted in interview with Military Times that Moscow already had plans in place to launch an invasion by the end of January 2022. He was not talking about a modest border incursion in support of pro-Russia separatists who control portions of Ukraine’s Donbas region either. The attack he was predicting, Budanov insisted, would likely involve airstrikes, artillery and armor attacks followed by airborne assaults in the east, amphibious assaults in Odessa and Mariupul and even an incursion of Ukraine through neighboring Belarus in the north.

  Ukrainian President Voldymyr Zelensky soon made Budanov’s prediction look mild by comparison. He warned that Moscow not only intended to seize large swaths of Ukraine’s territory, but that the Kremlin had plans in place to stage a coup to overthrow his government. Zelensky was quite specific about the timetable; the coup was to occur during the week of November 28-December 4.

  It would be bad enough if such efforts to generate a crisis were simply a unilateral campaign by a government determined to whip-up nationalist emotions to revive its flagging fortunes. But as it did in April, Joe Biden’s administration seems ready to give full credence and backing to the stance of its Ukrainian client toward Russia. In an April 2 telephone call to Zelensky, Biden “affirmed the United States’ unwavering support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of Russia’s ongoing aggression in the Donbas and Crimea.”

  Washington’s knee-jerk support for Kiev is equally evident with respect to the latest developments. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Karen Donfried told reporters in a telephone briefing on November 26 that “all options are on the table” in how to respond to Russia’s “large and unusual” troop buildup near Ukraine’s border. Her statement is the typical diplomatic blather for emphasizing that Washington would even consider using military force on behalf of Ukraine – although the United States has no formal security obligations whatever toward that country. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg likewise insisted that the Alliance “stands with Ukraine” in its confrontation with Russia.

  Such blank check assurances are likely to encourage the most irresponsible, revanchist sentiments in Ukraine and increase the likelihood of a catastrophic showdown. Typically, though, establishment news media outlets in the United States busily try to spin the crisis as the latest evidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin, “surrounded by hardliners,” is the one seeking a confrontation with the United States and NATO. Kiev and Washington, implicitly, are entirely innocent parties.

  The record indicates otherwise. The Biden administration and its NATO allies seem to be going out of their way to engage in highly provocative actions in Russia’s immediate neighborhood. And those moves are not confined to the mounting diplomatic and military support for Kiev, including weapons sales, and now perhaps even the dispatch of U.S. military “advisers” (i.e. disguised Special Forces personnel), although that aspect is the centerpiece.

  The Pentagon is waging a multifaceted campaign of provocations, especially in and around the Black Sea. The US air and naval presence there has surged markedly in the past year or so, including a new deployment in November over Moscow’s strenuous and increasingly pointed protests. Washington and its NATO allies also have conducted several “exercises” (i.e., war games) in that body of water. The ever-helpful Ukrainian government now calls for a “constant” NATO military presence in the Black Sea.

  Such measures may not be the worst of the provocations that the United States and its partners have committed. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu accused US bombers of rehearsing a nuclear strike on Russia from two different directions earlier in November and complained that the planes had come within 20 km (12.4 miles) of the Russian border. Highlighting the notorious tone-deaf behavior of US officials, the Pentagon brushed off the complaint with the bland statement that “These missions were announced publicly at the time, and closely planned with (Strategic Command), (European Command), allies and partners to ensure maximum training and integration opportunities.” More objective observers might respond that conducting such maneuvers that close to the borders of another nuclear-armed great power, especially during an already tense environment, was reckless.

  However, there is no indication that Western foreign policy elites have the slightest intention to dilute the hyper-aggressive policy toward Russia, despite the Kremlin’s warnings that the United States and its allies are taking Moscow’s security red lines far too lightly. Hawkish types act as though previous US and NATO actions have been entirely defensive and conciliatory, despite massive evidence to the contrary. They cling to the benign motives mantra, even as they advocate escalating the confrontation through such steps as coercing Moscow’s client Belarus.

  Former National Security Adviser John Bolton’s latest article is a textbook example of such thinking. Bolton charges that Russia not only intends to dominate Ukraine and Belarus, it plans to re-establish unchallenged control over the entire “near abroad.” In other words, Putin’s goal is to reconstitute the Soviet empire in all but name. US and NATO actions are, of course, a purely defensive response to such plans for egregious aggression and territorial aggrandizement.

  “The Kremlin’s wider perspective,” Bolton charges, “is exemplified by its increases in Black Sea naval drills, and rising complaints about the US Navy’s “provocative” presence there. Black Sea dominance would threaten not only Ukraine but also Georgia, intimidate NATO members Bulgaria and Romania, and induce angst in Erdogan’s increasingly erratic Turkey.”

  According to Bolton, Moscow’s determination to regard the Black Sea as an essential part of Russia’s security zone is definitive evidence of aggressive intent, but Washington’s repeated willingness to send its air and naval forces 6,000 miles from home to conduct war games in that same body of water is not in any way provocative or aggressive.

  Bolton’s willful blindness is typical of how most of the US foreign policy community views relations with Russia. Such arrogance is producing a crisis with Moscow on multiple fronts, and the Putin government seems less and less willing to continue backing down. A potentially catastrophic military confrontation is still avoidable, but new thinking on the part of US and Western policymakers is imperative. Unfortunately, there are very few signs that such new thinking is on the horizon.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 23:50

• Biden's Asia Czar Says China To Likely End Trade War "On Australia's Terms"
  Biden’s Asia Czar Says China To Likely End Trade War “On Australia’s Terms”

  More than 18 months after China kicked off its campaign of economic coercion against Canberra targeting a range of key commodities including barley, wine, coal timber and lobsters – Australia has yet to be brought “to its knees” as officials in Beijing had been hoping for. 

  Though without doubt devastating for many Australian farmers and others in industries directly impacted by the $17bn China trade row, the data ultimately shows it’s been Canberra’s allies like the US picking up much of the slack.

  President Joe Biden’s top Asia adviser Kurt Campbell is now predicting eventual defeat for China, telling the Sydney-based Lowly Institute that he expects Beijing to waive the white flag and restore the trade relationship with Australia, and on Canberra’s terms.

  

  The past months have seen Australia-China relations reach their lowest point in history, given the already soaring tensions went to boiling point after Canberra on Sept.15 unveiled the ‘AUKUS’ nuclear submarine technology sharing deal with the US and Britain. Thus economic warfare unleashed alarming words among state officials threatening future literal war.

  Campbell, who is point man on everything Indo-Pacific for the National Security Council, told the think tank in his statements, “I fully believe that over time, that China will re-engage with Australia. But it will, I believe, re-engage on Australian terms.”

  “I think China’s preference would have been to break Australia,” he underscored. “To drive Australia to its knees… I don’t believe that’s going to be the way it’s going to play out.”

  “I believe that China will engage because it is in its own interest to have a good relationship with Australia,” he concluded. He suggested that likely China, as Australia’s largest trade and export partner – had never expected Canberra to weather the storm this long…

  Mr Campbell said that China respected “strength” and that Australia’s resolve in the face of the economic sanctions would strengthen its hand when dealing with the Chinese government.

  Months ago outside observers began expressing surprise over Australia’s economy standing up better than expected in the face of China’s coercion. 

  

  Australian treasurer Josh Frydenberg has lately emphasized a theme that despite Beijing “willing to use its economic weight as a source of political pressure” it remains that his country’s economy has shown “great resilience to date”.

  We noted starting in October that there are signs China is beginning to fold – for example reluctantly unloading Australian coal amid its recent power crunch despite its unofficial import ban.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 23:30

• Miller: Fauci The Omnipotent
  Miller: Fauci The Omnipotent

  Authored by Stephen L. Miller via The Spectator World (emphasis ours),

  What does Anthony Fauci have to do with a starship? The good doctor’s staggering claims and admissions during his Sunday interview with Face the Nation’s Margaret Brennan recall a classic scene from Star Trek V: The Undiscovered Country. The crew of the Enterprise are taken to a mysterious realm to face a being claiming to be an all-powerful god. To question the being would be to question God himself. The being, of course, turns out not to be a god or the God, but rather an alien entity, trapped and trying to escape.

  

  Now, Dr. Fauci seems to be borrowing from the alien’s playbook.

  When Fauci was asked recently about Senator Ted Cruz recommending prosecutorial action against him to the attorney general, he grew incensed and defensive, even throwing in a reference to the Capitol riot on January 6 for some reason. It was a nakedly partisan attack, the kind you might expect from our politicians and bureaucrats, but not the nation’s bedside doctor, who should be led by the Hippocratic Oath and not Jim Acosta.

  Then came a broad swipe at anyone who dared to question the omnipotent Anthony Fauci, despite his many, many backtracks over the last two years. Fauci decreed that to question him, his decisions or his motives, is to question the very foundations of science itself.

  When Brennan referenced Fauci’s testimony to Congress, he responded, “I’m just going to do my job. I’m going to be saving lives and they are going to be lying.” He continued, “If they get up and really aim their bullets at Tony Fauci. It’s easy to criticize. But they are really criticizing science. Because I represent science and that’s dangerous.”

  Tony Fauci has apparently anointed himself the Science, or at least the ambassador speaking on behalf of Science. This is the second time he has made such a declaration. “Attacks on me, quite frankly, are attacks on science,” he told Chuck Todd on Meet the Press in June.

  This is where most criticism of Fauci misses the mark. Breathless tweets from anonymous accounts depict him as a war criminal, worse than Hitler. Senators threaten him with jail time over misleading testimony to Congress. But when Fauci declares himself a representative of Science, it’s a statement of his religious devotion. He’s not referring to the science of, say, the human manipulation of viruses that can lead to a global pandemic, research Fauci once said he believed was worth the risk. Or to the science that has possibly led to eleven million deaths worldwide and altered the lives of every citizen of every industrialized nation on the planet.

  Fauci believes himself to be a force for good, no matter how many people or puppies have to die to achieve that good. He does not believe in the laws of Congress or man, which is why when pressed, even by Brennan in that same interview, about the origins of this virus and why it seems engineered differently than other SARS viruses, he retreats once again and pushes a wet market theory that not even the Chinese government is willing to stand by anymore.

  Fauci does not consider himself to be accountable to us, or to Congress. He is accountable only to Science. He’s not going to be prosecuted. He’s not going to prison, no matter how many Twitter users crow about it. He will, however, be judged by science, real science, when this is all over. And the real science shows that eleven million people and counting have died so far.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 23:10

• New Zealand Deploys Military To Restore Peace In Crisis-Stricken Solomon Islands
  New Zealand Deploys Military To Restore Peace In Crisis-Stricken Solomon Islands

  New Zealand’s government announced Wednesday it would deploy military personnel to the crisis-stricken Solomon Islands after a mob burnt down buildings and looted shops, according to Reuters. 

  New Zealand joins similar deployments by Australia, Fiji, and Papua New Guinea to restore peace following anti-government rioting. Protesters demand Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare step down over foreign diplomatic ties with China. 

  

  New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Arden said 15 military and police personnel would be deployed on Thursday, followed by a much larger group of 50 over the weekend. She said security forces would work with Solomons police as part of the Australia-led mission to restore peace. 

  “We are deeply concerned by the recent civil unrest and rioting in Honiara, and following yesterday’s request of the Solomon Islands Government, we have moved quickly to provide urgent assistance to help restore sustained peace and security,” Ardern said in the statement.

  Last week, more than 1,000 rioters gathered in Honiara, the capital, and unleashed havoc on government buildings and targeted Chinese-owned shops. Protesters were angered about Sogavare’s move to switch diplomatic relations from Taiwan to China two years ago. He said the demonstrations were “influenced and encouraged by other powers” (we wonder who that could be…). 

  Australia said it will deploy more than 100 police and military personnel to the Solomon Islands as protesters in the Pacific nation defied a government-imposed lockdown and set fire to buildings in the capital Honiara for a second day https://t.co/RuYqDZcVWI pic.twitter.com/DEH0eEjlHZ

  — Reuters (@Reuters) November 25, 2021

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

  The Solomon Islands appears to become a geopolitical battleground between China and the US.

  “Geopolitical maneuvering was a trigger but it isn’t the whole picture,” Anna Powles, a senior lecturer at Massey University in New Zealand, told Financial Times. 

  “The dynamics underpinning the riots are a complex web of longstanding local grievances over the lack of economic development, corruption, and the capturing of elites. These dynamics have intersected over the past three years with the geopolitical competition,” Powles said. 

  Locals are also angered by the increase of businesses owned by ethnic Chinese that has driven economic inequality.

  “There was some feeling against the Chinese businesses that are involved in the financing of domestic politics, but this is not new,” said Leliana Firisua, a Honiara resident influential in the Malaitan community. “This resentment will continue if they do not stop doing it.”

  Firisua warned: “This unrest will not stop unless what the people are demanding is achieved. And that is change.”

  So the temporary Australia-led peacekeeping mission might turn into a much more extended stay as local anger against the Chinese may not abate anytime soon. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 22:50

• LA To Enforce Homeless Encampment Bans In Parks, Near Elementary School In District 12
  LA To Enforce Homeless Encampment Bans In Parks, Near Elementary School In District 12

  Authored by Micaela Ricaforte via The Epoch Times,

  The Los Angeles City Council passed a motion Nov. 30 to enforce the ban on homeless encampments in seven locations of District 12 amid the city’s growing homeless population.

  

  An ordinance passed earlier this year banned homeless encampments in the public right-of-way; however, a city council vote is required before the ban can be enforced.

  Introduced by Councilman John Lee of District 12 and seconded by District 15’s Councilman Joe Buscaino, the motion was passed 10–2, with dissent from Councilmembers Nithya Raman and Mike Bonin.

  The motion prohibits “sitting, lying, sleeping, or storing, using, maintaining, or placing personal property” within 500 feet of the parks on Chatsworth Street, Rinaldi Street, Vanowen Street, Reseda Boulevard, and Nordhoff Street—as well as Chatsworth Branch Library and Dearborn Elementary Charter Academy in District 12.

  Buscaino’s own motions to enforce the ban in his district’s 161 locations—more than 100 of which are schools and daycare centers, and dozens are parks and libraries—will be voted on Dec. 1.

  Some Angelenos expressed their opposition to the ban, criticizing Buscaino and Lee’s handling of homelessness.

  “This is a really, really cruel way of enforcing encampment [bans],” Olga Lexell, a resident in the South Robertson neighborhood, commented during the council meeting.

  Lexell went on to criticize the council’s lack of outreach in the communities that would be impacted by the ban.

  “It’s been shocking, as somebody with experience working with the unhoused population, to see people on the city council with zero experience in social services or in working with these groups, who don’t even come out to the park, who don’t even know what outreach looks like, advocating for these punitive measures that do nothing but displace people and disconnect people from their case workers,” Lexell said.

  Lou Caravella, president of Central San Pedro Neighborhood Council, told The Epoch Times in an email that anything besides affordable housing construction was “just for show.”

  “The only solution to homelessness is building affordable housing,” Caravella said.

  “Sweeps of homeless encampments are temporary and almost entirely cosmetic. We must build low-income housing and end the cycle of pay-for-play that rewards LA City Council for gifting permits to donor-developers for overpriced housing.”

  Some residents in support of the enforcement said the bans are about protecting public spaces and single-family homes.

  Speaking only as an individual resident in Northridge, Glenn Bailey, who is also the president of the city’s East Neighborhood Council, said three of the locations listed on Lee’s motion fell into his neighborhood council district’s boundaries.

  “These three locations are surrounded on three or more sides by single-family residences or townhomes and condos,” Bailey told The Epoch Times.

  “The prohibition of encampments in the public right-of-way adjoining these public facilities is especially appropriate.”

  This comes amid a growing homeless population in the city.

  Though the 2021 data is not yet available, Los Angeles city has more than 41,000 homeless people in 2020—a 16.1 percent increase from 2019—according to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority.

  Earlier this month, Buscaino, who is also running for mayor, introduced a citywide motion that would ban homeless people from camping in public spaces if enough shelter is available and has been offered. If passed, the measure would be placed on the upcoming 2022 ballot.

  However, the council voted 11–2 on Nov. 23 to send the measure to the council’s Homelessness and Poverty Committee, where the fate of the measure will be decided in the next several months.

  Michael Trujillo, a spokesperson for Buscaino’s campaign, said Nov. 23 they plan to collect signatures for the measure starting in January.

  Buscaino criticized the council’s move to send the measure to the committee.

  “Here’s what I’m hearing,” Buscaino said Nov. 23. “Process, process, vetting, let’s send this to committee. Let’s get a report back in 90 days. Let’s create a task force while people are dying in our streets.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 22:30

• 88% Of Black Marylanders Support Governor's Plan To 'Re-Fund The Police'  
  88% Of Black Marylanders Support Governor’s Plan To ‘Re-Fund The Police’  

  Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan recently announced a $150 million proposal to “re-fund the police” despite state Democrats denouncing the move as “divisive” and “misguided.” But who cares what Democrats think, and let’s focus on the people of Baltimore City who may experience one of the most murderous years on record. We want to hear what they think about the governor’s proposal. 

  According to internal polling obtained by the Washington Free Beacon, an astonishing 88% of black voters support Hogan’s plan to increase police funding. The poll was conducted by an outside group with relations to Hogan, showing 64% of black voters “strongly support” the governor’s plan to re-fund state and local police agencies,” while 24% “somewhat support.” Across racial lines, 89% and 74% of white and Hispanic voters support it, respectively

  

  Efforts by Democrats to defund the police and demoralize officers have backfired. The movement began after the Ferguson and Baltimore Riots, and ever since, the city has experienced some of the most violent crimes on record. 

  Currently, there is no law and order on the streets of Baltimore. Hogan said it’s the worst possible time to reduce police funding because it would undermine public safety. He advocated for more investing and beefing up budgets to restore the peace in the metro area.  

  However, across party lines, Democrat politicians slammed the governor’s plan, calling it “misguided” and the wrong measure to make communities safer. 

  Hogan pointed specifically to Baltimore and said, “people are being shot nearly every single day” in the city, “and we all have an obligation to do something about it right now.” He said, “I want those families and all of the victims of this violence to know that we will not stop pursuing those criminals who are terrorizing our community.”

  The defund movement may be popular with some wealthy (white) elites, activists on the extreme left. Still, there’s the silent majority of black folks who oppose defunding the police, according to a recent Harvard’s Center for American Political Studies and Harris Poll. 

  Most of all, Americans want police, prosecutors, and judges to uphold the law because the law is the law, which makes a society civil. Progressive cities that attempt to dismantle or undermine the law and policing cause more harm than good with surging violent crime to show forth. 

  This past summer, in Oakland, California, black families stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the police against Antifa’s “defund the police” chaos. 

  Ordinary people across America, no matter their race, desire law-and-order, and with that comes prosperity.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 22:10

• This $1.6 Trillion Market Could Cease To Exist Soon
  This $1.6 Trillion Market Could Cease To Exist Soon

  By Bloomberg Markets Live commentators Ye Xie and Amy Li

  By now, it’s clear that Beijing is greatly discouraging, if not completely forbidding, listings of Chinese tech companies in the U.S. What’s unclear is what Beijing will do with existing Chinese ADRs, an overwhelming majority of which used variable-interest entities to circumvent Chinese laws to get listed.

  Even if Beijing doesn’t demand the likes of Alibaba and Baidu dismantle their VIEs immediately, the authorities have signaled that Hong Kong, instead of New York, is now the preferred capital market for China Inc. Over time, the $1.6 trillion ADR market may become a footnote in history books.

  Bloomberg reported that China plans to ban companies from listing overseas through VIEs. But companies using such structures would still be allowed to pursue IPOs in Hong Kong, subject to regulatory approval. The China Securities Regulatory Commission quickly denied the report, without giving details.

  The controversial VIE structure, designed to bypass Chinese restrictions on foreign investment in sensitive sectors including the internet industry, has been used by most Chinese ADRs for decades. It allows a Chinese firm to transfer profits to an offshore entity, whose shares foreign investors can own. There’s always been an argument over why the best companies should be allowed to skirt Chinese laws and enrich foreigners, while depriving local investors opportunities to benefit from the crown jewels of the economy. As Paul Gillis, professor at Peking University, put it bluntly: “The VIE has always made a mockery of rule of law in China.”

  

  Washington is also increasing security over VIEs, deeming they lack transparency and legal protection for investors. In other words, both sides would be happy to do away with VIEs.

  But with billions of dollars at stake, outlawing the VIEs and demanding an immediate delisting would cause massive disruption and damage China’s reputation. Listing VIEs in Hong Kong may be still allowed, suggesting “we shouldn’t worry about the big hammer dropping on existing VIEs, as that would contradict Beijing’s stance re VIE listing in the HK,” noted Jason Hsu, chief investment officer of Rayliant Global Advisors.

  What could happen is that the existing VIEs get “grandfathered,” but ADRs are encouraged to pursue dual-listings in Hong Kong.  “Perhaps over time, as most of the liquidity shifts toward the HK venue, with the U.S. listing taking on a diminished role, the concern would become a non-concern,” said Hsu.

  

  The fate of VIEs isn’t the only concern for Chinese ADRs. Under a law (HFCA) passed under the Trump administration in December, Chinese companies may face delisting if they refuse to hand over financial information to American regulators, a demand that Beijing has refused so far. “Unless something unexpected happens, the Chinese ADR market should be eliminated within three years because of HFCA,” said Jesse Fried, professor at Harvard Law School. “Even absent the HFCA, China might have prevented companies from listing in the U.S. to build up its own markets and have greater control over the companies. But the U.S. government seems to be doing China’s work for it.”

  With all this going on, trading activity in most Chinese ADRs has greatly diminished since the tightening of regulations during the summer. The average daily trading volume for Didi, for example, has declined to 31 million shares since July, from 288 million in June when it was listed. In aggregate, the trading volume of Chinese ADRs has declined 44% since July, from the first half of the year.

  This may be where we are going.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 21:50

• Stunning Images Reveal Downtown San Francisco Is Boarded Up Amid Mass Looting 
  Stunning Images Reveal Downtown San Francisco Is Boarded Up Amid Mass Looting 

  San Francisco is spiraling out of control amid a massive wave of “smash-and-grab” gangs targeting retail stores. Progressives have transformed the metro area into a liberal hell-hole of surging violent crime. Retail thefts have dramatically increased due to the recent passage of ‘Proposition 47,’ which lowers the penalty for theft. 

  By now, readers are well familiar with nearly two dozen Walgreens stores in San Francisco that have closed up shop due to the high rate of thefts (read: here & here).

  Lately, organized crime gangs have been targeting ultra-luxury retailers, such as Louis Vuitton stores. There was also an eighty-person flash mob that looted a Nordstrom in the Bay Area last week. 

  As a result of all the looting and failed progressive leadership doing nothing about the smash-and-grab crimes, retailers have taken things into their own hands by boarding up windows and doors. 

  

  Ahead of Christmas, here’s what the liberal utopia of downtown San Francisco looks like:

  This is what downtown San Francisco looks like right now.

  (🧵1/x) pic.twitter.com/V1nrHs7Iqf

  — Michelle Tandler (@michelletandler) November 29, 2021

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

  pic.twitter.com/XKAsS1MoSJ

  — Michelle Tandler (@michelletandler) November 29, 2021

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

  pic.twitter.com/aUNRl81svV

  — Michelle Tandler (@michelletandler) November 29, 2021

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

  pic.twitter.com/dgXp9OXiA5

  — Michelle Tandler (@michelletandler) November 29, 2021

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

  pic.twitter.com/IA6rxOefVL

  — Michelle Tandler (@michelletandler) November 29, 2021

  Twitter user Michelle Tandler who captured photos of downtown said, “I have no words right now to convey the shock and disappointment I feel towards our local government. My hands are trembling I am so angry at our leaders. This is their doing.”

  Boarded windows > broken windows.

  This is what happens when the criminal justice system doesn’t work.

  San Francisco has become lawless and residents and businesses are going into self-protection mode.

  The stats are fictitious. Nobody reports. People are hunkering down.

  We are all over the news.

  A shiny example of what a progressive-run city looks like.

  I believe our government is more akin to a regime than a body of public servants. San Franciscans — this is our doing. It’s up to us to reverse the trend.

  It’s only a matter of time before progressive California lawmakers come under fire and are booted out of office for their failed policies. For civil society to work, law and order need to be restored. 

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 21:30

• US Troop Pullout Date Of Dec.31 Nears, But Iraqis Are Skeptical
  US Troop Pullout Date Of Dec.31 Nears, But Iraqis Are Skeptical

  Authored by Jason Ditz via AntiWar.com,

  Recent reports on the deal to withdraw US combat forces from Iraq suggest that the process is just 15 days away. The hope is that they would be completed before the December 31 deadline, as Iraq’s military assures.

  That’s what the Iraqis want, but informed by the last 17+ years of US occupation, most are very skeptical. They’ve a right to be, too, as the Pentagon has already said troops will remain in Iraq beyond December 31.

  

  “US combat troops stationed in Iraq are scheduled to leave the country in 15 days, the Iraqi army’s spokesman said on Thursday,” The National wrote based on military statements late last week.

  “Baghdad and Washington announced in July that the full withdrawal of American combat troops from Iraq would be completed by the end of this year,” the report indicated. “Training and advising missions, however, would continue.”

  Over the past few years the US coalition presence has continued under the guise of fighting ISIS, despite the Islamic State having long been dismantled and driven underground. The majority of the some 2,500 or more US troops there have been continued training Iraq’s army.

  Analysts say there will be no real withdrawal in December, but rather the US will just change the name of the mission and try to spin it as something else. Effectively, Iraq will see a withdrawal only on paper.

  Some fear that if the US doesn’t withdraw according to the timetable, pro-Iran Iraqi militias could launch attacks…

  Iraq Militias, Seeing Taliban’s Success, Plan to Force U.S. Troops Out After Dec. 31 https://t.co/FFp8IQzRAw

  — Ruth Anderson (@Ruthie19) November 23, 2021

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

  Past times when the US did this, they went to substantial effort to spin this as keeping promises. This time around, it seems they’re leaving it up to Iraq’s military to manage the narrative.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 21:10

• Aussie Police Arrest Teen 'Fugitives' Who Escaped From COVID Internment Camp
  Aussie Police Arrest Teen ‘Fugitives’ Who Escaped From COVID Internment Camp

  Three teenagers who escaped a Northern Australian Covid internment camp were arrested by police, who say they don’t believe they came into contact with members of the nearby community and “the health risk to the community was very low,” adding “But there is absolutely no excuse for the actions of these three this morning.”

  

  According to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), the three teens from the Binjari community near Katherine, aged 15, 16 and 17, tested negative for the virus yesterday. They had been confined to quarantine for being ‘close contacts of positive cases,’ only to scale a fence and escape at 4:30 am Wednesday morning.

  NT Police Commissioner Jamie Chalker said officers found the trio on the edge of Palmerston and arrested them after a chase on foot.

  He said the young people are still being interviewed but “early indications” were they had not had any contact with members of the public.

  The facility is housing people affected by the  Katherine region COVID-19 outbreak as well as returned travellers from repatriation flights, including a man who tested positive for the Omicron variant on Monday.

  Each of the teens faces a fine of up to $5,024. According to Chalker, they will beef up CCTV coverage at the facility, and that they would discuss making more contact with lonely residents whose isolation ‘may have been a trigger’ for the escape.

  “I also want to point to the overwhelming compliance that we’ve had, given several hundred people have been placed into the Centre of National Resilience linked to the clusters from Robinson River, Katherine, Binjari and Rockhole,” he said.

  

  Their escape set off a police manhunt, which included highway checkpoints.

  BREAKING: Police set up checkpoints after several wards escaped from government quarantine facility in Howard Springs, Australia. So far, three fugitives have been caught; all three tested negative for COVID-19.https://t.co/CKjJ5pbadepic.twitter.com/X04pm3Ox3m

  — Michael P Senger (@MichaelPSenger) December 1, 2021

  This is what happens when you let tyrants run Bartertown…

  

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 20:50

• As US Retailers Struggle Against Smash-And-Grab Flash Mobs, Liberals Blame "White Supremacy"
  As US Retailers Struggle Against Smash-And-Grab Flash Mobs, Liberals Blame “White Supremacy”

  Authored by Robert Bridge via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

  Americans are facing a new type of crime wave that got its start in the mad liberal laboratory, where the utopian notion that going soft on criminals is going terribly awry. While threatening the traditional brick and mortar shopping experience with extinction, and making communities a living hell, the left needs to stop trying to reinvent the wheel.

  

  Apparently unwilling to wait for Black Friday discounts, roaming gangs of young men are descending on retail outlets and pharmacies in flash mobs, clearing out the store shelves in a matter of seconds as clerks look on helplessly.

  $100k in handbags 👜 stolen at a Louis Vuitton store near Chicago! pic.twitter.com/jaElFgbkWO

  — Asian Crime Report (@activeasian) November 19, 2021

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

  In one pre-Thanksgiving raid, about 90 individuals stormed a Nordstrom outlet in Walnut Creek, situated in the San Francisco Bay Area. Members of the masked mob pepper-sprayed one employee, and assaulted another with a knife before making off with an estimated $100,000 in merchandise. Many of the looters made their getaway in some 25 vehicles parked out front.

  Disturbingly, as this sort of mayhem unfolds in major cities across the country, liberals seem more preoccupied with determining how to define the criminal acts.

  Lorenzo Boyd, PhD, Professor of Criminal Justice & Community Policing at the University of New Haven, and a retired veteran police officer, is just one academic who seems more obsessed with semantics than digging to the root of the problem.

  “Looting is a term that we typically use when people of color or urban dwellers are doing something,” Boyd remarked in an interview with ABC7 news channel.

  “We tend not to use that term for other people when they do the exact same thing.”

  And by “other people” it is abundantly clear who Boyd is referencing.

  It’s looting. Just like there were riots in Kenosha, not just protests. https://t.co/trvUHxsCHU pic.twitter.com/nmdUTg6IXT

  — Scott Walker (@ScottWalker) November 23, 2021

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

  Martin Reynolds, Co-executive director of the Robert C. Maynard Institute of Journalism Education, invited listeners to compare the current wave of flash mob thefts to the fallout from Hurricane Katrina, when many marginalized New Orleans residents, the majority of them Black, were labeled looters for stealing from local businesses.

  “This seems like it’s an organized smash and grab robbery,” Reynold said, speaking about the current phenomenon of flash mobs.

  “This doesn’t seem like looting. We’re thinking of scenarios where first responders are completely overwhelmed. And folks, often may be on their own,” he said.

  While both academics do make some valid points, there is a risk of liberals getting trapped in a game of semantics that eventually leads to social disaster. More on that in a moment. At the same time, the radical progressives wish to ignore the fact that the primary reason for these crimes happening at all is because they went soft on crime.

  Back in 2014, the Democrats in California passed ballot initiative Proposition 47, which legislates that theft of less than $950 in merchandise is considered to be a nonviolent misdemeanor. In other words, such cases are rarely prosecuted. The repercussions of such stupidity should not have been hard to predict.

  Prop. 47 led to a rise in the larceny theft rate of about 135 per 100,000 residents, an increase of close to 9 percent compared to the 2014 rate, according to a report by the Public Policy Institute of California. Police Chief David Swing, president of the California Police Chiefs Association, responded, saying that the PPIC’s conclusions “are consistent with what police chiefs across the state have seen since 2014.”

  But for store owners in California and elsewhere, there is no need for special reports. The damage from the shortsighted legislation is abundantly clear.

  “Theft in Walgreens’ San Francisco stores is four times the average for stores elsewhere in the country, and the chain spends 35 times more on security guards in the city than elsewhere,” reported the San Francisco Chronicle, discussing just one of the myriad casualties of Prop 47.

  Experts caution use of ‘looting’ in describing rash of Bay Area smash and grabs https://t.co/dQfftRG84T

  — ABC7 News (@abc7newsbayarea) November 23, 2021

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

  Compounded with the problem of a legal system that is increasing willing to let criminals walk, a confab of writers, agitators and academics are more inclined to see the ‘poetic justice’ of young marauders clearing out stores in coordinated flash mobs.

  Last year, during the street protests in the wake of George Floyd’s death, a Chicago Black Lives Matter organizer called looting in the Windy City “reparation” for past crimes committed against Black people.

  “I don’t care if somebody decides to loot a Gucci’s or a Macy’s or a Nike because that makes sure that that person eats,” Ariel Atkins screamed at a rally outside the South Loop police station.

  “That’s a reparation,” Atkins said.

  “Anything they want to take, take it because these businesses have insurance.”

  But even before George Floyd had become a household name, self-described agitator Vickie Osterweil had penned a book entitled, ‘In Defense of Looting,’ provided an apology for the act of looting before it was cool.

  Beginning by explaining that the word comes from the Hindi, lút, which means “goods” or “spoils,” Osterweil (who wrote the book under the name ‘Willie Osterweil,’ apparently at a different stage in life) goes on to argue that the idea of property in the United States is “derived through whiteness and through Black oppression, through the history of slavery and settler domination of the country.”

  Funny how many of the oppressed and downtrodden of the world are willing to be consoled by Gucci bags, Samsung televisions and Nike tennis shoes. But I digress.

  Osterweil goes off on a massively contradictory spiel, somehow equating the theft of property with liberation from the “White man’s world.”

  “Looting strikes at the heart of property, of whiteness and of the police; it gets to the very root of the way those three things are interconnected,” she says. “And also it provides people with an imaginative sense of freedom and pleasure and helps them imagine a world that could be. And I think that’s a part of it that doesn’t really get talked about — that riots and looting are experienced as sort of joyous and liberatory.

  How looting and stealing could help a person “imagine a world that could be” it is difficult to imagine, but the left must do better than merely coddling and apologizing for the criminals in their midst. More than just midterms are at stake.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 20:30

• Fierce Taliban vs. Iran Clashes Break Out On Afghan Border
  Fierce Taliban vs. Iran Clashes Break Out On Afghan Border

  Fierce clashes erupted Wednesday between the Taliban and Iranian forces along Afghanistan’s western border, Reuters reports based on local eyewitness accounts. Battlefield videos have also begun emerging showing gunfights on the border in the Nimruz region in the country’s southwest.

  The Afghan side is claiming that Iranian border patrols crossed into Afghan territory, resulting in an armed confrontation and firefight. “Amaj News based in Kabul also quoted local sources as saying that Iranian forces used heavy weapons and the Taliban dispatched armored American Humvees to confront Iran’s border troops,” regional news source Iran International observed.

  First clashes today between #Taliban & #Iran forces on #Afghanistan border today.

  Local Afghan media reporting that Taliban took control of 3 Iranian border checkpoints: pic.twitter.com/c5bpXD8tWj

  — Joyce Karam (@Joyce_Karam) December 1, 2021

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

  In addition to the American Humvees, ironically enough, it’s also likely that US weapons and ammunition were used by the Taliban militants, given the hardline Islamist group had last August captured many millions of dollars worth of US equipment as the Pentagon rapidly withdrew from the country.

  Hours following the intense clash, Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency called it a “border misunderstanding” while denying reports that Taliban fighters had captured an Iranian outpost. Some unverified videos circulating in regional social media have claimed a small Iranian border base was captured and ransacked by the Taliban.

  Local Afghan news sources are additionally claiming some Iranian soldiers were captured. If true it would prove hugely embarrassing for the Islamic Republic…

  #BREAKING Fierce clashes have erupted between Iranian border guards and Taliban forces along Iran-Afghanistan border.
  Sources told @aamajnews24 several Iranian border posts have been captured by Taliban fighters pic.twitter.com/v88lhQWcXZ

  — Reza Khaasteh (@Khaaasteh) December 1, 2021

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

  “The clashes ended and Iran is discussing the dispute over the border with the Taliban,” Tasnim reported, however, there’s little that’s been confirmed – and likely there could be further firefights that break out.

  There are also unconfirmed reports from the ground that the Taliban took on casualties.

  #AFG Taliban soldiers clashing with Iranian border forces in Kaaang district, Nimroz on the Iranian border. Fighting stopped this evening. There are casualties and fatalities among Taliban, several sources in Nimroz province including doctors at a hospital tells me. pic.twitter.com/XC15LvkEut

  — BILAL SARWARY (@bsarwary) December 1, 2021

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

  Beginning in July the Taliban started capturing increasingly important border crossings with Iran as the US withdrawal was initiated.

  The Taliban advance so near the border had placed Iran’s border forces on high alert, which included deployments of elite IRGC units in some places. At the time the IRGC said it would crackdown on any possible drug smuggling or any unauthorized breaches of Iran’s border. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 20:10

• Dying COVID-19 Patient Recovers After Court Orders Hospital To Administer Ivermectin
  Dying COVID-19 Patient Recovers After Court Orders Hospital To Administer Ivermectin

  Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

  An elderly COVID-19 patient has recovered after a court order allowed him to be treated with ivermectin, despite objections from the hospital in which he was staying, according to the family’s attorney

  After an Illinois hospital insisted on administering expensive remdesivir to the patient and the treatment failed, his life was saved after a court ordered that an outside medical doctor be allowed to use the inexpensive ivermectin to treat him, over the hospital’s strenuous objections.

  Ivermectin tablets have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat humans with intestinal strongyloidiasis and onchocerciasis, two conditions caused by parasitic worms. Some topical forms of ivermectin have been approved to treat external parasites such as head lice and for skin conditions such as rosacea. The drug is also approved for use on animals.

  Remdesivir has been given emergency use authorization by the FDA for treating certain categories of human patients that have been hospitalized with COVID-19. But the use of ivermectin to treat humans suffering from COVID-19 has become controversial because the FDA hasn’t approved its so-called off-label use to treat the disease, which is caused by the CCP virus also known as SARS-CoV-2.

  Critics have long accused the FDA of dragging its heels and being dangerously over-cautious and indifferent to human suffering in its approach to regulating pharmaceuticals, a criticism that led to then-President Donald Trump signing the Right to Try Act in May 2018. The law, according to the FDA, “is another way for patients who have been diagnosed with life-threatening diseases or conditions who have tried all approved treatment options and who are unable to participate in a clinical trial to access certain unapproved treatments.”

  Medical doctors are free to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID-19, even though the FDA claims that its off-label use could be harmful in some circumstances.

  Clinical human trials of the drug for use against COVID-19 are currently in progress, according to the agency.

  The drug “most definitely” saved the elderly patient’s life “because his condition changed right immediately after he took ivermectin,” attorney for the family, Kirstin M. Erickson of Chicago-based Mauck and Baker, told The Epoch Times.

  

  Sun Ng, 71, who was visiting the United States from Hong Kong to celebrate his granddaughter’s first birthday, became ill with COVID-19 and within days was close to death. He was hospitalized on Oct. 14 at Edward Hospital, in Naperville, Illinois, a part of the Edward-Elmhurst Health system. His condition worsened dramatically and he was intubated and placed on a ventilator a few days later.

  Ng’s only child, Man Kwan Ng, who holds a doctoral degree in mechanical engineering, did her own research and decided that her father should take ivermectin, which some medical doctors believe is effective against COVID-19, despite the FDA’s guidance to the contrary.

  But against the daughter’s wishes, the hospital refused to administer ivermectin and denied access to a physician willing to administer it.

  The daughter went to court on her father’s behalf and on Nov. 1, Judge Paul M. Fullerton of the Circuit Court of DuPage County granted a temporary restraining order requiring the hospital to allow ivermectin to be given to the patient. The hospital refused to comply with the court order.

  At a subsequent court hearing on Nov. 5, Fullerton said one physician who testified described Sun Ng as “basically on his death bed,” with a mere 10 to 15 percent chance of survival. Ivermectin can have minor side effects such as dizziness, itchy skin, and diarrhea at the dosage suggested for Ng, but the “risks of these side effects are so minimal that Mr. Ng’s current situation outweighs that risk by one-hundredfold,” Fullerton said.

  The judge issued a preliminary injunction that day directing the hospital to “immediately allow … temporary emergency privileges” to Ng’s physician, Dr. Alan Bain, “solely to administer Ivermectin to this patient.”

  The hospital resisted the order on Nov. 6 and 7, denying Bain access to his patient. The hospital claimed that it couldn’t let Bain in because he wasn’t vaccinated against COVID-19 and that its chief medical officer wasn’t available to “proctor” Bain administering ivermectin.

  The daughter’s attorneys filed an emergency report with the court on Nov. 8 and Fullerton heard from both sides. The judge admonished the hospital and restated that it must allow Bain inside over a period of 15 days to do his job. When the hospital filed a motion to stay the order, Fullerton denied it, again directing the facility to comply.

  The ivermectin appears to have worked, and Sun Ng has recovered from COVID-19. He was discharged by the hospital on Nov. 27.

  “My father’s recovery is amazing,” his daughter, Man Kwan Ng, said in a statement.

  “My father is a tough man. He was working so hard to survive, and of course, with God’s holding hands. He weaned off oxygen about three days after moving out of the ICU. He started oral feeding before hospital discharge. He returned home without carrying a bottle of oxygen and a feeding tube installed to his stomach. He can now stand with a walker at the bedside and practice stepping. After being sedated for a month on a ventilator in ICU, his performance is beyond our expectations. Praise the Lord.”

  Attorney Erickson said the “happy” end result here provides “hope for the nation.”

  “We get calls from all over the place,” she told The Epoch Times.

  “People that want to sue hospitals after someone’s passed, they wanted to get the medicine and couldn’t. Obviously, that’s a different, difficult case because a medical malpractice case is very difficult.”

  People just want to do what’s best for their family members and “find ivermectin themselves” and have it on hand “and use it when someone starts to develop symptoms,” Erickson said.

  She said her legal team and client were “really thankful” that Ng recovered and “we salute” Judge Fullerton, Dr. Bain, and others, as well as the hospital for abiding by the court order in the end.

  For more information on ivermectin and how to obtain it, Erickson said people should visit the website of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance at Covid19CriticalCare.com.

  Keith Hartenberger, system director for public relations for Edward-Elmhurst Health, declined to comment.

  “We’re not able to comment due to patient privacy guidelines,” he told The Epoch Times by email.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 19:50

• Cook County Blows Past 1,000 Homicides This Year In First Since 1994
  Cook County Blows Past 1,000 Homicides This Year In First Since 1994

  The greater Chicago-area Cook County has this week surpassed a grim record – for the first time in almost three decades seeing more than 1,000 homicides in one year. With still a month to go until the close of 2021 the Cook County Medical Examiner’s office put out figures on Tuesday showing 1,009 total homicides.

  The last time the county – which is the most populous within the state of Illinois encompassing the Chicagoland area and Evanston city – saw 1,000 homicides in a one-year period was in 1994, when there were 1,141 killings.

  

  According to local CBS-2, “Chicago alone has had 777 homicides so far this year, according to the medical examiner’s office. That’s more than the total number of homicides reported by Chicago Police all of last year, when CPD reported 769 homicides.”

  Further, the medical examiner’s office records show that “the vast majority of homicide victims have been Black, with 81% of the victims identified as African American. Latinos accounted for about 15% of the county’s homicide victims.”

  The vast majority of these deaths are by gun violence. But strangely enough, Democrat Mayor Lori Lightfoot who has lately been at war with her own police department over the vaccination status disclosure mandate, has tried to shift blame for the soaring violent crime gripping the city’s streets onto (what else?) the coronavirus pandemic…

  “There’s no question that the COVID-related impact on the public safety system in Chicago, in New York, in L.A., D.C. and other cities across the country is real. And what we’ve got to continue to do is make sure that we’re demanding of our courts and our prosecutors that they hold violent people accountable and keep them off our streets,” the mayor told MSNBC last month.

  Most recently, Thanksgiving weekend saw over 40 people shot, including five killed, which means Cook County could possibly be headed toward an all-time high of shootings before 2021 is out. 

  One report after the bloody holiday weekend described Chicago as “a war zone” while featuring footage of someone firing a machine gun:

  This it the terrifying moment machine gun shooting erupted on the streets of Chicago in a bloody Thanksgiving weekend of gun violence. 

  …Footage posted online shows a man, who does not appear to have a gun, running through the streets of Chicago as machine gun fire erupts nearby.  

  ‘Chicago is a war zone’: Terrifying video shows MACHINE GUN fire erupting on the streets in bloody Thanksgiving weekend of violence as three are killed and another 40 are shot – pic.twitter.com/anUd9XR7Rd

  — Blanche Victoria (@tammytabby) November 30, 2021

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

  It’s certainly not the first time in recent months that fully automatic gunfire has erupted on Chicago streets.

  As one previously widely viewed social media video from last summer showed, gunfights have on occasion broken out in broad daylight…

  Chicago’s Gone Wild: Gang Member Machine Gun Shootout Called Worst Violence Since Al Capone Days!! pic.twitter.com/gqrRo5wuQT

  — Willie D (@WillieDLIVE) June 26, 2021

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

  Meanwhile, the city of Chicago and Mayor Lightfoot’s hugely controversial vaccine status disclosure mandate for police officers remains at a tense stalemate.

  Just under a month ago an Illinois judge handed the police union a major victory, ruling that an arbitrator must examine the policy before the city can implement it based on prior union agreements and rules with the city. The vaccine mandate order remains blocked for the time being. Many observers and Chicagoans themselves have expressed alarm that if patrol officers were ever actually removed from the streets for failure to comply with the pandemic-related mandates, the chaotic violence would spiral out of control even beyond already existing levels.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 19:30

• France Deploys Military Police To Caribbean Islands Amid Unrest Over Vaccine Mandate
  France Deploys Military Police To Caribbean Islands Amid Unrest Over Vaccine Mandate

  Authored by Isabel van Brugen via The Epoch Times,

  The French government has deployed military police to the Caribbean islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe amid intensifying protests against COVID-19 vaccine mandates and other pandemic related restrictions.

  

  Following several weeks of unrest and violent protests over COVID-19 measures—including a vaccine mandate for health care workers—police reinforcements were sent to the French Caribbean territories on Tuesday.

  Compulsory vaccinations for health workers, a measure already introduced on the French mainland, had fuelled resentment among the islands’ population.

  Sebastien Lecornu, the minister for France’s overseas territories, said 70 gendarmes had arrived in Martinique earlier in the day, in addition to two squadrons that were deployed from metropolitan France unannounced, to help clear road blocks.

  

  French Overseas Minister Sebastien Lecornu speaks as he attends a press conference during his official visit in Fort-de-France on the French Caribbean island of Martinique, on Nov. 30, 2021. (Alain Jocard/AFP via Getty Images)

  “Social dialogue is not possible without a sound basis and that sound basis is the re-establishment of freedoms … and our capacity to re-establish order,” Lecornu told a press conference in Martinique after meeting its leaders and trade unions.

  In Guadeloupe, home to some 400,000 residents, 70 police reinforcements were sent on Tuesday along with 10 extra SWAT team members to help shore up security, Lecornu said.

  

  Protestors hold flags of the ‘Confederation Generale du Travail de la Guadeloupe’ CGTG Trade union as they demonstrate against compulsory vaccination in front of the sub-prefecture of Pointe-a-Pitre, in the French Caribbean island of Guadeloupe, on Nov. 29, 2021. (Christophe Archambault/AFP via Getty Images)

  There is a historic mistrust of the government’s handling of health crises in Guadeloupe after many people were systematically exposed to toxic pesticides used in banana plantations in the 1970s. Protesters have insisted they should be allowed to make their own choices about health treatment.

  Protests have continued although Paris last week said it would postpone a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for public sector workers amid the widespread protests.

  The vaccine mandate and other COVID-19 restrictions fanned long-standing grievances over living standards and the relationship between France’s Caribbean islands and Paris.

  French President Emmanuel Macron has described the ongoing unrest as an “explosive” situation.

  

  French President Emmanuel Macron at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, on Aug. 27, 2021. (Benoit Tessier/Reuters)

  More than three dozen protesters have been detained over the past week in Guadeloupe, while numerous reports have emerged of looting and individuals erecting street barricades to slow traffic.

  The situation remains “very difficult” in Guadeloupe, Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin told France Inter radio on Tuesday. “There are still scenes of extreme violence with police forces being shot at with real ammunition,” he added.

  Last week, journalists from French television, news and photo agencies were attacked, media group Altice said in a statement.

  In Martinique, an island of 375,000 some protesters reportedly shot at police officers and firefighters, according to Agence France-Presse. Local authorities said one police officer was seriously injured and needed surgery.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 19:10

• JPM's Kolanovic Suggests Omicron Could Be Positive For Risk And "End The Covid Pandemic"
  JPM’s Kolanovic Suggests Omicron Could Be Positive For Risk And “End The Covid Pandemic”

  Two days ago, amid one of the biggest market routs since March 2020 and following the worst Black Red Friday for markets in history sparked by the panic and chaos over the brand new Omicron variant, we asked a simple, contrarian question: “Will The Omicron Virus Turn Out To Actually Be Bullish For Stocks“

  Will The Omicron Virus Turn Out To Actually Be Bullish For Stocks https://t.co/WoA9irHqdy

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 29, 2021

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

  Specifically, we quoted the South African doctors who first discovered the variant – so they should know – who said over the weekend that not only is Omicron much more transmissable Omicron variant “extremely mild” but also “far less stable” than Delta or previous variants due to its numerous, 30+ spike-protein mutations, which got us thinking: “one could make the point that while Omicron could soon become the dominant strain due to its higher R-nought (or pace of transmission), that could be a blessing in disguise as it pushes out the much more dangerous (and more stable) delta strain.”

  A few hours later, none other than Pershing Square’s Bill Ackman apparently read this take because shortly after he tweeted what we said, namely that “while it is too early to have definitive data, early reported data suggest that the Omicron virus causes ‘mild to moderate’ symptoms (less severity) and is more transmissible. If this turns out to be true, this is bullish not bearish for markets.”

  A thought. While it is too early to have definitive data, early reported data suggest that the Omicron virus causes ‘mild to moderate’ symptoms (less severity) and is more transmissible. If this turns out to be true, this is bullish not bearish for markets.

  — Bill Ackman (@BillAckman) November 29, 2021

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

  Others quickly caught on to this view, including not just hedge fund managers but also respected physicians, in this case the top Russian scientist Anatoly Altshtein, a virologist at the Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, which pioneered Russia’s Sputnik V jab, and who also echoed what we said, namely that  “we already see Omicron has many mutations, more than Delta. More than thirty in a single gene of its spike protein. This is too many, and it means the virus has an unstable genome. As a rule, this sort of infectious agent becomes less dangerous, because evolutionarily, an overwhelming number of mutations leads to a weakening of the virus’s ability to cause disease.”

  According to the professor, if this rule holds true, then Omicron would be fatal in only a small fraction of cases, and would become like other common seasonal infections.

  “We shouldn’t be afraid that the Omicron variant is spreading widely,” said Professor Altshtein, “but that it could turn out to be the most pathogenic variant, making infection worse.”

  The latest facts confirm this take: as we learned today (much to the chagrin of bulls), the first Omicron case was detected in San Francisco in a traveler who returned from South Africa on Nov 22. Yet while the variant clearly appears to be highly transmissable, what the media ignored to note is that the individual – who was fully vaccinated – had only mild symptoms that are improving.

  Hardly the extinction level event that the starved for clicks mainstream media is trying to make it out to be.

  So fast forward to today when none other than JPMorgan’s head quant Marko Kolanovic – whose long running growth-to-value thesis just suffered a spectacular meltdown in recent days, also paraphrased what we said, and in a note whose title is oddly familiar, namely “What if “Nu” variant Omicron ends up positive for risk?“…

  

  … reaches the same conclusion as us for the same two reasons: Omicron is i) more transmissable and ii) less severe, which means it will eventually crowd out the Delta and other dangerous variants, and could in fact “accelerate the end of the pandemic.”

  Before we get to the punchline, a quick detour into how Kolanovic explains the violent stock rout observed in the past 4 days, which he attributes to two main sources of confusion: government responses and tranmissibility assessments, to wit:

  What was the timeline and how did the market react on the Omicron variant? Despite Omicron being around for several weeks, a media blitz happened on Thanksgiving evening, one of the lowest points of market liquidity for the whole year, prompting a crash in various  assets sensitive to global growth and recovery such as Oil. A second blow to markets was delivered shortly after, also in the middle of night in the U.S. (Monday midnight), with the Moderna story (here) that was later largely invalidated by reports from Pfizer, Oxford, the WHO, and the Israeli Health Ministry (here, here, here). Many clients have told us they are not worried about Omicron itself, but the reaction of governments. For example, currently flights are restricted from several African countries that don’t have Omicron, while on the other hand, flights are not restricted from European countries that have cases, and similar apparent inconsistencies.

  Another source of confusion comes from assessments of Omicron’s transmissibility. Broadly circulated claims that the new variant is 500 times more infectious than Delta (here) seem implausible. For instance, assume that R0 for Delta is 4, so Omicron would have an R0 of 2,000, meaning one infected person should result in 2,000 new infections? This is highly unlikely when on average an individual has 16 daily contacts (here), and, by that math, the whole world would have been already infected in less than a week (i.e., 3 cycles would result in 2000³ = 8Bn infections). This figure came from extrapolating transmissibility from relative spread of Delta and Omicron, but not accounting for the fact that Delta is being spread in significant part via breakthrough infections in a significantly immune population (e.g., via vaccines or recovery). In simple terms, when older variants are spreading via breakthrough infections, new variants will always appear to be significantly more transmissible than older ones. This was explained in work by Gabriela Gomes (e.g., see here).

  Which brings us to Kolanovic’s punchline which, for what it’s worth, is identical to ours:

  While it is likely that Omicron is more transmissible, early reports suggest it may also be less deadly – which would fit into the pattern of virus evolution observed historically. Should these trends be confirmed in the coming weeks, could the Omicron variant ultimately prove to be a positive for risk markets, in the sense that it could accelerate the end of the pandemic?

  If a less severe and more transmissible virus quickly crowds out more severe variants, could the Omicron variant be a catalyst to transform a deadly pandemic into something more similar to seasonal flu? That development would fit with historical patterns (duration and number of waves) of previous respiratory virus pandemics, especially given the broad availability of vaccines and new therapeutics that are expected to work on all known variants (Pfizer, Merck).

  Of course, it goes without saying that Kolanovic’s perpetual optimism is dictated by a simple overarching philosophy: he needs to always find a bullish spin in every situation, especially when JPM clients are surely calling him every hour and asking why the growth-to-value rotation he has been pitching so aggressively for the past year just imploded. The Croat admits as much:

  If the market were to anticipate that [positive Omicron] scenario – Omicron could be a catalyst for steepening (not flattening) the yield curve, rotation from growth to value, selloff in COVID and lockdown beneficiaries and rally in reopening themes. Also, if that scenario were to happen, instead of skipping two letters and naming it Omicron, the WHO could have skipped all the way to Omega. As such, we view the recent selloff in these segments as an opportunity to buy the dip in cyclicals, commodities and reopening themes, and to position for higher bond yields and steepening.

  The bolded sentence doesn’t surprise us: unlike the Marko Koalnovic of old who skeptically, rationally and diligently analyzed every possible outcome with a focus on the downside, ever since his promotions the head JPM quant has just one function – to spin every possible scenario into a positive one (which with the help of the Fed’s $8+ trillion balance sheet wasn’t all that difficult). As such, his attempts to spin Omicron as a positive event is hardly a shock. That said, for the very same reasons which we discussed first days ago, this is one time when Marko may actually be right and the next few days will reveal if that’s the case.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 18:50

• Satyajit Das Exposes Fintech's "Flim-Flam" Innovation Games
  Satyajit Das Exposes Fintech’s “Flim-Flam” Innovation Games

  Authored by Satyajit Das via NakedCapitalism.com,

  Investment in fin-tech (the untidy agglomeration of finance and technology) has reached a record $91.5 billion, double that of 2020. In the last quarter, there were over 40 fintech unicorns (start-ups valued at over $1 billion). The sector now attracts around 20% of all venture capital. But its looks remarkably like a repeat of the late 1990s, when investors made ill-fated bets on online finance. 

  

  Fintech consists of traditional banking products conveniently packaged up and delivered via an Internet platform or App. Examples include payments (online payment firms like Square or Stripe); lending (supply chain finance (the late Greensill Capital); peer-to-peer lending; buy-now-pay-later (BNPL) or point-of-sale (POS) financing, such as Afterpay, Affirm, Klarna); and deposit taking (online banking start-ups).

  Investors include armoured cash carrier chasing venture capitalists and asset managers, armed with other people’s money. The usual suspects are augmented by financial institutions fearful of digital threats to their businesses. Then, there are former senior bank executives eager to displace their former employers, find profitable homes for their large paydays and continue ‘God’s work’.

  The Fintech recipe is simple:

  …take a function,

  …digitise it,

  …toss in a little jargon – ‘financial engineering’, ‘technological disruption’.

  …season generously with mystique;

  …add some high profile spruikers or fawning media endorsements.

  …Stir and then serve.

  The rules of the game are straightforward.

  First, disguise the true function. Exploiting disclosure loopholes,supply chain finance helps businesses treat borrowings as accounts payable on the balance sheet rather than debt, improving liquidity and reducing leverage.  Unfortunately, it leaves investors and creditors bearing bigger losses when the business finally collapse, as happened with Spain’s Abengoa in 2015, Carillion in 2018and NMC Health in 2020. BNPL is nothing more than unsecured personal finance.

  Second, mask the true economics. For example, in supply chain financing and BNPL, the seller of goods or services receives the sales price less a discount immediately from the financier who is paid back in deferred instalments by the buyer. A 4% discount, a typical BNPL charge to the seller, paid back over two-months translates into usurious funding costs of over 26% per annum. It helps to obscure how the cost is borne. In the case of BNPL, the retailer not the purchaser appears to bear the financing cost -the discount. But if they want to maintain margins, business must put up overall prices, penalising cash buyers who effectively subsidise BNPL users.

  Third, find an attractive demographic. Supply chain finance and peer-to-peer lending targets weaker borrowers. BNPL is aimed at younger, less financially literate clientele, attuned to a world of free everything. Appeals to ‘democratising capital’ can’t hurt.

  Fourth, find a lightly regulated lacunae of finance. Pressure to embrace innovation and facilitate the flow of credit has led to the concept of a ‘regulatory sandbox’, where fintech firms can test ‘innovative’ concepts without stringent rules. For example, specialist supply chain financiers and BNPL firms effectively lend money without being subject to the rules applicable to regulated banks.

  Fifth, increase risk to boost profitability, such as making risky loans, or ignore earnings altogether – few fintech’s are actually profitable. BNPL does not make money or lacks a clear pathway to profitability, onceinterchange, network fees, issuer processing fee, credit losses and funding are considered.

  Sixth, ensure that the real risks remain unknown unknown. Supply chain finance is short term and inappropriate for funding long-term assets, such as plant and equipment, as GFG Alliance (Greensill’s most prominent customer) discovered. A highly concentrated loan portfoliowith large exposures to a few clients is not generally recommended ‘best practice’ banking. It is irregular for financial institutions to entertain large transactions with related parties. In Greensill’s case, it appears to have extended substantial credit to shareholders. It also allegedly funded non-existent future or expected receivables. 

  Fintech lenders frequently undertake soft credit checks and minimal authentication. Former FSA chief Lord Adair Turner argued that the losses which will emerge from peer-to-peer lending will make the worst bankers look like lending geniuses.

  Seventh, solicit investors paranoid about digital disruption whose phones are generally smarter than they are. The reasons for mental dysfunction don’t matter but look for: search for high returns and growth, befuddlement about rapidly changing technology, wealth and confidence gained from previous successes or shame at missing out on a ‘ten-bagger’ (10 times increase on investment), faith in unending state underwriting of asset prices and, of course, TINA (there is no alternative).

  Branding as ‘fin-tech’ beguiles investors, allowing new businesses to attract capital at high valuations. Greensill’s genius was to persuade everyone that it had changed the business of traditional, staid, low margin, short-term secured lending against invoices and accounts receivable into something revolutionary. Softbank reportedly invested US$1.5 billion in Greensill, now presumably lost.

  Eighth, raise a lot of cash and spend it to build market share. Improving banking technology is passé. Most fintech systems consist of an app or user interface sitting on top of clunky, antiquated systems, held together by duct tape. The focus is accelerating customer acquisition which businesses with a wider array of products might be able to monetise.

  The hope is to find this buyer before you run out cash.

  The thing is that fintech could lower banking costs (the cost of transferring funds across borders is punitive) and provide basic, low cost financial services to a large part of the world lacking such access. Some emerging market fintechs do provide genuinely valuable mobile phone banking, micro-loans and simple trade finance for low income individuals and small businesses are. Unfortunately, they are the minority.

  There are other issues. The growth of these businesses promotes a burgeoning shadow banking system whose problems can leach into financial markets, requiring tax-payer funded bailouts.  Greensill resulted in the failure of three small banks and investor losses of around US$3 billion. Exempting proper controls and compliance with regulations designed to maintain financial stability in the name of invention, a willingness to ‘break things’ and ‘fix them later’ is patently dangerous.

  Worryingly for investors, the Fintech model may have peaked. For example, the Reserve Bank of Australia, in a decision likely to be adopted globally, will allow merchants to pass on the costs of BNPL services to customers. With surveys showing that most users would not use the service if there is a cost, a more even competitive field of play and increased competition from banks and credit card providers, Fintech’s future is dimming.

  The world needs real innovation but John Kenneth Galbraith was sceptical about the financial variety, seeing them as merely variants on old designs, novel only in the brief and defective memory of the financial world. Fintech illustrates how, given time, everything old is new again and everything new turns out to be a re-run.

  *  *  *

  Das is a well-recognized derivatives expert who wrote one of the discipline’s important early textbooks as well as popular works, notably Traders, Guns and Money and Extreme Money: Masters of the Universe and the Cult of Risk. His latest books include A Banquet of Consequences – Reloaded (March 2021) and Fortune’s Fool: Australia’s Choices (forthcoming March 2022)

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 18:30

• South Africa Sees Cases Double As White House Extends Federal Mask Mandate
  South Africa Sees Cases Double As White House Extends Federal Mask Mandate

  Update (1800ET): Now that the first case of the omicron variant has been confirmed in the US (even though Dr. Anthony Fauci insists that all of the case’s close contacts have been identified and tested, and that there’s no sign of additional cases – at least not right now), the Biden Administration has decided to extend a federal mask mandate through mid-March.

  The mandate requires travelers to wear masks on airplanes, trains and buses, and at airports and train stations.

  President Biden is expected to share his plans for imposing tighter travel restrictions on foreigners on Thursday. The CDC is reportedly already collecting names to give to local authorities so that their viral status can presumably be tracked.

  * * *

  As European countries from Germany, to Austria to the Netherlands tighten lockdown measures amid a surge in COVID cases (while deaths remain slightly elevated but more subdued), the continent’s unelected bureaucrat in chief, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, asked during a speech on Wednesday that EU members consider adopting a vaccine mandate. All members should “think about” imposing mandates of their own in a coordinated fashion that’s in keeping with the Continent’s new approach.

  

  Source: Reuters

  Speaking during a news conference, the European Commission chief suggested that member states need mandates to help prevent the spread of cases and a further spike in infections due to the emergence of new variants, such as the omicron strain.

  “I think it is understandable and appropriate to lead this discussion now, how we can encourage and potentially think about mandatory vaccination within the European Union,” von der Leyen stated, adding that fighting the pandemic requires a “common approach” across the bloc.

  Meanwhile, a former president of EU member Ireland published an editorial in Politico Europe Wednesday slamming the WTO’s refusal to approve sharing of intellectual property that would allow emerging countries to produce their own vaccines.

  Epidemiologists warned us time and again that allowing the virus to spread around the world is a recipe for new mutations to develop and that they will indiscriminately harm us all. This waiver, which has now dominated WTO talks for over a year, is a necessary global solution to end the pandemic. Yet one powerful voice at the WTO has continued to undermine this effort — and that must change.

  Isn’t it interesting how world leaders talk about vaccine mandates, while simultaneously ensuring that emerging countries will need to purchase their jabs from American pharmaceutical giants? But let’s put a pin in that.

  South Africa has seen the number of new COVID cases doubled between Wednesday and Tuesday, according to official data released by the same people who issued the first warnings about the omicron variant.

  What’s more, a top South African health official said the omicron variant would likely still be susceptible to the T-cell response caused by both natural and vaccine-induced causes. But that hasn’t stopped the country from seeing a surge in infections and reinfections, which has been particularly notable among the older population, officials said.

  

  Back in Europe, outgoing Chancellor Angela Merkel has proposed new nationwide restrictions on people who haven’t been vaccinated.

  Coincidentally, the WHO said earlier that indications are that most omicron cases will be mild, not severe. Of course, that’s true of delta and all the other strains as well. The organization later said that the world is still “in the midst” of the pandemic.

  But the point is – as even some of South Africa’s top virology experts discussed earlier this week and over the weekend – that even if omicron does break through natural and vaccine-induced protections, infections will likely be mild in nearly all of these patients, and the body’s T-cell response will leave most people protected.

  Confirmed cases of the omicron variant remained fewer than 300 (closer to 250 still by midday) while omicron cases were confirmed for the first time in South Korea (which has already imposed travel restrictions on southern African states), Saudi Arabia and Norway. More cases were found in new locations in the UK, Switzerland, Nigeria, Brazil and elsewhere.

  No cases have been confirmed in the US, but several have been identified in Canada.

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Here are some other important stories regarding COVID and the omicron variant:

  • Poland reported 29K new COVID cases, the highest in almost eight months, and 570 fatalities, on Wednesday. More alarming: the Health Ministry said 25% of the deaths were among vaccinated patients, mostly elderly people with comorbidities. Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki called on the nation to get boosters ahead of Christmas. The country has imposed new restrictions on travelers but hasn’t confirmed a single case of omicron.
  • WHO members voted to start drafting an international agreement to help avoid future pandemics as more cases amid the spread of the omicron variant. The WHO’s members approved a proposal Wednesday that set a deadline of 2024 to try to implement such a measure. They didn’t resolve the biggest disagreement, however: whether the accord should be a legally binding treaty.
  • OECD chief economist Laurence Boone says it would cost $50 billion to vaccinate the world, a sum that pales in comparison to the $10 trillion G-20 countries have spent mitigating the impact of the pandemic. Too bad the US-controlled WTO won’t share the recipe with the emerging world.
  • The EU is preparing to recommend that member states review their travel rules daily. They should pursue a “coordinated approach” and be prepared to impose new controls if necessary.
  • Finally, Israel’s coronavirus czar Salman Zarka said the country should look at mandatory vaccination now that the omicron variant has emerged. “Mandatory vaccination needs to be considered, whether through legislation or otherwise, especially given the fact that not only is the pandemic here, but I fear it will get worse,” Zarka said on 103FM radio. He said he changed his mind following the appearance of omicron, which has been identified in several Israelis.
  • The US is preparing to impose new travel restrictions while the CDC plans to tighten COVID screening and testing at airports around the country by requiring international travelers to have a negative COVID test result from the past 24 hours.
  • WHO adds that vaccine makers shouldn’t rush to rework their vaccines because they’re not sure whether new vaccines are necessary.
  • Austrian lawmakers extended a nationwide lockdown for a second 10-day period to suppress the latest wave of coronavirus infections before the Christmas holiday period.

  Nigeria, meanwhile, has detected a case of omicron from October, the latest piece of evidence to suggest that the variant has likely already spread around the world. The Netherlands says it has found a case of omicron from two weeks ago. Before this, the earliest known sample of the variant was collected on Nov. 9 in South Africa.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 12/01/2021 – 18:25

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Escobar: Fauci As Darth Vader Of The COVID Wars
  Escobar: Fauci As Darth Vader Of The COVID Wars

  Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Asia Times,

  Robert F Kennedy Jr’s The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health should be front-page news in all the news media in the US. Instead, it has been met with the proverbial thundering silence.

  

  Critics seeking to have Kennedy dismissed as a kook trading on a famous name had scored a hit in February, when Instagram permanently deleted his account, allegedly for making false claims about coronavirus and vaccines. Nevertheless, the book, published only a few days ago, is already a certified pop hit on Amazon.

  RFK Jr., chairman of the board of and chief legal counsel for Children’s Health Defense, sets out to deconstruct a New Normal, encroaching upon all of us since early 2020. In my early 2021 book Raging Twenties I have termed this force techno-feudalism.

  Kennedy describes it as “rising totalitarianism,” complete with “mass propaganda and censorship, the orchestrated promotion of terror, the manipulation of science, the suppression of debate, the vilification of dissent and use of force to prevent protest.”

  Focusing on Dr Anthony Fauci as the fulcrum of the biggest story of the 21st century allows RFK Jr to paint a complex canvas of planned militarization and, especially, monetization of medicine, a toxic process managed by Big Pharma, Big Tech and the military/intel complex – and dutifully promoted by mainstream media.

  By now everyone knows that the big winners have been Big Finance, Big Pharma, Big Tech and Big Data, with a special niche for Silicon Valley behemoths.

  Why Fauci?

  RFK Jr. argues that for five decades, he has been essentially a Big Pharma agent, nurturing “a complex web of financial entanglements among pharmaceutical companies and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and its employees that has transformed NIAID into a seamless subsidiary of the pharmaceutical industry. Fauci unabashedly promotes his sweetheart relationship with Pharma as a ‘public-private partnership.’”

  Arguably the full contours of this very convoluted story have never before been examined along these lines, extensively documented and with a wealth of links. Fauci may not be a household name outside of the US and especially across the Global South. And yet it’s this global audience that should be particularly interested in his story.

  RFK Jr accuses Fauci of having pursued nefarious strategies since the onset of Covid-19 – from falsifying science to suppressing and sabotaging competitive products that bring lower profit margins.

  Kennedy’s verdict is stark: “Tony Fauci does not do public health; he is a businessman, who has used his office to enrich his pharmaceutical partners and expand the reach of influence that has made him the most powerful – and despotic – doctor in human history.”

  This is a very serious accusation. It’s up to readers to examine the facts of the case and decide whether Fauci is some kind of medical Dr Strangelove.

  No Vitamin D?

  Pride of place goes to the Fauci-privileged modeling that overestimated Covid deaths by 525%, cooked up by fabricator Neil Ferguson of the Imperial College in London, duly funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This is the model, later debunked, that justified lockdown hysteria all across the planet.

  Kennedy attributes to Canadian vaccine researcher Dr Jessica Rose the charge that Fauci was at the frontline of erasing the notion of natural immunity even as throughout 2020 the CDC and the World Health Organization (WHO) admitted that people with healthy immune systems bear minimal risk of dying from Covid.

  Dr Pierre Kory, president of Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance, was among those who denounced Fauci’s modus operandi of privileging the development of tech vaccines while allowing no space for repurposed medications effective against Covid: “It is absolutely shocking that he recommended no outpatient care, not even Vitamin D.”

  Clinical cardiologist Peter McCullough and his team of frontline doctors tested prophylactic protocols using, for instance, ivermectin – “we had terrific data from medical teams in Bangladesh” – and added other medications such as azithromycin, zinc, Vitamin D and IV Vitamin C. And all this while across Asia there was widespread use of saline nasal lavages.

  By July 1, 2020, McCullough and his team submitted their first, ground-breaking protocol to the American Journal of Medicine. It became the most-downloaded paper in the world helping doctors to treat Covid-19.

  McCullough complained last year that Fauci has never, to date, published anything on how to treat a Covid patient.” He additionally alleged: “Anyone who tries to publish a new treatment protocol will find themselves airtight blocked by the journals that are all under Fauci’s control.”

  It got much worse. McCullough: “The whole medical establishment was trying to shut down early treatment and silence all the doctors who talked about success. A whole generation of doctors just stopped practicing medicine.” (A contrarian view would argue that McCullough got carried away: A million US doctors – the approximate number practicing at any given time – could not all have been in on it.)

  The book argues that the reasons there was a lack of original research on how to fight Covid were the dependence of much-vaunted American academics on the billions of dollars granted by the National Institute of Health (NIH) and the fact they were terrified of contradicting Fauci.

  Frontline Covid specialists Kory and McCullough are quoted as charging that Fauci’s suppression of early treatment and off-patent medication was responsible for up to 80% of deaths attributed to Covid in the US.

  How to kill the competition

  The book offers a detailed outline of an alleged offensive by Big Pharma to kill hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) – with research mercenaries funded by the Gates-Fauci axis allegedly misinterpreting and misreporting negative results by employing faulty protocols.

  Kennedy says that Bill Gates by 2020 virtually controlled the whole WHO apparatus, as the largest funder after the US government (before Trump pulled the US out of the WHO) and used the agency to fully discredit HCQ.

  The book also addresses Lancetgate – when the world’s top two scientific journals, The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine published fraudulent studies from a nonexistent database owned by a previously unknown company.

  Only a few weeks later both journals – deeply embarrassed and with their hard-earned credibility challenged – withdrew the studies. There was never any explanation as to why they got involved in what could be interpreted as one of the most serious frauds in the history of scientific publishing.

  But it all served a purpose. For Big Pharma, says Kennedy, killing HCQ and, later, Ivermectin (IVM) were top priorities. Ivermectin happens to be a low-profit competitor to a Merck product, molnupiravir, which is essentially a copycat but capable of retailing at a profitable $700 per course.

  Fauci was quite excited by a promising study of Gilead’s remdesivir – which not only is not effective against Covid but is a de facto deadly poison, at $3,000 for each treatment.

  The book suggests that Fauci might have wanted to kill HCQ and IVM because under federal US rules, the FDA’s recognition of both HCQ and IVM would automatically kill remdesivir. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation happens to have a large equity stake in Gilead.

  A key point for Kennedy is that vaccines were Big Pharma’s Holy Grail.

  He details how what could be construed as a Fauci-Gates alliance put “billions of taxpayer and tax-deducted dollars into developing” an mRNA “platform for vaccines that, in theory, would allow them to quickly produce new ‘boosters’ to combat each ‘escape variant.’”

  Vaccines, he writes, “are one of the rare commercial products that multiply profits by failing.… The good news for Pharma was that all of humanity would be permanently dependent on biannual or even triannual booster shots.”

  Any similarities with our current “booster” reality are not mere coincidence.

  The final summary of Pfizer’s clinical trial data will raise countless eyebrows. The whole process lasted a mere six months. This is the document that Pfizer submitted to the FDA to win approval for its vaccine. It beggars belief that Pfizer won the FDA’s emergency approval despite showing that the vaccine might prevent one (italics mine) Covid death in every 22,000 vaccine recipients.

  Peter McCullough: “Because the clinical trial showed that vaccines reduce absolute risk less than 1 percent, those vaccines can’t possibly influence epidemic curves. It’s mathematically impossible.”

  The Gates matrix

  Bill Gates – Teflon-protected by virtually all Western mainstream media – describes the operational philosophy of his foundation as “philantrocapitalism.” It’s more like strategic self-philantropy, as both the foundation’s capital and his net worth have been ballooning in style ($23 billion just during the 2020 lockdowns).

  The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – “a nonprofit fighting poverty, disease and inequity around the world” – invests in multinational pharma, food, agriculture, energy, telecom and global tech companies. It exercises considerable de facto control over international health and agricultural agencies as well as mainstream media – as the Columbia Journalism Review showed in August 2020.

  Gates, without a graduate degree, not to mention medical school degree (like author Kennedy, it must be noted, whose training was as a lawyer), dispenses wisdom around the world as a health expert. The foundation holds corporate stocks and bonds in Pfizer, Merck, GSK, Novartis and Sanofi, among other giants, and substantial positions in Gilead, AstraZeneca and Moderna.

  The book delves in minute detail into how Gates controls the WHO (the largest direct donor: $604.2 million in 2018-2019, the latest available numbers). Already in 2011 Gates ordered: “All 183 member states, you must make vaccines a central focus of your health systems.” The next year, the World Health Assembly, which sets the WHO agenda, adopted a Global Vaccine Plan designed by – who else? – the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

  The Foundation also controls the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), the top advisory group to the WHO on vaccines, as well as the crucial GAVI Alliance (formerly the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization), which is the second-largest donor to the WHO.

  GAVI is a Gates “public-private partnership” that essentially corrals bulk sales of vaccines from Big Pharma to poor nations. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, only three month ago, proclaimed that “GAVI is the new NATO”. GAVI’s global HQ is in Geneva. Switzerland has given Gates full diplomatic immunity.

  Few in East and West know that it was Gates who in 2017 handpicked the WHO’s director general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus – who brought no medical degree and a quite dodgy background.

  Dr Vandana Shiva, India’s leading human rights activist (routinely accused of being merely anti-vax), sums up: “Gates has hijacked the WHO and transformed it into an instrument of personal power that he wields for the cynical purpose of increasing pharmaceutical profits. He has single-handedly destroyed the infrastructure of public health globally. He has privatized our health systems and our food systems to serve his own purposes.”

  Gaming pandemics

  The book’s Chapter 12, Germ Games, may be arguably its most explosive, as it focuses on the US bioweapons and biosecurity apparatus, with a special mention to Robert Kadlec, who might claim leadership of the – contagious – logic according to which infectious disease poses a national security threat to the US, thus requiring a militarized response.

  The book argues that Kadlec, closely linked to spy agencies, Big Pharma, the Pentagon and assorted military contractors, is also linked to Fauci investments in “gain of function” experiments capable of engineering pandemic superbugs.

  Fauci strongly denies he’s promoted such experiments. Already in 1998 Kadlec had written an internal strategy paper for the Pentagon – though not for Fauci – promoting the role of pandemic pathogens as stealth weapons leaving no fingerprints.

  Since 2005 DARPA, which invented the internet by building the ARPANET in 1969, has funded biological weapons research. DARPA – call it the Pentagon’s angel investor – also developed the GPS, stealth bombers, weather satellites, pilotless drones, and that prodigy of combat, the M16 rifle.

  It’s important to remember that in 2017 DARPA funneled $6.5 million through Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance to fund “gain of function” work at the Wuhan lab, on top of gain of function experiments at Fort Detrick. EcoHealth Alliance was the organization through which Kadlec, Fauci and DARPA financed these gain of function experiments.

  DARPA also developed the GPS, stealth bombers, weather satellites, pilotless drones, and that prodigy of combat, the M16 rifle. In 2017 DARPA funneled $6.5 million through Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance to fund “gain of function” work at the Wuhan lab, on top of gain of function experiments at Fort Detrick. EcoHealth Alliance was the organization through which Kadlec, Fauci and DARPA financed these gain of function experiments,

  Few people know that DARPA also financed the key tech for the Moderna vaccine, starting way back in 2013.

  RFK Jr dutifully connects the Germ Games progress, starting with Dark Winter in 2001, which emphasized the Pentagon’s drive towards bioweapon vaccines (the code name was coined by Kadlec); the anthrax attack three weeks after 9/11; Atlantic Storm in 2003 and 2005, focused on the response to a terrorist attack unleashing smallpox; Global Mercury 2003; and Lockstep in 2010, which developed a scenario funded by the Rockefeller Foundation where we find this pearl:

  During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems – from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty – leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.

  RFK Jr paints a picture in which, by mid-2017, the Rockefeller Foundation and US intel agencies had all but crowned Bill Gates as the top financier for the intel/military pandemic simulation business.

  Enter the MARS (Mountain Associated Respiratory Virus) simulation during the G20 in Germany in 2017. MARS was about a novel respiratory virus that spread out of busy markets in a mountainous border of an unnamed nation that looked very much like China.

  It gets curiouser and curiouser when one learns that MARS’s two moderators were very close to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and one of them, David Heymann, sat with the Moderna CEO on the Merieux Foundation USA Board. BioMerieux happens to be the French company that built the Wuhan lab.

  Big Pharma kisses Western intel

  Afterward came SPARS 2017 at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation happen to be major funders of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. SPARS 2017 gamed a coronavirus pandemic running from 2025 to 2028. As RFK Jr. notes, “the exercise turned out to be an eerily precise predictor of the Covid-19 pandemic.”

  By 2018 bioweapons expert Peter Daszak was enthroned as the key connector through whom Fauci, Kadlec, DARPA and USAID – which used to be a CIA cover and now reports to the National Security Council – moved grants to fund gain-of-function research, including at the Wuhan Institute of Virology Biosafety Lab.

  Crimson Contagion, overseen by Kadlec after eight months of planning, came in August 2019. Fauci was on board the self-described “functional exercise,” representing the NIH, alongside the CDC’s Robert Redfield and several members of the National Security Council. The war game was held in secret, nationwide. The After-Action Crimson Contagion Report only came out via a FOIA request.

  The star of the Gates pandemic show was undoubtedly Event 201 in October 2019, held only 3 weeks before US intel may – or may not – have suspected that Covid-19 was circulating in Wuhan. Event 201 was about a global coronavirus pandemic. RFK Jr. persuasively argues that Event 201 was as close as possible to a “real-time” simulation.

  The book’s Germ Games chapter leads the reader to acknowledge what mainstream media have simply refused to report: how the pervasive involvement of US (and UK) intel has a secretive – yet dominating – presence in the whole response to Covid-19.

  A very good example is the Wellcome Trust – the UK version of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – which is a spin-off of Big Pharma’s GlaxoSmith Kline. This epitomizes the marriage between Big Pharma and Western intel.

  The Wellcome Trust chair, from 2015 to 2020, used to be a former director general of MI5, Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller. She was also chair of the Imperial College since 2001. The “English Dr. Fauci,” Neil Ferguson, of the infamous, deadly wrong models that led to all lockdowns, was an epidemiologist working for the Wellcome Trust.

  These are only a few of the insights and connections woven through RFK Jr’s book. As a matter of public service, the whole lot should be available for popular scrutiny worldwide. These matters concern the whole planet, especially the Global South.

  Nobel laureate Luc Montaigner has noted how, “tragically for humanity, there are many, many untruths emanating from Fauci and his minions.” Even more tragic is what emanates from his masters.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 23:45

• Russian Forces Are Growing…In Russia! Pentagon Awkwardly Downplays Ukraine Invasion Hype
  Russian Forces Are Growing…In Russia! Pentagon Awkwardly Downplays Ukraine Invasion Hype

  Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba on Tuesday urged Western allies in NATO to act fast to “deter” Russian aggression aimed at the country’s east, claiming that a Russian military assault could come “in the blink of an eye”.

  “What we are seeing is very serious. Russia has deployed a large military force in regions close to Ukraine’s state border,” he told reporters after weeks of widespread Western media assertions that at least 90,000 Russian troops are mustering near the border. “If Russia decides to undertake a military operation, things will happen in literally the blink of an eye,” the foreign minister added.

  Kuleba’s numbers were even higher than common Western press estimates: “Moscow has massed 115,000 troops around Ukraine, on the Crimean peninsula,” he was cited as saying. He also alleged tanks, military vehicles, and electronic warfare systems were also being positioned. 

  

  But the consistent response from the Kremlin has been to point out it’s free to move its forces anywhere it wants within Russia’s own sovereign borders. Ironically enough no officials in the US or anywhere else have actually disputed the reality that there’s not been any attempt to breach Ukraine’s borders.

  Pentagon spokesman John Kirby seemed to acknowledged this in statements the same day. He said the Pentagon is monitoring Russian troop movements… within Russia. Kirby described Russian forces as—

  …”a continuing concern” and pledged US support for Ukrainian forces, though he downplayed expectations of a direct US military intervention.

  “We continue to see movement, we continue to see additions” to their forces near the Ukrainian border, said Kirby.

  “We’re watching it very closely,” he told reporters, adding: “We don’t envision any US military intervention in this conflict.”

  To be sure, if US intelligence actually believed Putin is preparing an “imminent” invasion (as an initial Bloomberg report and some US officials earlier this month claimed), Kirby would now be threatening US military intervention to prevent such an offensive. 

  But instead Kirby is obviously downplaying the “invasion” scenario, and is reduced to admitting the Pentagon is merely “watching” the “movement” of Russian troops within Russia’s own territory. He with a serious tone told the press pool that Russian troops are growing…in Russia.

  

  This is tantamount to if China or Russia called a press conference, only to inform reporters that American troop movements are being monitored within the United States and in the vicinity of US bases on US soil. Moscow days ago slammed what it’s classified as an ongoing ‘disinformation campaign’ coming from Ukraine and Washington, meant to increase the Western pressure on Russia and provide leverage.

  Last week Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova issued a searing response to what’s perhaps in reality a ‘non-crisis’. She said, “The hot heads in the Kiev regime, apparently with a feeling of complete impunity, are in favor of a military solution to this internal Ukrainian crisis.”

  The Kremlin is now turning the accusation right back, asserting it’s Ukraine that’s pushing for fresh confrontation in Donbass, while attempting to hype tensions to the point that Kiev’s Western backers get drawn in. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 23:25

• Pentagon Orders New Probe into Syria Airstrike That Killed Dozens of Civilians
  Pentagon Orders New Probe into Syria Airstrike That Killed Dozens of Civilians

  By Isasbel van Brugen of Epoch Times,

  Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has ordered a new investigation into a 2019 airstrike in Syria that led to multiple civilian deaths, Pentagon press secretary John Kirby announced on Monday.

  

  The renewed probe will be led by U.S. Army Forces commander Gen. Michael Garrett within a 90-day deadline. It aims to review “reports of investigation already conducted” while simultaneously conducting “further inquiry into the facts and circumstances” of the U.S. airstrike that killed dozens of women and children, Kirby said.

  The news follows an investigation published by The New York Times earlier this month, titled “How the U.S. Hid an Airstrike That Killed Dozens of Civilians in Syria.”

  Its report revealed that the March 18, 2019 airstrike on ISIS in Baghouz, Syria, was carried out by a classified American special operations unit, called Task Force 9, which was in charge of ground operations in Syria, and resulted in the deaths of as many as 70 civilians.

  There were mostly women and children in the region hit by the strike, the Times reported, noting that the Baghuz strike was one of the largest civilian casualty incidents of the war against the Islamic State, but it has never been publicly acknowledged by the U.S. military.

  The investigation also alleged that top officers and civilian officials attempted to downplay these figures.

  The probe will cover “civilian casualties that resulted from the incident, compliance with the law of war” and “whether accountability measures would be appropriate,” Kirby said.

  Garrett will also be asked to recreate the timeline of the original probe into the incident after it was “stalled and stripped of any mention of the strike,” according to the Times.

  It comes after Austin earlier this month said that the U.S. military was “committed” to getting right its transparency about strikes and how they are conducted.

  “The American people deserve to know that we take this issue very seriously. And that we are committed to protecting civilians and getting this right both in terms of how we execute missions on their behalf and how we talk about them afterwards,” Austin said at a press briefing on Nov. 17. “And I recognize that and I’m committed to doing this in full partnership with our military leaders.”

  Kirby said on Monday that Austin decided to order a new probe after being briefed on the matter by Central Command head Gen. Kenneth McKenzie earlier this month.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 23:05

• US May Impose New Omicron-Inspired Travel Restrictions As More Cases Confirmed In Canada
  US May Impose New Omicron-Inspired Travel Restrictions As More Cases Confirmed In Canada

  Fewer than 250 confirmed cases of the omicron variant have been recorded worldwide (although epidemiologists fear the number of cases caused by the variant could be much higher). But that isn’t stopping the CDC, led by Rochelle Walensky – the same bureaucrat who admitted two months ago that COVID jabs “can’t prevent transmission” of the virus – from pushing for tighter travel restrictions in an effort to “slow” the new variant’s entry into the US.

  President Joe Biden signaled that he would be taking the new variant seriously during a press conference yesterday where he delegated to Dr. Anthony Fauci multiple times. Dr. Fauci has seized the opportunity to bombard Americans with FUD related to the new strain.

  Cases of the variant have been confirmed in Canada, and many believe it’s only a matter of time before a case is confirmed in the US (even if the US were to close its borders to non-citizens again tomorrow).

  CDC Dir. Walensky: “We don’t know everything we need to know yet about the omicron variant, but we know that vaccination is a safe and effective way to protect yourself from severe illness and complications from all known SARS-CoV-2 variants to date.” https://t.co/SNpGmVWFmu pic.twitter.com/TTHQVLsNHH

  — ABC News Live (@ABCNewsLive) November 30, 2021

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

  But instead of taking such drastic action, the CDC is looking at a handful of less intensive measures.

  These include narrowing the testing window for travelers heading into the US, while adding quarantine requirements in certain cases, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said Tuesday on a call with reporters. It’s also expanding surveillance programs at four major airports to test for the omicron variant, and just regular old COVID, from certain international arrivals.

  In the meantime, Canada, which has just confirmed another case of the new variant, is reportedly adding Nigeria, Malawi and Egypt to the list of African countries where travelers are banned due to concerns about the new variant, the Toronto Star. The first cases of omicron were reported in travelers from Nigeria.

  Walensky added that local health officials across the US are actively looking for the omicron variant. “Right now, there is no evidence of omicron in the United States…the delta variant remains the predominant circulating strain” she added.

  She also warned that the CDC is “strengthening” its recommendation that all adults over 18 get their booster shots.

  “Everyone ages 18 and older should get a booster shot either when they are 6 months after their initial Pfizer or Moderna series or 2 months after their initial J&J vaccine,” she said.

  Assuming the US does impose new travel restrictions, how much longer until Americans who don’t have their boosters are treated as de facto unvaccinated? While those who haven’t had any of their shots are treated like lepers.

  

  Source: NYT

  A handful of countries – Israel, Morocco, Japan and South Korea – have closed off foreign travel while European nations shut their borders specifically to travelers from southern Africa. And a US governor has already declared a state of emergency without a single omicron case being confirmed. That all seems to contradict President Biden’s insistence that the new variant is a “cause for concern, not panic”.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 22:45

• Australia Will Not Return To Lockdown In Wake Of Omicron Variant: PM
  Australia Will Not Return To Lockdown In Wake Of Omicron Variant: PM

  Authored by Brendan Taylor via Insider Paper (emphasis ours),

  Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has stated that the country will not be placed back into lockdown in response to the Omicron variant of Covid-19.

  

  Morrison met with state and territory leaders on Tuesday afternoon to discuss the national response to the new variant of concern.

  Prior to the meeting, Morrison stated that the federal, state, and territory governments would be cautious about Omicron, but ruled out a return to strict stay-at-home restrictions, according to the Xinhua news agency.

  He said he would use the national cabinet meeting to implore state and territory leaders to keep domestic borders open in the run-up to Christmas.

  “We’re not going back to lockdowns. None of us want that,” he told reporters in Canberra on Tuesday.

  “What we did last night was protecting against that by having a sensible pause and to keep proceeding with where we are now and to further assess that information so we can move forward with confidence.”

  Earlier on Tuesday, Health Minister Greg Hunt said that the federal government’s “overwhelming view” is that the Omicron variant is “manageable.”

  Six cases of the new variant had been confirmed in Australia as of Tuesday.

  Australia reported more than 1,100 new Covid-19 cases and nine deaths on Tuesday morning, as the country battles the third wave of infections.

  The majority of new cases were reported in Victoria, the country’s second-most populous state with Melbourne as its capital city, which reported 918 cases and six deaths.

  According to the Health Department, as of Monday, 92.4 percent of Australians aged 16 and up had received one vaccine dose and 87% had received their second dose.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 22:25

• Goldman Partners With Amazon To Launch New Cloud Computing Platform
  Goldman Partners With Amazon To Launch New Cloud Computing Platform

  Goldman Sachs and Amazon are launching their most ambitious collaboration yet:  a new cloud computing service geared toward Wall Street firms to help them with high-frequency trading and other practices.

  And all these firms need to do is agree to entrust their entire back-end IT setup to the Vampire Squid to access what Amazon is touting as one of the fastest and most useful back-end systems available to Wall Street firms looking to transition on to the cloud.

  

  The new product – the result of a two-year collaboration with Amazon – will allow buy-side and sell-side firms to access all of Goldman’s tools for quickly analyzing market data while enabling clients to set up high-speed trading strategies. Instead of simply relying on Goldman for prime brokerage services, hedge funds could soon outsource most of their IT setup to Wall Street’s most powerful investment bank, with a critical assist from Amazon.

  CNBC said the collaboration is in line with Goldman’s attempt to use technology to better serve clients of the firm’s markets division.

  “Clients of the firm will get access to our decades of experience and data aggregation that should enable them to enhance their business decisions, both from a speed and efficiency perspective,” Solomon told CNBC last week in a phone interview. “We think that adds to our position as a leader in the marketplace.”

  The new service, called GS Financial Cloud for Data with Amazon Web Services, will purportedly allow buy side firms to save time by allowing developers to focus on what matters – making sure trades are filed and filled as quickly as possible, rather than wasting time wrangling data sets and leaning on a patchwork of legacy software to analyze said data. It will also “lower the barriers to entry” for firms to use advanced quantitative trading techniques, Goldman said.  

  To be sure, using Goldman’s IT platform will also help the Vampire Squid monitor the activities of clients, granting Goldman the transparency to avoid any overlevered time bombs like Archegos.

  The industry is struggling to keep up with the rising technological demands of the latest investment techniques, according to Goldman co-chief CIO Marco Argenti.

  Argenti added that “if this existed, we would have used it…but we had to build it for ourselves. All you need to do is assemble the interface and integrate it with your application and then everything else is kind of taken care of for you.”

  Amazon and Goldman unveiled the new product at the AWS: Invent Conference in Las Vegas on Tuesday. But this isn’t the start of the relationship between Goldman and Amazon. The two company’s have been collaborating for more than a decade. Goldman leaned on Amazon to help build the back end of Goldman’s “Marcus” consumer finance business, along with its Apple Card, which was released a few years after Marcus.

  Adam Selipsky, who rejoined Amazon as head of AWS earlier this year, said the idea for a collaboration with Goldman arose from conversations with other financial services customers.

  “We have a lot of customers who ask us to help them do what Amazon did with AWS,” Selipsky said in a phone interview. “When we started talking about Goldman’s capabilities around data and around analytics in the financial services realm, the ideas just sprang up pretty rapidly about collaborating together.”

  Goldman CEO David Solomon said the new offering will “enhance the experience” of Goldman’s institutional clients and that “the way we get paid for that is we get more of their wallet share because the overall experience and services we provide gives us more mindshare, more opportunities to trade with them, to finance them and do things like that,” Solomon said.

  It’s only the latest major cloud deal involving a Wall Street player as firms with complicated trading operations look to the cloud to solve their problems.

  Hey look at that. Another cloud deal.

  CME – Google
  Nasdaq – Amazon
  Goldman – Amazon https://t.co/FAUlOKQM6D

  — Patrick Rooney (@patrickrooney) November 30, 2021

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

  Put another way: once Goldman is running the buy side’s back end, firms will effectively be forced to trade with Goldman (not to mention the treasure drove of data and information that Goldman might glean from the arrangement). Nothing’s free on Wall Street.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 22:05

• Judge Blocks Biden’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate For Federal Contractors
  Judge Blocks Biden’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate For Federal Contractors

  By Zachary Stieber of Epoch Times

  A judge on Tuesday blocked President Joe Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for federal contractors, finding that Biden likely lacks the authority to force them to get vaccinated.

  “This is not a case about whether vaccines are effective. They are. Nor is this a case about whether the government, at some level, and in some circumstances, can require citizens to obtain vaccines. It can,” U.S. District Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove, a George W. Bush nominee, wrote in the 29-page order.

  “The question presented here is narrow. Can the president use congressionally delegated authority to manage the federal procurement of goods and services to impose vaccines on the employees of federal contractors and subcontractors? In all likelihood, the answer to that question is no,” he said.

  The judge granted a request for a preliminary injunction by the attorneys general of Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee.

  

  The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

  “This is not about vaccines, it’s about the mandates,” Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, a Republican, said in a statement.

  “The judge’s opinion clearly states that and it has been our position all along that the president cannot impose these mandates on the people.”

  Biden signed an executive order on Sept. 9 that led several weeks later to the White House requiring contractors force all their workers to get a COVID-19 vaccine unless the worker is entitled to an exception.

  Contractors who did not comply with the order, originally set with a Dec. 8 deadline, were poised to lose the government’s business.

  The states charged that the vaccine mandate was both illegal and unconstitutional, in part because it was imposed with little regard to “important aspects surrounding the mandate, including but not limited to economic impacts, cost to States, cost to citizens, labor-force and supply-chain disruptions, the current risks of COVID-19, and basic distinctions among workers such as those with natural immunity to COVID-19 and those who work remotely or with limited in-person contacts, among other aspects.”

  The government disagreed, arguing that the president does have authority to regulate contractors under the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act because. Courts have ruled the president can pursue “efficient and economic” procurement, which he was in the order, lawyers asserted.

  Van Tatenhove sided with the states.

  Defendants, he said, failed to point to a single instance when the services act was used “to promulgate such a wide and sweeping public health regulation as mandatory vaccination for all federal contractors and subcontractors.” He also expressed concern that the mandate “intrudes on an area that is traditionally reserved to the States,” citing the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution.

  A preliminary injunction means the mandate is blocked for now in the three states, with the possibility of becoming a permanent block or eventually being allowed to take effect.

  A preliminary injunction has already been entered against the Biden administration’s health care worker vaccine mandate and a similar mandate for private businesses.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 21:45

• Lumber Prices Soar As British Columbia Floods Curb Shipments
  Lumber Prices Soar As British Columbia Floods Curb Shipments

  Lumber prices surged to June highs as Canada’s largest forestry company curbed shipments due to supply chain disruptions after severe flooding in British Columbia.

  West Fraser Timber Co. Ltd. said weekly lumber shipments from Canada’s westernmost province fell approximately 25%-30% in the second half of November following floods. Pulp shipments to the port of Vancouver were down 20%. 

  “While West Fraser is utilizing alternative transportation routes and methods to the extent they are available to continue servicing customers, the magnitude and duration of the impact from current weather events remains uncertain.

  Therefore, West Fraser has reduced operating schedules at multiple western Canadian locations and will continue to make such adjustments as necessary in order to manage inventory levels, raw material supplies and our integrated fibre supply chain.

  At the current time, it is not possible to estimate when full transportation services will resume or when the backlogs resulting from the interruptions will be cleared,” the company said in a statement. 

  Uncertainty about lumber supply spooked lumber futures trading in Chicago on Tuesday, up nearly 4% to $824.50 per 1,000 board feet, the highest price since late June. Prices have jumped 30% in the last two weeks. 

  

  Around Nov. 14, an atmospheric river dumped torrential rains across southern parts of British Columbia. A series of floods severely damaged infrastructure, including roads, bridges, and train tracks. Moving lumber from sawmills to ports generally occurs on trucks and or trains. With infrastructure damaged, as shown below, it appears West Fraser has been partially choked off in accessing ports. 

  

  Greg Kuta, the founder of Westline Capital Strategies Inc., which specializes in lumber trading, told Bloomberg that “there’s no point in producing more than you can ship right now, especially knowing lumber is at the bottom of the pecking order with rail car allocation.”

  There’s no timetable on when West Fraser’s supply chain will go back to normal. Fixing bridges and roads is not an overnight process. It could take weeks, if not months, to resolve the logistical nightmare that some blame on climate change, and others point to La Nina. As for now, a bullish thesis could be developing for lumber as supply woes mount. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 21:25

• The Perfect Con Job
  The Perfect Con Job

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via DailyReckoning.com,

  One of the most famous examples of smart people being sucked into a bubble and losing a packet as a result is Isaac Newton’s forays in and out of the 1720 South Sea Bubble that is estimated to have sucked in 80–90% of the entire pool of investors in England.

  Some have claimed that Newton did not buy early in 1711, sell in April 1720 for a nice profit and then sink the majority of his substantial fortune in the bubble as it peaked in summer, then suffering heavy losses as the bubble popped in September, but evidence supports this chain of events.

  Newton “bought the dip” on the way up and then added to his position as the mania rolled over, making his final fatal purchase as a “buy the dip” just before the “last chance to exit” spike — which is precisely the point the current bubble has finally reached, when everyone is all in and “buying the dip” to increase the profits that everyone agrees are essentially guaranteed because the Fed.

  Not Even a Genius Can See a Bubble

  Isaac Newton was a very smart man. Newton was not just smart and wealthy, but he was financially sophisticated and a very successful investor who favored financial instruments such as bonds over land.

  He was the ultimate experienced, savvy investor who would not be bamboozled by specious math.

  The problem is, alas, smart people are still humans, and humans run with the herd when the herd is minting money.

  The Herd Is in for a Rude Awakening

  Absurdly farfetched claims are gussied up with “mathiness” and narratives that are powerfully simplistic, with just enough common-sense credibility to enliven the excessive greed that lies dormant but ready in every human heart.

  Despite Newton’s tremendous intelligence and experience, he fell victim to the bubble along with the vast herd of credulous greedy punters.

  Newton died a wealthy man in 1727, so his bubble misadventure did not ruin him, though it did lop a huge chunk off his net worth.

  Many in the herd, then and now, won’t be as fortunate. In fact, right now they’re being set up for a massive fall. And the financially intelligent could make fortunes as a result.

  Let me explain…

  An Opportunity to Scoop up Mega-Millions

  An extraordinary opportunity to scoop up mega-millions in profits has arisen, and grabbing all this free money makes perfect financial sense. Now the question is: Will those who have the means to grab the dough have the guts to do so?

  Here’s the opportunity:

  Retail punters (those who attempt to make fast profits from an investment regardless of its underlying fundamentals) have gone wild for call options, churning $2.6 trillion in mostly short-term calls — bets on gains now, not later.

  This expansion of retail options exposure is unprecedented not just in its volume but in its concentration in short-term bets (options that expire in a few days) and in mega-cap tech companies that are commanding rich premiums for options.

  The options market is like every other market only more so.

  The price of an option — a bet that a stock, ETF or index will go up or down before the option expires — is sensitive to the volatility of the underlying equity, the demand of other punters for options and the premium being demanded for time:

  The further out the expiration date, the higher the cost of the option.

  Anyone with 100 shares of the underlying equity can write/originate an option. Each option controls 100 shares, so a call option that is listed at $1 costs the buyer of the call $100.

  This is very sweet leverage if the market goes your way. You get all the gains of the 100 shares for a cost considerably less than buying the 100 shares outright. No wonder retail punters are going crazy for this cheap leverage to maximize gains in “can’t lose” trades.

  There’s a Catch

  But options have one funny trait: They can expire worthless and the punter loses the entire bet.

  Each option has an expiration date and a strike price — the price of the underlying equity that’s the pivot point for the bet.

  Calls gain value if the equity’s price moves above the strike price and puts gain value if the equity’s price falls below the strike price.

  The entity that sold the option gets to keep the money if it expires without any value. Here’s an example:

  Let’s say you have 100 shares of Engulf & Devour and you sell me a call for $500 at a strike price of $100. If Engulf & Devour closes below $100 at expiration, you keep the $500 as pure profit and I lose the entire bet.

  Now, it would be extraordinarily profitable to sell a huge number of calls — bets on a move higher — and then pull the rug out by crashing the market just as all those options expire. It would be criminally foolish not to crash the market and scoop up all that free money.

  Here’s what makes the opportunity so extraordinary…

  All Bulls, No Bears

  The options universe is extremely lopsided. Bearish bets have dried up as the market has melted higher month after month; short bets are at record lows and the put-call ratio reflects the same capitulation of bears and bulls’ supreme confidence in near-term gains.

  This means a crash will cost very little in terms of puts gaining value because there are so few puts out there to reap enormous gains as the vast majority of call options will expire worthless, leaving those who wrote the calls immensely wealthier.

  In previous eras with lower retail option volume and a less lopsided options market, it wouldn’t be worth the trouble to flash-crash the market to scoop up retail calls. But a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you’re talking real money.

  Buyers of “can’t lose” calls may be unaware that the tail can wag the dog. Mega-cap tech companies appear invulnerable to declines, but they are now the 800-pound gorillas in all the indexes (Dow 30, S&P 500, Nasdaq) and a boatload of ETFs.

  So triggering a mass sell-off in an index play such as SPY will trigger a sell-off in all the components of that index, including the invulnerable mega-cap tech names.

  Mass Exodus

  The opportunity here is amplified by the dominance of computer trading algorithms. Once a crash begins, the algos will trend-follow and liquidate exposure to lower risk. This sets up a self-reinforcing chain of selling as every drop triggers more sell programs.

  Volumes are so low that it won’t take that big of a leveraged sell order to start the rug-pull.

  Add up the extraordinary size of retail options bets, the lopsided bullish bias in calls and the short duration of the calls and you have an unprecedented opportunity to scoop mega-millions of dollars by doing a rug-pull of the market via selling leveraged index instruments.

  Retail call buyers are basically begging the big players to take their money via a flash crash, and the players would be insanely incompetent not to take the money lying on the table.

  The Perfect Con

  It has all the moving parts of a perfect con:

  Convince the retail punters that they can’t lose by buying calls, jack up the premium they’re paying to own that beautiful leverage for a few days or weeks, lead them on with little rallies, “proving” they can’t lose and encouraging them to buy more high-priced calls, crush volatility to show the futility of buying puts and persuade the punters they have no need for any hedge, as the market can only loft higher because the Fed, etc.

  Then bang, pull the rug out and crash the market limit down for a few days.

  

  It’s a gorgeous setup, literally picture-perfect. It makes perfect financial sense to crash the market and no sense to reward the retail options marks by pushing it higher.

  Let’s see who gets to be the Road Runner and who ends up as Wile E. Coyote.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 21:05

• NY Man Robs Woman At Knifepoint, Released Without Bail And Promptly Finds Another Female Victim
  NY Man Robs Woman At Knifepoint, Released Without Bail And Promptly Finds Another Female Victim

  A man in New York City was arrested for allegedly robbing a woman at knifepoint in a Nov. 22 subway attack. Hours later he was released on  bail by Judge James Clynes, a Democrat.

  

  After a good night’s sleep in his own bed, 63-year-old Augustin Garcia stole an iPhone from another woman on the subway the next morning, according to Fox News.

  He now faces charges of petty larceny, grand larceny, robbery, menacing, criminal possession of a weapon and criminal trespassing.

  He allegedly stole a woman’s purse on the afternoon of Nov. 22 and ran onto a train, then “displayed a knife and told her to stay back” when she pursued him, according to a criminal complaint. 

  After he was arrested, prosecutors requested a $15,000 cash bail or a $45,000 bond, but Judge James Clynes let him go on supervised release just after midnight on Nov. 23, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office told Fox News. 

  Garcia was arrested again about seven hours later for allegedly stealing from the second victim and prosecutors upped the request to a $20,000 cash bail or a $60,000 bond, but Judge Valentina Morales ordered him to undergo a mental health evaluation. 

  “My brother is a sick person,” said Jose Garcia, Augustin’s brother, in a comment to the NY Post, adding that Augustin used to be “sharp as a weasel” when he was working as a supervisor at at welding company. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia around 35 years ago.

  “When he goes to the hospital and is committed there, sometimes for a month or two, he sometimes doesn’t get the treatment completely, and they release him. And once they release him, the problem comes back again,” Garcia continued.

  Augustin was arrested the day before the first robbery for allegedly stealing a 12-pack of beer from a Bronx bodega – and reportedly bragged to the cops that he knew he’d be released.

  “I know I’m getting out, he said, adding “I have no record.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 20:45

• US Officials Confirm Israel Behind Cyberattack On Iranian Gas Stations
  US Officials Confirm Israel Behind Cyberattack On Iranian Gas Stations

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  Citing unnamed US military officials, The New York Times reported Saturday that Israel was responsible for a recent cyberattack against civilian infrastructure in Iran that targeted gas stations.

  The report said Israel was behind an October 26th hack of Iran’s fuel distribution system that caused gas pumps to stop working across the country. Gas pumps displayed a digital message telling customers to blame the problem on Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

  

  Iran provides a certain amount of subsidized fuel to each citizen for a discounted price, and the report said it took the Oil Ministry two weeks to get the system back up and running. The idea was to get Iranians angry at the government and to create unrest, but it never materialized.

  It’s unclear if the cyberattack was as disruptive as the Times report said, as Israel is known for using leaks to the media to exaggerate the power it has inside Iran. The report also cited unnamed Israeli officials who claimed Iranians hacked an Israeli dating site and a medical facility in response. The officials said the hackers posted the personal details of millions of Israelis to social media.

  Israel is often suspected of carrying out cyberattacks against Iran on top of its frequent attacks against Iran’s civilian nuclear program. But the US usually keeps quiet on these operations.

  The acknowledgment by US officials came just before the US and Iran resumed negotiations to revive the nuclear deal, known as the JCPOA, and could have been an attempt to increase the pressure ahead of the talks.

  Israel & Iran up cyberattacks against each other. A recent cyberattack on Iran’s fuel distribution system paralyzed 4,300 gas stations & took 12 days restored. Days later a cyberattacks in Israel hit a medical facility & popular LGBTQ dating site. https://t.co/u6APXgOfRH

  — Kylie Atwood (@kylieatwood) November 28, 2021

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

  When the Biden administration started its first round of talks with Iran back in April, Israel carried out a covert attack against Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility. By not condemning the attack, the US gave it a tacit endorsement. Quietly backing Israel’s operations against Iran appears to be a negotiations tactic for the Biden administration.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 20:25

• Leaked Video Shows Moment F-35 Jet Rolled Off UK Carrier In Mediterranean 
  Leaked Video Shows Moment F-35 Jet Rolled Off UK Carrier In Mediterranean 

  New video has emerged, possibly the result of a military leak, of a British fighter jet crash that occurred less than two weeks ago off the HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean. 

  A Nov.17 press release put out by the UK Defence Ministry had stated, “A British F35 pilot from HMS Queen Elizabeth ejected during routine flying operations in the Mediterranean this morning.” The pilot was described as in safe condition and is back on the ship after the major incident, but further details were scant. But new video has been featured by Business Insider after apparently leaked footage from aboard the carrier was posted to social media. A UK military analyst posted the new footage:

  Well thank God he is still with us! That’s all I can say. pic.twitter.com/YtL6f0BFAm

  — Seb H (@sebh1981) November 29, 2021

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

  The Royal Navy video looks to be security footage from the crash. It was initially unknown whether the advanced fighter jet had crashed while in flight, or if it had rolled off the carrier, with the footage now confirming the latter scenario. 

  The private analyst who posted the footage online said it was sourced to a Royal Navy WhatsApp group, with Business Insider describing the scene as follows: 

  The video shows the plane losing speed as it climbs the runway, so much so that it immediately drops instead of taking off. The pilot’s parachute is visible as he ejects, and smoke billows around the ramp and sea.

  The BBC’s report added that the MoD confirmed that the pilot survived and was rescued. The MoD also told the BBC that an investigation was still underway as crews are still trying to recover parts of the high-technology, sensitive parts of the plane.

  The UK military has since said it was “aware” of the now public video but didn’t give comment. It simply stated that “It is too soon to comment on the potential causes of this incident.”

  One former Royal Navy officer was cited in British media as explaining, “Given how close the aircraft ditched to the bow, and the speed of the ship on launch, the likelihood of it hitting the bow of the ship (under the waterline) would be quite high.” 

  The short clip shows the jet taking off at a dangerously slow speed, and then appearing to power down just as it reached the end of the runway, which caused it to plunge into the sea below. The pilot ejected at the moment the F-35’s nose began going overboard. The military hasn’t confirmed if there was damage to the carrier due to the accident.

  

  The crashed jet was part of a contingent of nearly a dozen F-35s aboard. The F-35 that went down was an estimated 135 million dollars, and had cutting-edge stealth technology and radar. Depending on what the investigation returns, the mishap could prove hugely embarrassing, especially if it wasn’t pilot error but something wrong with the plane’s advanced systems.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 20:05

• Retailers Open Pop-Up Container Yards To Bypass Savannah Port Jams
  Retailers Open Pop-Up Container Yards To Bypass Savannah Port Jams

  By Eric Kulisch of American Shipper,

  Overflow lots set up by large retailers this month as temporary staging areas for imported containers have helped bring down congestion levels at the Port of Savannah, and Georgia officials expect further efficiency gains with this week’s opening of two more port-sponsored pop-up sites.

  

  The Georgia Ports Authority, in partnership with the Norfolk Southern, will start accepting loaded containers on Monday at the freight railroad’s nearby Dillon Yard and later this week will begin routing shipping units to a general aviation airport in Statesboro, located about 60 miles west of Savannah, Chief Operating Officer Ed McCarthy told FreightWaves.

  Moving containers to off-port properties is part of the recently announced South Atlantic Supply Chain Relief Program designed to reclaim space at the Garden City Terminal, where container crowding is making it difficult for vessels to unload and for stacking equipment and trucks to maneuver. In October, Savannah handled an all-time record of 504,350 twenty-foot equivalent units for a single month, an increase of 8.7% over October 2020. The volume surpassed the GPA’s previous record of 498,000 TEUs set in March.

  Port officials began testing the Dillon Yard and Statesboro locations last week after renting top loaders for stacking and truck transfers, installing computer lines in order to track containers entering the gate with radio frequency identification, and laying extra pavement at the rail facility, McCarthy said. 

  Four or five more pop-up container facilities are scheduled to open around Georgia by mid-December and the port authority is talking with freight railroad CSX about an auxiliary storage site in Rocky Mount, North Carolina, the COO said in an interview. 

  The sites are mini-versions of inland ports where containers are brought to strategically located sites by intermodal rail, shortening the distance trucks have to travel to collect imports or drop off exports and reducing traffic in and around busy seaports. The concept essentially brings the seaport closer to manufacturing, agriculture and population centers. 

  The GPA currently operates a large inland intermodal rail terminal in Murray County, Georgia, as well as an inland dry bulk facility. Construction on a second inland rail link for containerized cargo in northeast Georgia is scheduled to begin in April and be completed by mid- to late 2024, spokesman Robert Morris said. South Carolina also operates two inland ports, Virginia has one in the northwestern part of the state and the Port of Long Beach in California recently launched an effort to quickly flow cargo to Utah for distribution by converting truck traffic to rail.

  Several users of the Port of Savannah this month have opened pop-up yards of their own where they can directly flow import containers to avoid waiting for longshoremen to sort through shipping units for their cargo and then retrieve them when space opens at one of their distribution centers. Each of the private spillover yards can accommodate 2,000 to 3,000 containers. 

  “We’re starting to see some of our customer base do their own pop-ups. They’re contracting with some folks who have capabilities in the Savannah region and … taking their long-term destiny in their own hands,” McCarthy said in an interview.

  The Rocky Mount intermodal facility being discussed with CSX will probably be used as an alternative storage location for empty containers. It could be running by early December, the COO said. Whether containers are diverted from other locations or whether empties are loaded up in Savannah and sent there remains to be determined. 

  The Biden administration, which is focused on alleviating a nationwide supply chain crisis that is creating product shortages and contributing to inflation, helped fund the GPA’s emergency storage yards by reallocating $8 million in federal funds. Additional flexibility recently granted by the Department of Transportation allows port authorities to redirect cost savings from previous projects funded by port infrastructure grants toward mitigating truck, rail and terminal delays that are preventing the swift evacuation of containers from ports.

  White House port envoy John Porcari, the liaison between industry and the White House Supply Chain Disruptions Task Force, said the government is looking to create more inland ports. 

  “We’re encouraging other ports to do the same [thing as Savannah.] I think you’ll see a generation of projects in the short term around the country that will help maximize the existing on-dock capacity through interior pop-up sites,” Porcari said on Bloomberg’s “Odd Lots” podcast last week. 

  “The fundamental issue is that the docks themselves are such valuable pieces of real estate that you don’t want the containers dwelling there a second longer than you have to. You want to get them to the interior or back on ships to their target markets overseas,” he said.

  Better Fluidity

  Improvements in rail handling, a dip in import volumes in line with seasonal patterns and the customer pop-up yards have combined to improve cargo flow and reduce the number of ships waiting for a berth at the Port of Savannah, McCarthy said. 

  

  The port authority released an operations update last week showing the average dwell time for a container moving by rail after vessel unloading is two days, and that the average resting time within the terminal for import and export containers is about eight days, down from 11 and 10 days, respectively. The backlog of empty containers remains a problem, with boxes lingering an average of 17.8 days.

  The improved performance is helping personnel work vessels faster and reduce Savannah’s cargo backlog. The number of ships at anchor in the Atlantic Ocean declined to 15 as of Monday morning from 22 two weeks ago, Morris said. There were 24 container vessels at anchor in mid-October. Total containers on the terminal also declined 13% and are down 16% from the peak of 85,000, according to the update.

  McCarthy said there are about 225,000 TEUs currently on the water, a 10% to 12% reduction from early November that indicates “we are over the hump of the peak season.”

  Last week, ocean carrier CMA CGM said its Liberty Bridge service from northern Europe to the U.S. East Coast would temporarily skip Savannah due to the congestion. According to the revised schedule, seven stops between late December and early February will be omitted. Shippers can send Savannah cargo to the Port of Charleston, South Carolina, until then, it said.

  The GPA also noted that providers have increased the supply of chassis, the wheeled frames on which containers rest when pulled by truck, and are increasingly able to repair more chassis to help meet demand for cargo deliveries.

  

  The Port of Savannah increased its near-dock rail capacity by 30% with the commissioning two weeks ago of a second set of nine tracks at the Mason Mega Rail Terminal. The port moved 550,000 containers by rail last year and now has more than 2 million TEUs of capacity with an eye toward future growth. The ability to discharge cargo from a vessel and ship it out by train in less than two days is best in class for the U.S., McCarthy noted.

  A huge new container yard will come online in phases starting in December and culminate with about 820,000 TEUs of additional capacity by March. The project includes rubber-tired gantry cranes for sorting, stacking and transferring containers.

  Construction of another berth is underway and scheduled to be complete in 2023.

  Meanwhile, the federal dredging project to deepen the Savannah River to 47 feet (54 feet at high tide) is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2022. It has already allowed vessels with deeper drafts to enter the port, McCarthy said. The deepening translates to about 200 extra loaded containers per foot and a total of 1,000 per vessel when the project is finished.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 19:45

• Michael Flynn Reportedly Calls QAnon A 'CIA Disinformation Campaign'
  Michael Flynn Reportedly Calls QAnon A ‘CIA Disinformation Campaign’

  Former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn reportedly believes that ‘QAnon’ is actually a ‘disinformation campaign created by the CIA,’ despite having heavily endorsed the movement.

  

  In a private telephone conversation with pro-Trump attorney Lin Wood which has not been independently verified, Flynn – according to Wood, dismissed QAnon as ‘total nonsense,’ the Daily Mail reports.

  Wood posted the conversation to his Telegram channel on Saturday. Exactly when the call took place is unclear, however it referenced a Hal Turner article published Nov. 2.

  “I think it’s a disinformation campaign. I think it’s a disinformation campaign that the CIA created. That’s what I believe,” the man said to be Flynn said on the recording. “Now, I don’t know that for a fact, but that’s what I think it is.”

  Later in the call, the same man can be heard stating how the conspiracy movement was ‘total nonsense’ calling it a ‘disinformation campaign created by the left’. 

  ‘I think it’s a disinformation campaign. There’s actually a very interesting article today out that was sent to me — I’ll send it to you — about how the QAnon movement has failed and all that. But I find it total nonsense, and I think it’s a disinformation campaign created by the left,’ he said. –Daily Mail

  Listen:

  vIdEo pRoDuCtIoN iS mY pAsSiOn pic.twitter.com/7ErBpus3kn

  — Jan Bobrowicz (@janbobrowicz) November 28, 2021

  While it’s possible the man heard in the recording is not Flynn, the retired Army General hasn’t denied it when reached for comment by other outlets.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 19:25

• Bitcoin Version Of "Giving Tuesday" Returns With 10 Times As Many Nonprofits
  Bitcoin Version Of “Giving Tuesday” Returns With 10 Times As Many Nonprofits

  Authored by ‘NAMCIOS’ via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  Crypto Giving Tuesday returns this year to connect bitcoin donors with over 1,000 nonprofits from various sectors.

  

  Philanthropy platform The Giving Block is launching the Crypto Giving Tuesday initiative on Tuesday, November 30, according to a statement sent to Bitcoin Magazine. The campaign will take place on the same day as the world’s most prominent day of global generosity, Giving Tuesday, to connect bitcoin donors with nonprofits across various sectors.

  The Giving Block facilitates nonprofit organizations’ experience in receiving donations in bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Philanthropic investors can browse and contribute to the cause they identify more with by sending direct bitcoin donations rather than converting the desired amount to fiat currency and donating that instead. Donors can avoid capital gains taxes from the sale of cryptocurrency and enable a bigger donation to reach the nonprofit, a win-win for both parties.

  “People can avoid giving proceeds to the IRS by donating that money directly…to charity,” the statement said.

  “For example, if an investor chooses to donate based on assets they have recouped, takes $10,000 in Bitcoin and cashes out to donate, they will get the write-off, but pay capital gains tax on the $10K (as much as 20%). If the same investor donates the $10K in Bitcoin directly to a nonprofit, they still get the write-off, but there’s zero tax to be paid.”

  There are currently over 700 nonprofit organizations on The Giving Block’s platform, and the company expects over 1,000 organizations to participate in the campaign this year, almost ten times more than in 2020.

  Crypto Giving Tuesday can also serve as an inexpensive pilot program for nonprofits interested in accepting bitcoin donations. If they have a successful campaign, they can present their results to their leadership to push the Bitcoin agenda more easily. And for those worried about their precious bitcoin stack, they can enforce a virtuous cycle while purchasing back the same amount of BTC instantly after donating, which is also tax efficient.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 19:05

• FDA Advisory Committee Narrowly Votes To Approve Merck's COVID 'Miracle Drug'
  FDA Advisory Committee Narrowly Votes To Approve Merck’s COVID ‘Miracle Drug’

  During a week that has seen a new COVID variant emerge and suddenly throw the efficacy of American vaccines and remedies into question, the FDA’s outside advisors have only narrowly approved of Merck’s molnupiravir, opening the door for the agency to approve the drug for use among high-risk patients only.

  The Antimicrobial Drugs Advisory Committee, as the panel is known, voted 13 to 10 in support of the FDA approving the drug, which was first introduced to the public a couple of months ago with “blockbuster” experimental results from a very limited trial that, according to some critics, glossed over safety risks presented by the drug.

  

  By granting its blessing to the drug, the committee will allow Merck to start selling it widely in the US by the end of the year.

  As far as omicron is concerned, Merck plans to study whether molnupiravir is effective against the new variant panic of the moment. The company is working to collect samples of the new strain to do so. Nick Kartsonis, who oversees Merck’s vaccine clinical research, confirmed as much to the panel.

  “We expect, based on what we know about the Omicron variant, that molnupiravir would be effective against this particular variant,” he said.

  Evaluating molnupiravir against omicron, Kartsonis said, will take longer than assessing COVID-19 antibody drugs because Merck needs to collect a broader set of data covering the entire genome of the virus, rather than select pieces.

  As we have explained, molnupiravir targets the machinery the virus uses to replicate, rather than the spike protein, the structure that helps the virus infiltrate cells. Omicron has mutations to the spike protein, which researchers say could help it evade protections provided by vaccines and drugs trained to target the virus’s spike protein.

  Just last week, the company said that a final analysis had found the drug to be about 30% effective at reducing the risk of hospitalization and death in high-risk people, lower than the 50% efficacy first announced in October after a preliminary look at the data.

  While the FDA isn’t obligated to follow the ADAC’s recommendation, it typically does.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 18:45

• CNN Suspends Chris Cuomo 'Indefinitely'
  CNN Suspends Chris Cuomo ‘Indefinitely’

  Update (1835ET): CNN has suspended Chris Cuomo indefinitely following the release of new documents this week that reveal he leveraged media sources to help dig up dirt on his brother’s accusers.

  

  “The New York Attorney General’s office released transcripts and exhibits Monday that shed new light on Chris Cuomo’s involvements in his brother’s defense. The documents, which we were not privy to before their public release, raise serious questions,” the network said in a Tuesday statement. “When Chris admitted to us that he had offered advice to his brother’s staff, he broke our rules and we acknowledged that publicly. But we also appreciated the unique position he was in and understood his need to put family first and job second. However, these documents point to a greater level of involvement in his brother’s efforts than we previously knew. As a result, we have suspended Chris indefinitely, pending further evaluation.“

  *  *  *

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  CNN is reviewing material released Monday that showed host Chris Cuomo was not truthful to viewers when he told them in August that he did not speak to fellow media members about the scandal that engulfed his brother Andrew Cuomo.

  “The thousands of pages of additional transcripts and exhibits that were released today by the NY Attorney General deserve a thorough review and consideration,” CNN said in a statement.

  “We will be having conversations and seeking additional clarity about their significance as they relate to CNN over the next several days,” the news outlet added.

  Speaking on his show earlier this year, Chris Cuomo claimed that he “never made calls to the press about my brother’s situation.”

  

  But the newly released material showed Chris Cuomo tapped sources, including some inside rival outlets, to try to ascertain if more women were coming forward to accuse his brother of sexual misconduct.

  In one case, Chris Cuomo was tasked by Melissa DeRosa, at the time a top aide to Andrew Cuomo, with gathering “intel” about a looming story by New Yorker reporter Ronan Farrow.

  Chris Cuomo was successful, telling DeRosa in a text message on March 15 that Farrow’s story “not ready for tomorrow.”

  In another message, Chris Cuomo appeared to signal that he spoke directly with Farrow.

  He also checked into rumored stories by other outlets, including Politico.

  Other texts showed the CNN host drafted entire statements he hoped the New York gubernatorial office would release and attribute to Andrew Cuomo, who was governor at the time.

  Chris Cuomo has not responded to requests for comment.

  He told investigators during a deposition that he did not try to affect any reports.

  “If I had tried to influence any of the reporting at CNN or anywhere else, I guarantee you, you people would know, and so would a lot of others,” he said.

  “So the idea of one reporter calling another to find out about what’s coming down the pipe is completely business-as-usual.”

  Experts have told The Epoch Times that Chris Cuomo’s behavior violates journalism standards and questioned CNN’s lack of transparency regarding the situation.

  It is unethical for a journalist to use their position, contacts, and influence to help a family member or friend involved in an investigation by law enforcement,” Rebecca Aguilar, president of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), said in an email.

  “The SPJ Code of Ethics clarifies the rules: Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived, minimize harm and be accountable and transparent,” she added.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 18:35

• Los Angeles Now Enforcing Vaccine Mandates For Indoor Businesses
  Los Angeles Now Enforcing Vaccine Mandates For Indoor Businesses

  Authored by Li Hai via The Epoch Times,

  The City of Los Angeles has started enforcement of its COVID-19 vaccine mandate for indoor businesses.

  

  The mandate, also named SafePassLA, requires all people eligible for a COVID-19 vaccine, including kids 12 and above, to show photo ID and proof of full vaccination against COVID-19 when entering indoor restaurants, gyms, entertainment facilities, personal care establishments, and some city buildings.

  From Monday, inspectors from the Department of Building and Safety, and authorized agents, started enforcing the ordinance.

  Business owners who violate the mandate will receive a warning for the first violation, a $1,000 fine for a second violation, and a $2,000 fine for a third violation. Fines are capped at $5,000 for four or more violations.

  The city said the measure would help stop the spread of COVID-19, a disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, or the novel coronavirus.

  The mandate comes from an ordinance (pdf) which was adopted by the city in October. The ordinance became effective on Nov. 8.

  The mandate allows for medical or religious exemptions.

  “A patron must provide the covered location with a verbal self-attestation to qualify for the exemption,” the city said on its website. The patrons should be directed to use an outdoor area.

  “If an outdoor area is not available, the patron may be permitted to use an indoor area by providing proof of a negative COVID-19 test taken within 72 hours before entry and photo identification.”

  The mandate doesn’t apply to business employees.

  Patrons are required to wear masks when they’re not actively eating or drinking, even they’re fully vaccinated. The city said that’s because the mandate does not modify any health orders issued by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.

  Some business owners have expressed concerned that the mandate will affect their businesses.

  Restaurateurs in New York City told The Epoch Times last month that business went down 40 to 60 percent due to the city’s vaccine mandate. New York City enacted a similar requirement in August and started enforcing the rule on Sept. 13.

  Milbet Del Cid, owner of Amalia’s, a Guatemalan restaurant in Los Angeles, told Los Angeles Times that criticism poured in on social media earlier this month when she alerted her clients that she would soon be asking them to show proof of vaccination.

  “If you’re obligated to ask,” one customer wrote in response, “then we won’t eat there anymore, so there.”

  Beginning Nov. 4, Los Angeles County, where the City of Los Angeles is located, also issued a similar but less expansive mandate, mainly focused on adult-oriented businesses providing alcohol.

  The city is also requiring proof of full vaccination or a negative COVID test within 72 hours to participate in outdoor events with 5,000 more people. This is stricter than the county mandate, which applies to outdoor events with 10,000 or more people.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 18:25

• Jussie Smollett's Defense: Osundario Brothers 'Sophisticated' Criminals Who Set Him Up
  Jussie Smollett’s Defense: Osundario Brothers ‘Sophisticated’ Criminals Who Set Him Up

  Jussie Smollett says two Nigerian-born brothers – one of whom was his personal trainer, lover, and alleged drug dealer – are “sophisticated” criminals who set him up. The 39-year-old actor is accused of lying to police about being the victim of a racist and homophobic assault. The class-4 felony carries a sentence of up to three years in prison, however experts cited by Fox News think he would most likely face probation and perhaps community service.

  

  Smollett trial: in opening, Smollett’s attorney is telling jury that Smollett is a victim. The Osundairo brothers are “sophisticated” criminals that did not like Jussie.

  — Matt Finn (@MattFinnFNC) November 30, 2021

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

  The brothers, Abimbola and Olabinjo Osundario, claim Smollett paid them $3,500 to stage an infamous hate-crime hoax on January 29, 2019 – when the former “Empire” star claimed he was attacked around 2 a.m. by two white men who recognized him from the show shouted racist and homophobic slurs, doused him in a bleach-like liquid, hung a rope around his neck, and yelled “This is MAGA country.“

  The MSM uncritically reported the ‘hate crime,’ without questioning obvious holes in the story – such as why two Trump supporters were hanging out in Chicago at 2am in the freezing cold. Then-Senator Kamala Harris called it a “modern day lynching.”

  Smollett was indicted twice following a six-month special counsel investigation.

  According to Smollett’s attorney, there was “an elephant in this room – assumptions,” as the Daily Wire reports.

  Fox News‘ Matt Fin reports that the prosecution focused on arguing that Smollett had faked his own hate crime, including the fact that Smollett had initially refused to turn over his cell phone when investigators requested it – which the prosecutor said may have been to avoid investigators discovering that he had contacted one of the Osundario brothers.

  Smollett trial: prosecutor is repeatedly calling Smollett’s incident a “fake hate crime.” Really using the word fake a lot in front of jury.

  — Matt Finn (@MattFinnFNC) November 30, 2021

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

  Prosecutor says Smollett didn’t want CPD to see communication with one of the Osundairo brothers

  — Matt Finn (@MattFinnFNC) November 30, 2021

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

  In November of 2019, Smollett filed a lawsuit against the brothers for ‘concocting the whole thing.’

  Smollett – whose sisters worked for President Obama, was originally slapped with a 16-count indictment for lying to the police, however the Cook County State Attorney’s office suddenly dropped the charges after  Michelle Obama’s former Chief of Staff, Tina Tchen, pressured Chicago’s top prosecutor, Kim Foxx, to transfer the case to the FBI. When that wasn’t done, Foxx’s office decided not to pursue the case. 

  Explaining their decision to drop the case, Foxx’s office said: “After reviewing all of the facts and circumstances of the case, including Mr. Smollet’s volunteer service in the community and agreement to forfeit his bond to the City of Chicago, we believe this outcome is a just disposition & appropriate resolution.”

  As Fox News reports, former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani thinks the prosecution has a good case.

  “The prosecution is strong because of corroborating, independent evidence that is consistent with Smollett making a false police report,” she said, adding “What type of explanation can Smollett’s attorney have to justify him contacting the brothers?”

  According to experts, Smollett will probably get a slap on the wrist.

  “Smollett is facing 6 counts of essentially minor class 4 felonies that carry a maximum sentence of three years in State prison,” said Los Angeles-based criminal defense attorney Silva Megerditchian, adding “The judge will consider that Smollett has no history of any arrests nor convictions — and thus will likely give him a probationary sentence. Keeping that in mind, however, this was a case that got national attention, and stirred a lot of anger that Smollett would stage this kind of grotesque racial attack.  As well, the City of Chicago spent a lot of money investigating these false charges. Thus, I would not be surprised if the Judge imposes some kind of sentence, considering the nation is watching.”

  (h/t Daily Wire)

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 11/30/2021 – 18:05